Social Psychology Quarterly 2018, Vol. 81(3) 228–247 Villains,Victims,andHeroes Ó American Sociological Association 2018 DOI: 10.1177/0190272518781050 in Character Theory and journals.sagepub.com/home/spq Affect Control Theory

Kelly Bergstrand1 and James M. Jasper2

Abstract We examine three basic tropes—villain, victim, and hero—that emerge in images, claims, and narratives. We compare recent research on characters with the predictions of an established tradition, affect control theory (ACT). Combined, the theories describe core traits of the vil- lain-victim-hero triad and predict audiences’ reactions. Character theory (CT) can help us understand the cultural roots of evaluation, potency, and activity profiles and the robustness of profile ratings. It also provides nuanced information regarding multiplicity in, and sub- types of, characters and how characters work together to define roles. Character types can be strategically deployed in political realms, potentially guiding strategies, goals, and group dynamics. ACT predictions hold up well, but CT suggests several paths for extension and elaboration. In many cases, cultural research and social psychology work on parallel tracks, with little cross-talk. They have much to learn from each other.

Keywords affect control theory, character theory, heroes, victims, villains

On October 9, 2012, 15-year-old Malala including one attack in December 2014 Yousafzai went to school, despite the Tali- that killed 132 schoolchildren and another ban’s intense campaign to stop female in January 2016 where 22 people were education in her region of Pakistan and gunned down at a university. Why did despite its death threats against her and Malala’s story touch Western audiences, her father. On the ride home, a masked resulting in widespread sympathy, charity, gunman boarded the bus, asked for and political action, while other attacks Malala by name, and shot her in the garnered far less attention? Why do some head. This event inspired an outpouring cases spark extensive concern and activism of support and political action, with pro- while others never make the newspapers? tests in Pakistan and a global petition that garnered two million signatures in 1 support of Malala and her right to an edu- University of Texas, Arlington, TX, USA 2 cation. She survived, won a Nobel Peace The Graduate Center, City University of New York, USA Prize, and started the Malala Fund, an advocacy group for girls’ rights to educa- Corresponding Author: Kelly Bergstrand, Department of Sociology and tion across the globe. Anthropology, University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Malala was just one of many young vic- Box 19599, Arlington, TX 76019, USA. tims of Taliban violence in Pakistan, Email: [email protected] Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 229

The image or story of an individual and folk psychology (Gilbert 1998; Jasper, often grabs more attention than statis- Young, and Zuern forthcoming). tics. Slovic and colleagues find that peo- Diverse genres such as myth, fiction, ple are more willing to help one person advertising, and politics offer familiar than many; even moving from one to characters, especially the villain, victim, two needy children decreases positive and hero (Cle´ment, Lindemann, and San- feelings about donating and actually low- gar 2017). Villains focus blame, provide ers donations (Slovic 2007; Va¨stfja¨ll et al. a clear target for action, intensify 2014). In a numbing effect, numbers negative emotions, and solidify group mask individuals, and without that identities. A correctly cast victim—good, humanizing element, people seem less innocent, and in need of protection—can inclined to send a check or join a protest. also motivate action and encourage recruit- Statistics run the danger of depicting ment to a cause; it can help to increase per- ‘‘‘human beings with the tears dried off,’ ceptions that a particular problem is an that fail to spark emotion or feeling and injustice worth combatting. Heroes form thus fail to motivate action’’ (Slovic a rallying point, increase agreement among 2007:1). members, and boost commitment to a cause. One way to reattach the human to the Villain-victim-hero is the ‘‘essential triad’’ statistic so that it sparks attention and of protest, mobilization for war, construct- compassion is to tell a compelling story ing social problems, and many other that makes sense of the world; narratives instances of political oratory (Jasper et al. can paint details about abstract, distant 2018). Minions—malevolent but weak— issues and help them resonate with are less central, but they are useful tropes everyday lives. They bring tension and for ridiculing opponents. suspense, compelling notice and interest. Although they rarely address charac- In political arenas, storytelling can be ters directly, sociologists use concepts a powerful strategy, especially for vulner- like charisma and reputation in ways able and marginalized populations that help us understand character work, (Swerts 2015). Narrative theory—which the construction of these moral charac- identifies the elements of stories that res- ters. Sociology’s attention to character onate with audiences—has become a cen- lies mostly in its understanding of the tral tool in social and political analysis pathways along which reputations spread (Amsterdam and Bruner 2000; Polletta (Fine 2001). In politics, these run primar- 2006). ily through the media, although personal Less understood are the characters networks also carry gossip and jokes, who populate the stories and drive their influential bits of character work action. Stories interest us because of the (Hunzaker 2014, 2016). Social inequal- humans who make choices, feel torn ities also shape reputations, not only in between competing actions, attach and access to resources but through the detach themselves from others, suffer, tri- deployment of group stereotypes (Fiske umph, and have a good time in between. 2012). Are women strong enough to be They do things; but they also are certain proper heroes? Are stigmatized minorities kinds of people. They are familiar to us good enough to be sympathetic victims? both from real life and the fictional and This paper compares new research into political tropes that we construct. We characters, which with hopeful exaggera- find characters in narratives but also out- tion we will call character theory (CT), side them, drafted through images, facts, with the well-established tradition of 230 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3) affect control theory (ACT) to understand the value-added of building nuance into how and why characters are constructed. identities, suggesting an expanded use of From CT, we see that people easily relate modifiers in understanding events. to characters and that two traits—good- In many fields of sociology, cultural ness and power—prevail in defining char- analysis and social psychology have cov- acter types (Jasper et al. 2018, forthcom- ered the same ground but with different ing). It focuses on the active character methods, classic references, and units of work that corporations, media, lawyers, analysis (Jasper 2017). As complemen- and political players do. From ACT, we tary traditions, each should benefit from find that characters tap into widely engaging the other more. We hope to pro- shared cultural identities and that indi- vide an example of that dialogue. viduals are motivated to maintain these meanings. ACT also details the impor- tance of a third dimension, active versus BACKGROUND passive. Although both are cultural approaches and highlight emotions, CT Character Theory comes out of the analysis of cultural prod- A theory of moral characters has devel- ucts, while ACT speaks to the social psy- oped in recent years out of cultural chology of individuals and their motiva- analyses of politics and protest. Jasper tions (although ACT has also been et al. (2018, forthcoming) weave together applied to news texts: Ahothali and threads from rhetoric, cognitive psychol- Hoey 2015; Joseph et al. 2016). We can ogy, literary theory, visual analysis, use the findings of CT to test ACT predic- rumor theory, and performance theory, tions for these three identities. And applying them to characters found today because CT was developed largely to in political arenas ranging from elections understand political rhetoric, we can bet- to wars to protest campaigns. Partly an ter see how ACT applies to politics. extension of narrative theory and partly We briefly summarize CT and ACT, a critique of narrative theory’s focus on integrate the two theories, and analyze plots to the exclusion of characters, these what ACT data show about the basic authors revive a sociological tradition character tropes. We then discuss sugges- that saw basic characters as embodiments, tions from CT that we feel might extend attacks, or mockery of a society’s basic val- ACT, including the special nature of polit- ues (Goode 1978; Klapp 1962). Unlike ical arenas, in which players try to influ- ACT, much of its analysis is of visual ence sentiments for strategic purposes, images of characters (Bonnell 1997). the use of visual as well as verbal infor- This emerging character theory (CT) mation, and understanding multidimen- uses two basic dimensions to define char- sionality, nuance, and ambiguity in iden- acters traditionally found in literature tities. CT also helps us understand the and still found today in political rhetoric. cultural roots of evaluation-potency- The first is moral quality as shown activity profiles: how fundamental senti- through good or bad intentions and ments come to be established and actions. The second dimension concerns maintained. EPA profile ratings are power, separating those who are rela- remarkably consistent, but understand- tively weak or ineffectual from those ing their origins in historical eras, artifacts, who can get things done. Table 1 shows and cultural conflict could suggest when we the main characters and some subtypes might expect them to be more stable, when derived from crossing these dimensions less stable. Characters also demonstrate (Jasper et al. forthcoming). Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 231

Table 1. Main Characters by Power and Intent.

