This research investigated whether LGBTQ* minority stress and public displays of affection (PDA; e.g., kissing, hugging) among LGBTQ* couples are context-sensitive. We expected that (a) LQBTQ* minority stress would be more prevalent in a harmful (i.e., city center) versus a less harmful (i.e., university campus) context, and (b) PDA would be reduced for LGBTQ* couples in a harmful context. In three studies, LGBTQ* and Hetero/Cis students ( N Total = 517) reported LGBTQ*-specific minority stress and PDA in the city and on campus. The city center was higher in minority stress than the campus in all studies. Also, LGBTQ* participants’ PDA enjoyment was lower in the city than on campus (Studies 1 and 3). Minority stress mediated the context effect on PDA (Study 3). A qualitative analysis illuminated the harmful versus protective natures of public contexts. We conclude that a protective context can powerfully promote healthy LGBTQ* relationship behavior.
In the last decade, empirical sciences have faced a tremendous change in the way of conducting research. As a broad interdisciplinary field, research in Affective Computing often employs empirical user studies. The current paper analyzes research practices in Affective Computing and deduces recommendations for improving the quality of methods and reporting. We extracted a total of k = 65 empirical studies from the two most recent International Conferences on Affective Computing & Intelligent Interaction (ACII) '17 and '19. Three raters summarized characteristics of studies (e.g., number of experimental studies) and how much methodological (e.g., participant characteristics) and statistical information (e.g., degrees of freedom) were missing. Also, we conducted a p-curve analysis to test the overall evidential value of findings. Results showed that 1. in at least half of the studies, one important information about statistical results was missing, and 2. those k = 31 studies that had reported all necessary information to be included into the p-curve showed evidential value. In general, all criteria were never met in one single study. We provide concrete recommendations on how to implement open research practices for empirical studies in Affective Computing.
Abstract We examined whether mimicking an interaction partner is universally advantageous or, provided the mimicry is particularly strong, whether it has detrimental impacts on interpersonal and negotiation outcomes. Participants interacted with a confederate who engaged in no, subtle, or strong mimicry and then negotiated. In laboratory Experiment 1 ( N = 71) and Experiment 2 ( N = 149), subtly (vs. not) mimicked participants liked the confederate more, while strongly (vs. subtly) mimicked participants liked and trusted less. In Experiment 2, strongly (vs. subtly) mimicked participants were less susceptible to the first-offer anchor. The online Experiment 3 ( N = 180) corroborated the too-much-mimicry effect: When participants became aware of mimicry, it exerted detrimental effects on liking and trust irrespective of the experimental condition. Experiment 1 and Experiment 3 found no too-much-mimicry effect on anchoring susceptibility. These findings show that (a) sufficiently subtle mimicry positively influences interpersonal outcomes and (b) too much mimicry backfires.
Humans can develop closeness through the exchange of personal information. A structured method of self-disclosure has been developed in the Fast Friends paradigm, in which two people alternately ask 36 questions with increasing levels of interpersonal intimacy. We transferred this paradigm to interactions with Socially Interactive Agents (SIA). In our study, 72 participants alternately asked and answered 36 questions with a SIA -- indicating their level of interpersonal closeness with the SIA at three points. Participants rated specific trust in the SIA after the interaction, and their general trust and attachment styles were measured. Over time, participants' levels of closeness increased, which was moderated by specific trust but not by general trust and attachment style. Participants with high specific trust developed higher levels of closeness to the SIA than participants with low specific trust. These findings indicate that people can develop a close relationship with SIAs and that trust in the SIA is a prerequisite for developing closeness. Furthermore, this paper introduced the Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale for assessing the relationship between two interaction partners during an ongoing interaction.
Nonverbal behavior of socially interactive agents (SIAs) is often automatically generated and identical across all users. This approach, though economic, might have counterproductive effects when designing applications for diverse and vulnerable populations. Also, it might negatively impact research validity and diminish the effectiveness of SIA-based interventions. This paper presents arguments for and proposes a method to model nonverbal behavior in SIAs. The ModelIT method enables researchers to ground the modelling of nonverbal behavior in psychological theories. It aims at establishing a standardized and replicable method that promotes open science practices and facilitates the creation of tailored SIAs. It is a step towards barrier-free and accessible SIA applications across diverse populations. The necessity, guidelines, and limitations of the ModelIT method are thoroughly addressed.
The present research investigated facial mimicry of the basic emotions joy, anger, and sadness in response to stimuli in different formats. Specifically, in an electromyography study, 120 participants rated the expressions of joyful, angry, and sad faces presented as photographs or stick figures while facial muscle activity was measured. Using both frequentist and Bayesian approaches to hypothesis testing, we found strong support for a facial mimicry effect: Participants showed higher zygomaticus major and orbicularis oculi activity (smiling) towards joyful faces, while they showed higher corrugator supercilii activity (frowning) towards angry and sad faces. Although participants rated the stick figures as more abstract and less interesting stimuli, the mimicry effect was equally strong and independent of the format in which the faces were presented (photographs or stick figures). Additionally, participants showed enhanced emotion recognition for stick figures compared to photographs, which, however, was unrelated to mimicry. The findings suggest that facial mimicry occurs in response to stimuli varying in their abstractness and might be more robust to social-cognitive influences than previously assumed.
