Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions

Abstract

This study investigated which features of AVATAR laughter are perceived threatening for individuals with a fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia), and individuals with no gelotophobia. Laughter samples were systematically varied (e.g., intensity, laughter pitch, and energy for the voice, intensity of facial actions of the face) in three modalities: animated facial expressions, synthesized auditory laughter vocalizations, and motion capture generated puppets displaying laughter body movements. In the online study 123 adults completed, the GELOPH <15 > (Ruch and Proyer, 2008a,b) and rated randomly presented videos of the three modalities for how malicious, how friendly, how real the laughter was (0 not at all to 8 extremely). Additionally, an open question asked which markers led to the perception of friendliness/maliciousness. The current study identified features in all modalities of laughter stimuli that were perceived as malicious in general, and some that were gelotophobia specific. For facial expressions of AVATARS, medium intensity laughs triggered highest maliciousness in the gelotophobes. In the auditory stimuli, the fundamental frequency modulations and the variation in intensity were indicative of maliciousness. In the body, backwards and forward movements and rocking vs. jerking movements distinguished the most malicious from the least malicious laugh. From the open answers, the shape and appearance of the lips curling induced feelings that the expression was malicious for non-gelotophobes and that the movement round the eyes, elicited the face to appear as friendly. This was opposite for gelotophobes. Gelotophobia savvy AVATARS should be of high intensity, containing lip and eye movements and be fast, non-repetitive voiced vocalization, variable and of short duration. It should not contain any features that indicate a down-regulation in the voice or body, or indicate voluntary/cognitive modulation.

Gender differences on laugh‐related traits: A cross‐sectional study

“…Past research has indicated that gender differences account for laugh‐related traits. Men had a stronger disposition to laugh at others than did women, but there were no gender differences with respect to gelotophobia and gelotophilia (Platt & Ruch, ; Platt, Ruch, Hofmann, & Proyer, ; Proyer, Hempelmann, & Ruch, ; Proyer & Ruch, ; Ruch et al, ; Ruch, Beermann, & Proyer, ; Ruch & Proyer, ). In addition, Chen and his colleagues analysed the impact of gender difference on laugh‐related traits among adolescents, that is, senior elementary students and junior high students, and found that boys had higher tendencies of katagelasticism and gelotophilia than did girls (Wang, ), which indicated gender differences with respect to laugh‐related traits for adolescents.…”

Laughter Research: A Review of the ILHAIRE Project

“…The latter were generally lower pitched, and shorter (but no differences in F0 were found). When comparing individuals with a fear of being laughed at to individuals with no fear, Ruch and colleagues [113] found within ILHAIRE that the fundamental frequency modulations and the variation in intensity were indicative of perceived maliciousness. Fast, non-repetitive voiced vocalizations, variable and of short duration were perceived as most friendly by individuals with a fear of being laughed at.…”

“…Similarly, Mancini et al [66] found that laypersons were generally very good in distinguishing full-body animations of laughter from non-laughter (79.70% of the stimuli were categorized correctly), with high levels of confidence in rating either stimulus category. When assessing the perceptions of gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes, Ruch and colleagues [113] found that in the virtual body portrayals (faceless full body stick figures), backwards and forward movements and rocking vs. jerking movements distinguished the most malicious from the least malicious laugh.…”

“…This was replicated for maliciousness in the second study, although participants could potentially infer the "frown" as a natural element of the laugh, as they had seen the video and the picture. Hofmann (2014) concluded that a dynamic presentation is necessary for detecting graduating intensity markers in the joyfully laughing face. While these studies focused on general differences in laughter perception, we also investigated inter-individual differences within the ILHAIRE project.…”

“…Thus, for gelotophobes, the "smiling face may hide an evil mind". Ruch and colleagues [113] looked at how the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia, cfr. [112] for a recent review on this topic) influenced the perception of laughter animations (face and upper body avatar portrayals, synthesized laughter sounds with four different modifications, faceless full body stick figure animations).…”