Strong Weak

Benevolent Heroes Victims Martyrs, saints, and survivors Good clowns (start in cell across) Sympathetic bystanders Judges, Donors Followers and supporters Converts (start in cell below) Friends Malevolent Villains Minions Traitors (start in cell above) Bad clowns Outside agitators Cowardly bystanders Foes Scoundrels

Heroes are strong and well-inten- Heroes’ sources of goodness also differ: tioned, even when it takes some time innocence, protecting others, conformity and effort to find or motivate them to valued norms, a willingness to sacrifice (O’Neill 1993). They are the players who oneself for others, generosity, or merely must set things right and protect others. being helpful. Most forms of goodness A protest or interest group presents itself are unconnected to strength. You can still as heroic in its fundraising letters: it can try to protect or help others without being and must prevail against evil. An Ameri- powerful, although power helps you suc- can presidential candidate offers to save ceed. The hero can also demonstrate the nation from moral malaise or the moral goodness in her style of action. free world from terrorists. Heroes strug- Klapp (1964:228, 230) suggests that the gle bravely, which is why they are admi- hero has more straightforward forms of rable—and also why they need our sup- aggression than the villain. Whereas the port. American politicians describe the villain exhibits ‘‘sneakiness, backbiting, United States itself as a hero in the world, innuendo, mudslinging, bullying, domi- intervening on behalf of less fortunate neering, quarrel-picking, and cruelty,’’ nations threatened by villains, whenever the hero relies on ‘‘pluck, cockiness in they need to arouse domestic support for an underdog, audacity, humor, satire, wars (Dower 1986; McDougall 1997). honest man-to-man slugging, and non- Sources of heroes’ strength can include violent pressure.’’ personal physical power, intelligence, Villains are malevolent and strong various technical skills such as firing enough to menace others, lending some a gun, virility, creativity, bravery, aristo- urgency to stopping them. Fear and cratic birth, supernatural favor or line- hatred of villains are among the most age, wealth, even moral purity. Beyond powerful emotions in political conflict the individual, strength can also come (Cohen 1972; Dower 1986). Political lead- from large numbers or social connections ers deploy anxieties and outrage to draw necessary to mobilize others. These sour- people out of their daily routines and pre- ces can be in tension with each other, pare them for the sacrifices of public such as brute strength versus intelli- life, even war. To present villains as gence, and heroes who have one type of both powerful and secretive is to heighten power often clash with heroes who have the urgency. We construct villains for another (Alexander 2010). Such traits the powerful emotions they inspire in are similar to ‘‘modifiers’’ in ACT. audiences who fear and hate them. They 232 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3) focus blame, transforming anxiety and precedes the search for villains or heroes. frustration into indignation and purpose, The most sympathetic victims are good fear into anger (Gamson 1992:29). They and powerless. We pity them and want reinforce negative feelings toward out- to help them. It is hard to watch them groups (Tajfel and Turner 1979). suffer. A villain’s strengths come from the As strong, active characters, both her- same list as the hero’s. Intelligence oes and villains often have sidekicks who becomes wily cunning, virility becomes aid or support them. Heroes’ helpers share disrespect for women. Wealth and nobil- the goodness traits of their mentors but do ity are corrupting, physical strength is not have the same levels of power. Vil- now brutish. Only bravery disappears lains’ supporters are traditionally known from the list, as it has an unavoidable as minions, a term given new currency moral admixture: villains are rarely self- by a series of recent films. The movies sacrificing. In fact, recognition of oppo- get it right: minions are small, numerous, nents’ valor transforms them from vil- and given to high-pitched chatter. Minions lains into heroes, at least in part. Just are dangerous only when massed together as heroes can be superhuman, with god- and led by a villain (or a demagogue). like qualities, so villains can appear inhu- A familiar character provides a recur- manly strong. Evil sorcerers have magical rent, simplified package of intentions powers. But villains need not be smart. and capacities that we expect to find Instead, they may be viewed as forces of together; our imaginations fuse cognitive nature, beastlike predators who are pow- understandings, moral judgments, emo- erful and threatening but incapable of tional responses, and expectations for reasoning. Many of the folk devils of behavior. Characters are familiar tropes moral panics are characterized this way, because they are conveyed by diverse like the young African Americans accused media, both fictional and nonfictional. of ‘‘wilding’’ and related delinquency in Narratives, rhetoric, ideologies, frames, recent decades (Cohen 1972). If some vil- and the like shape our understandings lains are superhuman, others are subhu- largely through the characters they cre- man (Smith 2011). ate. When we see photos, caricatures, According to CT, we feel warmly and other visual images, we can sum up enough toward victims to want to aid a character in a split second (Willis and them since they are too weak to save Todorov 2006). themselves (Jasper et al. 2018). Victims Characters are caricatures, oversim- have long been a staple of research into plifications that exaggerate certain fea- the construction of social problems and tures of a player and ignore many of its protest rhetoric (Best 1997). Indignation complexities. They essentialize. Charac- over injustice is the core motivation ter workers exaggerate their heroes’ behind protest, and it follows that there goodness and their opponents’ vicious- must be someone who has been treated ness. Victims become more pure and inno- unjustly. Victims testify, their stories cent, minions more ridiculous. Literary are elaborated in detail, photos of their theorists have recognized that the power wounds (figurative or literal) are pub- of characters lies in our emotional reac- lished, all in an effort to arouse moral tions to them rather than simply their anger (Whittier 2009). If character work ability to condense cognitive information can create a victim, then there must be (Lynch 1998). We pity or hate them, trust a wrong to be righted. In politics, the and admire them. The emotions we feel establishment of a victim usually for characters are the motor propelling Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 233 narrative, giving it resonance (Cle´ment environment by assigning them ‘‘affective et al. 2017). meaning’’ along three main dimensions: CT does not offer formal predictions as evaluation (good or bad), potency (strong ACT does. Like many interpretive or weak), and activity (lively or sluggish), approaches, it highlights what it claims abbreviated as EPA (Heise 2007; Osgood, are relevant, influential processes: char- Suci, and Tannenbaum 1957). The dimen- acters get streamlined and stereotyped sions of evaluation, potency, and activity for rhetorical and emotional impact. serve as ‘‘cultural abbreviations’’ that Character tropes also dramatize the summarize important social information boundaries between in- and outgroups, about the components of interactions, making outgroup villains appear more which include identities, behaviors, emo- threatening, ingroup victims more threat- tions, and settings (Robinson and Smith- ened, and ingroup heroes stronger and Lovin 2006:140). ACT scholars have more admirable. These group boundaries used surveys to develop dictionaries become ‘‘electrified’’ in political and inter- with EPA profile ratings of these ele- national conflicts (Hoggett 1992). ments that vary from –4.3 to 14.3. Nega- tive numbers indicate badness, power- lessness, and passivity; positive numbers Affect Control Theory: Maintenance show goodness, power, and activity. of Meanings Thus, the profile for ‘‘hero’’ averaged If CT identifies the main characters in across several data sets is: evaluation = political rhetoric, affect control theory 2.61, potency = 2.69, activity = 1.39 (see explains why characters resonate with Table 2); heroes are very good, very audiences. ACT describes the processes strong, and moderately active.1 through which cultural perceptions of Our sentiments about actors, behav- identities, behaviors, settings, and other iors, and objects are not always confirmed concepts affect people’s thoughts, emo- in everyday life. When we see reports of tions, and actions (Heise 1979, 2007; pedophile priests, brutal police, or unlov- MacKinnon and Heise 2010; Smith-Lovin ing mothers, our expectations are dashed, 1979). As a branch of symbolic interac- and we may feel shock or confusion. tionism, ACT assumes that we bring When there is a mismatch between what expectations to a situation but then also we expect and what we see, this produces react to what happens. Its core premise ‘‘deflection’’: people are motivated to is that individuals create events to con- maintain meanings in their world, and firm ‘‘sentiments’’ that they already when such meanings are disconfirmed, have about themselves and others and this produces uncomfortable tension or that when sentiments are not main- stress that motivates action to restore tained, then individuals redescribe them- the meanings. With high levels of deflec- selves and others (Heise 2002; Robinson tion, people are left with the unsettling and Smith-Lovin 2006). The benefit is sense that the world has become strange stability; the world makes sense. Through or unreal, a troubling place in which to this process, people perform the social live. Unresolved deflection can lead to roles that maintain society. psychological stress (Heise 2007). In the Like character theory, ACT draws on expectations of goodness and power to 1The tables use sex-averaged scores. For data define identities but adds the dimension sets that only presented evaluation, potency, of how active or passive identities may and activity (EPA) profile ratings separated by be. People react to things in their sex, the male and female means were averaged. 234 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3)

