Cited by 147Emotion and Mood RecognitionMental Health via WritingDeception detection and forensic psychology

Automatic behavior descriptors for psychological disorder analysis

Scherer, Stefan, Stratou, Giota, Mahmoud, Marwa, Boberg, Jill, Gratch, Jonathan, Rizzo, Albert, Morency, Louis-Philippe·2013·2013 10th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG)

Abstract

We investigate the capabilities of automatic nonverbal behavior descriptors to identify indicators of psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder. We seek to confirm and enrich present state of the art, predominantly based on qualitative manual annotations, with automatic quantitative behavior descriptors. In this paper, we propose four nonverbal behavior descriptors that can be automatically estimated from visual signals. We introduce a new dataset called the Distress Assessment Interview Corpus (DAIC) which includes 167 dyadic interactions between a confederate interviewer and a paid participant. Our evaluation on this dataset shows correlation of our automatic behavior descriptors with specific psychological disorders as well as a generic distress measure. Our analysis also includes a deeper study of self-adaptor and fidgeting behaviors based on detailed annotations of where these behaviors occur.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/fg.2013.6553789

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scherer, S., Stratou, G., Mahmoud, M., Boberg, J., Gratch, J., Rizzo, A., & Morency, L.-P.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Venue
2013 10th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2013-04
Pages
1-8
ISSN
1541-5058 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981231682
Cited by
147
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 14
FWCI
23.59
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
Keywords
depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, dyadic interaction, visual signals

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