Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl
the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects,
then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and
observations.
Today's article explains an important facet of nonverbal communication: the main reason for facial expressions. We're taught, traditionally, that one's face expresses one's mood at the time of making the expression. But as far as I can recall, that's all I was taught. Happy faces mean the person is happy. Sad and angry faces mean the same.
The fact is, that's the smallest portion of what a facial expression is used for. The vast majority of its use is to influence others. Our expressions do the talking. If you're walking around a grocery store scowling, you may be personally indicating to yourself that you're in a bad mood (but you could also be frustrated, constipated or in pain)... but you're also broadcasting to everyone around you that you should be left alone. Or a person may be utterly miserable due to life circumstances or current pain level, but when asked about their favorite subject, or put into a situation where they're required to smile to be polite, they will smile- not because they're feeling better, but because the subject matter or situation merits it.
The article also makes an example of the "disgust" face. If used only in the internal sense, meaning to project our moods, we would only use this face to express having an upset stomach or smelling something gross. But the article points out that we also use the same expression to express a dislike for whatever music happens to be playing, to let other people know we don't like that type of music. I suppose I always kind of thought one led to the other... but perhaps a better example would be the absence of such an expression. In polite company, even if you don't like the music, you're usually better off keeping your opinions to yourself. So while you might hate polka, the host loves it and instead of making a disgusted face, you would school your face to polite stillness or a faint smile, to specifically NOT indicate you hate your host's musical choices. This facial expression choice, then, is a form of white/polite lie.
The article also points out that people smile more at funny videos when they're watching them with friends- even if the friends are at a remote location watching at the same time. I think, in retrospect, I may have noticed this effect. Things that people said were funny often just...weren't, much, to me when I checked them out later. But I assumed it's because I didn't have as developed a sense of humor as most people, or a different sense of humor. I watch most of the media I consume alone, and it's a pretty rare piece of work that can make me smile regularly. I have a few webcomics that can do it, and I treasure them all the more for that... but I guess perhaps the fault is not specifically mine.
The quote from the main researcher at the end of the article seems spot on, too. "When we are with others, we're always checking to see how they are reacting, and they make faces when we see them looking for our reactions." I think most NT people automatically learn to do this somehow. And I've read a book that purports to teach you how to teach autistic people to do this. To its credit, it at least did it in a fun way, making a game out of it for the autistic child, rather than making it drudgery. Speaking from personal experience, it's drudgery for most of your life, so you can at least make it fun to start with.
But that actually brings up the question as to how I learned this skill. When I was reading this article, I stopped and went, "Wow, this is totally correct, but why didn't I already know this consciously?" Nobody taught me in the most direct sense, using any method. I also wasn't exceptionally observant as a child. Most of my memories revolve around internal (personal) thoughts and observations, rather than external (thinking about others) ones. My best guess is that I learned it very slowly, over the course of years, by haphazard observation.
The first piece of the learning is already somewhat stated above: by wearing your emotions on your face, you're broadcasting them, and people will react to them. I'm pretty sure that's exactly what happened, and I must've taken notice. I was likely taught, as everyone else is, that facial expressions are how you display emotions. So that was what I did... and people did react to it. That likely taught me, without somehow directly teaching me, that people use your face as an information point for how to act in a situation. Learning NOT to display those emotions was probably harder, and probably required someone (likely my mother) to say something like: "Well, even though you feel that way, you shouldn't look like it if you're going to be in polite company." I have a pathological tendency towards bluntness and honesty, so this inversion probably took a lot of time to learn.
That seems like most of this concept, though: either displaying an emotion or not doing so, depending on how you're feeling or wanting the interaction to go.
Today's article explains an important facet of nonverbal communication: the main reason for facial expressions. We're taught, traditionally, that one's face expresses one's mood at the time of making the expression. But as far as I can recall, that's all I was taught. Happy faces mean the person is happy. Sad and angry faces mean the same.
The fact is, that's the smallest portion of what a facial expression is used for. The vast majority of its use is to influence others. Our expressions do the talking. If you're walking around a grocery store scowling, you may be personally indicating to yourself that you're in a bad mood (but you could also be frustrated, constipated or in pain)... but you're also broadcasting to everyone around you that you should be left alone. Or a person may be utterly miserable due to life circumstances or current pain level, but when asked about their favorite subject, or put into a situation where they're required to smile to be polite, they will smile- not because they're feeling better, but because the subject matter or situation merits it.
The article also makes an example of the "disgust" face. If used only in the internal sense, meaning to project our moods, we would only use this face to express having an upset stomach or smelling something gross. But the article points out that we also use the same expression to express a dislike for whatever music happens to be playing, to let other people know we don't like that type of music. I suppose I always kind of thought one led to the other... but perhaps a better example would be the absence of such an expression. In polite company, even if you don't like the music, you're usually better off keeping your opinions to yourself. So while you might hate polka, the host loves it and instead of making a disgusted face, you would school your face to polite stillness or a faint smile, to specifically NOT indicate you hate your host's musical choices. This facial expression choice, then, is a form of white/polite lie.
The article also points out that people smile more at funny videos when they're watching them with friends- even if the friends are at a remote location watching at the same time. I think, in retrospect, I may have noticed this effect. Things that people said were funny often just...weren't, much, to me when I checked them out later. But I assumed it's because I didn't have as developed a sense of humor as most people, or a different sense of humor. I watch most of the media I consume alone, and it's a pretty rare piece of work that can make me smile regularly. I have a few webcomics that can do it, and I treasure them all the more for that... but I guess perhaps the fault is not specifically mine.
The quote from the main researcher at the end of the article seems spot on, too. "When we are with others, we're always checking to see how they are reacting, and they make faces when we see them looking for our reactions." I think most NT people automatically learn to do this somehow. And I've read a book that purports to teach you how to teach autistic people to do this. To its credit, it at least did it in a fun way, making a game out of it for the autistic child, rather than making it drudgery. Speaking from personal experience, it's drudgery for most of your life, so you can at least make it fun to start with.
But that actually brings up the question as to how I learned this skill. When I was reading this article, I stopped and went, "Wow, this is totally correct, but why didn't I already know this consciously?" Nobody taught me in the most direct sense, using any method. I also wasn't exceptionally observant as a child. Most of my memories revolve around internal (personal) thoughts and observations, rather than external (thinking about others) ones. My best guess is that I learned it very slowly, over the course of years, by haphazard observation.
The first piece of the learning is already somewhat stated above: by wearing your emotions on your face, you're broadcasting them, and people will react to them. I'm pretty sure that's exactly what happened, and I must've taken notice. I was likely taught, as everyone else is, that facial expressions are how you display emotions. So that was what I did... and people did react to it. That likely taught me, without somehow directly teaching me, that people use your face as an information point for how to act in a situation. Learning NOT to display those emotions was probably harder, and probably required someone (likely my mother) to say something like: "Well, even though you feel that way, you shouldn't look like it if you're going to be in polite company." I have a pathological tendency towards bluntness and honesty, so this inversion probably took a lot of time to learn.
That seems like most of this concept, though: either displaying an emotion or not doing so, depending on how you're feeling or wanting the interaction to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment