SARS 013.401
Male-Female Communication, East-West
Final Paper: A Study on Smiling
Kim Vinh
Professor Franklin Southworth
December 15, 2000
Gray skies are gonna clear upPut on a happy faceBrush off the clouds and cheer upPut on a happy face Take off that gloomy mask of tragedy, it’s not your styleYou’d look so good that you’d be glad you decided to smile Pick out a pleasant outlookStick out that noble chinWipe off that full of doubt lookSlap on a happy grin I knew a girl so gloomyShe’d never laugh or singShe wouldn’t listen to meNow she’s a mean ol’ thing So spread sunshine all over the place
Just, put on a happy face
--Albert Peterson, Bye
Bye Birdie
*
* *
Whether flashed in a social setting or forced for a camera, a smile is generally regarded to be one of the most easily decoded facial expressions. It conveys happiness, warmth, and friendliness – or does it?
Unfortunately, the answer has become increasingly complex over the years. The seemingly innocent smile has been interpreted as everything from an invitation for sexual harassment to an indication of insecurity. One constant, however, is that the smile is generally regarded as more of a female habit than male. However, the image of the “smiling female” has many different meanings to people. While many consciously choose to “put on a happy face” every day, an equal number of people choose not to, depending on their personal interpretation of what it means to smile. These reasons for smiling or not smiling are as varied as the number of studies done on the topic, and vary greatly by gender, age, and setting, as an example of just a few factors.
The hypothesis that females smile more than males has existed since the 1970s, at least, when the first studies were done to test the belief. Since then, over a dozen experiments have been performed to analyze the actual act, as well as the implications of it. The yearbook photo experiment, performed by different researchers over a number of years as a test on society’s changing standards, has always yielded the same results. “A trio of investigations in the 1980s established the study of school yearbook photographs as a valuable technique for the study of gender differences in smiling. Examining photos from college and/or high school yearbooks, Morse (1982), Ragan (1982), and LaFrance (1985) all reported more frequent smiling by women than by men.”[1]
An informal experiment performed on the University of Pennsylvania campus in the fall of 2000 only supported the previous findings. The data for testing this hypothesis comes from two sources, however, as opposed to the earlier documented cases of smiling in yearbooks. While the “formal,” or studio-taken portraits used in yearbooks were tallied, a “casual” setting was also included to see if the influence of a social setting played any role in an individual’s decision to smile for the camera. The formal portraits provided the real, concrete data, however, the reason being that often, in the casual settings, the context in which a photo is taken is not consistent. For example, in taking pictures in a dormitory or in a classroom, the former setting is often more playful and joking, which could result in more smiles than in a more serious, quieter classroom situation. The studio photograph, however, provides a uniform situation for all of the subjects. They know of and are prepared to have a portrait taken, and there are (for the most part) no outside factors that can influence a person’s mood during the time the photo is taken.
Data from the experiment was arranged into three categories of “smiles,” based on psychologist Judith Hall’s 1984 article “The Face.” According to Hall, degrees of smiles are assigned “scale values,” with “ ‘frown’ or ‘no expression’ at the lowest scale value, ‘smile’ at the middle scale value, and ‘laugh’ at the highest scale value.”[2] Therefore, pictures were tallied according to the level of “smile” shown. Those with a full smile with teeth shown and smile lines around the mouth and eyes received a “high” smile level, while a closed-lipped smile or one that seemed forced was marked in the “middle” smile level. In photos where the subject did not smile at all, instead showing either a neutral or negative facial expression, a tally was made under “low” smile level.
The experiment yielded an average ratio of males smiling to females smiling as almost 1-to-2, similar to data found from every year since the first. Though the numerical data varies from year to year, females have always “outsmiled” males, with only slight differences between age groups.
As documented in Tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix, the results for the experiment show a general trend in smiling, but differ slightly with respect to the “casual” and “formal” settings. For example, while females “out-smiled” males in the formal setting by an overwhelming 77 percent to 35 percent, the margin was less in the casual setting: 92 percent to 70 percent. The results for the casual setting are extremely high in terms of the number of “high” smilers. This ties into the common idea that smiling is a social phenomenon, for both men and women. However, some have hypothesized that this can also explain the higher rate of smiling for women, as the female sex is generally thought to be more “social.”
