Micro-Expressions of Fear During the 2016 Presidential Campaign Trail: Their Influence on Trait Perceptions of Donald Trump

The influence of President Trump's micro-expressions during his COVID-19 national address on viewers' emotional response

This preregistered study replicates and extends studies concerning emotional response to wartime rally speeches and applies it to U.S. President Donald Trump's first national address regarding the COVID-19 pandemic on March 11, 2020. We experimentally test the effect of a micro-expression (ME) by Trump associated with appraised threat on change in participant self-reported distress, sadness, anger, affinity, and reassurance while controlling for followership. We find that polarization is perpetuated in emotional response to the address which focused on portraying the COVID-19 threat as being of Chinese provenance. We also find a significant, albeit slight, effect by Trump's ME on self-reported sadness, suggesting that this facial behavior served did not diminish his speech, instead serving as a form of nonverbal punctuation. Further exploration of participant response using the Linguistic Inventory and Word Count software reinforces and extends these findings.

An ingroup disadvantage in recognizing micro-expressions

Micro-expression is a fleeting facial expression of emotion that usually occurs in high-stake situations and reveals the true emotion that a person tries to conceal. Due to its unique nature, recognizing micro-expression has great applications for fields like law enforcement, medical treatment, and national security. However, the psychological mechanism of micro-expression recognition is still poorly understood. In the present research, we sought to expand upon previous research to investigate whether the group membership of the expresser influences the recognition process of micro-expressions. By conducting two behavioral studies, we found that contrary to the widespread ingroup advantage found in macro-expression recognition, there was a robust ingroup disadvantage in micro-expression recognition instead. Specifically, in Study 1A and 1B, we found that participants were more accurate at recognizing the intense and subtle micro-expressions of their racial outgroups than those micro-expressions of their racial ingroups, and neither the training experience nor the duration of micro-expressions moderated this ingroup disadvantage. In Study 2A and 2B, we further found that mere social categorization alone was sufficient to elicit the ingroup disadvantage for the recognition of intense and subtle micro-expressions, and such an effect was also unaffected by the duration of micro-expressions. These results suggest that individuals spontaneously employ the social category information of others to recognize micro-expressions, and the ingroup disadvantage in micro-expression stems partly from motivated differential processing of ingroup micro-expressions.

Oxytocin Impairs the Recognition of Micro-Expressions of Surprise and Disgust

As fleeting facial expressions which reveal the emotion that a person tries to conceal, micro-expressions have great application potentials for fields like security, national defense and medical treatment. However, the physiological basis for the recognition of these facial expressions is poorly understood. In the present research, we utilized a double-blind, placebo-controlled, mixed-model experimental design to investigate the effects of oxytocin on the recognition of micro-expressions in three behavioral studies. Specifically, in Studies 1 and 2, participants were asked to perform a laboratory-based standardized micro-expression recognition task after self-administration of a single dose of intranasal oxytocin (40 IU) or placebo (containing all ingredients except for the neuropeptide). In Study 3, we further examined the effects of oxytocin on the recognition of natural micro-expressions. The results showed that intranasal oxytocin decreased the recognition speed for standardized intense micro-expressions of surprise (Study 1) and decreased the recognition accuracy for standardized subtle micro-expressions of disgust (Study 2). The results of Study 3 further revealed that intranasal oxytocin administration significantly reduced the recognition accuracy for natural micro-expressions of surprise and disgust. The present research is the first to investigate the effects of oxytocin on micro-expression recognition. It suggests that the oxytocin mainly plays an inhibiting role in the recognition of micro-expressions and there are fundamental differences in the neurophysiological basis for the recognition of micro-expressions and macro-expressions.

Leaders' Windows of Tolerance for Affect Arousal-and Their Effects on Political Decision-making During COVID-19

The recent ‘affect revolution’ in strategic decision-making research has placed greater emphasis on the role of stress and emotions in decision-making, with new theorizing to highlight how leader decisions often differ from rational choice expectations. However, while existing theories add to our understanding of the interplay between affect and cognition, they have not yet explained why affect drives decisions in some situations and not others. Undertheorized connections between leaders’ neurobiological windows of tolerance to affect arousal and their self-regulatory capacity—their capacity to regulate stress and emotions so that these phenomena do not drive resulting decisions—may hold the key to explaining this variation in affect’s influence on decision-making. Furthermore, this article considers how leaders’ windows of tolerance have unique ripple effects in their social environments, thereby affecting their groups’ collective window of tolerance. While regulated leaders can convey a calming and creative influence in their organizations that helps the group access strategic decision-making, dysregulated leaders are likely to convey stress and emotion contagion—which may erode the group’s ability to cooperate, adapt, and learn. It illustrates this argument using evidence from the upper echelons of governmental decision-making, comparing New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s and US President Donald Trump’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic in their respective nations. It concludes by offering hypotheses for testing the argument in future empirical research.