Exploring the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry and Intention: An Affirmation of the Correction Hypothesis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Study 1
2.1. Materials and Methods
2.1.1. Participants
2.1.2. Stimuli
2.1.3. Procedure
2.1.4. Facial EMG
2.2. Results
2.2.1. Examining the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry
2.2.2. Examining the Influence of Context on Intention
2.2.3. Examining the Relationship between Intention and Emotional Mimicry
3. Study 2
3.1. Materials and Methods
3.1.1. Participants
3.1.2. Stimuli
3.1.3. Procedure
3.1.4. Facial EMG
3.2. Results
3.2.1. Examining the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry
3.2.2. Examining the Influence of Context on Intention
3.2.3. Examining the Relationship between Intention and Emotional Mimicry
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Effect of Task (Face, Context, Face with Context) | ||||
Emotion | Context | Time Segments | F-Value | p-Value |
Happiness | Affiliative | 0–500 ms | 2.315 | 0.105 |
500–1000 ms | 1.583 | 0.211 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 0.745 | 0.478 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 0.066 | 0.936 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 0.554 | 0.577 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 0.254 | 0.776 | ||
Neutral | 0–500 ms | 0.223 | 0.801 | |
500–1000 ms | 1.046 | 0.356 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 1.520 | 0.225 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 0.764 | 0.469 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 0.957 | 0.388 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 1.040 | 0.358 | ||
Distancing | 0–500 ms | 4.433 | 0.015 | |
500–1000 ms | 3.894 | 0.024 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 4.941 | 0.009 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 4.624 | 0.012 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 2.799 | 0.066 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 2.829 | 0.065 | ||
Anger | Affiliative | 0–500 ms | 3.598 | 0.032 |
500–1000 ms | 0.956 | 0.389 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 1.865 | 0.161 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 3.333 | 0.040 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 3.118 | 0.049 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 3.097 | 0.050 | ||
Neutral | 0–500 ms | 0.868 | 0.423 | |
500–1000 ms | 1.090 | 0.341 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 2.793 | 0.067 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 1.799 | 0.172 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 1.229 | 0.298 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 1.085 | 0.342 | ||
Distancing | 0–500 ms | 1.772 | 0.176 | |
500–1000 ms | 0.819 | 0.444 | ||
1000–1500 ms | 2.736 | 0.070 | ||
1500–2000 ms | 1.934 | 0.151 | ||
2000–2500 ms | 1.852 | 0.163 | ||
2500–3000 ms | 1.545 | 0.219 |
References
- Hess, U.; Fischer, A. Emotional Mimicry as Social Regulation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2013, 17, 142–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hess, U.; Fischer, A. Emotional Mimicry: Why and When We Mimic Emotions: Emotional Mimicry. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2014, 8, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weyers, P.; Mühlberger, A.; Kund, A.; Hess, U.; Pauli, P. Modulation of Facial Reactions to Avatar Emotional Faces by Nonconscious Competition Priming. Psychophysiology 2009, 46, 328–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bourgeois, P.; Hess, U. The Impact of Social Context on Mimicry. Biol. Psychol. 2008, 77, 343–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fischer, A.; Manstead, A. Social Functions of Emotion and Emotion Regulation. In Handbook of Emotions; Lewis, I., Haviland-Jones, J., Barrett, L., Eds.; Guilford: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 456–468. [Google Scholar]
- Van Der Schalk, J.; Fischer, A.; Doosje, B.; Wigboldus, D.; Hawk, S.; Rotteveel, M.; Hess, U. Convergent and Divergent Responses to Emotional Displays of Ingroup and Outgroup. Emotion 2011, 11, 286–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ardizzi, M.; Sestito, M.; Martini, F.; Umiltà, M.A.; Ravera, R.; Gallese, V. When Age Matters: Differences in Facial Mimicry and Autonomic Responses to Peers’ Emotions in Teenagers and Adults. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mauersberger, H.; Blaison, C.; Kafetsios, K.; Kessler, C.; Hess, U. Individual Differences in Emotional Mimicry: Underlying Traits and Social Consequences. Eur. J. Pers. 2015, 29, 512–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blocker, H.S.; McIntosh, D.N. Automaticity of the Interpersonal Attitude Effect on Facial Mimicry: It Takes Effort to Smile at Neutral Others but Not Those We Like. Motiv. Emot. 2016, 40, 914–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seibt, B.; Weyers, P.; Likowski, K.U.; Pauli, P.; Mühlberger, A.; Hess, U. Subliminal Interdependence Priming Modulates Congruent and Incongruent Facial Reactions to Emotional Displays. Soc. Cogn. 2013, 31, 613–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stel, M.; Blascovich, J.; McCall, C.; Mastop, J.; Van Baaren, R.B.; Vonk, R. Mimicking Disliked Others: Effects of a Priori Liking on the Mimicry-Liking Link. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 40, 867–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsumoto, D.; Sung Hwang, H. Judging Faces in Context: Faces in Context. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2010, 4, 393–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hess, U.; Hareli, S. The Impact of Context on the Perception of Emotions. In The Expression of Emotion; Abell, C., Smith, J., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 199–218. ISBN 978-1-107-11105-9. [Google Scholar]
