Abstract
Researchers have reported two biases in how people recognise and respond to angry and happy facial expressions: (1) a gender-expression bias (Becker et al. in J Pers Soc Psychol, 92(2):179–190, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.179, 2007)—faster identification of male faces as angry and female faces as happy and (2) an approach–avoidance bias—faster avoidance of people who appear angry and faster approach responses people who appear happy (Heuer et al. in Behav Res The, 45(12):2990–3001, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2007.08.010 2007; Marsh et al. in Emotion, 5(1), 119–124, https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.119, 2005; Rotteveel and Phaf in Emotion 4(2):156–172, https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.4.2.156, 2004). The aim of the current research is to gain insight into the nature of such biases by applying the drift diffusion model to the results of an approach–avoidance task. Sixty-five participants (33 female) identified faces as either happy or angry by pushing and pulling a joystick. In agreement with the original study of this effect (Solarz 1960) there were clear participant gender differences—both the approach avoidance and gender-expression biases were larger in magnitude for female compared to male participants. The diffusion model results extend recent research (Krypotos et al. in Cogn Emot 29(8):1424–1444, https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2014.985635, 2015) by indicating that the gender-expression and approach–avoidance biases are mediated by separate cognitive processes.
Highlights
Approach–avoidance to facial expressionsEmotional expressions convey important information about another person—how they are feeling and what they intend to do
The effects were generally small in magnitude, Siedel et al recorded an approach effect for happy faces— participants were faster to pull vs push the joystick—and, an avoidance effect for angry faces—participants were faster to push than pull the joystick in response to angry faces
The diffusion model can provide a richer account of data from this task
Summary
Approach–avoidance to facial expressionsEmotional expressions convey important information about another person—how they are feeling and what they intend to do. In one task (Marsh et al, 2005; Seidel, Habel, Kirschner, Gur, & Derntl, 2010) participants are required to push a joystick away from (avoidance) and pull it toward (approach) themselves in response to specific facial expressions. Instructions to either push or pull in response to a specific expression (e.g., pull for happy and push for angry) are typically varied between blocks. Siedel and colleagues (Seidel et al, 2010) paired expressions within blocks so that participants responded to happy and disgusted facial expression in one block and angry and sad expressions in another block. The effects were generally small in magnitude, Siedel et al recorded an approach effect for happy faces— participants were faster to pull vs push the joystick—and, an avoidance effect for angry faces—participants were faster to push than pull the joystick in response to angry faces
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
