Psychological Reports, 2011, 109, 2, 521-532.

Psychological Reports 2011

Habitual Emotion Regulation

and the Facial Grimace1, 2, 3

Keith W. Burton

University of Illinois at Springfield

Summary.Images of pleasant scenes usually produce increased activity over

the zygomaticus major muscle, as measured by electromyography (EMG), while less
activity is elicited by unpleasant images. However, increases in zygomaticus major
EMG activity while viewing unpleasant images have occasionally been reported in
the literature on affective facial expression (i.e., grimacing). To examine the pos-
sibility that individual differences in emotion regulation might be responsible for this
inconsistently observed phenomenon, the habitual emotion regulation tendencies
of 63 participants (32 women) were assessed and categorized according to their
regulatory tendencies. Participants viewed emotionally salient images while zygo-
maticus major EMG activity was recorded. Participants also provided self-report rat-
ings of their experienced emotional valence and arousal while viewing the pictures.
Despite demonstrating intact affective ratings, the grimacing pattern of zygomati-
cus major activity was observed in those who were less likely to use the cognitive
reappraisal strategy to regulate their emotions.

A frequently used measure of emotional expression is the electromyo-

graphic (EMG) recording of zygomaticus major muscle activity. This muscle
group is enlisted when the corners of the mouth are pulled up and back,
as seen when smiling. The use of zygomaticus major activity for assessing
emotional expression was established with a series of emotional imag-
ery studies by Schwartz (Schwartz, Fair, Salt, Mandel, & Klerman, 1976a,
1976b; Brown & Schwartz, 1980), and its use has since been expanded to
assess emotional expression in a wide variety of emotion elicitation para-
digms. A commonly used paradigm involves exposure to emotionally sa-
lient pictures such as those in the International Affective Picture System
(Lang, Greenwald, Bradley, & Hamm, 1993; Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert,
2005), and considerable research via this paradigm has shown that zygo-
maticus major activity generally increases in a linear fashion with emotion-
al pleasantness (for review, see Bradley, 2000; Cacioppo, Bernston, Lar

1
Address correspondence to Keith W. Burton, 1 University Plaza, MS UHB-3124, University
of Illinois at Springfield, Springfield, IL 62703 or e-mail (kburt2@uis.edu).
2
I wish to thank Jason Scott, Tammy Herschberger, Amber Waterman, Stephanie Myers,
Christine McGraw, Kristen Hargrave, Ashley Warren, Sarah Wolsfeld, Dawn Tompkins, and
Monica Qualls for their invaluable assistance with data collection and scoring. I also wish
to thank my colleagues Sheryl Reminger and Karen Pressley for their insightful comments
on early drafts of this paper, and the reviewers of this paper for their helpful suggestions.
3
These data were presented in part as a poster at the 48th annual meeting of the Society for
Psychophysiological Research in Austin, Texas (Burton, Hargrave, Myers, Warren, Wolsfeld,
Tompkins, et al., 2008).

