Here I discuss a recent article in Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol. 26, Issue 8, on the accuracy of first impressions by UK cognitive scientists Richard Cook, Adam Eggleston, and Harriet Over. The researchers highlight that humans are bad at judging people from the look of their faces, and discuss why we are bad at it. I propose (equally science-based) ways how we can get better at sizing up people. ‘Reading’ what people have on their minds is an essential skill in negotiations, mediation or in many day-to-day social interactions in organizations. I discuss this topic in detail in chapter seven of my book (‘Empathy Revisited’).
- What do the cognitive scientists have to say about ‘first impressions’?
Encountering a stranger for the first time, we subliminally attribute to them certain character traits based on the way their face looks. For example, physically attractive faces are generally perceived as more sociable and intelligent while round faces and large eyes suggest naivety. Males with wide faces are perceived to be less trustworthy and more aggressive compared with thin-faced males. Similarly, individuals shown smiling are judged to be warmer, more approachable and trustworthy compared with those who appear to frown. These subliminal perceptions are widely referred to as ‘first impressions’ from facial cues.
- Why does it matter ?
First impressions are rooted in our evolutionary biology (judging whether a stranger has good or bad intentions could have been lifesaving for our early ancestors) but have now become notoriously unreliable. The mismatch between our slow biological evolution and fast cultural evolution (as exemplified in technological progress, medical advances, social media, etc.) are partly accountable for the fact that many of the traits we attribute to strangers show little correlation with their actual characteristics, feelings, or behaviours. Nonetheless, humans seem to put a lot of faith into their predictive capacities: in experiments, first impressions based on facial appearance have been shown to affect financial decisions, criminal sentencing, the outcome of elections – and whether we put trust in leaders or not.
- Why do we get first impressions wrong?
- Some people may have certain constant facial features such as narrow eyes or a mouth curving upward at the corners) that let observers perceive an intent to express certain feelings or emotions where none is intended. Similarly, people whose typical face shape resembles a frown may be judged unfairly because people misinterpret their normal facial expression as frowning. Physiology is a factor but a relatively rare one.
- More frequently, first impressions based on facial features and appearances are unreliable due to culturally acquired preconceptions, be it in terms of innate beauty bias or in terms of the influence social media (e.g. presentation of artificially enhanced faces), film or tv have on us: Netflix wants us to tell villains from heroes from the start through their respective, stereotypical, facial characteristics. Over time, we have learned to associate certain facial features with good and bad character traits – which are of course are fictitious. We need to unlearn those preconceptions to make better decisions about people, and becoming aware of them is only a first step.
What do the authors of the study propose to make first impressions reliable again? They suggest to make an effort to “…distinguish trait inferences based on facial appearance (i.e., invariant aspects of the face, such as shape, feature configuration, skin tone and texture) from those based on facial behaviours (e.g., expressions, gaze cues, or head tilting)”. The issue with this advice is that we can easily fake a frown or make an effort to look people in the eyes while keeping our head straight in order to persuade or manipulate. Yet, there is one facial expression that is impossible to fake: a genuine smile.
While AI, as we know, can produce almost too perfectly ‘genuine’ smiles, whether in photos or videos, humans cannot, as you can find out in chapter ten of ‘Subliminal Leadership (‘The power of humor, trust and charisma’). 26 of our total 42 facial muscles are involved in the ‘production’ of a genuine smile, so good luck trying to orchestrate 26 muscles of your face. In experiments people typically take 200 milliseconds, the time it takes to say ‘I’, to recognize an attempt at manipulating them by faking a smile.
- What are the practical implications for leadership and influence?
Faking a smile is futile as most people instantly recognize such attempts at being influenced or manipulated (e.g. making them comply with one’s wishes, or to generate certain feelings such as trust or confidence). Faking a smile tends to create the opposite effect, notably a loss of trust – which is the currency of leadership. Leaders must avoid pretending – whether to be, think or feel differently from what they try to convey. Attempts at conscious subliminal manipulation generally fail. Authenticity simply can’t be faked.
Unfaking it: Whose smile is genuine?