The measurements are ones from the New Scientist website where they have information about their pages.
I have made three columns as that is what New Scientist use on their layouts on some of their pages. Others they use 4, but for the editorial image that I am putting on I think that it will be suited to 3 columns.
ABSTRACT: ANNALS OF PSYCHOLOGY about reading people’s facial expressions. Some years ago, John Yarbrough was working patrol for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. It was about two in the morning. He and his partner approached a parked car and, suddenly, a man jumped out of the passenger side and pointed a gun directly at him. The two of them froze, separated by no more than a few yards. It was just a matter of who was going to shoot first. But for some reason Yarbrough didn’t shoot him. It was a gut reaction not to shoot-a hunch. So Yarbrough stopped, and sure enough, so did the kid. Many years later, Yarbrough met with a team of psychologists who were conducting training sessions for law enforcement. They sat beside him in a darkened room and showed him a series of videotapes of people who were either lying or telling the truth. On average, people score fifty percent which is to say that they would have done just as well if they hadn’t watched the tapes at all and just guessed. But every now and again -roughly one time in a thousand-someone scores off the charts. A Texas Ranger named David Maxwell did extremely well, for example, as did an ex-A.T.F. agent named J.J. Newberry, a few therapists, an arbitrator, a vice cop-and John Yarbrough, which suggests that what happened that night may have been more than a fluke or lucky guess. In the nineteen-sixties, a young San Francisco psychologist named Paul Ekman began to study facial expression after learning about and meeting with a Princeton professor, named Silvan Tomkins, who may have been the best face reader there ever was. Tomkins, it was said, could walk into a post office, go over to the "Wanted" posters, and just by looking at mug shots, tell you what crimes the various fugitives had committed. Tomkins felt that emotion was the code to life and that with enough attention to particulars the code could be cracked. After meeting with Tomkins, Ekman decided to create a taxonomy of facial expressions. The entire process took seven years. By working through each action-unit combination, Ekman and his collaborator, Wallace Friesen, sorted through over ten thousand possible visible facial configurations and identified about three thousand that seemed to mean something, until they had catalogued the essential repertoire of human emotion. On a recent afternoon, Ekman sat in his office with writer and began running through the action-unit configurations he had learned. "Everybody can do action unit four, "he began. He lowered his brow, using his depressor glabellae, depressor supercilli, and corrugator. "Almost everyone can do A.U. nine." He wrinkled his nose, using his levator labii superioris, alaeque nasi. The Facial Action Coding System, or FACS, the assemblage of all the possible facial combinations, takes weeks to master in its entirety, and only five hundred people around the world have been certified to use it in research. They learn to read the face the way that people like John Yarbrough did intuitively. Ekman recalls the first time he saw Bill Clinton, during the 1992 Democratic primaries. "I was watching his facial expressions, and I said to my wife, This is Peck’s Bad Boy. There was this expression. It’s that hand-in-the-cookie-jar, love-me-because-I’m-a-rascal look. It’s A.U. twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and twenty-four, with an eye roll."Ekman called someone on Clinton’s communications staff about the incriminating facial tic and volunteered to meet with Clinton and work on it. The staff-member, though, thought the expression was better than taking the risk of it getting out that Clinton was seeing an expert on lying. Silvan Tomkins once began a lecture by bellowing, "The face is like the penis! And this is what he meant ñ that the face has, to a large extent, a mind of its own. Often, some little part of a suppressed emotion leaks out. Our voluntary expressive system is the way we intentionally signal our emotions. But our involuntary expressive system is in many ways even more important: it is the way we have been equipped by evolution to signal our authentic feelings. Yarbrough has a friend in the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, Sergeant Bob Harms. Harms, like Yarbrough, is a gifted face reader. One night he was working in West Hollywood and spotted a man in drag. He rolled down the window to ask the guy a question just to get a reaction. The guy came over to the squad car and said, ‘I have something to show you.’. Later, after the incident was over, Harms and his partner learned that the man had been going around Holllywood making serious threats, that he was armed with a makeshift flame-thrower, and what he had in mind, evidently, was to turn the inside of the squad car into an inferno. All Harms had was a hunch, a sense from the situation and the man’s behavior-something that was the opposite of whatever John Yarbrough saw in the face of the boy he didn’t shoot. Harms pulled out his gun and shot the man through the open window. His partner looked at him like, "‘What did you do?’ because he didn’t perceive any danger." Harms said, "But I did."
the article is from:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/08/05/020805fa_fact_gladwell
No comments:
Post a Comment