The cultural shaping of compassion

In this chapter, we first review the existing literature on cross-cultural studies on compassion. While cultural similarities exist, we demonstrate cultural differences in the conception, experience, and expression of compassion. Then we present our own work on the cultural shaping of compassion by introducing Affect Valuation Theory ( e.g., Tsai, Knutson, & Fung, 2006), our theoretical framework. We show how the desire to avoid feeling negative partly explains cultural differences in conceptualizations and expressions of compassion. Specifically, the more people want to avoid feeling negative, the more they focus on the positive (e.g., comforting memories) than the negative (e.g., the pain of someone\u27s death) when responding to others\u27 suffering, and the more they regard responses as helpful that focus on the positive (vs. negative). Finally, we discuss implications of our work for counseling, health care, and public service settings, as well as for interventions that aim to promote compassion

The negative feelings that people want to avoid: Cultural differences and consequences for compassion

Previous research has documented cultural differences in the positive states that people desire. Less research, however, has examined whether cultural differences exist in the negative states that people want to avoid feeling ( avoided negative affect ). Using a multimethod approach, we examined cultural differences between Americans and Germans in avoided negative affect and whether they are related to different responses to suffering, or compassion. In Study 1, using survey methods, we assessed whether avoided negative affect differs from related constructs, and based on an existing literature, tested our hypothesis that Americans want to avoid negative affect more than do Germans. As predicted, avoided negative affect is distinct from actual negative affect (the negative states people actually feel) and from ideal negative affect (the negative states people ideally want to feel) and European Americans wanted to avoid negative states more than did Germans. In Study 2, we compared the emotional content of American and German sympathy cards to examine cultural differences in responses to suffering. As predicted, American cards contained more positive and less negative content than did German cards. In Study 3, using survey methods, we examined whether cultural differences in responses to suffering were due to cultural differences in avoided negative affect. As predicted, Americans felt less comfortable sending sympathy cards that contained primarily negative content (e.g., words will not lighten a heavy heart ) than did Germans, and these differences were mediated by cultural differences in avoided negative affect. Finally, in a series of experiments, American and German participants were randomly assigned to either avoid negative affect or approach negative affect conditions. Overall, participants in the avoid negative affect conditions preferred sympathy cards with negative content less than those in the approach negative affect conditions. These findings suggest that differences in avoided negative affect at least partially drive different responses to suffering (i.e., compassion)

Focusing on the negative: Cultural differences in expressions of sympathy

Feeling concern about the suffering of others is considered a basic human response, and yet we know surprisingly little about the cultural factors that shape how people respond to the suffering of another person. To this end, we conducted 4 studies that tested the hypothesis that American expressions of sympathy focus on the negative less and positive more than German expressions of sympathy, in part because Americans want to avoid negative states more than Germans do. In Study 1, we demonstrate that American sympathy cards contain less negative and more positive content than German sympathy cards. In Study 2, we show that European Americans want to avoid negative states more than Germans do. In Study 3, we demonstrate that these cultural differences in “avoided negative affect” mediate cultural differences in how comfortable Americans and Germans feel focusing on the negative (vs. positive) when expressing sympathy for the hypothetical death of an acquaintance’s father. To examine whether greater avoided negative affect results in lesser focus on the negative and greater focus on the positive when responding to another person’s suffering, in Study 4, American and German participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions: (a) to “push negative images away” (i.e., increasing desire to avoid negative affect) from or (b) to “pull negative images closer” (i.e., decreasing desire to avoid negative affect) to themselves. Participants were then asked to pick a card to send to an acquaintance whose father had hypothetically just died. Across cultures, participants in the “push negative away” condition were less likely to choose sympathy cards with negative (vs. positive) content than were those in the “pull negative closer” condition. Together, these studies suggest that cultures differ in their desire to avoid negative affect and that these differences influence the degree to which expressions of sympathy focus on the negative (vs. positive). We discuss the implications of these findings for current models of sympathy, compassion, and helping

Evidence for universality in phenomenological emotion response system coherence

The authors reanalyzed data from Scherer and Wallbott\u27s (Scherer, 1997b; Scherer & Wallbott, 1994) International Study of Emotion Antecedents and Reactions to examine how phenomenological reports of emotional experience, expression, and physiological sensations were related to each other within cultures and to determine if these relationships were moderated by cultural differences, which were operationally defined using Hofstede\u27s (2001) typology. Multilevel random coefficient modeling analyses produced several findings of note. First, the vast majority of the variance in ratings was within countries (i.e., at the individual level); a much smaller proportion of the total variance was between countries. Second, there were negative relationships between country-level means and long- versus short-term orientation for numerous measures. Greater long-term orientation was associated with lowered emotional expressivity and fewer physiological sensations. Third, at the individual (within-culture) level, across the 7 emotions, there were consistent and reliable positive relationships among the response systems, indicating coherence among them. Fourth, such relationships were not moderated by cultural differences, as measured by the Hofstede dimensions

Asian Americans respond less favorably to excitement (vs. calm)-focused physicians compared to European Americans

