Elsevier

Brain and Cognition

Volume 68, Issue 1, October 2008, Pages 1-8
Brain and Cognition

Pointing with the eyes: The role of gaze in communicating danger

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2008.01.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Facial expression and direction of gaze are two important sources of social information, and what message each conveys may ultimately depend on how the respective information interacts in the eye of the perceiver. Direct gaze signals an interaction with the observer but averted gaze amounts to “pointing with the eyes”, and in combination with a fearful facial expression may signal the presence of environmental danger. We used fMRI to examine how gaze direction influences brain processing of facial expression of fear. The combination of fearful faces and averted gazes activated areas related to gaze shifting (STS, IPS) and fear-processing (amygdala, hypothalamus, pallidum). Additional modulation of activation was observed in motion detection areas, in premotor areas and in the somatosensory cortex, bilaterally.

Our results indicate that the direction of gaze prompts a process whereby the brain combines the meaning of the facial expression with the information provided by gaze direction, and in the process computes the behavioral implications for the observer.

Introduction

Facial expression and direction of gaze are significant components of the information provided by a face. In the course of development, detection of gaze orientation plays an important role. Human and nonhuman primates interact with their caregivers and learn from observing the direction of gaze what objects to avoid. In primates, fear can be communicated through the mechanism of joint attention: young rhesus monkeys, initially unafraid of snakes, show fear after witnessing the fearful reaction of their parents to a snake (toy or real), suggesting that they are able to couple their parents’ fearful expression and their direction of gaze to learn that snakes are dangerous (Mineka, Davidson, Cook, & Keir, 1984).

Until recently, studies of gaze processing have used neutral faces, and investigated the attentional cues provided by gaze direction. Direction of gaze influences the level of activity in areas involved in processing faces, including the fusiform gyrus, the superior temporal sulcus and the intraparietal sulcus (George et al., 2001, Hoffman and Haxby, 2000, Pelphrey et al., 2003). But gaze direction may play a more complex role when it belongs to a face expressing a specific emotion (Adams et al., 2003, Adams and Kleck, 2003, Klucharev and Sams, 2004, Mathews et al., 2003, Sato et al., 2004); but see (Hietanen & Leppanen, 2003). A fearful facial expression with an observer-averted gaze is automatically recognized (Anderson, Christoff, Panitz, De Rosa, & Gabrieli, 2003) as possibly indicating environmental threat (“there is a danger located where I am looking at”) and as requiring an adaptive response (“you need to avoid it”).

Several recent studies indicate gaze direction influences other brain areas besides the ones specifically associated with face recognition. To account for this, several groups have developed a distributed representation model of face perception (Bruce and Young, 1986, de Gelder et al., 2003, Haxby et al., 2000, Haxby et al., 1994, Haxby et al., 1996, Hoffman and Haxby, 2000), in which different areas of the brain respond to different attributes of a face, such as identity (fusiform gyrus, inferior occipital gyrus), gaze direction and recognition of action (superior temporal sulcus), and expression and/or emotion (orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, premotor cortex).

It is well known that the sight of a fearful face expression provides a very strong signal, however, a fearful face can be either empathy-evoking to the observer or threat-related, depending on its gaze direction. Facial expression of fear can be ambiguous because it may be unclear whether the emphasis is on communicating an experienced emotion to the observer and possibly provoking empathy, or on providing a danger signal to an observer with the goal of preparing him to act. To date there have only been very few studies that have manipulated separately the facial expression and the direction of gaze (Adams and Kleck, 2005, Ganel et al., 2005). Two previous studies used behavioral measures (Adams & Kleck, 2003) and event-related brain imaging (Adams et al., 2003) to investigate the combined effect of gaze and facial expression. The behavioral study revealed a shorter reaction time for fearful faces looking away compared with fearful faces looking at the observer. The brain imaging study revealed increased amygdala activation for stimuli consisting of angry faces with an averted gaze and fearful faces with a direct gaze, that were ambiguous in terms of their significance as threat to the observer. No other areas were reported.

It is reasonable to expect that different brain networks are involved as a function of the direction of gaze a facial expression. To address this issue, we manipulated direction of gaze in fearful faces. Our goal was to test a single very specific prediction related to the combined perception of fear and averted gaze and its impact on action readiness. Our hypothesis was that a fearful face expression with averted gaze signals a danger in the environment and may trigger activity in brain areas involved in characteristic adaptive action associated with fear such as preparing to flight. If fearful faces with averted gaze do indeed signal danger in the environment (threat-related), then they should prompt more premotor and motor activity than faces with directed gaze where the emphasis is more on communicating the emotion and triggering empathy in the observer (empathy-evoking). We tested the hypothesis that threat-related fearful face would modulate activation in areas involved in stimulus detection, in fear processing, and in preparation for action. We did not use neutral faces in this study, because in the context of an emotional expression study, neutral faces suffer from carry-over effects and acquire an unintended emotional significance. To specifically address our hypothesis related to fear processing we limited our paradigm to fearful expression of emotion.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

