Table 1.

Descriptive information of studies and contrasts used in the meta-analyses.

Article	n	Male	Handedness	Age range	Task	Contrast	Foci	p-valuec
Arsalidou et al., 2011	15	2	N/A	26.3 ± 4.5	Dynamic and static happy and neutrala	Happy: dynamic > static	2	P < 0.01 using cluster level threshold p = 0.05
						Dynamic > static	5	P < 0.01, using cluster level threshold p = 0.05
Grosbras and Paus, 2006	20	10	R	19–46	Angry and neutral movements of facesb	Neutral: dynamic > control	28	P < 0.05 using Gaussian random-field theory to correct for multiple comparisons
						Angry: dynamic > control	27	P < 0.05 using Gaussian random-field theory to correct for multiple comparisons
Hurlemann et al., 2008	14	7	R	25.04 ± 2.4	Dynamic happy and angry facial animationsb	Dynamic:emotional > neutral	10	P < 0.001, uncorrected
						Dynamic: angry > neutral	3
						Dynamic: happy > neutral	17
LaBar et al., 2003	10	5	R	21–30	Dynamic and static; angry and fearfulb	Anger morph > static	6	P < 0.001, uncorrected
						Fear morph > static	16
						Identity morph > static neutral	16
						Emotion morph > static emotion	17
Lee et al., 2010	17	7	R	24.94 ± 4.16	Dynamic and static turning heada	Turning heads > static heads	9	P < 0.05, cluster corrected,
Pelphrey et al., 2007	8	6	All R	24.1 ± 5.6	Dynamic and static; angry and fearfula	Dynamic emotions > static emotions (normal group)	6	P < 0.05, uncorrected
Pentón et al., 2010	13	8	N/A	19–55	Static and dynamic, neutral and fearful facesb	Dynamic > static	21	P < 0.05, FDR corrected
Robins et al., 2009	10	3	N/A	22.3 ± 4.6	Dynamic angry, happy, fearful, and neutralb	Dynamic emotion > neutral	5	P < 0.001
Sarkheil et al., 2013	20	9	R	20–42	Angry and happy morph face stimulib	Intensity effect (more > less)	8	P < 0.05, cluster-size thresholding
Sato et al., 2015	15	9	R	26.9 ± 3.9	Fearful, happy, and neutral dynamic and static faces and mosaicsa	Dynamic facial > dynamic mosaics; time 150–200	13	P < 0.05 corrected for multiple comparisons with a height threshold of P < 0.01 (uncorrected)
						Dynamic facial > dynamic mosaics; time 200–250	3
						Dynamic facial > dynamic mosaics; time 250–300	4
						Dynamic facial > dynamic mosaics; time 300–350	6
						Dynamic facial > dynamic mosaics; time 350–400	5
Sato et al., 2004	11	*	R	26.5	Dynamic fearful and neutral facesa	Fear: dynamic > static	18	P < 0.05
	11	*				Happy: dynamic > static	12
Schultz and Pilz, 2009	10	6	N/A	N/A	Dynamic and static; angry and surprisedb	Dynamic faces > static faces	6	P < 0.05, FDR-corrected and cluster-wise corrected
Schultz et al., 2013	26	14	R	22–39	Video recordings of moving faces, static faces and scrambled order of dynamic facesb	Movies with ordered frames > movies with scrambled frames	3	P < 0.001, uncorrected
						Original 25 Hz movies > static faces	4
Trautmann et al., 2009	16	0	R	21.6 ± 2.3	Dynamic and static; happy and disgusta	Dynamic faces (happy > neutral) > static faces (happy > neutral)	14	P < 0.001, uncorrected
						Dynamic faces (disgust > neutral) > static faces (disgust > neutral)	18

n = sample size;

^*= 22 participants (10 males) participated in two studies, gender assignment was not specified; N/A, not available; R, all right handed;

^astudies that instruct participants to passively view faces;

^bstudies that instruct participants to make judgments about faces,

^cthresholding settings reported in paper.