Sung Hee Hong

My master’s thesis emerged from a curiosity about how and why individuals experience and express anger differently, particularly within the context of interpersonal relationships. It is typically easy to observe, especially as one spends enough time, that some are more easily angered or express their anger more openly than others—often attributing to their personality or the specific situation they find themselves in. As a personality researcher, I sought to explore and understand these differences through a scholarly approach. Two key factors seemed to drive these differences in the anger experience: (1) The Agreeableness (A) trait and (2) the interpersonal context, depending on how the participant categorizes the other person as Hindi Ibang Tao or Ibang Tao. 

The personality trait “Agreeableness” is characterized by empathy, altruism, and compliance, and a desire to maintain harmonious relationships with others, all of which strongly relates to interpersonal behavior. While the nature of Agreeableness is well-established in literature, less is known about how it manifests in different types of interpersonal relationship, particularly in emotionally charged situations like anger-driven conflicts. In this study, interpersonal relationships were categorized using concepts from Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Ibang Tao (IT; other people or outsider) and Hindi-Ibang Tao (HIT; not-other people or one of us). These categories, rooted in the core concept of  Kapwa, define the boundaries and behaviors deemed acceptable in different social contexts. For instance, people often feel more comfortable expressing emotions with those they are closer to than with others. 

To guide my research, I employed Fleeson’s Trait Model, which suggests that traits should be understood in a way that accommodates within-person variability. It recognizes that while individuals have an average trait level, they can also respond differently depending on the situation. In the context of my research, this means that while a person may have a typical way of reacting to anger, they may deviate from this pattern based on the interpersonal context they are dealing with; the interaction between a person’s trait and the situation creates a unique anger experience. 

Participants were selected from a pool of respondents who had taken the Masaklaw na Panukat ng Loob (Mapa ng Loob). Five participants from the top quartile of agreeableness (High A) and five participants from the bottom quartile (Low A) were chosen. Stories and episodes were shared by participants about their most recent or memorable anger experience. Thematic analysis revealed that anger typically arose from perceived unfairness and helplessness, but the interpretation and expression of these experiences differed between High As and Low As. 

High As were found to be constructively-passive agents (less easily provoked and expressive) and driven by emotions and prosocial motives. In contrast, Low As tended to be active agents (more easily provoked and expressive), driven by practicality and reason. Interestingly, when interpersonal context was considered, similarities emerged. Although the intensity of anger, behavioral responses, and underlying motives differed, both groups found it easier to express anger towards and were more provoked by those they were closer to (HITs), showing greater concern for these relationships in general. Additionally, both groups showed the ability to adjust their behavior to fit the type of interpersonal relationship they were dealing with or selectively control their words and expressions, particularly towards ITs. I further connected these interpersonal-related themes to relationship-driven characteristics within the Filipino culture, such as “Pakikipagkapwa-Tao” (regard for others) and the characteristics of flexibility, adaptability, and creativity in social situations.

This study provides valuable insights into the nature of Agreeableness and its relationship with specific interpersonal context within the Filipino cultural environment. To fully understand how Agreeableness manifests in conflict situations, we must recognize that it may differ depending on the interpersonal context. Furthermore, exploring how other traits, such as Conscientiousness (C) and Neuroticism (N), interact with Agreeableness could offer a more nuanced understanding of anger experiences. This was inferred in the exception case in my study: a participant in the Low A group showed inconsistent anger experience compared to others in the same group, potentially due to relatively low N and high C scores upon closer examination. In closing, my study highlights the significance of personality trait, context, and cultural perspectives in understanding individual experience. Future research to strengthen these ideas, using the same framework but with quantitative methods would be welcomed.