Cited by 17Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFace Recognition and PerceptionExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Dominance, reward, and affiliation smiles modulate the meaning of uncooperative or untrustworthy behaviour

Open access
Rychlowska, Magdalena, van der Schalk, Job, Niedenthal, Paula, Martin, Jared, Carpenter, Stephanie M., Manstead, Antony S. R.·2021·Cognition and Emotion

Abstract

We investigated the effects of different types of smiles on the perception of uncooperative or untrustworthy behaviour. In five studies, participants assigned to one group played an economic game with a representative of another group. In an initial round, the representative acted uncooperatively by favouring their group and then displayed a dominance, reward, or affiliation smile. Participants rated the motives of the representative and played a second round of the game with a different member of the same outgroup. Following uncooperative or untrustworthy behaviour, affiliation smiles communicated less positivity and superiority, and a greater desire to both repair the relationship between groups and change the uncooperative decision than reward or dominance smiles. Perceptions of a desire to repair the relationship and to change the decision were associated with trust and cooperation in a subsequent round of the game. Together, these findings show that smiles that are subtly different in their morphology can convey different messages and highlight the importance of these expressions in influencing the perceptions of others’ intentions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02699931.2021.1948391

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The smiles served as signals of affiliation rather than reflections of joy or felt reward.

    “Instead, we propose that the smiles served as signals of affiliation rather than reflections of joy or felt reward (Martin et al., 2017; Niedenthal et al., 2010; Rychlowska et al., 2021).”

    From Existential threat and responses to emotional displays of ingroup and outgroup members (2023) · cites this paper as Rychlowska et al., 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rychlowska, M., van der Schalk, J., Niedenthal, P., Martin, J., Carpenter, S. M., & Manstead, A. S. R.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • Institute of Education and Child Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Cognition and Emotion
Published
2021-07-06
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
1281-1301
ISSN
  • 0269-9931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0600
OpenAlex
W3181114729
Cited by
17
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognition & Emotion (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
ESRC (ES/L016486/1, ])
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
smiling, facial expressions, trust, cooperation, intergroup conflict, economic games, perceived motives, relationship repair
MeSH terms
Facial Expression, Humans, Motivation, Reward, Smiling, Trust

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