Other professional studies that have been done on the nature of smiling include one of self-portraits, and individuals’ perception of themselves. A 1990 study on self-composed, self-taken, single-subject photos revealed that women, even in the absence of others, smiled more often.[3] This idea, that women smile even when others are not around, disproves the theory that women are “social smilers” – that is, they only smile in the presence of others, to put up their expected role as the emotion-setting of the situation.
However, in terms of social smiling, the outside factors are still too many to be accurately controlled. Nevertheless, as a further test and improvement on the informal experiment conducted, therefore, a few changes could be made to the procedure. While care was taken to include two different settings to test the hypothesis, other factors could still be taken into account to further support these findings. In the casual setting, for instance, the subjects were photographed both individually and in groups (and randomly, too), which may have affected their mannerisms while being photographed. Also, as with any experiment, a larger sample size always better reinforces the findings, and therefore more people could have been tested. Finally, a wider range of subjects could have been tested, although most of the people photographed were college freshmen and sophomores from the 17-20 age range.
Stereotypes
A look at stereotypes, both past and present, can provide some insight on why there is such a large gender difference in smiling. For years, the concept of masculinity has often been associated with a physically-strong, but emotionally-lacking male. “Real men don’t show their feelings” is a commonly-heard expression, as the more sensitive males are generally regarded as more feminine. Though smiling does not directly equate to sensitivity, it is nevertheless a form of emotional expression.
With respect to age, males, especially those in business, are taught that smiling is not as dignified as keeping a stern face. Holding a high leadership position, for example, requires that one be respected and therefore calls for a distinguished, stately, often stoic manner.
On the other hand, the ideal happy, charming female is very much portrayed as smiling and willing to serve. Often, when a female is not smiling, she is criticized or questioned. It is as if the norm is for females to smile at all times, else she been seen as severe or unapproachable.
Rare is it to find a female who has not been taught to act like a “little lady” – to smile nicely and sit quietly, for example.
These old stereotypes in turn form the basis behind the simplest of the interpretations of a person smiling, but there are many more levels. Obviously, societal standards have changed over time, especially with regards to females and smiling. While somewhat true today, past generations traditionally thought of the image of a smiling female in pictures, especially when portrayed with men, as a sign of the woman’s submission to the man. As the typical female role in the 1950s and ’60s, for instance, was as a dutiful housewife, it comes as no surprise that the smile indicated her deference to her husband, presumably.
With new ideas such as feminism in the 1970s, however, the idea of female empowerment and individuality eliminated the idea of a small, submissive female. Instead, some females protested against smiling – saying that it was too traditionally feminine and indicated female subordination to males. For instance, a flight attendant ‘smiling strike’ in 1985 involved some angry airline employees who called their expected smile a bit of “artificially created elation.” According to a psychologist who studied the case, “the perpetually frozen smile of flight attendants is a classic bit of commercial manipulation that propels many of them into mini-breakdowns at the end of the trip.”[4]
A similar “protest against smiling” came in 1998 when employees of the Safeway supermarket company claimed that the company’s “smile and make eye contact” rule was often mistaken for flirting.[5] Although both male and female employees were required to follow the rule, and though both males and females alike filed complaints, the majority of the incidents involving sexual harassment came from female workers.
The accusations come from the idea that females are often assigned the social role of smiling. However, “the behavior of smiling is often ambiguous and open to such interpretations as submission, ingratiation, or holding of a weak position in the power/status hierarchy.” This view has been exploited many times, and females have complained that while their smiling is a sign of friendliness, it is in no way an invitation for sexual harassment. Too many incidents of sexual harassment led to the labels of “damned dazzling smile” and “women’s badge of appeasement” by many.[6]
Yet another change in society marked the beginning of a new public attitude towards female smiling. The rejection of feminism as too masculine, ironically, and a return to femininity in the early 1990s, combined with the rising status of women in the workplace brought the idea of a strong, capable woman. With women currently making up 48% of the workplace, the “working woman” image today can be exemplified in such smiling, confident public figures as First Lady (and soon to be New York State Senator) Hillary Clinton and even Penn President Judith Rodin, the first of only two female Ivy League university presidents. Their confident smiles are symbols of their achievements in a male-dominated world, a far cry from the smiles of women during the 1950s.
