Are there Nonverbal Cues to Commitment? An Exploratory Study Using the Zero-Acquaintance Video Presentation Paradigm
Open Access
- 1 January 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Evolutionary Psychology
- Vol. 1 (1)
- https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490300100104
Abstract
Altruism is difficult to explain evolutionarily if subtle cheaters exist in a population (Trivers, 1971). A pathway to the evolutionary maintenance of cooperation is nonverbal altruist-detection. One adaptive advantage of nonverbal altruist-detection is the formation of trustworthy division of labour partnerships (Frank, 1988). Three studies were designed to test a fundamental assumption behind altruistic partner preference models. In the first experiment perceivers (blind with respect to target altruism level) made assessments of video-clips depicting self-reported altruists and self-reported non-altruists. Video-clips were designed with attempts to control for attractiveness, expressiveness, role-playing ability, and verbal content. Overall perceivers rated altruists as more “helpful” than non-altruists. In a second experiment manipulating the payoffs for cooperation, perceivers (blind with respect to payoff condition and altruism level) assessed altruists who were helping others as more “concerned” and “attentive” than non-altruists. However perceivers assessed the same altruists as less “concerned” and “attentive” than non-altruists when the payoffs were for self. This finding suggests that perceivers are sensitive to nonverbal indicators of selfishness. Indeed the self-reported non-altruists were more likely than self-reported altruists to retain resources for themselves in an objective measure of cooperative tendencies (i.e. a dictator game). In a third study altruists and non-altruists' facial expressions were analyzed. The smile emerged as a consistent cue to altruism. In addition, altruists exhibited more expressions that are under involuntary control (e.g., orbicularis oculi) compared to non-altruists. Findings suggest that likelihood to cooperate is signaled nonverbally and the putative cues may be under involuntary control as predicted by Frank (1988).Keywords
This publication has 49 references indexed in Scilit:
- Biological signals as handicapsPublished by Elsevier ,2006
- The value of a smile: Game theory with a human faceJournal of Economic Psychology, 2001
- Is prospective altruist-detection an evolved solution to the adaptive problem of subtle cheating in cooperative ventures? Supportive evidence using the Wason selection taskEvolution and Human Behavior, 2000
- EVOLUTIONARY THEORIES OF MORALITY AND THE MANIPULATIVE USE OF SIGNALSZygon: Journal of Religion and Science, 1994
- Friendship and the Evolution of Co-operationJournal of Theoretical Biology, 1993
- Consensus at zero acquaintance: Replication, behavioral cues, and stability.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992
- Friends and strangers: Acquaintanceship, agreement, and the accuracy of personality judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988
- Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988
- Left-sided oral asymmetries in spontaneous but not posed smilesNeuropsychologia, 1988
- Differences between traits: Properties associated with interjudge agreement.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1987