Emotional Expression: Faces, Voices, Crying, and Social Signals
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 13, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Emotion & Affect Science · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Emotional expression is the observable way people communicate, display, and enact emotion through facial movements, voice, crying, posture, gesture, gaze, touch, and other behavior. A smile, a trembling voice, a sudden silence, or tears can influence what another person understands and does. Expression is part of emotion-related behavior, but its meaning depends on the person, situation, social relationship, culture, and combination of signals. No single facial movement or vocal feature provides an infallible reading of another person's private experience. Keltner and colleagues' review and the 2019 interdisciplinary review of facial expression evidence explain why modern affective science studies dynamic, multimodal signaling rather than treating faces as fixed emotion labels.
A person may feel afraid while keeping a calm face, laugh from embarrassment, cry from relief, or sound angry while speaking enthusiastically over background noise. Such examples are compatible with the scientific understanding that emotional experience and outward expression are connected probabilistically through physiology, learned practices, goals, and context. They also explain why a good interpretation begins with evidence from the whole interaction and, when appropriate, the person's own account.
What Is Emotional Expression in Psychology?
In psychology, emotional expression refers to facial, vocal, bodily, and behavioral activity that conveys or accompanies an emotional state or affects others' understanding of that state. The APA Dictionary's definition of affect display describes facial, vocal, and gestural behaviors that serve as indicators of affect. Emotion itself is broader: it can include subjective feeling, appraisal or evaluation, bodily response, attentional changes, action tendencies, and expression. The APA definition of emotion therefore encompasses experiential, behavioral, and physiological elements.
Expression can be spontaneous, habitual, socially shaped, strategically chosen, or a mixture of these. Someone may instinctively gasp when startled, deliberately smile to greet a colleague, suppress a visible reaction during a difficult conversation, or produce a supportive vocal tone while feeling exhausted. A signal can occur without the named emotion that an observer associates with it, and a genuine emotion can occur without the expected signal. These distinctions apply to adults and children, to ordinary positive and unpleasant emotions, and to both spoken and nonverbal communication.
Expression, emotional experience, and emotion recognition
Emotional experience is what a person subjectively feels or reports. Emotional expression is their observable behavior. Emotion recognition is the perceiver's inference about the meaning of that behavior. Researchers can examine each separately: a participant reports feeling anxious, a video records facial movement, an acoustic analysis measures vocal pitch, and another participant labels the expression as concern or anger. Agreement among these measures can be informative, but disagreement is itself a legitimate finding. As Barrett and colleagues (2019) emphasize, expressions carry substantial variation within emotion categories and considerable overlap between them.
Expression also differs from affect, a broader term that can refer to pleasantness and unpleasantness, activation, or observed emotional presentation. A cheerful facial display is an observable pattern; high positive affect is a description of affective state; joy is a specific emotion category. Readers seeking the broader architecture can consult What Are Emotions? Psychological Definition, Components, and Functions.
Why Emotional Expression Uses Multiple Channels
Human emotion-related signaling is distributed across channels because face, voice, body, and interpersonal behavior provide partly different information. A listener may hear urgency from a person's voice before seeing the person's eyes; an observer may notice protective body movement when the face seems neutral. In person, these signals unfold over time and respond to one another. In text-based communication, the voice and face may be absent, leaving words, punctuation, timing, and conventions to do more of the work. Keltner et al. (2019) review evidence for facial movement, vocalization, gesture, posture, touch, and dynamic patterns of expression.
A useful framework distinguishes the production of a signal, its physical form, its perception, and its social consequences. A sigh may originate in respiration and bodily state, become a sound with a particular duration and contour, be interpreted as frustration or relief, and prompt someone to ask what happened. Every stage can be influenced by learning, situation, culture, and social purpose. Scherer's review of vocal communication00084-5) formalized this separation through models of vocal encoding, acoustic transmission, and listener decoding.
