Margaret Mead Calls “Discipline-centric’’ Approach to Research

an “Example of the Appalling State of the Human Sciences ’’

Darwin and Facial Expres.rion: A Cen-
tury of Research in Keioiew edited by
Paul Ekman. New York: Academic
Press, 1973. 273 pages. $17.00.
T h i s book, edited by Paul Ekman (who
also contributed the introduction, epilogue,
a n d chapter o n his cross-cultural researches
i n t o recognition of facial expression of emo-
tions), consists of four main sections: “Facial
Expression of Emotion in Nonhuman Pri-
mates,” by Suzanne Chevalier Skolnikoff
(73 pages); “Facial Expressions of Infants
and Children,” by William R. Charlesworth the discussion is structured about the issue
and Mary Anne Kreutzer (72 pages); “Cross- that interests the editor and coauthor-to
Cultural Studies of Facial Expression,” by prove beyond all doubt or possibility of
Paul Ekman (52 pages); and “Darwin a n d refutation that facial expressions i n man are
the Representative Expression of Reality,” the product of evolutional continuity among
by Lewis Petrinovich (32 pages). T h e book primates, ;ind morphologically similar cross-
is appropriately and richly illustrated by culturally. I t works narrowly within the
diagrammatic drawings a n d photographs (for framework provided by traditional American
which, however, there is n o table of con- psychological research-within which, how-
tents). It takes off from Darwin’s T h e E x - ever, he is willing to include leading Euro-
pression! of ihe Emotions in illen a n d Ani- pean ethologists Lorenz, Tinbergen, Eibl-
mals, originally published in 1872. Eibesfeldt (all of whom have lectured in
T h e book is rigidly limited to the question the TJnited States), and Egon Rrunswik,
of facial expression, excluding Darwin’s “who was brought to the United States by
more generalized treatment of stance arid Tolman” (p. 211). T h e entire design of the
posture in the whole animal. Throughout, book excludes any consideration of anthro-
pological or I’sYcIioantlirofJologiCiil work, ex-
cept where Ekman wishes to use Rirtlwhistell
or Klineberg’s inadequately presented state-
ments of cross-cu1tur;il work ;IS whipping
boys, or when he quotes ethologists who
have cooperated with him, Heitlcr and Soren-
son. (He makes n o mentioil, however, of
Sorensen’s criticisms of the work in which
he cooperated with him.1) Psychiatrists, psy-
1 Sorenson, E. Richard, “C:rilture and the
Expression of Emotioii.” I n P.$yrliologicnl A n -
thropology, edited by T. R. Williams. Haguc:
Mouton, 1974.

209
Journal of Communication, Winter 1975

choanalysts, and sociologists are almost com-

pletely excluded from any consideration,
e l e n i n the definitions of situation and
organism-environment relationships, which
are discussed in the chapter o n “Darwin
and the Representative Expression of Real-
ity” in terms of abstract statements of Egon
Brunswik’s point of view
T h e narrowness and discipline-centric
nature of the book is a continuing example
of the appalling state of the human sciences,
when members of eaLh discipline treat their
specialized approach as the only approach. ments i n relation to facial expressions.
’4lthough it is quite possible that each of T h e chapter o n infants and children is
o u r disciplines is inarticulately fed by the less satisfactory, taken u p as it is by the
findings of parallel disciplines, the reader, state of research rather than by the behavior
in the strait jacket of the references citcd in of human infants and children. What re-
this book, would certainly never discoher it. search the author regards as valuable, again
T h e r e is no reference at all to the classic very narrowly interpreted, is carefully sum-
interdisciplinary study of multisensory com- marized and criticized, and conservative esti-
munication;2 nor is there any discussion of
mates advanced. T h e absence of data o n
what has seemed to many of us a crucial
expressiveness in older children, as opposed
concept which Darwin lacked, cybernetic to the more satisfactory immobilized in-
theory. fants, is lamented, and the shift to studies
T h e book is packed with information and
of children’s recognition studies-very poor
will provide a valuable reference point for
as compared with the work o n adults, which
future students interested in what the disci-
incidentally are only mentioned in this book
plines of psychology (human experimental
as reference or background data-is stressed.
and animal experimental) have contributed
T h e most stimulating material comes from
to the solution of the problem of the uni-
studies of blind children i n which blind
versality of human facial expressions, and children are said to have been able to ex-
the relationship between the facial expres- press emotions in the same way that sighted
sion of emotions i n man and in other children in the same culture express them,
primates. T h e chapter o n “Nonhuman Pri-
but are unable to sirnulate the emotions
mates” (although the title is unnecessarily
which they under appropriate situations ex-
euclusivist) is a statement of o u r now \cry press-for lack, as the authors point out,
extenshe observational and experimental
of visual reinforcement. I shall return to
knowledge of expressiveness and recognition
this point later.
of expressiveness in primates, and the rela-
Ekman’s single-minded research goal-to
tionship of visual cues-weaker in nocturnal
re-olve with absolute certainty (an attitude
primates-to other cues and tone to be-
which we usually d o not associate with
havior Diagrammatic drawings and carefully
science, which proceeds bv a succession of
built tabular presentation of results show
discarded paradigms) that the expression of
something of what is known, what is not
some, if not all, of the emotions of which
yet known, and how, for example, present
the human face is capable, is innate and
knowledge makes it possible to asqess the
universal-is outlined in full detail. Hi3
importance of incomplete intention m o l e
criticism of the problems of his type of work,
2 McQuown et al , A S n t i i r n l H i c t o r v of nn hased on recognition and ability to simulate
Tv/cr711c711I’niver\ity of Chicago Prew, in pre4s. expressions which can be cross-culturally

