Several studies have reported that persons with Down syndrome (DS) have difficulties recognizing emotions; however, there is insufficient research to prove that a deficit of emotional knowledge exists in DS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the recognition of emotional facial expressions without making use of emotional vocabulary, given the language problems known to be associated with this syndrome. The ability to recognize six emotions was assessed in 24 adolescents with DS. Their performance was compared to that of 24 typically developing children with the same nonverbal-developmental age, as assessed by Raven’s Progressive Matrices. Analysis of the results revealed no global difference; only marginal differences in the recognition of different emotions appeared. Study of the developmental trajectories revealed a developmental difference: the nonverbal reasoning level assessed by Raven’s matrices did not predict success on the experimental tasks in the DS group, contrary to the typically developing group. These results do not corroborate the hypothesis that there is an emotional knowledge deficit in DS and emphasize the importance of using dynamic, strictly nonverbal tasks in populations with language disorders.

Background: Children with Down syndrome (DS) often experience behavioral and emotional issues that complicate their socialization process and may lead to psychopathological disorders. These problems may be related to deficits affecting emotional knowledge, particularly emotional vocabulary. Because emotional vocabulary makes it easier for typically developing children to identify emotions, a deficit affecting it in DS could be problematic. Methods: Twenty-eight adolescents with DS matched with typically developing (TD) children for their score on the Benton Facial Recognition Test were asked to recognize six emotional expressions presented in the form of filmed sequences, based on (1) nonverbal cues such as prosody, and (2) an emotional label. Results: The adolescents with DS recognized the six basic emotional expressions at a level comparable to that of the TD children in both conditions (with and without emotional vocabulary), but the facilitating effect of vocabulary was lower in that group. Conclusions: This study does not show a deficit affecting emotion recognition in DS, but it emphasizes the importance of early acquisition of emotional knowledge in this syndrome. Regular and varied use of internal state words should be encouraged in familial interactions, and education should include specifically adapted social and emotional learning programs.

The aim of our study was to characterize the face recognition skills, theory of mind skills, and language skills of a single group of French participants with Williams syndrome (WS) compared to a group of participants with Down syndrome (DS). Twelve French-speaking participants with WS and 12 French-speaking participants with DS took part in this study. The two groups were matched for nonverbal and verbal levels. We used the Benton Facial Recognition test to study the groups’ ability to recognize faces, the Theory of Mind Test Revised, and the morphosyntactic production and morphosyntactic comprehension subtests from the French test battery “Instruments pour le Screening et l’Approfondissement de l’examen des DYsfonctionnements du Langage chez l’Enfant (ISADYLE)”. The results of the participants with WS were systematically better than those of the participants with DS. Nevertheless, although they outperformed the participants with DS, the participants with WS were far from performing at ceiling level. Most importantly, we found no significant correlations between performances on the various standardized tests for either group of participants. The evaluation of cognitive skills in a single group of French participants with WS confirmed that they present a complex profile. Because these competences are strongly influenced by social and cultural aspects, it is therefore essential to develop studies for specific languages, including when one is examining a rare developmental disability.