Abstract 抽象
In this article, we review recent developments in the study of emotional expression within a basic emotion framework. Dozens of new studies find that upwards of 20 emotions are signaled in multimodal and dynamic patterns of expressive behavior. Moving beyond word to stimulus matching paradigms, new studies are detailing the more nuanced and complex processes involved in emotion recognition and the structure of how people perceive emotional expression. Finally, we consider new studies documenting contextual influences upon emotion recognition. We conclude by extending these recent findings to questions about emotion-related physiology and the mammalian precursors of human emotion.
在本文中,我们回顾了在基本情绪框架内情绪表达研究的最新进展。数十项新研究发现,超过 20 种情绪以多模态和动态表达行为模式发出信号。从单词到刺激匹配范式,新的研究详细介绍了情绪识别所涉及的更细微和复杂的过程,以及人们如何感知情绪表达的结构。最后,我们考虑了记录情境对情绪识别影响的新研究。最后,我们将这些最近的发现扩展到有关情绪相关生理学和人类情绪的哺乳动物前体的问题。
Introduction 介绍
Basic Emotion Theory (BET) is guided by convergent analogies found in the writings of scientists working in different traditions: Emotions are a “grammar of social living” that situate the self within a social and moral order; they structure interactions, like scripts in pieces of fiction, in relationships that matter (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989; Oatley, 2004). In more specific terms, within BET emotions are thought of as distinct and brief states involving physiological, subjective, and expressive components that enable humans to respond in ways that are typically adaptive in relation to evolutionarily significant problems, from negotiating status hierarchies to avoiding peril to taking care of vulnerable offspring (Ekman, 1992; Ekman & Cordaro, 2011; Keltner & Lerner, 2010; Shariff & Tracy, 2011; van Kleef, 2016).
基本情感理论 (BET) 以在不同传统中工作的科学家的著作中发现的趋同类比为指导:情感是一种“社会生活语法”,它将自我置于社会和道德秩序中;它们构建互动,就像小说中的剧本一样,在重要的关系中(Eibl-Eibesfeldt,1989 年;Oatley,2004 年)。更具体地说,在 BET 中,情绪被认为是独特而短暂的状态,涉及生理、主观和表达成分,使人类能够以通常适应性的方式应对进化上重要的问题,从协商地位等级到避免危险再到照顾脆弱的后代(Ekman,1992 年;Ekman & Cordaro, 2011;Keltner & Lerner, 2010;Shariff & Tracy,2011年;van Kleef,2016 年)。
These core assumptions of BET have been foundational to new empirical advances, ranging from the study of a broad number of previously unexplored specific positive emotions (e.g., Campos et al., 2013; Shiota et al., 2017) to progress in understanding basic mechanisms of emotion-related appraisal, language, development, and central and peripheral nervous system physiology (e.g., Lench et al., 2011; Nummenmaa, & Saarimäki, 2017).
BET 的这些核心假设是新的实证进展的基础,范围从对大量以前未探索的特定积极情绪的研究(例如,Campos 等人,2013 年;Shiota等人,2017 年)在理解情绪相关评价、语言、发展以及中枢和周围神经系统生理学的基本机制方面取得进展(例如,Lench 等人,2011 年;Nummenmaa, & Saarimäki, 2017)。
BET has also been central to the study of emotional expression. It was a focus, of course, of Darwin, who was an inspiration of the rich literature that we summarize here. In the simplest of terms, Basic Emotion Theory posits that nonverbal expressions of emotion share five properties. 1) They are brief, coherent patterns of behavior that tend to covary with distinct subjective experiences; 2) they signal the current emotional state, intentions, and/or assessment of the eliciting situation of the individual; 3) they manifest some degree of cross-cultural similarity in both production and recognition; 4) they find evolutionary precursors in the behaviors of other mammals in contexts similar to the contexts humans encounter (e.g., when signaling adversarial or cooperative intentions); and 5) they tend to covary with emotion-related physiological responses (Ekman & Davidson, 1994; Hess & Fischer, 2013; Keltner & Haidt, 2001; Keltner & Lerner, 2010; Matsumoto et al., 2008; Shariff & Tracy, 2011).
BET 也是情绪表达研究的核心。当然,这是达尔文的关注点,他是我们在这里总结的丰富文献的灵感来源。用最简单的话来说,基本情感理论假设情感的非语言表达具有五个特性。1) 它们是简短、连贯的行为模式,往往与不同的主观体验共变;2) 它们表明当前的情绪状态、意图和/或对个人诱发情况的评估;3) 他们在生产和认可方面表现出某种程度的跨文化相似性;4) 他们在与人类遇到的环境相似的环境中(例如,当发出对抗或合作意图的信号时)在其他哺乳动物的行为中找到进化前体;5)他们倾向于与情绪相关的生理反应共变(Ekman & Davidson,1994;Hess & Fischer, 2013;Keltner & Haidt, 2001;Keltner & Lerner, 2010;Matsumoto et al., 2008;Shariff & Tracy,2011 年)。
A first wave of BET-inspired studies on emotional expression find their provenance in the studies of Ekman and Friesen in New Guinea (Ekman, Sorenson, & Friesen, 1969), with which many are now familiar, but whose details are worth recalling. Using still photographs of prototypical emotional facial expressions, Ekman and Friesen were able to document some degree of universality in the production and recognition of a limited set of “basic” emotions, including anger, fear, happiness, sadness, disgust, and surprise (for review, see Matsumoto et al., 2008). This study inspired hundreds like it, and led to the replicated finding that observers could reliably identify with some degree of consistency these six emotions in static photos of facial muscle configurations (Elfenbein & Ambady, 2001).
第一波受BET启发的情绪表达研究在新几内亚的Ekman和Friesen的研究中找到了他们的渊源(Ekman, Sorenson和Friesen, 1969),许多人现在已经熟悉了,但其细节值得回忆。使用原型情感面部表情的静态照片,Ekman 和 Friesen 能够记录在产生和识别一组有限的“基本”情绪(包括愤怒、恐惧、快乐、悲伤、厌恶和惊讶)的产生和识别中的某种程度的普遍性(有关评论,参见 Matsumoto 等人,2008 年)。这项研究激发了数百人的灵感,并导致了重复的发现,即观察者可以在面部肌肉配置的静态照片中可靠地识别这六种情绪(Elfenbein & Ambady,2001)。
Clearly there is much more to emotional expression - both in the behavior people emit and how they judge it - than matching static images of facial muscle movement configurations to words or situations (as in the original Ekman and Friesen work). People clearly express emotions in more ways than in facial muscle movements, and rely on more than just single words or scenarios to make sense of emotional expression. The Ekman and Friesen work inspired several robust critiques. Questions have been raised about biases in the forced choice paradigms, the robustness of those results from forced studies, and the reliance upon such exaggerated, stereotypical expressions (Russell, 1994; Matsumoto & Hwang, 2017; Nelson & Russell, 2013). Reviews have revealed that the relationship between self-reports of subjective experience and facial muscle movements is more modest than perhaps assumed in BET (Duran, Reisenzen, & Fernandez-Dols, 2017). More recent data raises questions about the degree to which people from remote cultures actually recognize emotion in static photos of the six emotions (Crivelli et al., 2016). Particularly generative is Fridlund’s critique of BET, summarized in his Behavioral Ecological theory (BECV, see Fridlund, 1991, this volume). Fridlund’s theorizing, steeped in evolutionary accounts of nonhuman display, argues that human facial displays did not evolve to signal interior feeling, as presupposed in BET, but social intentions or motives instead (see Parkinson, 2005, for a detailed review of BET and BECV claims). This theorizing has inspired studies of how people infer intentions, feelings, and appraisals from expressive behavior, which we consider later.
显然,情感表达 - 无论是在人们发出的行为还是他们如何判断它 - 不仅仅是将面部肌肉运动配置的静态图像与语言或情境相匹配(如 Ekman 和 Friesen 的原始工作)。人们显然以比面部肌肉运动更多的方式表达情绪,并且依赖的不仅仅是单个词或场景来理解情绪表达。Ekman 和 Friesen 的工作激发了几篇强有力的批评。人们提出了关于强制选择范式中的偏见、这些来自强制研究的结果的稳健性以及对这种夸张、刻板印象表达的依赖的问题(Russell, 1994;Matsumoto & Hwang, 2017;Nelson & Russell, 2013)。评论显示,自我报告的主观体验与面部肌肉运动之间的关系可能比BET中假设的要温和得多(Duran,Reisenzen和Fernandez-Dols,2017)。最近的数据提出了一个问题,即来自遥远文化的人们在多大程度上真正识别了六种情绪的静态照片中的情绪(Crivelli et al., 2016)。特别具有生成性的是 Fridlund 对 BET 的批评,总结在他的 Behavioral Ecological theory(BECV,参见 Fridlund,1991 年,本卷)中。弗里德伦德的理论沉浸在非人类展示的进化描述中,认为人类的面部展示并没有像 BET 中预设的那样进化为传达内部感觉,而是社会意图或动机(参见 Parkinson,2005 年,有关 BET 和 BECV 声明的详细评论)。这种理论化激发了人们对人们如何从表达行为中推断意图、感受和评价的研究,我们稍后会考虑。
The Ekman and Friesen empirical work - the focus on how people label static images of facial muscle configurations - has inspired another class of developments in the field that are still guided by the core assumptions of BET but that move beyond the study of the recognition of static images of facial expressions of six emotions. It is these developments that we focus on here. We attend, in particular, to three areas of empirical advance. A first concerns the nature of emotional expression, which has been shown to include much more than six distinct facial expressions, and, in fact, upwards of 20 multimodal expressions. A second set of advances is found in the study of emotion perception, which concerns the processes by which social perceivers derive meaning from emotional expressions of different kinds. Guided by the aforementioned critiques of the Ekman and Friesen studies, the field has moved beyond relying exclusively on forced choice labeling of expressions, and progress is being made in understanding how social perceivers infer intentions, motives, action tendencies, and relational properties of signaler and perceiver in brief expressions of emotion. Finally, arising out of the functional foundation of BET has emerged a new line of inquiry—how expressions coordinateinteractions between individuals (e.g., Keltner & Kring, 1998; Niedenthal et al., 2015; van Kleef, Cheshin, & Fischer, 2016). This line of work most explicitly returns to a core notion of BET— that emotions are the grammar of social living—to detail how brief emotional expressions, in single modalities and in multimodal forms, coordinate interactions within meaningful relationships, such as those between parent and child, romantic partners and friends, or individuals within status hierarchies (e.g., for review, see van Kleef, 2016).
Ekman 和 Friesen 的实证工作 - 关注人们如何标记面部肌肉配置的静态图像 - 激发了该领域的另一类发展,这些发展仍然以 BET 的核心假设为指导,但超越了对识别六种情绪面部表情的静态图像的研究。我们在这里关注的正是这些发展。我们特别关注实证进步的三个领域。第一个涉及情感表达的性质,它已被证明包括超过 6 种不同的面部表情,事实上,包括 20 多种多模态表情。第二组进展是在情感感知研究中发现的,它涉及社会感知者从不同种类的情感表达中获得意义的过程。在上述对 Ekman 和 Friesen 研究的批评的指导下,该领域已经超越了仅仅依赖表达的强制选择标签,并且在理解社会感知者如何在简短的情感表达中推断信号和感知者的意图、动机、行为倾向和关系特性方面取得了进展。最后,从 BET 的功能基础中产生了一条新的研究路线——表达式如何协调个体之间的互动(例如,Keltner & Kring,1998;Niedenthal et al., 2015;van Kleef, Cheshin, & Fischer, 2016)。 这一系列工作最明确地回到了 BET 的一个核心概念——情绪是社会生活的语法——详细说明了简短的情绪表达如何以单一模态和多模态形式协调有意义的关系中的互动,例如父母与孩子、浪漫伴侣和朋友之间的互动,或地位等级中的个人之间的互动(例如, 有关评论,请参阅 van Kleef,2016 年)。
Advances in understanding the nature of emotional expression
理解情绪表达本质的进展
Emotional Expressions are Multimodal, Dynamic Patterns of Behavior
情绪表达是多模态的、动态的行为模式
Central to Basic Emotion Theory is the assumption that emotions enable the individual to respond adaptively to evolutionarily significant threats and opportunities in the environment, such as the cry of offspring, a threat from an adversary, or a potentially available sexual partner (Ekman, 1992; Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Emotions enable such responses primarily through shifts in peripheral physiology (Levenson, Ekman & Friesen, 1990), patterns of cognition (Oveis, Horberg, & Keltner, 2010), movements of the body (e.g., the proverbial fight or flight response), and expressive behaviors that coordinate social interactions through the information they convey and the responses the evoke in others (e.g., Keltner & Kring, 1998; van Kleef, 2009).
基本情绪理论的核心是假设情绪使个体能够对环境中进化上重要的威胁和机会做出适应性反应,例如后代的哭声、来自对手的威胁或潜在的性伴侣(Ekman,1992;Keltner & Haidt,2003 年)。情绪主要通过外周生理学的变化(Levenson, Ekman & Friesen, 1990),认知模式(Oveis, Horberg和Keltner,2010),身体的运动(例如,众所周知的战斗或逃跑反应)以及通过他们传达的信息和在他人中引发的反应来协调社交互动的表达行为(例如,Keltner & Kring, 1998 年;van Kleef,2009 年)。
Within this framework, emotions are fundamentally about instigating action and changing the probabilities of future actions (Frijda, 1986). Emotions enable people to react to significant stimuli (in the environment or within themselves), with complex patterns of behavior involving multiple modalities - facial muscle movements, vocal cues, bodily movements, gesture, posture, and so on. For example, studies of the emotion sympathy find that this brief state involves bodily movements forward, soothing tactile behavior, oblique eyebrows, a fixed pattern of gaze, vocalizations, and skin-to-skin contact when sympathy leads to embrace (Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010).
在这个框架内,情绪从根本上讲是关于煽动行动和改变未来行动的概率(Frijda,1986)。情绪使人们能够对重要的刺激(在环境中或自身内部)做出反应,其复杂的行为模式涉及多种模式——面部肌肉运动、声音暗示、身体运动、手势、姿势等。例如,对情绪同情的研究发现,这种短暂的状态涉及身体向前的运动、舒缓的触觉行为、斜眉毛、固定的凝视模式、发声以及当同情导致拥抱时的肌肤接触(Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010)。
Early studies of emotional expression largely focused on whether perceivers could infer emotions from static portrayals of prototypical configurations of facial muscles thought to convey anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise, and happiness (Ekman, 1994; Russell, 1994). The last 20 years of scientific study has moved significantly beyond static facial portrayals of these six emotions, revealing that emotional expressions are multimodal, dynamic patterns of behavior, involving facial action, vocalization, bodily movement, gaze, gesture, head movements, touch, autonomic response, and even scent (Keltner et al., 2016).