- Seibt, B.; Mühlberger, A.; Likowski, K.U.; Weyers, P. Facial Mimicry in Its Social Setting. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Noh, S.R.; Isaacowitz, D.M. Emotional Faces in Context: Age Differences in Recognition Accuracy and Scanning Patterns. Emotion 2013, 13, 238–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Szczurek, L.; Monin, B.; Gross, J.J. The Stranger Effect: The Rejection of Affective Deviants. Psychol. Sci. 2012, 23, 1105–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wróbel, M.; Imbir, K.K. Broadening the Perspective on Emotional Contagion and Emotional Mimicry: The Correction Hypothesis. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2019, 14, 437–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Hamilton, A.F.D.C. Social Top-down Response Modulation (STORM): A Model of the Control of Mimicry in Social Interaction. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2012, 6, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Murata, A.; Saito, H.; Schug, J.; Ogawa, K.; Kameda, T. Spontaneous Facial Mimicry Is Enhanced by the Goal of Inferring Emotional States: Evidence for Moderation of “Automatic” Mimicry by Higher Cognitive Processes. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0153128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fischer, A.H.; Becker, D.; Veenstra, L. Emotional Mimicry in Social Context: The Case of Disgust and Pride. Front. Psychol. 2012, 3, 475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rauchbauer, B.; Majdandžić, J.; Hummer, A.; Windischberger, C.; Lamm, C. Distinct Neural Processes Are Engaged in the Modulation of Mimicry by Social Group-Membership and Emotional Expressions. Cortex 2015, 70, 49–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rauchbauer, B.; Majdandžić, J.; Stieger, S.; Lamm, C. The Modulation of Mimicry by Ethnic Group-Membership and Emotional Expressions. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0161064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Carr, E.W.; Winkielman, P.; Oveis, C. Transforming the Mirror: Power Fundamentally Changes Facial Responding to Emotional Expressions. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2014, 143, 997–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hess, U. Who to Whom and Why: The Social Nature of Emotional Mimicry. Psychophysiology 2021, 58, e13675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, L.; Chen, X.; Sun, Y.; Worm, T.; Reale, M. A High-Resolution 3D Dynamic Facial Expression Database. In Proceedings of the 2008 8th IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 17–19 September 2008; 2008; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Winter, D.G. Power, Affiliation, and War: Three Tests of a Motivational Model. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 65, 532–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beall, P.M.; Moody, E.J.; McIntosh, D.N.; Hepburn, S.L.; Reed, C.L. Rapid Facial Reactions to Emotional Facial Expressions in Typically Developing Children and Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2008, 101, 206–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Heerey, E.A.; Crossley, H.M. Predictive and Reactive Mechanisms in Smile Reciprocity. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 24, 1446–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimberg, U.; Petterson, M. Facial Reactions to Happy and Angry Facial Expressions: Evidence for Right Hemisphere Dominance. Psychophysiology 2000, 37, 693–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fridlund, A.J.; Cacioppo, J.T. Guidelines for Human Electromyographic Research. Psychophysiology 1986, 23, 567–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, H.; Hu, P. Matching Your Face or Appraising the Situation: Two Paths to Emotional Contagion. Front. Psychol. 2018, 8, 2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sonnby–Borgström, M. Automatic Mimicry Reactions as Related to Differences in Emotional Empathy. Scand. J. Psychol. 2002, 43, 433–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dimberg, U.; Thunberg, M.; Grunedal, S. Facial Reactions to Emotional Stimuli: Automatically Controlled Emotional Responses. Cogn. Emot. 2002, 16, 449–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hietanen, J.K.; Astikainen, P. N170 Response to Facial Expressions Is Modulated by the Affective Congruency between the Emotional Expression and Preceding Affective Picture. Biol. Psychol. 2013, 92, 114–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dozolme, D.; Brunet-Gouet, E.; Passerieux, C.; Amorim, M.-A. Neuroelectric Correlates of Pragmatic Emotional Incongruence Processing: Empathy Matters. