| Literature DB >> 34025499 |
Mariska E Kret1,2, Angela T Maitner3, Agneta H Fischer4.
Abstract
While new regulations obligate or recommend people to wear medical masks at public places to prevent further spread of the Covid-19 virus, there are still open questions as to what face coverage does to social emotional communication. Previous research on the effects of wearing veils or face-covering niqabs showed that covering of the mouth led to the attribution of negative emotions and to the perception of less intense positive emotions. The current study compares a sample from the Netherlands with a sample from the United Arab Emirates on their perception of emotions from faces covered by a niqab, censoring black bars, or uncovered faces. The results show that covering the mouth area leads to greater anxiety in participants in both countries. Furthermore, although participants did not report greater decoding difficulties for faces that were covered as compared to fully visible, results show that face coverage did influence emotion perception. Specifically, happiness and anger were perceived as being less intense. Further, face coverage by a niqab, as compared to black bars, yielded lower emotional intensity ratings. We conclude that face coverage in particular can modulate the perception of emotions, but that affective contextual cues may play a role as well.Entities:
Keywords: cross-cultural comparison; emotion recognition; face coverage; interpretation bias; veiled faces
Year: 2021 PMID: 34025499 PMCID: PMC8137903 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.620632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Stills from emotion videos, full face, covered face (black bar and niqab).
Descriptives.
| Anger | Full Face | 4.768 | 1.687 | 5.065 | 1.299 |
| Black bar | 3.000 | 2.156 | 3.573 | 2.170 | |
| Niqab | 2.871 | 2.080 | 2.895 | 1.982 | |
| Happy | Full Face | 4.598 | 1.886 | 5.500 | 1.330 |
| Black bar | 3.040 | 1.810 | 3.917 | 1.709 | |
| Niqab | 2.661 | 1.830 | 3.023 | 1.903 | |
| Shame | Full Face | 4.089 | 2.034 | 4.837 | 1.775 |
| Black bar | 4.774 | 1.983 | 4.542 | 1.794 | |
| Niqab | 4.460 | 1.914 | 4.535 | 1.720 | |
Emotion-congruent intensity ratings.
| Intercept | 8, 1.893 | 45.830 | 0.000 | ||||
| Face coverage (y/n) | 1, 1.893 | 138.937 | 0.000 | ||||
| Country | 1, 1.893 | 18.995 | 0.000 | ||||
| Emotion display | 1, 1.893 | 11.762 | 0.000 | ||||
| Face coverage * Emotion display | 2, 1.893 | 54.654 | 0.000 | ||||
| Country * Emotion display | 2, 1.893 | 3.648 | 0.026 | ||||
| Variance | 3.391 | 0.121 | 28.098 | 0.000 | 3.163 | 3.636 | |
| Intercept [subject = id] | Variance | 0.121 | 0.058 | 2.072 | 0.038 | 0.047 | 0.311 |
FIGURE 2Emotion congruent intensity ratings. (A) Predicted means showing an interaction between emotion display and face coverage; (B) Main effect of face coverage type showing that participants rated women wearing a niqab as expressing emotions less intensely compared to women whose faces were partly covered by black bars.
Emotion-congruent intensity ratings.
| Intercept | 6 | 32.764 | 0.000 | |||
| Country | 1 | 6.765 | 0.009 | |||
| Emotion display | 2 | 78.153 | 0.000 | |||
| Face coverage | 1 | 12.459 | 0.000 | |||
| Country * Emotion display | 2 | 3.667 | 0.026 | |||
| Residual | 3.744 | 0.148 | 25.328 | 0.000 | 3.465 | 4.045 |
| Intercept [subject = id]: Variance components: This parameter is redundant | ||||||