Facial Expressions: What the Face Communicates
Movements, combinations, and timing
Facial expression involves changing configurations of the eyebrows, eyelids, eyes, nose, cheeks, mouth, and jaw. Researchers frequently describe these movements by muscle-related action units rather than first deciding what emotion they mean. A smile can involve lifting the corners of the mouth; expressions associated with distress may include changes around the brows and eyes; a startle reaction can involve a rapid eye opening and mouth movement. The meaning of these motions depends on intensity, timing, gaze, speech, and interpersonal setting. Barrett et al. (2019) review the strengths and limitations of inferring states from such configurations.
A crucial distinction is between observing an action and attributing a cause. Recording a raised eyebrow is closer to observing behavior than deciding that the person is surprised, disapproving, or skeptical. Facial Action Coding System approaches are designed to describe visible actions; an emotion label requires an additional interpretive step. Researchers sometimes study posed portraits because they standardize stimuli, whereas everyday interactions contain transitions, mixed signals, movement, conversation, and changing opportunities to communicate.
Why smiles do not have one meaning
Smiling can accompany pleasure, affiliation, encouragement, embarrassment, politeness, nervousness, or attempts to soften an interaction. The same visible smile may mean something different when someone receives praise, apologizes after a misunderstanding, or encounters a stranger. Likewise, an absence of smiling cannot establish the absence of pleasure. The major integrative scientific assessment finds substantial variation in how often proposed facial configurations occur during particular emotions and in what observers infer from them.
Expressions can also help cause social outcomes. A reassuring smile may make an approach feel welcome; a disapproving look may change a conversation; shared laughter may invite another person to join. These outcomes belong to the social function of expression and do not require the observer to know exactly what the expresser feels.
How body and situation change facial meaning
Facial movements are interpreted alongside body movement and situational information. In experiments involving intense positive and negative situations, observers could distinguish the emotional valence of isolated body postures more accurately than that of isolated peak-intensity facial expressions; body context also shifted how identical faces were perceived. This finding from Aviezer, Trope, and Todorov (2012) illustrates how perception integrates channels. It does not show that bodies always outperform faces in every setting.
Social expectations matter as well. A neutral face following a harsh comment can be perceived differently from the same face following a compliment. Observers bring their own prior knowledge, mood, and expectations. Their interpretations can diverge from a speaker's intention even when both are responding reasonably to the available evidence.
The Emotional Voice: Words, Prosody, and Vocal Bursts
Prosody: how something is said
Emotions may change the acoustic properties of speech, including fundamental frequency (perceived pitch), pitch range, loudness, speech rate, intensity contours, pauses, voice quality, and timing. The effect is probabilistic rather than uniquely diagnostic: excitement, fear, anger, performance style, language, and vocal effort can all influence overlapping acoustic features. Juslin and Laukka's review of vocal and musical communication examined 104 studies of vocal expression and reported regularities in acoustic cues and perceptual judgments. Laukka and colleagues' five-nation study analyzed how culturally variable production and perception depend on such cues.
People can communicate emotionally through speech without naming an emotion. Compare “I didn't expect that” spoken softly after a disappointment, rapidly during an excited surprise, or with a strained voice after frightening news. The sentence remains identical while its social implication changes. At the same time, ordinary acoustic differences due to fatigue, illness, stress, dialect, hearing, microphone quality, or speaking environment can resemble emotion-related differences. Listening accurately requires the words and context as well as the voice.
Laughter, sighs, gasps, screams, and other vocalizations
Nonverbal vocal bursts include laughter, cries, gasps, shrieks, sobs, sighs, groans, cheers, and exclamations. They can convey rich distinctions that ordinary lists of five or six emotions miss. In a study of over 2,000 vocal bursts and a smaller set of naturalistic recordings, Cowen, Elfenbein, Laukka, and Keltner (2019) identified at least 24 reliably distinguished emotion-related dimensions in listeners' judgments. The result describes the structure of perceived meaning in those samples; it is not proof that every person has exactly 24 universal vocal expressions.
Vocal meaning has both shared and culture-specific dimensions. Sauter et al. (2010) found cross-cultural recognition of a selected set of nonverbal emotional vocalizations, while later cross-cultural computational research documented shared and culture-specific meanings of vocal bursts in participants from five countries. Experimental choices, available emotion labels, speaker sampling, and the distinction between recognizing a stereotyped display and interpreting spontaneous speech all affect what can be concluded.
