A NEW TEST TO MEASURE EMOTION RECOGNITION ABILITY: MA TSUMOTO AND EKMAN’S JAPANESE AND CAUCASIAN
BRIEF AFFECT RECOGNITION TEST (JACBART)
ABSTRACT: In this article, we report the development of a new test设计构思
grace李秀英
designed to measure individual differences in emotion recognition ability(ERA), five studies examining the reliability and validity of the scores produced using this test, and the first evidence for a correlation between ERA measured by a standardized test and personality. Utilizing Matsumoto and Ekman’s (1988) Japane and Caucasian Facial Expressions of Emotion (JACFEE) and Neutral
Faces (JACNeuF), we call this measure the Japane and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART). The JACBART improves on previous measures of ERA by (1) using expressions that have substantial validity and reliability data associated with them, (2) including pors of two visibly different races (3) balanced across ven universal emotions (4) with equal distribution of por race and x across emotions (5) in a format that eliminates afterimages associated with fast exposures. Scores derived using the JACBART are reliable, and three studies demonstrated a correlation between ERA and the personality constructs of Openness and Conscientiousness, while one study reports a correlation with Extraversion and Neuroticism.
Rearch on judgments of emotion from facial expressions has a long and important history in psychology, and has contributed greatly to the literature concerning the universality of emotion, and to knowledge concerning differences between gender, ethnicity, culture, and psychiatric status. Studies examining the relationship between individual differences in judgments of emotion (hereon referred to as Emotion Recognition Ability—ERA) and personality also have a considerable history, but is checkered with inconsistent findings. On one hand, ERA has been correlated with emotional expression (e.g., Lanzetta & Kleck, 1970; Levy, 1964; Zuckerman, Hall, DeFrank, & Ronthal, 1976; Zuckerman, Larrance, Hall, DeFrank, & Ronthal, 1979), lf-monitoring (Mill,1984; Mufson&
Nowicki,1991;Riggio & Friedman, 1982); social desirability (Cunningham, 1977); depression, control, aggression, and gregariousness (Toner & Gates, 1985); and social style, mental ability , achievement ,普通话等级标准
and psychological mindedness (LeRoux, 1987) . On the other
懒惰的意思hand, Cunningham (1977) failed to replicate a relationship between lf-monitoring and ERA, and Zuckerman et al. (1979) found a relationship for women but not men. Buck, Savin, Miller, and Caul (1972) found a relationship between ERA and extraversion, as did Zuckerman et al. (1979). Cunningham (1977), however, did not replicate the findings, and instead found a relationship with neuroticism.
Theoretically, it is not unreasonable to consider that ERA should be related to stable personality traits. Individuals who are better at judging emotions in others should have greater degrees of interpersonal consciousness or concern; they should be more in tune with their environment, and with others. As an important component of our nonverbal communication system, such skills would be necessary for successful adaptation and manipulation of the environment, ensuring the stability and integrity of the lf.
Becau ERA is an important part of our daily lives, it is easy to consider how it
should be related to various personality constructs, such as tho specified in the five factor model. Extraversion, for example, is associated with stimulation eking from others and the environment. As such, extraverts should be more willing to take in data concerning the emotions of others, being more interpersonally conscious of others in the environment. Individuals who score high on neuroticism, however, tend to be emotionally avoidant; becau they are prone to experience negative emotions, they should have a tendency to avoid the recognition and awareness of others’emotions. The personality construct of openn ess is similar to extraversion in the n that open individuals tend to be curious and interested in stimulation; they should be more attendant to the emotions of others. Conscientiousness is related to cooperation with and attending to others; conscientious individuals are more thorough, reliable,
and efficient. They should be better at recognizing emotions becau they are more attentive to details, and are better able to participate in such emotion judgment tasks. Why have previous attempts to establish a relationship between personality and ERA been awash with contradictory findings? One possible reason is the stimuli ud in previous studies, which were different in each study and thus not equivalent across the studies nor, as Bruner and Tagiuri (1954) suggested, did th
专四考试时间几点到几点
ey cover a reprentative spectrum of emotional expressions (LeRoux, 1987). Another possible reason is the fact that, with only one exception (LeRoux, 1987, but
the data are not published), many previous studies ud measures specifically gene- rated in each study rather than accepted, standardized tests. This distinction is important (O’Sullivan,1982), becau there is no guarantee that accuracy judgments
were made against a valid standard.
年中总结范文If a standardized test were available, data could be generated using a valid standard, and the same test can be ud across studies. At the very least, inconsistencies in the nature of the stimuli could be ruled out as a possible moderator of the contradictions.
Previous Tests of ERA
There has been a number of such tests developed in the past, each asssing some aspect of ERA (and its clo relative, nonverbal decoding skills,)1 but each with its own limitations (e review by O’Sullivan, 1982). Some focus on nonverbal behaviors, such as the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS: Ronthal, Hall, DiMatteo, Rogers, & Archer, 1979), the Social Skills Inventory (SSI: Riggio,
1986), the Social Interpretations Test (Archer & Akert, 1977), and the Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy Scale (DANVA: Nowicki & Duke, 1994). But, the do not focus on the recognition of discrete emotional states. Other tests focus more cloly on emotion, such as the Communication and增大压强的方法
axxReception of Affect Test (CARA T: Buck, 1976), the Test of Emotion Styles (TES: Allen & Hamsher, 1974), the Understanding our Feelings test (Elmore,1985), the Feldstein Affect Judgment Test (Wolitzky,1973), the Affective Communication Test (Friedman, Prince, Riggio, & DiMatteo, 1980), and the Contextual and Affective Sensitivity test (CAST: Trimboli & Walker, 1993). But, the are also questionable becau of the lack of validity of the expressions ud to portray emotion, the ability to produce specific scores on discrete emotions, or the lack of balance within the test to portray encoder characteristics (e.g., x, race)equally.
The u of facial expressions of emotion that are universally recognized would address one concern.The data associated with expressions of anger, contempt, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, and surpri provide sufficient evidence of their external validity to portray accurately and reliably the discrete emotional states.
郑州室内设计学校
In fact, some studies have ud the expressions as measures (e.g., Matsumoto, 1989 , 1992) . But , while they address some concerns, one artifact of their u is the
high agreement level in judgments, which precludes the measurement of individual differences.
大阪将取消火炬传递There are at least three ways to address the issue of high agreement levels: (1) reduce image size, (2) distort temporal and/or spatial resolution, or (3) increa prentation speed. Ekman, Brattesani, O’Sullivan, and Frien (1979) explored the first method, using two cameras to videotape nurs during“honest”and “dishonest”interviews. One camera provided the“small face”conditio n in which the image size was one-fifth the area of a typical human face. The other camera provided the“large face”condition in which the image size was twice the area. Image size did not affect judgments about the nurs’affective states. Ekman et al. (1979) concluded“facial actions provide consistent information despite considerable size reduction”(p. 61).
