↓ Skip to main content

Interpreting text messages with graphic facial expression by deaf and hearing people

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interpreting text messages with graphic facial expression by deaf and hearing people
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00383
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chihiro Saegusa, Miki Namatame, Katsumi Watanabe

Abstract

In interpreting verbal messages, humans use not only verbal information but also non-verbal signals such as facial expression. For example, when a person says "yes" with a troubled face, what he or she really means appears ambiguous. In the present study, we examined how deaf and hearing people differ in perceiving real meanings in texts accompanied by representations of facial expression. Deaf and hearing participants were asked to imagine that the face presented on the computer monitor was asked a question from another person (e.g., do you like her?). They observed either a realistic or a schematic face with a different magnitude of positive or negative expression on a computer monitor. A balloon that contained either a positive or negative text response to the question appeared at the same time as the face. Then, participants rated how much the individual on the monitor really meant it (i.e., perceived earnestness), using a 7-point scale. Results showed that the facial expression significantly modulated the perceived earnestness. The influence of positive expression on negative text responses was relatively weaker than that of negative expression on positive responses (i.e., "no" tended to mean "no" irrespective of facial expression) for both participant groups. However, this asymmetrical effect was stronger in the hearing group. These results suggest that the contribution of facial expression in perceiving real meanings from text messages is qualitatively similar but quantitatively different between deaf and hearing people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 27%
Other 2 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Decision Sciences 1 7%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2015.
All research outputs
#12,725,419
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,409
of 29,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,607
of 263,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#248
of 460 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 460 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.