08 - Motivation and Emotion
ENDURING ISSUES IN MOTIVATION AND EMOTION
The heart of this chapter concerns the ways in which motives and emotions affect behavior and are affected by the external environment (Person-Situation). While discussing those key issues, we will explore the question of whether motives and emotions are inborn or acquired (Nature-Nurture) and whether they change significantly over the life span (Stability-Change). We will also consider the extent to which individuals differ in their motives and emotions (Diversity-Universality) and the ways in which motives and emotions arise from and, in turn, affect biological processes (Mind-Body).
PERSPECTIVES ON MOTIVATION
Instincts
Early in the 20th century, psychologists often attributed behavior to instincts - specific, inborn behavior patterns characteristic of an entire species. In 1890, William James compiled a list of human instincts that included hunting, rivalry, fear, curiosity, shyness, love, shame, and resentment. But by the 1920s, instinct theory began to fall out of favor as an explanation of human behavior for three reasons: (1) Most important human behavior is learned; (2) human behavior is rarely rigid, inflexible, unchanging, and found throughout the species, as is the case with instincts; and (3) ascribing every conceivable human behavior to a corresponding instinct explains nothing (calling a person's propensity to be alone an "antisocial instinct," for example, merely names the behavior without pinpointing its origins).
Drive-Reduction Theory
An alternative view of motivation holds that bodily needs (such as the need for food or the need for water) create a state of tension or arousal called a drive (such as hunger or thirst). According to drive-reduction theory, motivated behavior is an attempt to reduce this unpleasant state of tension in the body and to return the body to a state of homeostasis, or balance. When we are hungry, we look for food to reduce the hunger drive. When we are tired, we find a place to rest.
According to drive-reduction theory, drives can generally be divided into two categories. Primary drives are unlearned, are found in all animals (including humans), and motivate behavior that is vital to the survival of the individual or species. Primary drives include hunger, thirst, and sex. Secondary drives are acquired through learning. For instance, no one is born with a drive to acquire great wealth, yet many people are motivated by money.
Arousal Theory
Drive-reduction theory is appealing, but it cannot explain all kinds of behavior. It implies, for example, that once drives are reduced, people will do little. They would literally have no motivation. Yet this is obviously not the case. People work, play, do Sudoku puzzles, and do many other things for which there is no known drive that needs to be reduced.
Arousal theory suggests that each of us has an optimum level of arousal that varies over the course of the day and from one situation to another. According to this view, behavior is motivated by the desire to maintain the optimum level of arousal for a given moment. Sometimes, as envisioned in drive-reduction theory, that may call for reducing the level of arousal. But other times, behavior appears to be motivated by a desire to increase the state of arousal. For example, when you are bored, you may turn on the television, take a walk, or check for text messages.
Interestingly, overall level of arousal affects performance in different situations but psychologists agree that there is no "best" level of arousal necessary to perform all tasks (Gray, Braver, & Raichle, 2002). Rather, it is largely a question of degree, The Yerkes-Dodson law puts it this way: The more complex the task, the lower the level of arousal that can be tolerated without interfering with performances (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908/2007). Thus, to perform optimally on a simple task, you may need to increase your level of arousal. Conversely, you may need to reduce your level of arousal to perform well on a complex task.
Arousal theory has some advantages over drive-reduction theory, but neither one can readily account for some kinds of behavior. For example, many people today participate in activities that are stimulating in the extreme: rock climbing, skydiving, bungee jumping, kitesurfing, and hang gliding. Such thrill-seeking activities do not seem to be drive-reducing and do not seem to be done in pursuit of an optimal level of arousal. Zuckerman (2007a) accounts for such activities by suggesting that sensation seeking is itself a basic motivation, at least some aspects of which are inherited and neurologically based (Joseph, Liu, Jiang, Lynam, & Kelly, 2009; Zuckerman, 2009). In general, high-sensation seekers, compared to low sensation-seekers, are more likely to
prefer dangerous sports (Eachus, 2004; Goma-I-Freixanet, Martha, & Muro, 2012; Zuckerman, 2007b);
choose vocations that involve an element of risk and excitement (Zuckerman, 2006);
smoke, drink heavily, gamble, and use illicit drugs (Barrault & Varescon, 2013; Ersche, Turton, Pradhan, Bullmore, & Robbins, 2010; Gurpegui et al., 2007); engage in unsafe driving (Bachoo, Bhagwanjee, & Govender, 2013; S. L. Pederson & McCarthy, 2008);
have more sexual partners and engage in more varied and dangerous sexual activities (Berg, 2008; Cohen, 2008; Oshri, Tubman, Morgan-Lopez, Saavedra, & Csizmadia, 2013); and
be classified in school as delinquent or hyperactive (though not more aggressive) (Ang & Woo, 2003; Modecki, 2008)
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
Some psychologists further distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation provided by an activity itself. Children climb trees, finger paint, and play games for no other reason than the fun they get from the activity itself. In the same way, adults may solve crossword puzzles, play a musical instrument, or tinker in a workshop largely for the enjoyment they get from the activity. Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation that derives from the consequences of an activity. For example, a child may do chores not because he enjoys them but because doing so earns an allowance, and an adult who plays a musical instrument may do so to earn some extra money.
Whether behavior is intrinsically or extrinsically motivated can have important consequences (Deci & Ryan, 2008). For example, if parents offer a reward to their young daughter for writing to her grandparents, the likelihood of her writing to them when rewards can no longer available may actually decrease. One analysis of some 128 studies that examined the effect of intrinsic rewards on the behavior of children, adolescents, and adults found that when extrinsic rewards are offered for a behavior, intrinsic motivation and a sense of personal responsibility for that behavior are likely to decrease, at least for a short time (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999, 2001). However, unexpected (as opposed to contractual) rewards do not necessarily reduce intrinsic motivation, and positive feedback (including praise) may actually increase intrinsic motivation (Reiss, 2005). For example, one study showed that rewarding small children for eating vegetables they initially disliked resulted in the children consuming more of the vegetables and reporting that they liked them more (Cooke, 2011).
A Hierarchy of Motives
Humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow (1954) arranged motives in a hierarchy, from lower to higher. The lower motives spring from physiological needs that must be satisfied. As we move higher in Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the motives have more subtle origins: the desire to live as safely as possible, to connect meaningfully with other human beings, and to make the best possible impression on others. Maslow believed that the highest motive in the hierarchy is self-actualization - the drive to realize one's full potential. According to Maslow's theory, higher motives emerge only after the more basic ones have been largely satisfied: A person who is starving doesn't care what people think of her table manners.
Maslow's model offers an appealing way to organize a wide range of motives into a coherent structure. But recent research challenges the universality of his views. In many societies, people live on the very edge of survival, yet they form strong and meaningful social ties and possess a firm sense of self-esteem (E. Hoffman, 2008; Wubbolding, 2005). As a result of such research findings, many psychologists now view Maslow's model with a measure of skepticism although it continues to be a convenient way to think of the wide range of human motives.
