antecedent-focused emotion regulation as a source of cultural variation in emotion jozefien de...

ANTECEDENT-FOCUSED EMOTION REGULATION AS A

SOURCE OF CULTURAL VARIATION IN EMOTION

Jozefien De Leersnyder & Batja Mesquita

Berlin, Dec 20th , 2010

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The prevalence and intensity of emotional experiences are systematically associated with the culture’s meanings and practices, values, self-concept:

Emotions that FIT the cultural goals are more likely to be frequent

Emotions that VIOLATE the cultural goals are more likely to be rare

Since this association is so omnipresent, some REGULATORY MECHANISM must be involved

e.g., Mesquita & Albert, 2007


Emotion regulation as explanation for cultural differences in emotions: ANTECEDENT FOCUSED

Antecedent

event

EMOTION

Response

e.g., Gross, 1998

BY CULTUR

AL DISPLAY RULES

BY CULTUR

AL VALUES

AND GOALS

appraisal


As given values are more salient in a cultural context

these values will be more readily used to evaluate the situation experience of EMOTION or not (e.g., ambition)

these values will more readily provide meaning to the situation positive <-> negative

engaged <-> disengaged

Emotional experiences will thus systematically differ according to the most focal values in the cultural context antecedent focused regulatory mechanism


Specific aims of the research:

1. Emotion regulation is goal-driven

2. Independence and interdependence goals influence how people appraise situations

3. Salience of the independence and interdependence goals vary across cultures

4. Priming these goals affects emotional experiences

Research on Values and Emotions

Values and Emotion Studies

STUDY 1a188 Belgian

students

STUDY 1b100 Belgian

adults160 Turkish

immigrants in Belgium

STUDY 2a267 Belgian

students

STUDY 2b415 Turkish

students in Turkey

ValueImportanc

eQuestionn

aire

FIRST RESULTS: method

Describe an emotional situation varying across 2 dimensions:

Valence (positive<->negative) Engagement (disengaged<->engaged)Please think about a recent occasion in which you felt good about yourself (for example, proud, strong, superior, top of the world…)

Please describe the situation briefly. Provide as much detail as needed for somebody to understand why you felt that way in this situation.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Valence

= GoodBad

Engagement=

Disengaged

Engaged


Study 1 Rate emotional experience on 20 emotion scales

(e.g. shame)Describe situation according to 8 situated values

(e.g. loyalty)Study 2Rate emotional experience on 35 emotion scales

(e.g. anger)Describe situation according to 18 situated values

(e.g. leadership)

Study 1

Study 2


Self-focus

ed

Other-focus

ed

Growth

Protection


Situated Values QuestionnaireDomain Value1 Value2 Value3

Self-Direction

Own goals Independence

Achievement

Ambition Succeeding

Benevolence

Helping Loyalty

Tradition/conf

Tradition Religion

Power

Universalism

Domain Value1 Value2 Value3

Self-Direction

Own goals Independence

Freedom

Achievement

Ambition Succeeding Capacity

Benevolence

Helping Loyalty Promise

Tradition/conf

Tradition Religion Expectations

Power Leadership Richness Face loss

Universalism

Equality Openness Reconciliation


In this situation it was impossiblefor me to set my own goals

In this situation I could set my own goals OR

A bit true totally A bit true totally true true true true

NOT applicabl

e

xValue

inconsistentValue

consistent

Value applicable in situation

Value not

applicable

FIRST RESULTS: Study1a1. antecedent emotion-regulation is goal-driven

Value % relevant

in situation

Rank order

Independence 89.9% 1

Setting own

goals

80.9% 2

Loyalty 72.9% 3

Succeeding 67.6% 4

Ambition 64.9% 5

Helping others 53.7% 6

Tradition 47.9% 7

Religion 23.9% 8

Spearman rank orderCorrelation rs = .86p = .006

Rank order ESS

2

2

1

5

5

4

7

7

Correlation = .73

FIRST RESULTS: Study 2a1. antecedent emotion-regulation is goal-driven

FIRST RESULTS: Study 2a1. antecedent emotion-regulation is goal-driven

EMOTION PREDICTED BY: Applicability/Violation/Support of value in

situation Importance of value in general Interaction applicability X importance

E.g., Anger is predicted by: Violation of freedom in that situation* Violation of independence in that situation* Importance of showing your capacities in general*

E.g., Frustration is predicted by: Violation of ambition in that situation*** Violation of succeeding in that situation** Interaction between violation and importance of

capacities*

FIRST RESULTS: Study 1a 2. goal-types influence people’s emotional experience

Independence

Interdependence

Value-Types

Self-focused Other-focused

Value-Domain

Achievement Benevolence

Values Ambition + Succeeding

Helping + Loyalty

Emotion-Types

Disengaging Engaging

Emotions Pride, strong, irritation, bored

Close, relying, shame, indebted

Independence and interdependence goals influence

how people appraise situations

FIRST RESULTS: Study 1a 2. goal-types influence people’s emotional experienceOther-focused values Engaging emotions

highest

Self-focused values Disengaging emotions highest

What are the ODDS-RATIO’s that a value(e.g., helping) is relevant in an engaging and not relevant in a disengaging situation?