DOI 10.2466/07.09.21.PR0.109.5.521-532 ISSN 0033-2941

522 K. W. Burton

sen, Poehlmann, & Ito, 2000; Bradley & Lang, 2007). However, a J-shaped,
quadratic pattern of zygomaticus major activity has also occasionally been
observed across the pleasantness spectrum, with increases in activity ob-
served during exposure not only to the most pleasant images but also to
the most unpleasant images (although to a lesser degree), with less ac-
tivity observed during the intermediate neutral images. This has primar-
ily been observed during exposure to the more arousing, disgust-eliciting
images (Bradley, Coldispoti, Cuthberg, & Lang, 2001; Larsen, Norris, &
Cacioppo, 2003) and has been interpreted to represent facial grimacing
(Bradley & Lang, 2007).
The authors laboratory has also observed the grimacing pattern of
zygomaticus major activity (Burton, Hargrave, Myers, Warren, Wolsfeld,
Tompkins, et al., 2008), which would be expected given that the utilized
International Affective Picture System stimuli are often from the extreme
ends of the pleasantness and arousal spectrums (including disgust-elic-
iting images). However, the grimacing pattern is not always evident in
these studies despite the consistent use of more extreme images as emo-
tional stimuli, and it is also not always evident in the literature on zygo-
maticus major activity. The intermittent nature of this phenomenon has led
to the suspicion that individual difference variables may be playing a role
in the presence of grimace expressions.
One such individual difference variable that could potentially explain
the grimacing phenomenon is that of emotion regulation. Broadly defined,
emotion regulation is a process engaged in for the purpose of modifying
ones emotional experience. Gross (1998, 2001) has offered a conceptual-
ization of emotion regulation based on his process model, which posits
that individual differences can arise at any one of five different points in
the emotion-generation process. Two points in this process have received
considerable empirical attention: the point at which the individual ap-
praises the emotional stimulus and the point at which the individual re-
sponds to the emotional stimulus. Grosss model of emotion regulation
states that one can attempt to down-regulate negative emotions by either
cognitively reappraising the stimulus (at the appraisal point in the emotion
process) or by attempting to suppress ones emotional responses (the last
point in the emotion process). Cognitive reappraisal is a process by which
the appraisal of the stimulus significance is modified. For example, view-
ing a picture of a gruesome injury will ordinarily elicit a strongly nega-
tive emotion which one might wish to alter. One way of doing that would
be to reappraise the stimulus, and in this example one might attempt to
down-regulate that emotion by concluding the image might be a result of
a Hollywood-style special effect. Another way to down-regulate would
be to suppress the emotional reaction by clamping down and minimiz-
 Regulation and Grimacing 523

ing outward expression. Gross and John (2003; John & Gross, 2004) devel-
oped a metric for assessing two regulatory processes called the Emotion
Regulation Questionnaire, which has been successfully used to assess in-
dividual differences in these regulatory strategies and has related them to
a variety of adaptive emotional outcomes (e.g., depressive symptoms, ex-
perience of positive and negative emotion, etc.).
Expressive emotional outputs can, of course, be influenced by emo-
tion regulation strategies. Because the grimace expression may be a re-
flection of elevated distress produced by experiencing an exceptionally
negative emotion, it will be more likely to appear when the individual is
not attempting to down-regulate the effect of an unpleasant stimulus. It is
thus hypothesized that the quadratic pattern of zygomaticus major that has
been intermittently observed in the literature is, at least in part, a prod-
uct of individual differences in habitual emotion regulation. Specifically,
those who habitually regulate their emotions are hypothesized to be more
likely to demonstrate the typically observed linear pattern of zygomaticus
major activity, because implementation of a regulatory strategy will dimin-
ish the effect of the stimulus on both their emotional experience and the
resultant expressive outputs. Those who are less likely to regulate their
emotions habitually are hypothesized to demonstrate a quadratic or J-
shaped pattern of zygomaticus major activity that would be typical of a gri-
mace, as they will be subject to the relatively unregulated impact of the
unpleasant emotional stimuli.
Regulatory influences on emotional facial expression patterns would
be hypothesized to occur, at least in the case of cognitive reappraisal, via
modification of emotional experiences. Thus, it would be expected that
those who experience the more intense negative emotions presumed to be
responsible for solicitation of the facial grimace would also show height-
ened degrees of negative emotional experience. However, Nielsen and
Kaszniak (2007) suggested this might not be found, even if there is a re-
lationship between regulation and grimacing. They suggested instructing
participants to report their emotional experiences may not be sufficient
to provide a self-report that is free from contamination from other sourc-
es of affective information. They indicated subjective reports may be in-
fluenced by a generally understood emotional knowledge that is evoked
by emotionally salient images. This emotional knowledge may then influ-
ence the self-report of emotional experience, producing a rating that does
not purely reflect experience. Further, they suggested that when we fail
to truly experience an emotion we know we should be feeling (e.g., when
we see someone crying but do not genuinely feel compassion), social ex-
pectations often compel us to report having that feeling. While great pains
are taken in the protocol to emphasize the importance of rating emotional
524 K. W. Burton

