[Xmca-l] Re: What Faces Can't Tell Us

[Martin John Packer]

Hi Philip,

What you've written sounds to me like a critique not of the paper that Peter posted, but of Ekman's approach (The TV show "Lie to me" was based on his work). Lisa Barrett's research apparently reaches the same conclusion as you: we don't read people's emotions on the basis of a single, decontextualized feature such as gaze aversion.

Martin


On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:23 AM, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> wrote:

> 
> Peter, i agree with your sense of hesitation in accepting the research of facial expressions - i've been thinking about how police interrogation techniques have depended up on theories of eye behavior. Twenty-three out of 24 peer-reviewed studies published in scientific journals reporting experiments on eye behavior as an indicator of lying have rejected this hypothesis.1 No scientific evidence exists to suggest that eye behavior or gaze aversion can gauge truthfulness reliably.
> 
> phillip
> 
> 
> Phillip White, PhD
> Urban Community Teacher Education Program
> Site Coordinator
> Montview Elementary, Aurora, CO
> phillip.white@ucdenver.edu
> or
> pawhite@aps.k12.co.us
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky [smago@uga.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 4:50 AM
> To: lchcmike@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What Faces Can't Tell Us
> 
> Briefly, my beef comes from the interpretation of a response to a facial expression outside the context of how such an expression might authentically be generated in response to something real. Maybe it's just my own difficulty in reading social cues as a high-functioning Asperger's case, and the problems that are exacerbated by the decontextualization of the expressions in a lab setting.
>