Cargando…
Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces
People are good at recognizing emotions from facial expressions, but less accurate at determining the authenticity of such expressions. We investigated whether this depends upon the technique that senders use to produce deliberate expressions, and on decoders seeing these in a dynamic or static form...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30042717 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01184 |
_version_ | 1783340097441103872 |
---|---|
author | Zloteanu, Mircea Krumhuber, Eva G. Richardson, Daniel C. |
author_facet | Zloteanu, Mircea Krumhuber, Eva G. Richardson, Daniel C. |
author_sort | Zloteanu, Mircea |
collection | PubMed |
description | People are good at recognizing emotions from facial expressions, but less accurate at determining the authenticity of such expressions. We investigated whether this depends upon the technique that senders use to produce deliberate expressions, and on decoders seeing these in a dynamic or static format. Senders were filmed as they experienced genuine surprise in response to a jack-in-the-box (Genuine). Other senders faked surprise with no preparation (Improvised) or after having first experienced genuine surprise themselves (Rehearsed). Decoders rated the genuineness and intensity of these expressions, and the confidence of their judgment. It was found that both expression type and presentation format impacted decoder perception and accurate discrimination. Genuine surprise achieved the highest ratings of genuineness, intensity, and judgmental confidence (dynamic only), and was fairly accurately discriminated from deliberate surprise expressions. In line with our predictions, Rehearsed expressions were perceived as more genuine (in dynamic presentation), whereas Improvised were seen as more intense (in static presentation). However, both were poorly discriminated as not being genuine. In general, dynamic stimuli improved authenticity discrimination accuracy and perceptual differences between expressions. While decoders could perceive subtle differences between different expressions (especially from dynamic displays), they were not adept at detecting if these were genuine or deliberate. We argue that senders are capable of producing genuine-looking expressions of surprise, enough to fool others as to their veracity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6048358 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60483582018-07-24 Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces Zloteanu, Mircea Krumhuber, Eva G. Richardson, Daniel C. Front Psychol Psychology People are good at recognizing emotions from facial expressions, but less accurate at determining the authenticity of such expressions. We investigated whether this depends upon the technique that senders use to produce deliberate expressions, and on decoders seeing these in a dynamic or static format. Senders were filmed as they experienced genuine surprise in response to a jack-in-the-box (Genuine). Other senders faked surprise with no preparation (Improvised) or after having first experienced genuine surprise themselves (Rehearsed). Decoders rated the genuineness and intensity of these expressions, and the confidence of their judgment. It was found that both expression type and presentation format impacted decoder perception and accurate discrimination. Genuine surprise achieved the highest ratings of genuineness, intensity, and judgmental confidence (dynamic only), and was fairly accurately discriminated from deliberate surprise expressions. In line with our predictions, Rehearsed expressions were perceived as more genuine (in dynamic presentation), whereas Improvised were seen as more intense (in static presentation). However, both were poorly discriminated as not being genuine. In general, dynamic stimuli improved authenticity discrimination accuracy and perceptual differences between expressions. While decoders could perceive subtle differences between different expressions (especially from dynamic displays), they were not adept at detecting if these were genuine or deliberate. We argue that senders are capable of producing genuine-looking expressions of surprise, enough to fool others as to their veracity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6048358/ /pubmed/30042717 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01184 Text en Copyright © 2018 Zloteanu, Krumhuber and Richardson. 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(s) 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 Zloteanu, Mircea Krumhuber, Eva G. Richardson, Daniel C. Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title | Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title_full | Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title_fullStr | Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title_full_unstemmed | Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title_short | Detecting Genuine and Deliberate Displays of Surprise in Static and Dynamic Faces |
title_sort | detecting genuine and deliberate displays of surprise in static and dynamic faces |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30042717 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01184 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zloteanumircea detectinggenuineanddeliberatedisplaysofsurpriseinstaticanddynamicfaces AT krumhuberevag detectinggenuineanddeliberatedisplaysofsurpriseinstaticanddynamicfaces AT richardsondanielc detectinggenuineanddeliberatedisplaysofsurpriseinstaticanddynamicfaces |