Idea Transcript
! !
Logic of Pride
Name: Osen Figan Tuncer Student number: 535374 Supervisor: Prof. Dr. A.J.J.M. Vingerhoets Bachelor thesis Clinical Health Psychology Tilburg University August 2010
"! !
A bstract In this literature review the emotion pride is discussed. Research on the emotion pride is relatively new and is therefore not as much discussed as other emotions. Pride is an emotion that can be interpreted in a negative way, but also in a positive way. Therefore the distinction between authentic and hubristic pride is being made. Authentic pride is caused by internal and controllable causes and hubristic pride is caused by internal but uncontrollable causes. The self is necessary to be able to experience pride and because of this pride is called a selfconscious emotion. Self-conscious emotions in general have a more complex cognitive path they have to go through before it can be expressed. Even though pride is divided into authentic and hubristic pride, this distinction is not supported by studies on the recognition of pride. People are able to recognize pride, but cannot make a distinction between authentic and hubristic pride based on body language. To be able to recognize pride specific body movements are necessary. Namely the head slightly tilled back, a low intensity smile, an expanded posture, and arms with hand on hips or raised above the head with hands in fists. Differences in recognition were found when looked between cultures and gender. Members of an individualistic culture showed more often the emotion pride then the members of a collectivistic culture. The frequency of expressing pride was higher for men then for women.
Key words; pride, emotion, hubristic pride, authentic pride, self-conscious emotion,
recognizing pride
#! !
Benedict Carey (2009) describes in his news article how great the role of pride is in SHRSOH¶V OLYHV )RU H[DPSOH SHRSOH IDNH JRLQJ WR SODFHV RU DSSHDU WR EH EXV\ ZLWK ZRUN when in real life they do not have a job. People fake situations or maintain the routine they were used to, to keep the feeling of pride. 'HVSLWH WKH LPSRUWDQW UROH SULGH KDV LQ SHRSOH¶V OLYHV QRW PDQ\ UHVHDUFK KDV EHHQ done. This emotion is therefore fairly new in the field of psychology. It caught the attention of researchers approximately ten years ago. Since then there are more studies available which show the growing importance of the emotion within the field of psychology. The emotion pride can be interpreted in a positive and negative way (Tracy, Shariff & Cheng, n.d.). Throughout history there was a very negative view about pride and was even considered a sin among different religious groups. As time passed by and peoples thoughts changed, a positive side to it became clear. These sides to pride are called authentic and hubristic pride. Authentic pride is considered to be the positive side of this emotion and manifests pro-social outcomes, whereas hubristic pride is the exact opposite and is linked to narcissism. Pride is a self-conscious emotion that comes forth from achievements accomplished E\RQH¶VRZQDELOLW\,WUHIOHFWVKRZ\RXIHHODERXW\RXUVHOI 7UDF\ 5RELQVDE According to Lewis (1993) pride can only be called pride when there are different types of cognition related factors to the self. People evaluate or compare their behavior with a standard. Pride, in any case, seems to arise from the self (Tracy & Robins, 2004a, 2007b Williams, 2009). The self of a person is the reason why people are able to experience, express and recognize pride. It is therefore one of the so-called self-conscious emotions. Self-conscious emotions are different from basic emotions like joy, anger and fear. It has a more complex underlying cognitive structure. Self-conscious emotions occur as a response to an event that has consequences for the judgment others have about the individual (Leary, 2007). Pride is FDXVHG E\ LQWHUQDO HYHQWV WKDW DUH UHOHYDQW WR VRPHRQH¶V LGHQWLW\ 7UDF\ 6KDULII &KHQJ n.d.). People identify themselves with others, which result in that they can also react similarly to action of others that causes self-conscious emotions. We strive to be good people and try to do good for others, because this makes us feel good about ourselves (Silvia, 2009; Tracy & Robins, n.d.).
$! !
