Cultural Differences in Emotion Suppression in Belgian and Japanese Couples: A Social Functional Model (original) (raw)
Related papers
2012
How and why do Westerners and East Asians differ in their use of emotion regulation processes? In the present dissertation, I describe five studies that test whether differences in the self-models of Westerners and East Asians lead to culture-specific patterns of emotion regulation. In Study 1, I conduct comparisons between and within cultures to test whether differential exposure to Western and East Asian culture is associated with divergent use of two emotion regulation processes-expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal. In Study 2, I use an experimental design to prime American versus East Asian cultural identity in bi-cultural East Asian Americans, testing whether there is a causal link between cultural self-models and emotion regulation. In Studies 3 and 4, I present evidence that these cultural differences in emotion regulation are not due to methodological artifacts associated with global self-reports. In particular, I show that similar culture effects emerge when emotion regulation in a specific selfdisclosure context is rated by independent judges (Study 3), and when emotion regulation is rated by peers from an individual's real-life social network (Study 4). In Study 5, I test whether Western and East Asian cultural differences in emotion regulation can be explained by two specific cultural mechanisms, namely the interdependent and independent cultural models of self. Findings are consistent across all five studies and show that Westerners use less suppression (but not less reappraisal) than individuals of East Asian cultural origin. In terms of mechanism, these differences seem to be due to the strong emphasis on independence and authentic selfexpression in Western cultures, rather than to the strong emphasis on interdependence and interpersonal harmony in East Asian cultures. Emotion Regulation and Culture: The Effects of Cultural Models of Self on Western and East Asian Differences in Suppression and Reappraisal An American researcher, Jack, has a great idea for a new project. To test this idea, he needs the help of a collaborator in East Asia. So Jack sets up a meeting with Keiko, a visiting scholar in Jack's department who is about to return to her home in Japan. As Jack explains his idea, he attempts to gauge Keiko's interest in the project and is disappointed-she expresses little enthusiasm for his project. Jack concludes that Keiko does not find the idea intriguing, so he does not bother to ask her to help with the research. Months later, Jack has yet to find an East Asian collaborator and is about to give up on the project. He complains about his situation to several colleagues, and one of them knows Keiko well. Much to Jack's surprise, this colleague tells him that Keiko had found Jack's research idea quite interesting and was disappointed that Jack had not asked for her help with his project. As this scenario illustrates, globalization has made communication across cultural lines an increasingly common and necessary facet of everyday life. One potential barrier to effective cross-cultural communication is that misunderstandings may arise from cultural differences in the way people experience and express their emotions. Recent research (e.g., Gross, 2007) suggests that variation in emotional responding is often due to differential use of emotion regulation processes. It is argued here that individual differences in emotion regulation are likely to be learned and therefore subject to cultural influences during socialization. In the socialization of emotion regulation within a particular culture, the models of the self endorsed and taught by that culture should be particularly important; the notion of self should be tied closely to regulation because regulatory processes influence both how the individual self internally experiences emotion and how those emotions are expressed in social interactions (Srivastava, Tamir, McGonigal, John, & Gross, 2009). Therefore, understanding how and why cultures differ in their use of emotion regulation processes should be a critical concern for behavioral scientists, business leaders, and politicians alike. Past work suggest that Western cultures (e.g., the USA, Canada, and Australia) and East Asian cultures (e.g., China, Japan, and Korea) should provide an especially interesting cultural contrast with regard to emotion regulation. In particular, common folk conceptions and ethnographic accounts have long asserted that these two cultural contexts differ in values concerning emotions and emotional control (e.g., Benedict, 1946; Bond, 1994). Additionally, more recent empirical studies have shown that Westerners and East Asians exhibit differential emotional responding (e.g., Tsai, Chentsova-Dutton, Freire-Bebeau, & Przymus, 2002; Tsai, Levenson, & McCoy, 2006). Surprisingly, however, few researchers have tested empirically whether Westerners and East Asians differ in their use of emotion regulatory processes, and if so, whether those differences are due to cultural processes. In the present dissertation, I describe five studies that investigate how and why Western and East Asian cultures differ in their use of emotion regulation processes. In Study 1, I conduct comparisons between and within cultures to test whether differential exposure to Western and East Asian culture is associated with divergent use of two emotion regulation processesexpressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal. In Study 2, I investigate whether experimentally priming American versus East Asian cultural identity produces parallel emotion regulation effects. In Studies 3-4, I present evidence that Western and East Asian cultural differences in emotion regulation are not due to methodological artifacts associated with global self-reports. In particular, I show that similar culture effects emerge when examining emotion regulation in a specific context as rated by independent judges (Study 3), and when examining
Cross-cultural study on emotion regulation
2021
Emotions are several subjectively experienced, affect-laden states, the ontological status of each being established by a label, and the meaning of which is arrived at by simple consensus. Emotions are the cornerstones of our social worlds, affecting our interaction with others in countless ways. The following research seeks to explain different patterns of emotional regulation in a cross-cultural context. Culture provides meaning to the intent and the demonstrated behavior. The study has established significant differences amongst two cultures: collectivistic and individualistic using various questionnaires. In this cross-cultural study, variables like expressive suppression, negative emotions, emotional clarity, impulse strength of emotions, goal-directedness, and acceptance of emotional responses are studied. The study makes use of quantitative methods to establish the relationships between the variables and the cultural contexts of the participants (N=60). Significant difference...
