Cite as:
Kaulard K, De La Rosa S, Schultz J, Fernandez Cruz A L, Bülthoff H H, Wallraven C, 2011, "What are the properties underlying similarity judgments of facial expressions?" Perception 40 ECVP Abstract Supplement, page 115

What are the properties underlying similarity judgments of facial expressions?

K Kaulard, S De La Rosa, J Schultz, A L Fernandez Cruz, H H Bülthoff, C Wallraven

Similarity ratings are used to investigate the cognitive representation of facial expressions. The perceptual and cognitive properties (eg physical aspects, motor expressions, action tendencies) driving the similarity judgments of facial expressions are largely unknown. We examined potentially important properties with 27 questions addressing the emotional and conversational content of expressions (semantic differential). The ratings of these semantic differentials were used as predictors for facial expression similarity ratings. The semantic differential and similarity-rating task were performed on the same set of facial expression videos: 6 types of emotional (eg happy) and 6 types of conversational (eg don’t understand) expressions. Different sets of participants performed the two tasks. Multiple regression was used to predict the similarity data from the semantic differential questions. The best model for emotional expressions consisted of two emotional questions explaining 75% of the variation in similarity ratings. The same model explained significantly less variation for conversational expressions (38%). The best model for those expressions consisted of a single conversational question explaining 44% of the variation. This study shows which properties of facial expressions might affect their perceived similarity. Moreover, our results suggest that different perceptual and cognitive properties might underlie similarity judgments about emotional and conversational expressions.

These web-based abstracts are provided for ease of seaching and access, but certain aspects (such as as mathematics) may not appear in their optimum form. For the final published version of this abstract, please see
ECVP 2011 Abstract Supplement (complete) size: 2206 Kb

[Publisher's note: The abstracts in this year's ECVP supplement have been published with virtually no copy editing by Pion, thus the standards of grammar and style may not match those of regular Perception articles.]