HUNGER AND THIRST
When you are hungry, you eat. If you don't eat, your need for food will increase but your hunger will come and go. Moreover, shortly after lunch when you have no need for further food, if you pass a bakery and smell baked goods, you may crave a donut or a scone. In other words, the psychological state of hunger is not the same as the biological need for food, although that need often sets the psychological state in motion.
Thirst also is stimulated by both internal and external cues. Internally, thirst is controlled by two regulators that monitor the level of fluids inside and outside the cells. But we may also become thirsty just seeing a TV commercial featuring people savoring tall, cool drinks in a lush, tropical setting. Even what we thirst for can be influenced by what we see. One study showed, for example, that women watching a movie with commercials advertising sweetened soda were more likely to consume soda during movie breaks than were women who viewed commercials advertising water (Koordeman, Anschutz, van Baaren, & Engels, 2010).
Biological and Emotional Factors
Early research identified two regions in the hypothalamus that served as a kind of "switch" that turned eating on or off. When one of these centers was stimulated, animals began to eat; and when it was destroyed, the animals stopped eating to the point of starvation. When the second region was stimulated, animals stopped eating; when it was destroyed, animals ate to the point of extreme obesity. However, recent studies have challenged this simple "on-off" explanation for the control of eating by showing that a number of other areas of the brain are also involved in regulating food intake including regions of the cerebrum, amygdala, the insula, and the spinal cord (Garavan, 2010; Sternson, Betley, & Cao, 2013; Siep et al., 2009).
How do these various areas of the brain know when to stimulate hunger? It turns out that the brain monitors the blood levels of glucose (a simple sugar used by the body for energy), fats, carbohydrates, and the hormone insulin. Changes in the levels of these substances signal the need for food. In addition, fat cells within our body produce the hormone leptin, which travels in the bloodstream and is sensed by the hypothalamus. High levels of leptin signal the brain to reduce appetite, or to increase the rate at which fat is burned.
The brain also monitors the amount of food that you have eaten. Specialized cells in the stomach and the upper part of the small intestine sense the volume of food in the digestive system. When only a small quantity of food is present, these cells release a hormone called ghrelin into the bloodstream. Ghrelin travels to the brain where it stimulates appetite and focuses our thoughts and imagination on food (Faulconbridge, 2008; Langlois et al., 2011).
But, the biological need for food is not the only thing that can trigger the experience of hunger. For example, a single night of sleep deprivation can leave one feeling hungry by increasing ghrelin levels and decreasing leptin levels (Schmid, Hallschmid, Jauch-Chara, Born, & Schultes, 2008). Moreover, the mere sight, smell, or thought of food causes an increase in insulin production, which, in turn, lowers glucose levels in the body's cells, mirroring the body's response to a physical need for food (Logue, 2000; van der Laan, de Ridder, Viergever, & Smeets, 2011). Thus, the aroma from a nearby restaurant may serve as more than an incentive to eat; it may actually cause the body to react as though there is a real biological need for food. Most Americans eat three meals a day at fairly regularly intervals. Numerous studies with both humans and animals have shown that regularly eating at particular times during the day leads to the release at those times of the hormones and neurotransmitters that cause hunger (Woods, Schwartz, Baskin, & Seeley, 2000). In other words, we get hungry around noon partly because the body "learns" that if it's noon, it's time to eat.
Eating Disorders and Obesity
Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa.
"When people told me I looked like someone from Auschwitz [the Nazi concentration camp], I thought that was the highest compliment anyone could give me." This confession comes from a young woman who as a teenager suffered from a serious eating disorder known as anorexia nervosa. She was 18 years old, 5 feet 3 inches tall, and weighted 68 pounds. This young woman was lucky. She managed to overcome the disorder and has since maintained normal body weight. Many others are less fortunate. In fact, researchers have found that over 10% of the young women with anorexia nervosa die as a result of the disorder, one of the highest fatality rates for psychiatric disorders affecting young females (Birmingham, Su, Hlynsky, Goldner, & Gao, 2005; Huas, 2011).
The following symptoms are used in the diagnoses of anorexia nervosa (American Psychiatric Association, 2013)
Intense fear of becoming obese, which does not diminish as weight loss progresses
Disturbance of body image (for example, claiming to "feel fat" even when emaciated)
Refusal to maintain body weight at or above a minimal normal weight for age and height
Approximately 1% of all adolescents suffer from anorexia nervosa; about 90% of these are White upper- or middle-class females (Bulik et al., 2006).
Anorexia is frequently compounded by another eating disorder known as bulimia nervosa (Herpertz-Dahlmann, 2009). The following criteria are used for its diagnosis (American Psychiatric Association, 2013):
Recurrent episodes of binge eating (rapid consumption of a large amount of food, usually in less than 2 hours) accompanied by a lack of control while eating during the episode
Recurrent inappropriate behaviors to try to prevent weight gain, such as self-induced vomiting or misuse of laxatives
Binge eating and compensatory behaviors occurring at least once a week for three months
Body shape and weight excessively influencing a person's self-image
Occurrence of the just-mentioned behaviors at least sometimes in the absence of anorexia
Approximately 1 to 2% of all adolescent females suffer from bulimia nervosa, though some evidence suggests this number may be decreasing (Keel, Heatherton, Dorer, Joiner, & Zalta, 2006). Once again, the socioeconomic group at highest risk for bulimia is upper-middle- and upper-class women.
Although anorexia and bulimia are much more prevalent among females than males (Gleaves, Miller, Williams, & Summers, 2000; S. Turnbull, Ward, Treasure, Jick, & Derby, 1996), many more men are affected by these disorders than was once suspected (Gila, Castro, & Cesena, 2005). Both men and women with eating disorders are preoccupied with body image, but men are not necessarily obsessed with losing weight (Ey, 2010; Ousley, Cordero, & White, 2008). For example, a related phenomenon called muscle dysmorphia appears to be on the increase among young men (Olivardia, 2007; Woodruff, 2014). Muscle dysmorphia is an obsessive concern concern with one's muscle size. Men with muscle dysmorphia, many of whom are well-muscled, are nonetheless distressed at their perceived puniness, and spend an inordinate amount of time fretting over their diet and exercising to increase their muscle mass (Murray, Rieger, Karlov, & Touyz, 2013; C. G. Pope, Pope, & Menard, 2005).
Little is known about the factors that contribute to eating disorders among men (Crosscope-Happel, 2005), though research has shown that muscle dysmorphia is associated with low self-esteem and having been bullied as a child (Boyda & Shevlin, 2011; Wolke & Sapouna, 2008).. We know considerably more about the factors that contribute to eating disorders in women (Garner & Magana, 2006). On one hand, mass media promote the idea that a woman must be thin to be attractive. In addition, women with bulimia commonly have low self-esteem, are hypersensitive to social interactions, and are more likely to come from families where negative comments are often made about weight (Crowther, Kichler, Sherwood, & Kuhnert, 2002; Zonnevylle-Bender et al., 2004). Many also display clinical depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder and have engaged in self-injurious behaviors such as cutting themselves (Herpertz-Dahlmann, 2009). Finally, there is growing evidence that genetics plays a significant role in both anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa (Helder & Collier, 2011; Slof-Op't Landt et al., 2013).