情绪表达的早期研究主要集中在感知者是否可以从被认为传达愤怒、厌恶、恐惧、悲伤、惊讶和快乐的面部肌肉原型配置的静态描绘中推断出情绪(Ekman,1994 年;Russell, 1994)。过去 20 年的科学研究已经大大超越了这六种情绪的静态面部描绘,揭示了情绪表达是多模态、动态的行为模式,涉及面部动作、发声、身体运动、凝视、手势、头部运动、触摸、自主反应,甚至气味(Keltner 等人,2016 年)。
Notably, the notion that emotional expressions are multimodal patterns of behavior was evident already in Charles Darwin’s original, rich descriptions of the expressions of over 40 emotional states (Keltner, 2009), as illustrated in Table 1 (focusing specifically on positive emotions). As is evident in the table, Darwin focused on extended and multimodal dynamic patterns of behavior, that involve not only facial muscle movements but also changes in gaze, body movements, respiration, gestures, hand movements, the voice, tactile contact, and autonomic responses (e.g., tears).
值得注意的是,情绪表达是多模态行为模式的概念在查尔斯·达尔文 (Charles Darwin) 对 40 多种情绪状态的表达的原始、丰富的描述中已经很明显(Keltner,2009),如表 1 所示(特别关注积极情绪)。从表中可以明显看出,达尔文专注于扩展和多模式动态行为模式,这不仅涉及面部肌肉运动,还涉及凝视、身体运动、呼吸、手势、手部运动、声音、触觉接触和自主反应(例如,眼泪)的变化。
Table 1: 表 1:
Darwin’s descriptions of the expressive behavior ofpositive emotions.
达尔文对积极情绪的表达行为的描述。
Astonishment 惊讶 | eyes open, mouth open, eyebrows raised, hands placed over mouth 睁开眼睛,张开嘴巴,扬起眉毛,双手捂住嘴巴 |
Contemplation 沉思 | frown, wrinkle skin under lower eyelids, eyes divergent, head droops, hands to forehead, mouth, or chin, thumb/index finger to lip 皱眉、下眼睑下皮肤起皱、眼睛发散、头部下垂、双手贴在额头、嘴巴或下巴上,拇指/食指贴在嘴唇上 |
Determination 测定 | firmly closed mouth, arms folded across breast, shoulders raised 紧闭着嘴巴,双臂交叉在胸前,肩膀抬高 |
Devotion 奉献 | face upwards, eyelids upturned, fainting, pupils upwards and inwards, humbling kneeling posture, hands upturned 脸朝上,眼睑上翘,昏厥,瞳孔向上和向内,谦卑地跪着,双手向上翘起 |
Happiness 幸福 | eyes sparkle, skin under eyes wrinkled, mouth drawn back at corners 眼睛闪闪发光,眼下皮肤起皱,嘴角向后拉 |
High spirits, Cheerfulness 意气风发, 欢快 |
smile, body erect, head upright, eyes open, eye brows raised, eyelids raised, nostrils raised, eating gestures (rubbing belly), air suck, lip smacks 微笑, 身体直立, 头部直立, 眼睛睁开, 眉毛上扬, 眼睑上扬, 鼻孔上扬, 吃东西的姿势(揉肚子), 吸气, 咂嘴 |
Joy 喜悦 | muscle tremble, purposeless movements, laughter, clapping hands, jumping, dancing about, stamping, chuckle/giggle, smile, muscle around eyes contracted, upper lip raised. 肌肉颤抖、漫无目的的动作、大笑、拍手、跳跃、跳舞、跺脚、咯咯笑/咯咯笑、微笑、眼睛周围的肌肉收缩、上唇上扬。 |
Laughter 笑声 | tears, deep inspiration, contraction of chest, shaking of body, head nods to and fro, lower jaw quivers up/down, lip corners drawn backwards, head thrown backward, shakes, head face red, muscle around eyes contracted, lip press/bite. 流泪、深吸气、胸部收缩、身体颤抖、来回点头、下颚上下颤抖、唇角向后拉、头向后甩、摇晃、头脸发红、眼睛周围的肌肉收缩、压唇/咬合。 |
Love 爱 | beaming eyes, smiling cheeks (when seeing old friend), touch, gentle smile, protruding lips (in chimps), kissing, nose rubs. 炯炯有神的眼睛,微笑的脸颊(见到老朋友时),抚摸,温柔的微笑,突出的嘴唇(黑猩猩),接吻,揉鼻子。 |
Maternal love 母爱 | touch, gentle smile, tender eyes 抚摸, 温柔的微笑, 温柔的眼神 |
Pride 自豪 | head, body erect, look down on others 头, 身体直立, 看不起别人 |
Sympathy 同情 | tears 眼泪 |
Early studies, as we have noted, focused almost exclusively on facial muscle movements. The more recent consideration of other modalities of communication has greatly expanded the field’s understanding of emotional expression. Studies of emotional expressions associated with experiences of embarrassment, shame, pride, and love have discerned distinct expressions of these emotions by incorporating measurements of gaze activity (e.g., the gaze aversion of shame and embarrassment), body movements (e.g., the chest expansion of pride and the open posture of love), hand activity (e.g., the face touch of embarrassment and open handed gesture of love), and movements of the head, such as the head tilt back during expressions of pride (Keltner, 1995; Tracy & Robins, 2004; 2007). These findings have prompted studies to systematically characterize how emotions are communicated in movements of the body (Dael, Mortillaro, & Scherer, 2012; Gross, Crane, & Fredrickson, 2010) and gaze (Sander et al., 2007). These developments of the study of emotional expression are clearly in keeping with Darwin’s more comprehensive analysis, and his suggestion that there should be signal value in how emotions are conveyed from a vast array of communicative behaviors, from simple movements of the hands to shifts in body posture to head movements.
正如我们所指出的,早期研究几乎完全集中在面部肌肉运动上。最近对其他通信方式的考虑极大地扩展了该领域对情绪表达的理解。对与尴尬、羞愧、骄傲和爱的经历相关的情绪表达的研究通过结合凝视活动(例如,羞愧和尴尬的凝视厌恶)、身体运动(例如,骄傲的胸部扩张和爱的开放姿势)、手部活动(例如,尴尬的面部触摸和爱的张开双手手势)的测量来辨别这些情绪的不同表达。 以及头部的运动,例如在表达自豪时头部向后倾斜(Keltner,1995 年;Tracy & Robins, 2004;2007 年)。这些发现促使研究系统地描述情绪在身体运动中的交流方式(Dael, Mortillaro, & Scherer, 2012;Gross, Crane, & Fredrickson, 2010年)和凝视 (Sander et al., 2007)。情绪表达研究的这些发展显然与达尔文更全面的分析一致,他建议从大量的交际行为中传达情绪应该具有信号价值,从简单的手部动作到身体姿势的转变再到头部运动。
To take one example of a major stream of research in this vein, the human voice has consistently been documented to be a rich modality of emotional expression, as anticipated in the seminal theorizing of Klaus Scherer (Scherer, 1986). To study whether people can communicate emotions with the voice, researchers have relied on two methods. In one, people, often trained actors, attempt to express different emotions in prosody, the tone and rhythm of our speech, while reading nonsense syllables or neutral passages of text (Banse & Scherer, 1996; Juslin & Laukka, 2003). These samples of emotion-related prosody are then presented to listeners, who select from a series of options the term that best matches the emotion conveyed in the speech output. For example, Petri Laukka, Hillary Elfenbein and their colleagues had actors from five countries - India, USA, Singapore, Australia, and Kenya - attempt to convey 11 different emotions -- anger, contempt, fear, happiness, interest, neutral, sexual lust, pride, relief, sadness, and shame -- while uttering sentences of neutral content (e.g., “Let me tell you something”). They then presented these clips of emotional prosody to people in different cultures, and found that listeners could recognize most of the intended states when asked to label the sounds’ emotional content (e.g., Laukka et al., 2016). These findings build upon a review of 60 earlier studies of this kind, which found that listeners can judge five different emotions in the prosody that accompanies speech—anger, fear, happiness, sadness, and tenderness—with accuracy rates that approach 70% (Juslin & Laukka, 2003). Judgments are most accurate when listeners hear members of their own culture (Pell et al., 2009).
举一个这方面主要研究流的例子,人声一直被证明是一种丰富的情感表达方式,正如 Klaus Scherer 的开创性理论化所预见的那样 (Scherer, 1986)。为了研究人们是否可以用声音传达情感,研究人员依靠了两种方法。在一个故事中,人们,通常是训练有素的演员,试图用韵律、我们说话的语气和节奏来表达不同的情感,同时阅读无意义的音节或中性的文本段落(Banse & Scherer,1996;Juslin & Laukka,2003 年)。然后将这些与情感相关的韵律样本呈现给听众,听众从一系列选项中选择与语音输出中传达的情感最匹配的术语。例如,Petri Laukka、Hillary Elfenbein 和他们的同事让来自印度、美国、新加坡、澳大利亚和肯尼亚五个国家的演员试图传达 11 种不同的情绪——愤怒、蔑视、恐惧、快乐、兴趣、中性、、骄傲、解脱、悲伤和羞耻——同时说出中性内容的句子(例如,“让我告诉你一些事情”)。然后,他们将这些情感韵律片段呈现给不同文化中的人们,发现当被要求标记声音的情感内容时,听众可以识别出大多数预期状态(例如,Laukka et al., 2016)。这些发现建立在对60项早期此类研究的审查之上,该研究发现,听众可以在伴随语音的韵律中判断五种不同的情绪——愤怒、恐惧、快乐、悲伤和温柔——准确率接近70%(Juslin & Laukka,2003)。当听众听到他们自己文化的成员时,判断是最准确的(Pell et al.,2009 年)。
In a second line of study of vocal expression, participants communicate emotions through vocal bursts, which are brief, non-word utterances that arise between speech incidents. Laughs, shrieks, growls, sighs, oohs, and ahhs, are examples of vocal bursts. In studies of vocal bursts, people are typically given a situation that produces an emotion (e.g., for awe, “you are seeing a large waterfall for the first time”) and asked to communicate that emotion with a brief vocal burst but no words (Laukka et al., 2013; Sauter & Scott, 2007; Sauter, Eisner, Calder, & Scott, 2010; Simon-Thomas et al., 2009). These sounds are then played to listeners, who attempt to label the sound with one of many emotion terms, or to match the sound to the appropriate emotion eliciting situation. As with emotional prosody, people are quite adept at communicating emotions with vocal bursts. For example, Cordaro and colleagues presented vocal bursts of 16 emotions to people in 10 different cultures in Western Europe (Germany, Poland), East Asia (China, Japan, South Korea) and South East Asia (India, Pakistan) (Cordaro et al., 2016). In this study participants were asked to match emotionally rich but simple situations (e.g., someone has insulted you; you hit your leg on a rock) to one of four vocal bursts. Overall, participants were correct in matching stories to vocal bursts of 16 emotions 79% of the time. People in these 10 countries were able to identify vocal bursts of six positive emotions - amusement, awe, contentment, desire, interest, relief, and triumph - and six negative emotions - anger, contempt, disgust, embarrassment, fear, pain, and sadness. Subsequent studies have documented that even in remote cultural groups in Bhutan and Namibia, people are able to reliably discern a number of emotions from vocal bursts (Cordaro et al., 2016; Sauter et al., 2010; Sauter, Eisner, Ekman, & Scott, 2015).
在发声表达的第二条研究线中,参与者通过发声爆发来传达情感,发声爆发是在言语事件之间出现的简短的非单词话语。笑声、尖叫声、咆哮声、叹息声、哎呀声和啊声是人声爆发的例子。在对声音爆发的研究中,人们通常会被赋予一种产生情感的情境(例如,为了敬畏,“你第一次看到一个大瀑布”),并被要求通过短暂的声音爆发但不用语言来传达这种情绪(Laukka et al., 2013;Sauter & Scott, 2007;Sauter, Eisner, Calder, & Scott, 2010;Simon-Thomas et al., 2009)。然后,这些声音被播放给听众,听众试图用许多情感术语中的一个来标记声音,或者将声音与适当的情感引发情境相匹配。与情感韵律一样,人们非常擅长通过发声来传达情感。例如,Cordaro 及其同事向西欧(德国、波兰)、东亚(中国、日本、韩国)和东南亚(印度、巴基斯坦)的 10 种不同文化中的人们展示了 16 种情绪的声音爆发(Cordaro et al., 2016)。在这项研究中,参与者被要求将情感丰富但简单的情况(例如,有人侮辱了你;你的腿撞到了石头上)与四种发声爆发中的一种相匹配。总体而言,参与者在 79% 的时间内将故事与 16 种情绪的声音爆发相匹配是正确的。这 10 个国家的人们能够识别出六种积极情绪(娱乐、敬畏、满足、欲望、兴趣、解脱和胜利)和六种消极情绪(愤怒、蔑视、厌恶、尴尬、恐惧、痛苦和悲伤)的声音爆发。 随后的研究证明,即使在不丹和纳米比亚的偏远文化群体中,人们也能够可靠地从声音爆发中辨别出许多情绪(Cordaro et al., 2016;Sauter 等人,2010 年;Sauter, Eisner, Ekman, & Scott, 2015)。
Yet another modality that has been of increasingly systematic focus in the study of emotional expression is touch. In one line of research inspired by BET, Hertenstein and colleagues (Hertenstein et al., 2006, 2009) brought an encoder (the person charged with expressing emotion via touch) and decoder (the person being touched) to the lab. The encoder and decoder sat at a table, separated by an opaque black curtain which prevented communication other than touch. The encoder was given a list of emotions and asked to make contact with the decoder on the arm to communicate each emotion, using any form of touch. The decoder could not see any part of the touch because his or her arm was positioned on the encoder’s side of the curtain. After each touch, the decoder selected from 13 response options the term that best described what the encoder was communicating. Participants were found to reliably communicate anger, disgust, and fear from a brief one- or two-second touch of another’s forearm, as well as love, gratitude, and sympathy (see also Piff et al., 2012, for replication). Emotions like embarrassment, awe, and sadness were not reliably communicated via touch. In other research, it was found that people are more reliable in communicating emotion through touch when allowed to touch other regions of the body than the arm (Hertenstein et al., 2009). Finally, there are cross-cultural similarities in which emotions can be conveyed through tactile contact (see Hertenstein et al., 2009).
