Real-life and posed vocalizations to lottery wins differ fundamentally in their perceived valence.

A basic premise of classic emotion theories is that distinct emotional experiences yield distinct emotional vocalizations—each informative of its situational context. Furthermore, it is commonly assumed that emotional vocalizations become more distinct and diagnostic as their intensity increases. Critically, these theoretical assumptions largely rely on research utilizing posed vocal reactions of actors, which may be overly simplified and stereotypical. While recent work suggests that intense, real-life vocalizations may be nondiagnostic, the exact way in which increasing degrees of situational intensity affect the perceived valence of real-life versus posed expressions remains unknown. Here we compared real-life and posed vocalizations to winning increasing amounts of money in the lottery. Results show that while posed vocalizations are perceived as positive for both low- and high-sum wins, real-life vocalizations are perceived as positive only for low-sum wins, but as negative for high-sum wins. These findings demonstrate the potential gaps between real-life and posed expressions and highlight the role of situational intensity in driving perceptual ambiguity for real-life emotional expressions.