The Effects of Fear and Anger Facial Expressions on Approach- and Avoidance-Related Behaviors.

Marsh, Abigail A.; Ambady, Nalini; Kleck, Robert E.

doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.119

Cited by 501 publications

(498 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

430

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding in female expressions contradicts previous findings (Hess et al, 2007), but supports others (Springer et al, 2007;Anokhin and Golosheykin, 2009). Furthermore, our finding corresponds with those of other studies showing that female and male anger expressions induce avoidance behavior in the perceiver (Marsh et al, 2005). We found the same startle potentiation when the participants viewed positive facial expressions.…”

Section: Facessupporting

confidence: 92%

Emotional scenes and facial expressions elicit different psychophysiological responses

Alpers

Adolph

Pauli

2011

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined if emotional faces elicit physiological responses similar to pictures of emotional scenes. Forty one students viewed emotional scenes (negative, neutral, and positive) and emotional faces (angry, neutral, and happy). Heart rate, orbicularis oculi and electrodermal activity were measured continuously, and the startle reflex was elicited. Although the patterns of valence and arousal ratings were comparable, physiological response patterns differed. For scenes we replicated the valence-specific modulation of the startle response, heart rate deceleration, and the arousal-related modulation of the electrodermal response. In contrast, for faces we found valence-specific modulation only for the electrodermal response, but the startle and heart rate deceleration were modulated by arousal. Although arousal differences may account for some differences in physiological responding this shows that not all emotional material that is decoded similarly leads to the same psychophysiological output.

show abstract

Section: Facessupporting

confidence: 92%

Emotional scenes and facial expressions elicit different psychophysiological responses

Alpers

Adolph

Pauli

2011

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different emotional states are expressed by distinct profiles of vocal acoustic features (Banse & Scherer, 1996). The correct interpretation of these combined acoustic profiles and discriminative voice features is critical for the correct identification and discrimination of the affective value of the vocalization, which is crucial for the implementation of appropriate behavioral responses (Marsh, Ambady, & Kleck, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise, we chose three vocal emotions known to differ in these discriminative acoustic features (Banse & Scherer, 1996): anger, fear, and happiness. This combination allows testing neural discrimination mechanisms within and across valences requiring different adaptive responses (Marsh et al, 2005). Here, we specifically tested how fearful and happy voices are neurally discriminated from angry voices, which is a highly relevant decision for survival.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amygdala and auditory cortex exhibit distinct sensitivity to relevant acoustic features of auditory emotions

Pannese

Grandjean

Frühholz

2016

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amygdala Temporal voice area Auditory emotions fMRI a b s t r a c tDiscriminating between auditory signals of different affective value is critical to successful social interaction. It is commonly held that acoustic decoding of such signals occurs in the auditory system, whereas affective decoding occurs in the amygdala. However, given that the amygdala receives direct subcortical projections that bypass the auditory cortex, it is possible that some acoustic decoding occurs in the amygdala as well, when the acoustic features are relevant for affective discrimination. We tested this hypothesis by combining functional neuroimaging with the neurophysiological phenomena of repetition suppression (RS) and repetition enhancement (RE) in human listeners. Our results show that both amygdala and auditory cortex responded differentially to physical voice features, suggesting that the amygdala and auditory cortex decode the affective quality of the voice not only by processing the emotional content from previously processed acoustic features, but also by processing the acoustic features themselves, when these are relevant to the identification of the voice's affective value. Specifically, we found that the auditory cortex is sensitive to spectral high-frequency voice cues when discriminating vocal anger from vocal fear and joy, whereas the amygdala is sensitive to vocal pitch when discriminating between negative vocal emotions (i.e., anger and fear). Vocal pitch is an instantaneously recognized voice feature, which is potentially transferred to the amygdala by direct subcortical projections. These results together provide evidence that, besides the auditory cortex, the amygdala too processes acoustic information, when this is relevant to the discrimination of auditory emotions.© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirectJournal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cortex c o r t e x 8 5 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 1 6 e1 2 5http://dx

show abstract

“…For example, expressions of happiness and anger signal to the perceiver that the person can be approached or should be avoided, respectively, and there is evidence that angry faces trigger automatic avoidance responses (29,30). Although the trustworthiness model was data-driven and based on judgments of emotionally neutral faces, emotions signaling approach/avoidance behavior naturally emerged from the model when the features of the faces were exaggerated (SI Text and .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The functional basis of face evaluation

Oosterhof

Todorov

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

1,563

160

2,416

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People automatically evaluate faces on multiple trait dimensions, and these evaluations predict important social outcomes, ranging from electoral success to sentencing decisions. Based on behavioral studies and computer modeling, we develop a 2D model of face evaluation. First, using a principal components analysis of trait judgments of emotionally neutral faces, we identify two orthogonal dimensions, valence and dominance, that are sufficient to describe face evaluation and show that these dimensions can be approximated by judgments of trustworthiness and dominance. Second, using a data-driven statistical model for face representation, we build and validate models for representing face trustworthiness and face dominance. Third, using these models, we show that, whereas valence evaluation is more sensitive to features resembling expressions signaling whether the person should be avoided or approached, dominance evaluation is more sensitive to features signaling physical strength/weakness. Fourth, we show that important social judgments, such as threat, can be reproduced as a function of the two orthogonal dimensions of valence and dominance. The findings suggest that face evaluation involves an overgeneralization of adaptive mechanisms for inferring harmful intentions and the ability to cause harm and can account for rapid, yet not necessarily accurate, judgments from faces.emotions ͉ face perception ͉ social cognition T he belief that the nature of the mind and personality could be inferred from facial appearance has persisted over the centuries. References to this belief can be dated back to ancient Greece, Rome, and China (1). In the 19th century, the pseudoscience of physiognomy reached its apogee. Cesare Lombroso, the founder of criminal anthropology, argued that ''each type of crime is committed by men with particular physiognomic characteristics''. For example, ''thieves are notable for their expressive faces and manual dexterity, small wandering eyes that are often oblique in form, thick and close eyebrows, distorted or squashed noses, thin beards and hair, and sloping foreheads'' (2). Lombroso provided his ''scientific'' testimony at several criminal trials.Although modern science, if not folk psychology (3), has largely discarded such notions, trait evaluations from faces predict important social outcomes ranging from electoral success (4-6) to sentencing decisions (7,8). Studies show that people rapidly evaluate faces on multiple trait dimensions such as trustworthiness and aggressiveness (9, 10). For example, trait judgments can be formed after as little as 38-ms exposure to an emotionally neutral face (10). Studies also show that the amygdala, a subcortical brain region critical for fear conditioning and consolidation of emotional memories (11), plays a key role in the assessment of face trustworthiness (12-15).Why do mechanisms for rapid spontaneous face evaluation exist if they do not necessarily deliver accurate inferences? This apparent puzzle from an evolutionary point of view can be resolved b...

show abstract

The Effects of Fear and Anger Facial Expressions on Approach- and Avoidance-Related Behaviors.

Cited by 501 publications

References 26 publications

Emotional scenes and facial expressions elicit different psychophysiological responses

Emotional scenes and facial expressions elicit different psychophysiological responses

Amygdala and auditory cortex exhibit distinct sensitivity to relevant acoustic features of auditory emotions

The functional basis of face evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About