Mimicking emotions - Fischer & Hess - 2017 - Article

Mimicry can be described as the adaptation or imitation of non-verbal behavior of others. Emotional mimicry is the tendency to mimic other’s emotions in order to share minds. Examples are mimicking discrete emotions, body movements, or even pupil dilation can occur. A distinction is made between neutral imitation (behavior) and emotional imitation (attitudes, gestures and facial expressions). The difference between the two is that emotional behavior provides information about the assessment of an event.

Not all emotional responses are an imitation. Congruent emotional reactions can also come from a joint observation of an emotion-stimulating stimulus. It can be seen as a simulation if the response is based on a shared understanding of the emotion of the other person. The current study has developed a contextual model for emotional mimicry based on two assumptions. First, the basis of emotional facial expression is a shared mind, one only mimics an emotion if it is possible to connect to the expresser. This is especially the case when the expresser and the mimic share perspective. Secondly, imitation is targeted, not stimulus-driven.

Affiliate goals

The model assumes that there must be a certain level of emotional connection between the expresser and the mimicker. This is true according to the Affective Process Theory in which all kinds of mental states and behaviors are described that can form a bond between individuals and groups. The Shared Vantage Point (SVP) is the determining factor for affective connections. A low SVP would not lead to facial expression, because emotional facial expression forms the unconscious basis of affective processes. We have an automatic tendency to imitate people who are friendly and who we think are nice. But we also mimic people who seem less friendly, who send a negative signal to us. This requires more cognitive means.

The reverse relationship can also been explained, mimicking someone (without an affiliation goal) has a positive effect on the connection between two people. Several studies support this argument.

The emotional signal

Research showed that participants who felt proud were less likely to imitate the footprints of others than participants who did not feel proud. This means that the affiliate intention can be reflected in the emotion that is shown. This lack of facial expression can be explained by the functions of pride (more distance). Studies also show that congruent responses to non-affiliative signals show an inverse function of emotional facial expression. Then there is an increase in social distance. The first assumption of the model is supported with evidence. Affiliate goals are therefore associated with a tendency to imitate the emotions of others. And emotional mimicry has an important social regulatory function.

From bottom to top or from top to bottom?

The second assumption of the model is that the facial expressions and other non-verbal signals are interpreted through prior knowledge. This is consistent with other research that processes the role from top-down processing. The functional approach states that the meaning of social and visual cues is combined in an early stadium, rather than the traditional theories that state different cues are viewed later in the process. People rely on experiences from the past and link this to the information that comes in through the senses. This is again in line with the model from the current study that states that simulation is influenced by top-down processes.