然而,在情绪表达研究中越来越系统地关注的另一种方式是触摸。在受 BET 启发的一条研究中,Hertenstein 及其同事(Hertenstein 等人,2006 年、2009 年)将编码器(负责通过触摸表达情感的人)和解码器(被触摸的人)带到了实验室。编码器和解码器坐在一张桌子上,由不透明的黑色窗帘隔开,阻止了除触摸以外的通信。编码器被赋予一份情绪列表,并要求他与手臂上的解码器接触,以使用任何形式的触摸来传达每种情绪。解码器看不到触摸的任何部分,因为他或她的手臂位于编码器的窗帘一侧。每次触摸后,解码器从 13 个响应选项中选择最能描述编码器所通信内容的术语。研究发现,参与者可以通过短暂地触摸他人的前臂一两秒来可靠地传达愤怒、厌恶和恐惧,以及爱、感激和同情(另见 Piff 等人,2012 年,用于复制)。尴尬、敬畏和悲伤等情绪无法通过触摸可靠地传达。在其他研究中,发现当允许人们触摸身体的其他部位时,人们通过触摸传达情感比触摸手臂更可靠(Hertenstein et al., 2009)。最后,存在跨文化的相似性,其中情感可以通过触觉接触来传达(参见 Hertenstein et al., 2009)。
There are also emerging literatures on potential autonomic signals of emotion, including the blush (van Dijk et al, 2009), the chills (Maruskin et al, 2012), and tears (Balsters, Krahmer, Swerts, & Vingerhoets, 2013; Vingerhoets & Bylsma, 2016). Thinking of emotional expressions as dynamic multimodal patterns of behavior points to intriguing new questions (e.g., Aviezer, Trope, & Todorov, 2012). What is the relative contribution of different modalities to the perception and signal value of emotional expressions (e.g., Flack, 2006; Scherer & Ellgring, 2007)? Why is it that certain emotions are more reliably signaled in multiple modalities, whereas other emotions are only recognized from one modality? For example, sympathy is reliably signaled in touch and the voice, but less so in the face (Goetz et al., 2010). It is nearly impossible to communicate embarrassment through touch, but it is reliably communicated in patterns of gaze, head, and facial behavior (App, McIntosh, Reed, & Hertenstein, 2011).
也有关于情绪的潜在自主信号的新兴文献,包括脸红(van Dijk等人,2009年),发冷(Maruskin等人,2012年)和眼泪(Balsters,Krahmer,Swerts和Vingerhoets,2013年;Vingerhoets & Bylsma,2016年)。将情绪表达视为动态的多模态行为模式,这引发了有趣的新问题(例如(Aviezer, Trope, & Todorov, 2012)。不同模态对情绪表达的感知和信号价值的相对贡献是多少(例如,Flack,2006 年;Scherer & Ellgring,2007年)?为什么某些情绪在多种模式中更可靠地发出信号,而其他情绪只能从一种模式中识别出来?例如,同情在触摸和声音中是可靠的信号,但在面部中则不那么明显(Goetz et al., 2010)。通过触摸传达尴尬几乎是不可能的,但它可以通过凝视、头部和面部行为的模式可靠地传达出来(App, McIntosh, Reed, & Hertenstein, 2011)。
There are Expressions of More Emotions than the “Basic” Six
有比 “基本” 六种更多的情感表达
Critical to Basic Emotions Theory is the question of which emotions have distinctive signals. Evidence germane to this question informs taxonomies of emotion (e.g., Keltner & Lerner, 2010). As evident in the previous section, evidence has emerged revealing that emotions beyond the “basic six” have distinct multimodal and dynamic expressions, including emotions such as embarrassment, pride, shame, and love. In recent years, dozens of studies have contributed to this line of work differentiating expressions of a wider range of emotions (e.g., Keltner et al., 2016; Laukka et al, 2013; Sauter & Scott, 2007; Tracy & Robins, 2004). Three methods have been at the heart of this new development. A first is emotion encoding studies, where behavioral analyses ascertain whether the experience of closely related emotions, such as sympathy or distress, or love or desire, or embarrassment, shame, and amusement, are expressed in different patterns of behavior (e.g., for review, see Matsumoto et al., 2008).
基本情绪理论的关键是哪些情绪具有独特信号的问题。与这个问题密切相关的证据为情感分类法提供了信息(例如,Keltner & Lerner,2010 年)。如上一节所示,已经出现的证据表明,“基本六种”之外的情绪具有不同的多模态和动态表达,包括尴尬、骄傲、羞愧和爱等情绪。近年来,数十项研究为区分更广泛情绪表达的这一行工作做出了贡献(例如,Keltner 等人,2016 年;Laukka 等人,2013 年;Sauter & Scott, 2007;Tracy & Robins,2004年)。三种方法是这一新发展的核心。首先是情绪编码研究,其中行为分析确定密切相关的情绪的体验,例如同情或痛苦,或爱或欲望,或尴尬、羞耻和娱乐,是否以不同的行为模式表达(例如,如需回顾,参见 Matsumoto 等人,2008 年)。
A second approach is found in emotion production studies. In these studies, participants are given a prompt, most typically the definition of an emotion or an emotion-specific story, and asked to communicate each emotion nonverbally. For example, in one recent study, participants in five different cultures - China, India, Japan, Korea, and the USA - heard twenty-two emotion- specific situations in their native language and were asked to express the emotion in whatever fashion they desired, which could include facial, vocal, or bodily expressions; the only requirement was that the expressions be nonverbal (Cordaro et al., 2018). Over 5500 facial expressions, bodily movements, gaze movements, hand gestures, and patterns of breathing were coded using an expanded Facial Action Coding System (Ekman & Friesen, 1978), and a large subset of these was analyzed for patterns across and within cultures. For the 22 emotions that were studied, certain configurations of expressive behaviors were observed with above chance frequency across all five cultural groups, which one might think of as the prototypical elements of the multimodal expression. Across cultures the expression of awe, for example, tended to involve the widening of the eyes and a smile as well as a head movement up. Across cultures, head nods expressed interest. Confusion was generally expressed with behaviors including furrowed brows, narrowed eyes, and a head tilt. Overall, 22 emotions were found to have distinct, multimodal expressions.
第二种方法见于情绪产生研究。在这些研究中,参与者会得到一个提示,最常见的是情绪的定义或特定于情绪的故事,并要求以非语言方式传达每种情绪。例如,在最近的一项研究中,中国、印度、日本、韩国和美国等五种不同文化的参与者用他们的母语听到了 22 种特定情绪的情况,并被要求以他们想要的任何方式表达情绪,这可能包括面部、声音或身体表情;唯一的要求是表达是非语言的(Cordaro et al., 2018)。使用扩展的面部动作编码系统(Ekman & Friesen,1978)对超过5500种面部表情、身体动作、凝视动作、手势和呼吸模式进行了编码,其中很大一部分被分析为跨文化和文化内部的模式。对于所研究的 22 种情绪,在所有五个文化群体中都以高于偶然的频率观察到表达行为的某些配置,人们可以将其视为多模态表达的原型元素。例如,在不同文化中,敬畏的表达往往包括睁大眼睛和微笑以及抬头。在不同文化中,人们都点头表示了兴趣。意识模糊通常表现为皱眉、眯起眼睛和歪头等行为。总体而言,发现 22 种情绪具有独特的多模态表达。
A third approach to documenting distinct expressions is with emotion recognition paradigms, in which participants attempt to map an emotion concept - in their own words, in stories, or emotion terms - to different emotion-expressions. Based on the advances in understanding facial expression, Cordaro took photographs of prototypical facial-bodily expressions 18 different emotions and then gathered data from 10 different cultures, ranging from Pakistan to New Zealand (Keltner & Cordaro, 2016). In this study, as in the Ekman and Friesen work, participants were presented with emotion specific scenarios for each of 19 different emotions (e.g., for pain: “this person just stubbed their toe on a rock”). For each scenario they were required to choose from one of four static photos of facial/bodily expressions the photo that best captured the scenario. Table 2 presents examples and descriptions of the photos in this study. As can be seen from the recognition rates presented in Figure 1, the landscape of emotional expression in the face and body is increasingly rich.
记录不同表达的第三种方法是使用情感识别范式,参与者试图将情感概念(用他们自己的话、故事或情感术语)映射到不同的情感表达。基于对面部表情的理解进展,Cordaro拍摄了18种不同情绪的原型面部-身体表情的照片,然后从巴基斯坦到新西兰的10种不同文化中收集了数据(Keltner & Cordaro,2016)。在这项研究中,与 Ekman 和 Friesen 的工作一样,参与者被展示了 19 种不同情绪中的每一种情绪的特定场景(例如,对于疼痛:“这个人的脚趾只是在石头上绊了一下”)。对于每个场景,他们需要从四张面部/身体表情的静态照片中选择一张,即最能捕捉场景的照片。表 2 显示了本研究中照片的示例和描述。从图 1 呈现的识别率可以看出,面部和身体的情感表达景观越来越丰富。
Table 2. 表 2.
Facial expression examples, FACS action units, and physical descriptions for each expression.
面部表情示例、FACS 动作单位和每个表情的身体描述。
Emotion 情感 | Example photo 示例照片 | Action units 操作单位 | Physical description 物理描述 |
---|---|---|---|
Amusement 娱乐 | ![]() |
6+7+12+25+26+53 | Head back, Duchenne smile, lips separated, jaw dropped 头向后仰,杜兴微笑,嘴唇分开,下巴掉下来 |
Anger 愤怒 | ![]() |
4+5+17+23+24 | Brows furrowed, eyes wide, lips tightened and pressed together 眉头紧皱,睁大眼睛,紧紧抿着嘴唇 |
Boredom 无聊 | ![]() |
43+55 | Eyelids drooping, head tilted, (not scored with FACS: slouched posture, head resting on hand) 眼睑下垂,头部倾斜,(FACS 未评分:懒散的姿势,头靠在手上) |
Confusion 混乱 | ![]() |
4+7+56 | Brows furrowed, eyelids narrowed, head tilted 眉头紧皱,眼睑眯起,头歪着 |
Contentment 满意 | ![]() |
12+43 | Smile, eyelids drooping 微笑,眼睑下垂 |
Coyness 腼腆 | ![]() |
6+7+12+25+26+52+54+61 | Duchenne smile, lips separated, head turned and down, eyes turned opposite to head turn 杜兴娜微笑,嘴唇分开,头转过来又低着,眼睛转过来与转头相反 |
Desire 欲望 | ![]() |
19+25+26+43 | Tongue show, lips parted, jaw dropped, eyelids drooping 露出舌头,嘴唇分开,下巴掉下来,眼睑下垂 |
Disgust 厌恶 | ![]() |
7+9+19+25+26 | Eyes narrowed, nose wrinkled, lips parted, jaw dropped, tongue show 眼睛眯起,鼻子皱起来,嘴唇张开,下巴下垂,露出舌头 |
Embarrassment 困窘 | ![]() |
7+12+15+52+54+64 | Eyelids narrowed, controlled smile, head turned and down, (not scored with FACS: hand touches face) 眼睑眯起,克制的微笑,头转过来,(FACS不计分:手碰脸) |
Fear 恐惧 | ![]() |
1+2+4+5+7+20+25 | Eyebrows raised and pulled together, upper eyelid raised, lower eyelid tense, lips parted and stretched 眉毛上扬并拢,上眼睑上扬,下眼睑绷紧,嘴唇分开并伸展 |
Happiness 幸福 | ![]() |
6+7+12+25+26 | Duchenne display Duchenne 显示器 |
Interest 利息 | ![]() |
1+2+12 | Eyebrows raised, slight smile 眉毛扬起,微微一笑 |
Pain 疼痛 | ![]() |
4+6+7+9+17+18+23+24 | Eyes tightly closed, nose wrinkled, brows furrowed, lips tight, pressed together, and slightly puckered 眼睛紧闭,鼻子皱着,眉头紧皱,嘴唇紧闭,紧贴在一起,微微皱起 |
Pride 自豪 | ![]() |
53+64 | Head up, eyes down 抬头,低头 |
Sadness 悲伤 | ![]() |
1+4+6+15+17 | Brows knitted, eyes slightly tightened, lip corners depressed, lower lip raised 眉毛紧锁,眼眶微微紧绷,唇角下垂,下唇上扬 |
Shame 羞耻 | ![]() |
54+64 | Head down, eyes down 低头,低着眼睛 |
Surprise 惊喜 | ![]() |
1+2+5+25+26 | Eyebrows raised, upper eyelid raised, lips parted, jaw dropped 眉毛上扬,上眼睑上扬,嘴唇分开,下巴下垂 |
Sympathy 同情 | ![]() |
1+17+24+57 | Inner eyebrow raised, lower lip raised, lips pressed together, head slightly forward 内眉毛上扬,下唇上扬,嘴唇紧贴在一起,头部略微前倾 |
Figure 1. 图 1.
Recognition rates across five cultures in identifying 19 emotions from facial/bodily expressions portrayed in static photos (from Keltner & Cordaro, 2016).
从静态照片中描绘的面部/身体表情中识别出19种情绪的五种文化识别率(来自Keltner & Cordaro,2016)。
In Table 3, we summarize this new literature on multi modal expressions beyond the basic 6, indicating whether studies reveal that the facial, bodily, vocal, tactile, and music-related expressions of each emotion can be differentiated from expressions of other emotions. In the respective columns, “yes” indicates that the evidence suggests that the emotion is communicated in a modality at above chance levels; “no” indicates that the emotion cannot be reliably communicated in the modality. These data make the case for distinct expression or 24 emotional states when different modalities are considered. We note, however, that these findings leave open the possibility that there will be emotions with distinct multimodal expressions that are not readily recognized, and that few if any studies have looked at how reliably these emotions are identified when all modalities are considered.
在表 3 中,我们总结了这些关于基本 6 之外的多模态表达的新文献,表明研究是否表明每种情绪的面部、身体、声音、触觉和音乐相关表达可以与其他情绪的表达区分开来。在相应的列中,“是”表示有证据表明情绪是在高于机会水平的情况下以某种方式传达的;“否”表示情绪无法以模态可靠地传达。当考虑不同的方式时,这些数据为不同的表达或 24 种情绪状态提供了理由。然而,我们注意到,这些发现留下了这样一种可能性,即存在不容易识别的不同多模态表达的情绪,并且很少有研究(如果有的话)研究在考虑所有模态时识别这些情绪的可靠性。
Table 3. 表 3.
Evidence related to the expression of emotion in different modalities.