Table 2. Hero Evaluation, Potency, and Activity (EPA) Ratings across Data Sets.

Character Evaluation Potency Activity Location Year

Hero 2.01 2.29 1.45 Northern Ireland 1977 Hero 2.07 2.31 1.05 USA: North Carolina 1978 Hero 2.28 2.14 1.54 Canada: Ontario 1980 Hero 1.31 2.47 1.05 Germany 1989 Hero 1.96 2.60 1.73 Japan 1989 Hero 2.56 2.47 1.88 USA: Texas 1998 Hero 2.62 2.63 1.68 China 1991 Hero 2.67 2.57 1.70 Canada: Ontario 2001 Hero 2.84 2.58 2.22 USA: Indiana 2002 Hero 2.43 3.04 1.83 Germany 2007 Hero 2.60 2.34 .19 Egypt 2015 Hero 2.85 2.49 .03 Morocco 2015 Hero 3.63 3.45 1.54 USA: Georgia and North Carolina 2015 Hero 3.68 3.48 1.46 USA: University of Georgia 2015 Hero 3.63 3.43 1.55 USA: University of Georgia/Duke 2015

Note: The average across all data sets is evaluation = 2.61, potency = 2.69, activity = 1.39. face of such discrepancies, people are Cultures both acquire and lose identi- motivated to plan and enact new events ties over time. For example, a revised edi- ‘‘to return feelings to normal’’ (Heise tion of a standard dictionary for students 1979:20). of English (Oxford University Press) included the new identities of control freak, doula, spin doctor, and webmaster, Integrating Character Theory and while a dictionary from the 1800s (Bar- Affect Control Theory tlett 1848) reveals identities that have While several studies have investigated since faded: nimshi, scrouge, and stag how ACT could be used to evaluate differ- (MacKinnon and Heise 2010:30). Charac- ent narrative forms, such as folktales, ter theory can speak to the staying power frames, retellings, and newspaper of identities that become embedded in articles (Ahothali and Hoey 2015; social artifacts or match well-known Dunphy and MacKinnon 2002; Hunzaker plots. While EPA ratings tend to be sta- 2016; Shuster and Campos-Castillo 2017), ble, shifts do occur. For instance, in look- few have asked how narrative and char- ing at measures over 14 years, MacKin- acter analysis might improve or expand non and Luke (2002) found political concepts in affect control theory. In one identities to be losing respect and sexual- extension, Joseph et al. (2016) develop ity identities increasing in evaluation. a model they apply to newspaper articles Analysis of characters could help to detect on the Arab uprisings that can extract ACT identities that may be vulnerable to social events from text and generate shifting fundamental sentiments. People affective meanings for identities and have clear expectations about the role of behaviors not currently in ACT dictionar- ‘‘hero’’ due to its pervasive presence in ies. Just as models can now rely on public childhood stories and beyond, but some- texts to help define EPA ratings, we can thing like ‘‘bohemian,’’ a rare character, also turn to other cultural artifacts to bet- may have less accord or be more subject ter understand fundamental sentiments. to generational changes over time. Does Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 235 the identity tap into a stable character, clients, and voters. And as Boyle and increasing the likelihood of stronger cul- Meyer (2018) suggest, people hold cultural tural consensus around its meaning? Do sentiments about specific celebrities, cultural texts indicate a change in how icons, and politicians—another potential identities are cast, suggesting modifica- for dictionary expansion. tions to cultural sentiments and by exten- CT challenges ACT to move further in sion, EPA profiles? two directions that it has already taken. Combinations of characters help define One is to expand the use of modifiers, and solidify each other’s roles. CT helps adjectives that change the basic identity. us understand the effects of identities Thus, an ‘‘innocent’’ victim is rated differ- conceptualized in groups (i.e., alongside ently from an ‘‘evil’’ victim, notably on other characters) rather than as separate evaluation. CT specializes in the many entities. For instance, the ideal of hero is ways to describe someone as a villain, vic- reached only when there are helpless tim, or hero. CT also points to nonverbal others to save and a tyrant to defy. Chris- sources of information; our reaction to tie (1986:25) notes this feedback effect a character differs depending on its size, between characters: ‘‘The more ideal the gestures, colors, and even the sounds it victim is, the more ideal becomes the makes. Findings from CT should contrib- offender. The more ideal the offender, ute to the modifier inventories in ACT the more ideal is the victim.’’ ACT equa- profile dictionaries, which incorporate tions account for how identities and cues about traits, moods, and status char- behaviors modify each other’s evaluation, acteristics (e.g., angry, warm, young, potency, and activity ratings in events. middle-class, ugly, feminine). CT may By looking at interactions, we can demon- have insight into which elements of strate how this intuitively occurs in nar- appearance audiences react to most ratives and how the presence of other strongly, complementing ACT research characters helps to make certain features on how emotional displays influence eval- stronger and more salient. uations (Tsoudis and Smith-Lovin 1998). CT extends identities beyond human Second, CT suggests that different individuals as we also perceive characters institutional contexts may contain differ- in our anthropomorphic projections onto ent processes for creating identities; polit- animals, gods, groups, formal organiza- ical arenas in particular have incentives tions, and sometimes even nations. We for exaggerating the evil of villains, inno- ‘‘personify’’ all these, treating them as if cence of victims, and power and goodness they were individual humans. These fic- of heroes to create plots that stimulate tional humans are crucial in politics and action (Jasper et al. 2018). ACT has insti- marketing because they are often the tutional filters such as law or politics to players whose reputations and collective identify subsets of relevant concepts, identities motivate action: to avenge the and many dictionaries include settings, honor of the ‘‘nation’’ for instance, demand which can be used to situate interactions. the rights of a community, or buy from CT suggests filters that would lead to an a virtuous corporation (Marchand 1998). analysis of the rhetorical uses of identi- One extension for ACT would be to con- ties as players try to arouse different sider how actors manipulate their reputa- emotions in their audiences. This inten- tions, including the ‘‘brand’’ work done in tional construction of identities has not business or politics to cultivate customers, been fully explored in ACT but is central 236 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3) to politics where reputational battles (Robinson and Smith-Lovin 2015).2 CT abound. Motivations, too, could help helps explain the lower activity level: shed light on how events are viewed. In some heroes are ‘‘sleeping giants’’ who this way, CT suggests research on the must be aroused to activity when they (or borders of ACT that would connect ACT those they protect) are attacked. There is more clearly to the kinds of institutional widespread suspicion of those who initiate settings that many other areas of sociol- strategic engagement, with all the dangers ogy examine. that carries (Jasper 2006). Rhetorically, heroes’ initial passivity heightens their DATA AND ANALYSIS goodness as they only fight when provoked. The transformation from passive to active The Essential Triad of Villain, Victim, provides the emotional punch of many nar- Hero ratives, especially in politics. Individuals are born into societies Identities related to heroes are those already structured with social identities marked by goodness and power. The other and social categories (MacKinnon and top identities ranked on goodness are: best Heise 2010). In colloquial English, there friend,friend,brain,truelove,God,angel, are about 10,000 identities for everyday firefighter, soul mate, gentleman, and the situations. To cast as wide a net as possi- ideal self (‘‘myself as I would like to be’’). ble, ACT dictionaries include obscure as Angels and firefighters certainly are heroes well as common identities. Here we focus in many stories, but the personal ties are on villain, victim, and hero. striking: best friends may not typically be In addition to being distinct roles, CT’s viewed as heroes, but how many movies main characters are also clusters of roles: show exactly that, a best friend (sometimes anyone who is coded as good and strong is furry)savingtheday?Thatpeoplestriveto a kind of hero, and so on. A small region be heroes is telling as well. Of the top 50 of EPA space is heroic, another is villain- good identities, only 1 is seen as powerless ous, a third represents victimhood. (baby), and only 2 others have power rat- Through Heise’s Interact program (see ingsclosetoneutral(grannyandgrand- the following), we can find the identities mother). Power and goodness go hand in that are most similar to any particular hand (Osgood et al. 1957:108).3 identity of interest through a function Similarly, villains receive strong nega- that identifies similar EPA scores. The tive scores on evaluation but only moder- three closest identities to heroes are best ately strong potency scores; they are not friend, true love, and brain; closest to vil- as strong as heroes. Across multiple lain are pimp, devil, and slave driver; to data sets, the average profile for villain victim are homeless person, cripple, and is: evaluation = 22.66, potency = .74, mourner. Figure 1 presents the 15 identi- activity = 1.09 (see Table 3). In contrast, ties closest to each of these in EPA space. For heroes, ACT data support the 2The evaluation score was averaged across expectations of character theory. Over sex, using data collected at University of Georgia a dozen EPA profile data sets, collected (UGA), 2015. Unless otherwise noted, all EPA in multiple countries across 40 years, profile examples in the paper are drawn from give heroes very positive ratings on eval- this data set. For women, hero was the highest uation and potency and moderately high rated good identity, and for men, hero was the second highest rated good identity, after true ratings for activity level (see Table 2). love. In a recent data set, heroes are seen as 3The correlation between evaluation and the most ‘‘good’’ out of 930 identities power for identities was .48 (p \ .001; UGA 2015). Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 237

