Preschoolers‘ sensitivity to negative and positive emotional facial expressions: An ERP study

Abstract

This study aimed to expand the understanding of the neural-temporal trajectories ofemotion processing in preschoolers using electrophysiological measures. In particular, welooked at neural responses to the repetition of emotional faces. EEG was recorded whilechildren observed sequentially presented pairs of faces. In some trials, the pair of faces wasidentical, while in others they differed with regards to the emotional expression displayed(happy, fearful or neutral). We detected greater P1 and P3 amplitudes to angry compared toneutral facial expressions, but similar amplitudes for happy compared to neutral faces. Wedid not observe modulations of the N170 by emotional facial expressions. When investigatingpreschoolers’ sensitivity to the repetition of emotional facial expressions, we found no ERPamplitudes differences for repeated vs. new emotional facial expressions. Overall, the resultssupport the idea that basic mechanisms of emotion processing are developed in preschoolperiod. The trajectory of ERP components was similar to what has been reported foryounger and older age groups, suggesting consistency of order and relative timing of differentstages of emotion processing. Additionally, findings suggest that enhanced early neuralactivation for angry vs. neutral faces is related to increased empathic behavior. More work isneeded to determine whether the repetition of an emotion leads to more effective processingduring development.

Utility of linear mixed effects models for event-related potential research with infants and children

“…Parameter estimates after CWC describe within-subjects variability, and therefore resulting centered data reflect relatively higher or lower levels of the predictor for each subject. For example, CWC of transformed reaction times (RT) when emotional expressions are repeated versus novel (e.g., in a design such as Naumann et al, 2020 ) would be done by averaging RT within each subject and subtracting the average RT from each subject’s single-trial data. Therefore, data for each subject is representative of relatively slower or faster RT trials compared to that subject’s mean RT.…”