与不同方式的情感表达有关的证据。
Emotion 情感 | Facial, 面部 head, or head 或 bodily 身体的 action 行动 |
Voice 声音 | Touch 触摸 | Music 音乐 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Amused 逗乐 | yesa,b,d,i 是的,b,d, | yesy,z,bb 是的 Y,Z,BB |
n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Anger 愤怒 | yesd,w,x 是 d,w,x |
yesy,aa,bb 是的,是的,AA,BB |
yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
yesff 是的,投降 |
Awe 敬畏 | yesa,c,d 是A、C、D |
Yesy 是的 | no 不 | n/a 不适用 |
Boredom 无聊 | yesn 是n | yesaa 是的,冰魄 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Confused 困惑 | yesn,u 是的,不,你 |
n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Contempt 蔑视 | yesv,w 是的v,w |
yesy,aa 是的,是的,冰魄 |
n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Content 内容 | yesd 是的d | yesz 是的z | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Coy 腼腆 | Yese,f,g 是 e,f,g |
n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Desire 欲望 | yesh,i 是的, | noy 否和 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Disgust 厌恶 | yesd,w,x 是 d,w,x |
yesy,aa,bb 是的,是的,AA,BB |
yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
n/a 不适用 |
Embarrassed 尴尬 | Yesd,i,j,k,l,ii Yesd,,,k,,ii | yesy 是的 | noee 没有EE | n/a 不适用 |
Fear 恐惧 | yesd,w,x 是 d,w,x |
yesyy,aa,bb 是的,是的,AA,BB |
yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
yesff 是的,投降 |
Gratitude 感激 | n/a 不适用 | noy 否和 | yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
n/a 不适用 |
Happiness 幸福 | Yesi,w,x 是,w,x | yesaa 是的,冰魄 |
yesdd 是的,双倍伤害 |
yesff 是的,投降 |
Interested 感兴趣 | Yesi,m,n 是,m,n | yesy 是的 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Love 爱 | yesd,i 是的, | noy 否和 | yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
yesff 是的,投降 |
Pain 疼痛 | Yeso,p,q,r 是 o,p,q,r |
Yescc 是cc | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Pride 自豪 | yesa,i,s,ii,jj,t 是的,,S,II,JJ,T | noy 否和 | noee 没有EE | n/a 不适用 |
Relief 救济 | n/a 不适用 | Yesy,z,aa,bb 是 y,z,aa,bb |
n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Sadness 悲伤 | yesd,w,x 是 d,w,x |
Yesy,bb 是的,你,bb |
yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
yesff 是的,投降 |
Shame 羞耻 | yesd,i,t,ii,jj 是,,t,ii,jj | noy 否和 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Surprise 惊喜 | yesw,x 是的w,x |
yesy,bb,ee 是的 y,bb,ee |
noee 没有EE | n/a 不适用 |
Sympathy 同情 | Yes 是的i | yesy 是的 | yesdd,ee 是的,双倍,ee |
n/a 不适用 |
Triumph 胜利 | n/a 不适用 | yesy 是的 | n/a 不适用 | n/a 不适用 |
Bretherton & Ainsworth (1974).
g
Bretherton & Ainsworth (1974)。
Schroder (2003).
aa
Schroder (2003 年)。
Within category prototypes, variations, and cultural dialects
在类别原型、变体和文化方言中
An early assertion of BET is that emotions are expressed not only in prototypical expressions involving the behaviors common to that category, but also via within-category variations of expressions (Ekman, 1992). For example, Ekman observed that alongside the prototype of an anger expression – furrowed brow, raised upper eyelids, lip tighten and press together – there are upwards of 60 variants of anger-elated expressions (Ekman, 1993). More generally, within an emotion category variations might include additional behaviors – an eye brow flash in the embarrassment expression - or fewer of the prototypical elements of an expression - an expression of anger that only involves the lip press and tightening, but no movement in the eye brow region.
BET 的一个早期断言是,情绪不仅以涉及该类别常见行为的原型表达表达,而且还通过类别内表达的变体表达(Ekman,1992)。例如,Ekman 观察到,除了愤怒表情的原型——皱眉、上眼睑上扬、嘴唇收紧并压在一起——还有 60 多种愤怒的表情变体(Ekman,1993)。更一般地说,在一个情绪类别中,变化可能包括额外的行为——尴尬表情中的眉毛闪动——或较少的表情原型元素——一种愤怒的表达,只涉及压嘴唇和收紧,但眉毛区域没有运动。
Empirical studies have been fruitfully guided by this analysis of within category variation in emotional expression. For example, early studies of the expressive behavior of embarrassment documented a multimodal prototypical expression that included gaze down, head movement down, awkward smile. Further, naive observers were better able to recognize expressions of embarrassment as they increasingly resembled the prototypical expression (Keltner, 1995). A similar analysis has been taken to the analysis of pride, uncovering a prototypical expression and variations (see Tracy & Robins, 2007). Likewise, studies find that within the category of laughter, there are multiple variations (Szameitat et al., 2009). Studies of emotion-related tactile contact similarly find variation in the patterns of tactile behavior (location, pressure, configuration of hand) within the expression of one emotion, such as gratitude or sympathy, and, as in studies of facial and bodily movement, observer accuracy varies depending on which particular expression is observed (Hertenstein et al., 2006).
实证研究以这种对情绪表达类别内变化的分析为指导。例如,对尴尬的表达行为的早期研究记录了一种多模态原型表达,包括向下凝视、头部向下移动、尴尬的微笑。此外,天真的观察者能够更好地识别尴尬的表达,因为它们越来越类似于原型表达(Keltner,1995)。对骄傲的分析也进行了类似的分析,揭示了原型表达和变化(参见Tracy & Robins,2007)。同样,研究发现,在笑声的类别中,存在多种变化(Szameitat et al., 2009)。对情绪相关触觉接触的研究同样发现,在一种情绪的表达(如感激或同情)中,触觉行为模式(位置、压力、手的配置)会发生变化,并且,与面部和身体运动的研究一样,观察者的准确性会因观察到的特定表情而异(Hertenstein et al., 2006)。
There is clear precedent in BET that there is not necessarily a one-to-one correspondence between the occurrence of an emotion and a prototypical expression (see Ekman, 1992). Rather, emotions are expressed in prototypical multimodal patterns of behavior, with striking variations. To make sense of emotion-related prototypes and within category variations, Hillary Elfenbein, Ursula Hess, and their colleagues have offered their dialect theory of emotional expression (Elfenbein, 2013; Elfenbein et al., 2007). This theorizing posits that emotional expression is likely to function much like language, such as English, in the sense that languages have elements - select phonemes, words, forms of syntax -- shared by all speakers of the language, as well as dialects, or specific variations of the language in sound and word use that are specific to a geographical region. For example, although standard English is common to the English speaker in England, different regions - London, Newcastle, or the Midlands - are known to speak their own dialects, with unique words, phrases, and accents and forms of prosody.
在 BET 中有一个明确的先例,即情绪的发生和原型表达之间不一定是一一对应的(参见 Ekman, 1992)。相反,情绪以典型的多模态行为模式表达,具有显着的变化。为了理解与情感相关的原型和类别变化,Hillary Elfenbein、Ursula Hess 和他们的同事提出了他们的情绪表达方言理论(Elfenbein,2013 年;Elfenbein et al., 2007)。这种理论化假设情感表达的功能可能很像语言,例如英语,因为语言具有所有语言使用者共享的元素 - 选择音素、单词、句法形式 - 以及方言,或特定于某个地理区域的语言在声音和单词使用方面的特定变体。例如,尽管标准英语对英格兰的英语使用者来说是通用的,但不同的地区——伦敦、纽卡斯尔或中部地区——都说自己的方言,具有独特的单词、短语、口音和韵律形式。
Several recent studies speak to the prevalence of dialects in emotional expressions (e.g., Cordaro et al., 2018; Elfenbein et al., 2007; Laukka et al., 2016). In these studies, people from different cultures were given a definition of different emotions or a situation likely to produce the emotion, and then asked to express the emotion with any behavior that feels natural. These patterns of expression were then carefully analyzed for their specific facial, bodily, or vocal behaviors, identifying what is universal and how prevalent culturally specific dialects are. A first generalization of the results is just how pervasive emotion dialects are. For example, in one study that looked at expressions of 22 emotions, every emotion was found to have a dialect specific to the culture, and about 25% of an individual’s expressive behavior across emotions was based on dialect, while around 50% of an individual’s expressive behavior adhered to the universal prototype (Cordaro et al., 2018). Second, dialects appear to be more likely to emerge for emotions that are more directly involved in social interactions, such as anger, happiness, or shame - compared to emotions that are less directly or frequently involved in social interactions, such as disgust or fear (Elfenbein et al., 2007).
最近的几项研究谈到了方言在情感表达中的普遍性(例如,Cordaro 等人,2018 年;Elfenbein et al., 2007;Laukka等人,2016 年)。在这些研究中,来自不同文化背景的人被赋予不同情绪的定义或可能产生情绪的情况,然后要求他们用任何感觉自然的行为来表达情绪。然后仔细分析这些表达模式的特定面部、身体或发声行为,确定什么是普遍的以及特定文化方言的普遍程度。结果的第一个概括是情感方言是多么普遍。例如,在一项对 22 种情绪表达进行的研究中,发现每种情绪都有特定于文化的方言,个体跨情绪的表达行为中约有 25% 基于方言,而个体中约 50% 的表达行为遵循通用原型(Cordaro et al., 2018)。其次,与不太直接或频繁参与社交互动的情绪(例如厌恶或恐惧)相比,方言似乎更有可能出现在与社会互动更直接相关的情绪(例如愤怒、快乐或羞耻)中(Elfenbein et al., 2007)。
Process, Structure, and Contextual Shaping of Emotion Perception
情绪感知的过程、结构和上下文塑造
The first wave of science on emotional expression - largely focused on the face - involved emotion recognition studies that most typically entailed participants matching an emotion term, or an emotional-specific story, from a list of options to a specific expression. A meta-analysis of 182 independent samples examining judgments of emotion from facial and other nonverbal cues yielded an average accuracy rate of 58.0% (a large effect size), after correcting for chance guessing (Elfenbein & Ambady, 2002). With respect to vocal expressions of emotion, in a review of over 100 studies largely using single word emotion recognition paradigms, Juslin and Laukka (2003) concluded that listeners can judge at least five different emotions in the voice - anger, fear, happiness, sadness, and tenderness -- with accuracy rates that approach 70% (see Hawk et al., 2009; Sauter et al., 2013).
第一波关于情绪表达的科学浪潮——主要集中在面部——涉及情绪识别研究,这些研究通常需要参与者将一个情绪术语或一个特定于情绪的故事从选项列表匹配到特定表情。对182个独立样本的元分析检查了面部和其他非语言线索对情绪的判断,在纠正偶然猜测后,平均准确率为58.0%(一个大的效应量)(Elfenbein & Ambady,2002)。关于情绪的声音表达,在对 100 多项主要使用单个词语情绪识别范式的研究的回顾中,Juslin 和 Laukka (2003) 得出结论,听众可以判断声音中至少五种不同的情绪——愤怒、恐惧、快乐、悲伤和温柔——准确率接近 70%(参见 Hawk 等人,2009 年;Sauter et al., 2013)。
These findings have been critiqued, and debate continues about the degree of agreement in the recognition of emotion from expressive behavior (Nelson & Russell, 2013; Russell, 1994). Fridlund has also raised theoretical questions about what exactly is signaled by expressive behavior (Fridlund, this volume; Parkinson, 2005). Feelings? Intentions? Likely actions? Properties - e.g., of dominance or affiliation - of the relationship between the communicator and perceiver? This critique and theorizing has inspired considerable advances in the conceptualization of the process, structure, and contextual shaping of emotion perception.
这些发现受到了批评,关于从表达行为中识别情绪的一致性程度的争论仍在继续(Nelson & Russell,2013;Russell, 1994)。弗里德伦德还提出了关于表达行为究竟发出什么信号的理论问题(弗里德伦德,本卷;Parkinson, 2005)。感情?意图?可能的操作?传播者和感知者之间关系的属性 - 例如,支配性或从属关系?这种批评和理论化激发了情绪感知的过程、结构和上下文塑造的概念化取得了相当大的进步。
The process of emotion perception
情绪感知的过程
Clearly, when an individual encounters emotional expression in others, he or she is likely to engage in complex inferential processes that involve more than the ascription of single word labels; inferences are made about the target’s desires and intentions, trait-like tendencies, strategic motivations, and surrounding context (Sander et al., 2007).
显然,当一个人遇到他人的情绪表达时,他或她可能会参与复杂的推理过程,这些过程涉及的不仅仅是单个词标签的归属;对目标的愿望和意图、类似特质的倾向、战略动机和周围环境进行推断(Sander et al., 2007)。
One approach to this issue is that of Scherer and colleagues, who propose that perceivers first infer specific appraisals in the expresser that prompted the expressive behavior in the first place (Scherer & Grandjean, 2008). That is, if a person sees another person express anger in the face, or interest in the voice, or sympathy in a pattern of postural movement and tactile contact, the social perceiver first infers a pattern of appraisals that would lead the individual to express that particular emotion. From these inferred appraisals, the social perceiver, this line of theory maintains, then infers the experience of specific emotions. To illustrate, seeing someone express surprise in the face and voice might lead the observer to infer that the individual has been exposed to novel, unexpected information, which in turn would lead the observer to infer that the person is surprised. According to this account, the first inferences perceivers draw upon when seeing others’ expressive behavior is a pattern of appraisals, rather than distinct emotions.
解决这个问题的一种方法是Scherer及其同事,他们建议感知者首先推断出表达者的特定评价,这些评价首先促使了表达行为(Scherer & Grandjean,2008)。也就是说,如果一个人看到另一个人在脸上表达愤怒,或对声音感兴趣,或以姿势运动和触觉接触的模式表示同情,社会感知者首先会推断出一种评价模式,这将导致个人表达该特定情绪。从这些推断的评价中,社会感知者,这条理论路线坚持认为,然后推断出特定情绪的体验。举例来说,看到某人在脸上和声音中表达惊讶可能会导致观察者推断该人已经接触到了新的、意想不到的信息,这反过来又会导致观察者推断这个人很惊讶。根据这个叙述,感知者在看到他人的表达行为时得出的第一个推论是一种评价模式,而不是不同的情绪。
In a similar spirit, Scarantino has synthesized studies of emotion perception in a theory of affective pragmatics (Scarantino, 2017; Fischer & Sauter, 2017). He makes the case that emotional expressions - in the present case facial/bodily expressions -- communicate four kinds of information: 1) the individual’s current feeling (the expressive function of expression); 2) what is happening in the present context (the declarative function of expression); 3) desired courses of action from other people who perceive the expression (the imperative function of expression); and 4) intention and plans about what the person might do (the commissive function of expression).