OBJECTIVES: Despite being considered a model minority, Asian Americans report worse health care encounters than do European Americans. This may be due to affective mismatches between Asian American patients and their European American physicians. We predicted that because Asian Americans value excitement (vs. calm) less than European Americans, they will respond less favorably to excitement-focused (vs. calm) physicians. METHOD: In Study 1, 198 European American, Chinese American, and Hong Kong Chinese community adults read a medical scenario and indicated their preference for an excitement-focused versus calm-focused physician. In Study 2, 81 European American and Asian American community college students listened to recommendations made by an excitement-focused or calm-focused physician in a video, and later attempted to recall the recommendations. In Study 3, 101 European American and Asian American middle-aged and older adults had multiple online encounters with an excitement-focused or calm-focused physician and then evaluated their physicians\u27 trustworthiness, competence, and knowledge. RESULTS: As predicted, Hong Kong Chinese preferred excitement-focused physicians less than European Americans, with Chinese Americans falling in the middle (Study 1). Similarly, Asian Americans remembered health information delivered by an excitement-focused physician less well than did European Americans (Study 2). Finally, Asian Americans evaluated an excitement-focused physician less positively than did European Americans (Study 3). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that while physicians who promote and emphasize excitement states may be effective with European Americans, they may be less so with Asian Americans and other ethnic minorities who value different affective states

The religious shaping of feeling: Implications of Affect Valuation Theory

Over 80% of the world population identifies with a specific religion (Adherents. com, 2007; Central Intelligence Agency, 2011). For some individuals, this religion structures and shapes every dimension of their daily lives: what they wear, with whom they spend time, where they go, and what they eat. As important, but perhaps less overt, is how religion shapes people\u27s psyches. Indeed, one of the major functions of religion is to provide followers with a way of understanding and coping with their life circumstances (see Pargament, Falb, Ano, & Wachholtz, Chapter 28, this volume; Park, 2005). Another is to provide a guide or map for how to lead a good life (in this volume, see Donahue & Nielsen, Chapter 16, and Park, Chapter 18). A central part of coping with life and leading a good life is regulating one\u27s emotions. Indeed, several religious scholars have written about the centrality of emotion in religious experience (see Emmons, 2005a, for an excellent history of religion and emotion). For instance, ·two fundamental truths or tenets of Buddhism are that life is full of suffering, sorrow, and grief, and that the way to end this suffering is to relinquish one\u27s attachments to the material world and achieve· enlightenment (Smith, 1991). In this chapter, we explore several ways in which religion may shape people\u27s emotional lives, specifically their emotional goals, using the framework of affect valuation theory (AVT; Tsai, 2007). But first, we discuss our approach to religion

Choosing a physician depends on how you want to feel: The role of ideal affect in health-related decision making

When given a choice, how do people decide which physician to select? Although significant research has demonstrated that how people actually feel (their “actual affect”) influences their health care preferences, how people ideally want to feel (their “ideal affect”) may play an even greater role. Specifically, we predicted that people trust physicians whose affective characteristics match their ideal affect, which leads people to prefer those physicians more. Consistent with this prediction, the more participants wanted to feel high arousal positive states on average ([ideal HAP]; e.g., excited), the more likely they were to select a HAP-focused physician. Similarly, the more people wanted to feel low arousal positive states on average ([ideal LAP]; e.g., calm), the more likely they were to select a LAP-focused physician. Also as predicted, these links were mediated by perceived physician trustworthiness. Notably, while participants’ ideal affect predicted physician preference, actual affect (how much people actually felt HAP and LAP on average) did not. These findings suggest that people base even serious decisions on how they want to feel and highlight the importance of considering ideal affect in models of decision making, person perception, and patient physician communication

A Macat analysis of Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch’s Working Memory

In the 1960s, researchers into human memory began to understand memory as operating under two systems. The first was a short-term system handling information for mere seconds. The second was a long-term system capable of managing information indefinitely. They also discovered, however, that short-term memory was not simply a filing cabinet, but was actively working on cognitive - or mental - tasks. This is how the phrase working memory developed. Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch wanted to find evidence to prove that short-term memory really could be described as working memory. Their 1974 work presents the results of 10 original experiments and concludes that working memory actually consists of three parts. Two separate components - one handling what we hear, one handling what we see - act as our short-term information storage. The third component is responsible for processing and managing the first two, while also influencing attention, reasoning, reading comprehension, and learning. Although evidence from recent experiments has led to some modifications to the Baddeley - Hitch working memory model, Working Memory was and still is a highly influential paper in memory research.https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/faculty_books/1261/thumbnail.jp

Dataset and Syntax

Even people from frequently studied cultural contexts differ in how they conceptualize compassion, partly because of differences in how much they want to avoid feeling negative. To broaden this past work, we include participants from an understudied cultural context and start to examine the process through which culture shapes compassion. Based on ethnographic and empirical studies that include Ecuadorians, we predicted that Ecuadorians would want to avoid feeling negative less compared to U.S. Americans. Furthermore, we hypothesized that because of these differences in avoided negative affect, compared to U.S. Americans, for Ecuadorians, a compassionate response would contain more emotion sharing, which in turn would be associated with conceptualizing a compassionate face as one that mirrors sadness more and expresses happiness (e.g., a kind smile) less. Using a reverse correlation task, participants in the U.S. and Ecuador selected the stimuli that most resembled a compassionate face. They also reported how much they wanted to avoid feeling negative and described what a compassionate response would entail. As predicted, compared to U.S. Americans, Ecuadorians wanted to avoid feeling negative less, they conceptualized a compassionate response as one that focused more on emotion sharing, and visualized a compassionate face as one that contained more sadness and less happiness. Furthermore, exploratory analyses suggest that wanting to avoid feeling negative and conceptualizations of a compassionate response as emotion sharing partly sequentially explained the cultural differences in conceptualizations of a compassionate face. What people regard as compassionate differs across cultures, which has important implications for cross-cultural counseling.</p