Emotions are perceived differently from posed and spontaneous facial expressions.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Emotion Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1037/emo0001473
Yong-Qi Cong, Lidya Yurdum, Agneta Fischer, Disa Sauter
{"title":"Emotions are perceived differently from posed and spontaneous facial expressions.","authors":"Yong-Qi Cong, Lidya Yurdum, Agneta Fischer, Disa Sauter","doi":"10.1037/emo0001473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A widely used experimental paradigm in psychological research and clinical assessments involves identifying emotions from facial expressions, typically using posed expressions as stimuli. Perceptions of such stimuli are assumed to mirror those of naturally occurring emotional expressions. However, this assumption has been questioned because the perceptual equivalence of posed and spontaneous expressions has not been empirically established. To address this, we directly compared perceptual judgments of posed and spontaneous facial expressions produced by the same expressers in three preregistered studies. A total of 2,408 perceivers judged the emotions displayed in 1,244 dynamic facial expressions of eight emotions (anger, disgust, fear, sadness, joy, pride, compassion, and love). Consistent with our main hypothesis, emotions were much better recognized from posed compared to spontaneous expressions, by both Western (Study 1, <i>N</i> = 470) and non-Western perceivers (Study 2, <i>N</i> = 438). This pattern was replicated in a cross-cultural context in Study 3 (<i>N</i> = 1,500). Furthermore, in all three studies, we observed a \"negativity bias\" with only posed expressions. Specifically, negative emotions were better recognized than positive emotions from posed expressions, while the opposite was true for spontaneous expressions, such that positive emotions were better recognized than negative emotions. Our findings present clear evidence that perceptions of posed and spontaneous facial expressions meaningfully differ, and raise questions about the generalizability of findings from existing research that uses posed emotional expressions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48417,"journal":{"name":"Emotion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001473","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A widely used experimental paradigm in psychological research and clinical assessments involves identifying emotions from facial expressions, typically using posed expressions as stimuli. Perceptions of such stimuli are assumed to mirror those of naturally occurring emotional expressions. However, this assumption has been questioned because the perceptual equivalence of posed and spontaneous expressions has not been empirically established. To address this, we directly compared perceptual judgments of posed and spontaneous facial expressions produced by the same expressers in three preregistered studies. A total of 2,408 perceivers judged the emotions displayed in 1,244 dynamic facial expressions of eight emotions (anger, disgust, fear, sadness, joy, pride, compassion, and love). Consistent with our main hypothesis, emotions were much better recognized from posed compared to spontaneous expressions, by both Western (Study 1, N = 470) and non-Western perceivers (Study 2, N = 438). This pattern was replicated in a cross-cultural context in Study 3 (N = 1,500). Furthermore, in all three studies, we observed a "negativity bias" with only posed expressions. Specifically, negative emotions were better recognized than positive emotions from posed expressions, while the opposite was true for spontaneous expressions, such that positive emotions were better recognized than negative emotions. Our findings present clear evidence that perceptions of posed and spontaneous facial expressions meaningfully differ, and raise questions about the generalizability of findings from existing research that uses posed emotional expressions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Emotion
Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
325
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Emotion publishes significant contributions to the study of emotion from a wide range of theoretical traditions and research domains. The journal includes articles that advance knowledge and theory about all aspects of emotional processes, including reports of substantial empirical studies, scholarly reviews, and major theoretical articles. Submissions from all domains of emotion research are encouraged, including studies focusing on cultural, social, temperament and personality, cognitive, developmental, health, or biological variables that affect or are affected by emotional functioning. Both laboratory and field studies are appropriate for the journal, as are neuroimaging studies of emotional processes.
期刊最新文献
Interpersonal emotion regulation: Reflecting on progress and charting the path forward. What do we do to help others feel better? The eight strategies of the Regulating Others' Emotions Scale (ROES). You changed my mind: Immediate and enduring impacts of social emotion regulation. The dynamics of interpersonal emotion regulation: How sharers elicit desired (but not necessarily helpful) support. Interpersonal emotion regulation as a source of positive relationship perceptions: The role of emotion regulation dependence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1