Cross-Cultural Recognition of Basic Emotions through Nonverbal Emotional Vocalizations

Author(s): Disa A. Sauter, Frank Eisner, Paul Ekman, Sophie K. Scott and Edward E. Smith
Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol.
107, No. 6 (Feb. 9, 2010), pp. 2408-2412
Published by: National Academy of Sciences
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40536598
Accessed: 14-01-2016 19:37 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40536598?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Academy of Sciences is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Cross-cultural of basicemotionsthrough
recognition
nonverbal
emotionalvocalizations
Disa A. Sauterab'1, Frank Eisner', Paul Ekmand, and Sophie K. Scott0

department of Psychology,UniversityCollege London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom; bHenryWellcome Building,BirkbeckCollege, London WC1E
7HX, United Kingdom; institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, UniversityCollege London, London WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom; and dThe Paul Ekman Group,
San Francisco,CA 94104

Edited by Edward E. Smith,Columbia University,New York, NY, and approved November 4, 2009 (received for review July22, 2009)

Emotional signals are crucial for sharing important information, throughmedia or personalcontact.Furthermore, emotionalin-
withconspecifics,forexample, to warn humans of danger. Humans formation overlaiàon speechis restricted byseveral such
factors,
use a range of differentcues to communicate to others how they as the segmentaland prosodie structureof the language and
feel, including facial, vocal, and gestural signals. We examined constraintson the movementof the articulators.In contrast,
the recognition of nonverbal emotional vocalizations, such as nonverbalvocalizationsare relatively "pure"expressionsofemo-
screams and laughs, across two dramatically differentcultural tions. Without the simultaneoustransmissionof verbal in-
groups. Western participantswere compared to individuals from formation, the articulators(e.g., lips,tongue,larynx)can move
remote,culturallyisolated Namibianvillages. Vocalizations commu- freely, allowingfortheuse of a widerrangeof acousticcues (9).
nicatingthe so-called "basic emotions" (anger, disgust, fear, joy, We examinedvocal signalsof emotionsusingthe two-culture
sadness, and surprise)were bidirectionallyrecognized. In contrast, approach,in whichparticipants fromtwo populationsthatare
a set of additional emotions was only recognized within,but not maximally differentintermsoflanguageandculturearecompared
across, culturalboundaries. Our findingsindicate that a numberof (10). The claimofuniversality isstrengthened totheextentthatthe
primarilynegative emotions have vocalizations that can be recog- same phenomenonis foundin both groups.This approachhas
nized across cultures,while most positive emotions are communi- previously been used in workdemonstrating the universality
of
cated with culture-specific signals. facialexpressionsoftheemotionshappiness,anger,fear,sadness,
disgust,and surprise(11), a resultthathas nowbeen extensively
communication | affect | universality| vocal signals replicated(12). These emotionshave also been shownto be reli-
ablycommunicatedwithina culturalgroupvia vocal cues, and
differences in language,culture,and ecology,some additionally,vocalizationseffectively signal severalpositiveaf-
Despite
humancharacteristics aresimilarinpeople all overtheworld. fectivestates(3, 13).
Becausewe sharethevastmajority ofourgeneticmakeupwithall To investigate whetheremotionalvocalizationscommunicate
otherhumans,thereis greatsimilarity inthephysicalfeaturesthat affectivestates across cultures,we comparedEuropean native
are typicalforourspecies,eventhoughminorcharacteristics vary Englishspeakerswiththe Himba,a seminomadicgroupof over
betweenindividuals.Like manyphysicalfeatures,aspectsof the 20,000pastoralpeople livingin smallsettlements in the Kaoko-
humanpsychology are shared.These psychological universaiscan landregioninnorthern Namibia.A handfulofHimbasettlements,
inform aboutwhatfeaturesofthehumanmindarepart primarily those near the regionalcapital Opuwo, are so-called
arguments
of our sharedbiologicalheritageand whichare predominantly "showvillages"thatwelcomeforeigntouristsand media in ex-
productsofcultureandlanguage.Forexample,all humansocieties change forpayment.However,in the veryremotesettlements,
havecomplexsystems ofcommunication to conveytheirthoughts, wherethedataforthepresentstudywerecollected,theindividuals
and intentions to those around them(1). However,al- livecompletely traditionallives,withno electricity,
running water,
feelings,
formaleducation,oranycontactwithcultureorpeople fromother
thoughthereare some commonalitiesbetweendifferent com-
municativesystems,speakers of differentlanguages cannot groups.Theyhavethusnotbeen exposedto theaffective signalsof
understandeach others'wordsand sentences.Otheraspectsof individualsfromculturalgroupsotherthantheirown.
