The face of chauvinism: How prejudice expectations shape perceptions of facial affect

Are individuals who chronically expect to be treated prejudicially biased toward perceiving rejecting emotions in the faces of out-group others? In two studies, participants watched a series of computer-generated movies showing animated faces morphing from expressions of rejection (i.e., contempt and anger) to acceptance, and indicated when the initial expression of rejection changed. We also assessed stigma consciousness. Study 1 tested the connection between gender-based stigma consciousness and perceptions of contempt in male vs. female faces among female participants. Study 2 examined this connection for both men and women and for perceptions of contempt as well as anger. Results show that prejudice expectations lead individuals to interpret out-group faces as more rejecting than in-group faces, but only for female perceivers, and not for males. Further, our results suggest that prejudice expectations affect perceptions of contempt, but not anger. These results are discussed in relation to intergroup relations and emotion.     

The universality of a contempt expression: A replication

Two experiments replicated Ekman and Friesen's finding of an expression that signals contempt across cultures. The subjects, from West Sumatra, Indonesia, were members of a culture that differs in a number of ways from Western cultures. In one experiment the subjects judged photographs of Japanese and American faces, both males and females, which showed many different emotions. There was very high agreement about which expressions signaled contempt in preference to anger, disgust, happiness, sadness, fear, or surprise. In a second experiment the Indonesian subjects judged expressions shown by members of their own culture, and again there was very high agreement about which expression signals contempt.This study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 41100). Paul Ekman's work is also supported by a Research Scientist Award from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 06092). Karl G. Heider's work was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 38221). We are grateful to Maureen O'Sullivan for her many helpful comments on this report.     

The relationship among expressions, labels, and descriptions of contempt

This article reports 4 studies that demonstrate that the contempt expression is reliably associated with situations that elicit contempt and that the inability to label the contempt expression reflects a problem with its label or concept and not with the relationship between its expression and emotion. In Study I, the labeling of contempt in fixed-choice judgment tasks did not occur because of a process of elimination. In Studies 2 and 3, the contempt expression was associated with situations that elicit contempt, but participants did not label the situations in an open-ended response. In Study 3, participants also more reliably labeled the contempt expression with situations rather than with labels and did not generate contempt situations from labels. In Study 4, participants reported using, hearing, and reading about contempt the least among 7 emotions tested.     

More evidence for the universality of a contempt expression

Since its publication in 1986, Ekman and Friesen's (1986) discovery of a universal facial expression unique to contempt has received considerable attention (e.g., see Ekman & Friesen, 1988; Ekman & Heider, 1988; Ekman, O'Sullivan, & Matsumoto, 1991a, 1991b; Izard & Haynes, 1988; Russell, 1991a, 1991b; Ricci Bitti, Brighetti, Garotti, Boggi-Cavallo, 1989). Actually, much of this argument began before there was adequate sampling of contempt photographs across many cultures. In order to address this concern, this study reports judgment data on all 12 photos used in previous studies depicting the contempt expression from four non-American cultures. The data provide a strong replication of Ekman and Friesen's (1986) and Ekman and Heider's (1988) findings for a universal expression of contempt.The research reported in this article was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 42749-01), and by a Faculty Award for Creativity, Scholarship, and Research from San Francisco State University. I would like to thank Veronica Ton for her aid in the collection of the Vietnamese data; Valerie Hearn for her aid in the collection of the Polish and Hungarian data; Masami Kobayashi, Fazilet Kasri, Deborah Krupp, Bill Roberts, and Michelle Weissman for their aid in my research program on emotion; and William Irwin for his aid in the data analysis.     

Does familiarity breed contempt or liking? Comment on Reis, Maniaci, Caprariello, Eastwick, and Finkel (2011)

Reis, Maniaci, Caprariello, Eastwick, and Finkel (see record 2011-04644-001) conducted 2 studies that demonstrate that in certain cases, familiarity can lead to liking--in seeming contrast to the results of our earlier article (see record 2006-23056-008). We believe that Reis et al. (a) utilized paradigms far removed from spontaneous, everyday social interactions that were particularly likely to demonstrate a positive link between familiarity and liking and (b) failed to include and incorporate other sources of data-both academic and real-world-showing that familiarity breeds contempt. We call for further research exploring when and why familiarity is likely to lead to contempt or liking, and we suggest several factors that are likely to inform this debate.     

