Dominance, reward, and affiliation smiles modulate the meaning of uncooperative or untrustworthy behaviour
Open accessAbstract
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
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?
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
Mini Meta‐Analysis of Your Own Studies: Some Arguments on Why and a Primer on How
Goh, J. X., Hall, J. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2016) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12267 · Cited by 994 · see citing works
Facial dynamics as indicators of trustworthiness and cooperative behavior.
Krumhuber, E., Manstead, A. S. R., Cosker, D., Marshall, D., Rosin, P. L., & Kappas, A. (2007) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.730 · Cited by 407 · see citing works
Self-citationReading people’s minds from emotion expressions in interdependent decision making.
de Melo, C. M., Carnevale, P. J., Read, S. J., & Gratch, J. (2014) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0034251 · Cited by 260 · see citing works
Functional Smiles: Tools for Love, Sympathy, and War
Rychlowska, M., Jack, R. E., Garrod, O. G. B., Schyns, P. G., Martin, J. D., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617706082 · Cited by 223 · cited 3× · see citing works
“The videos in Study 5 were validated in previous research (Martin et al., 2021; Rychlowska et al., 2017) and also depicted the evolution of the facial expression from neutral to full intensity.”
BackgroundResultSelf-citation99% impossible: A valid, or falsifiable, internal meta-analysis.
Vosgerau, J., Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000663 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
The power of pupil size in establishing trust and reciprocity.
Kret, M. E., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000508 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Existential threat and responses to emotional displays of ingroup and outgroup members
Wessler, J., van der Schalk, J., Hansen, J., Klackl, J., Jonas, E., Fons, M., Doosje, B., & Fischer, A. (2023) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/13684302221128229 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“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).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- 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)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Cognition and Emotion
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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