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0129770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Diéguez-Risco, T.; Aguado, L.; Albert, J.; Hinojosa, J.A. Judging Emotional Congruency: Explicit Attention to Situational Context Modulates Processing of Facial Expressions of Emotion. Biol. Psychol. 2015, 112, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuang, B.; Li, X.; Li, X.; Lin, M.; Liu, S.; Hu, P. The Effect of Eye Gaze Direction on Emotional Mimicry: A Multimodal Study with Electromyography and Electroencephalography. NeuroImage 2021, 226, 117604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Achaibou, A.; Pourtois, G.; Schwartz, S.; Vuilleumier, P. Simultaneous Recording of EEG and Facial Muscle Reactions during Spontaneous Emotional Mimicry. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46, 1104–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sato, W.; Fujimura, T.; Suzuki, N. Enhanced Facial EMG Activity in Response to Dynamic Facial Expressions. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2008, 70, 70–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sato, W.; Yoshikawa, S. Spontaneous Facial Mimicry in Response to Dynamic Facial Expressions. Cognition 2007, 104, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dewied, M.; Vanboxtel, A.; Zaalberg, R.; Goudena, P.; Matthys, W. Facial EMG Responses to Dynamic Emotional Facial Expressions in Boys with Disruptive Behavior Disorders. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2006, 40, 112–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fischer, A.H.; Roseman, I.J. Beat Them or Ban Them: The Characteristics and Social Functions of Anger and Contempt. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 93, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Variables | Mean ± SD | Number of Trials: Rating as Distancing Intention (1–4) | Number of Trials: Rating as Affiliative Intention (6–9) | Number of Trials: Rating as Neutral Intention (5) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Happiness | Affiliative | 7.04 ± 0.90 | 22 | 364 | 22 |
Neutral | 5.83 ± 0.53 | 34 | 235 | 139 | |
Distancing | 3.03 ± 0.96 | 347 | 29 | 32 | |
Anger | Affiliative | 5.11 ± 1.28 | 168 | 191 | 49 |
Neutral | 4.45 ± 0.75 | 172 | 56 | 180 | |
Distancing | 2.45 ± 0.78 | 382 | 14 | 12 |
Variables | Happiness | Anger | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Affiliative | Neutral | Distancing | Affiliative | Neutral | Distancing | ||
Task (face) | Mean ± SD | 3.483 ± 0.737 | 3.52 ± 0.701 | 3.42 ± 0.729 | 6.884 ± 0.793 | 6.818 ± 0.775 | 6.653 ± 0.894 |
Number of Trials: Rating as Distancing Intention (1–4) | 15 | 16 | 26 | 279 | 286 | 296 | |
Number of Trials: Rating as Affiliative Intention (6–9) | 317 | 315 | 300 | 31 | 30 | 27 | |
Number of Trials: Rating as Neutral Intention (5) | 20 | 21 | 26 | 42 | 36 | 29 | |
Task (context) | Mean ± SD | 7.114 ± 0.881 | 5.293 ± 0.45 | 2.784 ± 0.86 | 7.352 ± 0.88 | 5.588 ± 0.624 | 2.892 ± 0.87 |
Number of Trials: Rating as Distancing Intention (1–4) | 3 | 16 | 309 | 11 | 34 | 321 | |
Number of Trials: Rating as Affiliative Intention (6–9) | 334 | 142 | 17 | 324 | 107 | 10 | |
Trial Number: Rating as Neutral Intention (5) | 15 | 194 | 26 | 17 | 211 | 21 | |
Task (face with context) | Mean ± SD | 5.19 ± 0.922 | 4.563 ± 0.664 | 2.881 ± 0.858 | 7.386 ± 0.809 | 6.349 ± 0.688 | 3.813 ± 0.848 |
Number of Trials: Rating as Distancing Intention (1–4) | 6 | 14 | 243 | 138 | 170 | 303 | |
Number of Trials: Rating as Affiliative Intention (6–9) | 331 | 272 | 55 | 165 | 62 | 26 | |
Number of Trials: Rating as Neutral Intention (5) | 15 | 66 | 54 | 49 | 120 | 23 |
Correlation between Intention and ZM Activities of Happiness | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
1. intention in TASK (face) | 1 | |||||
2. ZM in TASK (face) | −0.049 | 1 | ||||
3. intention in TASK (context) | 0.102 | 0.019 | 1 | |||
4. ZM in TASK (context) | −0.040 | 0.855 ** | 0.107 | 1 | ||
5. intention in TASK (face with context) | 0.575 ** | −0.094 | 0.440 ** | −0.026 | 1 | |
6. ZM in TASK (face with context) | −0.031 | 0.883 ** | 0.190 | 0.900 ** | −0.054 | 1 |
Correlation between Intention and CS Activities of Anger | ||||||
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
1. intention in TASK (face) | 1 | |||||
2. CS in TASK (face) | −0.252 | 1 | ||||
3. intention in TASK (context) | 0.023 | −0.107 | 1 | |||
4. CS in TASK (context) | 0.081 | 0.308 * | 0.044 | 1 | ||
5. intention in TASK (face with context) | 0.683 ** | −0.086 | 0.263 | 0.083 | 1 | |
6. CS in TASK (face with context) | −0.077 | 0.714 ** | −0.302 * | 0.424 ** | −0.115 | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Xu, X.; Hu, P. Exploring the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry and Intention: An Affirmation of the Correction Hypothesis. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13080677
Xu X, Hu P. Exploring the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry and Intention: An Affirmation of the Correction Hypothesis. Behavioral Sciences. 2023; 13(8):677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13080677
Chicago/Turabian StyleXu, Xiaohui, and Ping Hu. 2023. "Exploring the Influence of Context on Emotional Mimicry and Intention: An Affirmation of the Correction Hypothesis" Behavioral Sciences 13, no. 8: 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13080677