More What Duchenne Smiles Do, Less What They Express

We comment on an article by Sheldon et al. from a previous issue of Perspectives (May 2021). They argued that the presence of positive emotion (Hypothesis 1), the intensity of positive emotion (Hypothesis 2), and chronic positive mood (Hypothesis 3) are reliably signaled by the Duchenne smile (DS). We reexamined the cited literature in support of each hypothesis and show that the study findings were mostly inconclusive, irrelevant, incomplete, and/or misread. In fact, there is no single (empirical) article that would unanimously support the idea that DSs function solely as indicators of felt positive affect. Additional evidence is reviewed, suggesting that DSs can be—and often are—displayed deliberately and in the absence of positive feelings. Although DSs may lead to favorable interpersonal perceptions and positive emotional responses in the observer, we propose a functional view that focuses on what facial actions—here specifically DSs—do rather than what they express

No matter how real: Out-group faces convey less humanness

Past research on real human faces has shown that out-group members are commonly perceived as lacking human qualities, which links them to machines or objects. In this study, we aimed to test whether similar out-group effects generalize to artificial faces. Caucasian participants were presented with images of male Caucasian and Indian faces and had to decide whether human traits (naturally and uniquely human) as well as emotions (primary and secondary) could or could not be attributed to them. In line with previous research, we found that naturally human traits and secondary emotions were attributed less often to the out-group (Indian) than to the in-group (Caucasian), and this applied to both real and artificial faces. The findings extend prior research and show that artificial stimuli readily evoke intergroup processes. This has implications for the design of animated characters, suggesting that outgroup faces convey less humanness regardless of how life-like their representation is

Facial behavior

: We provide an overview of the current state-of-the-art regarding research on facial behavior from what we hope is a well-balanced historical perspective. Based on a critical discussion of the main theoretical views of nonverbal facial activity (i.e., affect program theory, appraisal theory, dimensional theory, behavioral ecology), we focus on some key issues regarding the cohesion of emotion and expression, including the issue of “genuine smiles.” We argue that some of the challenges faced by the field are a consequence of these theoretical positions, their assumptions, and we discuss how they have generated and shaped research. A clear distinction of encoding and decoding processes may prove beneficial to identify specific problems – for example the use of posed expressions in facial expression research, or the impact of the psychological situation on the perceiver. We argue that knowledge of the functions of facial activity may be central to understanding what facial activity is truly about; this includes a serious consideration of social context at all stages of encoding and decoding. The chapter concludes with a brief overview of recent technical advances and challenges highlighted by the new field of “affective computing” concerned with facial activity

Gene-controlled resistance to aromatic hydrocarbons Neurospora crassa and its relationship to the inhibition by L-sarbose

Resistance to aromatic hydrocarbon

Body and speech as expression of inner states

This article provides a sketch of the theoretical framework of German Expression Psychology (GEP) and discusses the forms and functions of bodily and verbal types of communication that express inner states. Starting with a brief historical overview, we discuss general concepts of the German Expression Psychology framework, in particular with respect to the definition of expression, the relationship between expression and its subject, and the perception of expression. Within each of these areas special attention is given to the face, body and voice as indicators of inner states. Following this general overview of German Expression Psychology, we focus on the contribution of three selected authors, namely, Philipp Lersch, Paul Leyhausen and Egon Brunswik, who have been particularly influential in the field of German Expression Psychology. For Lersch, we consider the co-existential relationship between affect and expression, the detailed anatomical description of expressions, as well as the analysis of dynamic aspects of expressions. Leyhausen added an ethological perspective on expressions and perceptions. Here, we focus on the developmental aspects of expression and impression formation, and differentiate between phylogenetic and ontogenetic aspects of expression. Brunswik’s Lens Model allows a separation between distal indicators on the part of the sender and proximal percepts on the part of the observer. Here, we discuss how such a model can be used to describe and analyze nonverbal communication on both the encoding and decoding side. Deriving from the presentation of all three authors, we outline the general relevance of German Expression Psychology for current research, specifically with respect to the definition and function of expressions and perceptions, and existing approaches to the study of verbal and nonverbal behavior

Real or Artificial? Intergroup Biases in Mind Perception in a Cross-Cultural Perspective

Recent research suggests that attributions of aliveness and mental capacities to faces are influenced by social group membership. In this article, we investigated group related biases in mind perception in participants from a Western and Eastern culture, employing faces of varying ethnic groups. In Experiment 1, Caucasian faces that ranged on a continuum from real to artificial were evaluated by participants in the UK (in-group) and in India (out-group) on animacy, abilities to plan and to feel pain, and having a mind. Human features were found to be assigned to a greater extent to faces when these belonged to in-group members, whereas out-group faces had to appear more realistic in order to be perceived as human. When participants in India evaluated South Asian (in-group) and Caucasian (out-group) faces in Experiment 2, the results closely mirrored those of the first experiment. For both studies, ratings of out-group faces were significantly predicted by participants’ levels of ethnocultural empathy. The findings highlight the role of intergroup processes (i.e., in-group favoritism, out-group dehumanization) in the perception of human and mental qualities and point to ethnocultural empathy as an important factor in responses to out-groups