In everyday life, people communicate not only with another person but also in front of other people. How do people behave during communication when observed by others? Effects of an observer (presence vs absence) and interpersonal relationship (friends vs strangers vs alone) on facial behavior were examined. Participants viewed film clips that elicited positive affect (film presentation) and discussed their impressions about the clips (conversation). Participants rated their subjective emotions and social motives. Durations of smiles, gazes, and utterances of each participant were coded. The presence of an observer did not affect facial behavior during the film presentation, but did affect gazes during conversation. Whereas the presence of an observer seemed to facilitate affiliation in pairs of strangers, communication between friends was exclusive and not affected by an observer.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArakawaA.SuzukiN. (2004) Hand movements and feeling. Japanese Journal of Research on Emotions, 10, 56–64.
2.
BernieriF. J.GillsJ. S.DavisJ. M.GraheJ. E. (1996) Dyad rapport and the accuracy of its judgment across situations: A lens model analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 110–129.
3.
ChengC. M.ChartrandT. L. (2003) Self-monitoring without awareness: Using mimicry as a nonconscious affiliation strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1170–1179.
4.
EkmanP. (1972) Universal and cultural differences in facial expression of emotion. In ColeJ. R. (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1971. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Pp. 207–283.
5.
FenigsteinA. (1979) Self-consciousness, self-attention and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 75–86.
6.
FenigsteinA.ScheierM. F.BussA. H. (1975) Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 4:4:, 522–527.
7.
FlemingJ. H. (1994) Multiple-audience problems, tactical communication, and social interaction: A relational-regulation perspective. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 215–292.
8.
FlemingJ. H.DarleyJ. M.HiltonJ. L.KojetinB. A. (1990) Multiple audience problem: A strategic communication perspective on social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 593–609.
9.
FriesenW. V. (1972) Cultural differences in facial expressions in a social situation: An experimental test on the concept of display rules. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of California, San Francisco.
10.
GonzalezR.GriffinD. (2000) On the statistics of interdependence: Treating dyadic data with respect. In IckesW.DuckS. (Eds.), The social psychology of personal relationships. Chichester, UK: Wiley. Pp.181–213.
11.
HessU.BanseR.KappasA. (1995) The intensity of facial expression is determined by underlying affective state and social situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 280–288.
12.
IshimoriM.SimizuH. (2004) The pairwise approach to the analysis of dyadic data. Japanese Journal of Interpersonal and Social Psychology, 4, 121–127.
13.
JakobsE.MansteadA. S. R.FischerA. H. (1999) Social motives, emotional feelings, and smiling. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 321–345.
14.
JakobsE.MansteadA. S. R.FischerA. H. (2001) Social context effects on facial activity in a negative emotional setting. Emotion, 1, 51–69.
15.
KimuraM.YogoM.DaiboI. (2005) Expressivity halo effect in the conversation about emotional episodes. Japanese Journal of Research on Emotions, 12, 12–23.
16.
KrautR. E. (1982) Social presence, facial feedback, and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 853–863.
17.
LakinJ. L.ChartrandT. L. (2003) Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science, 14, 334–339.
18.
LakinJ. L.JefferisV. E.ChengC. M.ChartrandT. L. (2003) The chameleon effect as social glue: Evidence for the evolutionary significance of nonconscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27, 145–162.
19.
NaruseF. (1999) Effect of display rules on emotion expression. Unpublished graduation thesis, Doshisha Univer., Kyoto, Japan.
20.
OgawaT.MonchiR.KikuyaM.SuzukiN. (2000) Development of the General Affect Scales. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 71, 241–246.
21.
OgawaT.TsurugaM.KobayashiT.MatsudaI.HirotaA.SuzukiN. (2007) Effects of arousal level on the physiological responding on the Concealed Information Test. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 78, 407–415.
22.
RichmondV. P.McCroskeyJ. C.HicksonM. L. (2010) Nonverbal behavior in interpersonal relations. (7th ed.) Boston: Ally & Bacon.
23.
SchererS. E.SchiffM. R. (1973) Perceived intimacy, physical distance and eye contact. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 36, 835–841.
24.
SugawaraK. (1984) An attempt to construct the Self-consciousness Scale for Japanese. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 55, 184–488.
25.
TsujiH. (1993) Self-consciousness and other-consciousness. Kyoto, Japan: Kitaoji Publishing.
26.
WagnerH. L.LeeV. (1999) Facial behavior alone and in the presence of others. In PhilippotP.FeldmanR. S.CoatsE. J. (Eds.), The social context of nonverbal behavior. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press. Pp. 262–286.
27.
YamamotoK.SuzukiN. (2005) The effects of personal relationships on facial displays. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 76, 375–381.
28.
YamamotoK.SuzukiN. (2006) The effects of social interaction and personal relationships on facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 30, 167–179.
29.
YarczowerM.DarunsL. (1982) Social inhibition of spontaneous facial expressions in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 831–837.