本着类似的精神,斯卡伦蒂诺将情感感知的研究综合在情感语用学理论中(Scarantino,2017 年;Fischer & Sauter,2017 年)。他指出,情绪表达——在本例中是面部/身体表情——传达了四种信息:1)个人的当前感受(表达的表达功能);2) 当前上下文中正在发生的事情(表达的陈述功能);3) 感知到表达的其他人期望的行动方案(表达的命令功能);4) 关于这个人可能做什么的意图和计划(表达的宽容功能)。
As one empirical illustration of this thinking about the inferences that expressive behavior prompt, Shuman and colleagues presented observers with dynamic, videotaped portrayals of five different emotions: happiness, sadness, fear, anger, and disgust (Shuman et al., 2015). The expressions were dynamic, more realistic, and less exaggerated than those in the Ekman and Friesen photos, more like the expressions people see in everyday social interactions. In different response formats, participants matched each expression to either: feelings (“fear”), appraisals (“that is dangerous”), social relational meanings (“you scare me”), or action tendencies (“I might run”). Results showed that participants labeled the dynamic but subtle expressions with the expected response 62% of the time, with greater accuracy revealed when labeling expressions with feeling states, and reduced accuracy found in labeling action tendencies (see Hortsmann, 2003). More recent work in the Trobriand Islands found that action tendencies were more prominent in the interpretation of facial expressions than emotion words, suggesting possible cultural variations in the labeling of emotional expression (Crivelli et al., 2016).
作为这种关于表达行为提示的推理的思考的一个实证说明,Shuman 及其同事向观察者展示了五种不同情绪的动态录像描绘:快乐、悲伤、恐惧、愤怒和厌恶(Shuman et al., 2015)。这些表情是动态的,更逼真,比 Ekman 和 Friesen 照片中的表情更不夸张,更像人们在日常社交互动中看到的表情。在不同的回答格式中,参与者将每种表达与以下任一表情相匹配:感受(“恐惧”)、评价(“那很危险”)、社会关系含义(“你吓到我”)或行动倾向(“我可能会逃跑”)。结果显示,参与者在 62% 的时间内以预期反应标记动态但微妙的表情,在用感觉状态标记表情时表现出更高的准确性,而在标记动作倾向中发现的准确性降低(参见 Hortsmann,2003)。特罗布里安群岛最近的工作发现,在面部表情的解释中,动作倾向比情感词更突出,这表明情绪表达的标签可能存在文化差异(Crivelli et al., 2016)。
This emerging literature on the process of emotion recognition from expressive behavior, would be well served by taking on intriguing questions. Given what has been learned about the automaticity of inferring trust, warmth, and dominance from human faces (e.g., Oosterhof & Todorov, 2008), more fine-grained methods oriented toward unpacking the process of emotion recognition could yield insights into the primacy of what information is conveyed - feelings, appraisals, intentions - and the unfolding process of emotion perception.
这些关于从表达行为中识别情绪过程的新兴文献,如果提出有趣的问题,将很好地服务于我们。鉴于已经从人类面孔中推断出信任、温暖和主导地位的自动性(例如,Oosterhof & Todorov,2008)的更细粒度的方法来解开情绪识别的过程,可能会深入了解所传达的信息的首要性 - 情感、评价、意图 - 以及情绪感知的展开过程。
The structure of emotion perception
情绪感知的结构
Emotion perception involves more than labeling multimodal expressions with words that capture distinct emotions. The way that distinct emotional expressions relate to each other - that is, the structure of recognition - is also critically important. For instance, suppose a given study found that expressions of “love,” “joy,” and “embarrassment” were accurately identified in two cultures. If, in the same study, members of one culture thought the expression of “love” was similar in meaning to that of “joy” but not that of “embarrassment,” whereas in another culture individuals thought the expression of “love” was more similar in meaning to “embarrassment”, this would reveal a potentially important cultural difference in the emotional meaning attributed to the three expressions. The structure of the relatedness of meaning of the three expressions may, in fact, be as interesting as the fact that they can be differentiated in forced choice type labeling paradigms.
情绪感知涉及的不仅仅是用捕捉不同情绪的单词来标记多模态表达。不同的情绪表达相互关联的方式——即识别的结构——也至关重要。例如,假设一项给定的研究发现,在两种文化中,“爱”、“喜悦”和“尴尬”的表达是准确的。如果在同一项研究中,一种文化的成员认为 “love” 的表达与 “joy” 的含义相似,但与 “embarassment” 的含义不相似,而在另一种文化中,个人认为 “love” 的表达在含义上与 “embarassment” 更相似,这将揭示这三种表达的情感含义存在潜在的重要文化差异。事实上,这三个表达式的意义相关性结构可能与它们可以在强制选择类型标签范式中加以区分的事实一样有趣。
Consider this intriguing study on the structure of emotion perception by Rachael Jack and her colleagues (Jack et al., 2012). These researchers relied on computer morphing technologies to generate over 2500 facial expressions based on the combined movements of anywhere from 1 to 6 Facial Action Units. They then presented these 2500 facial expressions as animations in sequences of four separate photos unfolding over 1.25 seconds, and had participants rate the emotional meaning of these expressions. With traditional factor analytic approaches, they documented that between 25 and 35 distinct states could be discerned in facial muscle movements, but that this realm of expression could be reduced to a simpler structure of four distinct patterns of Action Units well preserved in meaning across cultures. In both cultures, they distinguished (1) positive emotions, (2) sadness/fear-related emotions, (3) surprise-related emotions, and (4) disgust/anger-related emotions, respectively (for similar results on the variety of expressions see Cordaro et al., 2018; Du, Tao, & Martinez, 2014; for critique of study, see Sauter & Eisner, 2013).
考虑一下 Rachael Jack 和她的同事对情绪感知结构的有趣研究(Jack et al., 2012)。这些研究人员依靠计算机变形技术,根据 2500 到 1 个面部动作单元的组合动作生成了 6 多个面部表情。然后,他们将这 2500 个面部表情以动画的形式呈现,以四张独立照片的顺序在 1.25 秒内展开,并让参与者对这些表情的情感含义进行评分。使用传统的因素分析方法,他们记录了在面部肌肉运动中可以辨别出 25 到 35 种不同的状态,但这种表达领域可以简化为由四种不同模式组成的更简单的结构,这些模式在跨文化的意义上得到了很好的保留。在这两种文化中,他们分别区分了 (1) 积极情绪,(2) 悲伤/恐惧相关情绪,(3) 惊喜相关情绪,以及 (4) 厌恶/愤怒相关情绪(有关各种表达的类似结果,参见 Cordaro 等人,2018 年;Du, Tao, & Martinez, 2014;有关研究的批评,参见Sauter & Eisner,2013)。
Another recent study took a different approach to examining cultural similarities and differences in the structure of emotion perception. Bai and colleagues (Bai et al., 2018) began with more caricatured representations of 51 emotion concepts, created by asking a professional illustrator to draw each concept using emoji-like images. In one experiment, participants selfsorted the drawings, which were printed onto cards, into multiple stacks of drawings with similarity meaning. These data were processed with an agglomerative hierarchical clustering algorithm, resulting in tree-like representations of the structure of emotion perception, which correlated over .90 across the two cultures, and which we portray in Figure 2.
最近的另一项研究采取了不同的方法来检查情绪感知结构的文化相似性和差异性。Bai 及其同事(Bai et al., 2018)从 51 个情感概念的更多漫画化表示开始,通过要求专业插画师使用类似表情符号的图像绘制每个概念来创建。在一项实验中,参与者将打印在卡片上的图画自行分类为多堆具有相似含义的图画。这些数据使用凝聚分层聚类算法进行处理,从而产生情绪感知结构的树状表示,在两种文化中,其相关性超过 .90,如图 2 所示。
Figure 2. 图 2.
A hierarchical taxonomy ofperception of 51 emoji-like drawings based on data from a card sorting study, averaging across US and Chinese participants.
根据卡片分类研究的数据,对 51 个类似表情符号的图画进行分层分类,在美国和中国参与者中取平均值。
Note. Leaves (outer edge of the hierarchy) correspond to individual drawings. These drawings are paired based on correlations in the proportion of matches with each other drawing. These pairings are then linked iteratively based on the average correlations between the judgment profiles of the two sets of drawings they contain, so as to maximize the correlations in judgments of the drawings that are grouped together. The correlation corresponding to each linkage is represented by its distance from the center, with the grey outer edge corresponding to a correlation of 1 and the inner circle corresponding to a correlation of 0. The branches of the tree are colored according to 5 top-level clusters linked at a correlation greater than 0. All linkages shown correspond to correlations that are significantly higher than would be expected if the linked branches were correlated only by chance, based on the number of leaves contained in each branch (p < .05).
注意。叶子(层次结构的外边缘)对应于单个图形。这些绘图根据彼此绘图的匹配比例的相关性进行配对。然后,根据它们包含的两组图纸的判断配置文件之间的平均相关性,这些配对迭代链接,以最大限度地提高分组在一起的图纸的判断的相关性。对应于每个链接的相关性由其距中心的距离表示,灰色的外边缘对应于相关性 1,内圆对应于相关性 0。树的分支根据 5 个相关性大于 0 的顶级集群进行着色。显示的所有连锁关系都对应于相关性,如果根据每个分枝中包含的叶子数量(p < .05),如果链接的分枝仅偶然相关,则相关性明显高于预期。
As with the research by Rachel Jack and her colleagues, these approaches have the promise of capturing how expressions relate to one another, and broader categories of affective states that include distinct emotions.
与 Rachel Jack 和她的同事的研究一样,这些方法有望捕捉表达如何相互关联,以及包括不同情绪在内的更广泛的情感状态类别。
The Contextual Shaping of Emotion Perception
情绪感知的情境塑造
A final growth area in the study of emotion perception is a focus on how emotion perception is shaped by features of the social context (Barrett et al., 2011; Hess & Hareli, 2017; Scherer, 1986). An important source of contextual shaping of emotion perception is, of course, culture. Cultures vary greatly in their prioritization and understanding of emotion concepts, knowledge, and representations, so culture will necessarily influence the perception of emotion in expression. For example, cultures vary in their attention to the surrounding context of an expression. In one paradigmatic experiment, Masuda and colleagues showed Japanese and American participants cartoon figures with various facial expressions (Masuda, Ellsworth, Mesquita, Leu, & van de Veerdonk, 2004). The central, target face was always surrounded by smaller, less salient faces, that displayed expressions that were dissimilar to those of the target. Japanese participants’ judgments about the central target’s facial expression were more influenced by the surrounding faces than were judgments made by Americans -who tended to restrict their focus to the expression shown by the central target. Differences between groups of perceivers have also been found for populations that differ on other dimensions than culture, such as social class. In this vein, Kraus and colleagues have found that lower class individuals - more oriented to the social context than upper class individuals - also incorporate contextual information into their judgments of expressive behavior to a greater extent (Kraus et al., 2010).
情绪感知研究的最后一个增长领域是关注情绪感知如何受到社会环境特征的影响(Barrett et al., 2011;Hess & Hareli, 2017;Scherer, 1986)。当然,情感感知的语境塑造的一个重要来源是文化。不同文化在对情感概念、知识和表征的优先次序和理解方面差异很大,因此文化必然会影响表达中对情感的感知。例如,不同文化对表达周围环境的关注度各不相同。在一项范式实验中,Masuda及其同事向日本和美国参与者展示了具有各种面部表情的卡通人物(Masuda, Ellsworth, Mesquita, Leu, & van de Veerdonk, 2004)。中央的目标面孔总是被较小、不太突出的面孔包围,这些面孔显示的表情与目标的表情不同。与美国人相比,日本参与者对中心目标面部表情的判断受周围面部的影响更大——美国人倾向于将注意力限制在中心目标所表现出的表情上。对于在文化以外的其他维度(例如社会阶层)上不同的人群,也发现了感知者群体之间的差异。在这方面,Kraus 及其同事发现,下层阶级的个体——比上层阶级的个体更倾向于社会环境——也在更大程度上将情境信息纳入他们对表达行为的判断中(Kraus et al., 2010)。
A second source of variation is situational - who is the person expressing emotion, and what context are they in? How might the gender, power, ethnicity or social class of the individual expressing emotion shape what emotion observers perceive? For example, people are more likely to detect anger in men’s expressions of emotion, but sadness in expressions of women (Hess & Hareli, 2017). US participants are more likely to perceive anger in the emotional expressions of African Americans (Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003). Also relevant are what other behaviors expressers might be engaging in. For example, Aviezer and colleagues (2008) presented a photograph of a prototypical facial expression of disgust in one of four stimulus contexts, with the person expressing disgust engaged in different actions. Participants labeled the expression as disgust 91% of the time when the individual was holding a soiled article of clothing, 59% of the time when the person displayed fearful hand and arm movements, 33% of the time when the same person was clasping his or her hands sadly to the chest, and 11% of the time when the person was poised with fists clenched to punch. These results suggest that people do not see and perceive faces in a vacuum; rather, they are one very important predictor of emotion perceptions, which are used in combination with other contextual information to form judgments. Recent findings also highlight that a person’s previous emotional expressions can influence how a current emotional expression is perceived (Fang, Sauter & van Kleef, 2017). Clearly, the many dimensions of context - the nature of the expresser, the surrounding people, the formality or informality of the setting - all influence emotion perception.
第二个变化来源是情境——谁是表达情感的人,他们处于什么环境中?表达情感的个人的性别、权力、种族或社会阶层如何影响情感观察者所感知的东西?例如,人们更有可能在男性的情感表达中察觉到愤怒,但在女性的情感表达中察觉到悲伤(Hess & Hareli,2017)。美国参与者更有可能在非裔美国人的情绪表达中感知到愤怒(Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003)。同样相关的是表达者可能参与的其他行为。例如,Aviezer 及其同事 (2008) 展示了一张在四种刺激情境之一中典型的厌恶面部表情的照片,表达厌恶的人参与了不同的动作。当这个人拿着一件脏衣服时,参与者有 91% 的时间,当这个人表现出可怕的手和手臂动作时,有 59% 的时间,当同一个人悲伤地将他或她的手紧紧地紧紧握在胸前时,有 33% 的时间被参与者标记为厌恶,当这个人握紧拳头准备出拳时,有 11% 的时间。这些结果表明,人们不会在真空中看到和感知面孔;相反,它们是情绪感知的一个非常重要的预测因子,与其他上下文信息结合使用以形成判断。最近的发现还强调,一个人以前的情绪表达可以影响当前的情绪表达如何被感知(Fang, Sauter & van Kleef, 2017)。显然,语境的许多维度——表达者的性质、周围的人、环境的正式或不非正式——都会影响情绪感知。
A third kind of context is perceptual context (Barrett et al., 2011). Perceptual context refers to the mental states within the perceiver’s mind that shape his or her inferences upon observing expressive behavior. A person’s current feelings, goals, intentions, values, and physical state give rise to context-specific interpretations of social expressive behavior. For example, recent studies find that the likelihood that participants will label a disgust expression as “disgust” rises when an anger expression precedes the presentation of the disgust expression, but drops when no anger expression precedes the target disgust expression (Pochedly, Widen, & Russell, 2012).