The real-life data provided by the previously documented experiments, as well as the turn of social standards, is reflected in the artificial portrayal of males and females smiling in mass media in society – in advertisements and television commercials, or publications such as newspapers and magazines, for example. A 1992 study of the airline industry’s annual reports revealed that women were always shown smiling more often than men. “Women displayed a seriousness that was of a markedly lesser degree than that displayed by men. Smiling was a feature more common to women than to men in the photographs. Male senior executives and board directors projected a greater degree of seriousness than male employees in the portrait photographs.”[7]
However, the implications of this public portrayal are different than the effects of actual women smiling more in everyday person-to-person interaction. When specifically made to look a certain way by the art directors or advertising representatives, this shows that they have distinct ideas about who should be in charge, and who should be subordinate, reflects an ongoing bias in American society:
“Men and women have notably different facial expressions [in advertisements]. In pictures that portray one male, the male is serious 86% of the time. In contrast, when the picture shows one female, the female is serious 64% of the time. Similar percentages occur in the portrayal of two men and two women. Women are more frequently shown as smiling. This portrayal seems to reinforce generally held cultural role expectations. Women are supposed to be friendly, nurturing, and happy. Men, on the other hand, are supposed to take their jobs seriously and be in charge. Culturally, these attitudes or expectations are evident in the facial expressions.”[8]
Another explanation suggested as to why women smile more is based on the idea that a smile can reflect social unease. This often used “shy smile” or “nervous smile” (similar to a nervous laugh) diverts social pressure and hostility, and is therefore attributed to shy women. Hall states that “women might be more self-conscious than men, and their smiling could therefore reflect nervousness. Thus, pleasantness norms in women may be compounded by a tendency to smile (and laugh) excessively when socially nervous… Pilkonis (1977) found that though women smiled generally more than men, shy women smiled most of all.”[9] Here, the smile is used as a defense rather than to open oneself up.
Indeed, the idea of baring one’s teeth in “defense” is not a new one. Interestingly, it seems that in all other cultures, baring one’s teeth is a sign of aggression. The idea that showing your teeth is a friendly gesture is almost unique to Western culture. Psychology professor Frank McAndrew says that “in primates, showing the teeth, especially teeth held together, is almost always a sign of submission. The human smile probably has evolved from that.” He continues: “In the primate threat, the lips are curled back and the teeth are apart--you are ready to bite. But if the teeth are pressed together and the lips are relaxed, then clearly you are not prepared to do any damage. These displays are combined with other facial features, such as what you do with your eyes, to express a whole range of feelings. In a lot of human smiling, it is something you do in public, but it does not reflect true ‘friendly’ feelings--think of politicians smiling for photographers.”[10]
Even more interpretations are possible when taking into account the number of variations on the smile, as McAndrew mentioned with the “politician” smile. The smirk and the grin, for example, connote different emotions. While the grin is usually a broad smile, displaying a high level of happiness, the smirk can be undercut with hints of sarcasm or meanness.
Cross-cultural norms often contribute to the ambiguity of smiles. In every culture, smiles have different meanings, and are used in different contexts.