There are emotions that have the same expression and are recognized by everyone, regardless of their cultural background. These universally recognized emotions are joy, anger, fear, disgust, sadness and surprise (Ekman, 1992). Where we live, with what kind of values we are raised with, the meaning we give to situations, the way we interpret body language and many more aspects influence the way we experience, express and recognize emotions. Pride is a complex emotion where cultural differences are seen. Since the interest and importance of pride elevated, research is done on different areas. In this literature review different aspects of pride will be discussed which are divided into different sections. The research questions that will be answered are: What is pride? How does the underlying structure look like? How do we recognize pride? What are the cultural differences of pride? What are the differences between men and women? T wo distinct facets Pride is an emotion that can be interpreted in different ways. Many researchers make the distinction between a positive and negative pride or global and specific pride (Williams & DeSteno, 2008; Lewis, 1993). But the most commonly used way of dividing pride is the distinction authentic and hubristic pride. Tracy and Robins (2007a, 2007c) divided pride into these two facets. Positive, specific and authentic pride all describes the same facet of pride as does negative, global and hubristic pride. Hubristic pride ( I won because I am always great ), the global self, is caused by internal but uncontrollable causes (Tracy & Robins, 2007a, 2007c). It is to be seen as a virtue that is disliked. Hubristic comes from hubris, which means excessive pride. Hubristic pride causes negative social outcomes, which are responsible for the negative view of this emotion. It has no specific goal and it is the view of a positive self worth of oneself (Williams & DeSteno, 2008). With this it categorizes itself on the negative side of pride. Hubristic pride is DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK ZRUGV OLNH ³DUURJDQW´ ³SRPSRXV´ DQG ³HJRLVWLFDO´ 7UDF\ 5RELQV QG Due to human evolution and the changes in the social organization of people, hierarchies started to develop. Shariff, Tracy, Cheng and Henrich (in press) argue that hubristic pride emerged as a response to dominance hierarchies. Authentic pride ( I am proud of what I did), the specific characteristics of the self, is caused by internal and controllable causes (Tracy & Robins, 2007a, 2007c). It is seen as a virtue that is encouraged by the Western culture. It is based on specific accomplishments of the self. This supports the idea of the Western culture that is referred to as individualistic.
%! !
Williams and DeSteno (2008) describe like Tracy and Robins (2004a, 2007a, 2007c) and Lewis (1993) that authentic pride was a more specific type of pride, which can be termed as achievement-oriented. It reflects the specific self and is seen as a positive type of pride. It is DVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHZRUGV³DFFRPSOLVKPHQW´³FRQILGHQW´DQG³VHOI-ZRUWK´ 7UDF\ 5RELns, 2007d). Authentic pride emerged as a response to prestige hierarchies (Shariff et al., in press). Research findings suggest that there is a clear distinction. The emotion pride is divided into two facets. Authentic pride is the pro-social and achievement-oriented side of it and hubristic pride is the anti-social and narcissistic side of pride. Self-conscious emotion The self has a role in pride. Pride is being divided into the self-conscious emotion (Lewis, 1993; Silvia, 2009; Tracy & Robins, 2004a, 2004b, 2007a). The self plays a big role in many different motivational and decision making processes. You will not be able to experience pride without a sense of self. You should be able to criticize what you, the self has done (Silvia, 2009). The complexity of the self-conscious emotion is in the self. According to Tracy and Robins (2004a, 2007d) the self-conscious emotions distinguish themselves from non-self-conscious emotions with the following five features: First, self-awareness and selfrepresentations are important features of self-conscious emotions. These two processes make it possible to evaluate the self and thereby make it possible for self-conscious emotions to occur. Second, self-conscious emotions develop later than basic emotions. Most of the known basic emotions (for example joy, fear and anger) emerge in the first nine months of a newborn baby (Tracy & Robins, 2007d). With the self-conscious emotions, like pride and shame, it HPHUJHV E\ WKH HQG RI D FKLOG¶V WKLUG year (Tracy, Robins, & Lagattuta, 2005). Third, selfconscious emotions are primarily developed for the realization of social goals. With social goals Tracy and Robins (2007d) mean for example prevention of group rejection or PDLQWDLQLQJ RQH¶V VWDWXV )RXUWK WKH self-conscious emotions do not have a distinct, recognizable facial expression, though there are distinct other body movements, postures that are recognizable. And finally, the fifth feature is that self-conscious emotions have a complex cognitive structure. To be able to experience pride or shame one needs to have the ability to evaluate the self. Tracy and Robins (n.d.) designed a process model (appendix figure 1) that shows the complexity of the self-conscious emotions. According to the model pride is elicited after activation of the self-representation followed by internal attributions.
&! !