第三种语境是知觉语境(Barrett et al., 2011)。知觉语境是指感知者脑海中的心理状态,这些状态在观察表达行为时塑造了他或她的推理。一个人当前的感受、目标、意图、价值观和身体状态会引起对社会表达行为的特定上下文解释。例如,最近的研究发现,当愤怒表达在厌恶表达之前时,参与者将厌恶表达标记为“厌恶”的可能性会增加,但是当目标厌恶表达之前没有愤怒表达时,参与者将厌恶表达标记为“厌恶”的可能性会降低(Pochedly, Widen, & Russell, 2012)。
Emotional Expression and the Coordination of Social Interaction
情感表达与社交互动的协调
Based on his years of intensive observation of pre-industrial peoples, Irenaus Eibl- Eibesfeldt posited that emotional expressions are the “grammar of social interaction” (1989). Facial expressions, vocalizations, patterns of bodily movement, gaze, gestures, and touch bind people into dyadic and group-based interactions—the soothing of a distressed child, flirtation between potential suitors, sexual interaction, the play of young siblings, the aggressive encounters of rivals, or status conflicts in groups.
根据他对前工业化民族的多年深入观察,Irenaus Eibl- Eibesfeldt 假设情感表达是“社会互动的语法”(1989 年)。面部表情、发声、身体运动模式、凝视、手势和触摸将人们捆绑在二元组和基于群体的互动中——安抚痛苦的孩子、潜在追求者之间的调情、性互动、年轻兄弟姐妹的玩耍、竞争对手的咄咄逼人的相遇或群体中的地位冲突。
A corollary to this analysis is that emotional expressions trigger systematic inferences and behavioral responses in others. This thinking requires that we shift a level of analysis, and look from individuals’ expressions of emotion to the dyadic and group level (Tiedens & Leach, 2004; Keltner & Haidt, 1999), as has been done in the study of emotional mimicry (Hess & Fischer, 2013). In other words, perceivers do not merely recognize emotions from nonverbal displays - they also respond to them with their own emotion-guided behaviors, ranging from mimicry, coordination, and tenderness to antagonism and avoidance.
这种分析的一个推论是,情绪表达会触发他人的系统性推理和行为反应。这种思考要求我们改变分析的层次,从个人的情感表达到二元和群体的层面(Tiedens & Leach, 2004;Keltner & Haidt, 1999),就像在情绪模仿研究中所做的那样(Hess & Fischer, 2013)。换句话说,感知者不仅从非语言表现中识别情绪——他们还用自己的情绪引导行为来回应它们,从模仿、协调和温柔到对抗和回避。
Consider the recent theorizing of Paula Niedenthal and her colleagues concerning how different smiles and laughs evoke different inferences and responses in others (Niedenthal et al., 2010). Within 500 milliseconds, this theorizing posits, people respond to smiles with mimetic behavior and physiological reactions. For example, a warm smile of enjoyment triggers neural processes that lead the perceiver to seek more information about the smiler through eye contact, which in turn evokes feelings of pleasure, mimetic behavior, and the experience of positive emotion and approach behavior. A proud, dominant smile, by contrast, triggers the same automatic search for information about the smiler, along with neural activation that leads to a sense of threat and avoidant behavior.
考虑一下 Paula Niedenthal 和她的同事最近关于不同的微笑和笑声如何引起他人不同的推论和反应的理论化(Niedenthal et al., 2010)。这种理论假设,在 500 毫秒内,人们会以模仿行为和生理反应来回应微笑。例如,一个温暖的快乐微笑会触发神经过程,引导感知者通过眼神交流寻找更多关于微笑者的信息,这反过来又会唤起愉悦感、模仿行为以及积极情绪和接近行为的体验。相比之下,一个自豪的、占主导地位的微笑会触发对微笑者信息的自动搜索,以及导致威胁感和回避行为的神经激活。
So how do emotional expressions coordinate social interactions? Three ideas have emerged (Keltner & Kring, 1998; Niedenthal & Brauer, 2011; van Kleef, 2009). A first is that emotional expressions rapidly provide important information relevant to perceivers, useful in guiding subsequent behavior. For example, emotional expressions can signal trait-like tendencies of individuals. Individuals looking angry are perceived as dominant (Knutson, 1996) and those showing embarrassment are seen as being of upstanding character (Feinberg et al.,2012). Pride displays promote automatic, cross-cultural judgments of high status in the displayer—judgments that are strong enough to counter contextual information indicating that the displayer in fact merits low status (Shariff & Tracy, 2009; Shariff, Tracy, & Markusoff, 2012; Tracy, Shariff, Zhao, & Henrich, 2013).
那么,情绪表达如何协调社交互动呢?出现了三个想法(Keltner & Kring,1998;Niedenthal & Brauer, 2011;van Kleef,2009 年)。首先,情绪表达会迅速提供与感知者相关的重要信息,有助于指导后续行为。例如,情绪表达可以表明个体的类似特质的倾向。看起来生气的人被认为是占主导地位的(Knutson, 1996),而那些表现出尴尬的人被视为具有正直的品格(Feinberg et al.,2012)。骄傲展示促进了对展示者中高地位的自动、跨文化判断——这些判断足够强大,足以对抗表明展示者实际上值得低地位的上下文信息(Shariff & Tracy,2009;Shariff, Tracy, & Markusoff, 2012;Tracy, Shariff, Zhao, & Henrich, 2013)。
Emotional expressions also signal the trustworthiness of the sender (Fang, van Kleef & Sauter, in press). In one study, Krumhuber and colleagues found that people trust interaction partners more, and will give more resources to those partners, if the partners display authentic smiles (which have longer onset and offset times) compared to fake smiles, which have shorter onset and offset (Krumhuber et al., 2013). Social perceivers also infer trustworthy intentions from people who spontaneously display intense embarrassment, and are more likely to cooperate with individuals who express embarrassment than other emotions (Feinberg et al., 2012). Pride displays direct social learning by providing information to others; individuals motivated to attain the correct answer to a difficult trivia question were found to selectively copy the answer provided by others showing pride, more so than others showing happiness or a neutral display, suggesting that pride displays communicate expertise or knowledge (Martens & Tracy, 2013).
情绪化的表达也表明了发送者的可信度(Fang, van Kleef & Sauter, 正在出版中)。在一项研究中,Krumhuber 及其同事发现,如果合作伙伴表现出真实的微笑(持续时间和偏移时间更长),那么人们会更信任互动伙伴,并且会为这些伙伴提供更多资源,而假笑的持续时间和偏移时间更短(Krumhuber et al., 2013)。社会感知者还从自发表现出强烈尴尬的人那里推断出值得信赖的意图,并且比其他情绪更有可能与表达尴尬的人合作(Feinberg et al., 2012)。Pride 通过向他人提供信息来展示直接的社交学习;对于一个困难的问答问题,有动力去获得正确答案的个体被发现会选择性地复制其他表现出骄傲的人提供的答案,比其他表现出快乐或中立表现的人更明显,这表明骄傲表现出来传达的是专业知识或知识(Martens & Tracy, 2013)。
Emotional expressions also convey essential information about the environment (e.g., Klinnert et al., 1986; Sorce et al., 1985). For example, parents use touch and voice to signal to their young children as to whether other people and objects in the environment are safe or dangerous (Hertenstein & Campos, 2004), using vocal cues that are consistent across cultures (Bryant & Barrett, 2007).
情绪表达还传达了有关环境的基本信息(例如,Klinnert 等人,1986 年;Sorce et al., 1985)。例如,父母使用触摸和声音向他们的孩子发出信号,告诉他们环境中的其他人和物体是安全的还是危险的(Hertenstein & Campos,2004),使用在不同文化中一致的声音暗示(Bryant & Barrett,2007)。
Emotional displays coordinate social interactions in a second way, by evoking specific responses in social perceivers. Early studies in this tradition found that some emotional expressions trigger complementary emotions in social perceivers: facial displays of anger enhance fear conditioning in observers, even when the anger displays are not consciously perceived (Ohman & Dimberg, 1978); expressions of distress can evoke sympathy in observers (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 1989); displays of dominance trigger more submissive expressive behavior (Tiedens & Fragale, 2003). More recently, van Dijk and colleagues (van Dijk et al., 2009) have documented that the blush is an involuntary, costly way in which people signal their awareness and regret for the mistake they have made: social observers responded with more positive emotion to individuals who blushed after they made mistakes than if they showed other display behavior.
情绪展示以第二种方式协调社交互动,通过唤起社会感知者的特定反应。这个传统的早期研究发现,一些情绪表达会触发社交感知者的互补情绪:面部的愤怒表现增强了观察者的恐惧条件反射,即使愤怒的表现并未被有意识地感知(Ohman & Dimberg, 1978);痛苦的表达可以引起观察者的同情(例如,Eisenberg et al., 1989);主导地位的展示会引发更顺从的表达行为(Tiedens & Fragale, 2003)。最近,van Dijk 及其同事(van Dijk et al., 2009)记录了脸红是一种非自愿的、代价高昂的方式,人们通过这种方式来表达他们对所犯错误的意识和后悔:社会观察者对犯错后脸红的人的反应比他们表现出其他表现行为的人更积极。
Finally, emotional expressions structure social interactions by serving as incentives for others’ actions, by rewarding specific patterns of behavior in perceivers. Early studies on this notion focused on how parents use warm smiles and touches to increase the likelihood of certain behaviors in their children (e.g., Tronick, 1989) and the incentive value of laughter, and how it triggers cooperative interactions between friends (Owren & Bachorowski, 2001).
最后,情绪表达通过奖励感知者的特定行为模式来激励他人的行为,从而构建社会互动。关于这个概念的早期研究集中在父母如何利用温暖的微笑和触摸来增加他们孩子某些行为的可能性(例如,Tronick,1989)和笑声的激励价值,以及它如何引发朋友之间的合作互动(Owren & Bachorowski,2001)。
This analysis of the rewarding properties of emotional expression likewise sheds light on some of the direct effects of emotional touch upon recipients of touch (for review, see Keltner, 2009). Gentle, pleasing touch triggers activation in the orbitofrontal cortex, a brain region involved in the representation of secondary rewards. Given the rewarding quality of being touched, it has been claimed that touch motivates sharing behavior in others (De Waal, 1996). This may help explain why warm touch increases compliance to requests (Willis & Hamm, 1980) and cooperation toward strangers in economic games.
对情绪表达的有益特性的分析同样阐明了情绪触摸对触摸接受者的一些直接影响(回顾,参见 Keltner,2009 年)。温柔、令人愉悦的触摸会触发眶额叶皮层的激活,眶额叶皮层是参与表示次要奖励的大脑区域。鉴于被触摸的有益品质,有人声称触摸会激发他人的分享行为(De Waal, 1996)。这可能有助于解释为什么温暖的触摸会增加对请求的遵守(Willis & Hamm, 1980)和在经济游戏中对陌生人的合作。
Clearly, the study of how expressions coordinate social interactions are in their infancy. Many of the studies of the informative, evocative, and incentive functions of expressions have largely focused on the face; it will be important to extend this line of reasoning to studies of the voice, touch, gaze, and other modalities. With a few exceptions, this work has focused on a fairly limited set of emotional displays - smiles, anger displays, disgust expressions, and fear expressions. It will be important to examine how less studied expressions of emotion, for example of interest (in the voice), gratitude (in touch), sympathy (in the voice or touch), or awe (in the voice), coordinate social interactions.
显然,关于表情如何协调社会互动的研究还处于起步阶段。许多关于表情的信息、唤起和激励功能的研究主要集中在面部;将这条推理路线扩展到对声音、触觉、凝视和其他模态的研究是很重要的。除了少数例外,这项工作专注于相当有限的情感表现——微笑、愤怒表现、厌恶表情和恐惧表情。重要的是要检查较少研究的情感表达,例如兴趣(在声音中)、感激(在接触中)、同情(在声音或触摸中)或敬畏(在声音中)如何协调社交互动。
Studies of the social functions of emotional expressions have set the stage for new theorizing. One recent line of argument has outlined how emotional expressions evolved to serve these informative, evocative, and incentive signaling functions, perhaps in the “second stage” of their evolution (see Shariff & Tracy, 2011). This account dates back to Darwin (1872), and argues that internal physiological regulation was likely the original adaptive function of emotion expressions, which later evolved to serve communicative functions (e.g., Chapman, Kim, Susskind & Anderson, 2009; Eibl-Eibsfeldt, 1989; Ekman, 1992; Shariff & Tracy, 2011).
对情绪表达的社会功能的研究为新的理论化奠定了基础。最近的一个论点路线概述了情绪表达是如何进化来服务于这些信息、唤起和激励信号的功能的,也许是在它们进化的“第二阶段”(参见Shariff & Tracy,2011)。这一解释可以追溯到达尔文(1872 年),并认为内部生理调节可能是情绪表达的原始适应性功能,后来进化为服务于交际功能(例如,Chapman, Kim, Susskind & Anderson, 2009;Eibl-Eibsfeldt,1989 年;Ekman, 1992;Shariff & Tracy,2011 年)。
To take the classic example of fear, the facial muscle movements that constitute a fear expression likely originally emerged as part of a functional response to threatening stimuli; widened eyes increase the scope of one’s visual field and the speed of eye movements, allowing expressers to better identify (potentially threatening) objects in their periphery (Susskind et al.,2008). In contrast, the ‘scrunched’ nose and mouth of the disgust expression results in constriction of these orifices, thereby reducing air intake (Chapman, Kim, Susskind & Anderson, 2009). Given that disgust functions to alert expressers of the potentially noxious nature of the eliciting stimulus, and thereby disincline them from ingesting it (Rozin, Lowery, & Ebert, 1994), the reduced inhalation of airborne chemicals can well be considered part of the same adaptive response. In more recent work, these authors have shown that the opposing eye movements involved in fear and disgust expressions (i.e., widening versus narrowing) function to increase visual sensitivity (localizing an object) and acuity (determining what the object is), respectively—further supporting the argument that these two expressions initially evolved to serve opposing yet equally important functions for the expresser (Lee, Susskind, & Anderson, 2013).
