Acta Psychologica Sinica ›› 2024, Vol. 56 ›› Issue (6): 701-713.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00701
• Reports of Empirical Studies • Previous Articles Next Articles
Published:
2024-06-25
Online:
2024-04-08
Contact:
FANG Xia
E-mail:x.fang@zju.edu.cn
FANG Xia, GE Youxun. (2024). The impact of spontaneity and presentation mode on the ingroup advantage in recognizing angry and disgusted facial expressions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(6), 701-713.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://journal.psych.ac.cn/acps/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00701
Figure 1. Examples of Static Posed Facial Expressions in the Present Study Note. Examples of dynamic posed and spontaneous facial expressions are available at https://osf.io/8f5cd/?view_only=197bfe65e1be4723bf3ba0efb6294ba4.
Perceiver Culture | Spontaneity | Emotion | Ingroup Advantage | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Posed | Anger | 0.09 (0.11) | 61 | 6.50 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.53, 1.11] |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.10) | 61 | 4.38 | < 0.001 | 0.56 | [0.29, 0.82] | ||
Spontaneous | Anger | -0.05 (0.11) | 63 | ?3.48 | < 0.001 | ?0.44 | [?0.69, ?0.18] | |
Disgust | 0.02 (0.10) | 63 | 1.47 | 0.147 | 0.18 | [?0.06, 0.43] | ||
Western | Posed | Anger | 0.03 (0.10) | 61 | 2.55 | 0.013 | 0.32 | [0.07, 0.58] |
Disgust | 0.14 (0.11) | 61 | 9.86 | < 0.001 | 1.25 | [0.92, 1.58] | ||
Spontaneous | Anger | 0.10 (0.10) | 63 | 7.84 | < 0.001 | 0.98 | [0.68, 1.28] | |
Disgust | 0.04 (0.09) | 63 | 3.43 | 0.001 | 0.43 | [0.17, 0.68] |
Table 1 The Means, Standard Deviations, and Results of One-Sample T-Tests for the Ingroup Advantage under Each Condition in Experiment 1
Perceiver Culture | Spontaneity | Emotion | Ingroup Advantage | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Posed | Anger | 0.09 (0.11) | 61 | 6.50 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.53, 1.11] |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.10) | 61 | 4.38 | < 0.001 | 0.56 | [0.29, 0.82] | ||
Spontaneous | Anger | -0.05 (0.11) | 63 | ?3.48 | < 0.001 | ?0.44 | [?0.69, ?0.18] | |
Disgust | 0.02 (0.10) | 63 | 1.47 | 0.147 | 0.18 | [?0.06, 0.43] | ||
Western | Posed | Anger | 0.03 (0.10) | 61 | 2.55 | 0.013 | 0.32 | [0.07, 0.58] |
Disgust | 0.14 (0.11) | 61 | 9.86 | < 0.001 | 1.25 | [0.92, 1.58] | ||
Spontaneous | Anger | 0.10 (0.10) | 63 | 7.84 | < 0.001 | 0.98 | [0.68, 1.28] | |
Disgust | 0.04 (0.09) | 63 | 3.43 | 0.001 | 0.43 | [0.17, 0.68] |
Effect | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 248 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 31.34 | < 0.001 | 0.11 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 27.19 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 4.02 | 0.046 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.21 | 0.648 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 13.09 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 57.08 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Table 2 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Spontaneity (Eastern, Western) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on the Ingroup Advantage in Experiment 1
Effect | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 248 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 31.34 | < 0.001 | 0.11 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 27.19 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 4.02 | 0.046 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.21 | 0.648 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 13.09 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 57.08 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Figure 2. The Ingroup Advantage across Emotion, Spontaneity, and Perceiver Culture in Experiment 1 Note. All error bars stand for the standard error; * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
Perceiver Culture | Presentation Mode | Emotion | Ingroup Advantage | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Static | Anger | 0.06 (0.11) | 81 | 4.96 | < 0.001 | 0.55 | [0.31, 0.78] |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.12) | 81 | 4.88 | < 0.001 | 0.54 | [0.31, 0.77] | ||
Dynamic | Anger | 0.09 (0.11) | 61 | 6.50 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.53, 1.11] | |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.10) | 61 | 4.38 | < 0.001 | 0.56 | [0.29, 0.82] | ||
Western | Static | Anger | 0.10 (0.12) | 74 | 7.20 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.57, 1.09] |
Disgust | 0.16 (0.13) | 74 | 10.55 | < 0.001 | 1.22 | [0.92, 1.52] | ||
Dynamic | Anger | 0.03 (0.10) | 61 | 2.55 | 0.013 | 0.32 | [0.07, 0.58] | |
Disgust | 0.14 (0.11) | 61 | 9.86 | < 0.001 | 1.25 | [0.92, 1.58] |
Table 3 The Means, Standard Deviations, and Results of One-Sample T-Tests for the Ingroup Advantage under Each Condition in Experiment 2