Figure 1. Hero, Villain, and Victim Identities in Evaluation, Potency, Activity (EPA) Space.

Table 3. Villain Evaluation, Potency, and Activity (EPA) Ratings across Data Sets.

Character Evaluation Potency Activity Location Year

Villain –1.72 .25 1.52 Northern Ireland 1977 Villain –2.21 1.11 .95 USA: North Carolina 1978 Villain –2.52 1.23 1.31 Canada: Ontario 1980 Villain –2.53 1.28 .74 Japan 1989 Villain –2.88 .47 –.54 China 1991 Villain –2.56 1.46 .67 Canada: Ontario 2001 Villain –2.55 .85 1.14 USA: Indiana 2002 Villain –2.75 –1.48 1.73 Egypt 2015 Villain –2.79 –1.68 1.55 Morocco 2015 Villain –3.12 1.62 1.29 USA: Georgia and North Carolina 2015 Villain –3.15 1.96 1.38 USA: University of Georgia 2015 Villain –3.11 1.80 1.39 USA: University of Georgia/Duke 2015

Note: Average across all data sets: evaluation = 22.66, potency = .74, activity = 1.09.

CT views villains and heroes as equally to be highlighted. Villains appear power- strong. One reason may be CT’s focus on ful when they attack heroes or victims, political conflicts, in which threats need but their power recedes when justice— 238 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3)

Table 4. Victim Evaluation, Potency, and Activity (EPA) Ratings across Data Sets.

Character Evaluation Potency Activity Location Year

Victim –.10 –1.83 –.53 USA: North Carolina 1978 Victim .67 –2.12 –1.04 Canada: Ontario 1980 Victim –1.02 –2.24 –.66 Germany 1989 Victim –1.16 –2.32 –.53 USA: Texas 1998 Victim .42 –1.85 –1.36 China 1991 Victim –.15 –2.64 –.17 Canada: Ontario 2001 Victim –1.97 –2.41 –1.90 USA: Indiana 2002 Victim –1.68 –2.92 –.10 Germany 2007 Victim –.88 –.89 .74 Egypt 2015 Victim –.86 –1.86 –1.12 Morocco 2015 Victim –.30 –2.53 –1.26 USA: Georgia and North Carolina 2015 Victim –.16 –2.57 –1.50 USA: University of Georgia 2015 Victim –.17 –2.56 –1.45 USA: University of Georgia/Duke 2015

