Perception of emotion in psychiatric disorders: On the possible role of task, dynamics, and multimodality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental evidence suggests an impairment in emotion perception in numerous psychiatric disorders. The results to date are primarily based on research using static displays of emotional facial expressions. However, our natural environment is dynamic and multimodal, comprising input from various communication channels such as facial expressions, emotional prosody, and emotional semantics, to name but a few. Thus, one critical open question is whether alterations in emotion perception in psychiatric populations are confirmed when testing patients in dynamic and multimodal naturalistic settings. Furthermore, the impact task demands may exert on results also needs to be reconsidered. Focusing on schizophrenia and depression, we review evidence on how emotions are perceived from faces and voices in these disorders and examine how experimental task demands, stimulus dynamics, and modality may affect study results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it