Abstract
What mechanisms underlie facial expression recognition? A popular hypothesis holds that efficient facial expression recognition cannot be achieved by visual analysis alone but additionally requires a mechanism of motor simulation - an unconscious, covert imitation of the observed facial postures and movements. Here, we first discuss why this hypothesis does not necessarily follow from extant empirical evidence. Next, we report experimental evidence against the central premise of this view: we demonstrate that individuals can achieve normotypical efficient facial expression recognition despite a congenital absence of relevant facial motor representations and, therefore, unaided by motor simulation. This underscores the need to reconsider the role of motor simulation in facial expression recognition.
Highlights
Stereotyped facial movements – facial expressions – reveal people’s happiness, surprise, fear, anger, disgust, and sadness in a way that can be interpreted by their congeners (Ekman, 1982)
In the last 20 years, an alternative view suggesting that efficient facial expression recognition cannot be achieved by visual analysis alone but requires a process of motor simulation – an unconscious, covert imitation of the observed facial postures or movements – has gained considerable prominence (Goldman and Sripada, 2005; Ipser and Cook, 2016; Montgomery and Haxby, 2008; Niedenthal et al, 2010; Pitcher et al, 2008; Paracampo et al, 2017)
We studied 11 individuals with Moebius Syndrome using an experimental procedure designed to overcome the sensitivity and interpretative issues that have been raised for previous reports of intact facial expression recognition abilities in IMS: 1. Given the heterogeneity of the clinical expression of Moebius Syndrome, especially in terms of associated visuo-perceptual symptoms (Bate et al, 2013; Carta et al, 2011), and the specific prediction of the motor simulation hypothesis tested in this study – viz., that none of the individuals with congenital facial paralysis should be as efficient as the controls in facial recognition – we conducted analyses focused on the performance of each IMS
Summary
Stereotyped facial movements – facial expressions – reveal people’s happiness, surprise, fear, anger, disgust, and sadness in a way that can be interpreted by their congeners (Ekman, 1982). In the last 20 years, an alternative view suggesting that efficient (i.e., fast and accurate) facial expression recognition cannot be achieved by visual analysis alone but requires a process of motor simulation – an unconscious, covert imitation of the observed facial postures or movements – has gained considerable prominence (Goldman and Sripada, 2005; Ipser and Cook, 2016; Montgomery and Haxby, 2008; Niedenthal et al, 2010; Pitcher et al, 2008; Paracampo et al, 2017) This ‘motor’ view has become increasingly influential in neuroscience, philosophy, neurology and psychiatry where it is suggested that it opens new clinical perspectives for the diagnosis, Vannuscorps et al eLife 2020;9:e54687.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