experience and nothing else, it is quite possible some participants do not

have the emotional sophistication to differentiate emotional experience
from emotional knowledge, and that social desirability factors are at play.
Method
Participants
The project was approved by the University of Illinois at Springfield
Institutional Review Board for recruitment of human participants. Sixty-
three undergraduate students (32 women) were recruited from a psychol-
ogy course-based participant pool for research participation credit or extra
credit earned toward their courses. Participants were between the ages of
18 and 52 years (M=25.2, SD=8.7), were fluent in English, and were asked
to provide both demographic and health history information via written
questionnaire to screen for ongoing psychiatric conditions or medication
use that might influence emotion systems (e.g., depression, head injuries,
use of antidepressants).
Measures and Groups
Participants were grouped according to their scores on the Emotion
Regulation Questionnaire (Gross & John, 2003).
Emotional regulation.The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire has
good internal consistency reliability (Cronbachs alpha=.79 for the Reap-
praisal scale, .73 for the Suppression scale) and 3-mo. test-retest reliability
(.69; Gross & John, 2003). The convergent and discriminant validities of
these scales have been found to have appropriate statistical relationships
with other emotion constructs (Gross & John, 2003).
Participants were classified as either High regulators (n=32) or Low
regulators (n=31) based on a median-split of their Emotion Regulation
Questionnaire composite scale scores (Mdn=41.5; questionnaire range:
1070). The mean Emotion Regulation scores for the groups were M=47.4
(SD=4.3) for the High regulator group, and M=34.6 (SD=6.3) for the Low
regulator group. Groups were comparable with regard to both age and
sex ratio. For more detailed analyses bearing on particular regulatory
styles, participants were grouped according to their tendencies to regulate
via cognitive reappraisal based on a median split of their cognitive Reap-
praisal subscale score (Mdn=30.0; range=742). They were classified as ei-
ther High reappraisers (n=28) or Low reappraisers (n=35). The mean cog-
nitive reappraisal subscale scores for the groups were M=33.8 (SD=3.3)
for the High reappraiser group and M=23.7 (SD=4.9) for the Low reap-
praiser group. Likewise, participants were classified as either High sup-
pressors (n=35) or Low suppressors (n=28) based on a median-split of
their expressive Suppression subscale score (Mdn=12.5; range=428),
with mean expressive Suppression subscale scores of M=15.3 (SD=2.5)
 Regulation and Grimacing 525

and M=8.4 (SD=2.1), respectively. As with the regulator groups, these

groups were comparable with regard to both age and sex ratio.
Affective pictures and ratings.Four sets of 36 affective pictures were
selected from the International Affective Picture System (Lang, et al.,
2005). Each set was comprised of 12 Pleasant, 12 Neutral, and 12 Unpleas-
ant images based upon normative International Affective Picture System
ratings. Each set was equated for the types of stimuli included (e.g., erot-
ics, action images, disgusting images, etc.) and for mean Pleasantness and
Arousal ratings.
The 5-point version of the Self-Assessment Manikin (Lang, 1980) is a
commonly used nonverbal measure of self-reported emotional pleasant-
ness and arousal, in this case, in response to the picture stimuli. The Man-
ikin is a set of five numbered representations of a person with some at-
tribute (size, facial expression, etc.) modified as related to the strength of
reactionin this case, Pleasantness and Arousal. The participant indicates
a response equivalent to his or her reaction to the stimulus; the score is the
number associated with the chosen representation.
Procedure
Data were collected in a single 60-min. session. After providing in-
formed consent, participants completed a demographic questionnaire and
the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (Gross & John, 2003). Participants
were then seated in a comfortable reclining chair and had their skin pre-
pared using standard cleaning techniques. Facial EMG was recorded over
the left side of the face via skin-surface 4-mm standard silver/silver-chlo-
ride electrodes. Brief instructions were given on the use of the Self-As-
sessment Manikin (Lang, 1980). Participants then viewed a series of four
practice images to acclimate them to the task. The set of 36 affective im-
ages was presented on a 19-in. LCD monitor positioned at eye level ap-
proximately 30 in. in front of the participant. Images were presented, and
Self-Assessment Manikin ratings recorded, via E-prime experimental con-
trol software. Participants were instructed to attend to the picture for the
entire viewing period. Each trial consisted of a 3-sec. baseline period and
a 6-sec. image viewing period and 915 sec. between trials.
Data Reduction and Analysis
EMG recordings over the zygomaticus major muscle were made via
a Biopac MP150 system (Biopac Systems, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA). EMG
signals were relayed over shielded cables to bioamplifiers and ampli-
fied5000. EMG signals were digitally sampled at 1,000 Hz and recorded
on a computer. Offline, data were band-pass filtered over a range of 10 to
500 Hz, rectified, and smoothed over a 20-point moving window. EMG
activity was calculated as a change score reflecting the difference between
the mean activity over a 3-sec. baseline period and the mean level of ac-
526 K. W. Burton

