Amsterdam Brain and Cognition Center, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Brain and Cognition Group, Department of Psychology, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Amsterdam Brain and Cognition Center, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Social Psychology Program, Department of Psychology, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Psychol Rep. 2024 Dec;127(6):3170-3189. doi: 10.1177/00332941231153975. Epub 2023 Feb 3.
Nonreplications of previously undisputed phenomena tend to leave a theoretical vacuum. This theoretical perspective seeks to fill the gap left by the failure to replicate unobtrusive facial feedback. In the emblematic original study, participants who held a pen between the teeth (i.e., requiring activity of the zygomaticus major muscle) rated cartoons more positively than participants who held the pen between the lips. We argue that the same social mechanisms (e.g., the presence of an audience) modulate facial feedback to emotion as are involved in the feed-forward shaping of facial actions by emotions. Differing social contexts could thus help explain the contrast between original findings and failures to obtain unobtrusive facial feedback. An exploratory analysis that included results only from (unobtrusive) facial-feedback studies without explicit reference to emotion in the facial manipulation provided preliminary support for this hypothesis. Studies with a social context (e.g., due to experimenter presence) showed a medium-sized aggregate facial-feedback effect, whereas studies without a social context (e.g., when facial actions were only filmed), revealed a small effect. Video awareness strengthened facial feedback considerably within an engaging social context, but seemed to reduce it without a social context. We provisionally conclude that a (pro-)social interpretation of facial actions facilitates feedback to (primarily positive) emotion, and suggest further research explicitly manipulating this context.
先前无可争议的现象的非再现往往会留下理论空白。这种理论视角试图填补未能复制不显眼的面部反馈所留下的空白。在标志性的原始研究中，将笔夹在牙齿之间（即需要颧大肌活动）的参与者比将笔夹在嘴唇之间的参与者对卡通片的评价更积极。我们认为，相同的社会机制（例如，有观众在场）调节了情绪的面部反馈，就像情绪对面部动作的前馈塑造一样。因此，不同的社会背景可以帮助解释原始发现与未能获得不显眼的面部反馈之间的对比。一项探索性分析仅包括没有明确提及面部操纵中情绪的（不显眼的）面部反馈研究的结果，为这一假设提供了初步支持。有社会背景的研究（例如，由于实验者在场）显示出中等大小的综合面部反馈效应，而没有社会背景的研究（例如，当仅拍摄面部动作时）则显示出较小的效应。在引人入胜的社交环境中，视频意识极大地增强了面部反馈，但在没有社交环境的情况下，似乎会降低面部反馈。我们暂时得出结论，对面部动作的（亲）社会解释有助于反馈（主要是积极）情绪，并建议进一步研究明确操纵这种背景。