Anorexia and bulimia are notoriously hard to treat, and there is considerable disagreement on the most effective approach to therapy (G. T. Wilson, Grilo, & Vitousek, 2007; Yager, 2008). However, research suggests multimodal treatment approaches that draw upon nutritional counseling, individual therapy, family therapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and mindful mediation may be most effective (Herpertz-Dahlmann & Salbach-Andrae, 2009; Lenz, Taylor, Fleming, & Serman, 2014).
Unfortunately, some psychologists doubt that we can ever eliminate eating disorders in a culture bombarded with the message that "thin is in" (Fairburn, Cooper, Shafran, & Wilson, 2008). Regrettably, in many developing countries such as Taiwan, Singapore, and China, where dieting is becoming a fad, eating disorders, once little known, are now becoming a serious problem (H. Chen & Jackson, 2008).
Obesity and Weight Control
According to the U.S. Surgeon General, obesity is the most pressing health problem in America (Office of the Surgeon General, 2007). Obesity refers to an excess in body fat in relation to lean body mass, while overweight refers to weighing more than a desirable standard, whether from high amounts of fat or being very muscular. Obesity has increased by more than 50% during the past decade, with more than two-thirds of Americans being either overweight or obese. In contrast to anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa, obesity is more prevalent among Black women than among White women (Y. C. Wang, Colditz, & Kuntz, 2007).
Even more disturbing, the rate of obesity among young people has more than tripled since 1980, with over 9 million overweight adolescents in America today. This problem is particularly serious since overweight children and adolescents are more likely to become overweight adults who are at an increased risk for serious diseases like hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and sleep apnea (American Heart Association, 2009).
Many factors contribute to overeating and obesity (Hebebrand & Hinney, 2009). As stated above, many people inherit a tendency to be overweight (Frayling et al., 2007; Ramadori et al., 2008). Neuroimaging studies suggest part of this problem may stem from an inherited tendency in some people to become addicted to compulsive eating (similar to the genetic predisposition toward drug and alcohol addiction). As a result of this predisposition, these individuals are more vulnerable to cravings triggered by food cues in their environment, and less responsive to their body's internal signaling of satiety (Leutwyler-Ozelli, 2007).
Eating habits established during childhood are also important because they determine the number of fat cells that develop in the body and that number remains fairly constant throughout life. Dieting during adulthood only decreases the amount of fat each cell stores; it doesn't reduce the total number of fat cells (Spalding et al., 2008).
A sedentary lifestyle also contributes to obesity (Lee & Mattson, 2013). Children in the United States today are more likely to watch television and play video games than to play soccer or hockey; and many adults lack adequate physical activity, too. Abundant opportunities and encouragement to overeat in American culture also play a role. Several studies have shown that many obese people eat more than half their calories at night (Mieda, Williams, Richardson, Tanaka, & Yanagisawa, 2006). Portion size has also increased in recent years, as has the constant availability of food from vending machines and fast-food restaurants.
Adding to the medical difficulties accompanying obesity, overweight people often face ridicule and discrimination resulting in significant economic, social, and educational loss (Sikorski, Luppa, Brahler, Konig, & Riedel-Heller, 2012). For example, overweight women have reported lowered self-confidence owing to victimization in school and at work because of their weight (C. Johnson, 2002; Rothblum, Brand, Miller, & Oetjen, 1990). Obese male lawyers earn less than male lawyers of normal weight (Saporta & Halpern, 2002). Even children who are overweight are often the object of unrelenting and cruel bullying (Browne, 2012), display increased rates of behavior problems, including aggression, lack of discipline, immaturity, anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression when compared with their normal-weight peers (Ward-Begnoche et al., 2009; Q. Yang & Chen, 2001).
With all of the problems associated with being overweight, many people are constantly trying to lose weight. There are no quick fixes to weight loss, but there are tactics that can help people lose weight and keep it off.
SEX
Sex is the primary drive that motivates reproductive behavior. Like the other primary drives, it can be turned on and off by biological conditions in the body as well as by environmental cues. The human sexual response is also affected by social experience, sexual experience, nutrition, emotions, and age. In fact, just thinking about, viewing, or having fantasies about sex can lead to sexual arousal in humans (Bogaert & Fawcett, 2006). Sex differs from other primary drives in one important way: Hunger and thirst are vital to the survival of the individual, but sex is vital only to the survival of the species.
Biological Factors
Biology clearly plays a major role in sexual motivation. At one time, the level of hormones such as testosterone - the male sex hormone - was believed to determine the male sex drive. Today, scientists recognize that hormonal influences on human sexual arousal are considerably more complex (Gades et al., 2008). While moment-to-moment fluctuations in testosterone levels are not directly linked to sex drive, baseline levels of testosterone are associated with the frequency of sexual behavior and satisfaction (Persky, 1978). In addition, research has shown that just thinking about sex can increase testosterone levels in women (Goldey & van Anders, 2010) and that testosterone supplements can increase the sex drive in women (Bolour & Braunstein, 2005). However, unlike lower animals, whose sexual activity is tied to the female's reproductive cycle, humans are capable of sexual arousal at any time.
Many animals secrete substances called pheromones that promote sexual readiness in potential partners. Some evidence suggests that humans, too, secrete pheromones, in the sweat glands of the armpits and in the genitals, and that they may influence human sexual attraction (Boulkroune, Wang, March, Walker, & Jacob, 2007; Hummer & McClintock, 2009). The brain exerts a powerful influence on the sex drive, too. In particular, the limbic system and the insula, located deep within the brain, are involved in sexual excitement (Balfour, 2004; Bianchi-Demicheli & Ortigue, 2007).
The biology of sexual behavior is better understood than that of the sex drive itself. Sex researchers William Masters and Virginia Johnson long ago identified a sexual response cycle that consists of four phases: excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution (W. H. Masters & Johnson, 1966). In the excitement phase, the genitals become engorged with blood. In the male, this causes erection of the penis; in the female, it causes erection of the clitoris and nipples. This engorgement of the sexual organs continues into the plateau phase, in which sexual tension levels off. During this phase, breathing becomes more rapid and genital secretions and muscle tension increase. During orgasm, the male ejaculates and the woman's uterus contracts rhythmically; and both men and women experience some loss of muscle control. Following orgasm, males experience a refractory period, which can last from a few minutes to several hours, during which time they cannot have another orgasm. Women do not have a refractory period, and may, if stimulation is reinitiated, experience another orgasm almost immediately. The resolution phase is one of relaxation in which muscle tension decreases and the engorged genitals return to normal. Heart rate, breathing, and blood pressure also return to normal.
Cultural and Environmental Factors
Although hormones and the nervous system do figure in the sex drive, human sexual motivation, especially in the early stages of excitement and arousal, is much more dependent on experience and learning than biology.
