The scholars of psychology have always been trying to explore the spectacle of emotions characterized by distinctive facial expressions. Face has been the point of concentration during such investigative studies when conducted by social psychologists. However, other sources of information were also analyzed comparative to face reading by various investigators of different psychological fields. Such is the example of physiological psychologists who sought to determine the relationship between the emergence of facial expressions and the extent of involuntary responses triggered by stimulation. According to Darwin (1872), some specific emotional expressions are inherent in all individuals. However, his philosophy could not have attribution in the succeeding century. Rather, it was manifested that facial expressions could not reflect the emotions as perceived, even knowing that this argument was not valid in approach (Bruner & Tagiuri, 1954). Later on, it was revealed that facial expressions and emotions do have a strong bondage in-between them. Atypical to Darwin, anthropologists introduced the concept of cultural relativity, manipulating that cultural instinct causes impacts on the development of expressions. In 1972, Ekman launched a ‘neuro-cultural’ theory in order to illustrate the importance of cultural and biological stimuli for adopting facial expressions. The major motif behind this theory was to demonstrate ‘display rules’ that stood for socially recognized styles of controlling and using expressions. Hence, the facts and studies indicated that there was a complex suite of facial expressions. The emergence of sudden expressions in response to corresponding emotions was considered as precise and accurate. The evidence also showed that the symmetry of expression also helps to determine its intensity, duration and frequency in relation to emotion. Rather, some questions remained unanswered. Information gained through the study of facial expressions is still unauthorized for untrained observers. However, it has also been postulated that the distinctive spontaneous expressions of according emotions could only be judged truly by inexperienced observers, as endorsed by various studies utilizing intended expressions. As this area is still unclear, it needs further investigation and research. Besides this, the aspects of intensity and asymmetry caused serious hindrances for untrained observers to understand the facial expressions. Various theories presented in this concern faced challenges during their acknowledgements due to atypical evidence that accounted for several aspects of facial expression in accordance to the experience of emotions. Such is the example of Schachter and Singer’s theory which revealed that the physical changes during emotions were difficult to distinguish. It was further argued that the delicacy of such sort of relations produced opposite notions against theories, including Bem’s theory, which indicated that the culture differentiates the features of emotions but that was not real in practice. On the other hand, it is quite certain that there are clear distinctions among the expressions and emotions. Thus, it is quite mandatory to develop strong associations between feelings and emotions which may enhance the possibility for strengthening relation between the aspects of both (Hager & Ekman, 1983).
In response to increasing interest in emotions, psychologists started to study the human appearance for the analysis of veiled information. Here again, the face was the major source of information, producing strong linkage with emotions and which was also capable of hiding the emotions with equal intelligence. It can be observed from the statement of Paul Ekman, that is,
‘In a sense, the face is equipped to lie the most and leak the most, and thus can be a very confusing source of information’.
Decryption of facial expressions emphasizes learning about its synthesis. Smile is one of the most recognized versions of facial expression and also a multifaceted set. Ekman and associates could find nineteen versions, including different movements of distinct muscles. The investigators from different subjects of psychology have defined six major expressions that flush through our eyes when observing emotions. These six basic expressions are anger, fear, sadness, disgust, surprise and happiness, while embarrassment is another expression which has not been included in that six structured panorama of emotions. In addition to biological influences, cultural attitudes also determine the category of expression. Some of the neurological disorders are even diagnosed through the same hegemony. Parkinson’s disease is the example of this case in which facial expressions often display rigidity and immobilization. As far as face reading is concerned, it is an integral part of that very process. According to Pollak,
‘One of the problems that people don’t realize is how complicated face reading is’, ‘At first glance, it seems very straightforward, But if you break it down–think of all the information in the face, how quickly the brain has to comprehend and analyze it, memories come in, emotions, context, judgments–then you realize that we really can’t do it all’.
The recent innovations in the scenario may also contribute changes in our appearances. However, it is still strongly believed that facial expressions are the real reflection of emotions if observed by a trained observer, otherwise in case of a naïve observer, this assessment may cause unusual complications. In short, the investigation of emotions through facial expressions is valid only if approached through pragmatic vision.
References
Blum, D. (1998). “Face it!”. Psychology Today. Web.
Hager, J. C. & Ekman, P. (1983). “The Inner and Outer Meanings of Facial Expressions”. In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty (Eds.). Social Psychophysiology: A Sourcebook Chapter 10. New York: The Guilford Press.