Perceiver Culture | Presentation Mode | Emotion | Ingroup Advantage | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Static | Anger | 0.06 (0.11) | 81 | 4.96 | < 0.001 | 0.55 | [0.31, 0.78] |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.12) | 81 | 4.88 | < 0.001 | 0.54 | [0.31, 0.77] | ||
Dynamic | Anger | 0.09 (0.11) | 61 | 6.50 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.53, 1.11] | |
Disgust | 0.06 (0.10) | 61 | 4.38 | < 0.001 | 0.56 | [0.29, 0.82] | ||
Western | Static | Anger | 0.10 (0.12) | 74 | 7.20 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | [0.57, 1.09] |
Disgust | 0.16 (0.13) | 74 | 10.55 | < 0.001 | 1.22 | [0.92, 1.52] | ||
Dynamic | Anger | 0.03 (0.10) | 61 | 2.55 | 0.013 | 0.32 | [0.07, 0.58] | |
Disgust | 0.14 (0.11) | 61 | 9.86 | < 0.001 | 1.25 | [0.92, 1.58] |
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 277 | 13.25 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 2.52 | 0.113 | 0.01 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 18.87 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 0.29 | 0.589 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 26.52 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 7.44 | 0.007 | 0.03 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 4.81 | 0.029 | 0.02 |
Table 4 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Presentation Mode (Static, Dynamic) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on the Ingroup Advantage in Experiment 2
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 277 | 13.25 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 2.52 | 0.113 | 0.01 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 18.87 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 0.29 | 0.589 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 26.52 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 7.44 | 0.007 | 0.03 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 4.81 | 0.029 | 0.02 |
Figure 3. The Ingroup Advantage Across Emotion, Presentation Mode, and Perceiver Culture in Experiment 2 Note. All error bars stand for the standard error; * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
Perceiver Culture | Spontaneity | Emotion | Expresser Culture | Recognition Accuracy | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Posed | Anger | Eastern | 0.42(0.14) | 61 | 12.24 | < 0.001 | 1.55 | [1.18, 1.92] |
Western | 0.33(0.14) | 61 | 7.61 | < 0.001 | 0.97 | [0.66, 1.27] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.16) | 61 | 12.89 | < 0.001 | 1.64 | [1.25, 2.02] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.15) | 61 | 10.40 | < 0.001 | 1.32 | [0.98, 1.66] | |||
Spontaneous | Anger | Eastern | 0.24(0.11) | 63 | 2.71 | 0.004 | 0.34 | [0.09, 0.59] | |
Western | 0.29(0.14) | 63 | 4.93 | < 0.001 | 0.62 | [0.35, 0.88] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.31(0.14) | 63 | 6.13 | < 0.001 | 0.77 | [0.49, 1.04] | ||
Western | 0.29(0.13) | 63 | 5.54 | < 0.001 | 0.69 | [0.42, 0.96] | |||
Western | Posed | Anger | Eastern | 0.49(0.14) | 61 | 16.22 | < 0.001 | 2.06 | [1.62, 2.50] |
Western | 0.52(0.15) | 61 | 16.31 | < 0.001 | 2.07 | [1.63, 2.51] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.47(0.14) | 61 | 15.77 | < 0.001 | 2.00 | [1.57, 2.43] | ||
Western | 0.62(0.16) | 61 | 20.60 | < 0.001 | 2.62 | [2.09, 3.14] | |||
Spontaneous | Anger | Eastern | 0.21(0.10) | 63 | 0.83 | 0.206 | 0.10 | [?0.14, 0.35] | |
Western | 0.31(0.11) | 63 | 8.11 | < 0.001 | 1.01 | [0.91, 1.31] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.24(0.14) | 63 | 2.44 | 0.009 | 0.30 | [0.05, 0.55] | ||
Western | 0.28(0.13) | 63 | 4.88 | < 0.001 | 0.61 | [0.34, 0.88] |
Table S1 The Means, Standard Deviations, and Results of One-Sample T-Tests for Recognition Accuracy under Each Condition in Experiment 1
Perceiver Culture | Spontaneity | Emotion | Expresser Culture | Recognition Accuracy | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Posed | Anger | Eastern | 0.42(0.14) | 61 | 12.24 | < 0.001 | 1.55 | [1.18, 1.92] |
Western | 0.33(0.14) | 61 | 7.61 | < 0.001 | 0.97 | [0.66, 1.27] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.16) | 61 | 12.89 | < 0.001 | 1.64 | [1.25, 2.02] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.15) | 61 | 10.40 | < 0.001 | 1.32 | [0.98, 1.66] | |||
Spontaneous | Anger | Eastern | 0.24(0.11) | 63 | 2.71 | 0.004 | 0.34 | [0.09, 0.59] | |
Western | 0.29(0.14) | 63 | 4.93 | < 0.001 | 0.62 | [0.35, 0.88] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.31(0.14) | 63 | 6.13 | < 0.001 | 0.77 | [0.49, 1.04] | ||
Western | 0.29(0.13) | 63 | 5.54 | < 0.001 | 0.69 | [0.42, 0.96] | |||
Western | Posed | Anger | Eastern | 0.49(0.14) | 61 | 16.22 | < 0.001 | 2.06 | [1.62, 2.50] |
Western | 0.52(0.15) | 61 | 16.31 | < 0.001 | 2.07 | [1.63, 2.51] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.47(0.14) | 61 | 15.77 | < 0.001 | 2.00 | [1.57, 2.43] | ||