Why laughter is broader than happiness
Laughter may accompany amusement, companionship, excitement, surprise, discomfort, tension reduction, teasing, or ridicule. Its timing can invite affiliation or signal exclusion. A person may laugh without reporting much happiness, and a person can enjoy an event quietly. Treating laughter as a direct measurement of joy therefore confuses a communicative action with a subjective state. Researchers improve inference by considering conversational context, other signals, and the person's account rather than assuming one acoustic event corresponds to one private experience.
Bodily Expressions: Posture, Gesture, Gaze, and Touch
Posture and movement
A person may lean forward with interest, withdraw when threatened, stand taller after achievement, shift weight during unease, or lower their head in a socially exposed moment. These movements can accompany emotion and can themselves change what observers infer. Research on whole-body expressions finds that body context influences how people categorize facial and vocal signals. Van den Stock, Righart, and de Gelder (2007) demonstrated such cross-channel influences. Their findings support integration of information, rather than a simple fixed dictionary of postures.
Movement also serves action. Pulling away can protect, reaching toward a person can comfort, and stillness can be a response to uncertainty or concentrated attention. The same folded arms may reflect cold temperature, a comfortable habit, a desire for space, or an interpersonal boundary. Posture alone is too ambiguous to determine a specific emotion without contextual information.
Gaze, gesture, distance, and interaction
Eye contact, gaze aversion, head movements, hand gestures, interpersonal distance, and pacing can influence whether a speaker seems welcoming, guarded, urgent, embarrassed, or ready to cooperate. These patterns are partly culturally learned and vary with social role, familiarity, environment, and individual communication style. Gaze aversion can signal thoughtfulness, a wish to avoid overstimulation, deference, discomfort, or simply looking for information. It should be interpreted as part of the interaction rather than as an all-purpose marker of dishonesty or fear.
Emotional touch and its social meaning
Touch may communicate reassurance, gratitude, sympathy, care, urgency, affection, or disapproval. In controlled studies, Hertenstein et al. (2006) found that receivers in the United States and Spain could identify several emotions from touch on the arm at better-than-chance rates. This research establishes that contact can convey differentiated meaning under tested conditions; it does not imply that an identical touch will be welcome or interpreted similarly across relationships. Consent, context, cultural convention, personal history, and sensory preferences remain central to real-world touch.
Emotional Crying: Tears, Sobbing, and Social Signals
What makes emotional crying distinctive?
Crying can combine tears, facial movement, vocalization, altered breathing, body posture, and gestures. Tear production alone does not capture the full episode: the facial and vocal components may carry different information, and a person can experience deep sadness without visible tears. Emotional crying also occurs with relief, joy, frustration, empathy, overwhelming beauty, and interpersonal reconciliation. It therefore cannot be equated with sadness or interpreted as a clinical symptom by itself.
Researchers distinguish emotional tears from tears that lubricate or protect the eye. In social psychology, the central research question often concerns how other people react to visible emotional tears and crying behaviors. Biological explanations for human emotional tearfulness are still discussed, while the interpersonal effects can be tested more directly through controlled observations and experiments.
Do tears make other people more willing to help?
A large preregistered study involving 7,007 participants across 41 countries found that photographs with visible tears increased participants' stated intentions to offer support relative to comparable photographs without tears. The authors reported a moderate average effect (d = 0.49) alongside important variation across situations and countries. This is evidence about judgments and intentions in a photo-based task; it should not be read as a guarantee that an actual distressed person will receive care.
A complementary set of three retrospective daily-life studies with 2,277 participants found that crying was most often observed in close others and that helping depended strongly on the relationship and social setting. These observations challenge the idea that results from isolated photographs of unfamiliar people transfer straightforwardly to ordinary social life. In everyday interactions, people respond to the history of the relationship, the circumstances, the nature of the distress, and their own capacities.
