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 17 universalist perspective. This result contrasts Fridlund’s (1991) finding of no relationship between smiling and self-report of happiness. However, when we examined enjoyment and nonenjoyment smiles separately, we found that, as predicted by Hypthesis 2b, only enjoyment smiles correlated with self-report of enjoyment (Pearson r = 0.43, p < .001), which replicates Ekman et al’s (1990) finding. Moreover, the number of enjoyment smiles correlated significantly with self-report of happiness within each of the 3 conditions: whether participants were alone (Pearson r = 0.54, p < .01), in moderate (Pearson r = 0.46, p < .05) or in high social contact (Pearson r = 0.47, p < .05). In contrast, the combined total number of smiles and the number of nonenjoyment smiles within each of the 3 conditions did not correlate significantly with the self-report of happiness (see Table 2). Thus, amount of sociality did not seem to affect the relationship between enjoyment smiles and happiness, whereas the amount of sociality did seem to affect the relationship between all types of smiles and happiness. Consequently, Hypothesis 2b was fully supported, whereas Hypothesis 3 was partially supported because all smiles did not predict happiness within the different social contact conditions. Discussion This study attempted to replicate and clarify Fridlund (1991) to better understand the complex meaning of the smile in communication. Fridlund concluded from his study that there was no correlation between frequency of smiling and felt emotion of happiness and, thus, that smiling is a solely communicative gesture. To test Fridlund’s conclusions, this study proposed three hypotheses to explore the relationship between emotion, facial expression, and social interaction. This study improves Fridlund’s design because it incorporates Ekman and Friesen’s (1982) distinction between enjoyment smiles

Authors: Kurylo, Anastacia. and Frank, Mark.
first   previous   Page 18 of 32   next   last



background image
Kurylo & Frank
Smiles and Communication
17
universalist perspective. This result contrasts Fridlund’s (1991) finding of no relationship
between smiling and self-report of happiness. However, when we examined enjoyment
and nonenjoyment smiles separately, we found that, as predicted by Hypthesis 2b, only
enjoyment smiles correlated with self-report of enjoyment (Pearson r = 0.43, p < .001),
which replicates Ekman et al’s (1990) finding. Moreover, the number of enjoyment
smiles correlated significantly with self-report of happiness within each of the 3
conditions: whether participants were alone (Pearson r = 0.54, p < .01), in moderate
(Pearson r = 0.46, p < .05) or in high social contact (Pearson r = 0.47, p < .05). In
contrast, the combined total number of smiles and the number of nonenjoyment smiles
within each of the 3 conditions did not correlate significantly with the self-report of
happiness (see Table 2). Thus, amount of sociality did not seem to affect the relationship
between enjoyment smiles and happiness, whereas the amount of sociality did seem to
affect the relationship between all types of smiles and happiness. Consequently,
Hypothesis 2b was fully supported, whereas Hypothesis 3 was partially supported
because all smiles did not predict happiness within the different social contact conditions.
Discussion
This study attempted to replicate and clarify Fridlund (1991) to better understand
the complex meaning of the smile in communication. Fridlund concluded from his study
that there was no correlation between frequency of smiling and felt emotion of happiness
and, thus, that smiling is a solely communicative gesture. To test Fridlund’s conclusions,
this study proposed three hypotheses to explore the relationship between emotion, facial
expression, and social interaction. This study improves Fridlund’s design because it
incorporates Ekman and Friesen’s (1982) distinction between enjoyment smiles


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
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 18 of 32   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.