以恐惧的经典例子为例,构成恐惧表情的面部肌肉运动可能最初是作为对威胁性刺激的功能性反应的一部分出现的;睁大的眼睛增加了一个人的视野范围和眼球运动的速度,使表达者能够更好地识别其周边的(潜在威胁)物体(Susskind et al.,2008)。相比之下,厌恶表情的“皱缩”鼻子和嘴巴会导致这些孔口收缩,从而减少空气摄入(Chapman, Kim, Susskind & Anderson, 2009)。鉴于厌恶的作用是提醒表达者诱发刺激的潜在有害性质,从而阻止他们摄入它(Rozin, Lowery, & Ebert, 1994),减少吸入空气中的化学物质可以被认为是同样适应性反应的一部分。在最近的研究中,这些作者表明,恐惧和厌恶表情(即扩大与缩小)所涉及的相反眼球运动分别增加了视觉敏感性(定位物体)和敏锐度(确定物体是什么)——进一步支持了这两种表达最初进化为表达者服务于相反但同样重要的功能的论点(Lee, Susskind, & Anderson, 2013)。
However, many of these original physiological benefits experienced by expressers eventually became transformed into communicative signals, which benefit both expressers and observers by virtue of allowing for more efficient communication and coordinated interactions. Over time, the facial and bodily behavioral components of certain emotions came to signal those emotional states to observers, through processes of ritualization, wherein mammalian nonverbal displays become exaggerated, more visible, distinctive and/or prototypic, and ultimately, more recognizable (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989; Shariff & Tracy, 2011).
然而,表达者体验到的许多原始生理益处最终转化为交流信号,这些信号通过允许更有效的交流和协调互动而使表达者和观察者都受益。随着时间的推移,某些情绪的面部和身体行为成分开始通过仪式化过程向观察者发出这些情绪状态的信号,其中哺乳动物的非语言表现变得夸张、更明显、更独特和/或原型化,并最终更容易识别(Eibl-Eibesfeldt,1989;Shariff & Tracy,2011 年)。
Looking forward to future advances in the study of emotional expression
期待情绪表达研究的未来进展
In this review, we have summarized recent advances in the study of emotional expression inspired by Basic Emotion Theory. This literature reveals that there are upwards of 20 emotions with distinct, multimodal expressions. Intriguing discoveries highlight how this increasingly rich array of states with multimodal expressions might have a deeper structure that speaks to the potential evolutionary origins of emotional expression. And work is revealing how emotional expressions coordinate social interactions; they are indeed a grammar of social living.
在这篇综述中,我们总结了受基本情绪理论启发的情绪表达研究的最新进展。这些文献揭示了超过 20 种情绪具有独特的多模态表达。有趣的发现突出了这种日益丰富的具有多模态表达的状态数组如何具有更深层次的结构,这说明了情绪表达的潜在进化起源。工作揭示了情绪表达如何协调社交互动;它们确实是社会生活的一种语法。
These advances in the study of emotional expression are already proving to be generative in advancing other core hypotheses of Basic Emotions Theory. As one example, within this theoretical framework it is assumed that emotions involve emotion-specific physiology, which enable specific behaviors in response to eliciting stimuli - flight, skin-to-skin contact, the widening of the eyes to take in more information, clasping and striking. The literature we have reviewed here has begun to illuminate how distinct emotions covary with distinct physiological response. For example, brief nonverbal displays of love (Duchenne smile, head tilt, open handed gestures) correlate with oxytocin release, whereas cues of sexual desire (lip licks, lip puckers) do not (Gonzaga et al., 2006). Sympathy-related oblique eyebrow movements relate to increased activation in the vagus nerve, a branch of the parasympathetic autonomic nervous system that supports care-giving in mammals (Eisenberg et al., 1989; Stellar, Cohen, Oveis, & Keltner, 2015). Recent work finds that fear-related vocalizations, but not those of other emotions, covary with cortisol release (Anderson et al., 2018). This work suggests that more precise measurement of emotional expression may yield new insights into emotion-related physiology.
情绪表达研究的这些进展已经证明在推进基本情绪理论的其他核心假设方面具有生成性。举个例子,在这个理论框架内,假设情绪涉及特定于情绪的生理学,它使特定行为能够响应引发的刺激 - 飞行、皮肤接触、睁大眼睛以吸收更多信息、紧握和打击。我们在这里回顾的文献已经开始阐明不同的情绪如何与不同的生理反应共变。例如,短暂的非语言爱的表现(杜兴微笑、歪头、张开双手的手势)与催产素的释放相关,而的暗示(舔嘴唇、撅嘴唇)则不相关(Gonzaga et al., 2006)。交感神经相关的斜眉运动与迷走神经的激活增加有关,迷走神经是副交感自主神经系统的一个分支,支持哺乳动物的护理(Eisenberg et al., 1989;Stellar, Cohen, Oveis, & Keltner, 2015)。最近的工作发现,与恐惧相关的发声,而不是其他情绪的声音,与皮质醇的释放共变(Anderson et al., 2018)。这项工作表明,更精确地测量情绪表达可能会对情绪相关的生理学产生新的见解。
Critical to Basic Emotions Theory is the notion that human emotional expression arose during the process of mammalian evolution, and, by implication, that there should be compelling homologies between human and non-human behavior. Careful cross-species comparisons between human and nonhuman expressive behavior have revealed functional origins of laughter, smiling, embarrassment, affiliative cues involved in love, sexual signaling, threat displays, and dominance (for review see Keltner et al., 2016). Careful analyses of nonhuman vocal displays find distinct displays for sex, food, affiliation, care-giving, and threat (e.g., Briefer, 2012; Morton, 1977; Snowdon, 2003).
基本情感理论的关键是人类情感表达是在哺乳动物进化过程中出现的,这意味着人类和非人类行为之间应该存在令人信服的同源性。人类和非人类表达行为之间的仔细跨物种比较揭示了笑、微笑、尴尬、与爱情有关的从属线索、性信号、威胁展示和支配地位的功能起源(评论见 Keltner 等人,2016 年)。对非人类声音显示的仔细分析发现,性、食物、隶属关系、照顾和威胁有不同的显示(例如,Briefer,2012 年;Morton, 1977;Snowdon,2003 年)。
In moving beyond the basic six, new studies of emotional expression guided by Basic Emotion Theory are generating important advances in understanding what emotions are, and how they shape human social life.
在超越基本六种的过程中,以基本情绪理论为指导的情绪表达的新研究正在为理解什么是情绪以及它们如何塑造人类社会生活产生重要进展。
Contributor Information 贡献者信息
Dacher Keltner, University of California, Berkeley.
Dacher Keltner,加州大学伯克利分校。
Disa Sauter, Amsterdam University.
Disa Sauter,阿姆斯特丹大学。
Jessica Tracy, University of British Columbia.
Jessica Tracy,不列颠哥伦比亚大学。
Alan Cowen, University of California, Berkeley.
Alan Cowen,加州大学伯克利分校。
References 引用
-
Anderson CL, Moroy M, & Keltner D (2018). Emotion in the wilds of nature: The coherence and contagion of fear during threatening group-based outdoors experiences. Emotion, 18(3), 355–368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
安德森 CL, 莫罗伊 M, & 凯尔特纳 D (2018)。大自然荒野中的情感:在基于群体的威胁性户外体验中,恐惧的连贯性和传染性。情感,18(3),355-368。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
App B, McIntosh DN, Reed CL & Hertenstein MJ (2011). Nonverbal channel use in communication of emotion: How may depend on why. Emotion, 11(3), 603–617. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
App B, McIntosh DN, Reed CL & Hertenstein MJ (2011).非语言渠道在情感交流中的使用:如何可能取决于原因。情感,11(3),603-617。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Aviezer H, Trope Y, & Todorov A (2012). Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and negative emotions. Science, 338(6111), 1225–1229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Aviezer H, Trope Y, & Todorov A (2012)。身体暗示,而不是面部表情,区分强烈的积极和消极情绪。科学, 338(6111), 1225–1229。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Bai Y, McNeil G, Cowen A, & Keltner D (2018). Darwin’s Emoji: Dimensionality, structure, and conceptualization in the recognition of emotion. Manuscript under review. [Google Scholar]
Bai Y, McNeil G, Cowen A, & Keltner D (2018).达尔文的表情符号:情感识别中的维度、结构和概念化。手稿正在审查中。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Balsters MJH, Krahmer EJ, Swerts MGJ & Vingerhoets AJJM (2013). Emotional tears facilitate the recognition of sadness and the perceived need for social support. Evolutionary Psychology, 11(1), 148–158. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Balsters MJH, Krahmer EJ, Swerts MGJ & Vingerhoets AJJM (2013).情绪化的眼泪有助于识别悲伤和感知到的对社会支持的需求。进化心理学,11(1),148-158。[公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Banse R, & Scherer KR (1996). Acoustic profiles in vocal emotion expression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Banse R, & Scherer KR (1996)。声乐情感表达中的声学剖面。人格与社会心理学杂志,70(3),614。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Barrett LF, Lindquist KA, & Gendron M (2007). Language as context for the perception of emotion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(8), 327–332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Barrett LF, Lindquist KA, & Gendron M (2007)。语言作为情感感知的背景。认知科学趋势,11(8),327-332。[数字对象标识符][PMC 免费文章][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Botvinick M, Jha AP, Bylsma LM, Fabian SA, Solomon PE, & Prkachin KM (2005). Viewing facial expressions of pain engages cortical areas involved in the direct experience of pain. Neuroimage, 25(1, 312–319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Botvinick M, Jha AP, Bylsma LM, Fabian SA, Solomon PE, & Prkachin KM (2005).观察疼痛的面部表情会涉及参与疼痛直接体验的皮质区域。神经影像学, 25(1, 312–319.[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Briefer EF (2012). Vocal expression of emotions in mammals: mechanisms of production and evidence. Journal of Zoology, 288(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar]
Briefer EF (2012 年)。哺乳动物情感的声音表达:生产和证据机制。动物学杂志,288(1),1-20。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Campos B, Shiota M, Keltner D, Gonzaga G, & Goetz J (2013). What is shared, what is different? Core relational themes and expressive displays of eight positive emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 27,37–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Campos B, Shiota M, Keltner D, Gonzaga G, & Goetz J (2013)。什么是共享的,有什么不同?核心关系主题和八种积极情绪的表达展示。认知与情感,27,37-52。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Cordaro DT (2013). Universals and cultural variations in expression in five cultures. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. [Google Scholar]
科尔达罗 DT (2013)。五种文化中表达的普遍性和文化差异。未发表的博士论文,加州大学伯克利分校。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Cordaro DT, Keltner D, Tshering S, Wangchuk D, & Flynn L (2016). The voice conveys emotion in ten globalized cultures and one remote village in Bhutan. Emotion, 1, 117–128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cordaro DT, Keltner D, Tshering S, Wangchuk D, & Flynn L (2016).这个声音在不丹的十种全球化文化和一个偏远村庄中传达情感。情感,1,117-128。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Cordaro DT, Sun R, Keltner D, Kamble S
Huddar N., & McNeil G. (2018). Universals and cultural variations in 22 emotional expressions across five cultures. Emotion, 18 (1), 75–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cordaro DT, Sun R, Keltner D, Kamble S, Huddar N., & McNeil G. (2018).五种文化中 22 种情感表达的普遍性和文化差异。情感,18 (1),75-93。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Crivelli C, Jarillo S, Russell JA, & Fernandez-Dols JM (2016). Reading emotions from faces in two indigenous societies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 830–843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Crivelli C, Jarillo S, Russell JA, & Fernandez-Dols JM (2016).从两个土著社会的面孔中读取情感。实验心理学杂志:一般,145,830-843。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Crivelli C, Russell JA, Jarillo S, & Fernandez-Dols JM (2016). The fear gasping face as a threat display in a Melanesian society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(44), 12403–12407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Crivelli C, Russell JA, Jarillo S, & Fernandez-Dols JM (2016).恐惧喘息的面孔是美拉尼西亚社会中的威胁表现。美国国家科学院院刊,113(44),12403-12407。[数字对象标识符][PMC 免费文章][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Dael N, Mortillaro M, & Scherer KR (2012). Emotion expression in body action and posture. Emotion, 12(5), 1085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dael N, Mortillaro M, & Scherer KR (2012).身体动作和姿势中的情感表达。情感, 12(5), 1085.[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Darwin C (1872/1998). The expression of the emotions in man and animals (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
达尔文 C (1872/1998)。人和动物的情感表达(第 3 版)。纽约:牛津大学出版社。[谷歌学术搜索] -
De Waal FB (1996). Goodnatured. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
德瓦尔 FB (1996)。善良。剑桥:哈佛大学出版社。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Du S, Tao Y, & Martinez AM (2014). Compound facial expressions of emotion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(15), E1454–E1462. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Du S, Tao Y, & Martinez AM (2014)。复合面部情感表情。美国国家科学院院刊,111(15),E1454–E1462。[数字对象标识符][PMC 免费文章][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Dubois A, Bringuier S, Capdevilla X, & Pry R (2008). Vocal and verbal expression of postoperative pain in preschoolers. Pain Management Nursing, 9(4), 160–165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dubois A, Bringuier S, Capdevilla X, & Pry R (2008)。学龄前儿童术后疼痛的声音和语言表达。疼痛管理护理,9(4),160-165。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] -
Duran JI, Reisenzein R, & Fernandez-Dols J-M (2017). Coherence between emotions and facial expressions In Fernandez-Dols J-M & Russell JA (Eds). The Science of Facial Expression (pp. 107–129). New York:
Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
Duran JI, Reisenzein R, & Fernandez-Dols J-M (2017).情绪和面部表情之间的连贯性 在Fernandez-Dols J-M & Russell JA (Eds)中。面部表情的科学(第 107-129 页)。纽约:牛津大学出版社。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Eibl-Eibesfeldt I (1989). Human Ethology. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. [Google Scholar]
Eibl-Eibesfeldt I (1989 年)。人类行为学。纽约:Aldine De Gruyter。[谷歌学术搜索] -
Eisenberg N, Fabes RA, Miller PA, Fultz J, Shell R, Mathy RM, & Reno RR (1989). Relation of sympathy and personal distress to prosocial behavior: A multimethod study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Eisenberg N, Fabes RA, Miller PA, Fultz J, Shell R, Mathy RM, & Reno RR (1989)。同情和个人痛苦与亲社会行为的关系:一项多方法研究。人格与社会心理学杂志,57(1),55。[数字对象标识符][公共医学][谷歌学术搜索] - Ekman P (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6, 169–200. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P (1993). Facial Expression of Emotion. American Psychologist, 48, 384–392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ekman PE, & Davidson RJ (1994). The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P, & Rosenberg EL (Eds.). (1997). What the face reveals: Basic and applied studies of spontaneous expression using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P, & Friesen WV (1986). A new pan-cultural facial expression of emotion. Motivation and Emotion, 10(2), 159–168. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P, & Friesen WV (1978). Facial Action Coding System: Investigatoris Guide. Consulting Psychologists Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P, & Cordaro D (2011). What is meant by calling emotions basic. Emotion Review, 3(4), 364–370. [Google Scholar]
- Ekman P, Sorenson ER, & Friesen WV (1969). Pan-cultural elements in the Facial Display of Emotions. Science, 164, 86–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Elfenbein HA (2013). Nonverbal dialects and accents in facial expressions of emotion. Emotion Review, 5(1), 90–96. [Google Scholar]
- Elfenbein HA, Ambady N (2002) On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion regulation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(2), 203–235. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fang X, Sauter DA, & van Kleef G (2018). Mixed emotions: The specificity of emotion perception from static and dynamic faces across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(1), 130–148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fang X, van Kleef G & Sauter DA (in press). Person Perception from Changing Emotional Expressions: Primacy, Recency, or Averaging Effect? Cognition and Emotion. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fischer AH, & Sauter DA (2017). What the Theory of Affective Pragmatics Does and Doesn't Do. Psychological Inquiry, 28(2–3), 190–193. [Google Scholar]
- Flack W (2006). Peripheral feedback effects of facial expressions, bodily postures, and vocal expressions on emotional feelings. Cognition & Emotion, 20(2), 177–195. [Google Scholar]
- Fridlund AJ (1991). Evolution and facial action in reflex, social motive, and paralanguage. Biological Psychology, 32(1), 3–100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Frijda NH (1986). The Emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Goetz JL, Keltner D & Simon-Thomas E (2010). Compassion: An evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 351–374. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gonzaga GC, Turner RA, Keltner D, Campos B, & Altemus M (2006). Romantic love and sexual desire in close relationships. Emotion, 6(2), 163–179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gross MM, Crane EA, & Fredrickson BL (2010). Methodology for assessing bodily expression of emotion. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34(4), 223–248. [Google Scholar]
- Grunau RV, & Craig KD (1987). Pain expression in neonates: facial action and cry. Pain, 28(3), 395–410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Haidt J, & Keltner D (1999). Culture and facial expression: Open-ended methods find more faces and a gradient of recognition. Cognition & Emotion, 13, 225–266. [Google Scholar]
