Reports of Emotional Expression and Control in. Indian and American College Students

Transcription

1 Reports of Emotional Expression and Control in Indian and American College Students ` A thesis submitted to the Miami University Honors Program in partial fulfillment of the requirements for University Honors with Distinction by Michelle Lindsay Crowe May 2011 Oxford, OH

2 ABSTRACT Reports of Emotional Expression and Control in Indian and American College Students By Michelle L. Crowe Although some aspects of emotional expression are universal, considerable variation exists across cultures in the ways in which emotions are expressed (Cole, Brushi, Tamang, 2002). The present study seeks to discover cross-cultural differences and similarities in emotion expression among Indian and United States college students. A total of 268 participants (United States: n=160 and India: n=108) completed a self-report measure depicting hypothetical vignettes and a series of questions assessing likely emotions elicited, expressiveness, rationale for expression and control, and method of expression. Results showed variation in the emotions reported in response to some of the vignettes, with Indian participants reporting more other-focused emotions. US participants more commonly reported direct communication of the emotion, while Indian participants more frequently reported direct or discreet communication of the situation that caused the emotion. Key words: emotion expression, emotion, culture ii

3

4 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Vaishali Raval, who has significantly helped me through the entire process of writing this empirical study for my honors thesis. She is my primary connection for receiving data from India and the United States that made this study possible. She has also read and helped me revise several drafts of my thesis and is currently in the process of helping me work towards creating a manuscript for publication. I would also like to thank Suchi Daga, who is currently a Clinical PhD student in the department of psychology. She has served as my graduate student mentor and a reader for my thesis. She was available to answer any questions I had and was always willing to help in any way she could. She has been very supportive through this process. I would also like to thank my other reader, Dr. Amy Summerville, who has also made herself available to help me in any way she could. She has read a few drafts of my work and has provided me with excellent feedback. Two final people that I would like to thank include Shwetang Trivedi, MA, from H.K. Arts College in India, and Dr. Prariksha Raval, from Gujarat University in India, who collected the Indian data for my study. iv

5 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Culture and Emotion 1 Cultural Differences in Emotional Experience 2 Cultural Differences in Emotional Expressiveness 3 Cultural Differences in Methods of Expression 5 Cultural Differences in Reasons for Expression or Control 6 The Present Study 7 Methods 8 Participants 8 Procedure 9 Measure 10 Results 13 Preliminary Analysis 13 Main Analysis Felt Emotion 13 Decision to Express 15 Reason for Control 15 Reason for Expression 17 Method of Expression 19 Discussion 21 Cultural Differences in Felt Emotion 22 Cultural Differences in Decisions to Express Emotion 23 Cultural Differences in Reasons for Expression and Control 24 Cultural Difference in Methods of Expression 26 Limitations and Future Implications 27 References 29 Tables 33 v

6 Running Head: REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 1 Reports of Emotional Expression and Control in Indian and American College Students Emotions are defined as fundamental and universal attributes (Cole, Brushi, Tamang, 2002), however, although some aspects of emotion expression might be universal, others are culture-specific. The present study seeks to examine emotions across two cultural groups, including how they are expressed and what reasons lay behind controlling or expressing them. Although the literature on emotion expression is growing (Cole et al. 2002; Kitayama, Mesquita, & Karasawa, 2006; Matsumoto, 2001), many cross-cultural comparisons involve samples from East Asian countries and the West, while less focus on South Asia. Therefore, the present study focused on college students in India and the United States and compared Indian participants to US participants to discover whether Indians understanding, experience and expression of emotions match the universal prototype. Culture and Emotion In general, cultural differences in emotion expression can be attributed to ones cultural model which ultimately determines the way one regulates their emotions (Mesquita & Albert, 2007). Different cultural models arrange the social environment in specific ways, thus, there is a pattern of situations that one encounters on a day to day basis which determines how one s emotions are regulated. An individual is more likely to respond to a situation with emotions that are consistent with their cultural model. Research shows that different cultural models also contribute to an individual s motivation to confront positive or avoid negative situations in his or her social

