It has been repeatedly stated that approach and avoidance reactions to emotional faces are triggered by the intention signalled by the emotion. This line of thought suggests that each emotion signals a specific intention triggering a specific behavioural reaction. However, empirical results examining this assumption are inconsistent, suggesting that it might be too short-sighted. We hypothesise that the same emotional expression can signal different social messages and, therefore, trigger different reactions; which social message is signalled by an emotional expression should be influenced by moderating variables, such as the group membership of the expresser. In two experiments, we show that group membership influences approach and avoidance reactions to emotional expressions: Emotions (fear and happiness) expressed by in-group members elicited concordant behaviour, whereas emotions expressed by out-group members activated the reverse pattern. A third experiment, in which participants directly evaluated smiling and fearful individuals resembling in-group and out-group members supported this result.

Studies examining approach and avoidance reactions to emotional expressions have yielded conflicting results. For example, expressions of anger have been reported to elicit approach reactions in some studies but avoidance reactions in others. Nonetheless, the results were often explained by the same general underlying process, namely the influence that the social message signaled by the expression has on motivational responses. It is therefore unclear which reaction is triggered by which emotional expression, and which underlying process is responsible for these reactions. In order to address this issue, we examined the role of a potential moderator on approach and avoidance reactions to emotional expressions, namely the contrast emotion used in the task. We believe that different approach and avoidance reactions occur depending on the congruency or incongruency of the evaluation of the 2 emotions presented in the task. The results from a series of experiments supported these assumptions: Negative emotional expressions (anger, fear, sadness) elicited avoidance reactions if contrasted with expressions of happiness. However, if contrasted with a different negative emotional expression, anger and sadness triggered approach reactions and fear activated avoidance reactions. Importantly, these results also emerged if the emotional expression was not task-relevant. We propose that approach and avoidance reactions to emotional expressions are triggered by their evaluation if the 2 emotions presented in a task differ in evaluative connotation. If they have the same evaluative connotation, however, reactions are determined by their social message. (PsycINFO Database Record

It has been suggested that the impact of emotional expressions on the startle reflex is influenced by the intention communicated by the expression (e.g., the intention to attack). However, we propose that the meaning of an emotional expression is not only based on the intention, but is also influenced by characteristics of the expresser such as gender: since men are typically seen as more dominant than women, anger expressed by men should be perceived as particularly threatening, thus amplifying the startle response. We compared the influence of anger, fear and neutral expressions shown by men and women on the startle reaction. Startle reactions were measured using electromyography. As predicted, we found stronger startle reactions after the presentation of anger expressed by men compared to fearful and neutral expressions shown by men. For female expressers, the startle response was not affected by expression type.

No abstract

Even though smiles are seen as universal facial expressions, research shows that there exist various kinds of smiles (i.e., affiliative smiles, dominant smiles). Accordingly, we suggest that there also exist various mental representations of smiles. Which representation is employed in cognition may depend on social factors, such as the smiling person’s group membership: Since in-group members are typically seen as more benevolent than out-group members, in-group smiles should be associated with more benevolent social meaning than those conveyed by out-group members. We visualized in-group and out-group smiles with reverse correlation image classification. These visualizations indicated that mental representations of in-group smiles indeed express more benevolent social meaning than those of out-group smiles. The affective meaning of these visualized smiles was not influenced by group membership. Importantly, the effect occurred even though participants were not instructed to attend to the nature of the smile, pointing to an automatic association between group membership and intention.