The Effects of Acting Training on Theory of Mind, Empathy, and Emotion Regulation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Effects of Acting Training on Theory of Mind, Empathy, and Emotion Regulation Author: Thalia Raquel Goldstein Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/1970 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2010 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Boston College The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Department of Psychology THE EFFECTS OF ACTING TRAINING ON THEORY OF MIND, EMPATHY, AND EMOTION REGULATION A Dissertation by THALIA RAQUEL GOLDSTEIN Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2010 © Copyright by THALIA RAQUEL GOLDSTEIN 2010 Acknowledgments The scope and size of this project has seemed overwhelming, impossible, ridiculous and uncontrollable at times. Without the support in forms financial, physical and emotional from the persons and institutions below, you would not have the project you hold in your hands, and I would likely be a single, out of work actress waiting tables on the Upper East Side. I would first like to extend my sincerest gratitude to the administrators and teachers at each of the schools where this research was conducted, and to the parents and students who participated from each school. At the Walnut Hill School, Roger Shoemaker, Julie Faulstich, Eileen Soskin, Joe Cabral, Naomi Bailis and the teaching staff work hard to ensure arts instruction I wish I had been involved in during high school. At the Boston Arts Academy Kathleen Marsh, Linda Nathan, Juanita Rodrigues, Adam McLean and the teaching staff do amazing work and produce students that will go farther than anyone can imagine. John Goodnough, Joanne Leunig and the teaching staff at ActonArt made every drive to Acton a pleasurable experience, knowing I got to arrive and interact with such a well organized and enthusiastic group. And finally, Wheelock Family Theatre and John Bay, Jane Staab, Susan Kosoff, Kay Elliott, Charles Baldwin, and the teaching staff have worked with me with pride, enthusiasm and a love of theatre for the past five years. Thank you all for making this possible and your support. I would like to express particular gratitude to my funding sources over the past 5 years. The Department of Homeland Security and the Esther Katz Rosen Fellowship at the American Psychological Foundation provided stipends, and the National Science Foundation and the Boston College REG and GSA REG programs provided research funding. Thank you in particular to Joan Straumanis and Soo-Siang Lim at NSF for their help. I am known for having a small army of research assistants, and with good reason. This work would not happen without their dedication, attention to detail and enthusiasm. I am proud to say that almost 100% of the students I have worked with were double majoring in psychology and an art form, and in some cases, merely loved theatre and were not even psychology majors! Molly Baum, Danielle Carpentieri, Katelyn Coleman, Jessica DeLuca, Amanda Goldfine, Stephanie Hackett, Grace Jacobson, Ariella Katz, Bernard Kim, Lillian Z. King, Ken Kroog, Anna Kupchik, Lauren Moore, Ashley Naranjo, Emma Racioppo, Jon Romiti, Jenny Suh, Nicole Sullivan, Deanna Swain, Shelbi Thurau, Louis Tullo, San Wang, and Jeremy Yancey all contributed in the past five years. In particular, I would like to thank Kaitilin Mahoney, who helped run the lab for more than a year, including the pilot studies and lab organization that made this dissertation possible. And Nick Ackerman, my longest serving RA (7 semesters) provided innumerable hours of help- and many many laughs. Finally, this dissertation literally would not have been possible without the hours and dedication of Tess Fielden and Hannah Hughes. They completed the lion’s share of the data collection, coding, entering, reentering, transcription and spot-checking. Without their careful and tireless work, I would not have survived. My colleagues in the Boston College psychology department have provided support, a wall off which to bounce ideas, and much needed happy hours! The “six-pack” helped make a difficult transition from acting to graduate school easier. And I am honored to have shared time, office space, apartments, and lab space with Amy Love Collins, Jen Drake, Brett Ford, Fred Gaudios, Joy Hackenbract, Angelina Hawley, Alisha Holland, Kate Hudspeth, Mary Kayyal, Christina LeClerc, Jen Mize, Brendan Murray, Pam Naab, Alex Pittman, Mary Prenovost, Shannon Snapp, Katherine Mickley Stimetz, Kyle Tierney, Stacee Topper, Sherri Widen, Caren Walker, Jill Waring, and Xuan Zhang. Nicole Nelson in particular has been an immeasurably wonderful source of laughter, comfort, coffee, a listening ear, and is shockingly not