210
 Book Reviews

tested, looks careful a n d full. H e c lcilms

,. to expressive movement that (in the truncated
have faced, explicitly, all of tlie problems quotation provided by Ekman) “we can
involved i n such cross-cultural work. What expect them [emotional expressions] to be
he comes u p with are statements of results learned and patterned according to the
which have validity and statistical reliability: particular structure of particular societies.”
that expression of “primary emotions” (num- ’l’hese statements are not as incompatible
ber not yet conipletely specified), can be with Ekman’s actual findings as it wo~lld
simulated, photographed, or drawn, antl the a t first seem, If there are morphologically
simulation recognized cross-culturally. A n d congruent, universally occurring facial ex-
he adds that these expressions can be sys- pressions, which are subject to cultural
tematically related t o the morphology of modification from birth o n , there is no
the human face, and consistently related nccd to re,ject the presence of possible
to the evidence from primate studies of innate antl evolutionarily and potentially
the way in which the morphological featnres neurologically explicable facial expression,
of the face i n different species permits or in order to recognize that in all the in-
prevents certain types of expressiveness. dividuals Birdwhistell has studied in such
These morphological features makc i t pos- detail he did not find them. Ekman says
sible to analyze still photographs, films, ;ind that Birdwhistell “provides less evidence
videotape presentations of simulations in For his review than La Barre a n d Kline-
such a way as to provide ;I satisfactory berg.” T h i s is the type of canard which
cross-cultural (etic) form of analysis. T h e disgraces scientific controversy. Hirdwhistell’s
discussion of blended emotions, which are “evidence” is his detailed minute micro-
difficult either to simulate or to recognix analysis of human beings, from different
cross-culturally and which he believes to cultures in genuine social situations. By
be culturally patterned, strengthens the sig- repeating the clich6d criticism that Bird-
nificance of his own data. whistell h a s become a “captive of his own
An important issue is however presented linguistic model,” Ekman is guilty of the
by the importance of simulation i n these most gross misrepresentation, a misrepre-
cross-cultnral experiments, the behavior of sentation which has been popularized among
blind children, antl the ability of memhers psychologists, who are more interested i n
of a n isolated New Guinea tribe to simiilntc. validity and reliability than in what they
emotions of happiness, grief, anger. and are actually studying or what they might,
disgust (illustrated o n p. 212), in such a way hy including the work of other disciplines,
that California students could r e c o g n i ~ e possibly find out which was relevant to the
them. These findings, dramatic and signifi- study of man. Hr is equally unfair in his
cant as they are, must be placed beside criticisms of Klincberg and 1,a Rarre, ignor-
Rirdwhistcll’s analysis of culturally patterned ing the fact that hoth of them have worked
within other cultures. Klineberg worked and
taught in China: L a Rarre and Birdwhistell
have additionally deiroted 25 years to micro-
analysis.
If we take Ekman’s own phrasing, that
the “display rules” (a phrasing for cultural
patterning which he has manufactured from
ethologktl phrasings) differ in every cultrire,
:rnd his published evidence of the c r o w
cultural recognizability of simulation, we
have a n interesting and seminal point from
which to make Further scientific explorations.

