↓ Skip to main content

Abnormalities in early visual processes are linked to hypersociability and atypical evaluation of facial trustworthiness: An ERP study with Williams syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Abnormalities in early visual processes are linked to hypersociability and atypical evaluation of facial trustworthiness: An ERP study with Williams syndrome
Published in
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, July 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13415-017-0528-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Danielle M. Shore, Rowena Ng, Ursula Bellugi, Debra L. Mills

Abstract

Accurate assessment of trustworthiness is fundamental to successful and adaptive social behavior. Initially, people assess trustworthiness from facial appearance alone. These assessments then inform critical approach or avoid decisions. Individuals with Williams syndrome (WS) exhibit a heightened social drive, especially toward strangers. This study investigated the temporal dynamics of facial trustworthiness evaluation in neurotypic adults (TD) and individuals with WS. We examined whether differences in neural activity during trustworthiness evaluation may explain increased approach motivation in WS compared to TD individuals. Event-related potentials were recorded while participants appraised faces previously rated as trustworthy or untrustworthy. TD participants showed increased sensitivity to untrustworthy faces within the first 65-90 ms, indexed by the negative-going rise of the P1 onset (oP1). The amplitude of the oP1 difference to untrustworthy minus trustworthy faces was correlated with lower approachability scores. In contrast, participants with WS showed increased N170 amplitudes to trustworthy faces. The N170 difference to low-high-trust faces was correlated with low approachability in TD and high approachability in WS. The findings suggest that hypersociability associated with WS may arise from abnormalities in the timing and organization of early visual brain activity during trustworthiness evaluation. More generally, the study provides support for the hypothesis that impairments in low-level perceptual processes can have a cascading effect on social cognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 4 7%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 20 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 35%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 22 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,115,997
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#547
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,673
of 316,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,653 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.