A Meta-Analysis of the Facial Feedback Literature: Effects of Facial Expressions on Emotional Experience are Small and Variable

The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that our facial expressions influence our emotional experience. In light of Wagenmakers et al.’s (2016) failure to replicate Strack, Martin, and Stepper’s (1988) seminal demonstration of facial feedback effects, a meta-analysis was conducted on 286 effect sizes derived from 136 facial feedback studies. Results revealed that the overall effect of facial feedback on affective experience was significant, but small (d = .20, p \u3c .000000005).Approximately 70% of variation in facial feedback effect sizes is due to heterogeneity, which suggests that facial feedback effects are stronger in some circumstances than others. Eleven potential moderators were examined, and three were associated with differences in effect sizes: (1) Type of affective reaction: Facial feedback influenced emotional experience (e.g., reported amusement) and, to an even greater degree, perceptions of stimuli’s affective quality (e.g., funniness of cartoons). However, after controlling for publication bias, there was little evidence that facial feedback influenced perceptions of affective quality. (2) Presence of emotional stimuli: Facial feedback effects on emotional experience were larger in the absence of emotionally evocative stimuli (e.g., cartoons). (3) Type of stimuli: When participants are presented with emotionally evocative stimuli, facial feedback effects were larger in the presence of some types of stimuli (e.g., imagined scenarios) than others (e.g., pictures)

Face and Feeling: An Examination of the Role of Facial Feedback in Emotion

The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual’s experience of emotion is influenced by their facial expressions. Researchers, however, currently face conflicting narratives about whether this hypothesis is valid. A large replication effort consistently failed to replicate a seminal demonstration of the facial feedback hypothesis, but meta-analysis suggests the effect is real. To address these conflicting narratives, the Many Smiles Collaboration was formed. In the Many Smiles Collaboration, a large team of researchers—some advocates of the facial feedback hypothesis, some critics, and some without strong belief—collaborated to specify the best ways to test this hypothesis. Two pilot tests suggested that smiling could both initiate feelings of happiness in otherwise non-emotional contexts and magnify ongoing feelings of happiness. A conceptual replication revealed that scowling could initiate feelings of anger but did not provide evidence that scowling could magnify ongoing feeling of anger. An integrative framework for studying facial feedback effects—the Facial Feedback Component Process Framework—is reviewed

Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in COVID-19.

Host-mediated lung inflammation is present1, and drives mortality2, in the critical illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Host genetic variants associated with critical illness may identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic development3. Here we report the results of the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality In Critical Care) genome-wide association study in 2,244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 from 208 UK intensive care units. We have identified and replicated the following new genome-wide significant associations: on chromosome 12q24.13 (rs10735079, P = 1.65 × 10-8) in a gene cluster that encodes antiviral restriction enzyme activators (OAS1, OAS2 and OAS3); on chromosome 19p13.2 (rs74956615, P = 2.3 × 10-8) near the gene that encodes tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2); on chromosome 19p13.3 (rs2109069, P = 3.98 ×  10-12) within the gene that encodes dipeptidyl peptidase 9 (DPP9); and on chromosome 21q22.1 (rs2236757, P = 4.99 × 10-8) in the interferon receptor gene IFNAR2. We identified potential targets for repurposing of licensed medications: using Mendelian randomization, we found evidence that low expression of IFNAR2, or high expression of TYK2, are associated with life-threatening disease; and transcriptome-wide association in lung tissue revealed that high expression of the monocyte-macrophage chemotactic receptor CCR2 is associated with severe COVID-19. Our results identify robust genetic signals relating to key host antiviral defence mechanisms and mediators of inflammatory organ damage in COVID-19. Both mechanisms may be amenable to targeted treatment with existing drugs. However, large-scale randomized clinical trials will be essential before any change to clinical practice

A multi-lab test of the facial feedback hypothesis by the Many Smiles Collaboration

Following theories of emotional embodiment, the facial feedback hypothesis suggests that individuals' subjective experiences of emotion are influenced by their facial expressions. However, evidence for this hypothesis has been mixed. We thus formed a global adversarial collaboration and carried out a preregistered, multicentre study designed to specify and test the conditions that should most reliably produce facial feedback effects. Data from n = 3,878 participants spanning 19 countries indicated that a facial mimicry and voluntary facial action task could both amplify and initiate feelings of happiness. However, evidence of facial feedback effects was less conclusive when facial feedback was manipulated unobtrusively via a pen-in-mouth task.National Science Centre, Poland [2019/35/B/HS6/00528]; JSPS KAKENHI [16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015, 20H04581, 21H03784]; National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); Polish National Science Center; DFG Beethoven grant [2016/23/G/HS6/01775]; National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [R010138018]; Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades [PGC2018-098558-B-I00]; Comunidad de Madrid [H2019/HUM-5705]; Teesside University; Occidental College Academic Student Project AwardThis work was financially supported by B. Stastny, who generously donated funds for this research in memory of his father, Bill Stastny (J.T.L.). The work was also supported by the National Science Centre, Poland (grant no. 2019/35/B/HS6/00528; K.B.), JSPS KAKENHI (grant nos 16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015, 20H04581 and 21H03784; Y.Y.), the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq; R.M.K.F.), the Polish National Science Center (M.P.), the DFG Beethoven grant no. 2016/23/G/HS6/01775 (M.P.), the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (grant no. R010138018; N.A.C.), the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades (grant no. PGC2018-098558-B-I00; J.A.H.), the Comunidad de Madrid (grant no. H2019/HUM-5705; J.A.H.), Teesside University (N.B.) and the Occidental College Academic Student Project Award (S.L.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. We also thank C. Scavo and A. Bidani for help with translating the study materials, L. Pullano and R. Giorgini for help with coding, and E. Tolomeo and L. Pane for help with data collection

In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

To Which World Regions Does the Valence-Dominance Model of Social Perception Apply?

Over the past 10 years, Oosterhof and Todorov’s valence–dominance model has emerged as the most prominent account of how people evaluate faces on social dimensions. In this model, two dimensions (valence and dominance) underpin social judgements of faces. Because this model has primarily been developed and tested in Western regions, it is unclear whether these findings apply to other regions. We addressed this question by replicating Oosterhof and Todorov’s methodology across 11 world regions, 41 countries and 11,570 participants. When we used Oosterhof and Todorov’s original analysis strategy, the valence–dominance model generalized across regions. When we used an alternative methodology to allow for correlated dimensions, we observed much less generalization. Collectively, these results suggest that, while the valence–dominance model generalizes very well across regions when dimensions are forced to be orthogonal, regional differences are revealed when we use different extraction methods and correlate and rotate the dimension reduction solution