Share This Paper. Background Citations. Methods Citations. Results Citations. Citation Type. Has PDF. Publication Type. More Filters. Emotion or life, the universe, everything.
Emotions are fundamental to human life; they define its quality and motivate action. In the past, social scientists who have studied emotions have treated them as biological, cultural or social … Expand.
The sociology of emotions: Four decades of progress. The emotions that human beings experience play a fundamental role in all social phenomena. As a result, sociology needs to incorporate the analysis of affective structures and emotional dynamics into … Expand.
Highly Influenced. View 5 excerpts, cites background and results. Emotions and sentiments. I begin with the classical theorist Cooley , p. Like all valued resources, positive and negative emotions are unequally distributed in a society and constitute an important basis of social stratification. In this article, a general conceptual … Expand. What's basic about basic emotions? View 2 excerpts, cites background. Emotion and politics is the study of the non-cognitive core of politics.
Emotion and politics presents its own special set of difficulties. First, emotions are experienced individually but politics … Expand. View 1 excerpt, cites background. The sociology of emotions.
Recent work in the sociology of emotions has gone beyond the development of concepts and broad perspectives to elaboration of theory and some empirical research. More work has been done at the … Expand. Emotions, Sociology of. The prominent theoretically driven research traditions in the sociology of emotions are reviewed, and statements are made on some of the enduring conceptual issues in the field of inquiry.
The study … Expand. Emotion norms both reflect and sustain the social structures in which they develop. Discontent can result from either a feeling of excess or insufficiency of power and status. These relate to both subjective perceptions and cultural definitions of what is adequate, excessive or inadequate on these two relational dimensions, and cue physiological results.
Following the discussion of own power and status, we will move on to consider the structural emotions pertaining to the power and status of the other - which can also be evaluated in terms of adequacy, excess and insufficiency.
When viewed as adequate, it results in the person feeling security, comfort and a sense of ease. Essentially, a sense of having adequate power creates a sense of ability to win in competitive relationships, a workable deterrent, culminating in a general sense of security. Of course, an objective observer may disagree entirely, and some individuals may never feel guilt despite the most wanton uses of power over another e. Yet, most people are socialized to values that set limits on the use and enjoyment of power over others, and when those limits are overstepped, the emotion one is likely to feel is guilt.
Kemper hypothesizes that when self is seen as the agent of such excess power use, the emotion is introjected and experienced as guilt - and can go so far as Aan uncomfortable feeling of regret, remorse, and self-blame which can develop ultimately into a desire for punishment as a means of expiation. Numerous investigators have found that found that when research subjects have harmed another subject without justification, they subsequently behaved in an expiatory manner that would lead to an inference that they had experienced guilt e.
Cultural and religious values play a key role. However, when the other is seen as responsible for our excess of power, Kemper hypothesizes that the emotion is extrojected in a form of anger and hostility toward the other, even going so far as suggesting megalomania. This is guilt and possibly anxiety turned outward. Certainly there is considerable evidence that victims of excess power are often derogated or blamed e. Turning to the structural situation where an actor experiences insufficient power, Kemper argues that this gives rise to the emotions of fear and anxiety.
A real or imagined deficit of structural power means that the other can likely win when there is a crucial showdown, that one must comply with the wishes of the other when one does not wish to.
This makes the future both uncertain and uninviting, suitable conditions for fear and anxiety. It also implies that the other can exercise power at will, and it is the uncertainty of what the other may demand that gives rise to the painful character of this emotion. Kemper calls this type of fear-anxiety anarchy-rebelliousness. For example, when once free behaviors are brought under the control of others, people feel personally thwarted.
If there is no alternative, they are subjugated. If there are, there may be rebellion. The person may engage in fantasy conflicts with the other as a result. Experimental studies have, in fact, shown that an anticipatory and controlled use of counterpower can make the other desist from using power against you. Since one obtains status in this relational model from the other, and since this conferral involves the voluntary giving of rewards and gratifications, Kemper argues that when one receives status in adequate amounts one should feel happy.
Yet, just as with excess power, a specific emotion is invoked by receiving excess status: shame. When one claims more competence or achievements than is the case, or others mistakenly assume this, and more status is given and accepted than is deserved, the resulting emotion is shame.
Shame usually acts as a brake on the overweening desire for more and more benefits from others when one does not deserve them. Norms and standards that guide manners and appropriateness are full of guidelines as to who deserves and gets how much status. Since honor is a grant of status in the first place, one deserves less if once has accepted too much. Of course, this may take milder variants, such as momentary embarrassment. As well, a significant factor involves public exposure where those who provide the status become aware of the falsity of the status claim.
Nevertheless, on this relational definition, one primarily involves excess power; the other excess status. The following reaction has several possibilities: 1 acceptance of the lower status; 2 withdrawal from interaction; or 3 compensation: the difficult task of attempting to prove that one is indeed worthy of the previously conferred status. To be continually be exposed to the contrast between what one believes oneself to be and the higher estimate of the other must ultimately put great pressure on oneself to be as good or competent as suggested: the unpaid debt, as it were, keeps growing.