Western | 0.62(0.16) | 61 | 20.60 | < 0.001 | 2.62 | [2.09, 3.14] | |||
Spontaneous | Anger | Eastern | 0.21(0.10) | 63 | 0.83 | 0.206 | 0.10 | [?0.14, 0.35] | |
Western | 0.31(0.11) | 63 | 8.11 | < 0.001 | 1.01 | [0.91, 1.31] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.24(0.14) | 63 | 2.44 | 0.009 | 0.30 | [0.05, 0.55] | ||
Western | 0.28(0.13) | 63 | 4.88 | < 0.001 | 0.61 | [0.34, 0.88] |
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 248 | 8.87 | 0.003 | 0.04 |
Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 295.42 | < 0.001 | 0.54 |
Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 27.18 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 21.08 | < 0.001 | 0.08 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 2.00 | 0.159 | 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 0.21 | 0.648 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.78 | 0.378 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 13.09 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 39.79 | < 0.001 | 0.14 |
Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 125.08 | < 0.001 | 0.34 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 57.08 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.27 | 0.607 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 31.34 | < 0.001 | 0.11 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 4.02 | 0.046 | 0.02 |
Table S2 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Spontaneity (Eastern, Western) × Expresser Culture (Eastern, Western) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on Recognition Accuracy in Experiment 1
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 248 | 8.87 | 0.003 | 0.04 |
Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 295.42 | < 0.001 | 0.54 |
Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 27.18 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 21.08 | < 0.001 | 0.08 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 248 | 2.00 | 0.159 | 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 0.21 | 0.648 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.78 | 0.378 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 13.09 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 39.79 | < 0.001 | 0.14 |
Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 125.08 | < 0.001 | 0.34 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Expresser Culture | 1, 248 | 57.08 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 0.27 | 0.607 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 31.34 | < 0.001 | 0.11 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 248 | 4.02 | 0.046 | 0.02 |
Perceiver Culture | Presentation Mode | Emotion | Expresser Culture | Recognition Accuracy | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Static | Anger | Eastern | 0.44(0.15) | 81 | 12.05 | < 0.001 | 1.33 | [1.03, 1.63] |
Western | 0.38(0.14) | 81 | 8.57 | < 0.001 | 0.95 | [0.68, 1.21] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.14) | 81 | 14.13 | < 0.001 | 1.56 | [1.24, 1.88] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.17) | 81 | 8.24 | < 0.001 | 0.91 | [0.65, 1.17] | |||
Dynamic | Anger | Eastern | 0.42(0.14) | 61 | 12.24 | < 0.001 | 1.55 | [1.18, 1.92] | |
Western | 0.33(0.14) | 61 | 7.61 | < 0.001 | 0.97 | [0.66, 1.27] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.16) | 61 | 12.89 | < 0.001 | 1.64 | [1.25, 2.02] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.15) | 61 | 10.40 | < 0.001 | 1.32 | [0.98, 1.66] | |||
Western | Static | Anger | Eastern | 0.50(0.11) | 74 | 19.07 | < 0.001 | 2.20 | [1.78, 2.62] |
Western | 0.60(0.13) | 74 | 22.94 | < 0.001 | 2.65 | [2.16, 3.13] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.44(0.14) | 74 | 11.61 | < 0.001 | 1.34 | [1.03, 1.65] | ||
Western | 0.59(0.15) | 74 | 20.23 | < 0.001 | 2.34 | [1.90, 2.77] | |||
Dynamic | Anger | Eastern | 0.49(0.14) | 61 | 16.22 | < 0.001 | 2.06 | [1.62, 2.50] | |
Western | 0.52(0.15) | 61 | 16.31 | < 0.001 | 2.07 | [1.63, 2.51] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.47(0.14) | 61 | 15.77 | < 0.001 | 2.00 | [1.57, 2.43] | ||
Western | 0.62(0.16) | 61 | 20.60 | < 0.001 | 2.62 | [2.09, 3.14] |
Table S3 The Means, Standard Deviations, and Results of One-Sample T-Tests for Recognition Accuracy under Each Condition in Experiment 2
Perceiver Culture | Presentation Mode | Emotion | Expresser Culture | Recognition Accuracy | df | t | p | Cohen’s d | 95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern | Static | Anger | Eastern | 0.44(0.15) | 81 | 12.05 | < 0.001 | 1.33 | [1.03, 1.63] |
Western | 0.38(0.14) | 81 | 8.57 | < 0.001 | 0.95 | [0.68, 1.21] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.14) | 81 | 14.13 | < 0.001 | 1.56 | [1.24, 1.88] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.17) | 81 | 8.24 | < 0.001 | 0.91 | [0.65, 1.17] | |||
Dynamic | Anger | Eastern | 0.42(0.14) | 61 | 12.24 | < 0.001 | 1.55 | [1.18, 1.92] | |
