Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Visual stimuli examples.

(A) Illustrative example of the linear continuum of morphs created by morphing the neutral expression with the happiness face. (B) Illustrative example of the facial identification task. The large expression in the center is a sadness expression. These images do not correspond to the actual stimuli used in the experiment, and were created just for the purpose of illustrating the facial morphing procedure and the facial identification task in this article. The images used in the experiment (obtained from The NimStim set of facial expressions) are protected by copyrights and not freely available to be published.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Timeline of the experimental procedure.

Timeline showing the procedures conducted in pre-experiment, experimental session and post-experiment moments. The stages of the experimental session in which an odor condition was present (butyric acid, isoamyl acetate, lemongrass or no odor) are marked in grey.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Perception thresholds of each emotion category.

Mean intensities and standard errors for correct identification of each emotion for all odor conditions grouped. Sadness presented the highest perception threshold between the emotions, and fear was significantly higher than happiness. The significant differences are illustrated by asterisk brackets.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

RT for each intensity.

RT means and standard errors for each intensity with all emotions and odor conditions grouped.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Analysis of RT between intensities for disgust and fear.

Graphs showing RT means and standard errors for disgust and fear at threshold, medium and high expression intensities in different odor conditions.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Minimum RT of each emotion for high-intensity facial expressions (80, 90 and 100).

Means and standard errors of the minimum RT of each emotion for all odor conditions grouped. Happiness was recognized faster than sadness expressions (p < .005), but no other differences between emotions were observed. Significant differences are illustrated by asterisk brackets.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Difference in the minimum RT between emotions in each odor condition.

Means and standard errors of the minimum RT for each emotion according to the odor condition.

More »

Fig 7 Expand