Negative results on a reported facial expression of contempt

Ekman and Friesen (1986) claimed to have discovered a facial expression, a unilateral lip curl, universally recognized as conveying contempt. Their conclusion was based on a series of labeling studies, all of which relied on one response measure—subjects choosing one label from a small, preselected list. This article reports two studies on the question of whether their result can be replicated with other response measures. In one study, subjects were allowed to respond with any emotion label they wanted; in the second, subjects were asked to make quantitative ratings on six emotion scales. Neither method suggested contempt as subjects' interpretation of the unilateral lip curl.This study was funded by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I thank Dee-Ann Matsugu, Lara Weick, and Lisa Wong for their careful work on this study.     

On the form and universality of the contempt expression: A challenge to Ekman and Friesen's claim of discovery

The claim of Ekman and Friesen (1986, A New Pan- Cultural Facial Expression of Emotion,Motivation and Emotion, 10, 159–168) that they have found the first empirical support for the existence of a pancultural expression of contempt is challenged on three grounds. First, the claim that no one else had ever attempted to describe an expression unique to contempt in any culture neglects a tradition of research dating back to Darwin. Second, the data presented by Ekman and Friesen were derived using stimuli that are ambiguous representations of their intended expressions. Finally, there are earlier data for the universality of contempt expressions. Ekman and Friesen's contempt expression may best be viewed as a learned modification of a prototypical expression evolved from the infrahuman snarl.     

Held in contempt: the psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a work context

Guided by a social function of emotions perspective, the authors examined a model of the psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a series of 3 experiments that tested the outcomes of being a recipient of contempt in the work domain. In these experiments, participants engaged in a business strategy simulation with a virtual partner-a computer programmed to give contemptuous and other types of feedback. In Study 1, which examined the task performance and interpersonal outcomes of contempt, recipients of contempt had significantly better task performance but also significantly more interpersonal aggressiveness toward their virtual partners compared with recipients of failure, angry, or neutral feedback. Study 2 examined 3 psychological outcomes mediating the contempt-task performance/aggression relationship: self-esteem, returned feelings of contempt, and activation levels. Lowered levels of implicit self-esteem and greater levels of activation significantly mediated the relationship between receiving contempt and task performance, whereas the contempt-aggression relationship was mediated by lowered implicit self-esteem and increased feelings of returned contempt. Study 3 examined status as a moderator of these relationships. Low-status recipients had significantly better task performance than did equal-status recipients, who performed significantly better than did the high-status recipients of contempt. In addition, low-status recipients displayed significantly lower levels of aggression in response to contempt than did equal-status and high-status recipients.     

Conceptual and methodological issues in the judgment of facial expressions of emotion

In two studies, subjects judged a set of facial expressions of emotion by either providing labels of their own choice to describe the stimuli (free-choice condition), choosing a label from a list of emotion words, or choosing a story from a list of emotion stories (fixed-choice conditions). In the free-choice condition, levels of agreement between subjects on the predicted emotion categories for six basic emotions were significantly greater than chance levels, and comparable to those shown in fixed-choice studies. As predicted, there was little to no agreement on a verbal label for contempt. Agreement on contempt was greatly improved when subjects were allowed to identify the expression in terms of an antecedent event for that emotion rather than in terms of a single verbal label, a finding that could not be attributed to the methodological artifact of exclusion in a fixed-choice paradigm. These findings support two conclusions: (1) that the labels used in fixed-choice paradigms accurately reflect the verbal categories people use when free labeling facial expressions of emotion, and (2) that lexically ambiguous emotions, such as contempt, are understood in terms of their situational meanings.This research was supported in part by a Research Scientist Award from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 06091) to Paul Ekman.     

Do community and autonomy moral violations elicit different emotions?

According to one important set of theories, different domains of immorality are linked to different discrete emotions—panculturally. Violations against the community elicit contempt, whereas violations against an individual elicit anger. To test this theory, American, Indian and Japanese participants (N = 480) indicated contempt and anger reactions (with verbal rating and face selection) to both the types of immorality. To remedy method problems in previous research, community and autonomy violations were created for the same story‐frame, by varying the target to be either the community or an individual. Community and autonomy violations did not differ significantly in the emotion elicited: overall, both types of violations elicited more anger than contempt (and more negative emotion of any kind than positive emotion). By verbal rating, Americans and Indians reported more anger than contempt for both types of violation, whereas Japanese reported more contempt than anger for both types. By face selection, the three cultural groups selected anger more than contempt for both types of violation. The results speak against defining distinct domains of morality by their association with distinct emotions.     

