Thursday, October 4, 2012

Is it all in the eyes?



Read the two articles. What do you think?

http://www.thedaily.com/article/2012/09/29/100112-news-debate-blinking/

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/10/01/the-importance-of-facial-expressions-in-a-presidential-debate-a-story-in-gifs

25 comments:

  1. I think the idea that the presidential nominee that blinks the least is going to win is a bit far fetched but the evidence behind it makes me believe that this might actually have something to do with the winner, although it could also just happen by chance.
    The other article about facial expressions I thought did not make sense. I mean, just watching either presidential candidate I don't see how their "smile" could win over thousands of voters. That just makes no sense to me. I don't focus on the candidate's facial expressions, I focus on what points and information they are discussing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that is a little weird to just study how many times a candidate blinks and then think whoever blinks the most will lose the election. I just don't think the number of times a person blinks will change a persons mind if they are already going to vote for them. I think that whoever does this study has way too much time on their hands. I just think they look too far into this when it really doesn't mean that much.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the "blinking and facial expression" study is kind of interesting. I guess it does make sense when they say that you can tell how one of the canidates was feeling during their speech by their facial reactions. It's interesting to see the emotions or thoughts just by what they do with their face. To see whether they are nervous, confident, etc. But then again, I don't really think that study really matters when it comes to the election. I think the people only care about what they are saying they will do to help lead out country and who is more suit for the job.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Personally, I feel like it is strange how many people pick out the smallest details to base studies on. At first I thought, how would the amout of time that someone blinks really effect the result of the election? However reading more about the study seemed like it might be a real argument. They said that it is not really how many times the canidate blinks but they blink because of their emoitions and confidence. When someone is nervous and connot concentrate, they blink more. Sometimes while watching an election I see that one canidate blinks more than the others and it is quite irritiating. This makes me not even concenterate on their words but on their eyes. It makes me more comfortable watching them when they are calm and collected. It seems like a silly study in truth. But when you get down to the root of why that person is really blinking so much, it does effect the popularity of that canidate. However I thought it was interesting that during premilinaries, the results were usually opposite. This may mean that the people who go into the round with so much confidence do not really win, and at first people neeed to be humble.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that this cannot possibly be true. because even if blinking does have something to do with our body language and how we think it will not determine the way the nation votes. The president is elecvted by the peeople through their votes, and most people do not pick a candiate based on the number of blinks during a debate. On the other hand my I think that blinking is directly effected to what you are thinking and feeling. My dad always says he can tell a liar but how frequently they blink. There is a man on televsion that me and my dad call "blinks a lot" because he concesively blinks and my dad thinks he is a liar. Depite this, most people choose a candiate based on their values not on the frequency of their blinking. I agree with the last comment of the article about it being rediculous that people are looking so deeply into things. I think we should just let the election take its course and not waste time worring about the amount of blinks the presidential candiates have.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have heard of facial expression being watched in criminals to figure out certain cases, but i never thought about applying it to presidential debates. I will say this made me smile because it pretty cool when you really think about how you can tell if the candidate really is a good choice by just watching his facial expression as well as eye blinking. When I watch the debate i will definately watch their expressions and how much they more.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think both articles seem to be believable. I think the first one was a more intriguing topic because it focused only on the effects of the number of blinks, whereas the secodn article also included facial expressions, smiling, and eye movement. It was interesting to see the facts and legistics of the theory. Before I even read the article I thought about why blinking would affect the outcome and I thought that maybe blinking triggers stress or uncomfort in our minds. It was nice to read what I was trying to say actually put into words, scientifically. I like that the Us NEWS article talked about facial expressions in general. I do believe that these types of actions affect who wins because we tend to judge physical actions, sometimes more so than actual material of the candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Personally I feel like it might have some truth to it. I feel like if a appears stressed or uncomfortable behind the podium, the viewers are very likely to sense that, despite being separated by a TV screen. People want someone who comes off confident and poised for the presidency because these are qualities that are needed for a good leader. They feed off the energy the person is giving off. Personally overall, I don't think it has 100% truth to who wins the presidency or debates especially this election.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In my opinion, I don't think blinking should sway a voters' decision. I don't think it has that effect. I do think however, that the stats provided in the blinking article are interesting. The other article that talks about other facial expressions is a little more significant in swaying a voters' decision. The facial expressions in some ways show how one candidate can handle being under pressure or stress which is what they have to deal once they are in office. It can show the confidence that is needed or in a bad way, the doubt. But truthfully, I don't think the blinking is a big deal because we all blink, but some more than others because we're different.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I honestly think it's pretty cool. It makes lots of sense that a person would blink more, because of their emotions. When I cry, I tend to blink more, as well as when I am shocked and so on. I also feel like someone that may be lying would blink more, causing me to believe that they're fake, or untruthful. I think it's kind of awesome that he did a study all on why a person blinks, and what is a normal blink rate. I actually really enjoyed reading this and believed it all from the start. It makes complete sense, and I feel like now, I'm going to pay more attention to how often a person blinks.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For the first article, I do not believe the eye blinking counter plays out who will win the presidential election. Although the blinks counter has proven to be right, it has also proven to be wrong as well. I think it is just a coincidental lead that they want to take to help determine who will win before the election. I believe this because there are many reasons behind blinking besides just stress. No one knows why someone is blinking as much as they are. For all we know, the person who blinks the most could have something in their eye or anything that could be a variable and cause a noticeable change. As for the second article, I do believe that facial expressions can show a lot about a person. The way they react to things could change your whole outlook on them and make you think differently. One unintentional eye roll or a simple smile could make someones feelings toward a person shift easily. I believe that the president should have an easy-going and caring attitude and facial expressions when coming to deciding what's best for our country.