7 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 2 environment (e.g., Elliot, Chirkov, Kim, & Sheldon, 2001; Lee, Aaker, & Gardner, 2000). Within cross-cultural psychology, Western cultures (e.g. USA and Germany) are typically considered individualistic, in which individuals value autonomy and their social behavior is guided by their personal needs and desires (Triandis, 1995). Individuals from these cultures are predominantly characterized by independent self-construals, in which personal needs, desires, and attributes define the sense of self (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In contrast, Asian cultures (e.g., India, China and Japan) are considered collectivistic, where individuals value interpersonal harmony and group cohesion, and social behavior is guided by cognitions that focus on norms, duties, and expectations of others (Triandis, 1995). Interdependent self-construals characterize individuals from these cultures whereby self in relation to other is salient in individual experience (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). These cultural patterns and variation in self-construal are thought to influence the ways in which emotions are conceptualized, expressed or controlled, and the rationale guiding decisions for emotional expression and control. Cultural Differences in Emotional Experience Kitayama and colleagues (Kitayama, Mesquita, & Karasawa, 2006; Markus & Kitayama, 1991) have proposed that individuals with independent and interdependent self-construals experience and express different types of emotions. Specifically, these researchers suggest that individuals with an independent self-construal are likely to experience and express ego-focused (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) or socially disengaging emotions (Kitayama et al., 2006) that assert one s internal attributes (e.g. anger and pride) and promote independence and achievement. In contrast, it is argued that individuals

8 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 3 with an interdependent self-construal likely experience and express other-focused (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) or socially engaging emotions (Kitayama et al., 2006) that are expressed with another individual as the primary referent (e.g. sympathy and shame). Both positive and negative socially engaging emotions are thought to promote interpersonal relations and group harmony. Cultural Differences in Emotional Expressiveness In addition to cultural variation in the types of emotions expressed, researchers have also found that overall likelihood to express emotions differs across cultures. Asians, in general, are thought to show felt emotion less than European-Americans in order to maintain the well-being of the group (Kuppersbusch et al., 1999; Matsumuto, 1991). In contrast to Asians, Euro-Americans tend to express a wider range of emotions, including negative emotions, which is characteristic of individual uniqueness and independence (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). For instance, Safdar and colleagues (2009) found that Japanese college students, considered to have an interdependent self-construal, were less likely to express either negative (e.g., contempt, anger, disgust) or positive (e.g., happiness, surprise) emotions compared to North American college students who more typically have an independent self-construal. In another study, Wilson, Raval, Raval, Wehri, and Panchal (in press) found that school-age children in the US were more likely to report expressing anger, sadness, and physical pain than school-age children in India. This is consistent with the greater priorities of being self-reliant or self-assertive that are typically seen in Western cultures.

9 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 4 Gender differences have also been found in emotional expressiveness in Western cultures. Fischer and Manstead (2000) state that women in the US tend to express their emotions to a greater extent than men do. Numerous researchers found that women from the US across a variety of ethnicities (Asian-American, Hispanic, African American, Caucasian and other) appear to express and experience prosocial emotions, such as empathy, and joy, and emotions that have a powerless or vulnerable connotation, (e.g. shame, sadness and fear) more often than men (e.g. Brody & Hall, 1993; Simon & Nath, 2004; Gross & John, 1998). Fischer and Jansz (1995) noted that men, both Western and Dutch, tend to express powerful emotions such as anger, and pride, more often than women. Research examining gender differences in emotion expression across cultures has yielded mixed results. Some studies have shown few gender differences in Asian cultures, while others have shown gender differences that parallel findings from Western cultures. For example, one study showed few gender differences in regards to amount of total crying in response to a variety of hypothetical situations in India (Vingerhoets & Becht, 1996). In another study, Frymier, Klopf, and Ishii (1990) found no significant gender differences in emotional reactions of Japanese participants. In contrast, Wilson et al., (in press) found that school-age girls in India reported using direct verbal communication to express physical pain more than boys. Based on this literature, Indian students in the present study were expected to report expressing emotions less than US college students. US male college students were expected to report expressing emotions

