Cited by 36Face Recognition and PerceptionNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

A selective emotional decision-making bias elicited by facial expressions

Open access
Furl, Nicholas, Gallagher, Shannon, Averbeck, Bruno B.·2012·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Emotional and social information can sway otherwise rational decisions. For example, when participants decide between two faces that are probabilistically rewarded, they make biased choices that favor smiling relative to angry faces. This bias may arise because facial expressions evoke positive and negative emotional responses, which in turn may motivate social approach and avoidance. We tested a wide range of pictures that evoke emotions or convey social information, including animals, words, foods, a variety of scenes, and faces differing in trustworthiness or attractiveness, but we found only facial expressions biased decisions. Our results extend brain imaging and pharmacological findings, which suggest that a brain mechanism supporting social interaction may be involved. Facial expressions appear to exert special influence over this social interaction mechanism, one capable of biasing otherwise rational choices. These results illustrate that only specific types of emotional experiences can best sway our choices.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0033461

Cites

32 of 32 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Furl, N., Gallagher, S., & Averbeck, B. B.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-03-15
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
e33461
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970057043
Cited by
36
References
32
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
facial expressions, choice bias, social information, trustworthiness, attractiveness, emotional valence, rational decision-making
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Decision Making, Emotions, Facial Expression, Female, Food, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Learning, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Reward, Trust, Young Adult

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