Social determinants of facial displays

A primary function of facial displays is to communicate messages to others. Bavelas and Chovil (1990) proposed an Integrated Message Model of language in which nonverbal acts such as facial displays and gestures that occur in communicative (particularly face-to-face) interactions are viewed as symbolic messages that are used to convey meaning to others. One proposition of this model is that these nonverbal messages will be shaped by the social components of the situation. The present study attempted to delineate more precisely the components of sociality that explicitly affect the use of facial displays in social situations. Frequency of motor mimicry displays in response to hearing about a close-call experience was examined in four communicative situations. In one condition, participants listened to a tape-recording of an individual telling about a close-call event. In two interactive but nonvisual conditions, participants listened to another person over the telephone or in the same room but separated by a partition. In the fourth condition, participants listened to another person in a face-to-face interaction. The frequency of listeners' motor mimicry displays was found to vary monotonically with the sociality of the four conditions. Actual presence and visual availability of the story-teller potentiated listener displays. The results support the proposition that facial displays are mediated by the extent to which individuals can fully interact in communicative situations.

[1]  C. Hobart,et al.  The Measurement of Empathy , 1965, American Journal of Sociology.

[2]  P. Ekman,et al.  Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception †. , 1969, Psychiatry.

[3]  P. Ekman,et al.  The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior: Categories, Origins, Usage, and Coding , 1969 .

[4]  C. Izard The face of emotion , 1971 .

[5]  P. Ekman Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. , 1972 .

[6]  A. Mehrabian,et al.  A measure of emotional empathy. , 1972, Journal of personality.

[7]  R. Vaughan,et al.  Effects of being observed on expressive, subjective, and physiological responses to painful stimuli. , 1976, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  R. Kraut,et al.  Social and emotional messages of smiling: An ethological approach. , 1979 .

[9]  R. Emde,et al.  Mother's presence is not enough: Effect of emotional availability on infant exploration. , 1981 .

[10]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Social presence, facial feedback, and emotion. , 1982, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

[11]  P. Ekman Emotion in the human face , 1982 .

[12]  C. Malatesta Chapter 8 – Developmental Course of Emotion Expression in the Human Infant* , 1985 .

[13]  J. Bavelas,et al.  Experimental methods for studying “elementary motor mimicry” , 1986 .

[14]  J. Bavelas,et al.  "I show how you feel": Motor mimicry as a communicative act. , 1986 .

[15]  Alex Black,et al.  Motor mimicry as primitive empathy. , 1987 .

[16]  The State of Social Psychology: Issues, Themes, and Controversies , 1989 .

[17]  A. J. Fridlund,et al.  Audience effects on solitary faces during imagery: Displaying to the people in your head , 1990 .

[18]  A. J. Fridlund Evolution and facial action in reflex, social motive, and paralanguage , 1991, Biological Psychology.

[19]  A. J. Fridlund Sociality of Solitary Smiling: Potentiation by an Implicit Audience , 1991 .