Cited by 257Face Recognition and PerceptionAction Observation and SynchronizationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Cortical Regions for Judgments of Emotions and Personality Traits from Point-light Walkers

Heberlein, Andrea S., Adolphs, Ralph, Tranel, Daniel, Damasio, Hanna·2004·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Humans are able to use nonverbal behavior to make fast, reliable judgments of both emotional states and personality traits. Whereas a sizeable body of research has identified neural structures critical for emotion recognition, the neural substrates of personality trait attribution have not been explored in detail. In the present study, we investigated the neural systems involved in emotion and personality trait judgments. We used a type of visual stimulus that is known to convey both emotion and personality information, namely, point-light walkers. We compared the emotion and personality trait judgments made by subjects with brain damage to those made by neurologically normal subjects and then conducted a lesion overlap analysis to identify neural regions critical for these two tasks. Impairments on the two tasks dissociated: Some subjects were impaired at emotion recognition, but judged personality normally; other subjects were impaired on the personality task, but normal at emotion recognition. Moreover, these dissociations in performance were associated with damage to specific neural regions: Right somatosensory cortices were a primary focus of lesion overlap in subjects impaired on the emotion task, whereas left frontal opercular cortices were a primary focus of lesion overlap in subjects impaired on the personality task. These findings suggest that attributions of emotional states and personality traits are accomplished by partially dissociable neural systems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/0898929041920423

Cites

5 of 5 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heberlein, A. S., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • University of Iowa
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2004-09-01
Volume
16
Issue
7
Pages
1143-1158
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2104227741
Cited by
257
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 14
FWCI
7.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (T32-NS07413, NS-19632, T32NS007413)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
emotion recognition, point-light walker, nonverbal behavior, somatosensory cortex, frontal operculum, brain damage, neural correlates, social cognition, facial expression perception
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Brain Damage, Chronic, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Emotions, Female, Humans, Judgment, Functional Laterality, Male, Middle Aged, Nonverbal Communication, Personality, Photic Stimulation, Reference Values, 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