sick of my face or voice despite knowing it more intimately than perhaps anyone else has (or ever should!). I have been blessed with helpful, thoughtful, genius advisors throughout my psychology career. Jonathan Levy and Robin Rosenberg provided great insight and ideas in the early stages of this project, and for that I thank them. Kerri Johnson, first at Cornell and then at NYU set me on the right path, taught me to think big and turned cartwheels when I got into graduate school. Thank you for teaching me what a mentor should be. Paul Bloom (and lab) and Liane Young provided helpful thoughts and commentary. Members of my committee, Hiram Brownell, Andrew Sofer, and Ehri Ryu have provided much in help and constructive criticisms. Jim Russell was a wonderful chair for the first four years of my graduate school career and was always ready to listen and help when needed. Elizabeth Kensinger is a model advisor, researcher and bastion of calm for anyone looking for advice as frantically as I often did and for that I thank her. Maya Tamir has been an inspiration for my academic future and for a way of thinking I didn’t know was possible in myself. Finally, my advisor Ellen Winner has been absolutely everything I could have wanted in a Ph.D. advisor. I don’t know what I would have done without her cheerleading, brilliance, and ability to come up with the best titles. I hope to someday write as well as her, and to stop making grammar mistakes in her presence. Lastly, my family. My sisters Mara and Sasha and my sisterfriend Kay. Thank you for wanting to talk about something else besides psychology! For all of your support and friendship. The Roggenkamp and Zimmerman families, thank you for accepting me into your folds. To Sandy and Papi, thank you first for pointing out the DHS fellowship, but more importantly for the support, long phone calls, understanding, and for being honestly excited about my work. Mom, thank you for always being there for me with support and love, and for nurturing me always. And after everyone else, I want to send my love, my heart, to my best friend, my husband Ed. Thank you. Just thank you. For Ed, my favorite actor Table of Contents Page List of Tables…………………………………………………………………… iii List of Figures………………………………………………………………….. iv Abstract ………………………………………………………………………… v Chapter 1: Introduction ………………………………………………………… 1 Acting Theory and Western Theatre ………………....………… 2 Goals …………………………………………..……………….. 7 Chapter 2: Theory of Mind, Empathy, and Emotion Regulation: Developmental Trajectories and Relationship to Acting…………………………….. 8 Theory of Mind …………………………………………………. 8 The Development of Theory of Mind ……..……………. 9 Correlates of Theory of Mind Skill ……………………... 12 Theory of Mind and Acting……………………………… 16 Empathy …………………...…………………………………….. 24 Confounding Empathy and Theory of Mind…………….. 25 The Development of Empathy………………………….... 26 Empathy and Acting……………………………………… 28 Empathy and Emotion Regulation……………………….. 34 Emotion Regulation ……………………………………………… 35 The Development of Emotion Regulation ……………….. 35 Correlates of Emotion Regulation Skill…………………... 37 Emotion Regulation and Acting………………………….. 39 Dissertation Studies………………………………………………. 45 Chapter 3: Study 1 ………………………………………………………………… 48 Method…………………………………………………………….. 48 Participants ……………………………………………….. 48 Materials …………………………………………….......... 48 Procedure …………………………………………..…....... 54 Hypothesis……………………………………………………........ 54 Performances at Pretest……………………………………. 54 Change as a Function of Acting Training…………………. 56 Results……………………………………………………………... 57 Pretest……………………………………………………… 57 Posttest…………………………………………………….. 67 Discussion…………………………………………………………. 79 Chapter 4: Study 2 ………………………………………………………............... 83 Method…………………………………………………………….. 83 Participants ………………………………………………... 83 Overview of Class Activities……………………………… 84 i Coding……………………………………………………………... 85 Codes Used……………………………………………….. 85 Results & Discussion ………………….……………………..…... 95 Chapter 5: Study 3 ………………………………………………………............... 99 Method…………………………………………………………….. 99 Participants ……………………………………………….. 99 Materials …………………………………………….......... 99 Procedure …………………………………………..…....... 103 Results……………………………………………………………... 103 Pretest……………………………………………………... 103 Posttest…………………………………………………….. 109 Discussion…………………………………………………………. 116 Chapter 6: Study 4 ………………………………………………………............... 118 Method…………………………………………………………….. 118 Participants ………………………………………………... 118 Procedure………………………………………………….. 118 Overview of Class Activities……………………………… 119 Coding……………………………………………………………… 119 Results & Discussion ………………….……………………..…..... 126 Chapter 7: General Discussion……………………………………………............. 130 Differences Between Studies 1 and 3……………………………… 131 Differences Between Studies 2 and 4……………………………… 133