Western | 0.33(0.14) | 61 | 7.61 | < 0.001 | 0.97 | [0.66, 1.27] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.46(0.16) | 61 | 12.89 | < 0.001 | 1.64 | [1.25, 2.02] | ||
Western | 0.40(0.15) | 61 | 10.40 | < 0.001 | 1.32 | [0.98, 1.66] | |||
Western | Static | Anger | Eastern | 0.50(0.11) | 74 | 19.07 | < 0.001 | 2.20 | [1.78, 2.62] |
Western | 0.60(0.13) | 74 | 22.94 | < 0.001 | 2.65 | [2.16, 3.13] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.44(0.14) | 74 | 11.61 | < 0.001 | 1.34 | [1.03, 1.65] | ||
Western | 0.59(0.15) | 74 | 20.23 | < 0.001 | 2.34 | [1.90, 2.77] | |||
Dynamic | Anger | Eastern | 0.49(0.14) | 61 | 16.22 | < 0.001 | 2.06 | [1.62, 2.50] | |
Western | 0.52(0.15) | 61 | 16.31 | < 0.001 | 2.07 | [1.63, 2.51] | |||
Disgust | Eastern | 0.47(0.14) | 61 | 15.77 | < 0.001 | 2.00 | [1.57, 2.43] | ||
Western | 0.62(0.16) | 61 | 20.60 | < 0.001 | 2.62 | [2.09, 3.14] |
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 277 | 3.77 | 0.053 | 0.01 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 2.35 | 0.126 | 0.01 |
Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 18.87 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 99.74 | < 0.001 | 0.27 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 6.75 | 0.010 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 26.52 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 1.99 | 0.159 | 0.01 |
Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 7.44 | 0.007 | 0.03 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 0.17 | 0.684 | < 0.01 |
Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 345.35 | < 0.001 | 0.56 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 4.81 | 0.029 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 1.06 | 0.304 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 13.25 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 2.52 | 0.113 | 0.01 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 0.29 | 0.589 | < 0.01 |
Table S4 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Presentation Mode (Static, Dynamic) × Expresser Culture (Eastern, Western) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on Recognition Accuracy in Experiment 2
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 277 | 3.77 | 0.053 | 0.01 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 2.35 | 0.126 | 0.01 |
Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 18.87 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 99.74 | < 0.001 | 0.27 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 277 | 6.75 | 0.010 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 26.52 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 1.99 | 0.159 | 0.01 |
Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 7.44 | 0.007 | 0.03 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 0.17 | 0.684 | < 0.01 |
Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 345.35 | < 0.001 | 0.56 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture | 1, 277 | 4.81 | 0.029 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 1.06 | 0.304 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 13.25 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 2.52 | 0.113 | 0.01 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Expresser Culture × Perceiver Culture | 1, 277 | 0.29 | 0.589 | < 0.01 |
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 245 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity | 1, 245 | 33.17 | < 0.001 | 0.12 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 27.47 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 245 | 4.05 | 0.045 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 0.30 | 0.583 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 12.62 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 57.51 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Table S5 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Spontaneity (Posed, Spontaneous) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on Ingroup Advantage after Excluding Participants in Experiment 1
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 245 | 6.54 | 0.011 | 0.03 |
Spontaneity | 1, 245 | 33.17 | < 0.001 | 0.12 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 27.47 | < 0.001 | 0.10 |
Emotion × Spontaneity | 1, 245 | 4.05 | 0.045 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 0.30 | 0.583 | < 0.01 |
Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 12.62 | < 0.001 | 0.05 |
Emotion × Spontaneity × Perceiver Culture | 1, 245 | 57.51 | < 0.001 | 0.19 |
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 273 | 12.69 | < 0.001 | 0.04 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 273 | 1.75 | 0.187 | 0.01 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 18.48 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 273 | 0.38 | 0.539 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 26.23 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 6.72 | 0.010 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 5.36 | 0.021 | 0.02 |