What kinds of stimuli activate the sex drive? It need not be anything as immediate as a sexual partner. The sight of one's lover, as well as the smell of perfume or aftershave lotion, can stimulate sexual excitement. Soft lights and music often have an aphrodisiac effect. One person may be unmoved by an explicit pornographic movie but aroused by a romantic love story, whereas another may respond in just the opposite way. Ideas about what is moral, appropriate, and pleasurable also influence our sexual behavior. Finally, one global survey of reported sexual activity indicated the rate at which couples have sex varies dramatically around the world (Durex Global Sex Survey, 2005). This survey also revealed that the frequency of sexual activity varies by age, with 35- to 44-year-olds reporting to have sex an average of 112 times a year, 25- to 34-year-olds having sex an average of 108 times per year, and 16- to 20-year-olds having sex 90 times annually.
Gender equality is also an important cultural factor in how much people report enjoying their sex lives (Petersen & Hyde, 2010). For example, heterosexual couples living in countries where women and men hold equal status are the most likely to report that their sex lives are emotionally and physically satisfying. Conversely, both men and women in countries where men traditionally are more dominant report the least satisfying sex lives (Harms, 2006).
Patterns of Sexual Behavior Among Americans
Contrary to media portrayals of sexual behavior in publications like Playboy or TV shows like Sex in the City, which depict Americans as oversexed and unwilling to commit to long-term relationships, research indicates that most people are far more conservative in their sex lives. One carefully designed study (Michael, Gagnon, Laumann, & Kolata, 1994) of 3,432 randomly selected people between the ages of 18 and 59 revealed the following patterns in the sexual activity of American men and women:
About one-third of those sampled had sex twice a week or more, one-third a few times a month, and the remaining third a few times a year or not at all
The overwhelming majority of respondents did not engage in kinky sex. Instead, vaginal intercourse was the preferred form of sex for over 90% of those sampled. Watching their partner undress was ranked second, and oral sex, third.
Married couples reported having sex more often - and being more satisfied with their sex lives - than did unmarried persons (see also Waite & Joyner, 2001)
The average duration of sexual intercourse reported by most people was approximately 15 minutes
The median number of partners over the lifetime for males was 6 and for females 2 (17% of the men and 3% of the women reported having sex with over 20 partners)
About 25% of the men and 15% of the women had committed adultery
Extensive research has also documented at least four significant differences in sexuality between American men and women: Men are more interested in sex than are women; women are more likely than men to link sex to a close, committed relationship; aggression, power, dominance, and assertiveness are more closely linked to sex among men than among women; and women's sexuality is more open to change over time (Lykins, Meana, & Strauss, 2008; Peplau, 2003). However, it is important to point out that gender differences in sexuality are smallest in nations that have gender equality, suggesting many of the observed differences in sexuality between men and women are based in culture (Petersen & Hyde, 2011).
Sexual Orientation
Sexual orientation refers to the direction of an individual's sexual interest.
What determines sexual orientation? This issue has been argued for decades in the form of classic nature-versus-nurture debate. Those on the nature side hold that sexual orientation is rooted in biology and is primarily influenced by genetics (LeVay, 2011). They point out that homosexual men and women generally know before puberty that they are "different" and often remain "in the closet" regarding their sexual orientation for fear of recrimination (Lippa, 2005). Evidence from family and twin studies shows a higher incidence of male homosexuality in families with other gay men (Camperio-Ciani, Corna, & Capiluppi, 2004), and a higher rate of homosexuality among men with a homosexual twin even when the twins were raised separately (LeVay & Hamer, 1994). The nature position also derives support from studies revealing anatomical and physiological differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men (Fitzgerald, 2008; M. Hines, 2004, 2010; LeVay, 1991). In addition, research has shown that the brains of gay and lesbian people respond to sexual pheromones like the brains of heterosexual people of the opposite gender (Berglund, Lindstrom, & Savic, 2006; Savic, Berglund, & Lindstrom, 2007). Finally, if homosexuality is primarily the result of early learning and socialization, children raised by gay or lesbian parents should be more likely to become homosexual. Research, however, has clearly demonstrated that this is not the case (C. J. Patterson, 2000).
Among other animals, homosexual activity occurs with some degree of regularity. For instance, among pygmy chimpanzees, about 50% of all observed sexual activity is between members of the same sex. In zoos, sexual activity between members of the same sex has been observed in several species including penguins and koalas bears. Even male giraffes commonly entwine their necks until both become sexually stimulated. And among some birds, such as greylag geese, homosexual unions have been found to last up to 15 years (Bagemihl, 2000; Driscoll, 2008).
Those on the nurture side argue that sexual orientation is primarily a learned behavior, influenced by early experience and largely under voluntary control. They find support for their position from cross-cultural studies that show sexual orientations occurring at different frequencies in various cultures.
Regardless of the origin of homosexuality, the general consensus among medical and mental health professionals is that heterosexuality and homosexuality both represent normal expressions of human sexuality, and that there is no convincing evidence that sexual orientation can be changed by so-called "reparative" or "conversion therapy" (American Psychological Association, 2011; Panozzo, 2013).
OTHER IMPORTANT MOTIVES
So far, we have moved from motives that depend on biological needs (hunger and thirst) to a motive that is far more sensitive to external cues - sex. Next, we consider motives that are even more responsive to environmental stimuli. These motives, called stimulus motives, include exploration, curiosity, manipulation, and contact. They push us to investigate and often to change our environment. Finally, we will turn our attention to the motives of aggression, achievement, and affiliation.
Exploration and Curiosity
Where does that road go? What is in the dark little shop? Answering these questions has no obvious benefit: You do not expect the road to take you anywhere you need to go or the shop to contain anything you really want. You just want to know. Exploration and curiosity are motives sparked by the new and unknown and are directed toward no more specific goal other than "finding out." They are not unique to humans. The family dog will run around a new house, sniffing and checking things out, before it settles down to eat its dinner. Even rats, when given a choice, will opt to explore an unknown maze rather than through a familiar one.
Psychologists disagree about the nature of curiosity, its causes, and even how to measure it (Kashdan & Silva, 2009). William James viewed it as an emotion; Freud considered it a socially acceptable expression of sex. Others have seen it as a response to the unexpected and as evidence of a human need to find meaning in life. We might assume that curiosity is a key component of intelligence, but research has failed to confirm that hypothesis. Curiosity has been linked to creativity (Kashdan & Fincham, 2002). Interestingly, people who score high on novelty-seeking tests have a reduced number of dopamine receptors, suggesting curiosity and exploration may arise from a need for increased dopamine stimulation (Golimbet, Alfimova, Gritsenko, & Ebstein, 2007; Zald et al., 2008).
Manipulation and Contact
Why do museums have "Do Not Touch" signs everywhere? It is because the staff knows from experience that the urge to touch is almost irresistible. Unlike curiosity and exploration, manipulation focuses on a specific object that must be touched, handled, played with, and felt before we are satisfied. Manipulation is a motive limited to primates, who have agile fingers and toes. In contrast, the need for contact is more universal than the need for manipulation. Furthermore, it is not limited to touching with the fingers - it may involve the whole body. Manipulation is an active process, but contact may be passive.