communicative do notrelyon commonlexicalcodes and Participantshearda shortemotionalstory,describingan event
systems thatelicitsan affectivereaction:forexample,that a person is
maybe sharedacrosslinguisticand culturalborders.Emotional
signalsare an exampleof a communicative systemthatmaycon- verysad because a close relativeof theirshas passed away [see
stitutea psychologicaluniversal. Table SI]. Afterconfirming that theyhad understoodthe in-
Humans use a range of cues to communicateemotions, tendedemotionof the story,theywere playedtwovocalization
sounds. One of the stimuliwas fromthe same categoryas the
includingvocalizations,facial expressions,and posture (2-4). emotionexpressedin the storyand the otherwas a distractor.
Auditorysignalsallowforaffective communication whenthe re-
The participant was askedwhichof thetwohumanvocalizations
cipientcannotsee thesender,forexample,acrossa distanceor at matched the emotion in the story(Fig. 1). This task avoids
night.Infantsaresensitive tovocalcuesfromtheverybeginning of
life,whentheirvisualsystemis stillrelatively immature(5). problemswithdirecttranslationof emotiontermsbetweenlan-
Vocal expressions ofemotionscan occuroverlaidon speechin guages because it includes additionalinformation in the sce-
theformofaffective prosody.However,humansalso makeuse ofa
rangeof nonverbalvocalizationsto communicatehow theyfeel, Author contributions: D.A.S., F.E., P.E. and S.K.S. designed research; D.A.S. and F.E.
suchas screamsand laughs.In thisstudy,we investigate whether performedresearch; D.A.S. and F.E. analyzed data; and D.A.S. wrote the paper.
certainnonverbalemotionalvocalizationscommunicate thesame The authors declare no conflictof interest.
affectivestatesregardlessof thelistener'sculture.Currently, the This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.
only available cross-cultural data of vocal signals come from
Freelyavailable online through the PNAS open access option.
studiesof emotionalprosodyin speech (6-8). This workhas in-
1To whom correspondence should be sent at the presentaddress: Max Planck Institutefor
dicatedthatlistenerscan infersome affective statesfromemo- PO Box 310, 6500 AH Nijmegen,The Netherlands.E-mail:disa.sauter®
Psycholinguistics,
tionallyinflectedspeechacrossculturalboundaries.However,no mpl.nl
studyto date has investigated emotionrecognition fromthevoice This article contains supporting informationonline at www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/
in a populationthathas had no exposureto otherculturalgroups 09082391 06/DCSupplemental

2408-2412 | PNAS | February9, 2010 | vol.107 | no. 6 0.1073/pnas.09082391

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/i 06

This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fig. 1. Participantwatching the experimenterplay a stimulus{Upper) and
indicatingher response (Lower).
nariosand does notrequireparticipantsto be able to read. The
Englishsoundswerefroma previously validatedset of nonverbal
vocalizationsof emotion,producedbytwomale and twofemale
BritishEnglish-speakingadults. The Himba sounds were pro-
duced by fivemale and six femaleHimba adults,and were se-
lectedin an equivalentwayto the Englishstimuli(13).
Results
To examinethe cross-cultural recognitionof nonverbalvocal-
izations,we testedtherecognition ofemotionsfromvocal signals
fromtheotherculturalgroupineach groupoflisteners(Fig. 24).
The Englishlistenersmatchedthe Himba soundsto the storyat
exceeded chance (xi = 418.67, P <
a level that significantly
0.0001), and theyperformedbetterthanwould be expectedby
chanceforeach of the emotioncategories[xi = 30.15 (anger),
100.04 (disgust),24.04 (fear),67.85 (sadness), 44.46 (surprise),
41.88 (achievement),100.04(amusement),15.38 (sensual pleas-
ure),and32.35(relief),allP < 0.001,Bonferronicorrected]. These
data demonstrate
thatthe Englishlistenerscould inferthe emo-
tionalstateofeach ofthecategoriesof Himbavocalizations.
