One of science's greatest intellects examines how people and animals display fear, anger, and pleasure. Darwin based this 1872 study on his personal observations, which anticipated later findings in neuroscience. Abounding in anecdotes and literary quotations, the book is illustrated with 21 figures and seven photographic plates. Its direct approach, accessible to professionals and amateurs alike, continues to inspire and inform modern research in psychology.

We tested the hypothesis that “good feelings”—the central element of subjective well-being—are associated with interdependence and interpersonal engagement of the self in Japan, but with independence and interpersonal disengagement of the self in the United States. Japanese and American college students (total N = 913) reported how frequently they experienced various emotional states in daily life. In support of the hypothesis, the reported frequency of general positive emotions (e.g. calm, elated) was most closely associated with the reported frequency of interpersonally (...) engaged positive emotions (e.g. friendly feelings) in Japan, but with the reported frequency of interpersonally disengaged positive emotions (e.g. pride) in the United States. Further, for Americans the reported frequency of experience was considerably higher for positive emotions than for negative emotions, but for Japanese it was higher for engaged emotions than for disengaged emotions. Implications for cultural constructions of emotion in general and subjective well-being in particular are discussed. (shrink)

A meta-analysis of 190 cross-cultural emotion studies, published between 1967 and 2000, was performed to examine (1) to what extent reported cross-cultural differences in emotion variables could be regarded as valid (substantive factors) or as method-related (statistical artefacts, cultural bias), and (2) which country characteristics could explain valid cross-cultural differences in emotion. The relative contribution of substantive and method-related factors at sample, study, and country level was investigated and country-level explanations for differences in emotions were tested. Results indicate that a (...) correction for statistical artefacts and method-related factors reduced the observed cross-cultural effect sizes considerably. After controlling for valence (positive vs. negative emotions) and kind of study (self-report vs. recognition studies), the remaining cross-cultural variance was associated with subsistence mode, political system, values, and religiosity. Values explained more variance than did ecological or sociopolitical variables. It was concluded that both method-related factors (13.8% of variance explained) and culture-level factors (27.9% of variance explained) underlie observed cross-cultural differences. (shrink)

Cultural differences in daily emotions were investigated by administering emotion questionnaires four times a day throughout a one-week period. Respondents were American students, Japanese students living in the United States, and Japanese students living in Japan. Americans rated their emotional lives as more pleasant than did the Japanese groups. The dimension of emotional pleasantness (unpleasant-pleasant) was predicted better by interdependent than independent concerns in the Japanese groups, but this was not the case in the American group where the variance predicted (...) by interdependent and independent concerns did not significantly differ. It is argued that cultural differences in the concerns most strongly associated with pleasantness are related to differences in ideals, norms, and practices of what it means to be a person. Cultural differences in the concerns are assumed to implicate differences in the nature of emotional experience. (shrink)

In the present research we investigated gender-specific beliefs about emotional behaviour. In Study 1, 180 respondents rated the extent to which they agreed with different types of beliefs (prescriptive, descriptive, stereotypical, and contra-stereotypical) regarding the emotional behaviour of men and women. As anticipated, respondents agreed more with descriptive than with prescriptive beliefs, and more with stereotypical than with contra-stereotypical beliefs. However, respondents agreed more with stereotypical beliefs about the emotional behaviour of women than with those about men. These results were (...) replicated in Study 2 with a sample of 75 students and 80 nonstudents. In Study 3, a sample of 279 respondents rated the extent of agreement with the same items, this time with respect to then own emotional behaviour. A similar pattern of results was obtained, although agreement rates were higher than in Study 1 and 2. (shrink)

The present study examined the effects of gender on the emotional responses (physiology, self-reports of emotion, and emotional facial behaviour) of European Americans (EA) and Hmong Americans (HA) while they relived past emotional events. Women were more emotionally reactive than men: They demonstrated greater changes in electrodermal reactivity overall, reported experiencing more intense emotion while reliving anger and love, and smiled more while reliving happiness and love. The pattern and magnitude of these differences were similar for EA and HA, suggesting (...) that to some degree, the effects of gender on emotional response may hold across ethnic groups. (shrink)

Actual anger response styles during anger encounters may well diverge from self-reported habitual anger response styles, such as anger - in, anger - out, or anger control. Also, the relationship of actual anger response styles to broad personality traits is not well known. We obtained anger self - reports, physiological reactivity (diastolic blood pressure, skin temperature at the forehead, and EMG extensor digitorum), and ratings of facial anger expression, and defined actual anger response style dimensions of “intensity”, “suppression”, “repression”, and (...) “denial” as particular patterns of discrepancies among these responses. A total of 80 female subjects were randomly assigned to a treatment (Tr) and a control (Co) group. Anger was induced through real - life provocations. Compared to Co, Tr subjects showed larger physiological responses and reported more anger. Habitual anger response styles did not predict actual styles, whereas extraversion and neuroticism did. Control subjects scoring low on extraversion or high on neuroticism reacted with high denial, that is, with stronger physiological and behavioural than experiential anger, whereas the opposite pattern of low denial was found for treatment subjects low on extraversion or high on neuroticism. These results suggest that both the particular situation and broad but not narrow personality traits exert an influence on actual anger response styles. (shrink)