A dynamic systems approach to infant facial action

Journal ArticleWhat does it mean when a baby smiles? Is it an expression of enjoyment, a signal to a partner that rewards effective caretaking, or simply a muscular contraction? Do physically different types of smiles indicate different things? Should the social context in which an infant smiles inform our understanding of the smile? To address these questions, we apply insights and ideas from a dynamic systems perspective to anatomical, social interactive, and neurophysiological data on the development of infant facial action (Fogel, 1993; Fogel & Thelen, 1987; Thelen, 1995; Thelen & Smith, 1994)

All smiles are positive, but some smiles are more positive than others.

Disagreement as to whether all smiling or specific types of smiling index positive emotion early in life was addressed by examining when infants produced different types of smiling and other facial expres-sions. Thirteen infants were observed weekly from 1 to 6 months of age. Smiling alone—without cheek raising or mouth opening—was relatively more likely than periods without smiling both when mothers were smiling and when infants were gazing at their mothers ' faces. Cheek-raise (Duchenne) smiling was relatively more likely than smiling alone only when mothers were smiling. Open-mouth (play) smiling was relatively more likely than smiling alone only when infants were gazing directly at mothers ' faces. Smiling involving both cheek raising and mouth opening was relatively likely both when mothers were smiling and when infants were gazing at mothers ' faces and became increasingly likely with age when both conditions co-occurred. The cheek-raise and open-mouth dimensions of smiling appear to be associated with, respectively, the amplification of processes of sharing positive affect and of visual engagement that are present to a lesser degree in smiling alone. In infancy, positive emotions such as joy are hypothesized to motivate and organize desired actions (Blehar, Lieberman, & Ainsworth, 1977; Cohn, Campbell, & Ross, 1991; Malatesta, Cul

Anticipatory Smiling: Linking Early Affective Communication and Social Outcome

In anticipatory smiles, infants appear to communicate pre-existing positive affect by smiling at an object and then turning the smile toward an adult. We report two studies in which the precursors, development, and consequences of anticipatory smiling were investigated. Study 1 revealed a positive correlation between infant smiling at 6 months and the level of anticipatory smiling at 8 and 10 months during joint attention episodes, as well as a positive correlation between anticipatory smiling and parent-rated social expressivity scores at 30 months. Study 2 confirmed a developmental increase in the number of infants using anticipatory smiles between 9 and 12 months that had been initially documented in the Study 1 sample [Venezia, M., Messinger, D. S., Thorp, D., & Mundy, P. (2004). The development of anticipatory smiling. Infancy, 6(3), 397–406]. Additionally, anticipatory smiling at 9 months positively predicted parent-rated social competence scores at 30 months. Findings are discussed with regard to the importance of anticipatory smiling in early socioemotional development

Quantitative autistic trait measurements index background genetic risk for ASD in Hispanic families

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have indicated that quantitative autistic traits (QATs) of parents reflect inherited liabilities that may index background genetic risk for clinical autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in their offspring. Moreover, preferential mating for QATs has been observed as a potential factor in concentrating autistic liabilities in some families across generations. Heretofore, intergenerational studies of QATs have focused almost exclusively on Caucasian populations—the present study explored these phenomena in a well-characterized Hispanic population. METHODS: The present study examined QAT scores in siblings and parents of 83 Hispanic probands meeting research diagnostic criteria for ASD, and 64 non-ASD controls, using the Social Responsiveness Scale-2 (SRS-2). Ancestry of the probands was characterized by genotype, using information from 541,929 single nucleotide polymorphic markers. RESULTS: In families of Hispanic children with an ASD diagnosis, the pattern of quantitative trait correlations observed between ASD-affected children and their first-degree relatives (ICCs on the order of 0.20), between unaffected first-degree relatives in ASD-affected families (sibling/mother ICC = 0.36; sibling/father ICC = 0.53), and between spouses (mother/father ICC = 0.48) were in keeping with the influence of transmitted background genetic risk and strong preferential mating for variation in quantitative autistic trait burden. Results from analysis of ancestry-informative genetic markers among probands in this sample were consistent with that from other Hispanic populations. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative autistic traits represent measurable indices of inherited liability to ASD in Hispanic families. The accumulation of autistic traits occurs within generations, between spouses, and across generations, among Hispanic families affected by ASD. The occurrence of preferential mating for QATs—the magnitude of which may vary across cultures—constitutes a mechanism by which background genetic liability for ASD can accumulate in a given family in successive generations

Dynamic infant–parent affect coupling during the face-to-face/still-face.

We examined dynamic infant-parent affect coupling using the Face-to-Face/Still-Face (FFSF) paradigm. The sample included 20 infants whose older siblings had been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD-sibs), and 18 infants with comparison siblings (COMP-sibs). A series of extended autoregressive models was used to represent the self-regulation and interactive dynamics of infants and parents during FFSF. Significant bidirectional affective coupling was found between infants and parents, with the former serving as the “leading members” of the dyads. Further analysis of within-dyad dynamics revealed ongoing changes in concurrent infant-parent linkages both within and across different FFSF episodes. The importance of considering both inter- and intra-dyad differences is discussed

Darwin's Duchenne: Eye constriction during infant joy and distress

Darwin proposed that smiles with eye constriction (Duchenne smiles) index strong positive emotion in infants, while cry-faces with eye constriction index strong negative emotion. Research has supported Darwin's proposal with respect to smiling, but there has been little parallel research on cry-faces (open-mouth expressions with lateral lip stretching). To investigate the possibility that eye constriction indexes the affective intensity of positive and negative emotions, we first conducted the Face-to-Face/Still-Face (FFSF) procedure at 6 months. In the FFSF, three minutes of naturalistic infant-parent play interaction (which elicits more smiles than cry-faces) are followed by two minutes in which the parent holds an unresponsive still-face (which elicits more cry-faces than smiles). Consistent with Darwin's proposal, eye constriction was associated with stronger smiling and with stronger cry-faces. In addition, the proportion of smiles with eye constriction was higher during the positive-emotion eliciting play episode than during the still-face. In parallel, the proportion of cry-faces with eye constriction was higher during the negative-emotion eliciting still-face than during play. These results are consonant with the hypothesis that eye constriction indexes the affective intensity of both positive and negative facial configurations. A preponderance of eye constriction during cry-faces was observed in a second elicitor of intense negative emotion, vaccination injections, at both 6 and 12 months of age. The results support the existence of a Duchenne distress expression that parallels the more well-known Duchenne smile. This suggests that eye constriction-the Duchenne marker-has a systematic association with early facial expressions of intense negative and positive emotion. © 2013 Mattson et al