Value Odds-ratio (exp β)b Times more likely Sign.

Succeeding .330 3 x in dis p = .001

Ambition .411 2.3 x in dis p = .004

Helping others 1.98 2 x in eng p = .023

Loyalty 1.80 2 x in eng p = .087

FIRST RESULTS: 3. value-types vary across cultures

Most studies on culture and psychological tendencies show

that different cultural contexts are characterized bydifferent core cultural goals and values

European Social Survey

and other surveys with the

Schwartz ValueQuestionnaire

yieldeddifferent value

hierarchiesacross cultures

BelgiansTurkish low educated

Turkish higheducated

Emotional similarity to the Belgian students emotional pattern

FIRST RESULTS: emotional similarity predicts

A LITTLE SUMMARY:

PRIMING STUDY: general idea

Aim: violating autonomy <-> relatedness values/goals Look at REAL EMOTIONAL

EXPERIENCE/REACTION and appraisals of participants

In 3 different cultural contexts Mono-cultural Belgian Mono-cultural Turkish Bi-cultural Turkish-Belgian

In a real interaction in the laboratory with a confederate (no vignettes, strong manipulation) !

PRIMING STUDY: general idea

Last year: economic games? NO!

WHY not: a longer/more real interaction is needed to

elicit emotional experiences in participantviolation of the goals by a game is too

abstractmotivation/engagement of participants

needs to be high to get emotional experiences

……

PRIMING STUDY: general idea Confederate is a same culture-same gender

person Task can be done alone or together and is free

of culture-specific confounds Main manipulation occurs through confederate Interaction is video-taped Afterwards, participants watch their tape and

have to report appraisals and feelings at each violation

Video-tapes will be FACS or SPAFF coded by bi-cultural coders as additional information

One week later participant completes additional questionnaires and has a debriefing

PRIMING STUDY: general idea PILOT STUDY:

Scenario’s that might violate a certain type of value

Taken from real-life situation-descriptions in which people indicated that an autonomy or relatedness value was violated

With which emotions do people associate these violations?

Are the emotional patterns different across cultural contexts?

WHAT would YOU do with it?-we can set up some criteria they have to meet: e.g., for all ages, ecological….

You can use words, magazine-pictures, pencils, colorful paint…

PRIMING STUDY: a proposal

Cover story: in cooperation with neighbourhood centers People will be motivated because in own town No cognition, no ‘random’ game Everybody can do this, there is no ‘right’ or

‘wrong’ personal opinion/ideas You can work alone on it <-> work together Arbitrary in the sense of good <-> bad work Confederate can give (personal)

comments easily


What we can manipulate (not all at once in 1 experiment) Nature of the task:

Participant and confederate have to work together on 1 proposal Participant and confederate have to come up with own original

proposal

Task outcome They will be judged on team-performance, because jury will select

best team-proposal, that wins 250 € Task outcome is interdependent

They will be judged on their individual performance, because jury will select person with best ideas, who will win 250 €

Task outcome is independent


What we can manipulate (not all at once in 1 experiment) Contextual Priming:

Study is run in Turkish and focus on Turkish community Study is run in Dutch and focus on Belgian community

Way task is framed: Creativity and coming up with ideas are framed as an individual

capacity, as a characteristic of an individual, by which he/she expresses his/her uniqueness

Task as highlighting independent self Creativity and coming up with ideas is framed as a group or team-

capacity, as something that occurs between-people, by which they express the meanings and practices that are common in their group

Task as highlighting interdependent self


Overview of the experiment: 0-2 min: introduction by experimenter 2-6 min: brainstorm about big themes violation 1 6-10 min: work on project I 10-12 min: first discussion-moment violation 2 12-16 min: work on project II 16-18 min: second discussion-moment violation 3 18-22 min: work on project III 22-25 min: final discussion violation 4

+ experimenter walks in 25-45 min: participant watches video of 4 violation-

moments + responds to emotion-questions


Violation of the values/goals: Autonomy:

confederate says how participant must do it, does not like his/her ideas, starts drawing on his/her side without permission, gives instructions of how it should be Copies participants ideas (when they have to do it

separate) Relatedness:

confederate says that it is stupid to work together, that you’re more creative on your own,

that he/she has better things to do, starts calling a friend etc...


Extensions to behavioral measures: How willing are you to…

Do a follow-up study with the same interaction-partner?

Share your email-address with interaction partner?

Take a picture next to your ‘proposal’ with or without the interaction-partner?

Take the picture home? Hang the picture next to your work at an

exhibition of all proposals? …


PRIMING STUDIES: what they might tell us

If the different violations are indeed associated with different types of emotions…

If people from different cultural backgrounds are more or less sensitive to one kind of violation…

If bi-culturals can ‘switch’ their sensitivity depending upon the context…

Then, we might have some strong evidence for the idea that people’s emotions are regulated in accordance with the salient (cultural) goals in the context

PRIMING STUDIES: to be continued

All your ideas, comments,

other proposals, suggestions etc…

are very welcome!!!

antecedent-focused emotion regulation as a source of cultural variation in emotion jozefien de...

Documents