Cargando…

Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays

Smiles are distinct and easily recognizable facial expressions, yet they markedly differ in their meanings. According to a recent theoretical account, smiles can be classified based on three fundamental social functions which they serve: expressing positive affect and rewarding self and others (rewa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Orlowska, Anna B., Krumhuber, Eva G., Rychlowska, Magdalena, Szarota, Piotr
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6004382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942274
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00938
_version_ 1783332510710628352
author Orlowska, Anna B.
Krumhuber, Eva G.
Rychlowska, Magdalena
Szarota, Piotr
author_facet Orlowska, Anna B.
Krumhuber, Eva G.
Rychlowska, Magdalena
Szarota, Piotr
author_sort Orlowska, Anna B.
collection PubMed
description Smiles are distinct and easily recognizable facial expressions, yet they markedly differ in their meanings. According to a recent theoretical account, smiles can be classified based on three fundamental social functions which they serve: expressing positive affect and rewarding self and others (reward smile), creating and maintaining social bonds (affiliative smile), and negotiating social status (dominance smiles) (Niedenthal et al., 2010; Martin et al., 2017). While there is evidence for distinct morphological features of these smiles, their categorization only starts to be investigated in human faces. Moreover, the factors influencing this process – such as facial mimicry or display mode – remain yet unknown. In the present study, we examine the recognition of reward, affiliative, and dominance smiles in static and dynamic portrayals, and explore how interfering with facial mimicry affects such classification. Participants (N = 190) were presented with either static or dynamic displays of the three smile types, whilst their ability to mimic was free or restricted via a pen-in-mouth procedure. For each stimulus they rated the extent to which the expression represents a reward, an affiliative, or a dominance smile. Higher than chance accuracy rates revealed that participants were generally able to differentiate between the three smile types. In line with our predictions, recognition performance was lower in the static than dynamic condition, but this difference was only significant for affiliative smiles. No significant effects of facial muscle restriction were observed, suggesting that the ability to mimic might not be necessary for the distinction between the three functional smiles. Together, our findings support previous evidence on reward, affiliative, and dominance smiles by documenting their perceptual distinctiveness. They also replicate extant observations on the dynamic advantage in expression perception and suggest that this effect may be especially pronounced in the case of ambiguous facial expressions, such as affiliative smiles.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6004382
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60043822018-06-25 Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays Orlowska, Anna B. Krumhuber, Eva G. Rychlowska, Magdalena Szarota, Piotr Front Psychol Psychology Smiles are distinct and easily recognizable facial expressions, yet they markedly differ in their meanings. According to a recent theoretical account, smiles can be classified based on three fundamental social functions which they serve: expressing positive affect and rewarding self and others (reward smile), creating and maintaining social bonds (affiliative smile), and negotiating social status (dominance smiles) (Niedenthal et al., 2010; Martin et al., 2017). While there is evidence for distinct morphological features of these smiles, their categorization only starts to be investigated in human faces. Moreover, the factors influencing this process – such as facial mimicry or display mode – remain yet unknown. In the present study, we examine the recognition of reward, affiliative, and dominance smiles in static and dynamic portrayals, and explore how interfering with facial mimicry affects such classification. Participants (N = 190) were presented with either static or dynamic displays of the three smile types, whilst their ability to mimic was free or restricted via a pen-in-mouth procedure. For each stimulus they rated the extent to which the expression represents a reward, an affiliative, or a dominance smile. Higher than chance accuracy rates revealed that participants were generally able to differentiate between the three smile types. In line with our predictions, recognition performance was lower in the static than dynamic condition, but this difference was only significant for affiliative smiles. No significant effects of facial muscle restriction were observed, suggesting that the ability to mimic might not be necessary for the distinction between the three functional smiles. Together, our findings support previous evidence on reward, affiliative, and dominance smiles by documenting their perceptual distinctiveness. They also replicate extant observations on the dynamic advantage in expression perception and suggest that this effect may be especially pronounced in the case of ambiguous facial expressions, such as affiliative smiles. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6004382/ /pubmed/29942274 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00938 Text en Copyright © 2018 Orlowska, Krumhuber, Rychlowska and Szarota. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Orlowska, Anna B.
Krumhuber, Eva G.
Rychlowska, Magdalena
Szarota, Piotr
Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title_full Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title_fullStr Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title_full_unstemmed Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title_short Dynamics Matter: Recognition of Reward, Affiliative, and Dominance Smiles From Dynamic vs. Static Displays
title_sort dynamics matter: recognition of reward, affiliative, and dominance smiles from dynamic vs. static displays
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6004382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942274
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00938
work_keys_str_mv AT orlowskaannab dynamicsmatterrecognitionofrewardaffiliativeanddominancesmilesfromdynamicvsstaticdisplays
AT krumhuberevag dynamicsmatterrecognitionofrewardaffiliativeanddominancesmilesfromdynamicvsstaticdisplays
AT rychlowskamagdalena dynamicsmatterrecognitionofrewardaffiliativeanddominancesmilesfromdynamicvsstaticdisplays
AT szarotapiotr dynamicsmatterrecognitionofrewardaffiliativeanddominancesmilesfromdynamicvsstaticdisplays