Association of Facial Paralysis With Perceptions of Personality and Physical Traits.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2020
01 06 2020
Historique:
entrez:
25
6
2020
pubmed:
25
6
2020
medline:
24
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Facial paralysis has a significant effect on affect display, with the most notable deficit being patients' the inability to smile in the same way as those without paralysis. These impairments may result in undesirable judgements of personal qualities, thus leading to a significant social penalty in those who have the condition. To quantify the association of facial paralysis with the way smiling patients are perceived by others with respect to personality traits, attractiveness, and femininity or masculinity and to evaluate the potential association of facial palsy-related patient-reported outcome measures with how patients are perceived by others. This retrospective cross-sectional study used 20 images of smiling patients with facial paralysis evaluated between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016. Using photograph editing software, the photographs were edited to create a simulated nonparalysis smiling facial appearance. A total of 40 photographs were split into 4 groups of 10 photographs, each with 5 altered and 5 unaltered photographs. The surveys were designed such that altered and unaltered photographs of the same patient were not placed in the same survey to avoid recall bias. Anonymous raters used a 7-point Likert scale to rate their perception of each patient's personality traits (ie, aggressiveness, likeability, and trustworthiness), attractiveness, and femininity or masculinity based on photographs in their assigned survey. Raters were blinded to study intent. Scores from the Facial Clinimetric Evaluation questionnaire were included to assess self-perception. Data were analyzed from November 11, 2019, to February 20, 2020. Ratings of personality traits, attractiveness, and femininity or masculinity. Social function domain scores and overall scores were analyzed from the Facial Clinimetric Evaluation questionnaire. This study included photographs of 20 patients with facial paralysis (mean [range] age, 54 [28-69] years; 15 [75%] women). A total of 122 respondents completed the survey (71 [61%] women). Most respondents were between the ages of 25 and 34 years (79 participants [65%]). Overall, smiling photos of patients with facial paralysis were perceived as significantly less likeable (difference, -0.29; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.14), trustworthy (difference, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.11), attractive (difference, -0.47; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.32), and feminine or masculine (difference, -0.21; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03) compared with their simulated preparalysis photographs. When analyzed by sex, smiling women with facial paralysis experienced lower ratings for likeability (difference, -0.34; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.16), trustworthiness (difference, -0.24; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.06), attractiveness (difference, -0.74; 95% CI, -0.94 to -0.55), and femininity (difference, -0.35; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.13). However, smiling men with facial paralysis only received significantly lower ratings for likeability (difference, -0.24; 95% CI, -0.47 to -0.01) and trustworthiness (difference, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.07). As patients' self-reported social function and total Facial Clinimetric Evaluation scores increased, there was an increase in perceived trustworthiness (rs[480] = 0.11; P = .02) and attractiveness (rs[478] = 0.10; P = .04) scores by raters. In this study, photographs of patients with facial paralysis received lower ratings for several personality and physical traits compared with digitally edited images with no facial paralysis. These findings suggest a social penalty associated with facial paralysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32579192
pii: 2767590
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.5495
pmc: PMC7315303
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e205495Références
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Jun;111(7):2140-6; discussion 2147-8
pubmed: 12794453
Laryngoscope. 2012 Mar;122(3):533-8
pubmed: 22252782
Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Dec;12(12):455-60
pubmed: 18951830
Emotion. 2013 Aug;13(4):724-38
pubmed: 23627724
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Sep 1;18(5):363-9
pubmed: 27253905
Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Jul 7;269(1498):1307-12
pubmed: 12079651
Head Neck. 2016 Aug;38(8):1158-63
pubmed: 27225347
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017 May 1;19(3):190-196
pubmed: 27930763
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Nov;142(5):722e-728e
pubmed: 30511986
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998 Jun;118(6):790-6
pubmed: 9627238
Psicothema. 2017 Nov;29(4):462-468
pubmed: 29048304
Trends Cogn Sci. 2017 Nov;21(11):864-877
pubmed: 28964655
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2006;59(3):272-8
pubmed: 16673541
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1990 Fall;14(4):249-57
pubmed: 2239515
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Aug 12;111(32):E3353-61
pubmed: 25071197
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2019 Sep 1;21(5):369-374
pubmed: 31294743
Otol Neurotol. 2004 Nov;25(6):1014-9
pubmed: 15547436
Emotion. 2009 Apr;9(2):260-4
pubmed: 19348537
Laryngoscope. 2001 Mar;111(3):387-98
pubmed: 11224766
Emotion. 2009 Dec;9(6):807-20
pubmed: 20001124
Laryngoscope. 2011 Jun;121(6):1138-43
pubmed: 21557237
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Oct;10(10):1316-22
pubmed: 25717074
PLoS One. 2017 Jun 28;12(6):e0179708
pubmed: 28658294
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Jul;130(1):91-9
pubmed: 22743876
Psychol Sci. 2018 Apr;29(4):496-503
pubmed: 29485945
J Nonverbal Behav. 2009 Mar 1;33(1):17-34
pubmed: 19554208
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1999 Nov-Dec;23(6):416-23
pubmed: 10629298
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 May 12;112(19):E2429-36
pubmed: 25902500
Laryngoscope. 2013 May;123(5):1256-60
pubmed: 23553515
Laryngoscope. 2014 Jan;124(1):84-90
pubmed: 23775545
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Apr;72(4):729-741
pubmed: 29471708
Laryngoscope. 2016 Feb;126(2):334-9
pubmed: 26608714
PLoS One. 2009 Jun 22;4(6):e5952
pubmed: 19543398