Structure of self-conscious emotion With pride being a self-conscious emotion it distincts itself from the known basic emotions. Lewis (1993) describes the emotion pride as an emotion that needs all kind of cognition related factors to the self so it can be called pride. It occurs after evaluating or FRPSDULQJRQH¶VRZQEHKDYLRUZLWKDVWDQGDUGDUXOHRUDJRDO 65* ,IRQHEHOLHYHVKHRU she has succeeded it iVFDOOHGSULGH,WFDQEHVHHQDVWDNLQJSULGHLQRQH¶VRZQDFKLHYHPHQWV When one thinks he or she failed it is called shame or guilt. These emotions are also categorized in the self-conscious emotions. Other self-conscious emotions are for example jealousy, empathy and envy. Cognitive processes are the cause of these self-conscious emotions. There is interplay between the way we think or what we think and the occurrence of an emotion. The cause of self-conscious emotions is a cognitive event (Lewis, 1993). The SRG plays a big role in the theory Lewis has about the self-conscious emotions. These standards, rules or goals have to do with culture and are automatically taught to children from a young age. Because it is culture specific it differs in every society, but time changes these 65*¶V WRR 'HVSLWH WKHVH FKDQJHV HYHU\ RQH RI XV NQRZV VRPH RI LI QRW PRVW RI WKHVH standards, rules or goals. Lewis (1993) put these SRG also in his cognitive-attributional theory. This theory is an easy model to define the self-conscious emotion that is dealt with. In figure 1a the model is presented.
F igure 1a. Model for defining self-conscious emotions. In the model there is a distinction between a global attribution of the self and a specific attribution of the self. Global attribution refers to the whole self and the specific attribution self refers to specific characteristics of the self (Lewis, 1993). Hubris, which means pridefulness (Lewis, 1993; Tracy & Robins, 2007a, 2007c), is something that is disliked and should be avoided. When someone shows hubris in an exaggerated way it can be seen as
'! !
narcissistic. As can be noted from the model above hubris is the consequence of a successful evaluation of the SRG on the global self. Furthermore Lewis (1993) describes hubris as an emotion that is difficult to maintain in its state. It is an addictive emotion, which makes people look up for situations to be able to have the feeling of hubris again. With hubris the object and subject are fused. Pride is according to the model also an emotion that is a consequence of a successful evaluation of the standards, rules or goals. The difference between hubris and pride is that pride does not have to do with the global self, but with the specific attribution of the self. So it refers to specific characteristics of the self.
Cognitive structure Ortony, Clore, and Collins (1990) made a global structure of emotions (appendix figure 2, retrieved from Otorny et al., 1990, p.19). According to Ortony et al. (1990) there are three major aspects, namely events, agents, or objects. These are aspects of the world or changes in the world where one can focus on. When people focus on events, it is because they are interested in the consequences. When they focus on agents it is because of the actions and when focused on objects it is because of interest in aspects of the object. Agents, which pride is an emotion of, are not restricted to people. Agents can be institutions and/or situations. Figure 2 shows that the attribution emotions are a response to approving/disapproving of the actions of agents. When one reaction is intense enough it leads to one of the attribution emotions. Before experiencing the attribution emotion one has to make a distinction between whether the approval or disapproval focuses on the self or on some other agent. When it focuses on the self as agent, the outcome is shame or pride as an emotion. When another person is the agent, the outcome is admiration or reproach as emotion. The attribution emotion pride requires a developed awareness of the self (Ortony et al., 1990). In figure 2a (Ortonoy et al., 1990, p.136) a two by two table is shown, which is divided into the identity of WKHDJHQWDQGWKHDSSUDLVDORIWKHDJHQW¶VDFWLRQ7KHDFWLRQVRIDJHQWVDUHEHLQJGLYided in terms of their praiseworthiness. Events are evaluated in terms of their desirability and objects in terms of their appealingness. Praiseworthiness, desirability and appealingness are variables that influence the intensity of the emotions in the table boxes in figure 2. The emotion pride is WKHRXWFRPHRIDSUDLVHZRUWK\DSSUDLVDORIDJHQW¶VDFWLRQDQGWKHLGHQWLW\LVRQHRIWKHVHOI
(! !