Note: Average across all data sets: evaluation = 2.57, potency = 22.21, activity = 2.84. the hero—prevails. The immediate rhe- to come out. In contrast to heroes, villains torical needs of an arena differ from are always aggressing, always looking to underlying cultural sentiments. start trouble—even when they are behind Focusing only on badness, the top 10 bars. There is no villainous equivalent of villains would be: child molester, wife the sleeping giant. Indeed, a prime exam- abuser, rapist, murderer, kidnapper, ter- ple of a bad, powerful, but quiet identity rorist, backstabber, racist, devil, and is a vampire, indicating a stretch to myth- mugger. Limiting identities to at least ical creatures to fill this void, and even slightly powerful (P = 11 or greater) the then, they have been occasionally recast list becomes: rapist, murderer, kidnap- in modern films to be less threatening. per, terrorist, devil, mugger, evildoer, But if villains tend to be a little lower on slave driver, and arsonist. These identi- the ACT potency scale than the activity ties form the staple of many action thrill- scale, this may suggest that their sneaky ers chasing down serial killers and terro- ways are thought of as less potent acts. rists. Gone are the personal relationships This difference may again reflect CT’s marked by soul mates and friends; heroes focus on political characters. may stop by for tea, but villains are a dis- Victims are very weak, as CT pre- tinct other. Of the top 50 negative identi- dicts—the tenth most powerless identity ties, only 15 (30 percent) had power rat- out of 930 (Robinson and Smith-Lovin ings greater than 1, reflecting a cultural 2015). But they are not as good as CT reluctance to concede strength to disap- expects when it takes ‘‘innocent children’’ proved identities. as its exemplar (Jasper et al. forthcom- Part of evil is its mystery; normal peo- ing). There is some tendency toward neu- ple cannot quite fathom what motivates trality (neither good nor bad), with both evil characters like Iago or Hitler. CT por- positive and negative scores given by dif- trays political villains as active: if they ferent data sets, although there are more are not, how can they be threatening? negative ones. The average profile for vic- They must be plotting, conniving, and tim is: evaluation = 2.57, potency = scheming in order for their evil intentions 22.21, activity = 2.84 (Table 4). In ACT Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 239 data, the category of victim may include angry if we believe they could have done people who have been hurt in some way something to help themselves. If they but who are not themselves very good: could become survivors (a positive and ‘‘victims’’ of prison guard violence may powerful identity, E = 12.79 and P = not deserve it, but they are themselves 12.80, but not very active, A = 1.66) or criminals. Protestors who are beaten by resisters, we would admire them (Whit- police are often portrayed in this way, as tier 2009). having ‘‘asked for it.’’ If bad things hap- Several discrepancies between CT and pen to bad people, we still feel they are ACT—sleeping giants, active villains, the bad people. The difference between CT goodness of victims—reflect CT’s interest and ACT may again be due to the former’s in intentional character constructions in focus on politics: to mobilize people in political arenas rather than in the gen- support of victims, they had better be eral sentiments that the primary words morally admirable. Political organizers arouse. This suggests work that could search for and help construct ideal— link ACT’s general evaluations of words good—victims. such as hero with the reputations of con- Unlike villains and heroes, victims are crete actors in various institutional con- defined less by their goodness and more texts: more attention to modifiers, more by their (lack of) power. Power is linked elaborate and substantive institutional to activity as well as morality; of the 50 filters, and recognition of the ways that least powerful identities in the data set, groups and individuals use sentiments only 11 had positive activity scores, and for their own purposes and often change of these, only 5 were seen as more than them in doing so. slightly active (A = 11): baby, infant, cry- baby, toddler, and alcoholic. Children Mapping Interactions largely fill the niche of powerless but active identities. There appear to be By mapping common cultural knowledge moral judgments here: of the 50 least about elements of social interactions, powerful identities, only 5 had positive ACT can take the next step and predict evaluation ratings (baby, shrimp, infant, what will happen in specific events; we toddler, and servant), and once again, not only have typical feelings toward only those marking childhood status each character, we also have consistent (baby, infant, and toddler) had scores expectations about how they will interact with one another. CT suggests that her- greater than 1, indicating more than oes protect victims, villains attack, vic- slightly good. We do not just view the tims suffer, and minions make ineffectual powerless as inactive, we see them as threatening noises. Because they follow bad.4 These nuances of low-power charac- our expectations, these classic interac- ters help explain mixed attitudes toward tions are satisfying to watch, especially victims. We tend to pity them, but that when the ultimate satisfaction is delayed pity can shade into contempt (Fiske by suspenseful plot twists. CT offers an 2012) to such an extent that they slide analysis of the main character tropes— toward immorality. Victims are often what do they look, sound, talk, and act viewed as deviant (Boyle 2017). We are like—that helps to explain the sentiments and deflections found for these identities 4The correlation between power and activity for identities was .36 (p \ .001). There was no in ACT. similar significant correlation between activity Interact is a program that allows users and evaluation (r = .035; ns; UGA 2015). to perform various tasks using EPA 240 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3) dictionaries and ACT equations, such as in how we make sense of our world; so finding concepts that fit a particular strong that we can use such knowledge range of EPA scores or analyzing events to predict how people expect events to where selected identities engage in cho- unfold. sen behaviors. A user can input different When a particular experience breaks identities and ask for appropriate behav- from expectations, we feel deflection. iors that would occur given the roles ACT equations calculate how a fundamen- entered. By entering the identities of vil- tal impression changes in different situa- lain, victim, and hero, we can predict tions, such as how much goodness what the expected behaviors might be in a teacher might lose if she harms a child. these encounters (using Robinson and Deflection is the sum of those squared dif- Smith-Lovin 2015, sex-averaged scores, ferences between the original, fundamen- and male interactants in Interact). How tal sentiments and the new ones that should a hero behave toward a villain? emerge given the specifics of the situation The three most optimal (expected) acts (summed across the EPA dimensions). are: sentence, incarcerate, and jail. And Higher deflection predicts more severe how should a villain behave toward breaks from expectations and greater a hero? The three most expected acts shock (and stress) in that what is happen- are: chatter to, josh, and hookup with— ing is strange and unreal. all fairly mild actions that underline To show the range of deflection, Inter- ACT’s focus on everyday engagements in act divides a graph into four segments, contrast to CT’s concern with political with the first indicating normal and rhetoric. Next, we turn to victims; villains expected events (deflection numbers at are expected to enslave, exterminate, or about 0–6), the second showing events slay victims, while heroes are expected that are unusual and unique (about 7– to mother, teach, or guard them. These 14), the third signaling unorthodox and interactions fit many narratives. weird events (15–22), and the fourth indi- We can introduce peripheral actors to cating events that seem impossible as the story, like ‘‘sidekick’’ for heroes and originally conceived (23–301; Heise ‘‘henchman’’ for villains. Heroes are 2013:26). When a villain harms a victim, expected to propose marriage to, liberate, this is expected, with an extremely low or make love to their sidekicks, while vil- deflection value of 1.4. We might not lains frighten, scare, or freak out their like the harmful act, but this is how we henchmen. In response, the henchmen expect villains to behave. Next, a hero stammer at, idolize, and mimic villains, helps a victim. Again, this normal act pro- and sidekicks are expected to drink duces a low deflection score of 4.9. If we with, glance at, and ask about heroes. mix up the storyline and have the villain Some of these suggestions are humorous: help the victim, this more than doubles a computer program makes these the deflection to 12.6, making it unusual. matches based only on the location of Next, we try something truly unexpected behaviors and identities in EPA space. and have the hero harm the victim: There were many behaviors to choose deflection is off the charts (literally, as from—over 800—with actions as diverse the graph maxes out at 30) at 38.8. This as dazzle, financially back, photograph, is the impossible story. A hero engaging baptize, and fire from a job. With that in in this act is no hero. It is weird for the mind, it is almost uncanny how close victim to harm the villain (deflection = many of these optimal acts come to famil- 18.9) but impossible for the victim to iar storylines. It suggests strong patterns harm the hero (deflection = 32.3). Each Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 241 character has its role, and deviations players that engage in strategic interac- from the typical narratives quickly stray tion with each other. Of the infinite num- into strange, disturbing territory. ber of possible interactions that ACT can model, a small number are common and DISCUSSION important in social life, including those among the essential triad. This seems Character theory and affect control the- especially true in politics, where a small ory differ in ways that make them com- number of plots regarding fears and plementary. CT uses different sources of threats and their resolution recur fre- data, especially visual data; specializes quently. CT was developed to understand in political interactions; and uses more how characters and their interactions can interpretive and less formal theory. ACT lead to political action and beliefs, and provides comprehensive dictionaries of ACT’s deflections are key to this process. EPA profiles for hundreds of identities Shuster and Campos-Castillo (2017) and uses formal models to make predic- apply ACT to the ERA movement to find tions. Together, they provide a wide- that framing strategies that portray ranging picture of how people grapple events in a way that produces deflection with the identities and behaviors they may encourage people to engage in politi- see in both everyday life and the news cal behavior to prevent those outcomes. headlines of politics. CT identifies pervasive narratives, and Because CT emerged out of a cultural ACT can predict what happens when analysis of politics, in other words com- plots go unexpectedly off-track. In the petitive arenas, it highlights conflict in political arena, such disrupted storylines the construction of identities. We have may have influence on mobilization. seen competitive victimology, but there ACT has been applied to political set- is also competition over who is the hero tings (Britt and Heise 2000; Heise and and who the villain in a situation. One Lerner 2006; Irwin 2003; Shuster and side’s hero is the other’s villain. Different Campos-Castillo 2017), but we feel that sides in ‘‘culture wars’’ may agree on it retains unfulfilled potential that CT what a hero or a villain is but not who may help unlock. Generally, different fits the bill. Some people may simulta- institutional contexts reward different neously be viewed as a hero and a villain, formulations of character, especially the such as Edward Snowden, admired for identities of collective players such as revealing governmental surveillance nations and organizations. Competitive practices while simultaneously castigated environments presumably reward exag- for sharing classified information. In gerated threats of outgroups and exagger- 2008, some Americans admired McCain ated virtues of ingroup heroes and vic- for his military valor; others admired tims. Cooperative environments may Obama for the strength of his intellect— favor downplaying the same traits. two kinds of heroes (Alexander 2010). Many protest groups demand inclusion CT points to the rhetorical needs of differ- and respect, and as a result, intentionally ent elements of characterization and to challenge negative distortions of how different players try to highlight outgroups. one or another of them. ACT’s institutional filters acknowledge CT focuses on three identities out of contextual differences like these but do the thousands in ACT. These three, CT not fully grasp how institutional arenas claims, are the heart of political oratory, lead to the adaptation and sometimes representing the reputations of the key changes in identities. Processes by which 242 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3) sentiments are attacked, changed, and also the images: the colors, size, gaze, pos- deployed may simply be exogenous to ture, and gestures—all of which do some ACT, but further work is needed along character work (Jasper et al. forthcom- this border. Examination of variance in ing). Would ACT results be the same if EPA scores may suggest contentious survey respondents reacted to images identities. Another possibility is to collect instead of words? This should be possible data on the traits of raters pertaining to to test. In an age of extensive penetration ideological or political divides, which is by visual media, images play a large role then integrated into a data set in the in our lives. What is more, cognitive psy- same way profiles can be separated by chology has deployed images in research sex. Heise (1979) separated data along that is parallel to the impressions and both sex and moderate/conservative sentiments of ACT. Fiske (2012), for dimensions, measuring conservatism example, has examined class, race, and with a 30-item ideological checklist. gender stereotypes that largely corre- While this may be unnecessarily cumber- spond to ACT’s evaluation and potency some for some ACT dictionaries, it could dimensions. This could inform the modi- be advantageous for understanding con- fier inventories used in ACT, with the tested identities with known partisan possibility of visual-based expansions. divisions or ideological splits. Political Conflict over identities suggests how party identification has been shown to identities change over time. While funda- affect EPA ratings for at least some iden- mental sentiments are largely stable, par- tities (Boyle and Meyer 2018). ticularly the evaluation dimension (Heise By looking so closely at three identi- 2007), they can shift over time (MacKin- ties, CT can distinguish different kinds non and Luke 2002). Analysis of charac- of heroes, villains, and victims that are ters might point to arenas that could not obvious through ACT surveys. It experience broader change in the future should make a difference whether a hero’s as cultural swings captured in narratives strength comes from physical force or and other media could reflect shifts in the analytic intelligence; whether a villain is cultural assumptions underlying funda- a likeable scoundrel or truly evil. We mental sentiments. For instance, Christie saw that victims are fairly neutral on (1986) describes the ‘‘little old lady’’ as an evaluation, but this may simply cover ideal victim to garner sympathy and then the fact that some victims are extremely points out that four hundred years ago, at sympathetic, such as infants or animals, the height of the witch hunts, this was while others are actually bad people. We hardly the case, where instead, little old wonder if there are other cases where ladies were imbued with power, espe- a single word does not capture the com- cially in cases of birth, sickness, or plex sentiments people hold; some identi- death. The ideal victim today was once ties seem especially likely to hide com- the ideal villain. Characters persist, plexities, as victim does. Many political even as their incorporation of specific identities may harbor this ambivalence: identities changes. leaders, feminists, activists, politicians, Groups often mobilize to improve their and so on. CT suggests that the variance positions in society: to gain status, politi- of different ACT identities can be probed cal rights, economic resources, and insti- to identify cases of disagreement and tutional positions. Are they villains, vic- subtypes. tims, or heroes, with the political CT analyzes not simply the words rep- opportunities appropriate to each? CT resenting characters, as ACT does, but describes the dilemmas and strategies Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 243 they use in their character work, such as story depends instead on blame and portraying themselves as victims versus anger being focused squarely on the heroes (Whittier 2009). We can trace antagonist, the villain. And frustrations these strategies in EPA space: feminists that victims are weak or not helping aimed to portray women as stronger, the themselves are removed because again, early civil rights movement wished to the hero is expected to perform these demonstrate the goodness of blacks, and roles and an empowered class of victims many professions have advanced their denies the hero that opportunity to show interests by raising impressions on all his or her mettle. Thus, victims enter three EPA dimensions. We lack the space a pure form, where they are neither to describe these strategies, but CT’s find- expected to be heroes who save them- ings in the political realm help explain selves or others by fighting back nor vil- how groups move intentionally across lains who brought calamity upon them- EPA space (although their efforts can selves and potentially others by fail, due to countermobilization). There association. The co-occurrence of multiple are institutional, cultural, and political characters helps to parse out and underpinnings to this character work. strengthen the unique roles of each actor. CT’s attention to audiences in arenas may help resolve some ambiguity in sev- CONCLUSION eral ACT identities by pointing to strate- gic tradeoffs. We saw that victims score Understanding characters is not just an neutral or slightly negative on the evalu- academic enterprise; it translates into ation dimension in ACT dictionaries. Peo- real-world effects for those who adopt ple can react with warm compassion for such personas. For instance, Summers- some victims (e.g., children killed by Effler (2010) in her ethnographic drunk drivers: Weed 1990) but blame research comparing two social movement and anger toward others (e.g., people on groups finds that adhering to the ideals of welfare or patients in a mental hospital: saints versus heroes had a cascade of Lerner 1980), as occurs with the ‘‘just effects for each group. Saints endure world’’ bias, where people may see victims hardships with humility and joy. Heroes of misfortune as less good or as deserving bravely fight against insurmountable what happens to them. Such reactions odds, but in doing so, they must take on often depend on the institutional context. risks, identify opponents, and emerge vic- Adult victims of child sexual abuse may torious. This results in differences in tac- be reduced to innocent, passive childlike tics and goals for the groups. Saints and victims on television shows, but they pre- heroes experience different emotions and fer to appear as strong survivors so that vulnerabilities. For the leaders, saints they can pursue political programs and have to be more humble and closer to recruit others (Whittier 2009). CT’s focus the divine than those around them, while on rhetoric helps make sense of some ACT heroes have to be braver and more power- results, suggesting that a single word ful than those around them, affecting may cover ambivalence or multiple group dynamics. identities. One of the benefits of merging concepts Interactions among core characters from character theory and affect control can also resolve some of this ambiguity, theory is the ability to see the powerful for instance, when victims interact with applicability of both to concrete settings, villains and heroes. Here, the pressure and with character theory, particularly is removed to blame victims because the to the political realm. In this manner, 244 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3)