tivity during the first 3 sec. of image viewing. Because of the substantial
between-subject variability in magnitude of EMG responses, all raw EMG
change scores were converted on a within-subject basis to standardized t
scores. Artifacts were noted visually during data collection, and also of-
fline by measuring unusual levels of activity in the baseline periods. Addi-
tional outliers were identified as change scores in excess of three standard
deviations from the individuals mean change score (i.e., t scores below 20
or above 80).
A 3 within (image type: positive, neutral, negative)2 between (group:
High, Low) repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted for each emotion
regulation variable (overall Regulation, Reappraisal, and Suppression).
Results
Self-reported Emotional Experience
Self-Assessment Manikin ratings for emotional pleasantness typically
show a linear relationship between self-reported Pleasantness and image
type, with positive images rated as most pleasant, negative images as least
pleasant, and neutral images in between. A quadratic relationship is typi-
cally observed between self-reported Arousal and image type, with Arous-
al ratings highest for positive and negative images and lowest for neutral
images. Consistent with those typically reported patterns, a significant ef-
fect of image type was observed in this study for both Pleasantness ratings
(F2,124=492, p<.0001; 2=0.89) and Arousal ratings (F2,124=42.6, p<.0001;
2=0.42). Within-subject contrasts showed a linear effect for image type
on Pleasantness ratings (F1,62=608, p<.0001; 2=0.91) and a quadratic ef-
fect for image type on Arousal ratings (F1,62=140, p<.0001; 2=0.70), both
as expected. There was no interaction between image type and habitual
regulation groups for either pleasantness or arousal ratings. There were
no significant differences in Pleasantness or Arousal ratings between stim-
ulus sets, nor were there any sex differences in ratings.
TABLE 1
Zygomaticus Major Activity By Image Valence and Habitual Emotion Regulation
Regulation Group Zygomaticus Major Activity While Viewing Image Type
Positive Neutral Negative
M SD M SD M SD
High regulator 51.9 3.0 49.3 1.9 48.7 2.7
Low regulator 51.6 2.7 48.4 2.7 50.0 2.4
High reappraiser 52.3 2.9 49.2 2.0 48.5 2.6
Low reappraiser 51.2 2.7 48.6 2.8 50.2 2.4
High suppressor 51.9 2.8 48.7 2.4 49.4 2.7
Low suppressor 51.7 3.0 49.1 2.4 49.3 2.6
Note.Mean zygomaticus major change reported in t scores.
 Regulation and Grimacing 527
53

Change in Zygomaticus Major Activity

52

51
(t scores)

50

49

48

47
Positive Neutral Negative
Image Type

Fig. 1.Zygomaticus major activity in response to viewing emotionally salient images.

Low regulators=white bars; High regulators=gray bars.

