All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Human Smiles: Expression of Emotion or Communication Gesture?
Unformatted Document Text:  Kurylo & Frank Smiles and Communication 15 about past research (Kleck, Vaughan, Cartwright-Smith, Burns Vaughan, Colby & Lanzetta, 1976) that found people react differently when they are aware that they are being observed. Participants were given the option to decline consent and have the videotaping erased. No participant declined consent. Measurement of Facial Expressions The facial expressions were coded using on a high-resolution Super VHS videotape, that showed a close-up, head on view of the participant’s face. The coding of the smiles was based on FACS Action Unit (AU) scoring rules (Ekman & Friesen, 1978). Specifically, a smile was classified as an enjoyment smile if it featured AU6 (orbicularis oculi, pars lateralis) and AU12 (zygomatic major), and a smile was classified as a nonenjoyment smile if it featured AU12 alone or in combination with any other AU except AU6. A FACS-certified coder who had previously passed FACS certification test at over 70% agreement with other judges identified the frequency of AU12 and AU^ + AU12. This FACS trained coder was blind to the hypotheses of the study. Results Table 1 shows the mean number of enjoyment, nonenjoyment, and total number of smiles for each of the 3 social contact conditions. In order to test our first two hypotheses, a 3 x (2) mixed model Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed with sociality as the between-subjects variable, and smile type as the within-subject variable. Hypothesis 1 proposed that if the relativist position was supported, then we would expect a significant main effect for sociality such that the number of smiles would increase with increased levels of sociality. Contrary to this hypothesis, and in contradiction to Fridlund’s (1991) findings, the results showed that there was no significant main effect

Authors: Kurylo, Anastacia. and Frank, Mark.
first   previous   Page 16 of 32   next   last



background image
Kurylo & Frank
Smiles and Communication
15
about past research (Kleck, Vaughan, Cartwright-Smith, Burns Vaughan, Colby &
Lanzetta, 1976) that found people react differently when they are aware that they are
being observed. Participants were given the option to decline consent and have the
videotaping erased. No participant declined consent.
Measurement of Facial Expressions
The facial expressions were coded using on a high-resolution Super VHS
videotape, that showed a close-up, head on view of the participant’s face. The coding of
the smiles was based on FACS Action Unit (AU) scoring rules (Ekman & Friesen, 1978).
Specifically, a smile was classified as an enjoyment smile if it featured AU6 (orbicularis
oculi, pars lateralis) and AU12 (zygomatic major), and a smile was classified as a
nonenjoyment smile if it featured AU12 alone or in combination with any other AU
except AU6. A FACS-certified coder who had previously passed FACS certification test
at over 70% agreement with other judges identified the frequency of AU12 and AU^ +
AU12. This FACS trained coder was blind to the hypotheses of the study.
Results
Table 1 shows the mean number of enjoyment, nonenjoyment, and total number
of smiles for each of the 3 social contact conditions. In order to test our first two
hypotheses, a 3 x (2) mixed model Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed with
sociality as the between-subjects variable, and smile type as the within-subject variable.
Hypothesis 1 proposed that if the relativist position was supported, then we would expect
a significant main effect for sociality such that the number of smiles would increase with
increased levels of sociality. Contrary to this hypothesis, and in contradiction to
Fridlund’s (1991) findings, the results showed that there was no significant main effect


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 16 of 32   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.