Table S6 Emotion (Anger, Disgust) × Presentation Mode (Static, Dynamic) × Perceiver Culture (Eastern, Western) Mixed-Design ANOVA on Ingroup Advantage after Excluding Participants in Experiment 2
Effects | df | F | p | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Emotion | 1, 273 | 12.69 | < 0.001 | 0.04 |
Presentation Mode | 1, 273 | 1.75 | 0.187 | 0.01 |
Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 18.48 | < 0.001 | 0.06 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode | 1, 273 | 0.38 | 0.539 | < 0.01 |
Emotion × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 26.23 | < 0.001 | 0.09 |
Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 6.72 | 0.010 | 0.02 |
Emotion × Presentation Mode × Perceiver Culture | 1, 273 | 5.36 | 0.021 | 0.02 |
[1] |
Ambadar, Z., Schooler, J. W., & Cohn, J. F. (2005). Deciphering the enigmatic face: The importance of facial dynamics in interpreting subtle facial expressions. Psychological Science, 16(5), 403-410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01548.x
doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01548.x URL pmid: 15869701 |
[2] | Bain, A. (2006). The emotions and the will. New York, NY: Cosmo Classics. (Original work published 1859) |
[3] |
Blais, C., Fiset, D., Roy, C., Saumure Régimbald, C., & Gosselin, F. (2017). Eye fixation patterns for categorizing static and dynamic facial expressions. Emotion, 17(7), 1107-1119. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000283
doi: 10.1037/emo0000283 URL pmid: 28368152 |
[4] |
Bould, E., & Morris, N. (2008). Role of motion signals in recognizing subtle facial expressions of emotion. British Journal of Psychology, 99(2), 167-189. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712607X206702
doi: 10.1348/000712607X206702 URL |
[5] |
Cordaro, D. T., 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. https://doi. org/10.1037/emo0000302
doi: 10.1037/emo0000302 pmid: 28604039 |
[6] | Cunningham, D. W., & Wallraven, C. (2009). Dynamic information for the recognition of conversational expressions. Journal of Vision, 9(13), 7-7. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.13.7 |
[7] |
Dawel, A., Miller, E. J., Horsburgh, A., & Ford, P. (2022). A systematic survey of face stimuli used in psychological research 2000-2020. Behavior Research Methods, 54(4), 1889-1901. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01705-3
doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01705-3 URL |
[8] | Ekman, P. (1971). Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 19, 207-283. |
[9] |
Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3-4), 169-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068
doi: 10.1080/02699939208411068 URL |
[10] | Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Hager, J. C. (2002). The facial action coding system: A technique for the measurement of facial movement. San Francisco, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. |
[11] |
Ekman, P., Sorenson, E. R., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). Pan-cultural elements in facial displays of emotion. Science, 164(3875), 86-88. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.164.3875.86
doi: 10.1126/science.164.3875.86 URL pmid: 5773719 |
[12] |
Elfenbein, H. A. (2013). Nonverbal dialects and accents in facial expressions of emotion. Emotion Review, 5(1), 90-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912451332
doi: 10.1177/1754073912451332 URL |
[13] |
Elfenbein, H. A., & Ambady, N. (2002). On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(2), 203-235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.203
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.203 URL pmid: 11931516 |
[14] |
Elfenbein, H. A., Beaupré, M., Lévesque, M., & Hess, U. (2007). Toward a dialect theory: Cultural differences in the expression and recognition of posed facial expressions. Emotion, 7(1), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.131
doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.131 URL pmid: 17352569 |
[15] |
Fang, X., Rychlowska, M., & Lange, J. (2022). Cross-cultural and inter-group research on emotion perception. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 6(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-022-00102-2
doi: 10.1007/s41809-022-00102-2 URL |
[16] |
Fang, X., Sauter, D. A., Heerdink, M. W., & van Kleef, G. A. (2022). Culture shapes the distinctiveness of posed and spontaneous facial expressions of anger and disgust. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 53(5), 471-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221221095208
doi: 10.1177/00220221221095208 URL |
[17] |