F igure 2a. Attribution emotions All of the models and the underlying cognitive structure of pride show that the self is very important. By evaluating and giving meaning to the event people are able to experience feelings of pride or hubris. Recognizing pride Tracy and Robins (2007d) made clear that pride does not have a recognizable facial expression, but has distinct body movements and other recognizable postures. Tracy and Robins (2003, 2004b, 2007a, 2007b) conducted several studies about the recognition of pride. The results suggest that pride was identified when the head was slightly tilled back, a low intensity smile, expanded posture, arms with hands on hips or raised above the head with hands in fists. Not all of these components have to be displayed simultaneously for it to be recognized as pride. When someone shows a small smile it is necessary that at least one of the other components are displayed to be able to recognize the emotion as pride. When the arms DUHVWUDLJKWGRZQWKHVLGHRIRQH¶VERG\DWOHDVWWZRRIWKHFRPSRQHQWVZULWWHQDERYHKDYHWR be displayed too for it to be recognized as pride. Tracy and Robins (2007b) developed a coding system (appendix, figure 3) for pride recognition. This makes it easier for other researchers to study the emotion pride and its distinct expressions and movements. The body of a person plays a big role in the recognition of pride. This implies that the expression of pride is different from the basic emotions. Take for example joy. Joy can be recognized by a facial expression and it does not require any other body language for it to be recognized as joy. Basic emotions can be recognized solely on facial expressions. Before the distinction between hubristic and authentic pride is discussed. Research suggests that both of these types of pride have a similar way of expressing. There is one component that might be a cue to label a pride expression as authentic pride.
)! !
This is the eye gaze directed upward (number six of the facet Head Codes in the Pride coding system, figure 3) (Tracy & Robins, 2007b). But more studies are necessary to be able to make definite conclusions about this cue. Because there is no distinct difference in the expression of authentic and hubristic pride, this might suggest that there is no distinction of pride . Oosterwijk, Rotteveel, Fischer, and Hess (2009) made participants generate words linked to pride and disappointment while their posture was measured. Changes in posture were reported with disappointment, but with pride it was not significant. It did show some changes when the participant was asked to activate the knowledge they had about pride, but the effect was weak. Tracy and Robins (2008a) did research on how quick and in what kind of condition we are able to recognize emotions. They first looked at how quick participants were able to recognize these emotions (anger, contempt, disgust, embarrassment, fear, happiness, pride, sadness, shame, and surprise). Then they did an experiment to test whether the accuracy improved when participants were given longer time for deciding which emotion was displayed. Finally Tracy and Robins looked at whether cognitive load had any effect on the accuracy. When only focused on pride the outcome of the research was that, with a cognitive load participants were able to recognize pride and that this rate got higher when they were given the time and encouraged about the meaning. Frequently participants mislabeled pride by saying it was happiness what they saw . Because it happened in every condition of the study it implies that it did not have to do with the given timeframe or the cognitive load. Because of the small smile that pride has as a component, which is the most important feature of happiness, it was mistaken numerous times. But when forced to make a decision between pride and happiness, the participants were able to make the right choice (Tracy & Robins, 2008a). Again Tracy and Robins (2007a) made a link between status and pride. They suggested that the self of the emotion pride developed, in some extent, to give us information about ones socials status. Shariff and Tracy (2009) did more research on the suggested link. They conducted several studies where they paired pride expressions with high-status words or photographs of pride expressions with words representing high or low status. According to their study there were several situations where the link between pride and high status emerged. This was the case when compared with low-status emotions (shame and embarrassment), with emotions (disgust, fear and happiness) not relevant to status and when pride was compared with the expressions of happiness and anger. It suggests a positive
*! !
relation between pride and high status. Someone with high status will show more signs of pride than someone of a low social class. When defining the features of a self-conscious emotion it is pointed out that selfconscious emotions develop later than basic emotions. Tracy, Robins, and Lagattuta (2005) studied whether children are able to recognize pride, since it is a more complex emotion than the basic emotions. They found that by the time children are four years old, they are able to recognize pride. This recognition improves over a timeframe of 4 years (from their third year until they are seven years old). One reason that can explain why children recognize pride later than basic emotions is that they experience pride later (Tracy et al., 2005). People are able to recognize pride by its distinct body movements. Even though pride is divided into two facets it is recognized as one emotion. People are not able to recognize and thus separate authentic pride from hubristic pride. C ross-cultural view Pride has a recognizable non-verbal expression and this appears to be the same across cultures. Tracy and Matsumoto (2008) did research to find evidence whether pride is an emotion that is inherited and similar across cultures. To study this they used participants who were sighted, blind and born blind. The individuals were from collectivistic cultures, individualistic cultures, tradition cultures, secular cultures, survival cultures and selfexpression-valuing cultures (Tracy & Matsumoto, 2008). Spontaneous behavior (body and face changes) after winning or losing a judo match at the Olympics and Paralympics were coded. What they found was that the emotion pride was displayed when the situation was one of success. The expressions were all the same for the three groups. Within these groups there was a variety of more than thirty nationalities. This study suggest that pride is an emotion that is inherited and is similarly expressed across cultures. Durik et al. (2006) describes the people of an individualistic culture as independent self-construals. They attempt to be autonomic and see themselves separate from a group. In contrast, people from collectivistic cultures have interdependent self-construals and are very close connected to their group. Aaker and Williams (1998) adds that individuals from individualistic cultures (the United States, Australia, Canada, The Netherlands and many other Western- (European) countries) tend to make an effort to be unique and to be seen as an individual. Individuals in collectivistic cultures (China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea and many other countries) maintain connectedness. They linked individualistic cultures to ego-focused
"+! !
