Ekman emotion recognition test
I’m looking at Paul Ekman’s FACS system at the moment, the pictures that he uses to illustrate the system are pretty amusing. This, for example, is from an article in The Guardian asking “Can You Decode These Emotions?”
It’s a bit like Japanese rockabilly or something. It all looks right but there’s something missing. The girl’s face is composed in the right way, the muscle movements are right, and yet her eyes are completely devoid of the emotion. It strikes me that the test is somehow a little compromised as a result. A few months ago I did an interview for a news channel and the journalist interviewed an academic about Ekman’s work for the piece. The academic claimed that Ekman has been largely discredited and that it is generally accepted that the purpose of facial expressions is as communication. Therefore they don’t reflect the internal state of the subject. Which, just about anyone can tell you, is complete nonsense.
If something has evolved for a specific purpose, it doesn’t mean that it works on a conscious level. Walking, for example, is a learned trait, unlike facial expressions, and yet we don’t think about putting one foot infront of the other. We only think about expression when we want to use our body for communication on a conscious level. And a lot of the time we aren’t very good at faking internal states. If someone is playing a role in a social situation, it’s often expected of them, but much of the time we aren’t fooled by the performance. Which I think is one of the reasons why great actors are fascinating. A good performance is really a sort of willed self-delusion aided by research, observation and hard work.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Is the news piece you were interviewed for available online?
June 30th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Hi Lars, no it isn’t but there’s a short written piece you can see about it;
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=530436
Incidentally, I’ve never worked for the Daily Mirror in my life
June 30th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Hi Robbie,
Thanks for posting the link – the video is actually in the sidebar.
Thanks also for clarifying re. Daily Mirror. That’s borderline slander
If you’re researching Ekman’s work, you might find this interesting:
I’m a big fan of your work, btw.
Cheers,
Lars
June 30th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Hello again,
I see I can’t post links here. If you google ‘ekman kqed’, the interview is the first link.
Cheers,
Lars
June 30th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I think you must have misunderstood-Dr. Ekman’s work has not been discredited-actually the opposite-there have been a number of research projects that have backed up Dr.Ekman work-which initially proved Darwin correct-that emotions are universal!
June 30th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Hey Lee- maybe I wasn’t explaining myself very clearly. Actually I think Ekman’s work is very good, and I was disagreeing with the academic that was interviewed for the TV piece. Emotions are definitely universal, it’s just a question of how much and what is communicated by facial expressions.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Hey Lars, I’ve never seen that before, thanks! The part where the congenitally blind woman loses the match is pretty amazing. I don’t know why you couldn’t embed the video, people have done it before. Lets see if it’ll work for me;
July 6th, 2009 at 10:29 am
[...] also been enjoying his Immersion blog. Of late he’s had a humorous take on Ekman’s emotional faces, an intense video of close combat in Iraq, and babies as challenging both science and [...]
July 16th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
I just noticed that the Ekman images are from the Guardian so I’m contacting the paper about using the images. Enjoy your site.