In a classic series of experiments, Harry Harlow demonstrated the importance of the need for contact (Harlow, 1958; Harlow & Zimmerman, 1959). Newborn baby monkeys were separated from their mothers and given two "surrogate mothers." Both surrogate mothers were the same shape, but one was made of wire mesh and had no soft surfaces. The other was cuddly - layered with foam rubber and covered with terry cloth. Both surrogate mothers were warmed by means of an electric light placed inside them, but only the wire-mesh mother was equipped with a nursing bottle. Thus, the wire-mesh mother fulfilled two physiological needs for the infant monkeys: the need for food and the need for warmth. But baby monkeys most often gravitated to the terry-cloth mother, which did not provide food. When they were frightened, they would run and cling to it as they would to a real mother. Because both surrogate mothers were warm, the researchers concluded that the need for closeness goes deeper than a need for mere warmth. The importance of contact has also been demonstrated with premature infants. Low-birth-weight babies who are held and massaged gain weight faster, and calmer, and display more activity than those who are seldom touched (Hernandez-Reif, Diego, & Field, 2007; Weiss, Wilson, & Morrison, 2004).
Aggression
Human aggression encompasses all behavior that is intended to inflict physical or psychological harm on others. Intent is a key element of aggression. Accidentally hitting a pedestrian with your car is not an act of aggression - whereas deliberately running down a person would be.
Judging from the statistics (which often reflect underreporting of certain types of crimes), aggression is disturbingly common in this country. According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, more than 1.2 million violent crimes were reported in the United States in 2011. These crimes included more than 14,800 murders, more than 84,000 forcible rapes, 354,000 robberies, and more than 760,000 aggravated assaults (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2012).
Why are people aggressive? Freud considered aggression an innate drive, similar to hunger and thirst, that builds up until it is released. In his view, one important function of society is to channel the aggressive drive into constructive and socially acceptable avenues, such as sports, debate, and other forms of competition. If Freud's analysis is correct, than expressing aggression should reduce the aggressive drive. Research shows, however, that under some circumstances, venting one's anger is more likely to increase than to reduce future aggression (Bushman, 2002; Schaefer & Mattei, 2005).
Another view holds that aggression is a vestige of our evolutionary past that can be traced to defensive behaviors characteristic of our ancestors (G. S. McCall & Shields, 2008). According to this view, the potential for aggression became hard-wired in the human brain, since it served an important adaptive function that enabled our ancestors to effectively compete for food and mates (Wallner & Machatschke, 2009).
Frustration also plays an important role in aggression. However, frustration does not always produce aggression. For example, if frustration doesn't generate anger, aggression is unlikely (Berkowitz & Harmon-Jones, 2004). Moreover, people react to frustration in different ways: some seek help and support, others withdraw from the source of frustration, some become aggressive, and some choose to escape into drugs or alcohol. Finally, there is some evidence that frustration is most likely to cause aggression in people who have learned to be aggressive as a means of coping with unpleasant situations (R. E. Tremblay, Hartup, & Archer, 2005).
One way we learn aggression is by observing aggressive models, especially those who get what they want (and avoid punishment) when they behave aggressively. For example, in contact sports, we often applaud acts of aggression. In professional hockey, fistfights between players may elicit as much fan fervor as does goal scoring.
But what if the aggressive model does not come out ahead or is even punished for aggressive actions? Observers usually will avoid imitating a model's behavior if it has negative consequences. However, children who viewed aggressive behavior learned aggressive behavior, regardless of whether the aggressive model was rewarded or punished. The same results were obtained in a study in which children were shown films of aggressive behavior. Children who saw the aggressive model being punished were less aggressive than those who saw no aggressive model at all. These data are consistent with research showing that exposure to cinematic violence of any sort causes a small to moderate increase in aggressive behavior among children and adolescents (J. P. Murray, 2008). Indeed, one large-scale meta-analysis of 136 studies that were conducted in several different countries found clear evidence that playing violent video games was associated with increased aggressive behavior and decreased empathy and prosocial behavior (Anderson et al., 2010).
Aggression and Culture
Further evidence that aggression is learned can be seen in the cultural variations that exist for handling of aggression (Lansford & Dodge, 2008; Triandis, 1994). For example, cultures as diverse as the Semai of the Malaysian rain forest, the Tahitian Islanders of the Pacific, the Zuni and Blackfoot nations in North America, the Pygmies of Africa, and the residents of Japan and the Scandinavian nations place a premium on resolving conflicts peacefully. Most of these are collectivist societies that emphasize the good of the group over the desires of the individual. Members of collectivist societies are more likely to seek compromise or to withdraw from a threatening interaction because of their concern for maintaining group harmony. In contrast, cultures such as the Yanomano of South America, the Truk Islanders of Micronesia, and the Simbu of New Guinea encourage aggressive behavior, particularly among males. Members of these individualist societies are more likely to follow the adage "Stand up for yourself." Actually, we need not travel to exotic, faraway lands to find such diversity. Within the United States, such subcultures as Quakers, the Amish, the Mennonites, and the Hutterites have traditionally valued nonviolence and peaceful coexistence. This outlook contrasts markedly with individualistic attitudes and practices in mainstream American culture.
Gender and Aggression
Across cultures and at every age, males are more likely than females to behave aggressively. Three studies that reviewed more than 100 studies of aggression concluded that males are more aggressive than females both verbally (i.e., with taunts, insults, and threats) and, in particular, physically (i.e., with hitting, kicking, and fighting) (Bettencourt & Miller, 1996; Eagly & Steffen, 1986; Hyde, 1986). These gender differences tend to be greater in natural settings than in controlled laboratory settings (Hyde, 2005a) and appear to be remarkably stable (Arsenio, 2004; Knight, Fabes, & Higgins, 1996). Indeed, even historical data that go back to 16th-century Europe show that males committed more than three times as many violent crimes as females (L. Ellis & Coontz, 1990).
Is the origin of gender difference in aggression biological or social? The answer is not simple. On the one hand, certain biological factors appear to contribute to aggressive behavior. High levels of testosterone are associated with aggressiveness. At the same time, our society clearly tolerates and even encourages greater aggressiveness in boys than in girls (Sommers-Flanagan, Sommers-Flanagan, & Davis, 1993). For example, we are more likely to give boys toy guns and to reward them for behaving aggressively; girls are more likely than boys to be taught to feel guilty for behaving aggressively or to expect parental disapproval for their aggressive behavior. The most accurate conclusion seems to be that, like most of the complex behaviors that we have reviewed, gender differences in aggression undoubtedly depend on the interaction of nature and nurture (Geen, 1998; Verona, Joiner, Johnson, & Bender, 2006).
Achievement
Climbing Mount Everest, sending rockets into space, making the dean's list, rising to the top of a giant corporation - all these actions may have mixed underlying motives. But in all of them there is a desire to excel. It is this desire for achievement for its own sake that leads psychologists to suggest that there is a separate achievement motive. Perhaps not surprisingly, achievement motivation is correlated with measures of life satisfaction, success in life, and quality of life. Research also confirms that parental support for achievement is directly correlated with achievement motivation in children (Acharya & Joshi, 2011).