Cultural regulation of emotion: individual, relational, and structural sources
Frontiers in Psychology, 2013
The most prevalent and intense emotional experiences differ across cultures. These differences in emotional experience can be understood as the outcomes of emotion regulation, because emotions that fit the valued relationships within a culture tend to be most common and intense. We review evidence suggesting that emotion regulation underlying cultural differences in emotional experience often takes place at the point of emotion elicitation through the promotion of situations and appraisals that are consistent with culturally valued relationships. These regulatory processes depend on individual tendencies, but are also co-regulated within relationships-close others shape people's environment and help them appraise events in culturally valued ways-and are afforded by structural conditions-people's daily lives "limit" the opportunities for emotion, and afford certain appraisals. The combined evidence suggests that cultural differences in emotion regulation go well beyond the effortful regulation based on display rules.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2013
Based on Markus and Kitayama's (1991) theory, this study was conducted to examine whether the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony would be moderated by cultural group (i.e., Chinese and European Americans) and an Asian cultural value (i.e., emotional self-control). A total of 451 college students (205 Chinese and 246 European Americans) participated in this study. As expected, results indicated that the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony was significantly positive for Chinese but not significant for European Americans. Similarly, when emotional self-control was examined as a moderator, the results still confirmed our hypotheses. That is, the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony was significantly positive for those with stronger endorsement of emotional self-control but not for those with weaker endorsement of emotional self-control. Furthermore, we examined whether the above results could be replicated when forbearance (a construct similar to suppression) and distress disclosure (a construct opposite to suppression) were examined. The results showed the same pattern for forbearance and distress disclosure when cultural group or emotional self-control served as the moderator. The convergence of findings increased the robustness of our results. Finally, our data suggest that individuals from Eastern, interdependent cultures (e.g., Chinese) tend to value emotional suppression to preserve interpersonal harmony; individuals from Western, independent cultures may or may not necessarily suppress their emotions for this purpose. A comprehensive understanding of the different meanings of a specific strategy (i.e., emotional suppression) in different cultural contexts is important to promote effective cross-cultural counseling.
Family Science, 2010
The experience of anger in close relationships can be detrimental. Existing research suggests cultural differences in how people deal with negative emotions. In particular, anger seems to play a more disruptive interpersonal role in cultures where collectivistic cultural values are strongly endorsed. Our goal was to examine whether differences in the interpersonal contingencies of anger across contexts and persons were linked to the endorsement of collectivistic values. We examined this possibility using electronic diary data, collected multiple times per day over the course of a week. Data were collected from 623 couples in eight cultural contexts. We performed dyadic multilevel analyses to examine partner effects of anger on experienced anger and depressed mood the next day, and whether these effects were moderated by cultural context and by the endorsement of collectivistic values. Results suggested that cultural differences existed. We found partner effects of anger in couples from more collectivistic cultural contexts, and in couples who endorsed collectivistic values more strongly. Overall, the results demonstrate that culture is intertwined with daily psychological processes in close relationships.