Fang, X., Sauter, D. A., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2018). Seeing mixed emotions: The specificity of emotion perception from static and dynamic facial expressions across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(1), 130-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117736270
doi: 10.1177/0022022117736270 URL pmid: 29386689 |
[18] |
Fang, X., van Kleef, G. A., Kawakami, K., & Sauter, D. A. (2021). Cultural differences in perceiving transitions in emotional facial expressions: Easterners show greater contrast effects than Westerners. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 95, 104143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104143
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104143 URL |
[19] |
Fang, X., van Kleef, G. A., & Sauter, D. A. (2019). Revisiting cultural differences in emotion perception between easterners and westerners: Chinese perceivers are accurate, but see additional non- intended emotions in negative facial expressions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 82, 152-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.02.003
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.02.003 URL |
[20] |
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
doi: 10.3758/bf03193146 URL pmid: 17695343 |
[21] | Fiorentini, C., & Viviani, P. (2011). Is there a dynamic advantage for facial expressions? Journal of Vision, 11(3), 17. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.3.17 |
[22] | Giner-Sorolla, R., Kupfer, T., & Sabo, J. (2018). Chapter Five - What makes moral disgust special? An integrative functional review. In J. M. Olson (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 57, pp. 223-289). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.10.001 |
[23] | Gold, J. M., Barker, J. D., Barr, S., Bittner, J. L., Bromfield, W. D., Chu, N., Goode, R. A., Lee, D., Simmons, M., & Srinath, A. (2013). The efficiency of dynamic and static facial expression recognition. Journal of Vision, 13(5), 23-23. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.5.23 |
[24] |
Gross, J. J., & Levenson, R. W. (1995). Emotion elicitation using films. Cognition and Emotion, 9(1), 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269 9939508408966
doi: 10.1080/02699939508408966 URL |
[25] |
Hess, U., Kafetsios, K., Mauersberger, H., Blaison, C., & Kessler, C.-L. (2016). Signal and noise in the perception of facial emotion expressions: From labs to life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(8), 1092-1110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216651851
doi: 10.1177/0146167216651851 URL pmid: 27277281 |
[26] |
Hoffmann, H., Traue, H. C., Bachmayr, F., & Kessler, H. (2010). Perceived realism of dynamic facial expressions of emotion: Optimal durations for the presentation of emotional onsets and offsets. Cognition and Emotion, 24(8), 1369-1376. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930903417855
doi: 10.1080/02699930903417855 URL |
[27] |
Izard, C. E. (2007). Basic emotions, natural kinds, emotion schemas, and a new paradigm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(3), 260-280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00044.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00144.x URL |
[28] |
Jack, R. E., Blais, C., Scheepers, C., Schyns, P. G., & Caldara, R. (2009). Cultural confusions show that facial expressions are not universal. Current Biology, 19(18), 1543-1548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.051
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.051 URL pmid: 19682907 |
[29] |
Jack, R. E., Garrod, O. G. B., & Schyns, P. G. (2014). Dynamic facial expressions of emotion transmit an evolving hierarchy of signals over time. Current Biology, 24(2), 187-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.064
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.064 URL pmid: 24388852 |
[30] |
Jiang, Z., Li, W., Recio, G., Liu, Y., Luo, W., Zhang, D., & Sun, D. (2014). Time pressure inhibits dynamic advantage in the classification of facial expressions of emotion. PLOS ONE, 9(6), e100162. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100162
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100162 URL |
[31] |
Kang, S.-M., & Lau, A. S. (2013). Revisiting the out-group advantage in emotion recognition in a multicultural society: Further evidence for the in-group advantage. Emotion, 13(2), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030013
doi: 10.1037/a0030013 URL |
[32] |
Kätsyri, J., Saalasti, S., Tiippana, K., von Wendt, L., & Sams, M. (2008). Impaired recognition of facial emotions from low-spatial frequencies in Asperger syndrome. Neuropsychologia, 46(7), 1888-1897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.01.005
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.01.005 URL pmid: 18314147 |
[33] |
Kayyal, M. H., & Russell, J. A. (2013). Americans and Palestinians judge spontaneous facial expressions of emotion. Emotion, 13(5), 891-904. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033244
