Cross-cultural Perception of Emotional Expressions and the Social Relations Model

1. Cross-cultural Perception of Emotional Expressionsand the Social Relations Model Hillary Anger Elfenbein University of California, Berkeley Special thanks to Jennifer Boldry

2. Overview • Emotional intelligence and emotion recognition • Communicating via emotion is inherently relational • Need to look beyond individual differences • Accuracy due as much to emotional fit as individual emotional skill • Empirical research on cross-cultural perception • Meta-analysis • Block round-robin design using SRM • Future directions

3. Science of Emotional Intelligence • “The accurate appraisal and expression of emotions in oneself and others and the regulation of emotion in a way that enhances living” —Mayer, DiPaolo & Salovey (1990) • Difficulty validating claims • Low reliability and low validity(Ciarrochi, et al., 2000; Davies, et al.,1998; Roberts, et al., 2001) • Strongly correlated with personality • One exception: emotion recognition • Accuracy in understanding others’ emotions • Emotion provides usable information • Not paper-and-pencil

4. Communicating via Emotion • However, recognizing emotion is just one side of the story... • Communication involves a message sent and received EXPRESSION Expressor Perceiver RECOGNITION • Expression and recognition skills both part of EI but essentially independent (Rosenthal et al., 1979; Zajonc, 1998)

5. Who is Observing Whom Matters • Emotional accuracy is not merely an “intelligence” • Expressive styles can vary • Easier to understand familiar styles • Idiosyncratic match with interaction partner is also important • Hypothesis: Significant variance in accuracy is explained by the statistical interaction between the expressor and perceiver, controlling for main effects (in SRM terms, there are relationship effects)

6. Emotion is Largely Universal • Emotion evolved across species as a mechanism to signal internal states Is this monkey having a good day?

7. Universality, Continued • Apparently not a very good day • Context can serve as evidence Source: The Straits Times, Singapore, 9/4/2002

8. A Dialect Theory of Emotion • Emotional expression is a universal language • However, subtle dialects can across cultures • Differ more with greater physical or cultural distance • With exposure, we can learn new dialects It matters who is judging whom Culture A Specific Affect Program Universal Affect Program Culture B Specific Affect Program Sources: Elfenbein & Ambady (2003). Current Directions in Psych. Science. Elfenbein, Beaupre, Levesque, & Hess (2007). Emotion.

9. Cultural In-group Advantage • Greater accuracy for in-group vs. out-group • Meta-analysis of 87 studies with 184 comparisons • Over 21,000 total participants • In-group advantage M=9.3% (r = .55, p<10-14) • About one-quarter of the range (~50%-90%) • Effect robust across many methods • Effect decreased with greater cultural exposure • Greater physical proximity or telephone traffic • Living together within same nation, although minority groups better at overcoming advantage Source: Elfenbein & Ambady (2002). Psychological Bulletin.

10. Block Round-Robin Design “I” = in-group judgments; “O” = out-group judgments; “-” = deleted self-judgments Source: Boldry & Kashy (1999). JPSP.

11. Major social groups in Singapore • Chinese (77%), Malay (14%) • Remainder Indian and other groups • Extensive cross-group contact is mandated • 80% live in integrated government housing • However, assimilation is discouraged by policies to preserve each group’s cultural heritage • Comparable along other demographics • SES, education, urban vs. rural, etc. • Chinese and Malays in Singapore

12. Express emotions then judge all others’ expressions • 2 judgments x 7 states(angry, fearful, disgusted, happy, neutral, sad, surprised) • 24-person design generated 7,728 data points • Partition accuracy into components using the Social Relations Model(Kenny & LaVoie, 1985) • Individual differences in expression & recognition • Relationship/dyad effects: Some dyads are systematically more or less accurate than individual-level skills would predict • Methods and Analysis Source: Elfenbein, Foo, Boldry, & Tan (2006). Cognition & Emotion.

13. Individual differences matter in predicting accuracy… • …but the idiosyncratic combination of expressor and perceiver matters as much as recognition skill • Emotional “intelligence” lives partly in the dyad • Potential power of theoretically untapped domain • It Matters Who is Observing Whom Source: Elfenbein, Foo, Boldry, & Tan (2006). Cognition & Emotion.

14. Dyadic effects within-cultures, not just in-group advantage • Suggestive small positive trend of reciprocity • Intriguing trend of cross-group vs. within-group variance • High status groups see own group as more diverse, but low status groups do not (Boldry & Kashy, 1999) • Or greater expressiveness variation among Chinese • Examining Each Quadrant Separately Source: Elfenbein, Foo, Boldry, & Tan (2006). Cognition & Emotion.

15. Future Directions • Test differences in variance in block-round robin • Sufficient numbers needed to run 2x2 ANOVA on each variance component • ~8 complete rounds • Underway in India using distinct regional groups • FACS coding to distinguish explanations of perception vs. stimuli differences • Test mechanism of expressive “fit” within cultures • Indirect evidence: positive reciprocity • Direct evidence: new data set to be FACS coded