The HimbalistenersmatchedtheEnglishsoundsto thestories
at a levelthatwas significantly
higherthanwouldbe expectedby
chance(xi = 271.82,P < 0.0001). For individualemotions,they
performed at better-than-chance levelsfora subsetof the emo-
tions[xi = 8.83 (anger),27.03 (disgust),18.24 (fear),9.96 (sad-
ness), 25.14 (surprise),and 49.79 (amusement),all P < 0.05,
Bonferroni corrected].These data showthatthecommunication
oftheseemotionsvia nonverbalvocalizationsis notdependenton
Sauter et al.
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
a sharedculturebetweenproducerand listener:thesesignalsare
recognizedacrossculturalborders.
We also examinedthe recognitionof vocalizationsfromthe
listeners'own culturalgroups(Fig. 2B). As expected,listeners
fromthe Britishsample matchedthe Britishsoundsto the story
at a level thatsignificantly exceeded chance (xi = 271.82,P <
0.0001), and theyperformedbetterthanwould be expectedby
chance foreach of the emotioncategories[xi = 81.00 (anger),
96.04 (disgust),96.04 (fear), 81.00 (sadness), 70.56 (surprise),
96.04 (achievement),88.36 (amusement),51.84 (sensual pleas-
ure),and 67.24 (relief),all P < 0.001,Bonferronicorrected].This
replicatespreviousfindingsthat have demonstratedgood rec-
ognitionof a range of emotionsfromEnglishnonverbalvocal
cues bothwithin(13) and between(3) European cultures.
The Himba listenersalso matchedthe soundsfromtheirown
groupto the storiesat a level thatwas muchhigherthanwould
be expected by chance (xi = 111.42, P < 0.0001), and they
performedbetterthanwould be expectedby chance foralmost
all of theemotioncategories[xi = 39.86 (anger),42.24 (disgust),
44.69 (sadness),9.97 (surprise),15.21(fear),33.14 (achievement),
19.86 (amusement),and 12.45 (sensual pleasure),all P < 0.05,
Bonferronicorrected].Only sounds of reliefwere not reliably
paired with the relevantstory.Overall, the consistently high
Himba recognition of Himba soundsconfirms thatthesestimuli
constituterecognizablevocal signalsof emotionsto Himba lis-
teners,and further demonstratethatthisrangeof emotionscan
be reliablycommunicated withintheHimbaculturevia nonverbal
vocal cues.
Discussion
The emotionsthat were reliablyidentifiedby both groups of
listeners,regardlessof the originof the stimuli,comprisethe set
of emotions commonlyreferredto as the "basic emotions."
These emotionsare thoughtto constituteevolvedfunctions that
n
2*
are shared between all human beings,both in termsof phe- O t
nomenologyand communicativesignals (14). Notably,these
emotionshave been shownto have universally recognizablefa-
£8
cial expressions(11, 12). In contrast,vocalizationsof several
positive emotions (achievement/triumph, relief, and sensual
pleasure) were not recognizedbidirectionally bybothgroupsof
listeners.This findingis despitethe factthatthey,withthe ex-
ceptionof relief,werewellrecognizedwithineach culturalgroup
and that nonverbalvocalizationsof these emotionsare recog-
nizedacrossseveralgroupsof Westernlisteners(3). This pattern
suggeststhattheremaybe universally recognizablevocal signals
for communicating the basic emotions,but that this does not
extendto all affective
states,includingones thatcan be identified
by listenersfromcloselyrelatedcultures.
Our resultsshowthatemotionalvocal cues communicate affec-
tivestatesacrossculturalboundaries.The basic emotions - anger,
fear,disgust,happiness(amusement),sadness,and surprise - were
reliablyidentifiedby both English and Himba listenersfrom vo-
calizationsproducedby individualsfromboth groups.This ob-
servationindicatesthatsome affectivestatesare communicated
withvocal signalsthatare broadlyconsistentacrosshumansoci-
eties,and do notrequirethattheproducerand listenersharelan-
guage or culture.The findingsare in line withresearchin the
domainof visualaffective signals.Facial expressionsof thebasic
emotionsare recognizedacrossa wide rangeof cultures(12) and
correspond toconsistent constellations
offacialmusclemovements
(15). Furthermore, thesefacialconfigurations producealterations
in sensoryprocessing, suggestingthattheylikelyevolvedto aid in
the preparationforactionto particularly important typesof sit-
uations(16). Despite the considerablevariationin humanfacial
musculature, the facialmusclesthatare essentialto producethe
expressionsassociatedwithbasic emotionsare constantacrossin-
dividuals,suggestingthat specificfacial muscle structures have
likelybeen selected to allow individualsto produce universally
PNAS | February 9, 2010 | vol.107 | no. 6 | 2409
Fig. 2. Recognition performance(out of four) for each emotion category, within and across cultural groups. Dashed lines indicate chance levels (50%).
