anger and disgust. angerrrrrrr!  video video  start around :45 seconds  what are the events...

Download Anger and Disgust. ANGERRRRRRR!  Video Video  Start around :45 seconds  What are the events that make us angry?

Post on 13-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents

1 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Slide 1

Anger and Disgust Slide 2 ANGERRRRRRR! Video Video Start around :45 seconds What are the events that make us angry? Slide 3 Top 9 Things that make people angry (at least in the U.K.) People who smell Rude shop assistants Foreign call centers Stepping in dog poo People driving close behind you People who cough without covering their mouths People who eat with their mouth open Slow internet connections Poor customer service Slide 4 Angers 4 Components Physiology: SNS Activation Brain Areas: amygdala, prefrontal cortex Subjective Feelings: high arousal, high unpleasantness Appraisals: goal obstruction, controllability, unpleasantness Behavior: Approach and Facial Expression Slide 5 Todays Outline Distinct Emotions Looking for universality. Classic Appraisal Theories Strain Theory Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Are appraisals necessary? Frustration, Closeness in Time, External Causation Recent Appraisal Theories Cognitive Neoassociationistic Model of Anger General Model of Affective Aggression Slide 6 Basic Emotions Universal Facial Expressions Brow Lowerer Upper Lid Raiser Lid Tightener Lip Tightener Slide 7 (Scherer, 1997) Basic Emotions Universal Cognitive Appraisals? Slide 8 Two Classic Theories of Anger Strain Theory (Cloward & Ohlin; Merton, 1957) Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) Slide 9 Strain Theory Social system prevents people from attaining economic and social goals This causes anger and crime Relative, Deprivation (not absolute deprivation) (Cloward & Ohlin; Merton, 1957) Slide 10 Dollards (Yale Approach) Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Frustration: an unexpected external blockage of an anticipated goal attainment Aggression: in response to blocked goal, an action in which the goal is to injure another (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) Slide 11 Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Perception that we are being prevented from obtaining a goal increases the probability of anger and aggression. (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) FrustrationAggression Slide 12 F-A Hypothesis: What determines intensity of aggression? Strength of drive that was blocked Degree of interference Number of times experience the frustration The Angry Elf The Angry Elf (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) Slide 13 F-A Hypothesis: Direct or Displaced Aggression Direct: anger directed toward source of frustration Displaced: anger directed toward lower status target Lynchings and Cotton Prices, r = -.72 (Hovland & Sears, 1940; Green, Glaser, & Rich, 1988) Stressors and child abuse (Straus, 1980; Berkowitz, 2003) (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) Slide 14 Criticisms of Dollards F-A Hypothesis Focused on hostile (emotional) aggression Instrumental Aggression All aggression does not stem from frustration The goal of aggression is not always to inflict harm Not every frustration causes anger Goal obstruction is not the only appraisal External, Closeness in Time, Unfairness Slide 15 Modifications to F-A Hypothesis Its not just frustration! Weiner (1985) Lazarus et al. (1970) Berkowitz (1989) Aversive Event Negative affect Anger Aversive Event Intentional Controllable Anger Aversive Event Threat to well-being Anger Slide 16 Appraisals Cause Anger butare they necessary? Frustration / Goal Obstruction Closeness in Time External Cause Slide 17 Not every frustration causes anger Justified Frustration condition Confederates interference legitimate (i.e., hearing defect) NonJustified Frustration Condition Confederates interference not legitimate (i.e., no hearing defect) No Frustration Control Condition End of Study: Participants evaluated confederate in 3 formats Public evaluation in front of group Private Self-report, with punishment Private Self-report, without punishment (Burnstein & Worchel, 1962) Slide 18 % Participants who rejected confederate Not Justified Justified (hearing defect) No Frustration (Control) Public Rejection with punishment 29%0% Private Rejection with punishment 100%27%0% Private Rejection w/o punishment 100%50%0% (Burnstein & Worchel, 1962) Slide 19 Find a lineThen, cut in front of the last and the first person. Last Person First Person Behavior changes? Subjective feelings? Physiological changes? Emotion? Behavior changes? Subjective feelings? Physiological changes? Emotion? How did the emotion components vary for the person last in line versus the second in line? Slide 20 Closeness in Time -Goal-Gradient PrincipleGoal-Gradient Principle Experimenter deliberately cut into line Manipulation #1: Person was at front or rear of line Assumptions for people at front of line Subjects in front more aggressive WHY? (Harris, 1974) Slide 21 Is an External Cause Required? Many say Yes! An external event must be perceived of causing the offense Dollard, Lazarus, Appraisal Theorists Some say No! Anger can be caused even when we do not perceive an external entity as the cause of the offense. Ex: headaches, pain People who attribute failure to the self, report anger Berkowitz, Anderson Slide 22 Is an External Cause Required? Ps worked on a jigsaw puzzle in the presence of a confederate posed as a participant Manipulation #1: Group 1: confederate disturbed participants (external cause) Group 2: puzzle unsolvable (internal cause) Group 3: control, nonfrustrated DV: Later, participants given opportunity to shock confederates (similar to Milgrams study) Results by Greatest Level of Shocks: Group 1, 2, 3 Slide 23 Is an External Cause Required? Can we be angry toward ourselves? Shame Elicited by negative judgment of entire self Positively correlated with anger indices Guilt Elicited by bad act Negatively correlated with anger indices Slide 24 Two Recent Models of Anger Cognitive Neoassociationistic Model of Anger (CNA; Berkowtiz, 1989) Focuses on Negative Affect General Model of Affective Aggression (Anderson, 1995) Primary Appraisals (quick, automatic) Secondary Appraisals (slower, conscious) Slide 25 Berkowitzs Modifications to F-A Hypothesis More unpleasant conditions, greater anger Lab and Naturalistic Studies After goal blocked, pleasant experiences reduce aggression NA greatest predictor of anger (beyond controllability and intentionality) Aversive Negative affect Anger / Aggression Slide 26 Cognitive Neoassociationistic Model of Anger (CNA; Berkowtiz, 1989) Associative Network links following components together Feelings Thoughts Memories Behavioral reactions, including facial expressions Physiological reactions Aggressive cues in situation Activation of one component in network leads to activation of remaining components We experience associative networks for fear and anger at the same time! Slide 27 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 28 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Unpleasantness is the only cognitive appraisal! Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 29 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Approach and avoidance tendencies activated at same time Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 30 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Genetics, past learning, and situational influences determine strength of each tendency Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 31 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Basic feelings of anger and fear not completely developed emotions! Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 32 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Appraisals, social norms, expected consequences determine anger OR fear Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 33 AVERSIVE EVENTNEGATIVE AFFECT AGGRESSION-RELATED TENDENCIES ESCAPE-RELATED TENDENCIES RUDIMENTARY ANGER (blends of feelings, irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER FEAR Differentiation, intensification, suppression of rudimentary experiences Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Differentiated Feelings Slide 34 Pushed off bike Appraise as unpleasant/painful Thoughts about aggression, memories about fighting, increase in arousal, angry face Thoughts about fleeing, memories of being hurt, increase in arousal, fear face RUDIMENTARY ANGER (irritation-annoyance-anger) RUDIMENTARY FEAR IRRITATION OR ANNOYANCE OR ANGER N/A Higher-Order, Controlled Processing Lower-Order, Automatic Processing Differentiated Feelings Example Slide 35 Pushed off bike Appraise as unpleasant/painful Thoughts about aggress