The research behind How I Land

Akechi et al. 2013

• Japanese raters judged a held, direct gaze in person as angrier and less approachable than Finnish raters did.
• Finnish raters found a direct gaze in person more approachable than an averted one.
• In Japan and South Korea, for example, eye contact is set to about 2 seconds at a time instead of 3.

Ambadar, Cohn & Reed 2009

• Most smiles seen as amused had the mouth open; few polite ones did.
• Embarrassed smiles come with the head tipped down, amused ones with it tilted up.
• Smiles seen as amused lasted about twice as long as polite ones.

Binetti et al. 2016

• About 3 seconds of eye contact at a time is what viewers found most comfortable.
• In a study with a face on a screen, the length of eye contact that viewers found most comfortable averaged 3.3 seconds.

Burgoon et al. 1985

• More eye contact read as more credible, attractive and composed.

Centorrino et al. 2015

• Smiles rated genuine drew more trust and more money in trust games.

Grammer et al. 1988

• In everyday encounters filmed in three cultures, a quick raise of the brows came at the start of contact, usually with a smile, and signalled a yes to the contact itself.
• A quick lift of the brows with it is how people greet each other at the start of contact.
• Held, raised brows read as surprise.

Gunnery & Ruben 2016

• Lifted cheeks make a smile read as more genuine, though more in motion than in photos.

Guo et al. 2018

• Timing is the trust signal: spontaneous smiles rise more slowly than posed ones.

Gupta, Hanges & Dorfman 2002

• How I Land groups the world into twelve regions, following the GLOBE study’s culture clusters.

Haensel et al. 2020

• Japanese adults in conversation look at the eye region and between the eyes.
• In Japan and South Korea, for example, eye contact is set to about 2 seconds at a time instead of 3.

Harrigan & O'Connell 1996

• Very anxious people showed more fear-like movements, raised brows and widened eyes among them, more blinking and more movement overall.

Harrigan, Wilson & Rosenthal 2004

• The voice carries even more: observers read momentary anxiety from the voice more than from the face.

Hess, Blairy & Kleck 2000

• A smile at less than half strength already shifted how warmly a face was rated, so any smile gives it away.
• Lowering them on purpose adds open anger instead.

Jones et al. 2021

• What stays the same everywhere: the two axes that first impressions run on, warmth and dominance, were found again in all 11 world regions tested.

Knoll, Attkiss & Persing 2008

• Held, raised brows read as surprise.

Kraus & Chen 2013

• A smile edited onto a fighter’s photo made him look less hostile and less physically dominant.

Krumhuber et al. 2009

• In a mock job interview, a smile that built and faded slowly was rated higher than the same smile switched on fast, which did no better than no smile.

Krys et al. 2016

• Smiling raised perceived honesty in most of 44 cultures, but in some it made a face look less intelligent.
• The largest study of this, across 44 cultures, found that in some of them a smiling person is judged less intelligent than the same person not smiling, and that where corruption is high, a smile earns less trust.
• Smiling helps here with looking honest and, a little, with looking intelligent.

Lee & Anderson 2017

• Widened eyes read as fear and awe, narrowed ones as suspicion.
• Widened eyes read as fear and awe, so the app stops at 15%.
• Kept slight, narrowing reads as scrutiny.

Li et al. 2021

• Broad smiles cut perceived dominance.
• Broad smiles cut perceived dominance, and added no further trust over a mild one.
• The same person with a broad smile was rated warmer but less competent than with a slight one.

Mason, Tatkow & Macrae 2005

• A gaze that returns to the viewer raised likeability.

Mignault & Chaudhuri 2003

• A raised head reads as superior.
• A lowered head with lowered eyes reads as submissive and sad, so the head stays level.
• Seen from below (a raised chin), a face without a smile reads as superior.

Omori & Miyata 2001

• More blinking read as more nervous.

Oosterhof & Todorov 2008

• Pushing a face toward “trustworthy” made it look happy; the other way, angry.
• First impressions run on two axes: can I trust you, and how strong are you.
• Trustworthiness is read from resemblance to happiness; pushed the other way, a face looks angry.