Abbreviations:ach, achievement; amu, amusement; ang, anger; dis, disgust; fea, fear; pie, sensual pleasure; rei, relief;sad, sadness; and sur, surprise.(A)
Recognitionof each categoryof emotional vocalizations forstimulifroma differentculturalgroup for Himba (lightbars) and English{dark bars) listeners.(B)
Recognitionof each category of emotional vocalizations for stimulifromtheir own group for Himba (light bars) and English(dark bars) listeners.

recognizable emotionalexpressions (17). The consistency ofemo- the taskoverall(FUi4 = 127.31,P < 0.001; Englishmean: 3.56;
tionalsignalsacrossculturessupportsthenotionofuniversalaffect Himba mean: 2.74). This effectis likelybecause of the English
programs: thatis,evolvedsystems thatregulatethecommunication participants'more extensiveexposure to psychologicaltesting
of emotions,whichtaketheformof universalsignals(18). These and education.
signalsare thoughtto be rootedin ancestralprimatecommunica- The currentstudythusextendsmodels of cross-cultural com-
tivedisplays.In particular,
facialexpressions producedbyhumans municationof emotionalsignalsto nonverbalvocalizationsof
and chimpanzeeshave substantialsimilarities (19). Althougha emotion,suggesting thatthesesignalsare modulatedbyculture-
numberofprimatespeciesproduceaffective vocalizations(20), the specificvariationin a similarwayto emotionalfacialexpressions
extentto whichtheseparallelhumanvocal signalsis as yetun- and affectivespeechprosody(12).
known.The datafromthecurrent studysuggestthatvocalsignalsof
emotionare,likefacialexpressions, drivencommuni- PositiveEmotions. Some affective statesare communicatedusing
biologically
cativedisplaysthatmaybe sharedwithnonhumanprimates. signals that are not shared across cultures,but specificto a
particulargroupor region.In our study,vocalizationsintended
In-Group Advantage.In humans,the basic emotionalsystemsare to communicatea numberofpositiveemotionswerenotreliably
modulatedbyculturalnormsthatdictatewhichaffective signals identified by the Himba listeners.Whymightthisbe? One pos-
shouldbe emphasized,masked,or hidden(21). In addition,cul- sibilityis thatthisis due to thefunctionofpositiveemotions.It is
ture introducessubtle adjustmentsof the universalprograms, well establishedthatthe communication of positiveaffectfacil-
producingdifferences in theappearanceof emotionalexpression itatessocial cohesionwithgroupmembers(22). Such affiliative
acrosscultures(12). These culturalvariations,acquiredthrough behaviorsmay be restrictedto in-groupmemberswithwhom
sociallearning, underliethefinding thatemotionalsignalstendto social connectionsare builtand maintained.However,itmaynot
be recognizedmostaccuratelywhenthe producerand perceiver be desirableto share such signalswithindividualswho are not
are fromthesame culture(12). This is thoughtto be because ex- membersof one's ownculturalgroup.An exceptionmaybe self-
pressionand perceptionare filteredthroughculture-specific sets enhancingdisplaysof positiveaffect.Recent researchhas shown
of rules,determining what signalsare sociallyacceptable in a thatposturalexpressionsofprideare universally recognized(23).
particulargroup.When theserulesare shared,interpretation is However,pride signalshigh social statusin the sender rather
facilitated.In contrast,whenculturalfiltersdifferbetweenpro-
ducerand perceiver,understanding theother'sstateis moredif-
ficult.
