The effects of facial‐head cue combinations on interpersonal evaluations

Woodall, W. Gill; Burgoon, Judee K.; Markel, Norman N.

doi:10.1080/01463378009369374

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, facial blushing along with a head slightly downward movement usually indicates people concern about other opinions, feel sorry about their misdeed, and apologize in this non-verbal way [ 39 ]. A similar observation might also be seen in head nodding, which substantiates the reward power of facial cues in social interactions [ 70 ]. Accordingly, people with such embarrassment responses would like to be evaluated more positively and considered as more trustworthy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…On the other hand, an inverted U-shaped mouth with the lower lip and lower eyebrow is often associated with sadness and anger [ 37 , 47 , 51 , 57 ]. Indeed, emotion and perceived trustworthiness interact with each other: while the happy face is considered more trustworthy, the trustworthy face is also believed to be happier [ 48 , 60 , 70 ]. Since the judgment of trustworthiness is often associated with happiness [ 33 ], mouth movement then seems to be a salient signal of social perception [ 37 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trust in AI Agent: A Systematic Review of Facial Anthropomorphic Trustworthiness for Social Robot Design

Song

Luximon

2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an emerging artificial intelligence system, social robot could socially communicate and interact with human beings. Although this area is attracting more and more attention, limited research has tried to systematically summarize potential features that could improve facial anthropomorphic trustworthiness for social robot. Based on the literature from human facial perception, product, and robot face evaluation, this paper systematically reviews, evaluates, and summarizes static facial features, dynamic features, their combinations, and related emotional expressions, shedding light on further exploration of facial anthropomorphic trustworthiness for social robot design.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in AI Agent: A Systematic Review of Facial Anthropomorphic Trustworthiness for Social Robot Design

Song

Luximon

2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, participants are more likely to make situational attributions and observers are more likely to make dispositional attributions for the same behavior (Fiske & Taylor, 1991;Sypher & Sypher, 1984). This has been demonstrated specifically regarding nonverbal behaviors (Sillars, 1980;Woodall, Burgoon, & Markel, 1980).…”

Section: Rq1: What Is the Relationship Between An Individual's Verbal And Nonverbal Control Attempts And Others' Perceptions Of Dominancementioning

confidence: 87%

Perceptions of power and interactional dominance in interpersonal relationships

Dunbar

Burgoon

2005

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Self Cite

223

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This investigation uses dyadic power theory (Dunbar, 2000, 2004; Rollins & Bahr, 1976) to examine the relationship between dominance and power and the behavioral manifestations of power in close relationships. Ninety-seven couples (58 married, 39 cohabiting) completed a problem-solving task together while being videotaped. The videotapes were coded for a variety of verbal and nonverbal dominant control attempts including dysfluencies, interruptions, frequency of adaptor and illustrator gestures, vocal characteristics, and general perceptions of dominance. The results revealed that individuals’ perceptions of power led to more dominant communication behavior during discussions with their partner. Comparisons between the perceptions of participants and observers and the implications for future research are also discussed.

show abstract

“…This method resulted in the identification of 42 behaviors: eye gaze duration and frequency (look to the face/head of the target person; Cappella, 1981), seating distance (measured as the distance between a chair the participant places and a chair in which the confederate is to sit), standing distance (measured via [a] a task in which participants walked toward the target person until they stopped [stop distance] or [b] an unobtrusive measurement of an interaction with a confederate), body lean (torso bend beyond vertical toward the target person), body orientation (degree to which the participant’s body is facing the target person), open posture (positioning the arms and legs away from the body; Mehrabian & Friar, 1969), laughter (a smile accompanied by an acoustically detectable exhaustion of air; Bryant et al, 2016), head cant (a lateral head tilt toward the shoulder axis; Krumhuber et al, 2007), talking (word count/duration of a person’s vocalizations; Cuperman & Ickes, 2009), gesticulation (signaling with the hands and arms when talking; Özyürek, 2002), primp (smoothing clothes with hands; Grammer et al, 1999), hair flip (tipping the head forward followed by throwing hair back; Grammer et al, 1999), head akimbo (arching one’s back and putting one’s hands behind the neck with elbows pointed up and out; Grammer et al, 1999), mimicry (imitating another person’s behavior; Lakin & Chartrand, 2003), and head nod (continuous movement of the head up and down; Woodall, Burgoon, & Markel, 1980).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meta-analytic investigation of the relation between interpersonal attraction and enacted behavior.

Montoya

Kershaw

Prosser

2018

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a meta-analysis that investigated the relation between self-reported interpersonal attraction and enacted behavior. Our synthesis focused on (a) identifying the behaviors related to attraction; (b) evaluating the efficacy of models of the relation between attraction and behavior; (c) testing the impact of several moderators, including evaluative threat salience, cognitive appraisal salience, and the sex composition of the social interaction; and (d) investigating the degree of agreement between the meta-analytic findings and an ethnographic analysis. Using a multilevel modeling approach, an analysis of 309 effect sizes (N = 5,422) revealed a significant association (z = .20) between self-reported attraction and enacted behavior. Key findings include: (a) that the specific behaviors associated with attraction (e.g., eye contact, smiling, laughter, mimicry) are those behaviors research has linked to the development of trust/rapport; (b) direct behaviors (e.g., physical proximity, talking to), compared with indirect behaviors (e.g., eye contact, smiling, mimicry), were more strongly related to self-reported attraction; and (c) evaluative threat salience (e.g., fear of rejection) reduced the magnitude of the relation between direct behavior and affective attraction. Moreover, an ethnographic analysis revealed consistency between the behaviors identified by the meta-analysis and those behaviors identified by ethnographers as predictive of attraction. We discuss the implications of our findings for models of the relation between attraction and behavior, for the behavioral expressions of emotions, and for how attraction is measured and conceptualized. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

The effects of facial‐head cue combinations on interpersonal evaluations

Cited by 11 publications

References 19 publications

Trust in AI Agent: A Systematic Review of Facial Anthropomorphic Trustworthiness for Social Robot Design

Trust in AI Agent: A Systematic Review of Facial Anthropomorphic Trustworthiness for Social Robot Design

Perceptions of power and interactional dominance in interpersonal relationships

A meta-analytic investigation of the relation between interpersonal attraction and enacted behavior.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About