The contribution of self‐deceptive enhancement to display rules in the United States and Japan

Socially desirable responding was tested as a mediator of American and Japanese college student differences in display rules. Americans endorsed the expression of anger, contempt, disgust, fear, happiness, and surprise more than the Japanese. Americans also exhibited more self‐deceptive enhancement than the Japanese, and self‐deceptive enhancement partially mediated country differences on the endorsement of anger, disgust, happiness, and surprise, but not contempt and fear. These findings highlight the role of self‐deceptive enhancement in contributing to expressive display rules and support the point of view that socially desirable responding is a reflection of one's personality and culture rather than a statistical nuisance.     

The moral emotions: a social-functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt

Recent research has highlighted the important role of emotion in moral judgment and decision making (Greene, Sommerville, Nystrom, Darley, & Cohen, 2001; Haidt, 2001). What is less clear is whether distinctions should be drawn among specific moral emotions. Although some have argued for differences among anger, disgust, and contempt (Rozin, Lowery, Imada, & Haidt, 1999), others have suggested that these terms may describe a single undifferentiated emotional response to morally offensive behavior (Nabi, 2002). In this article, we take a social-functionalist perspective, which makes the prediction that these emotions should be differentiable both in antecedent appraisals and in consequent actions and judgments. Studies 1-3 tested and found support for our predictions concerning distinctions among antecedent appraisals, including (a) a more general role for disgust than has been previously been described, (b) an effect of self-relevance on anger but not other emotions, and (c) a role for contempt in judging incompetent actions. Studies 4 and 5 tested and found support for our specific predictions concerning functional outcomes, providing evidence that these emotions are associated with different consequences. Taken together, these studies support a social-functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt and lay the foundation for future research on the negative interpersonal emotions.     

The accessibility of the term “contempt” and the meaning of the unilateral lip curl

Four studies are reported investigating the conditions under which various proposed facial expressions of contempt are labelled “contempt”. Only under forced-choice conditions are any of these expressions labelled “contempt” above chance; free responses are at or below chance. Contrary to predictions from Rosenberg and Ekman's (1995) explanation of poor free-response performance, participants demonstrating the best understanding of “contempt”, and those primed by prior tasks to have the concept readily accessible did not do better than other subjects. Using the forced-choice paradigm, supposedly neutral expressions were labelled “contempt” by 70% of respondents. It is concluded that poor performance in free-response studies is not due to inaccessibility or unfamiliarity of “contempt”, that the unilateral lip curl included in the JACFEE set of expressions of basic emotions (Matsumoto & Ekman, 1988) is not decoded as contempt, and that good performance in forced-choice studies results from artifacts of the method.     

Forced-choice response format in the study of facial expression

This article is a methodological note on a potential problem with a forced-choice response scale in the study of facial expressions of emotion. For example, a majority of subjects categorized Matsumoto and Ekman's (1988) reported facial expression of anger as contempt when using one forced-choice format, as disgust, with another format, and as frustration, with a third. When shown the anger expression and given a choice amonganger, frustration, and other labels, few subjects (12.5% on average) selectedanger. Ifcontempt, digust, andfrustration are considered wrong answers, then forced choice can yield consensus on the wrong answer; ifanger is the right answer, then forced choice can fail to yield consensus on the right answer.This study was funded by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.I thank Dee-Ann Matsugu, Lara Weick, and Lisa Wong for their work on this study.     

The contempt expression and the relativity thesis

Ekman and Freisen (1986) reported a highly recognizable, pancultural facial expression unique to contempt. This article reports three studies in which the emotion inferred from that expression, a unilaterally raised and tightened lip, varied with the context of judgment. Different contexts of judgment were created by asking subjects to judge zero, one, or six other facial expressions posed by different actors before judging the lip curl. The lip curl was labeledcontempt in one context,disgust in another, andsadness in a third. Ekman and Friesen's result was replicated, but only when the specific anchoring context used in the original studies was reinstituted. People's judgments as to which emotion is conveyed by a particular facial expression can therefore be influenced by the method of gathering judgments.This study was funded by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I thank Dee-Ann Matsugu, Lara Weick, and Lisa Wong for their careful work on this study. I especially thank Darrin Lehman for his advice.     