Stimuli were taken from the NimStim Emotional Face Stimuli database (http://www.macbrain.org/faces/index.htm#faces), a set of over 600 face images, consisting of 16 expressions posed by 45 professional actors. All expressions have been validated, and only faces that received more than 90% agreement in the validation were used. Eight fearful faces (four females) were selected. We used Adobe Photoshop 8.0 to alter gaze direction towards the left and the right and downwards (Fig. 1). Grayscale

Imaging

Structural and functional MR images of brain activity of eight participants (3 males, age 29 ± 6 years) were collected in a 3T high-speed echoplanar imaging device (Allegra, Siemens) using a phased-array head coil. Participants all had normal or corrected-to-normal vision. Informed written consent was obtained before the scanning session, and the Massachusetts General Hospital Human Studies Committee under Protocol #2002P-000228 approved all procedures. Structural images were collected with the

Image statistics

Image analysis was conducted using the NeuroLens analysis package (Hoge & Lissot, 2004) (http://www.neurolens.org, version 1.3). All functional EPI and structural scans were first converted from DICOM to MINC format using NeuroLens. Functional image series were motion corrected to the third frame in each series within NeuroLens using a hardware-accelerated module based on source code from AFNI’s 3dvolreg module (Cox & Jesmanowicz, 1999). Next, each image series was spatially smoothed in 3D with

Results and discussion

Fearful faces with the gaze averted compared with the same faces directly gazing at the observer increased activation in areas belonging to face and emotion processing networks. Areas of increased BOLD signal were found in gaze processing areas (superior temporal sulcus, intraparietal sulcus); in face identification areas (fusiform gyrus, inferior occipital gyrus); in areas involved in rapid stimulus detection (left amygdala, visual area MT+); in areas involved in fear processing (left

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by NIH Grant RO1 NS44824-01 and Swiss National Foundation Grant PPOOB—110741 to Nouchine Hadjikhani. We thank Reginald Adams and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on our manuscript.

References (57)

  • K.A. Pelphrey et al.

    Brain activation evoked by perception of gaze shifts: The influence of context

    Neuropsychologia

    (2003)
  • W. Sato et al.

    The amygdala processes the emotional significance of facial expressions: an fMRI investigation using the interaction between expression and face direction

    Neuroimage

    (2004)
  • T.V. Sewards et al.

    Fear and power-dominance drive motivation: neural representations and pathways mediating sensory and mnemonic inputs, and outputs to premotor structures

    Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews

    (2002)
  • B. Wicker et al.

    Brain regions involved in the perception of gaze: a PET study

    Neuroimage

    (1998)
  • K.J. Worsley et al.

    A general statistical analysis for fMRI data

    Neuroimage

    (2002)
  • D.H. Zald

    The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli

    Brain Research. Brain Research Reviews

    (2003)
  • R.B. Adams et al.

    Effects of gaze on amygdala sensitivity to anger and fear faces

    Science

    (2003)
  • Adams, R. B., Jr., & Kleck, R. E. (2001). Young Adult Facial...
  • R.B. Adams et al.

    Perceived gaze direction and the processing of facial displays of emotion

    Psychological Science

    (2003)
  • R.B. Adams et al.

    Effects of direct and averted gaze on the perception of facially communicated emotion

    Emotion

    (2005)
  • R. Adolphs

    Recognizing emotion from facial expressions: Psychological and neurological mechanisms

    Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews

    (2002)
  • D.G. Amaral

    The amygdala, social behavior, and danger detection

    Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

    (2003)
  • A.K. Anderson et al.

    Neural correlates of the automatic processing of threat facial signals

    Journal of Neuroscience

    (2003)
  • Beaupré, M., Cheung, N., & Hess, U. (2000). La reconnaissance des expressions émotionelles facials par des décodeurs...
  • N. Birbaumer et al.

    Deficient fear conditioning in psychopathy: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study

    Archives of general psychiatry

    (2005)
  • V. Bruce et al.

    Understanding face recognition

    British Journal of Psychology

    (1986)
  • D.L. Collins et al.

    Automatic 3D intersubject registration of MR volumetric data in standardized Talairach space

    Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

    (1994)
  • R.W. Cox et al.

    Real-time 3D image registration for functional MRI

    Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

    (1999)
  • Cited by (101)

    • Differential magnocellular versus parvocellular pathway contributions to the combinatorial processing of facial threat

      2019, Progress in Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      At the time, this finding also helped resolve the long-standing puzzle as to why amygdala activation was consistently and robustly found in response to fear displays, but not to anger displays, when anger (at least coupled with direct gaze) is arguably a clearer signal of threat (it signals the presence of threat, its source, and its target). Although subsequent studies replicated these initial findings for greater amygdala response to threat-related ambiguity (e.g., Ewbank et al., 2010; George et al., 2001; Straube et al., 2009; Ziaei et al., 2016), other studies emerged that reported the exact opposite pattern, greater amygdala response found to congruent versus ambiguous threat-gaze pairs (Hadjikhani et al., 2008; N'Diaye et al., 2009; Sato et al., 2004). Helping address these disparate findings, a new factor was tested that systematically moderated these effects, namely stimulus presentation speed (Adams et al., 2012).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text