Otta, Abrosio & Hoshino 1996

• Rated happiness rises from a straight face to a closed smile to a smile showing teeth.

Reis et al. 1990

• Against no smile at all, smiling raises rated competence.

Sundelin et al. 2013

• Drooping mouth corners read as tired and sad.
• After a night without sleep, raters scored hanging eyelids and drooping mouth corners higher, and both tracked how tired the person looked.
• Hanging upper lids read as tired.

Sundelin et al. 2017

• A sleepier look made others less willing to spend time with the person.

Sutherland, Young & Rhodes 2017

• Facing the viewer made a smiling face read as more trustworthy.
• How you hold your face moves these judgments more than the face itself: ratings of one person varied more across their own photos, with different expressions and angles, than ratings varied between different people.

Talamas et al. 2016

• More open upper lids raised perceived intelligence, independently of attractiveness.
• More open lids read as more intelligent.

Todorov, Pakrashi & Oosterhof 2009

• People settle on a face within about a tenth of a second.
• Judgments made that fast matched unhurried ones, and more time changed little.

Torrance et al. 2020

• A chin tipped 10° down cut trust ratings.
• A chin 10° down cut trust; 10° up left it unchanged.
• Chin level. Level faces were rated best or equal as leaders; a chin tipped down cut trust.

Toscano, Schubert & Giessner 2018

• Eyes that hold. The tilt reads as dominant and angry only with a direct gaze.
• Chin down with the eyes on the viewer reads as dominant; with the eyes down, as submissive.
• With the eyes down, the same tilt reads as submissive and ashamed.

Tracy & Robins 2004

• A tilt of about 15° was recognised as pride better than 30°.
• A small smile was recognised as pride better than a large one.

Tracy & Robins 2007

• With the eyes looking up instead of at the viewer, far fewer people recognised pride.
• Confidence is read from the pride display: head raised, a small smile, eyes on the viewer.
• A raised head with a small smile reads as pride.

Tsai et al. 2019

• European Americans rated broad, excited smiles as more outgoing and agreeable than calm ones, more than Hong Kong Chinese did.
• China and Chinese-speaking regions: a calm smile does the job; the targets stay as they are.
• A calm smile does the job for “approachable”: Hong Kong Chinese gave broad, excited smiles less of an edge over calm ones than European Americans did.

Uono & Hietanen 2015

• On a screen a direct gaze read as pleasant in both Japan and Finland.

Vernon et al. 2014

• Across 1,000 everyday photos its strongest predictors were all mouth measures: the curve of the lower lip, the width of the mouth and lips apart.
• Lips apart is one of the strongest approachability cues in everyday photos.
• Low brows. They read as angry and dominant.

Wang et al. 2017

• A broad smile reads warmer but less competent.
• The same person with a broad smile was rated warmer but less competent than with a slight one.

Willis & Todorov 2006

• All of them are read that way, and fast: people settle on a face within about a tenth of a second.
• Judgments made that fast matched unhurried ones, and more time changed little.

Willis, Palermo & Burke 2011

• Happy faces were rated the most approachable, angry ones the least.

Witkower & Tracy 2019

• A chin 10° up already raised perceived dominance.
• A neutral face tilted down 10° was rated far more dominant than the same face level, because the tilt makes level brows look lowered and V-shaped.
• With the brows hidden, the effect vanished.

Witkower et al. 2020

• A lowered head without a smile signals dominance; a raised one with a smile, prestige.
• A raised head with a smile signals earned status; the same head without one reads as superior and contemptuous.

Witkower et al. 2022

• In a small-scale society in Nicaragua, most people picked the tilted face as the more dominant.

Zebrowitz, Kikuchi & Fellous 2010

• Faces that merely resemble anger are judged less competent as well as less warm.
• A face that merely resembles anger is judged less warm and less competent.

Messinger et al. 2012

Hull et al. 2017

• The looks are for moments you choose; holding a face that is not yours all day is tiring, and research with autistic adults ties long-term camouflaging to exhaustion.

Liaci et al. 2017

• Faint as the smile is, viewers in one study called the original happy in nearly every trial.