Home » Opinion » Book review
On reading faces, faking Smiles and laughing eyes
By Wang Yong |
January 23, 2010, Saturday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
FOR non-believers in Buddhism or Taoism that emphasizes the importance of a tranquil spirit, Dan Hill's book "Emotionomics: Leveraging Emotions for Business Success" makes cool bedside reading.
It essentially says that an "analysis of facial muscle activity" is an extremely reliable, indeed the best tool, to determine whether a person is speaking his or her mind.
The book may appeal to fans of "Lie to Me," the American TV series about a genius psychologist who interprets micro-expressions and body language. The character is based on a notable psychologist at the University of California at San Francisco.
If true, this facial coding theory would undermine ancient Chinese wisdom that one can never know the mind of another person although one can know his or her face.
The truth is this facial coding theory is only half true. The author is woefully optimistic about the revelations of facial coding and ability to read code.
If facial coding were really "extremely reliable" in telling whether someone is telling a lie, there would be no secrets about extra-marital affairs, no secrets about corruption, no secrets about spying.
The theory misses one key point. While the author is right in saying that people often do not say what they feel, he is too hasty to assure the reader that one's facial expression, especially eye expressions, never lie.
In the past few weeks, when I played ancient Chinese music on my guqin (seven-stringed zither), I often felt an unspoken happiness and peace of mind, but my wife would say that I had an unpleasant frown.
How could I feel happy in my heart but look disturbed in the eyes of someone else? My wife suggested I look at myself in the mirror when I played again, and I did so. I was aghast at how true her observation was: I looked exactly like a miserable soul when I actually felt happy.
Then I found I was not the only misunderstood "miserable soul." Many guqin masters, other musicians for that matter, looked quite distressed while performing music about profound happiness or beauty.
Facial coding does give away one's true feeling to a certain extent, but it can't be an exact science. However, in "Emotionomics," the author goes so far as to claim that true smiles last for about four seconds, while lying smiles last for five to 10 seconds and involve timing that makes no sense.
Except for too much faith in facial coding, the book is a pleasant read, rich in humorous details. For example, the author cautions the reader against what he calls the "social smile" and "social smilers."
"The face becomes rounder as the corners of the mouth move up and out and the cheeks lift upward," the author says. However, the muscles around the eyes are much more difficult to manipulate into genuine creases signifying pleasure or good will, he says.
Mencius (372-289 BC) would have agreed with the author. Mencius said: "You can't have a more reliable tool in judging a person than his or her eyes ... Watch his or her eyes when you listen to him or her speak, and you will arrive at a fair judgment."
But neither Mencius or Dan Hill says whether the eyes give away one's true feeling at the moment or reveal one's innate character that's more or less constant at all times.
Hill suggests that job prospects who generate true smiles during interviews are upbeat, hence good candidates as sales people.
Well, I have been fooled by too many faces that once looked genuine to me at a key moment.
It essentially says that an "analysis of facial muscle activity" is an extremely reliable, indeed the best tool, to determine whether a person is speaking his or her mind.
The book may appeal to fans of "Lie to Me," the American TV series about a genius psychologist who interprets micro-expressions and body language. The character is based on a notable psychologist at the University of California at San Francisco.
If true, this facial coding theory would undermine ancient Chinese wisdom that one can never know the mind of another person although one can know his or her face.
The truth is this facial coding theory is only half true. The author is woefully optimistic about the revelations of facial coding and ability to read code.
If facial coding were really "extremely reliable" in telling whether someone is telling a lie, there would be no secrets about extra-marital affairs, no secrets about corruption, no secrets about spying.
The theory misses one key point. While the author is right in saying that people often do not say what they feel, he is too hasty to assure the reader that one's facial expression, especially eye expressions, never lie.
In the past few weeks, when I played ancient Chinese music on my guqin (seven-stringed zither), I often felt an unspoken happiness and peace of mind, but my wife would say that I had an unpleasant frown.
How could I feel happy in my heart but look disturbed in the eyes of someone else? My wife suggested I look at myself in the mirror when I played again, and I did so. I was aghast at how true her observation was: I looked exactly like a miserable soul when I actually felt happy.
Then I found I was not the only misunderstood "miserable soul." Many guqin masters, other musicians for that matter, looked quite distressed while performing music about profound happiness or beauty.
Facial coding does give away one's true feeling to a certain extent, but it can't be an exact science. However, in "Emotionomics," the author goes so far as to claim that true smiles last for about four seconds, while lying smiles last for five to 10 seconds and involve timing that makes no sense.
Except for too much faith in facial coding, the book is a pleasant read, rich in humorous details. For example, the author cautions the reader against what he calls the "social smile" and "social smilers."
"The face becomes rounder as the corners of the mouth move up and out and the cheeks lift upward," the author says. However, the muscles around the eyes are much more difficult to manipulate into genuine creases signifying pleasure or good will, he says.
Mencius (372-289 BC) would have agreed with the author. Mencius said: "You can't have a more reliable tool in judging a person than his or her eyes ... Watch his or her eyes when you listen to him or her speak, and you will arrive at a fair judgment."
But neither Mencius or Dan Hill says whether the eyes give away one's true feeling at the moment or reveal one's innate character that's more or less constant at all times.
Hill suggests that job prospects who generate true smiles during interviews are upbeat, hence good candidates as sales people.
Well, I have been fooled by too many faces that once looked genuine to me at a key moment.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
