STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 1

Study of Smiling and Eye Contact on Wal-Mart Customers

Tiffany A. Dale, April L. Dipman, and Nathanael L. Matthews

University of Central Missouri

Author Note

Tiffany A. Dale, April L. Dipman, Nathanael L. Matthews, Department of Psychology,

University of Central Missouri.

We would like to thank the Departmental Review Board for helpful comments on the

study. We would also like to thank Wal-Mart for allowing us to collect data.

Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to Tiffany A. Dale, Department of

Psychology, Lovinger 1111, University of Central Missouri, Warrensburg MO 64093. E-mail:

tad12340@ucmo.edu.
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 2

Abstract

The aim of this observational study was to examine whether Wal-Mart customers held eye

contact longer while smiling or not smiling. Quota sampling was used to collect data from 30

incoming and outgoing Wal-Mart customers we estimated to be middle school aged (~12 years)

to adult. Two variables, length of eye contact and smiling or not smiling, were recorded using an

undisguised naturalistic observation. The results indicated that people tend to hold longer eye

contact when smiling. The mean duration of eye contact while smiling was 1.76 seconds and .84

when not smiling. Based on these results, we conclude that facial expressions, such as smiling

and not smiling, are correlated with the amount of eye contact a person will make.

Keywords: eye contact, facial expressions, naturalistic observation

STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 3

Study of Smiling and Eye Contact on Wal-Mart Customers

Eye witness testimony has been used in court rooms around the world. There are many

factors that go into whether or not the testimony is accurate and the jury is going to believe it.

Our rationale for doing this observational research was that if we knew more about the

correlation between eye contact and facial expressions, such as smiling or not smiling, the results

could help to understand underlying factors that go into eye witness testimony.

Previous research has shown when giving a testimony one should look the jurors in the

eyes so they believe you are telling the truth (Spiker, 2000). If the witness does not look at the

jurors directly, they may perceive the witness as anxious, dishonest, or disinterested. Other

studies have shown there is a strong correlation between avoiding eye contact and angry faces

(Horley, Williams, Gonsalvez, & Gordon, 2004). These studies help us in supporting our

hypothesis that the higher the level of happiness indicated through smiling influences the

duration of eye contact. We believe that when a person is smiling, they will hold longer eye

contact with another person than when they are not smiling. There is not a lot of specific research

to support our exact hypothesis; but there is research on infants that suggests there is some

connection between eye contact and smiling. McAdams, Jackson, and Kirshnit (1984) reported

that at about the same time an infant starts to make eye contact with others, the “social smile”

emerges as a signal that the infant is interested in the social world around them. If this is true for

infants, we believe that it will hold true into later years in life. Although we did not discriminate

between male and female subjects in our study, there is research that suggests females tend to

hold longer eye contact and make eye contact more frequently than males (Benenson, 2003).

As described above, a lot of research has been done in the area of facial expressions and

eye contact; however no one has done research specifically on how smiling affects the duration
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 4

of eye contact. We feel that more research in the area would be useful in psychology and

criminal justice lines of work. If more research was done, we could relate the results closely to

eyewitness testimony. Because eyewitness testimony is so widely used in courtrooms, we believe

this type of research could help in identifying falsified testimonies. As Spiker (2000) reported,

jurors usually find testimony more convincing when looking them directly. If the witnesses

tended to have a more solemn look on their faces and made no eye contact, the jurors may

perceive the witness as falsifying the truth. Therefore, we believe that more research conducted

in this area could be very beneficial.

Method

Participants

Thirty incoming and outgoing Wal-Mart customers in Warrensburg, Missouri between

what we estimated to be middle school age (~12 years) to adult were observed. We selected our

participants using quota sampling. We positioned ourselves in an undisguised naturalistic setting.

Materials

We prepared a static checklist to record whether a customer was smiling or not smiling,

and the duration of eye contact held (see Table 1). We each used a digital stop-watch to record

the duration of eye contact to the nearest hundredth of a second.

Procedure

We each went to the Warrensburg, Missouri Wal-Mart between the hours of four and

seven pm. We sat on the inside bench next to the front entrance and observed incoming and

outgoing customers. We watched for people who made eye contact (looking at the face with

emphasis on the eyes) and interacted with someone else in any way (talking, waving, passing by,

ETC.). As soon as we would notice eye contact being made, we would start the stop-watch.
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 5

When eye contact was terminated we would stop the watch. We recorded the duration of eye

contact between the two subjects on the checklist, along with whether the subject was smiling or

not smiling. Smiling was defined as a facial expression with mouth turned upward. Not smiling

was defined as no smiling present. We repeated this process until 30 participants were observed

and recorded.