Beat them or ban them: the characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt

This article reports 3 studies in which the authors examined (a) the distinctive characteristics of anger and contempt responses and (b) the interpersonal causes and effects of both emotions. In the 1st study, the authors examined the distinction between the 2 emotions; in the 2nd study, the authors tested whether contempt could be predicted from previous anger incidents with the same person; and in the 3rd study, the authors examined the effects of type of relationship on anger and contempt reactions. The results of the 3 studies show that anger and contempt often occur together but that there are clear distinctions between the 2 emotions: Anger is characterized more by short-term attack responses but long-term reconciliation, whereas contempt is characterized by rejection and social exclusion of the other person, both in the short-term and in the long-term. The authors also found that contempt may develop out of previously experienced anger and that a lack of intimacy with and perceived control over the behavior of the other person, as well as negative dispositional attributions about the other person, predicted the emergence of contempt.     

Understanding emotional display rules at work and outside of work: The effects of country and gender

This study examined the long-held, but empirically untested assumption that emotional display rules at work are different from more general display rules. We examined whether the effect of context (work vs. non-work) on display rules depended on rater gender, rater country (i.e., Singapore, United States), and discrete emotion (anger, contempt, disgust, fear, sadness, and happiness). Results revealed that display rules at work involved less expressivity of emotion than did display rules outside of work for all six emotions. Further, display rules in Singapore involved less expressivity of anger, sadness, and fear than display rules in the US, with no country differences being observed for the emotions of happiness, contempt, and disgust. These results were qualified by significant country-by-gender interactions for anger, contempt, and disgust, a significant country-by-context interaction for fear, and a three-way interaction (i.e., country-by-gender-by-context) for sadness.     

Moving faces, looking places: validation of the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES)

We report two studies validating a new standardized set of filmed emotion expressions, the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES). The ADFES is distinct from existing datasets in that it includes a face-forward version and two different head-turning versions (faces turning toward and away from viewers), North-European as well as Mediterranean models (male and female), and nine discrete emotions (joy, anger, fear, sadness, surprise, disgust, contempt, pride, and embarrassment). Study 1 showed that the ADFES received excellent recognition scores. Recognition was affected by social categorization of the model: displays of North-European models were better recognized by Dutch participants, suggesting an ingroup advantage. Head-turning did not affect recognition accuracy. Study 2 showed that participants more strongly perceived themselves to be the cause of the other's emotion when the model's face turned toward the respondents. The ADFES provides new avenues for research on emotion expression and is available for researchers upon request.     

Contempt and the Cultivation of Character

Macalester Bell urges the cultivation of apt contempt as the best response to what she calls “the vices of superiority” (arrogance, hypocrisy, racism, and the like). In this essay, I sketch two character profiles. The first—the ideal contemnor—paradigmatically answers the vices of superiority with contempt. The second—the ideal Christian neighbor—is marked by humility and love, and answers the vices of superiority in non‐contemptuous ways. I argue that the latter character rivals (and may even outshine) the former as a fitting moral response to the vices of superiority. Furthermore, I argue that the two character profiles are incompatible, so one cannot jointly cultivate humble love and contempt. Given contempt's nastiness, and the alternative resources available for answering the vices of superiority, I suggest one should focus one's character‐formation efforts on the cultivation of humility and love.     

网民对“人祸”事件的道德情绪特点——基于微博大数据研究

本研究采用大数据研究方法,对爬取的"动车事故"发生后40天内的94,562条相关微博进行情感分析,以探讨网民对"人祸"的道德情绪特点,同时对不同群体情绪表达差异进行探讨。结果发现:(1)网民对于动车事故主要表达的道德情绪有:愤怒、鄙视、厌恶、同情和爱。(2)包含不同道德基础的事件与不同的道德情绪相关联;(3)对于愤怒、厌恶和鄙视,男性普遍有更高的表达倾向和表达强度,而女性更倾向于表达爱和同情且强度更高;(4)对于爱和同情,团体VIP用户组表达的可能性和强度都高于其他用户;个体VIP用户比非VIP用户更可能表达愤怒、鄙视和厌恶,而团体VIP用户表达这类情绪的强度最小。研究表明,虚拟网络中人们道德情绪特点依然符合道德基础理论;不同群体在表达道德情绪时的差异性是对道德基础理论相关研究的补充。总言之,数据挖掘技术和情感分析方法是进行情绪研究的有效手段。