CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 189Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFace Recognition and PerceptionChild and Animal Learning Development

A systematic review and meta-analysis of facial emotion recognition in autism spectrum disorder: The specificity of deficits and the role of task characteristics

Yeung, Michael K.·2022·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
DOI 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.104518
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This review assessed the specificity of facial emotion recognition impairment and the role of task characteristics in facial emotion recognition in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Based on subsets of 148 studies identified in PubMed and PsycINFO, random-effects meta-analyses showed significant impairment in recognizing all basic facial emotions in ASD. Additionally, ASD involves poorer facial emotion recognition than other clinical conditions and has similar impairment in recognizing emotional and nonemotional facial attributes, as well as in recognizing emotion in faces and other modalities. Furthermore, there are significant moderating effects for emotion complexity and holistic processing, a statistical trend for task type, and no significant effect for motion, social relevance, or stimulus salience on facial emotion recognition in ASD. Altogether, this review suggests nonselective facial emotion recognition impairment in ASD. Such impairment is relatively specific to ASD but is not specific to the recognition of emotional facial attributes or emotion recognition in the face modality. Identifying the role of task characteristics improves our understanding of the mechanisms underlying facial emotion recognition in ASD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.104518

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sapey-Triomphe and colleagues reported a comparable perception of tonic volatility combined with altered response model parameters and modified neural correlates of prediction in a probabilistic associative learning task.

    “Similar to the current findings, Sapey-Triomphe and colleagues reported a comparable perception of tonic volatility combined with altered response model parameters [13] and modified neural correlates of prediction [14] in a probabilistic associative learning task.”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

  • Multiple studies using the HGF have documented comparable tonic volatility estimates in autistic and non-autistic adults in probabilistic associative learning tasks, the Wisconsin Card-Sorting task, and a size-illusion task.

    “Multiple studies using the HGF have now documented this similarity: probabilistic associative learning tasks [13, 14], the Wisconsin Card-Sorting task measuring cognitive flexibility and set-shifting [15] and a size-illusion task [16], experiment [9].”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

  • A recent study by Shi et al. investigated prior updating in ASD using the central tendency effect in combination with Kalman, finding an initial underweighting of priors in autistic adults that normalised by the end of the task.

    “For example, a recent study by Shi et al. [5] investigated prior updating in ASD using the central tendency effect in combination with Kalman. They found an initial underweighting of priors in autistic adults, resonating with some previous findings indicating atypical priors [13, 56], which normalised by the end of the task, resonating with contrasting previous findings of intact priors in ASD [57”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yeung, M. K.
Affiliations
Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Yeung, Michael K.
ORCID
Yeung, Michael K.
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
133
Pages
104518
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.104518
OpenAlex
W4205331548
Cited by
187
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 3
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, facial emotion recognition, basic emotions, task characteristics, holistic processing, facial attributes, social cognition
MeSH terms
Facial Recognition, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Emotions, Facial Expression, Humans, Recognition, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review