The smile: expressions and significance

Smiling (Non-Verbal communication)

Study of Relevant Literature on Smiling as a Non-Verbal Form of Communication: Typologies, Comparisons, and Situations

Among the various forms of non-verbal communication extant and utilized, it is the smile or the act of smiling that is considered universal and used by all communicating individuals, whatever social context or cultural background they have been exposed to. Smile as a form of non-verbal communication has evolved to convey different meanings and purposes, and is used in various communication interactions or situations.

Given this dynamic nature of the smile as a way of communicating messages or transmitting 'communication signals' from one communicator to another, it is not surprising, then, that a multitude of studies and researches have been conducted about this non-verbal communication form. These studies centered particularly on the typological, comparative interpretation, and situational dimensions of smiling.

The discussion that follows assume the position that, the dynamicity of smiling as a non-verbal communication form make it subject to various typologies, especially when determining its typologies, differences across different communicator characteristics, and usage in situational contexts. Overall, smiling as a communication action has evolved to become a complex form of non-verbal communication, expressed in various forms, used by different kinds of communicators, and applied in different situations/contexts.

Interpretations on Smiling as a Form of Non-Verbal Communication

The study of relevant literature on smiling are formed primarily from analyses of different studies that are quantitative in nature, wherein smiling or the concept of smile is determined quantitatively as well, through action units (AU). Thus, the results of these studies, in general, are expressed through interpretation of AUs provided for by the subjects of experiments or respondents for surveys on smiling or emotional expressions.

This section is divided into four sections, with each section discussing a specific dimension of smiling as a communication action. The first section centers on the typologies attached to smiling, which are basically identified into two main groups: Duchenne and mixed smile types. The second section focuses on the purposes and meanings attached to smiling, which, in this study of literature, is primarily attached to varying levels or degrees of trustworthiness given to another communicator. Section 3 provides a comparison of smiling as utilized by different communicators: male and female communicators. As will be shown later, the study of this comparative analysis showed no distinct differences in the utilization of smile as a communication form between males and females. The last section, meanwhile, applies the act of smiling in various situations or communication contexts, providing a clearer understanding of smiling as function of social interaction and establishment of social harmony.

Typologies of Smiling

Typologies of smiling is determined in Harris's (2005) analysis of how individuals respond when prompted or experiencing physical actions such as tickling, experiencing pain, or expressing (or responding to) sense of humor. Using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS), the author determined smiling as measured by the FACS in action units (AUs). Through the AUs, quantitative research has become more possible and easier to measure, providing useful insights into the question of the universality of smiling as a form of non-verbal communication.

Harris generally grouped smile types into two: the Duchenne-type of smiling, and the mixed type. The Duchenne smile is "composed of both smile (upturned lips produced by activation of the zygomatic major) and a crinkling of the eyes," facial expressions that most often convey feelings of "amusement or pleasure." Further, Duchenne smiles are considered "symmetrical" in nature, and have a duration of lasting for 0.5 up to 4 seconds. Mixed type smiles, meanwhile, are categorized as "controlled" expressions of happiness or positive emotions, often called "smile controls," which are defined as "muscular movements that either obscure a potential smile or counter the upward pull of the zygomatic major" (656)

It is through these types of smiling that Harris determined facial behavior, wherein an experiment exposed the subjects to different kinds of situations wherein smiling is the expected immediate response or one of the expected emotional responses. Through the AUs, the researcher then determined the subject's facial behavior, as collectively assessed from his/her facial expressions per situation, and reported emotions felt during a specific situation or inducement of the situations (tickling, experiencing pain, and expression of sense of humor).

Further into the author's analysis, it is important to note that mixed types of smile have more than just one form of expression of positive emotions or feelings. Unlike Duchenne smiles, which demonstrate pleasure and happiness, mixed types were identified to be more than just expressions of happiness and amusement. They also demonstrate negative emotions or feelings, which is described by the author as: "...a mixed smile might be produced to mask negative affect, as in pain, or it might reflect unintentional smiling combined with discomfort" (665).