Within the U.S. culture, a smile
can mean joy or happiness. In the Japanese culture, while a smile can be used
to signal joy, it can also be used to mask embarrassment, hide displeasure, or
suppress anger. In Russia, facial expressions serve as important negotiation
cues. U.S. Americans are taught to ‘open conversations with a smile and to keep
smiling. Russians tend to start out with grim faces, but when they do smile, it
reflects relaxation and progress in developing a good relationship. Winks and
nods are also good signs’ (Richmond, 1996, p.136).”[11]
* * *
From the biological basis of smiling to the different receptions of the facial expression in other countries, it comes that the smile is not as simple as it seems. Though women have been proven time and time again to smile more, there is no one consensus on why – factors such as a social setting and changing societal expectations are always in play. Still, the portrayal of people smiling in mass media even today suggests that smiling is a form of subordination, and therefore those who do not smile (generally males) are those destined to be in charge – an unfair commentary on social norms in today’s modern society of equality. But people are taught to “grin and bear it,” or in other words, use the smile as a social defense. A song in the 1963 musical Bye Bye Birdie suggested to just “brush off the clouds and cheer up… put on a happy face.” When does a smile ever convey true happiness, then? The answer depends on so many things, even on what country one is in. Most ironically, though the smile is an indicator of emotion, it is often used as a mask of emotion – and therefore must be closely studied.
Works Cited
Anderson, Claire J. and Giovanna Imperia. “The corporate annual report: a photo analysis of male and female portrayals.” Journal of Business Communication Spring 1992: 113.
“Ask the Experts: Biology.” Scientific American Online. <http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/biology/biology12.html>.
Clancy, Stephanie M. and Stephen J. Dollinger. “Photographic depictions of the self: gender and age differences in social connectedness.” Sex Roles: A Journal of Research Oct 1993: 477.
Dodd, David K., Brenda L. Russell And Cynthia Jenkins. “Smiling In School Yearbook Photos: Gender Differences From Kindergarten To Adulthood.” The Psychological Record Fall 1999: 543.
Hall, Judith. A. Nonverbal sex differences: Communication
accuracy and expressive style. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press:
1984.
Leo, John. “Is smiling dangerous to women?” Time Jan 14, 1985: 82.
Pomerenke, Paula, Iris I. Varner and Suzanne Mallar. “The depiction of female and male professionals in business communication textbooks.” Business Communication Quarterly Dec 1996: 36.
Ting-Toomey, Stella. Communicating Across Cultures. New York: The Guilford Press, 1999.
Webber, John “Smile 'til it hurts.” Communication World Oct-Nov 1998: 6.
“Casual Setting”:
Smiling during everyday activities on a college campus
|
|
Males |
Females |
||||
|
Smile level |
High |
Middle |
Low |
High |
Middle |
Low |
|
Number |
28 |
2 |
10 |
35 |
3 |
0 |
|
Percentage |
70% |
5% |
25% |
92% |
8% |
0% |
Table 1 dddddd
“Formal Setting”:
Smiling in high school yearbooks
Sample size: 350
males, 350 females
|
|
Males |
Females |
||||
|
Smile level |
High |
Middle |
Low |
High |
Middle |
Low |
|
Number |
122 |
76 |
152 |
269 |
62 |
19 |
|
Percentage |
35% |
22% |
43% |
77% |
18% |
5% |
Table 2 sss sssss
[1] David K. Dodd, Brenda L. Russell And Cynthia Jenkins, “Smiling In School Yearbook Photos: Gender Differences From Kindergarten To Adulthood,” The Psychological Record Fall 1999.
[2] Judith Hall, “The Face,” Nonverbal Sex Differences Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press: 61.
[3] Stephanie M. Clancy and Stephen J. Dollinger, “Photographic depictions of the self: gender and age differences in social connectedness,” Sex Roles: A Journal of Research Oct 1993.
[4] John Leo, “Is smiling dangerous to women?” Time Jan 14, 1985.
[5] John Webber, “Smile 'til it hurts,” Communication World Oct-Nov 1998.
[6] Leo, “Is Smiling dangerous to women?”
[7] Claire J. Anderson and Giovanna Imperia, “The corporate annual report: a photo analysis of male and female portrayals,” Journal of Business Communication Spring 1992.
[8] Paula Pomerenke, Iris I. Varner and Suzanne Mallar, “The depiction of female and male professionals in business communication textbooks,” Business Communication Quarterly Dec 1996.
[9] Hall, 67-68.
[10] “Ask the Experts: Biology.” Scientific American Online. <http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/biology/biology12.html>.
[11] Stella Ting-Toomey, Communicating Across Cultures. New York: The Guilford Press, 1999: 121-122.