Display options
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2014 Mar 06;5:139. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00139. eCollection 2014.

The dual nature of the human face: there is a little Jekyll and a little Hyde in all of us.

Frontiers in psychology

Karolann Robinson, Caroline Blais, Justin Duncan, Hélène Forget, Daniel Fiset

Affiliations

  1. Département de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais Gatineau, QC, Canada ; Centre de Recherche en Neuropsychologie et Cognition Montréal, QC, Canada.
  2. Département de Psychoéducation et de Psychologie, Université du Québec en Outaouais Gatineau, QC, Canada.

PMID: 24639658 PMCID: PMC3944200 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00139

Abstract

The fact that a mere glance makes it possible to extract a wealth of information about the person being observed is testament to both the salience of the human face and the brain's high efficiency in processing this information. Prior work has revealed that social judgments of faces are determined by facial features that vary on two orthogonal dimensions: trustworthiness and dominance. We conducted two experiments to investigate the visual information subtending trustworthiness and dominance judgments. In Experiment 1, we used the Bubbles technique to identify the facial areas and the spatial frequencies that modulate these two judgments. Our results show that the eye and mouth areas in high-to-medium spatial frequency bands were positively correlated with judgments of trustworthiness; the eyebrows region in medium-to-low frequency bands was positively correlated with judgments of dominance; and the lower left jawbone in medium-to-low frequency bands was negatively correlated with judgments of dominance. In Experiment 2, we used the results of Experiment 1 to induce subtle variations in the relative contrast of different facial areas, and showed that it is possible to rig social perception using such a manipulation.

Keywords: dominance; social face perception; social judgments; trust; visual information extraction

References

  1. Vision Res. 2004 Mar;44(5):471-7; discussion 479-82 - PubMed
  2. Perception. 2010;39(4):514-32 - PubMed
  3. Emotion. 2006 May;6(2):269-78 - PubMed
  4. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2008 May 1;2(3):1497 - PubMed
  5. Perception. 2009;38(11):1688-99 - PubMed
  6. Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42 - PubMed
  7. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997 Mar;72(3):558-69 - PubMed
  8. J Vis. 2009 Oct 13;9(11):12.1-13 - PubMed
  9. Br J Psychol. 2007 Feb;98(Pt 1):111-26 - PubMed
  10. Vision Res. 2001 Aug;41(17):2261-71 - PubMed
  11. Vision Res. 2004;44(13):1493-8 - PubMed
  12. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2006 Aug;32(4):1023-39 - PubMed
  13. Psychol Sci. 2005 Mar;16(3):184-9 - PubMed
  14. PLoS One. 2009;4(1):e4215 - PubMed
  15. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2013 Jun;23(3):373-80 - PubMed
  16. Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6 - PubMed
  17. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Aug 12;105(32):11087-92 - PubMed
  18. Psychol Sci. 2006 Jul;17(7):592-8 - PubMed
  19. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 May;78(5):837-52 - PubMed
  20. J Vis. 2005 Oct 05;5(9):659-67 - PubMed

Publication Types