Abstract
Izard and Haynes question our findings and claims for disovery because they did not consider the difference between a one-to-one and one-to-many relationship between a sign (the facial expression) and what it signifies (a message about emotion). Clarifying this matter not only shows that the disagreement between us is more apparent than real, but more importantly highlights what remains to be discovered about which emotional states are signaled by which facial expressions.
References
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1986). A new pan-cultural facial expression of emotion.Motivation and Emotion, 10 159–168.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Ellsworth, P. (1972).Emotion in the human face: Guidelines for research and an integration of findings. New York: Pergamon Press.
Izard, C. E. (1971).The face of emotion. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Izard, C. E. (1977).Human emotions. New York, London: Plenum.
Izard, C. E. (1979).The maximally discriminative facial movement coding system (Max). Newark, Delaware: University of Delaware Instructional Resources Center.
Izard, C. E., & Haynes, O. M. 1988. On the form and universality of the contempt expression: A challenge to Ekman and Friesen's claim of discovery.Motivation and Emotion, 12 1–16.
Landis, C., & Hunt, W. A. (1939).The startle pattern. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V. Who knows what about contempt: A reply to Izard and Haynes. Motiv Emot 12, 17–22 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992470
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992470