Frowning Makes it Seem Harder Honors Thesis Katie Michel Under the direction of Craig Smith & Leslie Kirby April, 2007

The Hypothesis Brow-furrowing will increase the perception that the task at hand is more difficult than it really is.

Why is this an interesting hypothesis? Working from appraisal theory, the hypothesis integrates 2 lines of research The componential structure of facial expression The facial feedback hypothesis

Appraisal Theory Evaluative process These evaluations, or appraisals, initiate and organize the other components of an emotional response

The Componential Structure of facial expression Not monolithic, unanalyzable entities Organized around the appraisals producing the emotions Some facial components directly reflect appraisal information

Ekman’s famous faces

Facial Feedback Hypothesis Physiological response creates the emotional elicitation FFH presents a challenge to appraisal theory But, if facial actions can be shown to prime their associated appraisals, then this priming provides evidence that facial actions might produce their emotional effects through cognitive activity (i.e. appraisals)

Significance of my experiment Link between the eyebrow frown and the perception of goal obstacles. Working in the opposite direction -- will manipulating the facial expression prime the relevant appraisal?

Benefits Provide convergent validation of the demonstrated links between brow activity and appraisal of goal obstacles. Help reconcile FFH with Appraisal Theory

Predictions Brow activity will prime/activate relevant concepts: Unpleasantness and perceived obstacles Effort

Stroop Meaning of word vs. color of word When the meaning of the word is especially attention grabbing, it makes responding to the color more difficult, which produces a measurable delay Therefore, it predicts slower responses to words whose meanings have been primed

Pilot Study

Pilot Limitations small n, potential alternative explanation - the golf tees were painful Address these issues, run a larger sample

Methods: How to test this hypothesis We needed a control We needed to find a non-painful and non-reactive way to manipulate facial muscle activity We needed a sensitive measure of concept activation

Task Posing Control Relaxed face, completely neutral to any stimuli. Mouth Lips curled upwards towards the nose Brow Furrowed together (“Like you are trying to touch a dot in between your eyebrows and top of your nose”)

Modified Stroop List of 110 words, 20 high obstacle, 20 high effort, 20 low effort/obstacle, 20 pleasant, 20 unpleasant, 10 practice Assuming our hypothesis is true, subjects should respond slower to high obstacle words and unpleasant words, if concept is primed.

Methods, cont.’d 19 participants – 12 female, 7 male Dropped data of one male participant, due to % error rate = 18 total analyzed Conditions were randomized IV– facial manipulations DV – reaction time EMG physio was used as a manipulation check

Task Word List Unpleasant words: Agony, bomb, brutal, harm Pleasant words: Amazing, beauty, beloved, charmed High Obstacle: Setback, prohibition, barricade, impediment

Task Word List, cont’d. High effort words: Drill, energy, exertion, haul Neutral words: Aluminum, apparent, briefly, cabinet

Procedure Consent Electrodes 5 minute baseline, Sudoku Practice, then 3 conditions with 5-min. baseline in between Debrief

Results Controlling for order as a covariate did not substantially affect the results. Marginally reliable effect of pose Multivariate F (10, 56) = 1.92, p =.06 Planned comparison - there is a significant difference for unpleasantness related to the brow furrow!

Results Graph

Limitations Unpleasantness, High Obstacle, and High Effort words We did see statistically significant results for the unpleasant words, but only nonsignificant trends for high obstacle and high effort words

Plans for Future Research Refine word lists Refine control task Use a bigger sample

Questions?

Thank you! Craig Smith Leslie Kirby Smith/Kirby lab group