Jeff T. Larsen

The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual's facial expressions can influence their emotional experience (e.g., that smiling can make one feel happier). However, a reoccurring concern is that supposed facial feedback effects are merely methodological artifacts. Six experiments conducted across 29 countries (N = 995) examined the extent to which the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports were moderated by (a) the hypothesis communicated to participants (i.e., demand characteristics) and (b) participants' beliefs about facial feedback effects. Results indicated that these methodological artifacts moderated, but did not fully account for, the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports. Even when participants were explicitly told or personally believed that facial poses do not influence emotions, they still exhibited facial feedback effects. These results indicate that facial feedback effects are not solely driven by demand or placebo effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Despite benefits for reducing disease spread, masks obscure facial expressions, impairing nonverbal communication of emotion. We assessed the impact of lower (masks) and upper (sunglasses) facial coverings on valence judgments of clearly valenced (fearful, happy) and ambiguously valenced (surprised) facial expressions, the latter of which have valid positive and negative meaning. Results from an online sample (n = 146) showed that masks, but not sunglasses, impaired judgments of clearly valenced expressions compared to expressions without coverings (ps < .001). Sunglasses, but not masks, affected judgments of the ambiguous surprised expressions (p = .08). Drift diffusion models revealed that face coverings impacted the judgment process in an expression-specific manner: Masks increased the amount of evidence required to reach a judgment boundary for both fearful and surprised faces (ps < .001) by eliminating starting point bias, whereas masks slowed evidence accumulation for happy faces (p < .001). Political ideology interacted with these effects, such that we observed stronger negativity bias towards masked expressions for Republican- than Democrat-leaning participants, particularly for happy faces (p < .001). In short, our results replicate interference effects of face coverings in the decoding of emotional expressions and suggest that political beliefs alter the degree of this interference. The findings have implications for nonverbal communication of emotion and intergroup communication.

Meaningful endings lead people to experience mixed emotions, but it is unclear why. We hypothesized that it is in part because meaningful endings lead people to reminisce on good times. In Study 1, college students who took part in our study on their graduation day (vs. a typical day) reported having spent more time that day reminiscing on good times. Moreover, reminiscence on good times partially mediated the effect of graduation on happiness, sadness, and mixed emotions. In Study 2, we asked undergraduates to reminisce on good (vs. ordinary) times from high school and found that reminiscence on good times elicited happiness, sadness, and mixed emotions. In Study 3, we found that reminiscing on good times that were not (vs. were) repeatable elicited especially intense sadness and mixed emotions. Taken together, results indicate that reminiscing on good times, especially good times gone, elicits mixed emotions and that these emotional consequences help explain why meaningful endings elicit mixed emotions.

Recently, Schulze and colleagues (2021) and we (Coles, Larsen, Kuribayashi, & Kuelz, 2019) published two separate meta-analyses examining whether glabellar-region botulinum toxin injections can decrease depression. Both meta-analysis teams reviewed similar studies; discussed similar mechanisms-of-action; observed unexpectedly large effect sizes; observed asymmetry in funnel plot distributions; and acknowledged that it is difficult to blind participants. Yet, our two teams came to starkly different conclusions. Whereas Schulze and colleagues concluded that the treatment reaches rigorous “1a level of evidence” standards (p. 338), we concluded the opposite: that the claim is “not yet well substantiated by a credible balance of evidence” (p. 11). In this Letter to the Editor, we clarify why we believe that a more careful consideration of the quality of the evidence, potential costs, and potential benefits is necessary before promoting botulinum toxin as an off-label treatment for depression.

The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual’s facial expressions can influence their emotional experience (e.g., that smiling can make one feel happier). However, a reoccurring concern is that supposed facial feedback effects are merely methodological artifacts. Six experiments conducted across 29 countries (N = 995) examined the extent to which the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports were moderated by (a) the hypothesis communicated to participants (i.e., demand characteristics) and (b) participants’ beliefs about facial feedback effects. Results indicated that these methodological artifacts moderated, but did not fully account for, the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports. Even when participants were explicitly told or personally believed that facial poses do not influence emotions, they still exhibited facial feedback effects. These results indicate that facial feedback effects are not solely driven by demand or placebo effects.

Researchers have proposed that blocking facial feedback via glabellar-region botulinum toxin injections (GBTX) can reduce depression. Random-effects meta-analyses of studies that administered GBTX to individuals with depression indicate that, 6 weeks postintervention, GBTX groups were significantly less depressed compared to placebo groups (d = 0.83) and pretreatment levels (d = 1.57). However, we noted the following concerns: (a) effect sizes were extraordinarily large, (b) authors failed to provide information to compute 51% of relevant effect sizes, (c) 96% of effect sizes came from studies conducted by investigators with conflicts of interest, (d) there is some evidence of publication bias, and (e) studies used ineffective blinding procedures. These considerations suggest that confidence in GBTX as a treatment for depression is premature.

Following theories of emotional embodiment, the facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual’s subjective experience of emotion is influenced by their facial expressions. Evidence for this hypothesis, however, has been mixed. We formed a global adversarial collaboration designed to specify and test the conditions that should most reliably produce facial feedback effects. Data from 3,878 hypothesis-unaware participants from 19 countries indicated that a facial mimicry and voluntary facial action task could both amplify and initiate feelings of happiness. Evidence, however, was less conclusive when unobtrusively manipulating facial feedback via a pen-in-mouth task. When present, the effects of facial feedback on happiness were similar in size to the effect of mildly pleasant images.

Hernandez et al.’s (2018) review provides clear evidence that positive affect can contribute to well-being and fits nicely within the positive psychology framework. The emergence of positive psychology has been valuable for understanding well-being, but I suggest that a balanced psychology can prove even more valuable in the years to come. A balanced psychology requires giving as much attention to negative emotion as to positive emotion. It also requires considering whether there are circumstances in which positive emotions can be detrimental and negative emotions can be beneficial. Along those lines, evidence reviewed here indicates that healthy coping with severe stressors involves experiencing a combination of positive and negative emotions.

Theories of the structure of affect make competing predictions about whether people can feel happy and sad at the same time. Considerable evidence that happiness and sadness can co-occur has accumulated in the past 15 years, but holes in the case remain. I describe those holes and suggest strategies for testing them in future research. I also explore the possibility that the case may never be closed, in part because the competing hypotheses may not be entirely falsifiable. Fortunately, hypotheses need not be falsifiable to be useful. Research on mixed emotions has been generative and the body of research will continue to shed light on the structure of affect.