emotions. Pride is an ego-focused emotion. Likewise they link collectivistic cultures with other-focused emotions, for example empathy. Neumann, Steinhäuser and Roeder (2009) did research between a Chinese and a German group. Chinese belong to a collectivistic culture and Germans belong to an individualistic culture. Like Durik et al. (2006) Neumann et al. (2009) describe that members of a collectivistic culture are seen as individuals experiencing less pride than members of an individualistic culture. In this study they examined the responses of the individuals from the two groups on scenarios where others were successful. Neumann et al. (2009) found that the Chinese participants felt more pride in these types of situations. In a second study German participants first were primed with an independent or interdependent self-construal. Then they were asked to think about their own achievement or DFKLHYHPHQWV RI RWKHUV$V D UHVXOW WKH\ IRXQG WKDW WKLQNLQJ DERXW RQH¶V RZQ DFKLHYHPHQWV after being primed an independent self-construal increased the feeling of pride, hence the egofocused emotion. And likewise, after being primed an interdependent self-construal and then asked to think about other ones achievements, increased pride. Priming of independent and interdependent self-construals influences the feeling of pride. Scollon, Diener, Oishi, and Biswas-Diener (2004) also made a comparison between different cultural groups. They compared European Americans, Asian Americans, Japanese, Indian and Hispanic in their study. Regarding expressing pride they found that Asian Americans, Japanese and the Indian (collectivistic culture) group reported lower levels of pride than European Americans and Hispanics (individualistic culture). And as reported before collectivistic cultures report lower levels of pride than the individualistic culture. Tracy and Robins (2008b) also examined whether the recognition of pride is the same across cultures. They conducted three studies. In the first study participants living in Italy were asked to choose the best emotion (pride, happiness, surprise and contempt) for the picture they were shown. After comparing the result with participants living in the United States, there was no significant difference in the test scores. The second study also supports the view that pride is recognized across cultures. Non-Western individuals (a tribe in Burkina Faso) were able to distinct pride from other emotions. The fact that they were able to recognize pride and distinct it from other related emotions suggests that pride might be a human universal emotion (Tracy & Robins, 2008b). With the third study individuals from thirty-six nations were divided into three cultural groups, namely African, Asian, and Caucasian. All three groups recognized the emotion pride.
""! !
There are studies that show that the emotion pride is recognized across cultures. But the distinction between individualistic and collectivistic cultures describe a difference of the frequency of expressing pride, giving a positive/negative meaning to it and connect this with selfish/selfless self of individuals in these cultures. Individuals from individualistic cultures show more frequently pride and give a positive meaning to this. They are considered more selfish. Individuals from collectivistic cultures give a negative meaning to pride and therefore it is not expressed as much as in the individualistic cultures. Collectivistic cultures have a more selfless identity and find the group very important.
Gender differences Tracy and Robins (2008b) also studied if there are any gender differences in the recognition of pride. They found that pride was better recognized by participants (!"#$%"&'% ($!"#$%)"*+$),%-(%.(*/0"&1%.,/"&1%"&'%2"30",/"&%'$,0$&)4 when displayed by a woman then by a man. The effect was the strongest with the pictures of African male/female. Berbner (2003) studied two groups. One group consisted of Australians and the other consisted of numerous other nationalities (forty one countries). He compared these two groups, focused on men and women, by studying the emotions affection, anger, contentment, fear, guilt, joy, pride and sadness. He examined the frequency and intensity of these emotions. Again when only focused on pride the results are the same as with the previous research. In the Australian group men scored significantly higher on the frequency of pride then women. The men in the Australian group also scored higher on the intensity when displaying pride. The frequency and intensity of displaying pride when focused on the international group was not significant when controlled for male and female participants. Durik et al. (2006) examined the gender stereotypes of emotions among four ethnic groups (African American, European American, Hispanic American and Asian American) in the United States. When only focused on pride there was not much of a difference between the stereotype of expressing pride by men and women among the African American group. But when looked into the three other groups, European American, Hispanic American and Asian American, there was a significant difference between men and women. This difference was the largest within the group European American, where men were stereotyped to display much more pride then women. Women are believed to express more emotions like love, guilt, shame and surprise than men.