211
Journal of Communication, Winter 1975

I n Bali, all expressions of grief at a death-

with the solitary exception of a mother
whose infant dies a t less than six months
old-are culturally interdicted. T h e dead
will be reincarnated; ritual acts are per-
formed to ensure that a n individual will be
more beautiful in the next incarnation.
Grief is inappropriate. However, when the
Balinese present mourning o n the stage, it
is pantomimed with expressions of anguish
that are cross-culturally recogniiable. When
a series of films of ordinary parent-child
For this is what Ekman has demonstrated. interaction in Bali were presented to a highly
Given a limited range of semantically desig- trained American observer, followed by a
nated emotions-grief, happiness, anger, film of a theatrical scene, the observer ex-
disgust, it is possible to persuade members claimed: “I don’t understand a bit of this,”
of different cultures to produce simulations in response to the natural scene, and: “Now
which are mutually intelligible between this is explicable,” when shown the theatri-
these cultures. If simulations are mutually cal scene. I t was also possible to test the
recognizable, then there must be some uni- response of Balinese to expressions of con-
versal element involved, such as Ekman cern over the illness of their children. My
postulates i n a connection between the ordinary expressions of concern, a facial,
nervous system and specific facial muscles. bodily, and vocal expression of sympathy and
T h e fact that those who have studied facial anxiety, repelled them, but when I theat-
expressions i n many cultures find patterning ricaliied, or simulated more emotion than
from birth, and possibly before birth, does I felt, they responded quite happily. These
not necessarily conflict with the possibility responses-which were replicated by another
that human beings may share a core of field worker-can he used to illustrate the
innate behaviors which are usually highly Ralinese avoidance of expressions of close-
modified but which are available for simula- ness of any sort, but they can also emphasize,
tion. Much that we know about innate be- in the light of Ekman’s findings, a more
havior would support this hypothesis. As basic communication, wherein the expres-
far down i n the evolutionary scale as octopi, sion of a response to a forbidden sponta-
we find simulated attack used as reassurance. neous feeling could he evoked by a simula-
Infant reflex walking behavior becomes ah- tion of that feeling.
sorbed into walking behavior, and so on. If A further research problem is the way
the evidence o n the blind’s production of visual reinforcement of expressiveness is
emotional expression were to be found to maintained in a society where the “display
resemble the simulated human emotions rules” forbid that expression, and there is
which Ekman then maps on the facial mus- n o theater. In such cultures, is the expression
culature, we would begin to have some in- of the postulated primary emotions buried
teresting possibilities. Rut by caricaturing deeper and less accessible? And does simula-
and denying the work of other investigators tion or caricature have some of the attributes
and claiming that what is recogni7ed cross- of what Konrad Lorenz has called the “super-
culturally is a culturally unmodified ex- normal object?” Is there not a n element of
firerrion of emotion, rather than a simula- exaggeration and selectivity in the simulation
tion of emotion, Ekman detracts from the which makes it ?osier to recognise?
possible significance of his own work. T h e very early responsiveness of a young
An illustration may make my point clearer. infant to its mother’s facial expression, and

212
 Book Revieinis

the rapid alteration in a child’s expressive-

ness, have been vividly demonstrated i n stud-
ies of infants’ responses to depression and
separation, and differential treatment of
early states of different levels of activity
(Spitz, Fries, Robertson).
Taking all of the evidence into account
would lead us towards a more comprehen-
sive understanding of human behavior, to a
human science instead of a series of one-
track trains running parallel, meeting only
in denigration of each other.
Pctrinovich’s history of the single-track hlarx) as a continuing groundplan for the
development of American psychology treats organization of research, the defense of one
Darwin’s book from a philosophical and methodology over another, or the basis of
methodological viewpoint rather than ask- polemic and provincial attacks, the quota-
ing whether he was right about observed and tion with which Petrinovich ends his chap-
reported details of species-specific behavior. ter, a quote from Ghiselin, seems more ap-
Petrinovich exalts Darwin’s insistence on the propriate; “ T h e explorer’s virtues must not
relationship between theory a n d observation, be confounded with those of the prophet.
but when he begins to discuss a “real Darwin was a great scientist because he
science,” based on experimentation, he ig- asked great questions. H e was a n influential
nores Darwin’s use of historically provided scientist because he seized upon those prob-
experiments, which can provide highly valu- lem\ which, a t the time, could be exploited
able information. in further research. His works retain their
It seems to me that there are other ways interest for the working biologist because
to examine a work like Darwin’s T h e E x - they continue to generate new and useful
pre.r.rion of / h e Emotions i n M e n and Ani- theories. His thoughts have been historically
mn1.s. It is, for example, interesting to specu- important because they illuminated the path
late what was lacking i n the scientific re- of investigation, regardless of where that
pertoire o n which Darwin drew and to which path may lead.”
he added. I was asked to write a n introduc-
tion to the Philosophical Library’s 1955 edi- MAK(;ARET
MEAI)
tion, immediately after the 1954 Conference
Amerirnn M i i s e w n of Nnturnl Hic.torv
o n Culture and Communication a t the Uni-
versity of Louisville Institute for Culture
and Communication, which was such a sig-
nificant event in the development of kinesics
Dominating the Space wa ves
and other semiotic disciplines. I n reply to
I,VTELSA T , Politicv and Functionalism
the appalling suggestion of the publisher
b y Joseph N. Pelton. Mt. Airy, Mtl.:
that Darwin’s illustrations were old-fashioned
Lomond Books, 1974. 183 pages.
a n d should be replaced by more modern
$14.50.
ones, I agreed to introduce, a s a n appendix,
illustrations which would demonstrate what Dr. Joseph N . Pelton’s I)ook about
seemed to be the concept which Darwin INTELSAT (the International Telecom-
lacked and needed-cybernetics, which had munications Satellite Consortium) is a very
been the basis of the Louisville Conference. useful and illuminating account, richly
Rather than treating the early work of n documented from primary 3ources, of the
great innovator like Darwin (or Freud, or formation and early years of the interna-