Does Social Exclusion Improve Detection of Real and Fake Smiles? A Replication Study

Abstract

Research on social exclusion suggests an increased attention of excluded persons to subtle social cues. In one study (N = 32), published in Psychological Science, Bernstein et al. (2008) provided evidence for this idea by showing that participants in the social exclusion condition were better in correctly categorizing a target person’s smile as real or fake. Although highly cited, this finding has never been directly replicated. The present study aimed to fill that gap. 201 participants (79.1% female) were randomly assigned to a social exclusion, social inclusion or control condition. Next, participants watched 20 videos of smiling persons and rated whether they show a real or a fake smile. In line with the original study, results showed that participants in the exclusion condition performed better than in the control condition. However, the performance did not differ between the exclusion and inclusion condition—although the pattern was in the predicted direction. In sum, the findings of our study increase rather than decrease confidence in the validity of the investigated idea, but results point to a substantially smaller effect.

Witnessed inclusion improves identification of Duchenne and non‐Duchenne smiles

“…Although our results seem to counter previous studies examining perceptual changes following inclusion and exclusion, their findings are not consistent. While Bernstein et al (2008) found that participants were more accurate in discriminating smiles following exclusion, Schindler and Trede (2021) found no difference in participants’ ability to accurately identify smiles. Our results show yet a different pattern, with higher accuracy following inclusion.…”

“…We studied 6-and 7-year-olds who can distinguish between Duchenne and non-Duchenne smiles (Gosselin et al, 2002), understand and use disingenuous smiles (Kromm et al, 2014), and demonstrate sensitivity to social exclusion (Marinović & Träuble, 2018;Over & Carpenter, 2009;Song et al, 2015;Watson-Jones et al, 2016). We also tested adults because our methodology differs from that of previous adult studies (e.g., use of photos vs. videos of smiles; witnessed vs. direct inclusion/exclusion; Bernstein et al, 2008;Schindler & Trede, 2021), which provided evidence of validity for our methodology and allowed us to compare general patterns between age groups.…”

Mitigating the affective and cognitive consequences of social exclusion: an integrative data analysis of seven social disconnection interventions

“…Yet at the same time, there is mixed evidence on how short-term, momentary vulnerabilities of social disconnection either assist or hinder social processing. For example, some research suggests that after experiencing social exclusion, individuals are better at distinguishing between Duchenne (“real”) and non-Duchenne (“fake”) smiles, and that the experience increases the cone of direct gaze [ 115 , 116 ]. Yet, other research has found that individuals are less likely to categorize faces as “happy” faces and less accurate in perceiving gaze direction after the experience of social exclusion [ 117 , 118 ].…”