Why a person may cry alone, in public, or not at all
Crying involves both bodily and social processes. Some people cry readily in trusted company and rarely around strangers; others cry privately; some have powerful emotions with little visible crying. Social expectations about age, gender, vulnerability, professionalism, and public behavior can shape display. Crying should not be treated as a direct gauge of emotional depth, sincerity, psychological health, or the urgency of another person's needs. Support is best guided by context and the person's expressed preferences.
What Emotional Expressions Do in Social Life
Informing, influencing, and coordinating
An expression may inform an observer that something matters, invite affiliation, warn others about a possible problem, communicate protest, signal willingness to reconcile, or alter the pace of conversation. In their Annual Review of Psychology synthesis, van Kleef and Côté (2022) describe how expressions affect observers' emotions, inferences, and behaviors in close relationships, negotiations, groups, customer interactions, and leadership. The same display can have different effects depending on whether observers regard it as appropriate or trustworthy in the situation.
An angry tone may communicate that a boundary has been crossed, but it can also undermine cooperation or create fear. A display of pride may make accomplishment visible and inspire others, or be interpreted as dominance. Tears may invite support or elicit hesitation. These patterns show why social communication is a process between people: expressions influence others, those others respond, and the response changes what happens next.
Expressions can be genuine, controlled, or mixed
People select how much of their experience to show for many ordinary reasons: privacy, courtesy, concentration, professional role, cultural convention, safety, playfulness, and concern for another person. An expression may reflect a real feeling and a deliberate communication choice simultaneously. Distinguishing spontaneous from deliberately shaped display can be scientifically interesting, but the mere presence of control is not evidence of dishonesty. The psychology of techniques for managing emotion and display belongs to the separate topic of emotion regulation.
Emotional contagion and interpersonal feedback
Expressions can contribute to changes in observers' own feeling and behavior. A collective cheer may intensify excitement, tense vocal exchanges may amplify conflict, and calm reassurance may help organize a difficult interaction. Researchers examine mechanisms such as perception, mimicry, inference, norms, and shared attention; their contribution differs by task and relationship. Van Kleef and Côté (2022) situate these effects within a broader framework of social information and interpersonal influence. Claims about precisely how emotional contagion operates require evidence beyond observing that people's emotions correlate.
Do Emotional Expressions Mean the Same Thing Across Cultures?
Cross-cultural evidence shows both recurrent patterns and culturally variable meanings. A meta-analysis by Elfenbein and Ambady (2002) found better-than-chance recognition across cultures for studied stimuli, together with an in-group recognition advantage. That result is compatible with some shared expressive information and with variation arising from experience, learned conventions, and contextual expectations. It does not establish that every emotion has one expression that all humans use and interpret in the same way.
Other studies challenge simple universality. Jack et al. (2012) reconstructed culturally patterned mental representations of facial expressions in a small comparison sample. Their experimental approach illuminated differences in representations while raising questions about generalization beyond the groups studied. Neither a single universality study nor a single counterexample resolves the complete theoretical debate.
A more recent large-scale 2024 experiment examined 45,231 facial reactions to evocative videos across participant groups primarily in the United States, Western Europe, and Japan. Researchers identified multiple dimensions of experience and found meaningful cross-cultural convergence in facial actions alongside differences in display tendencies and substantial individual variability. Its authors disclosed employment relationships with companies working on emotion-related AI. The geographical scope, measurement choices, and predictive modeling matter when assessing wider generalization.
Cultural display rules and social expectations
Social norms influence when and where people smile, cry, avert their gaze, laugh, speak loudly, or show anger. Norms can vary by setting within the same community: a funeral, sporting event, family dinner, classroom, and workplace create different expressive opportunities. Language also affects the labels people apply to experiences and expressions. An unfamiliar expression can be misread when observers import conventions from their own environment. Better interpretation combines knowledge of cultural patterns with attention to the particular person and context rather than applying a group stereotype.
How Emotional Expression Changes Across Individuals and Situations
People differ in expressive intensity, frequency, muscle movement, vocal style, crying, social learning, and willingness to display emotion. The same person can vary by relationship, energy level, privacy, and current goal. Age, developmental history, disability, hearing and communication access, neurodevelopmental differences, and physical health can alter how an expression is produced or perceived. These sources of variation call for appropriate sampling and careful interpretation rather than a single universal baseline.