- Hawk ST, Kleef GAV, Fischer AH, & Schalk JVD (2009). “Worth a thousand words”: Absolute and relative decoding of nonlinguistic affect vocalizations. Emotion, 9, 293–305. doi: 10.1037/a0015178 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hejmadi A, Davidson RJ, & Rozin P (2000). Exploring Hindu Indian emotion expressions: Evidence for accurate recognition by Americans and Indians. Psychological Science, 11(3), 183–187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hertenstein MJ, Holmes R, McCullough M, & Keltner D (2009). The communication of emotion via touch. Emotion, 9(4), 566–573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hertenstein MJ, Keltner D, App B, Bulleit BA, & Jaskolka AR (2006). Touch communicates distinct emotions. Emotion, 6(3), 528–533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hess U, & Fischer A (2013). Emotional mimicry as social regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 142–157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hess. U, & Hareli S (2017). The social signal value of emotions: The role of contextual factors in social inferences from emotional displays In Russell J & Fernandez-Dols J-M (Eds.), The Psychology of Facial Expression (pp. 375–392). New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Horstmann G (2003). What do facial expressions convey: Feeling states, behavioral intentions, or actions requests? Emotion, 3(2), 150–166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jack RE, Garrod OG, Yu H, Caldara R, & Schyns PG (2012). Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(19), 7241–7244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Juslin PN, & Laukka P (2003). Communication of emotions in vocal expression and music performance: Different channels, same code?. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 770–814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D (2009). Born to be good: The science of a meaningful life. New York: WW Norton & Company. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D (1995). Signs of appeasement: Evidence for the distinct displays of embarrassment, amusement, and shame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(3), 441–454. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D (1996). Evidence for the distinctness of embarrassment, shame, and guilt: A study of recalled antecedents and facial expressions of emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 10(2), 155–172. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Bonanno GA (1997). A study of laughter and dissociation: Distinct correlates of laughter and smiling during bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Cordaro DT (2016). Understanding multimodal emotional expressions: Recent advances in Basic Emotion Theory. Emotion Researcher, Andrea Scarantino (ed.). http://emotionresearcher.com/ [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Haidt J (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297–314. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D & Kring AM (1998). Emotion, social function, and psychopathology. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 320–342. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D & Lerner J (2010). Emotion In Fiske Giblert and Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, Volume 1 (pp. 317–342). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Shiota MN (2003). New displays and new emotions: A commentary on Rozin and Cohen (2003). Emotion, 3(1), 86–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Buswell BN (1997). Embarrassment: Its distinct form and appeasement functions. Psychological Bulletin, 122(3), 250–264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, Sauter D, Tracy J, McNeil G, & Cordaro DT (2016). Expression. In Barrett LF, Lewis M, & Haviland-Jones J (Ed.), Handbook of emotion. (pp. 467–482). New York, NY: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Keltner D, & Haidt JA (2001). Social functions of emotions In Mayne T & Bonanno G, (Eds.), Emotions:Current Issues and future directions. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Kraus MW, Côté S, & Keltner D (2010). Social class, contextualism, and empathie accuracy. Psychological Science, 21, 1716–1723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laukka P, Elfenbein HA, Söder N, Nordstrom H, Althoff J, Chui W, et al. (2013). Cross-cultural decoding of positive and negative non-linguistic emotion vocalizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 353: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00353 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laukka P, Elfenbein HA, Thingujam NS, Rockstuhl T, Iraki F, Wanda C, & Althoff J (2016). The expression and recognition of emotions in the voice across five nations: A lens model analysis based on acoustic features. Journal of Personaity and Social Psychology, 11 (5), 686–705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lee DH, Susskind JM, & Anderson AK (2013). Social transmission of the sensory benefits of eye widening in fear expressions. Psychological Science, 24(6), 957–965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lench HC, Flores SA, & Bench SW (2011). Discrete emotions predict changes in cognition, judgment, experience, behavior, and physiology: A meta-analysis of experimental emotion elicitations. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 834–855. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Levenson RW, Ekman P, & Friesen WV (1990). Voluntary facial action generates emotion-specific autonomic nervous system activity. Psychophysiology, 27(4), 363–384. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Maruskin LA, Thrash TM, & Elliot AJ (2012). The chills as a psychological construct: Content universe, factor structure, affective composition, elicitors, trait antecedents, and consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 135–157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Masuda T, Ellsworth PC, Mesquita B, Leu J, & van de Veerdonk E (2004). A face in the crowd or a crowd in the face: Japanese and American perceptions of others’ emotions. Unpublished manuscript, Hokkaido University. [Google Scholar]
- Matsumoto D, et al. (2008). Facial expressions of emotion In Lewis Haviland-Jones & Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions, Third Edition (pp. 211–234). New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Matsumoto D, & Hwang HC (2017). Methodological issues regarding cross-cultural studies of judgments of facial expressions. Emotion Review, 9(4), 375–382. [Google Scholar]
- Morton ES (1977). On the occurrence and significance of motivation-structural rules in some bird and mammal sounds. American Naturalist, 111, 855–869. [Google Scholar]
- Nelson NL, & Russell JA (2013). Universality revisited. Emotion Review, 5(1), 8–15. [Google Scholar]
- Niedenthal PM, Mermillod M, Maringer M, & Hess U (2010). The Simulation of Smiles (SIMS) model: Embodied simulation and the meaning of facial expression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(06), 417–433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nummenmaa L, & Saarimäki H (2017). Emotions as discrete patterns of systemic activity. Neuroscience letters. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Oatley K (2004). Scripts, transformations, and suggestiveness, of emotions in Shakespeare and Chekhov. Review of General Psychology, 8, 323–340. [Google Scholar]
- Oosterhof NN, & Todorov A (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105, 11087–11092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ortony A, & Turner TJ (1990). What's basic about basic emotions?. Psychological Review, 97(3), 315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Oveis C, Horberg EJ, & Keltner D (2010). Compassion, pride, and social intuitions of self-other similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,.98(4), 618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Owren MJ, & Bachorowski J (2001). The evolution of emotional expression: A “selfish-gene” account of smiling and laughter in early hominids and humans In Mayne TJ & Bonanno GA (Eds.), Emotions: Current issues and future directions (pp. 152–191). New York, NY: Guilford. [Google Scholar]
- Parkinson B (2005). Do facial movements express emotion or communicate social motives? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 278–311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pell MD, Monetta L, Paulmann S & Kots SA (2009). Recognizing emotions in a foreign language. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33, 107–120. [Google Scholar]
- Piff PK, Purcell A, Gruber J, Hertenstein MJ, & Keltner D (2012). Contact high: Mania proneness and positive perception of emotional touches. Cognition & Emotion, 26(6), 1116–1123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Prkachin KM (1992). The consistency of facial expressions of pain: A comparison across modalities. Pain, 51(3), 297–306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Reddy V (2000). Coyness in early infancy. Developmental Science, 3(2), 186–192. [Google Scholar]
- Reddy V (2005). Feeling shy and showing-off: Self-conscious emotions must regulate selfawareness. Emotional Development, 183–204. [Google Scholar]
- Reeve J (1993). The face of interest. Motivation and Emotion, 17(4), 353–375. [Google Scholar]
- Rozin P, & Cohen AB (2003). High frequency of facial expressions corresponding to confusion, concentration, and worry in an analysis of naturally occurring facial expressions of Americans. Emotion, 3(1), 68–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Russell JA (1994). Is there universal recognition of emotion from facial expressions? A review of the cross-cultural studies. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 102–141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sander D, Grandjean D, Kaiser S, Wehrle T, & Scherer KR (2007). Interaction effects of perceived gaze direction and dynamic facial expression: Evidence for appraisal theories of emotion. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 470–480. [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, & Eisner F (2013). Commonalities outweigh differences in the communication of emotions across human cultures [Letter to the editor]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (3), E180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, & Scott SK (2007). More than one kind of happiness: Can we recognize vocal expressions of different positive states? Motivation and Emotion, 31(3), 192–199. [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, Eisner F, Calder AJ & Scott SK (2010). Perceptual cues in non-verbal vocal expressions of emotion. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(11), 2251–2272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, Eisner F, Ekman P, & Scott SK (2010). Cross-cultural recognition of basic emotions through nonverbal emotional vocalizations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(6), 2408–2412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, Eisner F, Ekman P, & Scott SK (2015). Emotional vocalisations are recognised across cultures regardless of distractor valence. Psychological Science, 26(3), 354–356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, Panattoni C, & Happe F (2013). Children’s recognition of emotions from vocal cues. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 97–113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sauter DA, Gangi D, McDonald N, & Messinger DS (2014). Nonverbal expressions of positive emotions In Shiota MN, Tugade MM, and Kirby LD (Eds.) Handbook of Positive Emotion (pp 179–200). New York: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Scarantino A (2017). How to Do Things with Emotional Expressions: The Theory of Affective Pragmatics, Psychological Inquiry, 28:2–3, 165–185 [Google Scholar]
- Scherer KR (1986). Vocal affect expression: A review and a model for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 99 (2), 43–65. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Scherer KR, & Ellgring H (2007). Multimodal expression of emotion: Affect programs or componential appraisal patterns?. Emotion, 7(1), 113–130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Scherer KR, & Grandjean D (2008). Facial expressions allow inference of both emotions and their components. Cognition and Emotion, 22(5), 789–801. [Google Scholar]
- Schröder M (2003). Experimental study of affect bursts. Speech Communication, 40(1), 99–116. [Google Scholar]
- Shariff AF, & Tracy JL (2011). What are emotion expressions for?. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(6), 395–399. [Google Scholar]
- Shariff AF, & Tracy JL (2009). Knowing who’s boss: Implicit perceptions of status from the nonverbal expression of pride. Emotion, 9, 631–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shariff AF, Tracy JL, & Markusoff J (2012). (Implicitly) judging a book by its cover: The power of pride and shame expressions in shaping judgments of social status. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1178–1193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shiota MN, Campos B, & Keltner D (2003). The faces of positive emotion: prototype displays of awe, amusement, and pride. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1000, 296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shiota MN, Keltner D, & Mossman A (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition & Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. [Google Scholar]
- Shiota MN, Campos B, Oveis C, Hertenstein M, Simon-Thomas E, & Keltner D (2017). Beyond happiness: Toward a science of discrete positive emotions. American Psychologist, 72 (7), 617–643. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shuman V, Clark-Polner E Meuleman B, Sander D, & Scherer KR. (2015). Emotion perception from a componential perspective. Cognition & Emotion, 37 (1), 47–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Silvia PJ (2008). Interest—The curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 57–60. [Google Scholar]
- Simon-Thomas ER, Keltner DJ, Sauter D, Sinicropi-Yao L, & Abramson A (2009). The voice conveys specific emotions: Evidence from vocal burst displays. Emotion, 9(6), 838. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Snowdon CT (2003). Expression of Emotion in Nonhuman Animals. In Davidson Scherer & Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences (pp. 457–534). New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Stellar JE, Cohen A, Oveis C, & Keltner D (2015, January 26). Affective and Physiological Responses to the Suffering of Others: Compassion and Vagal Activity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 572–585. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Szameitat DP, Alter K, Szameitat AJ, Darwin CJ, Wildgruber D, Dietrich S, & Sterr A (2009). Differentiation of Emotions in Laughter at the Behavioral Level. Emotion, 9(3), 397–405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL, & Robins RW (2004). Show your pride evidence for a discrete emotion expression. Psychological Science, 15(3), 194–197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL, & Robins RW (2008). The nonverbal expression of pride: Evidence for cross-cultural recognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 516–530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL, & Robins RW (2007). The prototypical pride expression: Development of a nonverbal behavioral coding system. Emotion, 7, 789–801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL, Robins RW, & Schriber RA (2009). Development of a FACS-verified set of basic and self-conscious emotion expressions. Emotion, 9, 554–559. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL & Matsumoto D (2008). The spontaneous expression of pride and shame: Evidence for biologically innate nonverbal displays. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(33), 11655–11660. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tracy JL, Shariff AF, Zhao W, & Henrich J (2013). Cross-cultural evidence that the pride expression is a universal automatic status signal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 163–180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tronick EZ (1989). Emotions and emotional communications in infants. American Psychologist, 44, 112–119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- van Dijk C, de Jong PJ, & Peters ML (2009). The remedial value of blushing in the context of transgressions and mishaps. Emotion, 9, 287–291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van Kleef GA (2009). How emotions regulate social life: The emotions as social information (EASI) model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 184–188. [Google Scholar]
- Van Kleef GA (2016). The interpersonal dynamics of emotion: Toward an integrative theory of emotions as social information. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Van Kleef GA, Cheshin A, Fischer AH, & Schneider IK (2016). Editorial: The social nature of emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(896), 1–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vingerhoets AJJM & Bylsma LM (2016). The Riddle of Human Emotional Crying: A Challenge for Emotion Researchers. Emotion Review, 8(3), 207–217 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams ACDC (2002). Facial expression of pain, empathy, evolution, and social learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(04), 475–480. [Google Scholar]