We investigated the correspondence between perceived meanings of smiles and their morphological and dynamic characteristics. Morphological characteristics included co-activation of Orbicularis oculi (AU 6), smile controls, mouth opening, amplitude, and asymmetry of amplitude. Dynamic characteristics included duration, onset and offset velocity, asymmetry of velocity, and head movements. Smile characteristics were measured using the Facial Action Coding System (Ekman, Friesen, & Hager, 2002) and Automated Facial Image Analysis (Cohn & Kanade, 2007). Observers judged 122 smiles as amused, embarrassed, nervous, polite, or other. Fifty-three smiles met criteria for classification as perceived amused, embarrassed/nervous, or polite. In comparison with perceived polite, perceived amused more often included AU 6, open mouth, smile controls, larger amplitude, larger maximum onset and offset velocity, and longer duration. In comparison with perceived embarrassed/nervous, perceived amused more often included AU 6, lower maximum offset velocity, and smaller forward head pitch. In comparison with perceived polite, perceived embarrassed more often included mouth opening and smile controls, larger amplitude, and greater forward head pitch. Occurrence of the AU 6 in perceived embarrassed/nervous and polite smiles questions the assumption that AU 6 with a smile is sufficient to communicate felt enjoyment. By comparing three perceptually distinct types of smiles, we found that perceived smile meanings were related to specific variation in smile morphological and dynamic characteristics. Keywords dynamic characteristics; morphological characteristics; smile interpretation; FACS; automatic facial image analysisWhat does it mean to you when someone smiles at you? You may think that the person is happy, they like you, they want to approach, they are hiding something or they are just being polite. Often, we have strong impressions about the meaning of a smile. An emerging view is that characteristics of the smile dramatically alter a smile's perceived meaning. This paper is about characteristics of smiles that influence perception of one meaning versus another. With the many possible meanings that smiles may communicate, knowledge of the distinction among different kinds of smiles and how they influence interpretation is critical to social adaptation (Abe, Beetham, & Izard, 2002;Brannigan & Humphries, 1972;Cheyne, 1976;Garotti, Caterina, Brighetti, Giberti, & Ricci-Bitti, 1993;Harrigan & Taing, 1997;Kraut & Johnston, 1979;Krull & Dill, 1998;Messinger, Fogel, & Dickson, 1999;Otta, Folladore Abrosio, & Hoshino, 1996;Scharlemann, Eckel, Kacelnik, & Wilson, 2001;Vrugt, Duijnhouwer, & Stam, 2004).Correspondence concerning this manuscript should be addressed to: Zara Ambadar, 4323 Sennott Square, 210 S. Bouquet St., Pittsburgh, PA 15260, Telephone: 412-624-9348, Fax: 412-624-2023, Email: E-mail: ambadar@pitt.edu. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSurprisingly little is know...