10 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 5 less than US female college students, while few gender differences were expected in India. Cultural Differences in Methods of Expression Hall s (1976) dimension of high context versus low context communication provides a helpful framework to understand emotion communication across cultures. Asian cultures are considered high context cultures where meaning in social conversations is acquired implicitly from the situation, non-verbal behaviors, social status of interactive partners, and/or previous knowledge (Hall, 1976). In contrast, Western cultures are considered low context cultures, where meaning in a conversation is conveyed directly through straightforward questions or statements (Hall, 1976). It is possible that emotion can function as the meaning expressed by each culture to provide support for cultural differences in the understanding and conveyance of emotions. Consistent with this dimension of low context versus high context communication, Wilson et al. (in press) found that school-age children in the US reported more direct verbal forms of expression (e.g., stating explicitly that one was angry or sad) than school-age children in Northwestern India. In the present study, cultural differences among Indian and American college students are expected such that American college students would be more likely to report direct verbal communication of emotion than Indian college students, and Indian college students would report more indirect and contextual methods of communication than American students.

11 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 6 Cultural Differences in Reasons for Expression or Control The study of individuals reasoning for their decisions to express or control emotions can provide important information about cultural display rules, culturallyshared norms and rules that guide the expression and experience of emotions (Ekman & Frissen, 1975). These display rules can vary as a function of Hofstede s (1991) Individualism-Collectivism dimension which can account for differences in participants decisions to express or control their emotions. In South Asian cultures, individuals are likely to express positive emotions and control negative emotions in order to maintain social relationships, social obligations, and expectations (Keller & Otto, 2009; Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In contrast, in Western cultures such as the US, the goal of emotional expression may be assertion of one s personal attributes and independence. In the Western developmental psychology literature, several rationales for expressing emotion have been documented including expectation of social support (e.g., an empathic response from the other), expectation of instrumental help (e.g., an intervention to help fix the situation), a desire to communicate emotions, and uncontrollability of emotion (Zeman & Garber, 1996). In contrast, rationale for controlling emotion cited by school-age children in Western cultures involve avoidance of negative interpersonal consequences, or prosocial concerns, and less frequently reference to social norms (Zeman & Garber, 1996; Zeman & Shipman, 1998). In a crosscultural study, Wilson et al (in press) found that US school-age children reported a desire to communicate feelings and an expectation of help/support as reasons to express emotions more than Indian children. In contrast, Indian children reported social norms

12 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 7 and reappraisal of the situation or the emotion as reasons to control emotions more than US children. In another cross-cultural study of preschoolers in India and England, Joshi and MacLean (1994) found that Indian children made more references to social rules and avoidance of physical punishment as reasons for controlling emotion than did British children. Based on this literature, in the present study, we expected Indian college students to cite rationales for controlling emotions that focus on social norms and expectations, reappraisal, and avoidance of negative interpersonal consequences more than US college students. In contrast, we expect US college students to cite rationales for expressing emotions that focus on autonomy and their desire to communicate emotion more than Indian college students. The Present Study The purpose of the present study was to compare the following between Indian and American college students: a) the type of emotions reported in response to hypothetical vignettes depicting interpersonal situations, b) the likelihood of expressing felt emotion, c) the reasons for expression, as well as control, and d) the method of expression. Given the lack of previous literature concerning variation in emotional experience in Indian culture, we examined the type of emotions reported by Indian and US college students in an exploratory manner. With respect to likelihood of expression, it was hypothesized that American college students (a culture presumed to be individualistic) would be more likely to report expressing their emotions than Indian college students (a

13 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 8 culture presumed to be collectivistic). We expected greater gender differences in US college students than Indian students such that US female college students would be more likely to report expressing their emotions than US male college students. With respect to method of expression, it was expected that US college students would be more likely to report direct communication of emotion than Indian college students, while Indian college students would report more implicit or indirect communication of emotion. Finally, with respect to reasons for controlling and expressing emotion, we expected Indian college students to cite rationales for controlling emotions that focus on social norms and expectations, reappraisal, and avoidance of negative interpersonal consequences more than US college students. In contrast, we expected US college students to cite rationales for expressing emotions that focus on autonomy and their desire to communicate emotion more than Indian college students. Method Participants The participants for the present study include college students from a midsize university in Southwestern Ohio, US (n=160; 64 % female) and from an undergraduate college in Gujarat, a northwestern state of India (n=108; 66 % female). Within the US sample, participants ranged in age from age 18 to 22 (M = 18.70, SD =.94), and the Indian participants ranged in age from 18 to 23 years (M= 19.03, SD =1.10). The majority of the US sample identified themselves as White/Caucasian (89%), with a few participants identifying as Black/African American (3%), Hispanic (4%), Asian/Asian American (3%), or other /biracial (1%). A majority of the Indian sample was Hindu