doi: 10.1037/a0033244 URL pmid: 23795587 |
[34] |
Krumhuber, E. G., Küster, D., Namba, S., & Skora, L. (2021). Human and machine validation of 14 databases of dynamic facial expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 53(2), 686-701. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01443-y
doi: 10.3758/s13428-020-01443-y URL |
[35] |
Krumhuber, E. G., Skora, L. I., Hill, H. C. H., & Lander, K. (2023). The role of facial movements in emotion recognition. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(5), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00172-1
doi: 10.1038/s44159-023-00172-1 URL |
[36] |
Krumhuber, E. G., Skora, L., Küster, D., & Fou, L. (2017). A review of dynamic datasets for facial expression research. Emotion Review, 9(3), 280-292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916670022
doi: 10.1177/1754073916670022 URL |
[37] | Matsumoto, D., & Ekman, P. (1988). Japanese and Caucasian facial expressions of emotion and neutral faces (JACFEE and JACNeuF) [Slides]: San Francisco, CA: Intercultural and Emotion Research Laboratory, Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University. |
[38] |
Matsumoto, D., & Ekman, P. (2004). The relationship among expressions, labels, and descriptions of contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(4), 529-540. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.529
URL pmid: 15491276 |
[39] |
Matsumoto, D., Olide, A., Schug, J., Willingham, B., & Callan, M. (2009). Cross-cultural judgments of spontaneous facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33(4), 213-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-009-0071-4
doi: 10.1007/s10919-009-0071-4 URL |
[40] |
Matsumoto, D., Olide, A., & Willingham, B. (2009). Is there an ingroup advantage in recognizing spontaneously expressed emotions? Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33(3), 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-009-0068-z
doi: 10.1007/s10919-009-0068-z URL |
[41] |
Matsumoto, D., & Willingham, B. (2009). Spontaneous facial expressions of emotion of congenitally and noncongenitally blind individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014037
doi: 10.1037/a0014037 URL pmid: 19210060 |
[42] |
Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S. H., & Fontaine, J. (2008). Mapping expressive differences around the world: The relationship between emotional display rules and individualism versus collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(1), 55-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0022022107311854
doi: 10.1177/0022022107311854 URL |
[43] | Namba, S., Kagamihara, T., Miyatani, M., & Nakao, T. (2017). Spontaneous facial expressions reveal new action units for the sad experiences. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 41(3), 203-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-017-0251-6 |
[44] |
Namba, S., Makihara, S., Kabir, R. S., Miyatani, M., & Nakao, T. (2017). Spontaneous facial expressions are different from posed facial expressions: Morphological properties and dynamic sequences. Current Psychology, 36(3), 593-605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9448-9
doi: 10.1007/s12144-016-9448-9 URL |
[45] |
Niedenthal, P. M., Rychlowska, M., Wood, A., & Zhao, F. (2018). Heterogeneity of long-history migration predicts smiling, laughter and positive emotion across the globe and within the United States. PLOS ONE, 13(8), e0197651. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197651
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197651 URL |
[46] |
Oatley, K., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1(1), 29-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699938708408362
doi: 10.1080/02699938708408362 URL |
[47] |
Ortony, A. (2022). Are all “basic emotions” emotions? A problem for the (basic) emotions construct. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(1), 41-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620985415
doi: 10.1177/1745691620985415 URL |
[48] |
Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195-203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y URL pmid: 30734206 |
[49] |
Pochedly, J. T., Widen, S. C., & Russell, J. A. (2012). What emotion does the “facial expression of disgust” express? Emotion, 12(6), 1315-1319. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027998
doi: 10.1037/a0027998 URL pmid: 22506499 |
[50] | Rinn, W. E. (1991). Neuropsychology of facial expression. In R. S. Feldman & B. Rimé (Eds.), Fundamentals of nonverbal behavior (pp. 3-30). Cambridge University Press. |
[51] | Rychlowska, M., Miyamoto, Y., Matsumoto, D., Hess, U., Gilboa-Schechtman, E., Kamble, S., Muluk, H., Masuda, T., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2015). Heterogeneity of long-history migration explains cultural differences in reports of emotional expressivity and the functions of smiles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(19), E2429-E2436. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1413661112 |