To examinewhether thoselisteners
whowerefromthesame
culturewherethestimuliwereproducedperformed betterin the
recognition of the emotionalvocalizations,we comparedrecog-
nitionperformance forthe two groupsand of the two sets of
stimuli.A significantinteractionbetweenthecultureofthelistener
and thatof thestimulusproducerwas found(F1414= 27.68,P <
0.001; means for Englishrecognitionof Englishsounds: 3.79;
Englishrecognition ofHimbasounds:3.34; Himba recognition of
Englishsounds:2.58; Himbarecognition ofHimba sounds:2.90),
confirming thateach groupperformedbetterwithstimulipro-
duced by membersof theirown culture(Fig. 3). The analysis
yieldedno maineffect ofstimulustype(F < 1; meanrecognition of
Englishstimuli:3.19; mean recognition of Himba stimuli:3.12),
demonstrating thatoverall,the two sets of stimuliwere equally Fig. 3. Group averages (out of four) for recognition across all emotion
recognizable. The analysisdid,however,resultin a maineffectof categories for each set of stimuli,for Himba (black line) and English(gray
listenergroup,because theEnglishlistenersperformed betteron line) listeners.Errorbars denote standard errors.

2410 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0908239106 Sauteret al.

This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
thangroupaffiliation, differentiatingit frommanyotherpositive
emotions.Althoughpride and achievementmay both be con-
sidered"agency-approach" emotions(involvedin reward-related
actions;see ref.24), theydifferin theirsignals:achievementis
well recognizedwithina culturefromvocal cues (3), whereas
prideis universally well recognizedfromvisual signals(23) but
not fromvocalizations(24).
We foundthatvocalizationsof reliefwere not matchedwith
the reliefstoryby Himba listeners,regardlessof whetherthe
stimuliwere Englishor Himba. This could implythatthe relief
storywas not interpreted as conveyingreliefto the Himba par-
ticipants.However,thisexplanationseems unlikelyforseveral
reasons.Afterhearinga story,each participantwas asked to
explainwhatemotiontheythoughtthe personin the storywas
feeling.Onlyonce itwas clearthattheindividualhad understood
theintendedemotionofthestorydid theexperimenters proceed
withpresenting thevocalizationstimuli,thusensuringthateach
participant had correctly understoodthe targetemotionof each
story.Furthermore, Himba vocalizationsexpressingreliefwere
reliablyrecognizedby Englishlisteners,demonstrating thatthe
Himba individualsproducingthe vocalizations(fromthe same
storypresentedto the listeners)were able to produce appro-
priatevocal signalsforthe emotionof the reliefstory.A more
parsimoniousexplanationforthisfindingmaybe thatthe sigh
used bybothgroupsto signalreliefis notan unambiguoussignal
to Himba listeners. Althoughused to signalrelief,demonstrated
bytheabilityof Himba individualsto producevocalizationsthat
wererecognizableto Englishlisteners,sighsmaybe interpreted
to indicatea rangeof otherstatesas well by Himba listeners.
Whetherthereare affective statesthatcan be inferredfromsighs
acrossculturesremainsa questionforfutureresearch.
In the presentstudy,one type of positivevocalizationwas
reliablyrecognizedby both groups of participants.Listeners
agreed,regardlessof culture,that sounds of laughtercommu-
nicatedamusement,exemplified as the feelingof beingtickled.
Ticklingtriggers laugh-likevocalizationsin nonhumanprimates
(25) as well as othermammals(26), suggesting thatit is a social
behaviorwithdeep evolutionary roots(27). Laughteris thought
to have originatedas a partof playfulcommunication between
younginfantsand mothers,and also occursmostcommonlyin
both childrenand nonhumanprimatesin responseto physical
play(28). Our resultssupporttheidea thatthesoundoflaughter
is universallyassociatedwithbeingtickled,as participants from
bothgroupsof listenersselectedthe amused soundsto go with
the ticklingscenario.Indeed, giventhe well-established coher-
ence betweenexpressiveand experientialsystemsof emotions
(15), our data suggestthatlaughteruniversally reflectsthe feel-
ingof enjoyment of physicalplay.
In our study,laughterwas cross-culturally recognizedas sig-
nalingjoy. In thevisualdomain,smilingis universally recognized
as a visualsignalof happiness(11, 12). This raisesthepossibility
thatlaughteris the auditoryequivalentof smiling,as bothcom-
municatea stateofenjoyment.
