Compensatory expressive behavior for facial paralysis: adaptation to congenital or acquired disability

Abstract

Objective: Although there has been little research on the adaptive behavior of people with congenital compared to acquired disability, there is reason to predict that people with congenital conditions may be better adapted because they have lived with their conditions for their entire lives (Smart, 2008). We examined whether people with congenital facial paralysis (FP), compared to people with acquired FP, compensate more for impoverished facial expression by using alternative channels of expression (i.e., voice and body).

Research method/design: Participants with congenital (n = 13) and acquired (n = 14) FP were videotaped while recalling emotional events.

Main outcome measures: Expressive verbal behavior was measured using the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (Pennebaker, Booth, & Francis, 2007). Nonverbal behavior and FP severity were rated by trained coders.

Results: People with congenital FP, compared to acquired FP, used more compensatory expressive verbal and nonverbal behavior in their language, voices, and bodies. The extent of FP severity had little effect on compensatory expressivity.

Conclusions/implications: This study provides the first behavioral evidence that people with congenital FP use more adaptations to express themselves than people with acquired FP. These behaviors could inform social functioning interventions for people with FP.

Figures

Figure 1

Manipulation check showing change in self-reported emotion during autobiographical recall. Ratings are self-reports of emotion intensity on a scale from 1 to 5, with higher numbers indicating a greater intensity of emotion. Error bars represent standard errors.

Figure 2

Interaction of FP onset and emotion recall on body expressivity. Participants with congenital FP, compared to acquired FP, tended to display more body expressivity, but only when recalling a happy event. Body expressivity is a composite containing ratings of gesture, head movement, trunk movement, and leg movement. Possible body expressivity composite rating scores ranged from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more expressivity. Error bars represent standard errors.