Running away from unwanted feelings: Culture matters
Findings from past research have suggested a link between experiential avoidance and expressive suppression. However, there is emerging evidence showing that the suppression of emotional expression may have different meanings depending on the specific cultural context. Taking a cultural perspective, the present study aimed to examine whether the link between experiential avoidance and expressive suppression is comparable or divergent between two cultural groups [i.e., European Americans (EAs) and Chinese (CH)] with different cultural norms surrounding emotional expression. We hypothesised that the positive association between experiential avoidance and expressive suppression typically found among EAs would be attenuated among CH. Furthermore, the observed cultural group difference in the experiential avoidance-suppression link was hypothesised to be mediated by beliefs in emotional self-control. Data from 224 EA college students and 190 CH college students provided a clear pattern of support for our hypotheses. Implications for current theories on experiential avoidance are discussed.
Daily Emotion Regulation in American and Asian-Indian Romantic Couples
Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 2018
We present findings from a daily diary study that explored relative preferences for using each of six emotion regulation strategies and associations between those strategies and romantic relationship quality, as indicated by negative emotions experienced due to one’s partner. We also investigate differences in these processes as predicted by country of residence (United States or India), since these countries differ on many aspects of social and emotional behavior. We hypothesized that a given emotion regulation strategy would be: 1) used more than the others, and 2) associated with lower negative emotions due to one’s partner to the extent that its function fit with an individual’s country of residence. The results provide both support for and evidence against our hypotheses, but in general suggest that culture can influence the preference for different emotion regulation strategies as well as their associations with negative emotional experiences in romantic relationships.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 19424620903471681, 2010
The experience of anger in close relationships can be detrimental. Existing research suggests cultural differences in how people deal with negative emotions. In particular, anger seems to play a more disruptive interpersonal role in cultures where collectivistic cultural values are strongly endorsed. Our goal was to examine whether differences in the interpersonal contingencies of anger across contexts and persons were linked to the endorsement of collectivistic values. We examined this possibility using electronic diary data, collected multiple times per day over the course of a week. Data were collected from 623 couples in eight cultural contexts. We performed dyadic multilevel analyses to examine partner effects of anger on experienced anger and depressed mood the next day, and whether these effects were moderated by cultural context and by the endorsement of collectivistic values. Results suggested that cultural differences existed. We found partner effects of anger in couples from more collectivistic cultural contexts, and in couples who endorsed collectivistic values more strongly. Overall, the results demonstrate that culture is intertwined with daily psychological processes in close relationships.
Culture, emotion regulation, and adjustment
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008
This article reports differences across 23 countries on 2 processes of emotion regulation--reappraisal and suppression. Cultural dimensions were correlated with country means on both and the relationship between them. Cultures that emphasized the maintenance of social order--that is, those that were long-term oriented and valued embeddedness and hierarchy--tended to have higher scores on suppression, and reappraisal and suppression tended to be positively correlated. In contrast, cultures that minimized the maintenance of social order and valued individual Affective Autonomy and Egalitarianism tended to have lower scores on Suppression, and Reappraisal and Suppression tended to be negatively correlated. Moreover, country-level emotion regulation was significantly correlated with country-level indices of both positive and negative adjustment.
Regulation of Positive and Negative Emotion: Effects of Sociocultural Context
Previous research has demonstrated that the use of emotion regulation strategies can vary by sociocultural context. In a previous study, we reported changes in the use of two different emotion regulation strategies at an annual alternative cultural event, Burning Man (McRae et al., 2011). In this sociocultural context, as compared to typically at home, participants reported less use of expressive suppression (a strategy generally associated with maladaptive outcomes), and greater use of cognitive reappraisal (a strategy generally associated with adaptive outcomes). What remained unclear was whether these changes in self-reported emotion regulation strategy use were characterized by changes in the regulation of positive emotion, negative emotion, or both. We addressed this issue in the current study by asking Burning Man participants separate questions about positive and negative emotion. Using multiple datasets, we replicated our previous findings, and found that the decreased use of suppression is primarily driven by reports of decreased suppression of positive emotion at Burning Man. By contrast, the increased use of reappraisal is not characterized by differential reappraisal of positive and negative emotion at Burning Man. Moreover, we observed novel individual differences in the magnitude of these effects. The contextual changes in self-reported suppression that we observe are strongest for men and younger participants. For those who had previously attended Burning Man, we observed lower levels of self-reported suppression in both sociocultural contexts: Burning Man and typically at home. These findings have implications for understanding the ways in which certain sociocultural contexts may decrease suppression, and possibly minimize its associated maladaptive effects.