However,a different interpretation
maybe thatlaughterand smilesare infactquitedifferent typesof
signals,withsmilesfunctioning as a signalof generallypositive
socialintent, whereaslaughtermaybe a morespecificemotional
signal,originating inplay(29). Thisissuehighlightstheimportance
of consideringpositiveemotionsin cross-cultural researchof
emotions(30). The inclusionofa rangeofpositivestatesshouldbe
extendedto conceptualrepresentations in semanticsystemsof
emotions,whichhas been exploredin the contextof primarily
negativeemotions(31).
Conclusion
In thisstudywe showthata numberof emotionsare cross-cul-
turallyrecognizedfromvocal signals,which are perceivedas
communicatingspecificaffective
states.The emotionsfoundto be
recognizedfromvocal signalscorrespondto those universally
Sauteret al.
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
inferredfromfacial expressionsof emotions(11). This finding
supportstheoriesproposingthattheseemotionsare psychological
universaisand constitutea setofbasic,evolvedfunctions thatare
sharedby all humans.In addition,we demonstratethatseveral
positiveemotionsare recognizedwithin - butnotacross- cultural
groups,which maysuggest that social signalsare shared
affiliative
primarilywithin-groupmembers.
Materialsand Methods
Stimuli.The English stimuliwere taken from a previouslyvalidated set of
nonverbal vocalizations of negative and positive emotions. The stimulusset
was comprised of 10 tokens of each of nine emotions: achievement, amuse-
ment,anger,disgust,fear,sensual pleasure, relief,sadness, and surprise,based
on demonstrationsthat all ofthese categories can be reliablyrecognized from
nonverbalvocalizations byEnglishlisteners(13). The sounds were produced in
an anechoic chamber bytwo male and two female native Englishspeakers and
the stimulusset was normalized for peak amplitude. The actors were pre-
sented witha briefscenarioforeach emotion and asked to produce the kindof
vocalization they would make ifthey felt like the person in the story.Briefly,
achievement sounds were cheers, amusement sounds were laughs, anger
sounds were growls,disgust sounds were retches,fear sounds were screams,
sensual pleasure sounds were moans, relief sounds were sighs, sad sounds
were sobs, and surprisesounds were sharp inhalations. Furtherdetails on the
acoustic propertiesof the Englishsounds can be found in ref.13.
The Himba stimuliwere recorded from five male and six female Himba
adults, using an equivalent procedure to that of the English stimulus pro-
duction, and were also matched for peak amplitude. The researchers(D.A.S.
and F.E.) excluded poor exemplars,as itwas not possible to performmultiple-
choice pilot tests with Himba participantsto pilot test the stimuli.Stimuli
containing speech or extensive background noise were excluded, as were
multiple,similarstimuliby the same speaker. Examples of the sounds can be
found as Audio S1 and Audio S2.
Z uj
Participants.The total sample consisted of two English and two Himba <. <»>
groups. The English sample that heard the English stimuliconsisted of 25
native Englishspeakers (10 male, 15 female; mean age 28.7 years),and those
who heard Himba sounds consisted of 26 native Englishspeakers (1 1 male, 15 Is
o t
female; mean age 29.0 years). Twenty-nineparticipants(13 male, 16 female)
from Himba settlementsin NorthernNamibia comprised the Himba sample
who heard the Englishsounds, and another group of 29 participants(13 male,
16 female) heard the Himba sounds. The Himba do not have a systemfor
measuringage, but no childrenor veryold adults were included in the study.
Informedconsent was given by all participants.
Design and Procedure. We used an adapted version of a task employed in
previous cross-culturalresearch on the recognition of emotional facial
expressions(1 1). Inthe originaltask,a participantheard a storyabout a person
feeling in a particularway and was then asked to choose which of three
emotional facial expressionsfitwiththe story.Thistask issuitable foruse with
a preliteratepopulation, as it requires no abilityto read, unlike the forced-
choice format using multiple labels that is common in emotion-perception
studies. Furthermore,the currenttask is particularlywell suited to cross-
culturalresearch,as itdoes not relyon the precisetranslationof emotion terms
because it includes additional informationin the stories. The original task
included three response alternativeson each trial,with all three stimulipre-
sented simultaneously.However, as sounds necessarilyextend overtime, the
response alternatives in the currenttask had to be presented sequentially.
