FACIAL EXPRESSIONS Flashcards
OVERVIEW
we fixate on the face approximately 95% of the time in conversation
Gullberg & Holmqvist (2002)
FACIAL EXPRESSION (INNATE OR LEARNED )
Darwin-facial expressions are innate innate
Paul Ekman was skeptical sought to prove Darwin wrong
Paul Ekman- Facial expressions are recognized universally
Ekman studied the interpretation of facial expressions across different cultures (Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Japan and US)
Showed photos of faces to individuals and asked them what facial expression was conveyed
findings: Observed consistency in the naming of the facial expressions across all cultures
EKMAN AND FRIESEN CONT.
This study was replicated in Papa New Guinea
Ekman and Friesen showed people images and asked them to come up with a story
They then reversed this method: Told them a story and asked them to select a facial
an expression which corresponded with this*
Conclusion: Considerable evidence that facial expressions are universal and interpreted
consistently across all cultures.
This study was conducted double-blind – they had no idea what faces were being selected at the time so they couldn’t provide (biased) feedback
BLIND AND SIGHTED PEOPLE
There is some consistency in facial expressions of blind and sighted people (Matsumato &
Willington, 2009)
Together, this evidence suggests that facial expressions are innate
Correlations between blind and sighted athletes’ facial muscles were r = .94. This suggests that there is strong evidence for a biological component in facial expression
WHAT COMES FIRST: EXPRESSION OR EMOTION?
THEORY: The Facial Feedback Hypothesis:
Pulling a facial expression causes us to experience the emotion it conveys
Evidence that facial expressions are tied to physiological responses
An enjoyable expression helps us appreciate humor (Strack, Martin & Stepper (1988)) : you can manipulate a person’s emotion by physically changing their facial expression.
Effects of facial expressions are lasting (Schnall & Laird (2003))-when you force yourself to smile when you’re sad it helps.
Pulling faces helps us to read (Havas, Glenberg, Gutowski, Lucarelli, Davidson (2010))
What happens first - the emotion or the facial expression? The Facial Feedback Hypothesis states that we pull the facial expression first, and then experience the emotion as a result: we don’t smile because we’re happy; we’re happy
THE MAIN FACIAL EXPRESSIONS
There are thought to be 6 / 7 main facial expressions: Sadness, Anger, Disgust, Contempt, Fear, Surprise, Happiness
These facial expressions are universal across cultures
READING FACES
Emotion Contagion claims that these facial expressions can influence our own
Can you manipulate another’s emotions through your own facial expressions?
People are more likely to remember your face if you were smiling (Righi, Gronchi, Marzi, Rebai, Vigginao (2015))
‘Emotional Contagion’ says that emotions are contagious:
When we see someone with a ‘happy’ expression, it causes us to smile (and consequently
feel happy ourselves). This can work for sadness too, but positive emotions are thought
to be more contagious than negative emotions.
MICROEXPRESSIONS
Microexpressions are described as “very fast facial movements lasting less than 1/5 of a second” (Ekman, 2003)
THEORY: microexpressions reveal an emotion that someone is trying to conceal
Microexpressions are thought to be useful in lie
detection: We know that someone forcing a facial expression
leads to some differences
E.g. ‘Fake’ Smiles do not use the same muscles as duchenne
smiles
‘Faked’ facial expressions are very slightly asymmetrical
We know that the ‘genuine’ expression can be revealed
through a microexpression
By this logic, studying facial expressions provides
insight into whether somebody is lying
MICROEXPRESSION CRITIQUES
Burgoon (2018) highlights some reasons why microexpressions
are not the best way to detect liars:
For microexpressions to work, some assumptions need to be met:
1) “Deception produces internal negative emotional experiences. “
2) These internal experiences have associated outward expressions,
including microexpressions.”
3) “Microexpressions are uncontrollable. “
4) “These expressions are reliable and valid indicators of deception. “
5) “Microexpressions occur frequently enough to be detectable. “
6) “Detected microexpressions successfully distinguish truth from
deception.”
An alternate approach: the rigidity effect (Burgoon, 2014)
ISSUES WITH EKMAN’S STUDIES
Photographs with ‘posed’ expressions do not elicit the same effect as those with genuine
expressions (Motley & Camden, 1988)
The way you present the faces and options to people can result in biased responses (Lisa Barrett)
Very little published, peer-reviewed scientific work on micro-expressions exists (Porter and ten Brinke, 2010)
FACIAL EXPRESSIONS: STATIC OR DYNAMIC
facial expressions have been considered to be static: We see all aspects of the
final emotion together
However, Jack, Garrod & Schyns (2014) suggest that facial expressions are
dynamic: Different parts of the facial expression unfold over time
Happinnes & Sadness: They identified happiness and sadness quite early on in the videos
Surprise & Fear: In the early stages of the video, participants could not differentiate between the two emotions (they looked identical)
It was only until the next phase of the facial expression was introduced that participants could identify what facial expression was being shown
Anger & Disgust: As with surprise and fear, participants could not differentiate between them until the next stage of the facial expression was formed