"#! !
*HQGHUGLIIHUHQFHVDUHVHHQUHJDUGLQJWKHUHFRJQLWLRQRISULGHDQGLW¶VH[SUHVVLRQ7KH stereotypes people have of others are similar to research results of actually expressing pride. Even though women are better in recognizing pride, men display more frequently pride than women. Conclusion The number of studies done on the emotion pride has increased in the last decade. The goal of this literature review was to provide the reader with the information that is known now about this emotion. To be able to do so the following questions where answered in different sections: What is pride? How does the underlying structure look like? How do we recognize pride? What are the cultural differences of pride? What are the differences between men and women? Pride is nowadays being divided into two facets. The most used distinction is authentic and hubristic pride. Authentic pride is the achievement-oriented side of pride. It is seen as the more pro-social one. In contrast, hubristic pride is associated with self-destructive behavior and can be seen as narcissistic. It is a self-conscious emotion and has an underlying complex cognitive structure. For someone to be able to express pride, it needs to go through long and complex internal changes. There are different models that show the complexity of this emotion and every model underlines the importance of the self. Authentic or hubristic pride is the result of evaluating and giving meaning to events. The distinction between authentic and hubristic pride is not supported by studies done on pride recognition. People are not able to make this distinction when they see pride expressed by others. Authentic pride and hubristic pride have a shared way of expressing. When the head is slightly tilled back, a low intensity smile is expressed, an expanded posture, and the arms with hands on the hips or raised above the head with the hands in a fist then people recognize it as pride. There is cross-cultural recognition of pride and studies even suggest that the emotion is inherited. This also applies when we compare men and women. Overall men show more frequently pride then women do, but these differences are stronger in some cultures then others. In the individualistic culture signs of pride are seen more frequently than in collectivistic cultures. There is a lot less research done on pride than on other emotions. There could be many various reasons for this (Lewis, 1993). One of them is that pride is a complex emotion. It cannot solely be recognized by the small smile, which is the facial expression of pride. It requires other body observations. Another reason could be that, for emotions to be
"$! !
experienced by an individual there is need for an elicitor. With basic emotions like fear it is clear and specific what those elicitors can and/or could be. Fear can be elicited by seeing a spider if afraid of a spider. With the emotion pride it is not quite clear what the elicitor is. Various sides of pride are discussed in this literature review but the same researchers wrote many of the used articles. This can be interpreted as a limitation, because it is written with the same perspective. Another limitation is that due to the amount of research that has been done until know, there is not much depth. There is still a lot not known yet. The following future research suggestions can be made after this literature review: There is a distinction between authentic and hubristic pride, but when doing research on the recognition of this distinction not much is stated. At the moment there is no distinction between these two facets regarding the recognition. Is there really a difference between authentic and hubristic pride? Could the eye gaze directed upward be an important cue for recognizing authentic pride? The studies discussed about cultural differences and gender differences all address the differences regarding the recognition of pride. What is the reason for these differences? People from individualistic cultures show more frequently pride and this is related to status. How do individuals from collectivistic cultures distinct themselves from others and thus are granted status? Both facets are linked to Big Five traits. Authentic pride is positively related to the socially desirable Big Five traits of Agreeableness, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Openness and Neuroticism. Hubristic pride is negatively related to the pro-social traits of Agreeableness and Consciousnesses. How does this influence the way individuals experience pride? In conclusion, there are a lot of important aspects of the emotion pride that still needs to be studied. These research questions will give more depth and understanding of the emotion pride on some aspects of it.
"%! !
References Aaker, J.L., & Williams, P. (1998). Empathy versus pride: The influence of emotional appeals across cultures. The Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (3), 241-261. Benedict, C. (2009, April 6). When all you have left is your pride. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com Brebner, J. (2003). Gender and emotion. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 387-394. Durik, A.M., Hyde, J.S., Marks, A.C., Roy, A.L., Anaya, D., & Schultz, G. (2006). Ethnicity and gender stereotypes of emotion. Sex Roles, 54, 429-445. doi: 10.1007/s11199-0069020-4 Ekman, P., (1992). Facial expressions of emotion: An old controversy and new findings.
Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 335, 63-69. Lear, M.R. (2007). Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of
Psychology, 58, 317-344. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085658 Lewis, M. (1993). Self-conscious emotions: Embarrassment, pride, shame, and guilt. In M. Lewis, J.M. Haviland-Jones & L.F. Barrett, The handbook of emotions (pp 742-756). Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books Neumann, R., Steinhäuser, N., & Roeder, U.R. (2009). How self-construal shapes emotion: Cultural differences in the feeling of pride. Social Cognition, 27 (2), 327-337. Oosterwijk, S., Rotteveel, M., Fischer, A.H., & Hess, U. (2009). Embodied emotion concepts: How generating words about pride and disappointment influences posture.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 457-466. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.584 Ortony, A., Clore, G.L., & Collins, A. (1990). The cognitive structure of emotions. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books Scollon, C.N., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2004). Emotions across cultures and methods. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35 (3), 304-326. doi: 10.1177/0022022104264124
"&! !
6KDULII$) 7UDF\-/ .QRZLQJZKR¶VERVV ,PSOLFLWSHUFHSWLRQVRIVWDWXVIURP the nonverbal expression of pride. E motions, 9 (5), 631-679. doi:10.1037/a0017089 Shariff, A.F., Tracy, J.L., Cheng, J.T., & Henrich, J. (In press). Further thoughts on the HYROXWLRQRISULGH¶VWZRIDFHWV $UHVSRQVHWR&ODUN E motion Review. Silva, P.J. (2009). Looking past pleasure: Anger, confusion, disgust, pride, surprise, and other unusual aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3 (1), 48-51. doi: 10.1037/a0014632 Tracy, J.L., & Matsumoto, D. (2008). The spontaneous expression of pride and shame: Evidence for biologically innate nonverbal displays. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 105 (33), 11655-11660. Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R.W. (n.d.). Self-conscious emotions: Where self and emotions meet. p. 187-209. doi: 10.1.1.130.6585 Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W. (2003). Does pride have a recognizable expression? New York
Academy of Science, 1000, 1-3. doi: 10.1196/annals.1280.001 Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R.W. (2004a). Putting the self into self-conscious emotions: A theoretical model. Psychological Inquiry, 15 (2), 103-125. Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W. (2004b). Show your pride: Evidence for a discrete emotion expression. American Psychological Society, 15 (3), 194-197. Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W., & Lagattuta, K.H. (2005). Can children recognize pride?
E motions, 5 (3), 251-257. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.3.251 Tracy. J.L., & Robins, R.W. (2007a). Emerging insight into the nature and function of pride.
Association for Psychological Science, 16 (3), 147-150. Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W. (2007b). The prototypical pride expression: Development of a nonverbal behavior coding system. E motions, 7 (4), 789-801. doi: 10.1037/15283542.7.4.789 Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W. (2007c). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92 (3), 506-523.
"'! !
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007d). The self in self-conscious emotions: A cognitive appraisal approach. In J. L. Tracy, R. W. Robins, & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), The self-
conscious emotions: Theory and research (pp. 3-20). New York, NY: Guilford. Tracy, J.L. & Robins, R. W. (2008a). The automaticity of emotion recognition. E motions, 6 (1), 81-95. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.8.1.81 Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R. W. (2008b).The nonverbal expression of pride: Evidence for crosscultural recognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (3), 516-530. doi: 10.1037/0822-3514.94.3.516 7UDF\-/6KDULII$ &KHQJ-7 $QDWXUDOLVW¶VYLHZRISULGH E motion Review, 2 (2), 163-177. doi: 10.1177/1754073909354627 Williams, L.A. (2009). Developing a functional view of pride in the interpersonal domain. Retrieved from http://iris.lib.neu.edu/psych.diss/11 Williams, L.A., & DeSteno, D. (2008). Pride and perseverance: The motivational role of pride. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (6), 1007-1017. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1007
"(! !
A ppendix Figure 1. Process model of self-conscious emotions
!
F igure 1. Process model of self-conscious emotions
")! !
Figure 2. Global structure of emotion types
F igure 2. Global structure of emotion types
"*! !
Figure 3. Pride coding system
F igure 3. Pride coding system !