Emotional facial expressions provide critical information for social interactions. Above all, angry faces are assumed to reflect potential social threat. We investigated event-related potentials (ERPs) triggered by natural and artificial faces expressing fear, anger, happiness or no emotion in participants with low and high levels of social anxiety. Overall, artificial faces elicited stronger P100 and N170 responses than natural faces. Additionally, the N170 component was larger for emotional compared to neutral facial expressions. Social anxiety was associated with an enhanced emotional modulation of the early posterior negativity (EPN) in response to fearful and angry facial expressions. Additionally, while the late positive potential (LPP) was larger for emotional than for neutral faces in low socially anxious participants, LPPs of higher socially anxious participants did not differ. LPPs might therefore be enhanced in higher socially anxious participants for both emotional and neutral faces. Furthermore, the modulations of the EPN and LPP were comparable between natural and artificial faces. These results indicate that social anxiety influences early perceptual processing of faces and that artificial faces are suitable for psychophysiological emotion research.

The current experiment explored the influence of attitudes on facial reactions to emotional faces. The participants’ attitudes (positive, neutral, and negative) towards three types of characters were manipulated by written reports. Afterwards participants saw happy, neutral, and sad facial expressions of the respective characters while their facial muscular reactions (M. Corrugator supercilii and M. Zygomaticus major) were recorded electromyografically. Results revealed facial mimicry reactions to happy and sad faces of positive characters, but less and even incongruent facial muscular reactions to happy and sad faces of negative characters. Overall, the results show that attitudes, formed in a few minutes, and only by reports and not by own experiences, can moderate automatic non-verbal social behavior, i.e. facial mimicry

Facial muscular reactions to avatars' static (neutral, happy, angry) and dynamic (morphs developing from neutral to happy or angry) facial expressions, presented for 1 s each, were investigated in 48 participants. Dynamic expressions led to better recognition rates and higher intensity and realism ratings. Angry expressions were rated as more intense than happy expressions. EMG recordings indicated emotion-specific reactions to happy avatars as reflected in increased M. zygomaticus major and decreased M. corrugator supercilii tension, with stronger reactions to dynamic as compared to static expressions. Although rated as more intense, angry expressions elicited no significant M. corrugator supercilii activation. We conclude that facial reactions to angry and to happy facial expressions hold different functions in social interactions. Further research should vary dynamics in different ways and also include additional emotional expressions.

The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning.

In interpersonal encounters, individuals often exhibit changes in their own facial expressions in response to emotional expressions of another person. Such changes are often called facial mimicry. While this tendency first appeared to be an automatic tendency of the perceiver to show the same emotional expression as the sender, evidence is now accumulating that situation, person, and relationship jointly determine whether and for which emotions such congruent facial behavior is shown. We review the evidence regarding the moderating influence of such factors on facial mimicry with a focus on understanding the meaning of facial responses to emotional expressions in a particular constellation. From this, we derive recommendations for a research agenda with a stronger focus on the most common forms of encounters, actual interactions with known others, and on assessing potential mediators of facial mimicry. We conclude that facial mimicry is modulated by many factors: attention deployment and sensitivity, detection of valence, emotional feelings, and social motivations. We posit that these are the more proximal causes of changes in facial mimicry due to changes in its social setting.