School of Psychology, Université de Moncton, 18 Avenue Antonine-Maillet, Moncton, NB, E1A 3E9, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON, Canada.
BMC Psychol. 2023 Apr 25;11(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01173-8.
While some research indicates that individuals can accurately judge smile authenticity of enjoyment and masking smile expressions, other research suggest modest judgment rates of masking smiles. The current study explored the role of emotion-related individual differences in the judgment of authenticity and recognition of negative emotions in enjoyment and masking smile expressions as a potential explanation for the differences observed.
Specifically, Experiment 1 investigated the role of emotion contagion (Doherty in J Nonverbal Behav 21:131-154, 1997), emotion intelligence (Schutte et al. in Personality Individ Differ 25:167-177, 1998), and emotion regulation (Gratz and Roemer in J Psychopathol Behav Assess 26:41-54, 2004) in smile authenticity judgment and recognition of negative emotions in masking smiles. Experiment 2 investigated the role of state and trait anxiety (Spielberger et al. in Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, 1983) in smile authenticity judgment and recognition of negative emotions in the same masking smiles. In both experiments, repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted for judgment of authenticity, probability of producing the expected response, for the detection of another emotion, and for emotion recognition. A series of correlations were also calculated between the proportion of expected responses of smile judgement and the scores on the different subscales.
Results of the smile judgment and recognition tasks were replicated in both studies, and echoed results from prior studies of masking smile judgment: participants rated enjoyment smiles as happier than the masking smiles and, of the masking smiles, participants responded "really happy" more often for the angry-eyes masking smiles and more often categorized fear masking smiles as "not really happy".
Overall, while the emotion-related individual differences used in our study seem to have an impact on recognition of basic emotions in the literature, our study suggest that these traits, except for emotional awareness, do not predict performances on the judgment of complex expressions such as masking smiles. These results provide further information regarding the factors that do and do not contribute to greater judgment of smile authenticity and recognition of negative emotions in masking smiles.
虽然一些研究表明,个体可以准确判断愉悦和伪装笑容的真实性,但其他研究表明,伪装笑容的判断率较低。本研究探讨了情绪相关个体差异在判断愉悦和伪装笑容的真实性和识别负面情绪中的作用,这可能是造成观察到的差异的原因。
具体来说,实验 1 研究了情绪传染(Doherty 在 J Nonverbal Behav 21:131-154, 1997 年)、情绪智力(Schutte 等人在 Personality Individ Differ 25:167-177, 1998 年)和情绪调节(Gratz 和 Roemer 在 J Psychopathol Behav Assess 26:41-54, 2004 年)在伪装笑容的真实性判断和识别负面情绪中的作用。实验 2 研究了状态和特质焦虑(Spielberger 等人在 Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, 1983 年)在识别相同伪装笑容的真实性和识别负面情绪中的作用。在这两个实验中,对于真实性判断、产生预期反应的概率、检测另一种情绪以及情绪识别,都进行了重复测量方差分析。还计算了微笑判断中预期反应比例与不同子量表得分之间的一系列相关性。
两个实验都复制了微笑判断和识别任务的结果,这些结果与伪装微笑判断的先前研究结果一致:参与者认为愉悦的笑容比伪装的笑容更快乐,在伪装的笑容中,参与者更频繁地对愤怒眼神的伪装笑容做出“真的很开心”的反应,更频繁地将恐惧伪装的笑容归类为“不是真的开心”。
总的来说,尽管我们研究中使用的情绪相关个体差异似乎对文献中基本情绪的识别有影响,但我们的研究表明,这些特征(除了情绪意识)并不能预测对复杂表情(如伪装笑容)的判断。这些结果提供了关于影响判断伪装笑容真实性和识别伪装笑容中负面情绪的因素的进一步信息。