MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604150021 · doi:10.1002/dev.21515

Recognizing facial expressions of emotion in infancy: A replication and extension

2017· article· en· W2604150021 on OpenAlex
Kristina Safar, Margaret C. Moulson

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCategorizationPsychologyFacial expressionPreferenceCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infants may recognize facial expressions of emotion more readily when familiar faces express the emotions. Studies 1 and 2 investigated whether familiarity influences two metrics of emotion processing: Categorization and spontaneous preference. In Study 1 (n = 32), we replicated previous findings showing an asymmetrical pattern of categorization of happy and fearful faces in 6.5-month-old infants, and extended these findings by demonstrating that infants' categorization did not differ when emotions were expressed by familiar (i.e., caregiver) faces. In Study 2 (n = 34), we replicated the spontaneous preference for fearful over happy expressions in 6.5-month-old infants, and extended these findings by demonstrating that the spontaneous preference for fear was also present for familiar faces. Thus, infants' performance on two metrics of emotion processing did not differ depending on face familiarity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it