SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Emotional cues from expressive behavior of women and men with Parkinson's disease.

PLoS One · 2018-07-02

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199886PMID: 29965984

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveEmotional experience of people with Parkinson's disease is prone to being misunderstood by observers and even healthcare practitioners, which affects treatment effectiveness and makes clients suffer distress in their social lives. This study was designed to identify reliable emotional cues from expressive behavior in women and men with Parkinson's disease.MethodVideotaped expressive behavior of 96 participants during an interview of discussing enjoyable events was rated using the Interpersonal Communication Rating Protocol. Indices from emotional measures were represented in three components. Correlational analyses between expressive behavior domains and emotional components were conducted for the total sample and by gender separately.ResultsMore gross motor expressivity and smiling/laughing indicated more positive affect in the total sample. Less conversational engagement indicated more negative affect in women. However, women with more negative affect and depression appeared to smile and laugh more.ConclusionThis study identified reliable cues from expressive behavior that could be used for assessment of emotional experience in people with Parkinson's disease. For women, because smiling/laughing may convey two possible meanings, that is, more positive and more negative affect, this cue needs to be interpreted cautiously and be used for detecting the intensity, not the type, of emotional experience. Healthcare practitioners should be sensitive to valid cues to make an accurate evaluation of emotion in people with Parkinson's disease.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.