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't think that the blinks determine who wins so much as they show who is faring better. There isn't some method to relate blinks to votes, you can just see who is more nervous or less composed. That may relate to doing poorly in the polls, but there isn't a direct correlation to votes. I think it is interesting that people thought to study this aspect of body language, but I don't think you can predict the president through this method.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I found both articles to be very interesting. The one that focused on the amount of times a candidate blinks during debates really caught my attention. I find it strange that statistics can actually prove the number of blinks a candidate has affects the outcome of the election. Although I found that the article seemed a little more far fetched as it progressed, I found the majority of it to be believeable. The second article was mainly about the facial expressions that the candidates make during the election process. It is extremely bothersome to me that people could make decisions about the election based on the facial expressions of the candidates. I am not a fan of debates during the elections because people base many of their decisions off of the personality and qualities of the candidate, rather than their ideas and plans.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think this topic is very interesting. I do believe there is evidence that proves that the right body language of the candidate and their likeliness to win. In a debate, it is not just about what you say, but HOW you say it. This includes the look you give while talking, rolling of eyes, figiting, and even the blinking of your eyes. I understand the point that those who are less worried would in return blink less. Studies do show that an increase in stress and worry effects the amount of blinks per minute along with other things. However, I do not think that it is impossible for someone who blinks a lot to always lose. Some people just naturally blink more than others. I also do not believe that our vote should be effected by the number of blinks a candidate produces a minute. This is merely for speculation purposes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In my belief, none of these political tell tale signs should tell the outcome of the presidential debate. This hysteria is brought upon by phychologists and phychoanalysts who believe there is a connection between different stresses and factors which affect how a voter will vote. Counting the number of times of which candidate blinks less is never a sure sign of who will win and lose the election. This is all just political absurdity since there have been cases in which it does not work in the presidential campaign and primary elections. Candidates can now study to not blink less even if they, in the future, lose the election. I do not believe this is an accurate way at all, and is most of all a contradictive hysteria.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Personally, I do not think that the winner of a presidential debate can be determined by the number of times each candidate blinks. Sure, blinking can be an indicator as to how stressed someone is, but there are a few other things that could contribute to someone blinking excessively. Firstly, what if the candidate has bad allergies? I know it sounds dumb, but if a candidate has sever allergies, then the candidate's eyes could be watery, causing him or her to blink. Also, a candidate could just be wired to blink faster than another candidate. I know that the article said that the eye blinks have determined the winner for the past 30 years, and that it is a stretch to call that a coincidence, but that's what I beleive it is, a coincidence.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think that the study is an interesting one. The blinking theory seems to hold up. The study on the body language of candidates is also interesting. Honestly, I don't think people who can't vote should get into the presidential race so much. We can not express our opinions by voting, so why should we feel so strongly about our opinions. I think we should be aware of the campaigns, of course, but not overly into them like adults are. Well that's all my sermon.... 'Twasn't very long anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I never thought about how many times they blinked to determine who the winner of the debate would be. Although this does make sense. When someone is saying something false, or is nervous about something they usually tend to have some type of nervous habit wether its moving around alot or even possibly blinking. I suppose the amount of times they blink and their behavoir could determine different things about their election.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I honestly don't think that brinking has that big of an impact on the sucess of presidential campains. I think that if a canadate blinks alot that may be because they are stressed out by the campains. That may indicate if their campains are going bad but it is defintly not the cause of candates losing. I personaly think campains are won primarly by ideas and by candates records as leaders.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I think that it is possible for the number of blinks the candidate makes to tell us who will win because of the statistic the first article gave about the candidate who blinks more has lost every election but one since 1980. It could just be a coincidence but it would have to be one that is repeated every election for the last 30 years. I do not believe that the second article about the facial expressions was as strong as the first article. I do not think that a candidate's smiles and body language will have a big affect on who will win. People should not focus on the number of "amusement smiles", "contempt smiles", and "controlled-false smiles" a candidate gives but their beliefs and what they plan to do in office.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Personally, I do not think that there is a connection between blinks and the winning candidate. I do think, however, that blinking shows a person's nervousness or stress level. I think it can be a good indicator of the amount of stress a person is in or if they are nervous. However, I do not think that this could be an accurate way to predict who will win. I did find it interesting though that the audience could be effected by the number of blinks. I think in some way we can subconciously pick up on the blinks and turn our opinions one way or the other on the character of the candidate. I don't know though if it would really have that much effect on the polls. I suppose it is defineatley a possiblity and I think it would be interesting to know if it actually made a difference in the number of votes for each candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think that the idea that the number of times the candidates blink determines who will win the election is kind of hard to believe. I mean, all the facts and evidence that back it up are nice and understandable of why it is like that but I do not really think that that is really true. I almost think that it just happens by chance. I might be wrong about it, but I do not really know. I just think that the whole idea is just really weird.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I feel the idea that the presidential candidates can be determined by the number of times the candidate blinks is a bit unrealistic. One article stated that is was applicable during the election but it was not applicable during the prelims. How can something works in one instance and not the other? I agree that body language can play an integral role on determining the ease of a candidate; however, I believe that counting the number of times a candidate blinks during a debate is a bit far fetched.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think the way a candidate displays facail expressions should not determine if they become president or not. The way someone looks should not stop a great politician from being president but unforunatly that is how uneducated voters vote. I think putting a bag over the candidates' faces would probably work.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think it is kind of silly how people are trying to predict the presidency based on such tiny little things like blinking. I also thought it was weird how us new's report was talking about who had the better smile and such and therefore had a better chance at winning the election. I know citizens do connect greatly with presidents based on behavior and appearance, but I feel like these days voters are too concerned with these issues. Shouldn't where a politician stands on the issues of our country be more important than who has the better smile?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.