For example, a person who communicates predominantly through text or an augmentative communication system can communicate emotional meaning through words, timing, symbols, and choices even if facial or vocal channels are unavailable. Another person may prefer limited eye contact, have a habitual neutral facial presentation, or speak with atypical prosody. Such differences do not establish lack of emotion, empathy, or interpersonal intention. In clinical settings, a person's subjective report, functional context, and relevant health information provide essential evidence separate from expressive appearance.
What Can Scientists Measure About Emotional Expression?
Behavioral observation and facial movement coding
Researchers can use systematic observational coding, frame-by-frame video analysis, facial action coding, movement tracking, and judgments by multiple observers. These approaches quantify observable behavior such as an eyebrow raise, duration of a smile, or movement of the head. They can be useful for studying change across conditions but rely on operational definitions, coder training, interrater agreement, camera quality, and representative sampling. Coding facial actions and identifying a person's internal emotion are distinct tasks, as emphasized in Barrett et al. (2019).
Acoustic analysis and vocal annotation
Audio analysis can quantify pitch, loudness, voice quality, speech rate, temporal structure, and spectral characteristics. Human raters may judge the emotion conveyed by the voice, while speakers independently report their own feelings. Comparing these measures helps test what information reaches listeners. Controlled acting tasks can establish technical consistency but may exaggerate contrasts relative to spontaneous conversations; multilingual and cross-cultural research introduces additional questions about language and context. Scherer (2003)00084-5) provides a methodological overview of the distinction between encoding, cues, and judgments.
Self-report, situation sampling, and multimodal studies
Self-report asks people what they experienced or intended to communicate. Experience sampling collects reports during daily life; naturalistic audio or video can capture unfolding interaction; experiments manipulate circumstances or signals. The best method depends on the question. If a researcher wants to know whether people produce more smiles during a particular task, facial movement is a relevant outcome. If the question concerns felt joy, a facial classifier alone is an incomplete measure. If the question concerns how an observer interprets a display, listener or viewer judgments are directly relevant. No instrument by itself combines all these meanings into one ground-truth emotion label.
Quality assessment also asks whether the data contain enough participants, cultures, age groups, languages, and ordinary interactions to support general claims. Designs that compare actors posing named emotions differ from those recording spontaneous expressions while participants describe their own experiences. Researchers should separate within-sample classification accuracy, cross-person generalization, actual causal influence, and ecological validity.
Can Faces, Voices, or AI Read a Person's True Feelings?
Facial, vocal, and physiological measurements can sometimes predict how a person or group labels emotion under specific conditions. A classifier can identify patterns in its training data and may achieve useful performance on tasks with carefully defined labels. Such performance does not demonstrate direct access to subjective experience. Differences across settings, people, cultural backgrounds, languages, cameras, microphones, and task instructions can reduce transfer. The comprehensive 2019 review documents why a one-to-one mapping between visible facial movements and discrete emotional states is unsupported.
Claims about microexpressions require the same care. A very brief facial movement can be observed or coded, but its duration alone does not establish concealed intent, deception, or a specific private emotion. A person may show an involuntary reaction, a conventional movement, or an ambiguous muscular event. Using brief expressions as a stand-alone lie detector exceeds what the evidence supports. Automated emotion recognition raises further concerns about the definition of ground truth, biased labels, performance across groups, and the consequences of acting on uncertain inferences. These issues deserve their own targeted analysis rather than a promise of mind-reading technology.
Common Misconceptions About Emotional Expression
“A smile means happiness.” Smiles can signal pleasure but also politeness, embarrassment, affiliation, and other social purposes. “No tears means no sadness.” Crying varies widely, and many people feel sadness without crying. “The face reveals the truth when words disagree.” Facial movements are meaningful clues with variable correspondence to experience, not a privileged truth detector. “A quiet person has weak emotions.” Expressiveness and intensity of subjective emotion are separate variables. “A universal face chart works everywhere.” Many studies find shared information, but specific movement patterns, recognition, and social rules show contextual and cultural variation. “An algorithm's accuracy proves it knows what someone feels.” Statistical prediction in a restricted dataset is different from direct observation of subjective experience.