Zygomaticus Major Activity and Emotion Regulation

Overall, the expected effect of image type on zygomaticus major ac-
tivity was observed (F2,122=14.9, p<.0001; 2=0.20), with greatest levels
of activity occurring while viewing pleasant images. The interaction be-
tween image type and regulation tendencies was not statistically signifi-
cant (F2,122=2.0, p=.10; 2=0.02), but a within-subject contrast revealed a
significant quadratic effect for the image type by regulation group interac-
tion (F1,61=4.5, p<.04; 2=.06). Visual inspection of the data (Table 1, Fig. 1)
revealed the Low regulator group demonstrated the grimacing pattern of
zygomaticus major activity while the High regulator group did not. How-
ever, the difference between High and Low regulators zygomaticus activ-
ity while viewing negative images was not significant (F1,61=2.3, p=.13;
2=0.03).
To investigate the possibility the different regulation styles contribut-
ed differentially to the production of grimacing expressions, similar, sep-
arate analyses for reappraisal and suppression groups were performed.
There was a significant interaction of image typereappraisal group
(F2,122=3.2, p<.05; 2=0.1; Table 2). Visual inspection of the data suggested

Table 2
Repeated-measures ANOVA for 3 (image type, within)2 (reappraisal group, between)
Source SS df MS F p
Image type 3.2 2 1.6 16.0 <.001
Image typeReappraisal 0.7 2 0.3 3.2 <.05
Error 12.3 122 0.1
528 K. W. Burton

53

Change in Zygomaticus Major Activity

52

51
(t scores)

50

49

48

47
Positive Neutral Negative
Image Type

Fig. 2.Zygomaticus major activity in response to viewing emotionally salient images.

Low reappraisers=white bars; High reappraisers=gray bars.

a linear relationship between image type and zygomaticus major activity for
the High reappraiser group and a quadratic relationship for the Low reap-
praiser group (Table 1; Fig. 2). Subsequent post hoc analyses with within-
subject contrasts confirmed the linear model as a best fit for the High re-
appraiser group (F1,34=19.3, p<.0001; 2=0.36) and a quadratic model as a
best fit for the Low reappraiser group (F1,27=8.9, p<.006; 2=0.25). There
was no statistically significant interaction of image type and suppression
group on zygomaticus major activity (Fig. 3).
53
Change in Zygomaticus Major Activity

52

51
(t scores)

50

49

48

47
Positive Neutral Negative

Fig. 3.Zygomaticus major activity in response to viewing emotionally salient images.

Low suppressors=white bars; High suppressors=gray bars.
 Regulation and Grimacing 529

Discussion
The goal of this research was to clarify the role habitual emotion regu-
lation may play in the generation of the grimace facial expression that
has been intermittently observed in picture perception investigations of
emotional expression. Grimacing, defined as a relative increase in EMG
activity over the zygomaticus major muscle while viewing unpleasant im-
ages, was hypothesized to be most likely to occur for those participants
who reported not routinely regulating their emotions. While not statisti-
cally significant, a modest effect size supported this hypothesis by utiliz-
ing the composite Emotion Regulation Questionnaire scores as an index of
overall emotion regulation (Fig. 1). Because the Emotion Regulation Ques-
tionnaire measures two distinct subtypes of emotion regulation, cogni-
tive reappraisal and expressive suppression, the possibility these different
regulatory strategies might differentially contribute to the likelihood of a
grimace elicitation was explored. While there was no evidence of a rela-
tionship between grimacing and the tendency to regulate emotions via ex-
pressive suppression (Fig. 3), a relationship between cognitive reappraisal
and grimacing was found. Specifically, a grimacing pattern of zygomaticus
major activity was found for those who reported being less likely to habit-
ually regulate their emotions via cognitive reappraisal, while a more lin-
ear pattern of zygomaticus major activity was found for those who report-
ed habitually utilizing cognitive reappraisal (Fig. 2). Identification of this
individual difference variables contributions to grimace elicitation may
thus provide a partial answer to the puzzle regarding the inconsistency
of emotion-evoked zygomaticus major patterns reported in the literature.
Because cognitive reappraisal is proposed to operate by down-regu-
lating ones negative emotional experience (Gross & John, 2003), it would
seem any change in facial expressions should be modulated via a corre-
sponding change in self-reported emotional experience. However, this
was not what was found. Self-report of experienced pleasantness and
arousal while viewing the stimuli did not differ significantly between the
High and Low cognitive reappraisal groups. One possible explanation for
this curious finding is that participants emotions were in fact influenced
by emotion regulation, but that the reporting of emotions was not perfect-
ly reflective of the experienced emotion. This is precisely what was sug-
gested by Nielsen and Kaszniak (2007), as noted earlier.
It could nevertheless be that emotional experience does not change as
a result of habitual emotion-regulation strategies. If this is the case, then
another explanation is needed for how cognitive reappraisal might influ-
ence the pattern of zygomtacius major activity. Larsen, et al. (2003) dem-
onstrated that zygomaticus major activity while viewing pleasant images
is subject to a threshold effect such that activity over that muscle is un-
530 K. W. Burton