From psychological tests and personal histories, psychologists have developed a profile of people with high achievement motivation. These people are fast learners. They relish the opportunity to develop new strategies for unique and challenging tasks. Driven less by the desire for fame or fortune than by the need to live up to a high, self-imposed standard of performance (M. Carr, Borkowski, & Maxwell, 1991), they are self-confident, willingly take on responsibility, and do not readily bow to outside social pressures. They are energetic and allow few things to stand in the way of their goals.
Affiliation
Generally, people have a need for affiliation - to be with other people. The affiliation motive is likely to be especially strong when people feel threatened (Rofe, 1984). Esprit de corps - the feeling of being part of a sympathetic group - is critical among troops going into a battle, just as a football coach's pregame pep talk fuels team spirit. Both are designed to make people feel they are working for a common cause or against a common foe. Moreover, being in the presence of someone who is less threatened or fearful can reduce fear and anxiety. For example, patients with critical illnesses tend to prefer being with healthy people, rather than with other seriously ill patients or by themselves (Rofe, Hoffman, & Lewin, 1985). In the same way, if you are nervous on a plane during a bumpy flight, you may strike up a conversation with the calm-looking woman sitting next to you.
Some have argued that our need for affiliation has an evolutionary basis (Buss, 2006). In this view, forming and maintaining social bonds provided our ancestors with both survival and reproductive benefits. Social groups can share resources such as food and shelter, provide opportunities for reproduction, and assist in the care of offspring. Children who chose to stay with adults were probably more likely to survive (and ultimately reproduce) than those who wandered away from their groups. Thus, it is understandable that people in general tend to seek out other people.
Recently, neuroscientists have shown how various hormones, including oxytocin and dopamine, are released during times of stress prompting us to build social bonds (Carter, 2005). Not surprisingly, these same hormones also play an important role in romantic attachments and the formation of parental bonds to children (Leckman, Hrdy, Keverne, & Carter, 2006).
EMOTIONS
Ancient Greek rationalists thought that emotions, if not held in check, would wreak havoc on higher mental abilities such as rational thought and decision making. In his classic book, The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (1872/1965), Charles Darwin argued that emotional expression in man evolved by natural selection to serve an adaptive and communicative function (Hess & Thibault, 2009). Many early psychologists, too, often viewed emotions as a "base instinct" - a vestige of our evolutionary heritage that needed to be repressed.
More recently, psychologists have begun to see emotions in a more positive light. Today, they are considered essential to survival and a major source of personal enrichment and resilience (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004).
Emotions are linked to variations in immune function and, thereby, to disease. Emotions may also influence how successful we are (Goleman, 1997; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002). It is clear, then, that if we are going to understand human behavior, we must understand emotions. Unfortunately, that task is easier said than done. Even identifying how many emotions there are is difficult.
Basic Emotions
Many people have attempted to identify and describe the basic emotions experienced by humans (Cornelius, 1996; Schimmack & Crites, 2005). Some years ago, Robert Plutchik (1927-2006), for example, proposed that there are eight basic emotions: fear, surprise, sadness, disgust, anger, anticipation, joy, and acceptance (Plutchik, 1980). Each of these emotions helps us adjust to the demands of our environment, although in different ways. Fear, for example, underlies flight, which helps protect animals from their enemies; anger propels animals to attack or destroy. According to Plutchik's model, different emotions may combine to produce an even wider and richer spectrum of experience. Occurring together, anticipation and joy, for example, yield optimism; joy and acceptance fuse into love; and surprise and sadness make for disappointment. Within any of Plutchik's eight categories, emotions also vary in intensity.
Because of the differences in emotions from one culture to another, the tendency now is to distinguish between primary and secondary emotions. Primary emotions are those that are evident in all cultures, contribute to survival, associated with a distinct facial expression, and evident in non-human primates. Secondary emotions are those that are not found in all cultures. They may be thought of as subtle combinations of the primary emotions.
Attempts to identify primary emotions have generally used cross-cultural studies (Jenkins & Andrewes, 2012; Matsumoto, Olide, Schug, Willingham, & Callan, 2009). For example, one group of researchers asked participants from 10 countries to interpret photographs depicting various facial expressions of emotions (Ekman et al., 1987). The percentage of participants from each country who correctly identified the emotions ranged from 60% to 98%. The researchers used this and other evidence to argue for the existence of 6 primary emotions - happiness, surprise, sadness, fear, disgust, and anger. Notice that love is not included in this list. Although Ekman did not find a universally recognized facial expression for love, many psychologists nevertheless hold that love is a primary emotion (Hendrick & Hendrick, 2003; Sabini & Silver, 2005). Its outward expression, however, may owe much to the stereotypes promoted by a culture's media (Fehr, 1994). In one study in which American college students were asked to display a facial expression for love, the participants mimicked the conventional "Hollywood" prototypes such as sighting deeply, gazing skyward, and holding their hand over their heart (Cornelius, 1996).
Theories of Emotion
In the 1880s, the American psychologist William James formulated the first modern theory of emotion. The Danish psychologist Carl Lange reached the same conclusions. According to the James-Lange theory, stimuli in the environment (say, seeing a large growling dog running toward us) cause physiological changes in our bodies (accelerated heart rate, enlarged pupils, deeper or shallower breathing, increased perspiration, and goose bumps), and emotions arise from those physiological changes. The emotion of fear, then, would simply be the almost instantaneous and automatic awareness of physiological changes.
There is some supporting evidence for this theory (R. J. Davidson, 1992; Prinz, 2008), but if you think back to the biology of the nervous system, you should be able to identify a major flaw in the James-Lange theory. Recall that sensory information about bodily changes flows to the brain through the spinal cord. If bodily changes are the source of emotions, then people with severe spinal cord injuries should experience fewer and less intense emotions, but this is not the case (Cobos, Sanchez, Perez, & Vila, 2004). Moreover, most emotions are accompanied by very similar physiological changes. Bodily changes, then, do not cause specific emotions and may not even be necessary for emotional experience.
Recognizing these facts, the Cannon-Bard theory holds that we mentally process emotions and physically respond simultaneously, not one after another. When you see the dog, you feel afraid and your heart races at the same time.
Cognitive Theories of Emotion
Cognitive psychologists have taken Cannon-Bard's theory a step further. They argue that our emotional experience depends on our perception of a situation (Lazarus, 1991; C. Phelps, Bennett, & Brain, 2008; Scherer, Schorr, & Johnstone, 2001). According to the cognitive theory of emotion, the situation gives us clues as to how we should interpret our state of arousal. One of the first theories of emotions that took into account cognitive processes was advanced by Stanley Schachter and Jerome Singer (1962; 2001). According to Schachter and Singer's Two-Factor Theory of Emotion, when we see a bear, there are indeed bodily changes; but we then use information about the situation to tell us how to respond to those changes. Only when we cognitively recognize that we are in danger do we experience those bodily changes as fear.