Practical Implications for Understanding Other People
When someone appears distressed or excited, treat the expression as information worth exploring. Notice the full interaction: speech content, voice, body, timing, recent events, and the relationship. A tentative question such as “You seem concerned; did I understand that correctly?” allows the person to supply context and correct the inference. This is especially helpful when the person uses an unfamiliar communication style or when a signal could have several meanings.
When your own message matters, consider whether the intended meaning is accessible through the channels available. A brief text may omit reassuring prosody; an expression of frustration may be interpreted as personal anger; silence may be read as disagreement when it simply reflects thought. Clear verbal explanation can complement rather than compete with expressive behavior. The scientific lesson is a practical one: communication improves when inference is treated as revisable and emotional self-report is given appropriate weight.
Researchers, educators, clinicians, employers, and technology designers should be especially careful when interpreting expression under unequal power. Unverified interpretations of facial or vocal behavior can affect judgments about sincerity, competence, trust, or psychological well-being. Expression-based systems and assessment protocols need documented validity for the exact question, population, and setting in which they are used. Ordinary differences in expression should not automatically be translated into symptoms or diagnoses.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are examples of emotional expression?
Examples include smiling during reunion, cheering after good news, frowning during disagreement, a trembling voice during fear, tearful crying during grief or relief, laughing with friends, leaning toward someone with concern, changing posture during embarrassment, and offering a comforting touch. Each behavior can have multiple meanings, so examples illustrate possible expressions rather than definitive emotion codes.
What is the difference between emotion and emotional expression?
Emotion refers to a broader psychological process that may include subjective feeling, evaluation, bodily changes, motivation, and action. Emotional expression refers to the visible or audible behavior that may accompany or communicate some aspect of that process. A person can experience an emotion without displaying a stereotypical expression, and an expression can serve a social purpose beyond reflecting a feeling.
Are facial expressions universal?
Some expression-related patterns and above-chance recognition occur across studied cultures, while the strength, meaning, frequency, and detailed patterns vary. The extent of universality depends on the definition of expression, method, chosen stimuli, and populations. Elfenbein and Ambady (2002), Jack et al. (2012), and Cowen et al. (2024) illuminate different parts of the evidence.
Is crying always a sign of sadness?
No. Crying may accompany grief, pain, joy, relief, frustration, tenderness, or overwhelming social experience. Some people do not cry during intense sadness. Whether and how tears elicit support depends on situation and relationship, as illustrated by Zickfeld et al. (2021) and Barthelmäs et al. (2024).
Can someone's tone of voice reveal emotion?
Voice carries information through pitch, loudness, timing, speech rate, and voice quality, and listeners can infer emotional meaning with some success. These patterns vary with language, speaker, context, and recording conditions. The voice provides evidence for interpretation, but it does not uniquely identify an inner state. Juslin and Laukka (2003) review the relevant acoustic evidence.
Is body language more accurate than facial expression?
Neither channel is consistently superior across all tasks. In some intense emotional contexts, body posture provided stronger information than isolated facial expressions; in other settings faces and voices can be highly informative. Combining appropriately contextualized signals often changes interpretation. The answer depends on the emotional situation and on what the researcher means by accuracy.
Can people deliberately control emotional expression?
Yes. People often modify expressions because of politeness, privacy, social norms, work roles, safety, or interpersonal goals. Some aspects are habitual or automatic, while others are deliberately shaped. A controlled expression can coexist with a genuine feeling. The study of how people manage emotion over time belongs to emotion regulation research.
Do microexpressions reliably detect lies?
A rapid facial movement does not provide a validated stand-alone indicator of lying or a person's hidden thoughts. Interpreting deception requires a distinct empirical question and appropriate evidence. Facial movements are not uniquely mapped to emotions, and emotions are not uniquely mapped to deception. The review by Barrett et al. (2019) explains the foundational inferential problem.
