“Ekman versus Scherer”

1. “Ekman versus Scherer” or“What is important torecognize/express emotion?” (Selected GERG studies directed by Susanne kaiser)

2. :p vs

3. Facial expression 2 theoretical approaches: • “Discrete emotions” (Ekman, 1992; Ekman & Frisen, 1975: EMFACS) • “Appraisal theory” of emotion (Scherer, 1984, 1992)

4. 2 theories, 2 sets of predictions:the example of Anger (EMFACS)

5. Cumulative effect of appraisals on facial muscles Novelty Unpleasantness Goal-obstructiveness High control / High power

6. Cues manipulation: in synthesis • Cues are manipulated (synthetized faces) acc to EMFACS predictions and to appraisal patterns predictions • Effects of different configurations (static and dynamic) on emotional attributions have been assessed by Wehrle et al. (2000)

7. Cues manipulation: in observation • Cognitive appraisals are “manipulated” in the context of a computer game • Effects of different appraisals on facial expressions have been reported in Kaiser, Wehrle, & Schmidt (1998) • Indications that basic emotions are not sufficiently differentiated to account for facial expressions

8. Facial appraisal patterns (1) Report: “Anger” Appraisal: “Unfair”

9. Facial appraisal patterns (2) Report: “Anger” Appraisal: “Blame someone (who did it on purpose)”

10. Facial appraisal patterns (3) Report: “Anger” Appraisal: “Blame the other AND oneself”

11. Conclusions (1) • Different expressions for the same basic emotion • Individual differences in expressivity are large • Similar observations can be made for • Vocal expressions • Physiological reactions • Gestures, postures

12. Next steps • Integration of multiple channels • One attempt for voice + physiology (Johnstone & Scherer, 1999) • Especially important for • Better undestanding single channels • Realism in building ECAs • Use of ECAs to address available theories

13. Thank you!