Cited by 94Emotion and Mood RecognitionFace Recognition and PerceptionCultural Differences and Values

Cross-cultural and cultural-specific production and perception of facial expressions of emotion in the wild

Open access
Srinivasan, Ramprakash, Martinez, Aleix M.·2021·IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing

Abstract

Automatic recognition of emotion from facial expressions is an intense area of research, with a potentially long list of important application. Yet, the study of emotion requires knowing which facial expressions are used within and across cultures in the wild, not in controlled lab conditions; but such studies do not exist. Which and how many cross-cultural and cultural-specific facial expressions do people commonly use? And, what affect variables does each expression communicate to observers? If we are to design technology that understands the emotion of users, we need answers to these two fundamental questions. In this paper, we present the first large-scale study of the production and visual perception of facial expressions of emotion in the wild. We find that of the 16,384 possible facial configurations that people can theoretically produce, only 35 are successfully used to transmit emotive information across cultures, and only 8 within a smaller number of cultures. Crucially, we find that visual analysis of cross-cultural expressions yields consistent perception of emotion categories and valence, but not arousal. In contrast, visual analysis of cultural-specific expressions yields consistent perception of valence and arousal, but not of emotion categories. Additionally, we find that the number of expressions used to communicate each emotion is also different, e.g., 17 expressions transmit happiness, but only 1 is used to convey disgust.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/taffc.2018.2887267

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 notion that discrete emotion categories can be reliably identified by specific behavioural patterns and/or physiological features has been seriously called into doubt by marked variability within instances of the same category as well as similarities across categories.

    “The notion that discrete emotion categories can be reliably identified by specific behavioural patterns and/or physiological features has been seriously called into doubt by the marked variability within instances of the same category as well as similarities across categories.”

    From A new science of emotion: implications for functional neurological disorder (2022) · cites this paper as [56]

    Section 2.6.2 reports multiple facial configurations for the same emotion and widely varying agreement on category labels, supporting the concern about variability in behavioural patterns. The paper also finds substantial cross-cultural consistency in identifying emotion categories; these passages do not establish the claimed similarities across categories or address physiological features. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [10]10. C. E. Izard, Human emotions. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
  2. [26]26. S. Bird and E. Loper, "Nltk: the natural language toolkit," in Proceedings of the ACL 2004 on Interactive poster and demonstration sessions. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2004, p. 31.
  3. [31]31. K. A. Lindquist, M. Gendron, A. B. Satpute, and K. Lindquist, "Language and emotion," Handbook of Emotions, 4th ed., The Guil- ford Press, New York, NY, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Srinivasan, R., & Martinez, A. M.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing
Published
2021-07-01
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
707-721
ISSN
  • 1949-3045 (ISSN-L)
  • 2371-9850
OpenAlex
W2885291642
Cited by
94
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4
FWCI
11.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R01-DC-014498, R01-EY-020834)
  • Human Frontier Science Program (RGP0036/2016)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
emotional facial expressions, cross-cultural emotion, emotion recognition, facial expression production, emotion perception, valence and arousal, emotion categories, happiness, disgust

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