This finding brings into fore an important function of mixed types of smiling. More than just expressions of feelings that are positive in nature, smiling can also signify feelings and emotions that are negative in their meaning. This is one indication that indeed, smiling has evolved into a complex non-verbal communication action, bringing with different meanings and connotations.

While Harris delved into the multi-faceted expressions of mixed types of smile, the study lacked further insights into how the smiles are actually "communicated" by the communicator or individual experiencing these emotions. It is vital that in addition to the quantitative determination of smiling (based on AUs), expression of smiling must be accompanied with an honest self-report from the part of the subject, in which s/he divulges exactly what s/he felt during the time s/he reacted with the 'kind' of smile identified (by the author/experimenter) during the experiment.

Smiling as a sign of trustworthiness

Smiling has always been identified as a sign of both attractiveness and trustworthiness. These two purposes of smiling -- that is, to appear to be both attractive and trustworthy at the same time -- takes into consideration the relationship that an individual has to be attractive in order to appear trustworthy to the other communicator.

Zaidel's (2003) study, however, did not find support to this assumption. In analyzing the smiles and levels of trustworthiness attributed to these smiles, the author found out that, when analyzed generally, smiling does not signify trustworthiness. However, Zaidel quantitatively analyzed smiling from different 'face angles,' and it surfaced that "left-left faces were judged previously to display a more salient smile than the right-right faces...a significant difference emerged between trustworthiness and smiling in both left-left and right-right faces," suggesting that trustworthiness is actually dependent on the face angle at which the individual is smiling from (231).

The dynamicity and specific face angles were determined through a computer interface program, which allowed the subjects to "judge" face angles at a 3D or three-dimensional angle. Through the use of computer technology, the methodology of determining which part of the human smile as executed by the individual's facial make-up is symbolic or connotes trustworthiness. Of course, it can always be argued that there might be specific "face angles" that were left out and not included in the study, but the conduct of 38 trials (that is, possible face angles) per subject demonstrates the exhaustive nature of the study. Thus, it can be said that Zaidel's generalization is not only a very insightful look into the quantitative (or biological) nature of smiling, but it also yielded important findings about the difference in meaning or connotation given when smiles are executed at different face angles.

Zaidel's study may have debunked the assumption that generally, smiling signifies trustworthiness, but such an assumption is proven to be right in the case of infants, as exemplified in Venezia's (2004) analysis of smiling among infants. As one of the earliest forms of communication learned by humans, infants displayed the propensity to smile to signify lesser "potential stranger anxiety," or conversely, "increasing familiarity" with an individual (403).

Called "anticipatory smiles," this kind of smile among infants occurs more commonly among infants that have already reached the age of six months. In describing the nature of anticipatory smiles and its role in reflecting the infant's expressed trustworthiness at another individual (identified as the "social partner"), Venezia has this to say (404):

only the infant's gaze from the object to the social partner indexes his or her intentional stance. During anticipatory smiling...infants gaze at the object, smile, and then, while continuing to smile, gaze at the experimenter...it is possible that the infant's maintenance of the smile while gazing from the object to the social partner indexes the infant's awareness of these two features of the environment and the relation between them...anticipatory smiles may be a more reliable measure of social understanding and self-other awareness

Gender differences in smiling

Smiling, like other forms of communication, is posited to be also gender-dependent. That is, communication theorists and researchers hold that there are differences between males and females while non-verbally communicating with another communicator or other communicators. Hess's (2005) study explores this hypothesis, wherein it was found out instead of being gender dependent, smiling is actually dependent on the personality characteristics of the individual more than his/her gender.

Findings from the study showed that levels of perceived affiliation of the individual determines the perceived expressiveness of smiles, whether this smile is given out by a man or a woman. In the study, individuals who were rated and perceived as "highly-affiliative" are perceived to be more expressive, and both highly-affiliative male and female participants of the study were identified as more expressive than participants with low affiliation ratings (532).