On 4/6/2011 17:42, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> ability of different people to judge acted versus real eye expressions.

Exactly.

> but I'd imagine that it's smaller than the
> variance in overall ability in reading eye expressions.

I wouldn't assume that, personally. But I know almost nothing about such 
subjects, really.

> To me this points that they are clearly measuring
> *something* useful.

Certainly.

> "complex" expressions like sarcasm, pensiveness, refection, etc. on the
> other hand the eyes seemed to be the most useful thing in conveying the
> expressions.

I think it's likely that the eyes are used much more for "intentional" 
expressions, too. Things you want the other person to see, like skepticism 
or disapproval?

> Also interesting was that the autistic spectrum people only
> seemed to have significant trouble with the complex expressions, but not
> with the simple ones. I actually found it to be a pretty interesting paper
> to skim -- not that I actually know anything about the field of course.

That's cool. Do you still have a reference to the study sitting about?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message