Challenges to Cognitive Theory
A direct challenge to the cognitive theory claims that emotions can be experienced without the intervention of cognition (C. E. Izard, 1971, 1994). According to this view, a situation such as separation or pain provokes a unique pattern of unlearned facial movements and body postures that may be completely independent of conscious thought. When information about our facial expressions and posture reaches the brain, we automatically experience the corresponding emotion. According to Carroll Izard, then, the James-Lange theory was essentially correct in suggesting that emotional experience arises from bodily reactions. But Izard's theory stresses facial expression and body posture as crucial to the experience of emotion, whereas the James-Lange theory emphasized muscles, skin, and internal organs.
While considerable evidence supports the view that facial expressions influence emotions (Ekman, 2003; Soussignan, 2002), a growing body of research also indicates that the most accurate recognition of emotional expression occurs when the expresser and receiver are from the same cultural group (Jack, Caldara, & Schyns, 2011; Young & Hugenberg, 2010). Exactly how the unlearned and learned components of emotional expression are communicated and recognized is the next topic.
COMMUNICATING EMOTION
Sometimes you are vaguely aware that a person makes you feel uncomfortable. When pressed to be more precise, you might say, "You never know what she is thinking." But you do not mean that you never know her opinion of a film or what she thought about the last election. It would probably be more accurate to say that you do not know what she is feeling. Almost all of us conceal our emotions to some extent, but usually people can tell what we are feeling. Although emotions can often be expressed in words, much of the time we communicate our feelings nonverbally. We do so through, among other things, voice quality, facial expression, body language, personal space, and explicit acts.
Voice Quality and Facial Expression
If your roommate is washing the dishes and says acidly, "I hope you're enjoying your novel," the literal meaning of his words is quite clear, but you probably know very well that he is not expressing a concern about your reading pleasure. He is really saying, "I am annoyed that you are not helping clean up." Similarly, if you receive a phone call from someone who has had very good or very bad news, you will probably know how she feels before she has told you what happened. In other words, much of the emotional information we convey is not contained in the words we use, but in the way those words are expressed (Gobl & Chasaide, 2003).
Among nonverbal channels of communication, facial expressions seem to communicate the most specific information (Horstmann, 2003). Hand gestures or posture can communicate general emotional states (e.g., feeling bad), but the complexity of the muscles in the face allows facial expressions to communicate very specific feelings (e.g., feeling sad, angry, or fearful). Many facial expressions are innate, not learned. Individuals who are born blind use the same facial expressions of emotion as do sighted persons to express the same emotions (Matsumoto & Willingham, 2009). Moreover, most animals share a common pattern of muscular facial movements. For example, dogs, tigers, and humans all bare their teeth in rage, and research has shown that the same pattern of facial muscles is used to display emotions among most primates, including monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans (Waller, Parr, Gothard, Burrows, & Fuglevand, 2008). Psychologists who take an evolutionary approach believe that facial expressions served an adaptive function, enabling our ancestors to compete successfully for status, to win mates, and to defend themselves (Tooby & Cosmides, 2008).
How the Brain Reads the Face
Scientists have known for quite some time that activity in brain circuits centering the amygdala and insula are critical for the release of emotions (Schafe & LeDoux, 2002; Philip Shaw et al., 2005). The amygdala and insula also appear to play an important role in our ability to correctly interpret facial expressions (Adolphs, 2008; Jehna et al., 2011). Interestingly, some of the underlying brain processes that are used to interpret facial expression take place so quickly (less than 1/10 of a second), it is unlikely that they are consciously driven (Adolphs, 2006).
Adolphs and his colleagues (Adolphs, Tranel, Damasio, & Damasio, 1994) reported the remarkable case of a 30-year-old woman (S. M.) with a rare disease that caused nearly complete destruction of the amygdala. Although S. M. could correctly identify photographs of familiar faces with 100% accuracy, and easily learned to recognize new faces, she had great difficulty recognizing fear and discriminating between different emotions, such as happiness and surprise. More recent research has also shown that people with amygdala damage have trouble "reading faces" (Adolphs, Baron-Cohen, & Tranel, 2002; Adolphs & Tranel, 2003). For example, some patients with severe depressive disorder have an impaired ability to accurately judge another person's facial expression of emotion, and this impairment contributes to their difficulty in interpersonal functioning (Surguladze et al., 2004). In addition, some researchers have suggested that abnormalities in the brain circuits associated with the amygdala can, in some cases, make it difficult for people to perceive threat accurately and that, in turn, can lead to unprovoked violence and aggression (R. J. Davidson, Putnam, & Larson, 2000; Marsh & Blair, 2008).
Body Language, Personal Space, and Gestures
Body language is another way that we communicate messages nonverbally. How we hold our back, for example, communicates a great deal. When we are relaxed, we tend to stretch back into a chair; when we are tense, we sit more stiffly with our feet together.
The distance we maintain between ourselves and others is called personal space. This distance varies depending on the nature of the activity and the emotions felt. If someone stands closer to you than is customary, that proximity may indicate either anger or affection; if farther away than usual, it may indicate fear or dislike. The normal conversing distance between people varies from culture to culture. Two Swedes conversing would ordinarily stand much farther apart than would two Arabs or Greeks.
Explicit acts, of course, can also serve as nonverbal clues to emotions. A slammed door may tell us that the person who just left the room is angry. If friends drop in for a visit and you invite them into your living room, that is a sign that you are probably less at ease with them than with friends whom you invite to sit down with you at the kitchen table. Gestures, such as a slap on the back, an embrace, whether people shake your hand briefly or for a long time, firmly or limply, also tell you something about how they feel about you.
You can see from this discussion that nonverbal communication of emotions is important. However, a word of caution is needed here. Although nonverbal behavior may offer a clue to a person's feelings, it is not an infallible clue. Laughing and crying can sound alike, yet crying may signal sorrow, joy, anger, or nostalgia - or that you are slicing an onion. Moreover, as with verbal reports, people sometimes "say" things nonverbally that they do not mean. We all have done things thoughtlessly - turned our backs, frowned when thinking about something else, or laughed at the wrong time - that have given offense because our actions were interpreted as an expression of an emotion that we were not, in fact, feeling.
Many of us overestimate our ability to interpret nonverbal cues. For example, in one study of several hundred "professional lie catchers," including members of the Secret Service, government lie detector experts, judges, police officers, and psychiatrists, every group except for the psychiatrists rated themselves above average in their ability to tell whether another person was lying. Only the Secret Service agents managed to identify the liars at a better-than-chance rate (Ekman & O'Sullivan, 1991).
Sometimes we use mimicry to help us understand what others are feeling. Research confirms that during the course of conversation, people often mimic each other's accents, gestures, postures, and facial expressions (McIntosh, 2006; Ponari, Conson, D'Amico, Grossi, & Trojano, 2012). Not surprisingly, research has shown that spontaneous mimicry makes conversations flow more smoothly, helps people feel closer to one another, and fosters friendship (Kobayashi, 2007). In addition, as described previously, because specific emotions are tied to behaviors, and in particular specific facial expressions, mimicking the facial expressions of others helps us to emphasize, or literally feel what another person is feeling (Stel, Van Baaren, & Vonk, 2008). However, even the use of mimicry doesn't overcome our tendency to being deceived. For example, research has also shown that mimicry may actually reduce our accuracy to judge another person's emotions if the person expressing the emotion is purposely trying to be deceptive. In other words, when we mimic a person who is attempting to mislead us, mimicry diminishes our ability to detect that they are trying to deceive us (Stel, van Dijk, & Olivier, 2009).