CT addresses an occasional critique of impressions, emotions, and moral senti- ACT that it is too abstract or that the ments. Politics is about the pursuit of equations of Interact and EPA profiles power, but one central way to get power are too divorced from the complexities of is to persuade others that you are compe- the real world. To the contrary, such pro- tent, courageous, and benevolent while files emerge from centuries of meaning- your opponents are none of these. Persua- making; they are firmly entrenched in sion is at the heart of electoral politics, the narratives that put children to sleep protest movements, even corporate mar- at night and entertain movie audiences. keting, with impression management as Linking character theory and affect con- its goal. Perhaps more than ever in poli- trol theory helps to make clear the tics—in an era of formal democracies grounding of ACT measures in cultural and the expanding reach of social artifacts. And by connecting stock charac- media—groups and individuals battle ters to fundamental sentiments, we shed over their reputations, over what others light on the staying power and consensus think and feel about them. Characters that emerges around particular identi- simplify complex people and issues, ties. In practice, ACT scholars could a core component of stories and images model nuances in characters by making that suggest the need for action. greater use of elements already collected Character theory and affect control in many ACT dictionaries, such as set- theory rely on different sources of evi- tings or modifiers, to capture greater dence about characters, especially public detail in the types of actors involved in texts and images on the one hand and interactions, as well as the arenas where surveys and experiments on the other. these events unfold. ACT scholars could This difference is widespread, as cultural expand these dictionaries of settings and sociologies and social psychologies have modifiers, using character and narrative in many cases asked parallel questions theory to help identify new traits and pla- with little cross-fertilization (Jasper ces relevant for inclusion. 2017). We hope to have shown that the CT examines a tiny number of identi- concerns of each can be translated, at ties in the context of strategic settings least, into the language of the other, in which players construct character allowing insights and tests not otherwise tropes. Mostly these are political arenas, obvious from within each tradition. How with clear stakes at risk in the character cultural meanings reverberate, spread, battles. This intentional character work and move people is a big subject for which can in turn influence basic ACT identities we need research and theory from all but even more, the connections between available subdisciplines. identities: what gender or ethnic group is eligible to be a hero, for instance, or ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a victim? By looking at this character work, it can also show the visual dimen- The authors would like to thank David Heise, Michael Young, Elke Zuern, Scott Savage, and sions of different identities as well as Monica Whitham for comments on earlier drafts, a number of subtypes of each. Political and the editors and anonymous reviewers for and politicized identities may be espe- their extremely helpful feedback. Both authors cially vulnerable to change, including contributed equally to this manuscript. intentional change, and CT suggests ways this happens. Politics involves the REFERENCES deployment of material resources but Ahothali, Areej, and Jesse Hoey. 2015. ‘‘Good also the mobilization of favorable News or Bad News: Using Affect Control Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 245