Thus,participantswere requiredto rememberthe other response alternatives
as they were listeningto the currentresponse option. To avoid overloading
the participants'workingmemory,the numberof response alternativesinthe
currentstudywas reduced to two.
The Englishparticipantswere tested in the presence of an experimenter;
the Himba participantswere tested inthe presence of two experimentersand
one translator. For each emotion, the participant listened to a short pre-
recorded emotion storydescribinga scenario that would elicitthat emotion
(Audio S3 and Audio S4). Aftereach story,the participantwas asked how
the person was feeling to ensure that they had understood the story. If
necessary,participantscould hear the storyagain. No participantsfailed to
identifythe intended emotion from any of the stories, although some in-
dividuals needed to hear a storymore than once to understandthe emotion.
The emotion stories used with the Himba participantswere developed to-
gether with a local person vyithextensive knowledge of the culture of the
Himba people, who also acted as a translatorduring testing. The emotion
storiesused withthe Englishparticipantswere matched as closelyas possible
PNAS | February9, 2010 | vol.107 | no. 6 | 2411
to the Himba stories,but adapted to be easily understood by Englishpar-
ticipants.The storieswere played over headphones fromrecordings,spoken
in a neutral tone of voice by a male native speaker of each language (the
Himba local language Otji-Hereroand English).Once they had understood
the story,the participantwas played two sounds over headphones. Stimulus
presentation was controlled by the experimenter pressing two computer
mice in turn,each playingone of the sounds (see Fig. 1). A subgroup of the
Himba participantslisteningto Himba sounds performeda slightlyaltered
version of the task, where the stimuli were played without the use of
computer mice, but the procedure was identical to that of the other par-
ticipantsin all other respects.The participantwas asked which one was the
kind of sound that the person in the storywould make. They were allowed
to hear the stimulias many times as they needed to make a decision. Par-
ticipants indicated their choice on each trial by pointing to the computer
mouse that had produced the sound appropriate for the story(see Fig. 1),
and the experimenterinputtedtheir response into the computer. Through-
out testing,the experimentersand the translatorwere naive to which re-
sponse was correctand which stimulusthe participantwas hearing. Speaker
gender was constantwithinany trial,with participantshearingtwo male and
1. Hauser MD, ChomskyN, FitchWT (2002) The facultyof language: What is it,who has
it, and how did it evolve? Science 298:1569-1579.
2. Coulson M (2004) Attributingemotion to static body postures: Recognitionaccuracy,
confusions,and viewpoint dependence. J Nonverbal Behav 28:1 17-139.
3. Sauter DA, Scott SK (2007) More than one kind of happiness: Can we recognize vocal
expressionsof differentpositive states? Motiv Emot 31:192-199.
4. Ekman P, FriesenWV, Ancoli S (1980) Facial signs of emotional experience. J Pers Soc
Psychol39:1 125-1 134.
5. Mehler J,BertonciniJ,BarriereM, Jass ikgersehenfeld D (1978) Infantrecognitionof
mothersvoice. Perception 7:491-497.
6. Scherer KR, Banse R, Wallbott HG (2001) Emotion inferencesfromvocal expression
correlate across languages and cultures.J Cross Cult Psychol32:76-92.
7. Pell MD, Monetta L, Paulmann S, Kotz SA (2009) Recognizing emotions in a foreign
language. J Nonverbal Behav 33:107-120.
8. BryantG, BarrettH (2008) Vocal emotion recognitionacross disparate cultures.JCogn
Cult 8:135-148.
9. Scott SK, Sauter D, McGettigan C (2009) Brain mechanismsfor processing perceived
emotional vocalizations in humans. Handbook of Mammalian Vocalizations, ed
BrudzynskiS (Academic Press,Oxford),pp 187-198.
10. Norenzayan A, Heine SJ(2005) Psychologicaluniversais:What are they and how can
we know? PsycholBull 13 1:763-784.
11. Ekman P, Sorenson ER, FriesenWV (1969) Pan-culturalelements in facial displaysof
emotion. Science 164:86-88.
12. ElfenbeinHA,Ambady N (2002) On the universalityand culturalspecificityof emotion
recognition:A meta-analysis.PsycholBull 128:203-235.
13. Sauter D, Calder AJ,EisnerF, Scott SK Perceptual cues in non-verbalvocal expressions
of emotion. Q J Exp Psychol,in press.
