UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Echoing emotions: reactions to emotional displays in intergroup context van der Schalk, J. Publication date 2010 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): van der Schalk, J. (2010). Echoing emotions: reactions to emotional displays in intergroup context. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:29 Sep 2021 Chapter 5 General Discussion Chapter 5 General Discussion The current dissertation focuses on emotional contagion in intergroup contexts. A first aim of the studies was to show that reactions to emotions of others depend on the intergroup context and on social categorization processes. A second aim was to show that reactions to others’ emotions impact upon the relations between social groups. In the present research we investigated these processes by studying emotional reactions to others’ facial displays while manipulating the group identity of the other person. Summary of Main Findings The first set of studies showed that Dutch participants were better at recognizing emotions when displayed by North-European models, compared to Mediterranean models. This supports other research suggesting that there is an ingroup advantage in emotion recognition (e.g., Elfenbein & Ambady, 2002). These studies also revealed that participants had stronger approach and avoidance action tendencies in response to ingroup emotion displays. This finding indicates that individuals have stronger behavioral responses to emotions of the ingroup than to emotions of the outgroup, and also suggests that emotions of ingroup members are more relevant for observers than emotions of outgroup members. The findings of these studies therefore provide empirical support for the argument that individuals are more emotionally responsive to their fellow group members, compared to non-group members. We further demonstrated that observing emotional displays of ingroup members increased liking of these models, whereas observing the same displays of outgroup members decreased liking of these models. Previous research has also shown that expressing and sharing of emotions occurs more frequently with intimates (Clark, Fitness & Brisette, 2004; Rimé, Mesquita, Philippot, & Boca, 1991), and that sharing of both positive and negative emotions has a beneficial effect on the relationships between people. The findings of the current studies suggest that observation of others’ emotions indeed has a positive effect on the relationship between individuals, but only if they share group membership. The second set of studies more specifically investigated mimicry of perceived emotional displays. These studies showed that emotions of others are an emotion- eliciting event in itself. The nature of the emotional response depends on the relationship between expresser and observer. Ingroup emotional expressions of anger and fear were mimicked to a greater extent than outgroup emotional expressions of these emotions. 106 107 Chapter 5 General Discussion In the case of outgroup emotions, expressions of the outgroup evoked emotions that diverged from the emotions perceived. Participants reported fear in response to outgroup anger displays, and showed facial expressions of aversion in response to outgroup fear displays. Once again, these studies showed that individuals have differential reactions to others’ emotions depending on intergroup context, both at a behavioral and at an experiential level. The studies also replicated the finding that seeing ingroup emotion displays increases liking for ingroup members, whereas seeing outgroup emotional displays does not increase liking for outgroup members. Moreover, we found that mimicry of negative emotions mediated the increase in liking for the ingroup. This suggests that automatic behavioral responses to emotions of others improve the relationship between individuals that share group membership, but that lack of these behavioral responses work against the relationship between individuals that do not share group membership. This general finding did not hold for all emotions, however. The attenuation of emotional mimicry to outgroup displays was not found for emotional displays of happiness. This finding suggests that reactions to others’ emotions are not only determined by group membership, but also by the specific meaning of the emotion displayed. We suggest that happiness displays, even from outgroup members, can be disarming, and that such displays can therefore overcome group boundaries. This idea was further investigated in the final set of studies. We found that when individuals were reminded of their mortality, emotional contagion of outgroup happiness increased. Moreover, when individuals were reminded of death and viewed happiness displays, attitudes towards the outgroup became more positive. This suggests that reminders of death can increase the desire to affiliate and that when this desire is met by a happy display, individuals are more emotionally responsive to outgroup displays, and the relationship between non-group members improves. In contrast, when this desire is answered with an angry display, individuals are more emotionally responsive to ingroup displays, and the relation between non-group members deteriorates. In other words, emotional responsiveness to emotions of others is influenced by contextual and motivational factors. These findings also suggest that the bias towards outgroup- members in emotional bonding can be overcome when individuals are motivated to affiliate. 106 107 Chapter 5 General Discussion Intergroup Emotional Convergence and Divergence (IECD). The findings reported in this dissertation provide new insights into how individuals respond to emotions of others. People respond behaviorally and emotionally to emotional displays, but the nature of their response depends on the relationship that they have with the displayer. Specifically, group membership has a profound effect on behavioral and emotional responses. We introduce a new model that captures these findings, the Intergroup Emotional Convergence and Divergence (IECD) model (see Figure 5.1). The IECD model presumes that when emotional displays are perceived, the observer simultaneously judges the group membership of the displayer. Emotion and intergroup context then interact to determine behavior and feelings of the perceiver. Importantly, behavioral and emotional reactions to others’ displays can be convergent with or divergent from the emotion displayed. At the behavioral level, convergence results in mimicry of facial display (e.g., frowning in response to anger displays), and 160divergence Chapter 5: Generalresults Discussion in behavioral contrast (e.g., pulling up the upper lip in response to Convergence (mimicry) Facial Behavior Intergroup context Divergence (contrast) Emotion Convergence (contagion) Feeling Divergence Figure 5.1. Model for Intergroup Emotional Convergence and Divergence (IECD). Emotion perception and intergroup context interact to determine facial behavior and feeling. Reactions to others’ emotions can be convergent and divergent, and occur both at the behavioral and the experiential level. 108 109 Chapter 5 General Discussion fear displays). At the emotional level, convergence results in emotional contagion (e.g., ‘catching’ the anger of another person), and divergence results in the experience of contrasting emotions (e.g., aversion in response to fear displays). In general, individuals converge towards emotions of the ingroup, whereas they diverge from emotions of the outgroup. The specific emotion that is displayed, however, also influences whether people converge or diverge. When emotions signal affiliation (e.g., happiness), the perceiver may converge to the display, independent of group membership of the displayer. In this way, emotion and intergroup context interact on behavioral and emotional reactions to displays. This pattern fits with the social functions of emotions, in terms of affiliation and distancing. According to Fischer and Manstead (2008) emotions are functional because they help the individual to overcome social problems. In a social world, emotions help to form and maintain relationships, or to establish social positions by creating distance between individuals. Based on our findings, we argue that reactions to emotions have similar functions. Specifically, we argue that that emotional convergence serves an affiliating function, and that emotional divergence serves a distancing function. By converging emotionally, individuals increase understanding for the other person and express support. In this way, the emotional bond between individuals is maintained or enhanced. By diverging,