MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382918795 · doi:10.1177/00332941231181027

Facial Reactivity to Emotional Stimuli is Related to Empathic Concern, Empathic Distress, and Depressive Symptoms in Social Work Students

2023· article· en· W4382918795 on OpenAlexaff
Pierrich Plusquellec, Kaylee Smart, Vincent Denault

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional contagionPsychologyEmpathyFacial expressionPersonal distressDistressEmpathic concernEmotional expressionDevelopmental psychologyEmotional distressClinical psychologySocial psychologyAnxietyPerspective-taking

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Helping professionals are exposed daily to the emotional burden of their vulnerable clients and are at risk of unconscious emotional contagion that may lead to stress and emotional distress. Being aware of their own susceptibility to emotional contagion, however, can improve their well-being. This study aimed to propose an objective measure of emotional contagion, complementary to the Emotional Contagion Scale, and to evaluate its construct and predictive validity. To do so, we turned to FACET, an automatic facial coding software using the Facial Action Coding System, to measure participants' facial expressions as they watched movie clips eliciting specific emotional responses. Results show that both tools to measure emotional contagion (objective and self-reported) are complementary, but they do not measure the same psychosocial constructs. Also, the new objective measure of emotional contagion seems to predict emotional empathy and the risk of developing depressive symptoms among this study's participants.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207