The Experience of Emotion in Adults

1. The Experience of Emotion in Adults Sarah L. Strout, Sarah E. Bush, & James D. Laird For 2nd Annual GSC Multidisciplinary Conference, Clark University March 31, 2004

2. Hypotheses Based on the assumptions of Self-Perception Theory • Participants identified as personal cuers will report on more physical aspects of an emotional experience • Participants identified as situational cuers will report on more situational aspects of an emotional experience.

3. What is Self-Perception Theory? Self-Perception Theory, based on William James’ theory of emotion (1890) shows that individuals can be separated into two groups based on the manner by which the person feels an emotion. • Personal cuers are happy because they smile and sad because they cry. • Situational cuers are sad because they understand that sadness is customary and appropriate when a family pet died and that happiness follows the receipt of a present.

4. Individual differences in the experience of emotion has been demonstrated in numerous studies through structured self-report scales or physiological response data. (i.e. Bresler & Laird, 1983; Comer, 1979; Duclos & Laird, 2001; Duncan & Laird, 1977; Flack, Laird, & Cavallaro, 1999; Kellerman & Laird, 1982; Laird, 1974; Laird & Berglas, 1975; Laird & Crosby, 1974 Laird, Kuvalanka, Grubstein, Kim, & Nagaraji, 1997)

5. The Current Study • The current study tested the hypothesis that situational and personal cuers would report on different aspects of an emotional experience by using an open-ended questionnaire. • Specifically, we hypothesized that situational cuers would report on situational aspects of the experience while personal cuers would report on physical aspects.

6. Method • Participants • 38 volunteers (25 females and 13 males) from Clark University and the community of Worcester. The ages of participants ranged from 18-46.

7. Method Open Ended Questionnaire • Included questions adapted from the MetaEmotion Interview (Katz & Gottman, 1994). • Participants were directed to choose two emotions (one positive, one negative) and to answer questions regarding that emotion.

8. Method Undisguised Facial Manipulation Procedure • Instructed participants to hold a facial expression (either a smile or a frown) for 10 seconds. The format of the questionnaire resulted in participants alternating between smiling and frowning. • After 10 seconds the participants were asked to report the strength of eight emotions (by placing an X on the line from Did not feel at all to Felt very strongly).

9. Method Coding Procedure • Two judges blind to cue response group coded the open-ended questionnaires by assigning a –1, 0, or +1 based on how much the participant’s responses focused on: • the situational aspects of the emotion experience (–1) • the physical, bodily aspects of the emotional experience (+1) • or discussed aspects of the emotional event that described neither the situation or the bodily reactions (0).

10. Results Two-way ANOVAs were performed with cue response group and sex as independent variables, but no main effects or interactions for sex were found, so data was collapsed into a t-test.

11. Results • The codes assigned to each question on the open-ended questionnaire were combined to form separate totals for the two emotions, positive and negative. • These scores were higher if the majority of the questions emphasized the bodily reactions and lower if the emphasis was on the situation.

12. Results • T-tests comparing personal and situational cuers on the three total scores on the open-ended questionnaires were significant. • The results for the Positive Emotion was significant, t (34.6) = 2.175, p= .037, with participants in the personal group reporting on more physical aspects of the emotion experience (M = 2.68, SD = 2.60). • The result was also significant for the Negative Emotion, t (36) = 3.586, p= .001, (M = 2.21, SD = 1.65). • The grand total of Positive and Negative Emotion was also significant, t (30.8) = 3.731, p = .001.

13. Means Table

14. Participants in the personal cue group were more likely to report on physical aspects of an emotional experience. Participants in the situational group are more likely to talk about the situational context of their emotion experiences. Discussion

15. Personal Cuer “YES, I TRY TO CALMMYSELF DOWN. I RELAX AND TAKE DEEP BREATHS.” Situational Cuer “NOT REALLY, IT IS AN EMOTION THAT WILL JUST COME ABOUT IN DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. AN EXAMPLE: BEING AFRAID OF NOT GETTING A PAPER DONE, EVEN IF I AM WORKING ON IT.” “Are there things that you do on a daily basis to make sure that you don’t feel this emotion (Fear)?”

16. Personal Cuer “MY EYES WOULD BE WIDE, MY EYES SCARED LOOKING I WOULD SHAKE AND CROUNCH IN A BALL, AND WOULD BE JUMPY” Situational Cuer “I WOULD LOOK CALM BUT SERIOUS “ “What would you look like, what would I see if I saw you feeling this emotion (fear)?”

17. Personal Cuer “MY HEART PUMPS, I GET SWEATY, MY BREATH GETS FASTER “ Situational Cuer “NOT REALLY” “Are there any particular physical feelings that go along with this emotion (anger)?”

18. Personal Cuer “TRIED TO FEEL THE EMOTION AND PICKED THE ONE I LIKED THE LEAST” Situational Cuer “NO ONE LIKES TO FEEL SHAME” “How did you arrive at the decision to choose this emotion (shame)?”

19. Implications • Suggests that not only do personal and situational cuers respond to different cues (as shown in previous research) but that they also focus on and talk about different aspects of the emotional experience • It seems that personal and situational cuers are focusing on (either consciously or unconsciously) the aspects of an experience that relate directly to their emotions.

20. Implications • Self-Perception Theory assumes that we infer our emotions in the same manner that others infer our emotions, from the situation and our expressions. • In this context, it makes sense that people would pay attention to information that is beneficial to themselves and not pay as much attention to information that does not assist the person

21. Limitations • Open-ended questionnaire limits responses. An interview would allow participants to expand and clarify their responses.

22. Thank You to Rosemarie Sokol for her help on the editing of this paper.