[52] |
Sato, W., Fujimura, T., & Suzuki, N. (2008). Enhanced facial EMG activity in response to dynamic facial expressions. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 70(1), 70-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.06.001
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.06.001 URL pmid: 18598725 |
[53] |
Scherer, K. R., Clark-Polner, E., & Mortillaro, M. (2011). In the eye of the beholder? Universality and cultural specificity in the expression and perception of emotion. International Journal of Psychology, 46(6), 401-435. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.626049
doi: 10.1080/00207594.2011.626049 URL pmid: 22126090 |
[54] |
Siedlecka, E., & Denson, T. F. (2019). Experimental methods for inducing basic emotions: A qualitative review. Emotion Review, 11(1), 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073917749016
doi: 10.1177/1754073917749016 URL |
[55] | Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2013, January). Life after p-hacking. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA, 17-19. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2205186 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2205186 |
[56] |
Tcherkassof, A., Bollon, T., Dubois, M., Pansu, P., & Adam, J.-M. (2007). Facial expressions of emotions: A methodological contribution to the study of spontaneous and dynamic emotional faces. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(6), 1325-1345. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.427
doi: 10.1002/ejsp.v37:6 URL |
[57] |
Tsai, J. L., & Chentsova-Dutton, U. (2003). Variation among European Americans in emotional facial expression. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(6), 650-657. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022103256846
doi: 10.1177/0022022103256846 URL |
[58] |
Valente, D., Theurel, A., & Gentaz, E. (2018). The role of visual experience in the production of emotional facial expressions by blind people: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(2), 483-497. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1338-0
doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1338-0 URL |
[59] |
Van Kleef, G. A., & Côté, S. (2022). The social effects of emotions. Annual Review of Psychology, 73(1), 629-658. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-010855
doi: 10.1146/psych.2022.73.issue-1 URL |
[60] |
Wehrle, T., Kaiser, S., Schmidt, S., & Scherer, K. R. (2000). Studying the dynamics of emotional expression using synthesized facial muscle movements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.105
URL pmid: 10653509 |
[61] |
Widen, S. C., Christy, A. M., Hewett, K., & Russell, J. A. (2011). Do proposed facial expressions of contempt, shame, embarrassment, and compassion communicate the predicted emotion? Cognition and Emotion, 25(5), 898-906. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2010.508270
doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.508270 URL |
[62] |
Wood, A., Rychlowska, M., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2016). Heterogeneity of long-history migration predicts emotion recognition accuracy. Emotion, 16(4), 413-420. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000137
doi: 10.1037/emo0000137 URL pmid: 27045686 |
[63] |
Yitzhak, N., Gilaie-Dotan, S., & Aviezer, H. (2018). The contribution of facial dynamics to subtle expression recognition in typical viewers and developmental visual agnosia. Neuropsychologia, 117, 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.04.035
doi: S0028-3932(18)30185-4 URL pmid: 29723598 |
[64] |
Zhang, Q., Yin, T. Z., & Ran, G. M. (2015). Psychological and neural mechanisms for the superiority effect of dynamic facial expressions. Advances in Psychological Science, 23(9), 1514-1522.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.01514 |
[65] | Zhang, Q. Y., Chen, J. W., Yu, Q. L., & Xin, P. (2011). An in-group advantage in recognizing emotion. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(2), 209-216. |
[66] | Zhang, X., Yin, L., Cohn, J. F., Canavan, S., Reale, M., Horowitz, A., Liu, P., & Girard, J. M. (2014). BP4D-Spontaneous: A high-resolution spontaneous 3D dynamic facial expression database. Image and Vision Computing, 32(10), 692-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2014.06.002 |
[1] | BAI Lu, MAO Weibin, WANG Rui, Zhang Wenhai. The effect of emotional scene and body expression on facial expression recognition [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(9): 1172-1183. |
[2] | Wang-,Fu-Xiaolan. Effect of Discriminability on Interference Between Facial Expression and Facial Identity Recognition [J]. , 2007, 39(02): 191-200. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||