The discomfort of this turns into hostility toward the other. Of course, this can result in an even more hostile response when the other suddenly turns on the actor, exposing him or her as a fraud. Such tactical power behavior shows how power and status dimensions can interrelate. Turning to the situation of insufficient status, Kemper proposes that when voluntarily given benefits and compliance from the other are inadequate, the emotion experienced is depression.
Structural insufficiency of status means that one is not receiving from the other enough of the benefits and rewards that one has come to depend on in that relationship e. When self is felt to be the agent of this deficit of status, or if one feels that one does not have the capacity or the means to change the situation, depression takes its classic form as despair, apathy or hopelessness.
Indeed, studies have shown that hostility will be directed more at self than other. When we feel ourselves worthy, but the other denies us the status, recognition, or benefits that we deserve, animosity is released against the other. Depression is turned outward. It is important to recognize the distinction between the anger of anxiety and the anger of depression. The former is primarily rooted in insufficient power; the latter in insufficient status. The objects of the anger are differentiated respectively.
Kemper proposes that when one gives adequate status to the other, we feel that we are fair, equitable and just, and hence experience a positive affective response of satisfaction or contentment with self - indistinguishable from the feeling of happiness that results from receiving adequate status. Hence, we can attain happiness by giving status to others as well as by receiving it from them. Conferring excess status on another appears to be an anomaly, since Kemper has defined giving status as voluntary compliance.
It may well be a null cell in his typology. These often result in powerful emotions when we are enlightened e. This is a form of exercising power - and like all use of power that is excessive, the emotion invoked is guilt.
In addition, there may be shame, since the excessive use of power may negate claims to fairness and decency. Perhaps there may even be fear of retaliation. Whether this leads to expiation or compensation, as in the case of excess power use and excess status, is another question considering that self and other are competing for the same status resources - and the only way to retain enough for oneself may be to deny them to the other. In summary, Kemper proposes that when self considers that the status given to the other is adequate, the structural emotion is happiness; when insufficient status is given, the emotion is a compound of guilt and shame.
A true excess of status conferral to the other is possibly a null. Kemper argues that the intensity of these structural emotions depends on the degree to which the four relational channels are favorable or unfavorable to the actor - either objectively and according to common standards and particular conditions of the relationship, or subjectively, according to a more idiosyncratic interpretation of what is favorable and what is not.
Obviously it feels good to receive status; it also feels good to give status to the other, as long as this is in appropriate amounts. In general, too, it is good to have power, as long as one has more of it than the other, since it is a partial guarantee that the rewards one gets will continue to flow from the other and that punishments from the other are deterred.
Since these are the possible structural emotions of a single actor, when all are positive, the person must feel quite content in that relationship. Of course, most relationships involve mixed emotions - a combination of adequate, excess and insufficient structural relations - in varying degrees of intensity.
As noted earlier, Kemper points out that in addition to such occurrent, structural emotions, there are anticipatory emotions. Taken together the two sentiments give rise to 4 feelings:. Within his framework, Kemper has proposed a socialization paradigm for guilt, shame, anxiety and depression as characteristic moods and dispositions.
It centers around punishment types: i power oriented; ii proportionality; and iii affection-oriented. This leads to a set of 8 possible outcome hypotheses about how each of the negative emotions above are socialized as a characteristic personality trait, as well as the usual coping response when the negative emotion is activated e.
Love relationships include 7 situations where one gives, or is prepared to give, extremely high amounts of status to another romantic, brotherly, unrequited, parent-infant, etc. Such relationships evolve or devolve in light of power-status dynamics therein. Kemper conducted an empirical test of the power-status approach an 8 nation study to the determination of emotions and found a good fit between the theory and the relational conditions antecedent to the Afour primary emotions anger, fear, sadness and joy.
He argues that these are perhaps the theoretically optimum dimensions by which any relationship may usefully be seen. Essentially, then, Kemper feels that this power-status model captures the complexity of emotional response in real life, and at the same time systematically allocates the mix of conflicting emotions to particular relational sources. However, it must be noted that his social relational model rests on at least 3 important assumptions:. If any of these assumptions were empirically refuted, his theory would require major restructuring.
Summing up his initial postulates, then: Relationships between actors can be characterized by locating the actors relative to each other on the two relational dimensions of power and status; In any interaction episode, up to 4 possible relational changes can occur simultaneously; Relational changes are understood as gain or loss in the power and status positions of the actors vs a vis each other; Continuity of the existing levels of power and status of the actors is also a possible outcome of an interactional episode; When a relational change occurs or when there is continuity, some agent is responsible for the outcome; Agents can be self, other, or 3 rd party; One can feel different emotions toward self, other, and 3 rd party if there is one as a result of the same relational outcome.
A Theory of Emotions: While noting that there are many definitions of emotion. Kemper prefers to call these long-term emotions sentiments.
0コメント