Multi-level processing of emotions in life motion signals revealed through pupil responses

  1. State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Science, CAS Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16 Lincui Road, Beijing 100101, China
  2. Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 19A Yuquan Road, Beijing 100049, China
  3. Chinese Institute for Brain Research, 26 Science Park Road, Beijing 102206, China

Peer review process

Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, and public reviews.

Read more about eLife’s peer review process.

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    Xilin Zhang
    South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China
  • Senior Editor
    Yanchao Bi
    Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:
Tian et al. investigated the effects of emotional signals in biological motion on pupil responses. In this study, subjects were presented with point-light biological motion stimuli with happy, neutral, and sad emotions. Their pupil responses were recorded with an eye tracker. Throughout the study, emotion type (i.e., happy/sad/neutral) and BM stimulus type (intact/inverted/non-BM/local) were systematically manipulated. For intact BM stimuli, happy BM induced a larger pupil diameter than neutral BM, and neutral BM also induced a larger pupil diameter than sad BM. Importantly, the diameter difference between happy and sad BM correlated with the autistic trait of individuals. These effects disappeared for the inverted BM and non-BM stimuli. Interestingly, both happy and sad emotions show superiority in pupil diameter.

Strengths:
1. The experimental conditions and results are very easy to understand.
2. The writing and data presentation are clear.
3. The methods are sound. I have no problems with the experimental design and results.

Weaknesses:
1. My main concern is the interpretation of the intact and local condition results. The processing advantage of happy emotion is not surprising given a number of existing studies. However, the only difference here seems to be the smaller (or larger) pupil diameter for sad compared to neutral in the intact (or local, respectively) condition. The current form only reports this effect but lacks in-depth discussions and explanations as to why this is the case.

2. I also found no systematic discussion and theoretical contributions regarding the correlation with the autistric trait. If the main point of this paper is to highlight an implicit and objective behavioral marker of the autistric trait, more interpretation and discussion of the links between the results and existing findings in ASD are needed.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:
Through a series of four experiments, Yuan, Wang and Jiang examined pupil size responses to emotion signals in point-light motion stimuli. Experiment 1 examined upright happy, sad and neutral point-light biological motion (BM) walkers. The happy BM induced a significantly larger pupil response than the neutral, whereas the sad BM evoked a significantly smaller pupil size than the neutral BM. Experiment 2 examined inverted BM walkers. Experiment 3 examined BM stimuli with acceleration removed. No significant effects of emotion were found in neither Experiment 2 nor Experiment 3. Experiment 4 examined scrambled BM stimuli, in which local motion features were preserved while the global configuration was disrupted. Interestingly, the scrambled happy and sad BM led to significantly greater pupil size than the scrambled neutral BM at a relatively early time, while no significant difference between the scrambled happy and sad BM was found. Thus, the authors argue that these results suggest multi-level processing of emotions in life motion signals.

Strengths:
The experiments were carefully designed and well-executed, with point-light stimuli that eliminate many potential confounding effects of low-level visual features such as luminance, contrast, and spatial frequency.

Weaknesses:
Correlation results with limited sample size should be interpreted with extra caution.

It would be helpful to add discussions as a context to compare the current results with pupil size reactions to emotion signals in picture stimuli.

Overall, I think this is a well-written paper with solid experimental results that support the claim of the authors, i.e., the human visual system may process emotional information in biological motion at multiple levels. Given the key role of emotion processing in normal social cognition, the results will be of interest not only to basic scientists who study visual perception, but also to clinical researchers who work with patients of social cognitive disorders. In addition, this paper suggests that examining pupil size responses could be a very useful methodological tool to study brain mechanisms underlying emotion processing.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:
The overarching goal of the authors was to understand whether emotional information conveyed through point-light biological motion can trigger automatic physiological responses, as reflected in pupil size.

Strengths:
This manuscript has several noticeable strengths: it addresses an intriguing research question that fills that gap in existing literature, presents a clear and accurate presentation of the current literature, and conducts a series of experiments and control experiments with adequate sample size. Yet, it also entails several noticeable limitations - especially in the study design and statistical analyses.

Weaknesses:
1. Study design:
1.1 Dependent variable:
Emotional attention is known to modulate both microsaccades and pupil size. Given the existing pupillometry data that the authors have collected, it would be both possible and valuable to determine whether the rate of microsaccades is also influenced by emotional biological motion.

1.2 Stimuli:
It appears that the speed of the emotional biological motion stimuli mimics the natural pace of the emotional walker. What is the average velocity of the biological motion stimuli for each condition?

When the authors used inverted biological motion stimuli, they didn't observe any modulation in pupil size. Could there be a difference in microsaccades when comparing inverted emotional biological motion stimuli?

2. Statistical analyses
2.1 Multiple comparisons:
There are many posthoc comparisons throughout the manuscript. The authors should consider correction for multiple comparisons. Take Experiment 1 for example, it is important to note that the happy over neutral BM effect and the sad over neutral BM effect are no longer significant after Bonferroni correction, which is worth noting.

2.2 The authors present the correlation between happy over sad dilation effect and the autistic traits in Experiment 1, but do not report such correlations in Experiments 2-4. Did the authors collect the Autistic Quotient measure in Experiments 2-4? It would be informative if the authors could demonstrate the reproducibility (or lack thereof) of this happy-sad index in Experiments 2-4.

2.3 The observed correlation between happy over sad dilation effect and the autistic traits in Experiment 1 seems rather weak. It could be attributed to the poor reliability of the Autistic Quotient measure or the author-constructed happy-sad index. Did the authors examine the test-retest reliability of their tasks or the Autistic Quotient measure?

2.4 Relatedly, the happy over sad dilation effect is essentially a subtraction index. Without separately presenting the pipul size correlation with happy and sad BM in supplemental figures, it becomes challenging to understand what's primarily driving the observed correlation.

2.5 For the sake of transparency, it is important to report all findings, not just the positive results, throughout the paper.

3. Structure
3.1 The Results section immediately proceeds to the one-way repeated measures ANOVA. This section could be more reader-friendly by including a brief overview of the task procedures and variables, e.g., shifting Fig. 3 to this section.

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation