A meta-analysis examined emotion recognition within and across cultures. Emotions were universally recognized at better-than-chance levels. Accuracy was higher when emotions were both expressed and recognized by members of the same national, ethnic, or regional group, suggesting an in-group advantage. This advantage was smaller for cultural groups with greater exposure to one another, measured in terms of living in the same nation, physical proximity, and telephone communication. Majority group members were poorer at judging minority group members than the reverse. Cross-cultural accuracy was lower in studies that used a balanced research design, and higher in studies that used imitation rather than posed or spontaneous emotional expressions. Attributes of study design appeared not to moderate the size of the in-group advantage. Psychologists have long debated whether emotions are universal versus whether they vary by culture. These issues have been extensively summarized elsewhere and we do not reiterate them (e.g., Ekman, 1972 Ekman, , 1994 Izard, 1971; Mesquita & Frijda, 1992; Mesquita, Frijda, & Scherer, 1997; Russell, 1994; Scherer & Wallbott, 1994) . Although many theorists have taken extreme positions and provoked lively debate, recent theoretical models have attempted to account for both universality and cultural variation by specifying which particular aspects of emotion show similarities and differences across cultural boundaries (e.g., Ekman, 1972; Fiske, Kitayama, Markus, & Nisbett, 1998; Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Mesquita & Frijda, 1992; Mesquita et al., 1997; Scherer, 1997; Scherer & Wallbott, 1994) . Many of these models present an interactionist perspective (Ekman, 1994; Matsumoto, 1989; Rosenthal, Hall, DiMatteo, Rogers, & Archer, 1979; Russell, 1994; Scherer & Wallbott, 1994) . For example, Matsumoto (1989) argued that, although emotions are biologically programmed, the process of learning to control both their expression and perception is highly dependent on cultural factors. Taking a different perspective, Russell (1994) suggested that specific emotional categories are largely culturally specific but that broad dimensions such as valence and arousal are universal. Although these models are rich and illuminating, Scherer and Wallbott (1994) have noted that there have not been many systematic attempts to gather evidence to examine the theories. Attempting to garner such evidence, Scherer and Wallbott found strong evidence for universality as well as cultural differences in emotional experience, including both psychological and physiological responses to emotions. The primary goal of the present article is to conduct a meta-analysis to examine the evidence that exists for both universality and cultural differences in the particular area of emotion recognition. Emotional expression falls under the category of emotional behavior: the outward expressions and actions that accompany emotional experience (Mesquita & Frijda, 1992; Mesquita et al., 1997) . Because such emotional behaviors are observable, they have been relatively more available for study by researchers who have examined both the expressions themselves as well as their accurate recognition. As a consequence, there is a rich literature on cross-cultural emotion recognition that can be empirically examined in order to assess the universality and the cultural specificity of emotion recognition, as well as to identify the factors that moderate these phenomena. Proponents of emotional universality have used cross-cultural studies of facial emotion recognition as one of their central sources of evidence. Classic studies conducted by Paul Ekman (1972), Hillary Anger Elfenbein, Program in Organizational Behavior, Harvard University; Nalini Ambady, Department of Psychology, Harvard University. Preparation of this article was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Student Fellowship and Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers Grant BCS-9733706. We thank David Matsumoto and Klaus Scherer for their extremely helpful comments. We are grateful to each author who responded to our requests for articles from their file drawers. We would also like to express appreciation to Andrew Calder, David Chan, Pierre Gosselin, William Ickes, Gilles Kirouac, Manas Mandal, Roslyn Markham, David Matsumoto, Steve Nowicki, Pio Ricci Bitti, Klaus Scherer, and H. L. Toner, who provided not only manuscripts but also reached deep into their archives to provide us with detailed information about their studies. We thank Donald Rubin, Robert Rosenthal, and the late Douwe Yntema for suggestions about the statistical analysis. For helpful comments on an earlier draft, we thank
Having said that, facial expression of emotion is a powerful modality to express emotion REF .
On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: a meta-analysis
Psychological Bulletin
Psychology Medicine