likely to occur until the stimulus exceeds a relatively high threshold of

pleasantness. Once stimuli exceeded that threshold, a sharp increase in
elicited zygomaticus major activity was observed. One possible explanation
for the present finding is that zygomaticus major activity may be subject
to a threshold effect for very unpleasant images as well, and that thresh-
old could vary as a function of individual differences in emotion-regula-
tion tendencies. Within this proposed model, one of the effects of habitual
cognitive reappraisal would be to influence the threshold of unpleasant
emotional experience required to trigger a grimace. Those who habitu-
ally regulate via cognitive reappraisal may have a much higher threshold
of unpleasantness required for grimace elicitation, and under a standard
picture exposure paradigm, this would tend to produce a more linear pat-
tern of zygomaticus major activity. Those who did not habitually regulate
via cognitive reappraisal might have a lower threshold for grimace elici-
tation and consequently be more likely to demonstrate that expression in
response to standard, unpleasant International Affective Picture System
stimuli.
This framework provides a possible explanation of the present find-
ings and may also be useful for interpreting previous findings (Burton &
Kaszniak, 2006) utilizing a similar picture perception paradigm for study-
ing emotion in healthy older adults and in Alzheimers disease. Those
with Alzheimers disease did not differ from healthy elderly controls with
regard to their self-reported emotional experiences. These findings were
explained as possibly reflecting a breakdown in the frontal cortical sys-
tems contribution to emotion processing. While emotion regulation was
not measured in that study, it may be that the suggested dysfunction of
the frontal cortical regions in Alzheimers disease exerts its influence on
facial expression via disruption of the cognitive reappraisal process. This
might be expected to occur in Alzheimers disease, as the implementation
of cognitive reappraisal has been described as requiring several important
cognitive functions that would be affected in Alzheimers disease, includ-
ing working memory, linguistic abilities, and access to long-term seman-
tic memory (Ochsner & Gross, 2007). Thus, those who are unable to en-
gage cognitive reappraisal due to neurologic disease might be expected
to show a pattern of zygomaticus major activity comparable to those who
might be cognitively capable, but do not habitually use cognitive reap-
praisal. This interpretation is of course speculative, but these seemingly
similar findings provide an intriguing topic for further exploration.
Another possibility is that those less likely to engage in a regulatory
mechanism assessed by the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire are enlist-
ing an alternative method of emotion regulation. Specifically, they may
be regulating their emotions by capitalizing on a process first proposed
 Regulation and Grimacing 531

