Group items tagged

Emoticons - representations of facial expressions using colons, dashes, parentheses and other text symbols - originated in the days of the telegraph as a substitute for the facial expressions, hand gestures and vocal clues for different emotions that humans pick up during in-person meetings. Because printed words alone can't always convey the full emotional meaning of a conversation, emoticons have evolved into a separate language, especially with the world increasingly relying on texting, tweeting and e-mail. Called Stickers, Facebook's emoticons were born out of more than two years of research into the compassion of Facebook members, then fine-tuned by scientists specializing in human facial expressions. And while they were inspired by evolutionist Charles Darwin's studies in the mid-19th century, Facebook believes they could be a vital part of human-to-human relationships in the digital 21st century.

Very cool results. At first, I wasn't sure if there was actually a way to gather this data, but it appears that with lots of training, it can be quiet easy to find things out!

If you're interested in learning more about it, consult Paul Eckman's research into microexpressions and the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). The animation industry depends on FACS, in fact!

Take a look at Dr. Paul Eckman's research on Facial Action Coding System, also bookmarked here (FACS)

Article talks about apologies and how CEOs whose facial expression matched their apologies had better invester recovery. Also, the vague language CEOs use in their apologies removed blame from themselves and made it seem like the mistake "just happened" rather than being their fault.

I wonder what the effects of possessing the skill to read others' facial expressions would produce. Would it strengthen our relationships with people or weaken them?

When the article said that misreading emotions is worst than not knowing of the emotion at all is worst, I question whether reading emotions is even worth it. Also, compared to a century ago, the divorce rate has skyrocketed. Could the lack of reading emotions be the cause of this increase? Emotions are innate and humans have always read or not read emotions. What's the difference between now and then? Freedom? So what if you can read someone's emotions? If you can't assist the person in his/her tragedy or emotional stress being able to read emotions is worthless. In addition Paul Ekman said that the percent rate after his lessons on DVD rose to 80-85%, but that still leaves 15%-20% of mistake. As i previously said, the article says that misreading emotions is worst than not knowing of the emotions at all. There's still of chance of being worst. Are we really accomplishing whatever we are trying to do by learning how to read emotions?

This is a very cool article, as it has caused me to become more aware of other people's reactions - sometimes I know that someone is holding an emotion in, but hopefully, through observing their facial gestures, perhaps I can find out how they feel.

This article talks about a face all humans make, the "not face." It combines the 3 emotions of anger, disgust, and contempt. It not only shows that we are able to express complex emotions, but also how the "not face" is closely tied to language. In ASL speakers, the sign for "not" is also replaced with the negative expression. This article also highlights how facial expression affects language and that there could be more facial expressions like grammatical markers.