Theory to Analyze Readers’ Reaction Gilbert, Daniel. 1998. ‘‘Ordinary Personology.’’ towards News Articles.’’ Pp. 1548–58 in Pp. 89–150 in The Handbook of Social Psy- Human Language Technologies. Denver: chology,editedbyD.Gilbert,S.Fiske,and Association for Computer Linguistics. G. Lindzey. New York: McGraw-Hill. Alexander, Jeffrey. 2010. The Performance of Goode, William. 1978. The Celebration of Her- Politics. New York: Oxford University oes. Berkeley: University of California Press. Press. Amsterdam, Anthony, and Jerome Bruner. Heise, David R. 1979. Understanding Events. 2000. Minding the Law. Cambridge: Har- New York: Cambridge University Press. vard University Press. Heise, David R. 2002. ‘‘Understanding Social Best, Joel. 1997. ‘‘Victimization and the Victim Interaction with Affect Control Theory.’’ Industry.’’ Society 34:9–17. Pp. 17–40 in New Directions in Contempo- Bonnell, Victoria. 1997. The Iconography of rary Sociological Theory, edited by J. Power. Berkeley: University of California Berger and M. Zelditch, Jr. Lanham: Row- Press. man & Littlefield Publishers. Boyle, Kaitlin. 2017. ‘‘Sexual Assault and Heise, David R. 2007. Expressive Order. Bos- Identity Disruption: A Sociological ton: Springer. Approach to Posttraumatic Stress.’’ Society Heise, David R. 2013. ‘‘Interact Guide.’’ and Mental Health 7:69–84. Retrieved November 19, 2017 (http:// Boyle, Kaitlin M., and Chase B. Meyer. 2018. www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact/Ja ‘‘Who Is Presidential? Women’s Political vaInteract.html). Representation, Deflection, and the 2016 Heise, David R., and Steven Jay Lerner. 2006. Election.’’ Socius 4:1–16. ‘‘Affect Control in International Relations.’’ Britt, Lory, and David R. Heise. 2000. ‘‘From Social Forces 85:993–1010. Shame to Pride in Identity Politics.’’ Pp. Hoggett, Paul. 1992. Partisans in an Uncer- 252–68 in Self, Identity, and Social Move- tain World. London: Free Association ments, edited by S. Stryker, T. Owens, Books. and R. White. Minneapolis: University of Hunzaker, M. B. F. 2014. ‘‘Making Sense of Minnesota Press. Misfortune: Cultural Schemas, Victim Christie, Nils. 1986. ‘‘The Ideal Victim.’’ Pp. 17– Redefinition and the Perpetuation of Ster- 30 in From Crime Policy to Victim Policy,edited eotypes.’’ Social Psychology Quarterly by E. Fattah. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 77:166–84. Cle´ment, Mae´va, Thomas Lindemann, and Hunzaker, M. B. F. 2016. ‘‘Cultural Senti- Eric Sangar. 2017. ‘‘The ‘Hero-Protector ments and Schema-Consistency Bias in Narrative’: Manufacturing Emotional Con- Information Transmission.’’ American sent for the Use of Force.’’ Political Psychol- Sociological Review 81:1223–50. ogy 38:991–1008. Irwin, Kevin. 2003. ‘‘Politics.’’ Retrieved Cohen, Stanley. 1972. Folk Devils and Moral March 3, 2018 (http://www.indiana.edu/ Panics. St. Albans: Paladin. ~socpsy/ACT/interact/subcultures/ Dower, John. 1986. War without Mercy. New politics.htm). York: Pantheon Books. Jasper, James M. 2006. Getting Your Way. Dunphy, Tara, and Neil MacKinnon. 2002. ‘‘A Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Proposal for Integrating Folklore and Affect Jasper, James M. 2017. ‘‘The Doors that Cul- Control Theory.’’ Electronic Journal of ture Opened: Parallels between Social Sociology 6(3). Movement Studies and Social Psychology.’’ Fine, Gary Alan. 2001. Difficult Reputations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 20:285–302. Fiske, Susan T. 2012. Envy Up, Scorn Down. Jasper, James M., Michael Young, and New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Elke Zuern. 2018. ‘‘Character Work in Francis, Clare, and David Heise R. ‘‘Mean Social Movements.’’ Theory and Society Affective Ratings of 1,500 Concepts by Indi- 47:113–31. ana University Undergraduates in 2002-3.’’ Jasper, James M., Michael Young, and Elke Retrieved November 17, 2017 (http:// Zuern. Forthcoming. Moral Characters. www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact/Ja New York: Oxford University Press. vaInteract.html) Joseph, Kenneth, Wei Wei, Matthew Benigni, Gamson, William. 1992. Talking Politics. New and Kathleen Carley. 2016. ‘‘A Social-Event York: Cambridge University Press. Based Approach to Sentiment Analysis of 246 Social Psychology Quarterly 81(3)

