Lily Thom
Matsumoto defines culture as a sociopsychological construct that encompasses not only nationality or ethnicity but also gender and language experiences. Thus, we can look at all the articles from this week as studies in cross-cultural psychology. Barrett et al’s work from last week can provide an interesting backdrop for examining cross-cultural studies on emotion. Barrett’s concept of emotional granularity could be extended to consider cultural, or gendered granularity of emotion. In the variety of studies on language and gender what Barrett saw as mental representations of emotion may also be cultural representations. People of difference cultures, using different languages experience different emotional states or emotional intensity. This goes beyond just display rules. We see differences in brain activation, electrodermal reactions, language for emotions, and differences in expression and recognition.
Both Wager and Matsumoto approach gender as a cultural difference. The Wager study shows that men have greater brain activation in response to violence and aggression and points to enculturation as a main reason. It is interesting to compare this study to some of the many studies Matsumoto cites on cultures with varying differences in individualism, masculinity and power distance. Within cultures, these dimensions may apply very differently to men and women. For example, American culture may encourage women to sacrifice individual goals more than men. Matsumoto shows that individualism is positively correlated with intensity ratings of anger and fear. I wonder if there is a connection between this outcome and that from Wager’s study in terms of how gender and culture interconnect.
Harris et al examine language learning as both a cognitive and emotional process and introduce the “emotional context of learning” theory to explain why first languages are often more emotional than second languages. Harris et al’s work can be considered in the context of Barrett’s work on the role of memory in emotional processing. Language is deeply connected with emotional memory and context in evoking emotions. Harris et al examine the ideas that early language learning is more closely related to emotional or visceral meaning making. First languages develop simultaneous to emotional regulation systems, contributing to a deeply emotional context. However, a striking counter example is that of parents who raise children and have deeply interpersonal interactions using their second language. In such cases, this emotional context overrides the emotional context of early language.
Considering cultural or mental representations of emotion lead me again to wonder about the function of emotion, something we have only touched upon in class. Niiya et al show that humans have the capacity to experience emotions that may not be named or recognized in their own culture. Yes still we see an astounding variability in emotional experience, both within and across cultures. Niiya et al recognize that emphasizing Amae in one cultural environment serves to reinforce and strengthen the culture. Whereas in a more invidualistic culture Amae does not have a socializing function and, therefore, is not emphasized. What biological purposes do such variability and flexibility provide? How do cultural or language barriers limit this emotional range and why? What biological purpose might there be to these limitations?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I thought the idea of culturally unique emotion pretty interesting. I suppose I've always been one to generalize about human emotion and reading about it in the context of gender and culture guided me to think about things differently. I have always been aware of the emotional differences between genders but I think it is important to consider something that Wager and Ochsner bring up and that is reporting style. I think it is easy to attribute differences in reporting style to socialization and gender roles. However, with the use of brain imaging technology distinct brain activation differences between men and women can confirm certain emotion qualities. Matsumoto also brought up something very intriguing about bilingualism and the idea of dual perception that can effect personality. Therefore, a bilingual person may experience things in different ways depending on the language/culture they are identifying with.
Something that really sparked my interest about the Matsumoto article is his questioning of the application of the term "culture" to large groups of people who, though living within the same country or belonging to the same racial or ethnic group, may be vastly different from one another and thus defy such broad categorization. He speaks specifically of the wide diversity of responses of people who identify as American to questions regarding affect intensity, display rules, etc., and I agree with his urging for research not to assume that all those who may be part of a particular cultural group subscribe, conform, or even have full access to the guidelines and values of the "primary" members of that group. Although it is often useful to identify a "mainstream" element of a culture so that broader questions can be asked, it is important too not to let these generalizations cloud our understanding that a group is made up of individuals, and that individual differences are worth devoting some time and attention to as well.
Post a Comment