by James (1884), which has come to be known as the facial feedback hy-
pothesis. The Jamesian theory of emotion was predicated on emotional
states being effected by multiple variables, including their visceral and
expressive emotional elements. Subsequent research (see Laird, 2006, for
a summary) has documented that it is indeed possible to influence emo-
tional states by engaging in very simple manipulations of facial muscles
(see also Mori & Mori, 2009, 2010). It may thus be the case that the indi-
viduals in this study who were less likely to use regulatory mechanisms
assessed by the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire are instead relying on
manipulation of their zygomaticus major, or smiling, muscle to down-
regulate their negative emotions. This possibility is certainly deserving of
further study.
Finally, some individual difference variables were assessed in this
study, but these are certainly not the only individual difference variables
that could influence emotion processing, regulation, and expression. This
study should be considered a preliminary foray into the examination of
the effects of individual differences on these emotion measures. Some pos-
sible individual difference variables worth considering for future research
might include personality traits, emotional reactivity, and coping styles.
References
Bradley, M. M. (2000)Emotion and motivation. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G.
G. Bernston (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology. (2nd ed.) New York: Cambridge
Univer. Press. Pp. 602-642.
Bradley, M. M., & Codispoti, M., Cuthberg, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (2001)Emotion and
motivation: I. Defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion,
1, 276-298.
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2007)The International Affective Picture System (IAPS)
in the study of emotion and attention. In J. A. Coan & J. J. B. Allen (Eds.), Handbook
of emotion elicitation and assessment. New York: Oxford Univer. Press. Pp. 29-46.
Brown, S., & Schwartz, G. E. (1980)Relationships between facial electromyography
and subjective experience during affective imagery. Biological Psychology, 11, 49-62.
Burton, K. W., Hargrave, K., Myers, S., Warren, A., Wolsfeld, S., Tompkins, D.,
Qualls, M., & Reminger, S. (2008)Habitual emotion regulation and increased
zygomaticus major activity evoked by negative images (or grimacing). Psycho-
physiology, 45, S118.
Burton, K. W., & Kaszniak, A. W. (2006)Emotional experience and facial expression
in Alzheimers disease. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 13, 636-651.
Cacioppo, J. T., Bernston, G. G., Larsen, J. T., Poehlmann, K. M., & Ito, T. A. (2000)The
psychophysiology of emotion. In R. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), The
handbook of emotion. (2nd ed.) New York: Guilford. Pp. 173-191.
Gross, J. J. (1998)The emerging field of emotion regulation: an integrative review.
Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-299.
Gross, J. J. (2001)Emotion regulation in adulthood: timing is everything. Current Di-
rections in Psychological Science, 10, 214-219.
532 K. W. Burton

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003)Individual differences in two emotion regulation pro-
cesses: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 85, 348-362.
James, W. (1884)What is an emotion? Mind, 19, 188-205.
John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2004)Healthy and unhealthy emotion regulation strategies:
personality processes, individual differences, and life-span development. Journal
of Personality, 72, 1301-1333.
Laird, J. D. (2006)Feelings: the perception of self. New York: Oxford Univer. Press.
Lang, P. J. (1980)Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: computer ap-
plications. In J. B. Sidowski, J. H. Johnson, & T. A. Williams (Eds.), Technology in
mental health care delivery systems. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Pp. 119-137.
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2005)International Affective Picture
System (IAPS): affective ratings of pictures and instructional manual. (Technical Report
No. A-6) Gainesville, FL: Univer. of Florida.
Lang, P. J., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M., & Hamm, A. O. (1993)Looking at
pictures: affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions. Psychophysiology, 30,
261-273.
Larsen, J. T., Norris, C. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2003)Effects of positive affect and nega-
tive affect on electromyographic activity over zygomaticus major and corrugator su-
percilii. Psychophysiology, 40, 776-785.
Mori, K., & Mori, H. (2009)Another test of the passive facial feedback hypothesis:
when your face smiles, you feel happy. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109, 76-78.
Mori, K., & Mori, H. (2010)Examination of the passive facial feedback hypothesis
using an implicit measure: with a furrowed brow, neutral objects with pleasant
primes look less appealing. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 111, 785-789.
Nielsen, L., & Kaszniak, A. W. (2007)Conceptual, theoretical, and methodological is-
sues in inferring subjective emotional experience: recommendations for research-
ers. In J. A. Coan & J. J. B. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of emotion elicitation and assess-
ment. New York: Oxford Univer. Press. Pp. 361-375.
Ochsner, K. N., & Gross, J. J. (2007)The neural architecture of emotion regulation.
In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation. New York: Guilford. Pp. 87-109.
Schwartz, G. E., Fair, P. L., Salt, P., Mandel, M. R., & Klerman, G. L. (1976a)Facial
expression and imagery in depression: an electromyographic study. Psychosomatic
Medicine, 38, 337-347.
Schwartz, G. E., Fair, P. L., Salt, P., Mandel, M. R., & Klerman, G. L. (1976b)Facial
muscle patterning to affective imagery in depressed and nondepressed subjects.
Science, 192, 489-491.

Accepted August 8, 2011.