Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Nov 29;11(11):e0167276.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167276. eCollection 2016.

The Role of the Amygdala in Facial Trustworthiness Processing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of fMRI Studies

Affiliations
Review

The Role of the Amygdala in Facial Trustworthiness Processing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of fMRI Studies

Sara Santos et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Faces play a key role in signaling social cues such as signals of trustworthiness. Although several studies identify the amygdala as a core brain region in social cognition, quantitative approaches evaluating its role are scarce.

Objectives: This review aimed to assess the role of the amygdala in the processing of facial trustworthiness, by analyzing its amplitude BOLD response polarity to untrustworthy versus trustworthy facial signals under fMRI tasks through a Meta-analysis of effect sizes (MA). Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) analyses were also conducted.

Data sources: Articles were retrieved from MEDLINE, ScienceDirect and Web-of-Science in January 2016. Following the PRISMA statement guidelines, a systematic review of original research articles in English language using the search string "(face OR facial) AND (trustworthiness OR trustworthy OR untrustworthy OR trustee) AND fMRI" was conducted.

Study selection and data extraction: The MA concerned amygdala responses to facial trustworthiness for the contrast Untrustworthy vs. trustworthy faces, and included whole-brain and ROI studies. To prevent potential bias, results were considered even when at the single study level they did not survive correction for multiple comparisons or provided non-significant results. ALE considered whole-brain studies, using the same methodology to prevent bias. A summary of the methodological options (design and analysis) described in the articles was finally used to get further insight into the characteristics of the studies and to perform a subgroup analysis. Data were extracted by two authors and checked independently.

Data synthesis: Twenty fMRI studies were considered for systematic review. An MA of effect sizes with 11 articles (12 studies) showed high heterogeneity between studies [Q(11) = 265.68, p < .0001; I2 = 95.86%, 94.20% to 97.05%, with 95% confidence interval, CI]. Random effects analysis [RE(183) = 0.851, .422 to .969, 95% CI] supported the evidence that the (right) amygdala responds preferentially to untrustworthy faces. Moreover, two ALE analyses performed with 6 articles (7 studies) identified the amygdala, insula and medial dorsal nuclei of thalamus as structures with negative correlation with trustworthiness. Six articles/studies showed that posterior cingulate and medial frontal gyrus present positive correlations with increasing facial trustworthiness levels. Significant effects considering subgroup analysis based on methodological criteria were found for experiments using spatial smoothing, categorization of trustworthiness in 2 or 3 categories and paradigms which involve both explicit and implicit tasks.

Limitations: Significant heterogeneity between studies was found in MA, which might have arisen from inclusion of studies with smaller sample sizes and differences in methodological options. Studies using ROI analysis / small volume correction methods were more often devoted specifically to the amygdala region, with some results reporting uncorrected p-values based on mainly clinical a priori evidence of amygdala involvement in these processes. Nevertheless, we did not find significant evidence for publication bias.

Conclusions and implications of key findings: Our results support the role of amygdala in facial trustworthiness judgment, emphasizing its predominant role during processing of negative social signals in (untrustworthy) faces. This systematic review suggests that little consistency exists among studies' methodology, and that larger sample sizes should be preferred.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow diagram.
Flow of information describing the different phases of the systematic review.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Meta-analysis of effect sizes (n = 11): Confidence intervals for effect size (Pearson’s correlation coefficient).
Forest plot resulting from the meta-analysis with 12 studies (11 articles) for the contrast "Untrustworthy > Trustworthy" faces presenting central values of correlation coefficients (square markers) and their confidence intervals (horizontal lines). The size of the square markers varies with the sample size. Diamond markers represent pooled effects. The location of the diamond represents the estimated effect size and the width of the diamond reflects the precision of the estimate.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis with 7 studies (6 articles) regarding the negative correlation between neural activation and facial trustworthiness.
Some of the modulated regions were a) L amygdala (-18, -4, -18), b) R Amygdala (21, -4, -17), c) R Insula, BA 13 (43, -2, 14) and d) R Thalamus (8, -15, 14). The obtained ALE maps were thresholded using 1000 permutations, p < .001 as cluster-forming threshold and p < .05 for cluster-level inference.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis with 6 studies (6 articles) regarding the positive correlation between neural activation and facial trustworthiness.
Some of the modulated regions were a) R Cingulate gyrus (6, -43, 25) and b) R Anterior Medial Frontal gyrus (3, 55, 14). The obtained ALE maps were thresholded using 1000 permutations, p < .001 as cluster-forming threshold and p < .05 for cluster-level inference.
Fig 5
Fig 5. Funnel plot.
Verification of publication bias in the meta-analysis of effect sizes is graphically represented in a Funnel plot displaying effect size and standard error.
Fig 6
Fig 6. Egger’s regression.
Graphical results of the regression performed to evaluate asymmetry in the results and publication bias in the meta-analysis of effect sizes.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Frith CD. Social cognition. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008;363(1499):2033–9. 10.1098/rstb.2008.0005 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Frith CD, Frith U. Social Cognition in Humans. Vol. 17, Current Biology. 2007. - PubMed
    1. Engell AD, Haxby J V, Todorov A. Implicit trustworthiness decisions: automatic coding of face properties in the human amygdala. J Cogn Neurosci. 2007;19(9):1508–19. 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1508 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Frith CD, Singer T. The role of social cognition in decision making. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008;363(1511):3875–86. 10.1098/rstb.2008.0156 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brothers L. The social brain: a project for integrating primate behavior and neurophysiology in a new domain In: Foundations in social neuroscience. 2002. p. 367–84.