14. Ekman P (1992) An argument for basic emotions. Cogn Emotion 6:169-200.
15. Rosenberg EL, Ekman P (2005) Coherence between expressive and experiential
systemsin emotion. What the Face Reveals: Basic and Applied Studies of Sponta-
neous Expression,eds EkmanP, Rosenberg EL (OxfordUniversityPress,New York), pp
63-85.
16. SusskindJM,et al. (2008) Expressingfear enhances sensoryacquisition. Nat Neurosci
11:843-850.
17. Waller BM, Cray JJ,Burrows AM (2008) Selection for universal facial emotion.
Emotion 8:435-439.
2412 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0908239106
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:37:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
female trialsforeach emotion. Thus,all participantscompleted fourtrialsfor
each of the nine emotions, resultingin a total of 36 trials.The target stimulus
was of the same emotion as the story,and the distractorwas varied in terms
of both valence and difficulty, such that for any emotion participantsheard
fourtypes of d ¡stractors: maximallyand minimallyeasy of the same valence,
and maximallyand minimallyeasy of the opposite valence, based on con-
fusiondata froma previousstudy(13). Which mouse was correcton any trial,
as well as the order of stories,stimulusgender, distractortype, and whether
the target was firstor second, was pseudorandomized for each participant.
Stimuluspresentationwas controlledusingthe PsychToolbox(32) for Matlab,
runningon a laptop computer.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank David Matsumoto for discussions. This
research was funded by grants from the Economic and Social Research
Council, UniversityCollege London Graduate School Research Project Fund,
and the Universityof London Central Research Fund (to D.A.S.), a contribu-
tion toward travel costs fromthe UniversityCollege London Department of
Psychology,and a grant fromthe Wellcome Trust(to S.K.S.).
18. Ekman P (1999) Facial expressions. Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, eds
Dalgleish T, Power M (Wiley, New York), pp 301-320.
19. ParrLA,Waller BM, Heintz M (2008) Facial expressioncategorization by chimpanzees
using standardized stimuli.Emotion 8:216-231.
20. SeyfarthRM (2003) Meaning and emotion in animal vocalizations. Ann N Y Acad Sci
1000:32-55.
21. Matsumoto D, Yoo S, Hirayama S, Petrova G (2005) Development and initial
validation of a measure of display rules: The Display Rule Assessment inventory
(DRAI). Emotion 5:23-40.
22. Shiota M, Keltner D, Campos B, Hertenstein M (2004) Positive emotion and the
regulation of interpersonal relationships. Emotion Regulation, eds Phillipot P,
Feldman R (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ),pp 127-156.
23. TracyJ,Robins R (2008) The nonverbal expressionof pride: Evidence forcross-cultural
recognition.J Pérs Soc Psychol94:516-530.
24. Simon-ThomasE, KeltnerD, Sauter D, Sinicropi-YaoL, Abramson A The voice conveys
specificemotions: evidence fromvocal burstdisplays.Emotion, in press.
25. Ross MD, Owren MJ,ZimmermannE (2009) Reconstructingthe evolution of laughter
in great apes and humans. CurrBiol 19:1106-1111.
26. Knutson B, Burgdorf J, Panksepp J (2002) Ultrasonic vocalizations as indices of
affectivestates in rats. Psycho/Bull 128:961-977.
27. Ruch W, Ekman P (2001) The expressive pattern of laughter. Emotion, Qualia and
Consciousness,ed Kaszniak A (Word ScientificPublisher,Tokyo).
28. Panksepp J (2004) Rough-and-tumble play: The brain sources to joy. Affective
Neuroscience: the Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions, ed Panksepp J
(Oxford UniversityPress,New York), pp 280-299.
29. van HooffJARAM(1972) A comparative approach to the phylogenyof laughter and
smiling. In Nonverbal Communication, ed Hinde RA (Cambridge UniversityPress,
Cambridge, England).
30. Sauter D More than happy: the need for disentangling positive emotions. CurrDir
PsycholSci, in press.
31. RomneyAK, Moore CC, Rusch CD (1997) Culturaluniversais:Measuring the semantic
structureof emotion terms in English and Japanese. Proc Nati Acad Sci USA 94:
5489-5494.
32. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysicstoolbox. Spat Vis 10:433-436.
Sauter et al.