Results

We observed 30 participants altogether. Seventeen participants were smiling and 13 were

not smiling during the recording of eye contact. Eye contact time is the difference between when

we started the stop-watch and stopped the stop-watch. The mean duration for a smiling

participant was 1.76 seconds. This was computed by adding up all of the eye contact durations

with a smiling subject and dividing by 17 participants. The mean duration for a participant that

was not-smiling was .84 seconds. This was computed by adding up all of the eye contact

durations with a non-smiling subject and dividing by 13. The standard deviation for a smiling

subject’s eye-contact time was 1.04. The standard deviation for a not smiling subject’s eye-

contact time was .33. The range for a smiling subject’s eye contact was 4.60 seconds. Range for

a not-smiling subject’s eye contact was 2.14 seconds. Range was computed by subtracting the

lowest duration of eye contact from the highest duration of eye contact and adding one second to

each time for being continuous variables. See Figure 1 for descriptive statistics of a smiling

subject’s duration of eye contact. See Figure 2 for descriptive statistics of a not smiling subject’s

duration of eye contact.

STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 6

Discussion

The results supported our hypothesis that smiling subjects have a longer duration of eye

contact than non smiling subjects. There was almost one full second difference between the

mean duration of a smiling subject and the mean duration of a subject not smiling. We believe

these findings have good external validity because of the location used to complete our research.

Wal-Mart is a natural normal setting where the behavior of eye contact and smiling or not

smiling is naturally shown. By choosing Wal-Mart as our location, we can also generalize our

results to people in other types of mass-marketing stores where most people shop.

Our findings related to the previous literature (Spiker, 2000) in that positive facial

expressions tend to correlate with a longer duration of eye contact. Research using infants was

found that supported our hypothesis, but we are interested in middle school age (~12 years) to

adult subjects. This was our interest because the age group relates more with the issue of eye

witness testimony. Because no one has done research on only smiling or not smiling and the

duration of eye contact held within this age group, we feel our research has helped fill a gap in

previous research.

There were limitations to our research. Unlike previous research, we used quota

sampling. By doing this, our sample may have been unrepresentative of the population.

Extraneous variables may have also played a part in our research. A lot of the eye contact was

made between two people that came into or left Wal-Mart together; therefore they probably

already knew each other. If the two people did not know each other that made the eye contact,

the results may have varied more. We also recorded our data alone and then put it all together.

We could have improved interrater reliability if two of us observed and recorded the same

person. Previous research also suggested females tend to hold longer eye contact and make eye
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 7

contact more frequently than males. We could have benefited more from our study if we

discriminated whether the participants were male or female during the eye contact.

Further research in this area would benefit from choosing a different sampling method

than quota sampling. It may also be helpful if you could use indirect narrative records. By using

a video tape we could more accurately record the duration of eye contact between the two

subjects. If that is not possible, we would suggest at least two observers for each subject. We

would also suggest instead of being undisguised, use a disguised method to collect data. It

seemed that people would cut their conversations short and stare at us when they noticed we

were watching them and writing things down. All of these variables could have affected the

research.
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 8

References

Benenson, J.F. (2003). Sex on the brain. Nature, 424, 132-134.

Horley, K., Williams, M.L., Gonsalvez, C., & Gordon, E. (2004). Face to face: Visual scanpath

evidence for abnormal processing of facial expressions in social phobia. Psychiatry

Research, 127, 43-53.

McAdams, D.P., Jackson, J.R., Kirshnit, C. (1984). Looking, laughing, and smiling in dyads as a

function of intimacy motivation and reciprocity. Journal of Personality, 52, 261-272.

Spiker, T. (2000). A courtroom drama. Mens Health, 15, 37.

STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 9

Table 1

Duration of Eye Contact for Smiling and Not Smiling Subjects

Smiling Not Smiling Duration of eye contact in seconds

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 10

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.
STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 11

3
Frequency

0
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Figure 1. Histogram showing duration of eye contact for smiling subjects.

STUDY OF SMILING AND EYE CONTACT 12

3
Frequency

0
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Figure 2. Histogram showing duration of eye contact for not smiling subjects.