Can a person express emotion without speaking or using facial expressions?
Yes. Gesture, posture, touch, movement, writing, symbols, augmentative communication, and action in context can all convey emotional meaning. Communication access and individual preferences shape which channels are available and effective. The absence of a familiar facial or vocal pattern does not establish the absence of emotional experience.
How do psychologists study emotional expression?
Researchers use facial movement coding, observation, acoustic analysis, recordings of natural interactions, controlled experiments, self-report, experience sampling, and judgments of social meaning. Each method measures a defined aspect of expression or interpretation, and conclusions are strongest when the measurement fits the question and generalizes beyond a narrow stimulus set.
Related Articles
For the broader science of emotion, see What Are Emotions? Psychological Definition, Components, and Functions. For the distinct question of how observers interpret expressive cues, read Emotion Recognition: Faces, Voices, and Context. For a structured overview of emotion categories, see Types of Emotions: Basic, Complex, and Social Categories.
References
American Psychological Association. (2018). Affect display. APA Dictionary of Psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/affect-display
American Psychological Association. (2018). Emotion. APA Dictionary of Psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/emotion
Aviezer, H., Trope, Y., & Todorov, A. (2012). Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and negative emotions. Science, 338(6111), 1225–1229. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1224313
Barrett, L. F., Adolphs, R., Marsella, S., Martinez, A. M., & Pollak, S. D. (2019). Emotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 20(1), 1–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100619832930
Barthelmäs, M., Stöckle, D., & Keller, J. (2024). On the social signal function of emotional crying: Broadening the perspective to social interactions in daily life. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001313
Cowen, A. S., Elfenbein, H. A., Laukka, P., & Keltner, D. (2019). Mapping 24 emotions conveyed by brief human vocalization. American Psychologist, 74(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000399
Cowen, A. S., et al. (2023). Deep learning reveals what vocal bursts express in different cultures. Nature Human Behaviour. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01489-2
Cowen, A. S., Brooks, J. A., Prasad, G., et al. (2024). How emotion is experienced and expressed in multiple cultures: A large-scale experiment across North America, Europe, and Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1350631. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1350631
Elfenbein, H. A., & Ambady, N. (2002). On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(2), 203–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.203
Hertenstein, M. J., Keltner, D., App, B., Bulleit, B. A., & Jaskolka, A. R. (2006). Touch communicates distinct emotions. Emotion, 6(3), 528–533. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.528
Jack, R. E., Garrod, O. G. B., Yu, H., Caldara, R., & Schyns, P. G. (2012). Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(19), 7241–7244. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1200155109
Juslin, P. N., & Laukka, P. (2003). Communication of emotions in vocal expression and music performance: Different channels, same code? Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 770–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.770
Keltner, D., Sauter, D., Tracy, J., & Cowen, A. (2019). Emotional expression: Advances in basic emotion theory. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 43(2), 133–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-019-00293-3
Laukka, P., Elfenbein, H. A., Thingujam, N. S., Rockstuhl, T., Iraki, F. K., Chui, W., & Althoff, J. (2016). The expression and recognition of emotions in the voice across five nations: A lens model analysis based on acoustic features. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(5), 686–705. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000066
Sauter, D. A., Eisner, F., Ekman, P., & Scott, S. K. (2010). Cross-cultural recognition of basic emotions through nonverbal emotional vocalizations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(6), 2408–2412. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908239106
Scherer, K. R. (2003). Vocal communication of emotion: A review of research paradigms. Speech Communication, 40(1–2), 227–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00084-500084-5)
Van den Stock, J., Righart, R., & de Gelder, B. (2007). Body expressions influence recognition of emotions in the face and voice. Emotion, 7(3), 487–494. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.3.487
van Kleef, G. A., & Côté, S. (2022). The social effects of emotions. Annual Review of Psychology, 73, 629–658. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-010855
Zickfeld, J. H., van de Ven, N., Pich, O., et al. (2021). Tears evoke the intention to offer social support: A systematic investigation of the interpersonal effects of emotional crying across 41 countries. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 95, 104137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104137