Log in

No account? Create an account
Spot the Fake Smile. - Sauce1977 — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ Userinfo | Sauce1977 Userinfo ]
[ Archive | Sauce1977 Archive ]

Spot the Fake Smile. [Aug. 22nd, 2005|01:15 am]
[Tags|, , ]
[In the Moment |Ha-Ha Smile]
[Special Music |Kelis feat. Nas - In Public]

Society teaches people to not show true emotion.

From found_online, a link brought me to a BBC Science & Nature quiz to guage how well one spots a fake smile.

Find Out How Well You Spot Fake Smiles.

I scored 9 out of 20 correct.


From: hulagalinthesky
2005-08-22 03:22 pm (UTC)
That's cool. I got 12/20.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2005-08-22 07:07 pm (UTC)
The test is neat, free of heavy load times, and it's on a relatively clutter-free place like the BBC. I like it when they don't need 40,000 pop-ups to support things.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: hulagalinthesky
2005-08-22 07:17 pm (UTC)
I found it interesting since I just finished reading Blink. I concentrated on the muscles in the face, but still wasn't able to get a perfect score.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2005-08-22 07:21 pm (UTC)

Matter of preference.

I don't like short smiles.

If someone smiles for a second upon a greet, it better be a huge freaking grin. I don't like short petite smiles, at all, ever. To me, that's an insult.

I can't figure out where I got that notion. As far as I can think about it, it seems to be an instinctual thing, possibly linked to something from childhood that I can't remember.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: hulagalinthesky
2005-08-22 07:25 pm (UTC)

Re: Matter of preference.

Though I don't really know, I would suspect your instincts to be correct. It seems to me that it would be easier to go full-on into a smile (in terms of using your facial muscles) than to only smile a little. It would (I suspect) take more muscles to refrain from smiling huge.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2005-08-22 07:50 pm (UTC)

Total Subjectivity.

I don't mind false displays, which is the other part.

It's like shaking hands.

A smile should be long enough for a person to notice, upon a greet. A handshake should be firm enough, but for women, handshakes are optional in grip, so they can be of any tension.

Long smiles and firm handshakes, to me, upon greet, are a sign of effort. If you can hold a smile for more than a second, and you can shake my hand with some sort of grip, then you probably are well-balanced and alert enough to be worthy of my time.

I don't really put any touching requirement, however, on people. I suspect that as society progresses, with the introduction of such diseases as HIV/AIDS in the 1980s, people will want to touch each other less and less.

But the smile, anyone without a stroke or severe quadraplegic limitation can do. If you can't smile for more than a second, then it's probably an indicator that the time to spend isn't going to amount to much.

So, I probably should expect any new people I meet that ever come across this post to probably make an exaggerated effort, like Nicholson's Joker from Batman. LOL.

Naw, just make that smile count.

This is all coming from a person who doesn't find it necessary to look at someone while in conversation, which is another quirk of mine.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: hulagalinthesky
2005-08-22 07:57 pm (UTC)

Re: Total Subjectivity.

I tend to think people with wishy-washy handshakes ARE wishy-washy, regardless of gender.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2005-08-22 08:00 pm (UTC)

Re: Total Subjectivity.

Well, they could have carpal-tunnel, or whatever that's called.

I noticed that if a handshake is weak, and the person is very weak in their conversation, then it's probably not a good idea to put them in customer service.

Hopefully, they have some other usefulness, like number-crunching or computers, because that weak shit will get them nowhere in sales or service.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)