Identities and Behaviors in the Text.’’ Jour- collected at University of Georgia, Duke nal of Mathematical Sociology 40:137–66. University, and Durham N.C.’’ Retrieved Klapp, Orrin. 1962. Heroes, Villains and Fools. January 29, 2018 (https://research.frankli- Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. n.uga.edu/act/content/data-sets2). Klapp, Orrin. 1964. Symbolic Leaders. New Robinson, Dawn T., and Lynn Smith-Lovin. York: Minerva Press. 2015. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of 929 Iden- Lerner, Melvin J. 1980. The Belief in a Just tities, 814 Behaviors and 660 Modifiers col- World. New York: Plenum Press. lected at University of Georgia and Duke Lynch, Deidre Shauna. 1998. The Economy of University.’’ Retrieved January 29, 2018 Character. Chicago: University of Chicago (https://research.franklin.uga.edu/act/conte Press. nt/data-sets2). MacKinnon, Neil J., and David R. Heise. 2010. Schneider, Andreas. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings Self, Identity, and Social Institutions. New of 787 Concepts by Texas Tech University York: Palgrave Macmillan. Undergraduates in 1998.’’ Retrieved MacKinnon, Neil J., and Alison Luke. 2002. November 17, 2017 (http://www.indiana ‘‘Changes in Identity Attitudes as Reflec- .edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact/JavaInteract.html). tions of Social and Cultural Change.’’ The Schneider, Andreas. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings Canadian Journal of Sociology 27:299–338. of 804 Concepts by West German Students MacKinnon, Neil J. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of in 1989.’’ Retrieved November 17, 2017 1,931 Concepts by Guelph University (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/inter Undergraduates, Ontario, Canada, in act/JavaInteract.html). 1980-6.’’ Retrieved November 17, 2017 Schro¨der, Tobias. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/inter 1100 Concepts by German Adults in act/JavaInteract.html). 2007.’’ Retrieved November 17, 2017 MacKinnon, Neil J. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/inte 2,294 Concepts by Guelph University ract/JavaInteract.html). Undergraduates, Ontario, Canada, in Shuster, Stef, and Celeste Campos-Castillo. 2001-3.’’ Retrieved November 17, 2017 2017. ‘‘Measuring Resonance and Disso- (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/ nance in Social Movement Frames with interact/JavaInteract.html). Affect Control Theory.’’ Social Psychology Marchand, Roland. 1998. Creating the Corpo- Quarterly 80:20–40. rate Soul. Berkeley: University of Califor- Slovic, Paul. 2007. ‘‘‘If I Look at the Mass I nia Press. Will Never Act’: Psychic Numbing and McDougall, Walter. 1997. Promised Land, Genocide.’’ Judgment and Decision Making Crusader State. New York: Houghton 2:79–95. Mifflin. Smith, David Livingstone. 2011. Less Than O’Neill, William. 1993. A Democracy at War. Human. New York: St. Martin’s. New York: Free Press. Smith, Herman, and Yi Cai. ‘‘Mean Affective Osgood, Charles, George Suci, and Percy Tan- Ratings of 1,146 Concepts by Shanghai nenbaum. 1957. The Measurement of Mean- Undergraduates, 1991.’’ Retrieved Novem- ing. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. ber 17, 2017 (http://www.indiana.edu/ Polletta, Francesca. 2006. It Was Like a Fever. ~socpsy/ACT/interact/JavaInteract.html). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, Herman, Takanori Matsuno, Shuui- Robinson, Dawn T., and Lynn Smith-Lovin. chirou Ike, and Michio Umino. ‘‘Mean 2006. ‘‘Affect Control Theory.’’ Pp. 137–64 Affective Ratings of 1,894 Concepts by in Contemporary Social Psychological The- Japanese Undergraduates, 1989–2002.’’ ories, edited by P. J. Burke. Stanford: Stan- Retrieved November 17, 2017 (http:// ford University Press. www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact/Ja Robinson, Dawn T., and Lynn Smith-Lovin. vaInteract.html). 2015. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of 930 Iden- Smith-Lovin, Lynn. 1979. ‘‘Behavior Settings tities, 814 Behaviors and 660 Modifiers col- and Impressions Formed from Social Sce- lected at University of Georgia.’’ Retrieved narios.’’ Social Psychology Quarterly January 29, 2018 (https://research.franklin 42:31–43. .uga.edu/ act/content/data-sets2). Smith-Lovin, Lynn, and David R. Heise. Robinson, Dawn T., and Lynn Smith-Lovin. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of 2,106 Concepts 2015. ‘‘Mean Affective Ratings of 929 Iden- by University of North Carolina Under- tities, 814 Behaviors and 660 Modifiers graduates in 1978.’’ Retrieved November Character Theory and Affect Control Theory 247

17, 2017 (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ Willigan, Dennis, and David R. Heise. ‘‘Mean ACT/interact/JavaInteract.html). Affective Ratings of 1,026 Concepts by Summers-Effler, Erika. 2010. Laughing Catholic High School Students in Belfast, Saints and Righteous Heroes. Chicago: Uni- Northern Ireland in 1977.’’ Retrieved versity of Chicago Press. November 19, 2017 (http://www.india- Swerts, Thomas. 2015. ‘‘Gaining a Voice: Sto- na.edu/~socpsy/ACT/interact/ rytelling and Undocumented Youth Activ- JavaInteract.html). ism in Chicago.’’ Mobilization 20:345–60. Willis, Janine, and Alexander Todorov. 2006. Tajfel, Henri, and John Turner. 1979. ‘‘An ‘‘First Impressions.’’ Psychological Science Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.’’ 17:592–98. Pp. 33–47 in The Social Psychology of Inter- group Relations, edited by W. Austin and S. BIOS Worchel. Monterey: Brooks-Cole. Tsoudis, Olga, and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 1998. Kelly Bergstrand is an assistant profes- ‘‘How Bad Was It? The Effects of Victim and Perpetrator Emotion on Responses to sor of sociology at the University of Texas Criminal Court Vignettes.’’ Social Forces at Arlington. She specializes in social psy- 77:695–722. chology, social movements, and environ- University of Georgia. 2015. ‘‘USA datasets mental sociology. Her current research collected in Georgia, North Carolina, Duke projects include using affect control the- University, and University of Georgia, and datasets from Morocco and Egypt.’’ ory to understand public support for Retrieved (https://research.franklin.uga activist issues and examining the role of .edu/act/content/data-sets2). emotions in activism. Va¨stfja¨ll, Daniel, Paul Slovic, Marcus May- orga, and Ellen Peters. 2014. ‘‘Compassion James M. Jasper writes about culture Fade: Affect and Charity Are Greatest for a Single Child in Need.’’ PLoS One 9(6). and politics. His most recent books Weed, Frank. 1990. ‘‘The Victim-Activist Role include The Emotions of Protest and Pro- in the Anti-Drunk Driving Movement.’’ test: A Cultural Introduction to Social Sociological Quarterly 31:459–73. Movements. He teaches sociology at the Whittier, Nancy. 2009. The Politics of Child Graduate Center of the City University Sexual Abuse. New York: Oxford Univer- sity Press. of New York.