Skip to main content

Psychology: Research and Review

Table 2 Studies selected for the review according to author, sample description, type of stimuli, and emotions

From: Facial expressions and eye tracking in individuals with social anxiety disorder: a systematic review

Authors

Sample

Apparatus

Type of stimuli

Emotions

Method

Time

Main results

Horley et al. (2003)

Clinical SAD patients (n = 15); controls (n = 15)

CEDRIC Mark II

Photographs

Neutral, happy, and sadness

Required to look at the fixation point for 1 s, just until the face appeared. Afterward, could freely look at the face

10 s

Subjects with SAD: Lack of fixation for sadness and neutral; greater tracking length; tendency to avoid fixation on eyes, nose, and mouth; avoidance of eyes on sad faces

Horley et al. (2004)

Clinical SAD patients (n = 22); controls (n = 22)

CEDRIC Mark II

Photographs

Happy, sadness, anger, and neutral

Looked freely at faces

10 s

Subjects with SAD: Hypervigilance and avoidance of eyes in the case of anger

Garner et al. (2006)

Exp. 1: (n = 40) students (control and SAD);

Exp. 2: (n = 40) students (control and SAD)

Eye Tracker and Gaze Tracker, Applied Science Laboratories,

Model 504

Photographs of faces and domestic objects (e.g., chair, lamp, clock)

Neutral, happy, and anger

Exp. 1: Pair of images (neutral-emotion or neutral-object), subsequently replaced by two points (vertical or horizontal) in the position of one of the faces. Required to indicate the orientation of the points

Exp. 2: Before Task 1 were instructed to present a speech to a camera

1.5 s

Exp. 1: Subjects with SAD: First fixation and maintenance in the case of emotional faces; longer fixation time on neutral faces than on objects

Exp. 2: Subjects with SAD: Shorter fixation latency for emotional faces but with shorter fixation time

Both groups: Fixation first and gaze maintained for longer for faces as opposed to objects

Mühlberger et al. (2008)

SAD students (n = 12); controls (n = 14)

iView X Hi-Speed, SMI

Virtual environments with elevator, person, or virtual object (e.g., bookcase)

Anger and happy

In an elevator with opening doors (on 60 floors) pairs of stimuli (two people with different expressions, one happy person and a bookcase, one angry person and a bookcase) were presented

6 s

Subjects with SAD: Initially avoided the faces and avoided maintaining fixation on angry faces

Weiser et al. (2009b)

n = 29 female students (separated into 2 groups)

iView X Hi-Speed, SMI

Virtual photographs

Happy, anger, and neutral

Explored a pair of faces (neutral-emotion). Afterward, judged the valence and arousal of the face

3 s

Subjects with SAD: Hypervigilance in the first fixation in the case of emotions; attentional bias toward happy female faces; modest hypervigilance-avoidance regarding emotions

Weiser et al. (2009a)

Students with high levels of SAD (n = 21); low levels of SAD (n = 21); controls (n = 20)

iView X Hi-Speed, SMI

Virtual photographs

Happy, anger, sadness, fear, and neutral

Faces presented at the sides of the screen. Required to perform prosaccades or antisaccades toward the faces, then judge the valence and arousal of the face

1 s

Subjects with SAD: Antisaccades with more errors in response to all facial expressions

Both groups: Correct antisaccades with more time in response to fearful faces

Moukheiber et al. (2010)

SAD patients (n = 26); control (n = 24)

EyeLink II

Male and female photographs

Happy, surprise, disgust, sadness, anger, fear, and neutral

There was no participant task; subjects were required to hold the head still and, after cross-calibration in the middle of the screen between the pictures, to look at the pictures

10 s

Subjects with SAD: Hyperscanning overview and a reduction in fixations and time for the eye region and to specific emotions, most notably anger and disgust. No difference was observed in relation to gaze avoidance according to the correspondence of the sex of the subject and that of the image

Lange et al. (2011)

SAD students (n = 22); controls (n = 21)

EyeLink V02.01

Photographs

Anger, neutral, and happy

Explore matrices of neutral-angry or happy-angry faces. Had to judge the matrices as friendly or not

500 ms or

2.5 s

Subjects with SAD: Fixation on angry faces.

Long presentation time: Quicker deviation if the original fixation was toward anger

Schofield et al. (2013)

Clinical SAD patients (n = 19); controls (n = 20)

EyeLink 1000 - SR Research

Photographs

Happy, fear, anger, and neutral

Pairs of facial expressions (anger-neutral, fear-neutral, happy-neutral) replaced by a down or up arrow in the position of one of the faces. Required to indicate the arrow type

1.5 s

Subjects with SAD: Similar fixation pattern toward emotion and neutral

Controls: More fixation toward happy in the last moments of the presentation and less throughout the presentation in relation to negative emotions

Two groups: Lower fixation latency for emotional faces

Finch et al. (2016)

SAD students (n = 36); controls (n = 37)

Tobii T120 eye-tracking system

Photographs

Anger, neutral, and happy

Looked at pairs of facial expressions for 3000 ms in two stages: during the first 500 ms of exposure and during the remaining time

3 s

Subjects with SAD: Initial bias toward social threat. In particular, socially anxious participants in the fear of death condition were vigilant in the detection of angry and happy faces

Boll et al. (2016)

Clinical SAD patients (n = 22); controls (n = 22)

EyeLink 1000

Grayscale photographs

Anger, fear, happy, and neutral

Exp 1: Rated the emotion of facial stimuli as quickly and accurately as possible

Exp 2: Identified the target letter presented next to the facial stimuli as quickly and accurately as possible

150 ms or 3 s

Exp 1: Patients with SAD: Hypervigilance in relation to the mouth area regardless of the type of emotional expression. There was no evidence of subsequent avoidance of looking toward the eye. Time difference in looking toward the eye between patients and controls.

Exp 2: Patients with SAD were significantly slower than controls in identifying the target letter, but there was no significant difference with respect to the number of correct responses when identifying letters

Kim and Lee (2016)

SAD students (n = 22); controls (n = 22)

iView X RED-IV, SMI

Face-body composites: consistent (same emotion) and inconsistent (different emotion)

Anger, fear, disgust, sadness, and happy

Looked at the picture and selected the emotional state that best described the presented individual

4 s

Individuals with SAD: Hypervigilance without avoidance toward the face for consistent composite face and body images. There was an avoidance of faces without hypervigilance

Lazarov et al. (2016)

Students with low levels of SAD (n = 20); students with high levels of SAD (n = 20); clinical SAD patients (n = 20)

SMI BeGaze native software

Color photographs of 16 male and 16 female actors

Unpleasant and neutral expressions

Looked freely at each matrix in any way desired until it disappeared. Student groups repeated the session after 1 week

6 s

Session 1: All groups spent less fixation time on threatening faces than neutral faces. High SAD and clinical patient group: The fixation time was greater on threat than the low SAD group

Session 2: High SAD group exhibited more fixation time on threat than the low SAD group. No significant difference was found in fixation time on neutral faces