↓ Skip to main content

Explicit recognition of emotional facial expressions is shaped by expertise: evidence from professional actors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Explicit recognition of emotional facial expressions is shaped by expertise: evidence from professional actors
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00382
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimiliano Conson, Marta Ponari, Eva Monteforte, Giusy Ricciato, Marco Sarà, Dario Grossi, Luigi Trojano

Abstract

Can reading others' emotional states be shaped by expertise? We assessed processing of emotional facial expressions in professional actors trained either to voluntary activate mimicry to reproduce character's emotions (as foreseen by the "Mimic Method"), or to infer others' inner states from reading the emotional context (as foreseen by "Stanislavski Method"). In explicit recognition of facial expressions (Experiment 1), the two experimental groups differed from each other and from a control group with no acting experience: the Mimic group was more accurate, whereas the Stanislavski group was slower. Neither acting experience, instead, influenced implicit processing of emotional faces (Experiment 2). We argue that expertise can selectively influence explicit recognition of others' facial expressions, depending on the kind of "emotional expertise".

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 4%
India 1 2%
Unknown 44 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 21%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 7 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 40%
Arts and Humanities 5 11%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 8 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2014.
All research outputs
#4,602,797
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,473
of 31,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,330
of 284,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#331
of 968 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,930 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 968 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.