Micro-Expressions Test

Post Reply New Topic

Not bad. I scored below average on everything, which I guess proves the Dunning-Kruger effect because I had no idea I was that bad at it.

0%

4%

I don't think this is a fair test in terms of scoring and the actors but I am generally crap at these things, the mind in the eye one too. I have doubts about the validity of these tests but I've found I can look at photos of random people online and not be able to tell what they feeling at that moment unless its a very extreme expression like a happy beaming smile, but then again I'm not always sure it is a real smile or a fake one disguising some other emotion. I don't think I have prosopagnosia I just tend to take longer to commit a face to memory simply through not looking. I recently found out that my next door neighbour shares the same workplace as me and often sees me in the canteen and I had no idea even though I had spoke to her a few times in the hallway at home. When previously she spoke to me these were always brief occasions and I probably didn't make eye contact and she would not have been wearing work uniform. It was embarrasing and somewhat unnerving when she said she sees me at work all the time! I still don't have a clear picture what she looks like so have yet to recognise her at work and say hello.

6%

This test reflects nothing IMHO.

Interesting! I am really bad at reading people and I am faceblind. However, I scored 44% and I recognised all micro-expressions in the second try. Have to admit that I did not see any expression at all when the man started talking. I can either listen to what he says or watch his face, but not both.

0%, I truly did not understand how the actions the person in the video were doing related to the emotions they offered as choices.

Hm. Just took the "mindreading" tests on the other site:
Faces: 82.0% Voices: 84.0%

Funny thing is, it seems NTs didn't score much higher than aspies on that test (aspie women even did better than NT women on the voices one). Looks like the NTs are scoring higher on the microexpressions, though.

Your score: 0.
Actually, I thought I got at least one on the first try. I got 3 others in the re-tries.
That was EVEN HARDER than I was expecting it to be.

Sincerely,
Matthew
PS. emotions at cards? Well, if you ever play poker yoyu will know why emotions might be involved. But you had best hide those! LOL

0%. I tend to score above normal on similar tests (edit: by that I mean the "mindreading" tests) with static images. I suck at reading expressions in real situations though (but I'm above 0%, at least ), so I guess this test reflects me better than the other ones.

Got 18% for the microexpressions test, though most of the guesses were partially trial-and-error and got a lot of them on the 2nd or 3rd attempt.

I really thought I would be a lot better at that than the score I got. 14% here. I thought that would have been my strong point.

36%. I think I got lucky; at least four of my questions were repeats, so when I got them wrong the first time, I just chose the right answer the second time it came up. Most of them I was genuinely surprised, and a little unnerved that I could read absolutely nothing of their expression, since I can usually tell a little of what someone feels by watching their face, but with this, nothing. It would have been useful if the test had told us what the average was meant to be.

seeing as this had corporate interests at heart i do not think it is valid but i think it is better than the reading the mind in the eyes test.
i got 6% in this. i thought i'd get higher but i guess not. wish i had more NT results to compare this with. the problem was that none of them had facial expressions. they were all blank! and the one where the woman shrugs her eyebrows wasnt an expression- in my culture that is the equivalent of shaking your head in a "no" gesture. it is not a facial expression! that was hard.

this test is almost completely inaccurate and buggy as hell too. they are not natural reactions. these people are acting.

I got 0%