A NEW TEST TO MEASURE EMOTION RECOGNITION ABILITY: MATSUMOTO AND EKMANS JAPANESE AND CAUCASIAN BRIEF AFFECT RECOGNITION TEST (JACBART)ABSTRACT: In this article, we report the development of a new test designed to measure individual differences in emotion recognition ability(ERA), five studies examining the reliability and validity of the scores produced using this test, and the first evidence for a correlation between ERA measured by a standardized test and personality. Utilizing Matsumoto and Ekmans (1988) Japanese and Caucasian Facial Expressions of Emotion (JACFEE) and Neutral Faces (JACNeuF), we call this measure the Japanese and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition Test (JACBART). The JACBART improves on previous measures of ERA by (1) using expressions that have substantial validity and reliability data associated with them, (2) including posers of two visibly different races (3) balanced across seven universal emotions (4) with equal distribution of poser race and sex across emotions (5) in a format that eliminates afterimages associated with fast exposures. Scores derived using the JACBART are reliable, and three studies demonstrated a correlation between ERA and the personality constructs of Openness and Conscientiousness, while one study reports a correlation with Extraversion and Neuroticism.Research on judgments of emotion from facial expressions has a long and important history in psychology, and has contributed greatly to the literature concerning the universality of emotion, and to knowledge concerning differences between gender, ethnicity, culture, and psychiatric status. Studies examining the relationship between individual differences in judgments of emotion (hereon referred to as Emotion Recognition AbilityERA) and personality also have a considerable history, but is checkered with inconsistent findings. On one hand, ERA has been correlated with emotional expression (e.g., Lanzetta & Kleck, 1970; Levy, 1964; Zuckerman, Hall, DeFrank, & Rosenthal, 1976; Zuckerman, Larrance, Hall, DeFrank, & Rosenthal, 1979), self-monitoring (Mill,1984; Mufson&Nowicki,1991;Riggio & Friedman, 1982); social desirability (Cunningham, 1977); depression, control, aggression, and gregariousness (Toner & Gates, 1985); and social style, mental ability , achievement , and psychological mindedness (LeRoux, 1987) . On the other hand, Cunningham (1977) failed to replicate a relationship between self-monitoring and ERA, and Zuckerman et al. (1979) found a relationship for women but not men. Buck, Savin, Miller, and Caul (1972) found a relationship between ERA and extraversion, as did Zuckerman et al. (1979). Cunningham (1977), however, did not replicate these findings, and instead found a relationship with neuroticism.Theoretically, it is not unreasonable to consider that ERA should be related to stable personality traits. Individuals who are better at judging emotions in others should have greater degrees of interpersonal consciousness or concern; they should be more in tune with their environment, and with others. As an important component of our nonverbal communication system, such skills would be necessary for successful adaptation and manipulation of the environment, ensuring the stability and integrity of the self.Because ERA is an important part of our daily lives, it is easy to consider how it should be related to various personality constructs, such as those specified in the five factor model. Extraversion, for example, is associated with stimulation seeking from others and the environment. As such, extraverts should be more willing to take in data concerning the emotions of others, being more interpersonally conscious of others in the environment. Individuals who score high on neuroticism, however, tend to be emotionally avoidant; because they are prone to experience negative emotions, they should have a tendency to avoid the recognition and awareness of othersemotions. The personality construct of openness is similar to extraversion in the sense that open individuals tend to be curious and interested in stimulation; they should be more attendant to the emotions of others. Conscientiousness is related to cooperation with and attending to others; conscientious individuals are more thorough, reliable, and efficient. They should be better at recognizing emotions because they are more attentive to details, and are better able to participate in such emotion judgment tasks. Why have previous attempts to establish a relationship between personality and ERA been awash with contradictory findings? One possible reason is the stimuli used in previous studies, which were different in each study and thus not equivalent across the studies nor, as Bruner and Tagiuri (1954) suggested, did they cover a representative spectrum of emotional expressions (LeRoux, 1987). Another possible reason is the fact that, with only one exception (LeRoux, 1987, but these data are not published), many previous stud