Gender Differences in Judgments of Multiple Emotions From Facial Expressions.
Abstract
The authors tested gender differences in emotion judgments by utilizing a new judgment task (Studies 1 and 2) and presenting stimuli at the edge of conscious awareness (Study 2). Women were more accurate than men even under conditions of minimal stimulus information. Women's ratings were more variable across scales, and they rated correct target emotions higher than did men.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a second study in [31], women were overall better than men only when scalar ratings of different emotions could be used, not when they had to select just one emotion.
“In a second study, shorter presentation times were used (70ms, 130ms, 200ms), which showed that women were overall better than men, only when the presence of different emotions could be rated (scalar ratings), and not when they had to select just one emotion.”
From Gender differences in emotion perception and self-reported emotional intelligence: A test of the emotion sensitivity hypothesis (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
In [31], no interaction between speed of presentation and gender was found.
“No interaction between the speed of presentation and gender was found, thus women performed better than men in all three presentation times.”
From Gender differences in emotion perception and self-reported emotional intelligence: A test of the emotion sensitivity hypothesis (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
Study [31] found that women judged the target emotion as more present and the non-target emotion as less present than men, for disgust, happiness, sadness and surprise.
“Their results showed that women judged the target emotion as being more present on the face, and the non-target emotion as less present than did men. This was the case for disgust, happiness, sadness and surprise.”
From Gender differences in emotion perception and self-reported emotional intelligence: A test of the emotion sensitivity hypothesis (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sergerie, K., Chochol, C., & Armony, J. L. (2008) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2007.12.002 · Cited by 917 · see citing works
Revisiting gender differences: what we know and what lies ahead.
Meyers‐Levy, J., & Loken, B. (2015) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2014.06.003 · Cited by 614 · see citing works
Multidimensional assessment of empathic abilities: Neural correlates and gender differences
Derntl, B., Finkelmeyer, A., Eickhoff, S., Kellermann, T., Falkenberg, D. I., Schneider, F., & Habel, U. (2010) · Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2009.10.006 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Fischer, A. H., Kret, M. E., & Broekens, J. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0190712 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
“The expected advantage was that such ratings would enable us to detect subtler differences in what men and women perceive in others’ faces (see also [31]).”
InfluentialThe impact of facial emotional expressions on behavioral tendencies in women and men
Seidel, E.-M., Habel, U., Kirschner, M., Gur, R. C., & Derntl, B. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/a0018169 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
A socio-relational framework of sex differences in the expression of emotion
Vigil, J. M. (2009) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x09991075 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Facial emotion recognition in patients with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder
Derntl, B., Seidel, E., Kryspin‐Exner, I., Hasmann, A., & Dobmeier, M. (2009) · British Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466509x404845 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Facial mimicry, empathy, and emotion recognition: a meta-analysis of correlations
Holland, A. C., O’Connell, G., & Dziobek, I. (2021) · Cognition and Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699931.2020.1815655 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Sharing concerns: Interpersonal worry regulation in romantic couples.
Parkinson, B., Simons, G., & Niven, K. (2016) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0040112 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Invisible expressions evoke core impressions
Laeng, B., Profeti, I., Sæther, L., Adolfsdottir, S., Lundervold, A. J., Vangberg, T., Øvervoll, M., Johnsen, S. H., & Waterloo, K. (2010) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0018689 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hall, J. A., & Matsumoto, D.
- Affiliations
- Northeastern University (US)
- San Francisco State University (US)
- Venue
- Emotion
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 201-206
- ISSN
- 1528-3542 (ISSN-L)
- 1931-1516
- OpenAlex
- W2136315560
- Cited by
- 454
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 1.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Emotion (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
- Keywords
- gender differences, emotion judgment, facial expressions, emotion recognition, conscious awareness, interobserver variability
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Affect, Decision Making, Discrimination, Psychological, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Sex Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
