Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Models of hemispheric specialization in facial emotion perception - a reevaluation.

Najt, P. and Bayer, U. and Hausmann, M. (2013) 'Models of hemispheric specialization in facial emotion perception - a reevaluation.', Emotion., 13 (1). pp. 159-167.

Abstract

A considerable amount of research on functional cerebral asymmetries (FCAs) for facial emotion perception has shown conflicting support for three competing models: (i) the Right Hemisphere Hypothesis, (ii) the Valence-Specific Hypothesis, and (iii) the Approach/Withdrawal model. However, the majority of studies evaluating the Right Hemisphere or the Valence-Specific Hypotheses are rather limited by the small number of emotional expressions used. In addition, it is difficult to evaluate the Approach/Withdrawal Hypothesis due to insufficient data on anger and FCAs. The aim of the present study was (a) to review visual half field (VHF) studies of hemispheric specialization in facial emotion perception and (b) to reevaluate empirical evidence with respect to all three partly conflicting hypotheses. Results from the present study revealed a left visual field (LVF)/right hemisphere advantage for the perception of angry, fearful, and sad facial expressions and a right visual field (RVF)/left hemisphere advantage for the perception of happy expressions. Thus, FCAs for the perception of specific facial emotions do not fully support the Right Hemisphere Hypothesis, the Valence-Specific Hypothesis, or the Approach/Withdrawal model. A systematic literature review, together with the results of the present study, indicate a consistent LVF/right hemisphere advantage only for a subset of negative emotions including anger, fear and sadness, rather suggesting a “negative (only) valence model.”

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
(481Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029723
Publisher statement:© 2013 APA, all rights reserved. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.
Date accepted:No date available
Date deposited:18 November 2014
Date of first online publication:February 2013
Date first made open access:No date available

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar