Perfidious feminine faces.

Bugental, Daphne E.; Love, Leonore R.; Gianetto, Robert M.

doi:10.1037/h0030586

Cited by 87 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, we reported that, while smiling is positively correlated with evaluation for both target sexes, the correlation is much higher for male targets than female targets. This observation is consistent with the findings of Bugental, Love, and Gianetto (1971) that, for parent-child interactions, smiles on womens' faces did not convince children of the positive tone of otherwise negative messages. Smiles given by men, however, were always interpreted to be positive and consistent with verbal messages.…”

Section: Sex Of Target Effectssupporting

confidence: 93%

Nonverbal behaviors and social evaluation1

Shrout

Fiske

1981

J Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Male and female observers watched videotapes of short interactions between previously unacquainted dyads of one sex or the other and then rated one target. An evaluation measure derived from the ratings was positively correlated with a majority of the diverse nonverbal behaviors coded from the videotapes. The significant correlations were all positive and all but one involved social behaviors directed toward the other person. In a multiple regression analysis, nod rate, short vocal back-channel rate, smile time, filled pause rate, and gaze time were sufficient to predict evaluations by either sex. Although no overall effects were found for sex of target, weights for behaviors varied with sex of observer in the second root of a canonical correlation analysis. Consistent with the findings of others, the amount of nonverbal activity, especially socially oriented activity, is related to favorableness of observers' evaluative impressions. The contribution of some behaviors varies with the sex of the observer.When observers form impressions of unfamiliar other persons, they have available at least four categories of immediate cues from the target: {a) verbal behavior, {b) nonverbal behavior, (c) demographic characteristics (such as race and sex), and (d) other aspects of appearance. While each type of cue has generated research interest (Secord & Backman, 1974), we find nonverbal behaviors to be especially interesting because they are both discrete public events and subtle influences on impressions. Researchers have in fact established that several nonverbal behaviors are related to impression formation. For example, Kendon (1967) and Kendon and Gook (1969) have shown that gazing is related to ratings of liking; Rosenfeld (1966) reported that approval-seeking 1. This

show abstract

Section: Sex Of Target Effectssupporting

confidence: 93%

Nonverbal behaviors and social evaluation1

Shrout

Fiske

1981

J Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That is, black communicators smiled less and white communicators increased their smiling. Since smiling is thought to be a masking behavior among middle-class, white women (Bugental, Love, & Gianetto, 1971;Dierks-Stewart, 1979;Frances, 1979;Pearson, 1985), we may speculate that white interactants smiled to cover uncertainty and anxiety over interracial communication. However, smiling behavior did not appear to serve the same function for black interactants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Communication adaptation among racially homogeneous and heterogeneous groups

Booth‐Butterfield

Jordan

1989

Southern Communication Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, Bugenthal et al (1971) observed that fathers, when smiling at their children, often made a friendly remark, whereas for mothers there was no relation between the smile and the friendliness of the remark.…”

Section: Smilingmentioning

confidence: 93%