An examination of the Kuleshov effect using still photographs

Autoři: John Mullennix aff001;  Jeremy Barber aff001;  Trista Cory aff001
Působiště autorů: University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, Johnstown, PA, United States of America aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224623


The goal of the present study was to examine whether the effect of visual context on the interpretation of facial expression from an actor’s face could be produced using isolated photographic stills, instead of the typical dynamic film sequences used to demonstrate the effect. Two-photograph sequences consisting of a context photograph varying in pleasantness and a photograph of an actor’s neutral face were presented. Participants performed a liking rating task for the context photograph (to ensure attention to the stimulus) and they performed three tasks for the face stimulus: labeling the emotion portrayed by the actor, rating valence, and rating arousal. The results of the labeling data confirmed the existence of a visual context effect, with more faces labeled as “happy” after viewing pleasant context and more faces labeled “sad” or “fearful” after viewing unpleasant context. This effect was demonstrated when no explicit connection between the context stimulus and face stimulus was invoked, with the contextual information exerting its effect on labeling after being held in memory for at least 10 seconds. The results for ratings of valence and arousal were mixed. Overall, the results suggest that isolated photograph sequences produce a Kuleshov-type context effect on attributions of emotion to actors’ faces, replicating previous research conducted with dynamic film sequences.

Klíčová slova:

Analysis of variance – Cognition – Emotions – Face – Fear – Happiness – Memory – Sequence databases


1. Ekman P, Oster H. Facial expressions of emotion. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 1979; 30:527–554.

2. Ekman P. Facial expressions of emotion: New findings, new questions. Psychol. Sci. 1992; 1:34–38.

3. Aviezer H, Hassin RR, Ryan J, Grady C, Susskind J, Anderson A. Angry, disgusted, or afraid? Studies on the malleability of emotion perception. Psychol. Sci. 2008; 19:724–732. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02148.x 18727789

4. Aviezer H, Bentin S, Dudarev V, Hassin RR. The automaticity of emotional face-context integration. Emotion 2011; 11:1406–1414. doi: 10.1037/a0023578 21707150

5. Carroll JM, Russell JA. Do facial expressions signal specific emotions? Judging emotion from the face in context. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1996; 70:205–218. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.70.2.205 8636880

6. Wallbott HG. In and out of context: influences of facial expression and context information on emotion attributions. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 1988; 27:357–369.

7. Wallbott HG. The relative importance of facial expression and context information in emotion attributions–biases, influence factors, and paradigms. Adv. in Psychol. 1990; 68:275–283.

8. Wieser MJ, Brosch T. Faces in context: A review and systematization of contextual influences on affective face processing. Fron. in Psychol. 2012; 3:1–13.

9. Barrett LF, Mesquita B, Gendron M. Context in emotion perception. Curr. Dir. in Psychol. Sci. 2011; 20:286–290.

10. Barrett LF, Kensinger EA. Context is routinely encoded during emotion perception. Psychol. Sci. 2010; 21:595–599. doi: 10.1177/0956797610363547 20424107

11. Righart R, de Gelder B. Rapid influence of emotional scenes on encoding of facial expressions: An ERP study. Soc. Cog. and Aff. Neuro. 2008; 3:270–278.

12. Prince S, Hensley WE. The Kuleshov Effect: recreating the classic experiment. Cine J. 1992; 31:59–75.

13. Mobbs D, Weiskopf N, Lau HC, Featherstone E, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. The Kuleshov effect: the influence of contextual framing on emotional attributions. Soc. Cog. and Aff. Neuro. 2006; 1:95–106.

14. Barratt D, Re´dei AC, Innes-Ker A, van de Weijer J. Does the Kuleshov effect really exist? Revisiting a classic film experiment on facial expressions and emotional contexts. Perception 2016; 45:847–974. doi: 10.1177/0301006616638595 27056181

15. Calbi M, Siri F, Heimann K, Barett D, Gallese V, Kolesnikov A, Umiltà M.A. How context influences the interpretation of facial expressions: EEG study on the “Kuleshov effect.” Sci. Rep. 2019; 9:1–15. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37186-2

16. Pudovkin VI. Film technique and film acting. New York, NY: Bonanza Books; 1958.

17. Tsivian Y, Khokhlova E, Thompson K, Kuleshov L, Khokhlova A. The rediscovery of a Kuleshov experiment: a dossier. Film Hist. 1996; 8:357–367.

18. Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN. International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 2008 Technical Report A-8.

19. Lundqvist D, Flykt A, Öhman A. The Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces—KDEF, (CD ROM). Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychology section, Karolinska Institutet, ISBN 91-630-7164-9; 1998.

20. Schneider W, Eschman A, Zuccolotto A. E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA, Psychology Software Tools, Inc.; 2002.

21. Mullennix JW, Kristo G, Robinet J. Effects of preceding context on aesthetic preference. Emp. Stud. of the Arts Pre-published online 11 October 2018.

22. Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux; 2011.

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10