Gender and Emotion
Men are often said to be less emotional than women. But do men feel less emotion, or are they simply less likely to express the emotions they feel? And are there some emotions that men are more likely than women to express?
Research sheds some light on these issues. In one study, when men and women saw depictions of people in distress, the men showed little emotion, but the women expressed feelings of concern (Eisenberg & Lennon, 1983). However, physiological measures of emotional arousal (such as heart rate and blood pressure) showed that the men in the study were actually just as affected as the women were. The men simply inhibited the expression of their emotions, whereas the women were more open about their feelings. Emotions such as sympathy, sadness, empathy, and distress are often considered "unmanly," and traditionally, in Western culture, boys are trained from an early age to suppress those emotions in public (L. Brody & Hall, 2000). The fact that men are less likely than women to seek help in dealing with emotional issues (Komiya, Good, & Sherrod, 2000) is probably a result of this early training.
Men and women are also likely to react with very different emotions to the same situation (Gomez, Gunten, & Danuser, 2013). For example, being betrayed or criticized by another person will elicit anger in males, whereas females are more likely to feel hurt, sad, or disappointed (L. Brody & Hall, 2000; Fischer, Rodriguez-Mosquera, van-Vianen, & Manstead, 2004). And, when men get angry, they generally turn their anger outward, against other people and against the situation in which they find themselves. Women are more likely to see themselves as the source of the problem and to turn their anger inward, against themselves. These gender-specific reactions are consistent with the fact that men are four times more likely than women to become violent in the face of life crises; women, by contrast, are much more likely to become depressed.
Men and women also differ in their ability to interpret nonverbal cues of emotion. In particular, women and young girls are more skilled than men or young boys at decoding the facial expressions of emotion (Bosacki & Moore, 2004; Hall & Matsumoto, 2004). Perhaps not surprisingly, research has also shown that men are more likely than women to misperceive friendliness as sexual interest; interestingly, they are also more likely to perceive sexual interest as friendliness (Farris, Treat, Vikden, & McFall, 2008).
How can we explain these gender differences? One possibility is that because women tend to be the primary caregivers for preverbal infants, they need to become more attuned than men to the subtleties of emotional expressions. Some psychologists have even suggested that this skill may be genetically programmed into females. Consistent with this evolutionary perspective, research has shown that male and female infants express and self-regulate emotions differently (McClure, 2000; Weinberg, Tronick, Cohn, & Olson, 1999).
Another explanation of gender differences in emotional sensitivity is based on the relative power of women and men. Because women historically have occupied less powerful positions, they may have felt the need to become acutely attuned to the emotional display of others, particularly those in more powerful positions (namely, men). This idea is supported by evidence that, regardless of gender, followers are more sensitive to the emotions of leaders than vice versa (Aries, 2006; Judith Hall, Bernieri, & Carney, 2006).
Culture and Emotion
Does where we live affect what we feel? And if so, why? For psychologists, the key issue is how cultures help shape emotional experiences.
Some researchers have argued that across cultures, peoples, and societies, the face looks the same whenever certain emotions are expressed; this phenomenon is known as the universalist position. In contrast, other researchers support the culture-learning position, which holds that members of a culture learn the appropriate facial expressions for emotions. These expressions, then, can differ greatly from one culture to the next. Which view is more accurate?
As we saw earlier, Ekman and his colleagues have concluded from cross-cultural studies that at least six emotions are accompanied by universal facial expressions: happiness, sadness, anger, surprise, fear, and disgust. Carroll Izard (1980) conducted similar studies in England, Germany, Switzerland, France, Sweden, Greece, and Japan with similar results. These studies seem to support the universalist position: Regardless of culture, people tended to agree on which emotions others were expressing facially. However, this research does not completely rule out culture-learning view. Because the participants were all members of developed countries that likely had been exposed to one another through movies, magazines, and tourism, they might simply have become familiar with the facial expressions seen in other cultures. A stronger test was needed that reduced or eliminated this possibility.
Such a test was made possible by the discovery of several contemporary cultures that had been totally isolated from Western culture for most of their existence. Members of the Fore and the Dani cultures of New Guinea, for example, had their first contact with anthropologists only a few years before Ekman's research took place. They provided a nearly perfect opportunity to test the universalist/culture-learning debate. If members of these cultures gave the same interpretation of facial expressions and produced the same expressions on their own faces as did people in Western cultures, there would be much stronger evidence for the universality of facial expressions of emotions. Ekman and his colleagues presented members of the Fore culture with three photographs of people from outside their culture and asked them to point to the picture that represented how they would feel in a certain situation. For example, if a participant was told "Your child has died, and you feel very sad," he or she would have the opportunity to choose which of the three pictures most closely corresponded to sadness. The results indicated very high rates of agreement on facial expressions of emotions (Ekman & Friesen, 1971; Ekman, Sorenson, & Friesen, 1969). Moreover, when photographs of the Fore and Dani posing the primary emotions were shown to college students in the United States, the same high agreement was found (Ekman & Friesen, 1975). This finding suggests that at least some emotional expressions are inborn and universal.
If this is true, why are people so often confused about the emotions being expressed by people in other cultures? It turns out that the answer is not simple. Part of the explanation involves display rules. Display rules concern the circumstances under which it is appropriate for people to show certain emotion. Display rules differ substantially from culture to culture (Matsumoto, Yoo, & Chung, 2010; Safdar et al., 2009). In a study of Japanese and American college students, the participants watched graphic films of surgical procedures, either by themselves or in the presence of an experimenter. The students' facial expressions were secretly videotaped as they viewed the films. The results showed that when the students were by themselves, both the Japanese and the Americans showed facial expressions of disgust, as expected. But when the participants watched the films in the presence of an experimenter, the two groups displayed different responses. American students continued to show disgust on their faces, but the Japanese students showed facial expressions that were more neutral, even somewhat pleasant (Ekman, Friesen, & Ellsworth, 1972). Why the sudden switch? The answer in this case appears to lie in the different display rules of the two cultures. The Japanese norm says, "Don't display strong negative emotion in the presence of a respected elder" (in this case, the experimenter). Americans typically don't honor this display rule; hence, they expressed their true emotions whether they were alone or with someone else.
However, display rules don't tell the whole story. In a comprehensive review of the literature, Elfenbein and Ambady (2002, 2003) have demonstrated that differences in language, familiarity, majority or minority status within a culture, cultural learning, expressive style, and a number of other factors may also account for the fact that "we understand emotions more accurately when they are expressed by members of our own cultural or subcultural group" (p. 228). Since research indicates that learning to correctly identify emotions of people from a different culture contributes to intercultural adjustment (Yoo, Matsumoto, & LeRoux, 2006), further research in this area is important as the nations of the world become increasingly interdependent and multicultural.