Two experiments were conducted to determine whether embarrassment is a recognizable emotion independent of the nonverbal associates of humor. In the first experiment subjects attempted to identify embarrassment or amusement from silent videotape recordings presented under three viewing conditions: body, face, or face and body together. Correct recognition of embarrassment required both face and body cues while amusement required only facial cues. Embarrassment was incorrectly identified as amusement from facial cues. Experiment 2 investigated the relative importance of facial versus bodily cues for the recognition of embarrassment and amusement. Subjects, who viewed only the face plus body condition, indicated on a schematic drawing of a person which part they were utilizing to make their judgments. While the mouth signaled amusement, the eyes, hands, lower legs, and mouth were all important signals of embarrassment. The part played by amusement in an embarrassing incident is discussed in the light of these findings.
[1]
E. Goffman.
On face-work; an analysis of ritual elements in social interaction.
,
1955,
Psychiatry.
[2]
P. Ekman,et al.
Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception †.
,
1969,
Psychiatry.
[3]
Erving Goffman,et al.
Embarrassment and Social Organization
,
1956,
American Journal of Sociology.
[4]
P. Ekman,et al.
Detecting deception from the body or face.
,
1974
.
[5]
R. Edelmann,et al.
Changes in non‐verbal behaviour during embarrassment
,
1979
.
[6]
A. Modigliani,et al.
Embarrassment, facework, and eye contact: testing a theory of embarrassment.
,
1971,
Journal of personality and social psychology.
[7]
G. Milner.
Homo Ridens. Towards a Semiotic Theory of Humour and Laughter
,
1972
.
[8]
R. Exline,et al.
VISUAL BEHAVIOR IN A DYAD AS AFFECTED BY INTERVIEW CONTENT AND SEX OF RESPONDENT.
,
1965,
Journal of personality and social psychology.
[9]
E. Fink,et al.
Humorous Responses to Embarrassment
,
1977
.