Complex Facial Masking Predicts Neural Functioning, Self-regulation, and Behavioral Problems in Preschool Children

• In Event: Poster Session 09
  In Poster Session: PS 09 Topic - Social, Emotional, Personality

Abstract

Facial masking is the ability to produce facial expressions exhibiting an emotion that is not felt, such as contorting facial muscles to produce a positive expression despite feeling frustration. Facial masking has been hypothesized to emerge in early childhood and to reflect better self-regulation (Cole, 1986; Saarni, 1984), though few studies have empirically examined this relation. Further, facial expressions are complex; thus, masking expressions could comprise mixtures of positive and negative affect, yet few studies have explored phenotypic heterogeneity of masking in early childhood. Masking could be simple (i.e., smiling without co-occurring negative affect) or complex (i.e., a simultaneous mixture of smiling and negative affect) (Ekman et al., 1988). Moreover, although self-regulation correlates with greater neural activation (Ochsner & Gross, 2008), few studies have explored the neural correlates of facial masking in children. The goal of the present study was to examine how preschool children produce simple versus complex facial masking during frustration, and test how masking relates to prefrontal cortex (PFC) activation, self-regulation, and behavioral problems. We hypothesized that higher frequency of masking during frustration would predict better self-regulation, greater PFC activation, and lower behavioral problems. Fifty-five preschool-aged children (Mage=4.05, SD=.73) completed the emotion eliciting task “Incredible Cake Kids” (Grabell et al., 2019) on a touchscreen computer, while PFC activation was recorded via functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). The task involved choosing the “most delicious cake” for virtual customers who gave (unbeknownst to the child) predetermined positive (e.g., “yummy!”) or negative (e.g., “yuck!”) feedback. We used Ekman & Friesen’s (1977) Facial Action Coding System (FACS) to denote simple and complex masking during negative feedback. Complex masking was defined as a “lip corner puller” (AU 12) with a co-occurring negative emotion AU such as “brow lowerer” (AU 4), “nose wrinkler/upper lip raiser” (AU 9 and/or 10), or a “lip corner depressor” (AU 15). Simple masking was defined as an AU 12 without a co-occurring negative AU (see Figure 1). Caregivers reported their children’s self-regulation through the Soothability, Inhibitory Control, Impulsivity, and Anger/Frustration subscales of the Child Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ; Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, & Fisher, 2001), and Internalizing and Externalizing Problems via the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000). On average, preschool children produced facial masking, of either type, 69.8% of the time during negative trials. A paired-sample t-test revealed that preschool children generated significantly more simple masking (M=7.11, SD=4.72) than complex masking (M=1.64, SD=2.66, t(55)=9.57, p<.05) (see Figure 2). However, counter to hypotheses, complex masking predicted weaker PFC activation (r=-.31, p=.02), higher impulsivity (r=.31, p=.02), and at the trend level, higher internalizing (r=.24, p=.07) and externalizing problems (r=.24, p=.07). Simple and complex masking were not significantly correlated with Soothability, Inhibitory Control, and Anger/Frustration (p > .05). Our findings suggest that young children produce simple and complex facial masking. However, complex masking, although less common, may be a better predictor of self-regulation and a more salient clinical target. Lastly, whether masking is indicative of self-regulation may be more complicated than previously reported, warranting future study.

Group Authors

N/A.

Authors

• Adrelys Mateo Santana, University of Massachusetts Amherst
  Presenting Author

• Adam Grabell, University of Massachusetts Amherst
  Non-Presenting Author