Emotional Responses to Naturalistic and AI-generated Affective Pictures: A Systematic Comparison
Gilbert, F.; Yang, F.; Smith, E.; Gardy, S. M.; Farkas, A.; Ding, M.; Fang, R.; Keil, A.
Show abstract
Pictures depicting naturalistic scenes are widely used in studies of human emotion. However, the practical use of affective pictures is limited by several factors, including the difficulty of obtaining content-diverse, high-quality, openly accessible, and standardized stimuli that are necessary for specific research questions. The use of artificially generated (AI) pictures could address this limitation, but it is unclear if AI-generated pictures evoke reliable emotional responses. The present study sought to address these challenges by comparing emotional responses to AI-generated pictures with responses to original, standardized, pictures. In two study iterations, standardized pictures containing pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant content were selected from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) and other sources. Then, a matched AI-counterpart was created for each original picture using generative deep neural networks. A total of 109 participants viewed the picture sets while pupil diameter and electroencephalogram (EEG) were recorded. Evaluative ratings of hedonic valence and emotional arousal were also collected. For both AI and original exemplars, pictures depicting emotional content elicited stronger responses than neutral content for ratings and EEG-derived variables, with weaker effect sizes for the AI-generated pictures. Furthermore, picture-level analyses found that ratings and EEG measures were strongly correlated between matched AI and original pictures. Pupil data also showed the expected content effects in study iteration 2, but not in iteration 1. Together, this initial study suggests that AI-generated picture sets can effectively elicit well-established self-reported affect and physiological responses, presenting a promising avenue for future studies of human emotion.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- On the neuronal dynamics of aesthetic experience: Evidence from electroencephalographic oscillatory dynamics 97%
- Neurophysiological and Autonomic Dynamics of Threat Processing During Sustained Social Fear Generalization 95%
- Steady-state visually evoked potentials and feature-based attention: Pre-registered null results and a focused review of methodological considerations. 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Revisiting the Kuleshov effect with authentic films: A behavioral and fMRI study 96%
- No fruits without color: Cross-modal priming and EEG reveal different roles for different features across semantic categories 95%
- A closer look at the timecourse of mind wandering: pupillary responses and behavior 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Preliminary Evidence for Anxiety-Linked Neural Sensitivity to Emotional Faces Using Fast Periodic Visual Stimulation 95%
- Effects of unconscious tactile stimuli on autonomic nervous activity and afferent signal processing 95%
- Missing what is right under your nose: failed appetitive and aversive audio-olfactory conditioning in humans 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Dynamic facial trustworthiness perception in real-time social contexts 95%
- Valence-specific EEG microstate modulations during self-generated affective states 95%
- Let Me Make You Happy, And I'll Tell You How you look around: Using an Approach-Avoidance Task as an Embodied Emotion Prime in a Free-Viewing Task 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.