Previous research suggests differences in lip movement between deliberate and spontaneous facial expressions. We investigated within participant differences between deliberately posed and spontaneously occurring smiles during a directed facial action task. Using automated facial image analysis, we quantified lip corner movement during periods of visible Zygomaticus major activity. Onset and offset speed, amplitude of movement, and offset duration were greater in deliberate smiles. In contrast to previous results, however, lip corner movement asymmetry was not greater in deliberate smiles. Observed characteristics of deliberate and spontaneous smiling may be related to differences in the typical context and purpose of the facial signal. Keywords emotion expression; nonverbal communication; voluntary movementThe smile is one of the most frequent facial expressions and serves to communicate positive emotional states, as well as to serve social functions including greeting and appeasement (Keltner, 1995;Preuschoft, 1992;Schmidt & Cohn, 2001). Like many facial expressions, the smile can be produced either deliberately by voluntary movement of the Zygomaticus major muscles or spontaneously in response to social or emotional stimuli. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether deliberate and spontaneous smiles observed in the same individuals were significantly different in lip corner movement and in asymmetry of movement. The role of an additional facial movement, specifically Orbicularis oculi activity in these smiles was also addressed. Uncovering systematic differences in movement between deliberate and spontaneous expression has important implications for understanding pathological disruptions in facial movement, as well for understanding the biological basis underlying facial communication.Spontaneous smiles of enjoyment have been found to have a number of distinctive timing and movement characteristics in general; as compared to deliberate smiles, spontaneous smiles tend to be shorter in total duration (from 4 to 6 seconds), slower in offset time (Hess & Kleck, 1997), and less asymmetric in lip corner movements (Hager & Ekman, 1997;Skinner & Mullen, 1991). The findings, obtained with perceptually based measures, have been supported in part by studies using more objective quantitative methods. Cohn and Schmidt (2004) Kleck, & Lanzetta, 1989). This study combines the measurement of temporal differences in smiling movements with the measurement of specific visible characteristics of intra-individual variation in smiling movements to determine which aspects of movement timing differentiate deliberate and spontaneous smiles.Timing differences between deliberate and spontaneous smiles are important because they are likely to significantly affect social judgments of the person smiling. For example, asymmetry in smiling has been shown to relate to negative social judgments and lower ratings of trustworthiness in observers (Brown & Moore, 2002). In addition, Bugental (1986) found that women whose...

No abstract

What are facial expressions of emotion for? We test the hypothesis that some expressions serve as honest signals of subjective commitments, in particular, that angry faces increase the effectiveness of threats. In an ultimatum game, proposers decided how much money to offer a responder while seeing a film clip depicting an angry or a neutral facial expression, together with a written threat that was either inherently credible (a 50-50 split) or less credible (a demand for 70% of the money). Proposers were more likely to accede to the less credible threats when they were accompanied by an angry than a neutral expression, but were unaffected by the expression when dealing with credible threats. This supports the hypothesis that angry expressions are honest signals that enhance the credibility of threats.

The relationships among adult attachment styles, interpersonal problems, and categories of suicide-related behaviors (i.e., self-harm, suicide attempts, and their co-occurrence) were examined in a predominantly psychiatric sample (N= 406). Both anxious and avoidant attachment styles were associated with interpersonal problems. In turn, specific interpersonal problems differentially mediated the relations between attachment style and type of suicide-related behaviors. These findings suggest the importance of distinguishing between these groups of behaviors in terms of etiological pathways, maintenance processes, and treatment interventions.

Individuals suffering from depression show diminished facial responses to positive stimuli. Recent cognitive research suggests that depressed individuals may appraise emotional stimuli differently than do nondepressed persons. Prior studies do not indicate whether depressed individuals respond differently when they encounter positive stimuli that are difficult to avoid. The authors investigated dynamic responses of individuals varying in both history of major depressive disorder (MDD) and current depressive symptomatology (N ϭ 116) to robust positive stimuli. The Facial Action Coding System (Ekman & Friesen, 1978) was used to measure affect-related responses to a comedy clip. Participants reporting current depressive symptomatology were more likely to evince affect-related shifts in expression following the clip than were those without current symptomatology. This effect of current symptomatology emerged even when the contrast focused only on individuals with a history of MDD. Specifically, persons with current depressive symptomatology were more likely than those without current symptomatology to control their initial smiles with negative affect-related expressions. These findings suggest that integration of emotion science and social cognition may yield important advances for understanding depression.

No abstract

What is the function of emotional tearing? Previous work has found a tear effect, which resolves ambiguity in neutral expressions and increases perceptions of sadness in sad expressions. Tearing, however, is associated with a variety of emotional states, and it remains unclear how the tear effect generalizes to other emotion expressions. Here we expand upon previous works by examining ratings of video clips depicting posed facial expressions presented with and without tears. We replicate Provine et al.'s (2009) findings that tearing increases perceptions of sadness in sad expressions. Furthermore, we find that tearing has specific effects on ratings of emotion (happiness, sadness, anger, and fear) and ratings of intensity and valence in neutral, positive, and negative expressions. These results suggest that tearing may serve a specific and independent communicative function, interacting with those of various expressions.