14 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 9 (96%), with a few participants identifying as Jain (3%), and Muslim (1%). A majority of the US sample were freshman (60%), with a few sophomores (28%), juniors (8%) and seniors (4%). A majority of the India participants were in first (46%) or second year (42%), with a few in their third year (12%). Procedure All procedures in India took place in Gujarati, the participants first language, while all procedures in the US were completed in English. Written informed consent was obtained from participants in India and the US in participants native language prior to administration of the questionnaire. Participants completed a self-report questionnaire that presented five hypothetical vignettes depicting interpersonal situations, and a series of questions pertaining to each vignette. The questionnaire was translated from English to Gujarati and back translated to ensure conceptual and linguistic equivalence. Participants in both countries completed the questionnaire in paper-pencil format in one of the two random orders to investigate the impact of order of presentation on participants responses. For all of the open-ended questions, a coding scheme was developed based on a review of the literature and review of the responses in the present study. Responses to open-ended questions of US participants were coded in English by the primary researcher, and 1/3 of the responses were coded independently by a second coder to establish inter-rater reliability (Cohen s Kappa ranged from.64 to.73). Responses to open-ended questions of Indian participants were coded in Gujarati by the faculty advisor fluent in Gujarati, and 1/3 of the responses were coded independently by a

15 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 10 second Gujarati-speaking coder to establish inter-rater reliability (Cohen s Kappa ranged from.67 to.93). Measure The emotion vignettes questionnaire was adapted from Liem, Lim and Liem (2000) and included five vignettes depicting various interpersonal situations, and six questions for each of the vignettes. The interpersonal themes involved another individual cutting in front while waiting to be served at a bank (bank scenario), needing to inform one s parents about poor grades (poor grades scenario), learning about a good friend s illness (sick friend scenario), having to respond to an acquaintance inquiring about one s sibling who did not get into a top college/university (sibling admission scenario), and getting a job that one s friend did not get (compete for job scenario). The vignettes were intended to elicit anger, sadness, fear, shame or embarrassment, or happiness. After reading each vignette, participants answered six questions. The first question asked the participant to indicate which of the six emotions listed (happy, angry, sad, neutral, ashamed/embarrassed, and scared) he or she was most likely to feel in the given situation, along with an other option which instructed the participant to specify the emotion. Participants were instructed that they could choose more than one emotion, and if they did so, they were asked to rank order the chosen emotions as primary, secondary, tertiary. The second question asked the participant to indicate whether he or she would want others (e.g., people at the bank, parents, friend, acquaintance, or friend, respectively across the five vignettes) to know how he or she felt, and the participants responded on a

16 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 11 5-point Likert scale with response options ranging from 1 ( not at all likely ) to 5 ( very likely ). If participants responded not at all likely to question 2 ( how likely is it that you would want others to know how you felt? ), then the participant was instructed to respond to question 3 which inquired why the participant would not want others to know how he or she felt. Open-ended responses to question 3 were coded into following nine categories: a) prosocial reasons (focus on the other person s well-being), b) avoid discomfort, trouble, or others anger, c) a desire to maintain social norms, d) desire for privacy (not wanting to share experience with others, e) avoid creating a negative impression (desire to maintain a positive impression) and avoiding embarrassment for the self, f) lack of empathy/understanding from others, g) situation perceived as insignificant, and h) unclassifiable. If participants responded between slightly and very likely to question 2 ( how likely is it that you would want others to know how you felt? ), they were instructed to respond to question 4, which was an open ended question that inquired why the participant would want others to know how they felt. Responses to question 4 were coded into the following eight categories: a) expectation of emotional support/sympathy, b) expectation of instrumental assistance, c) communicating information about the situation (without explicit mention of wanting to change the situation), d) change current or future outcomes for the self or others, e) reference to other s personal attributes, f) desire to maintain the relationship, g) prosocial reasons (focus on the other person s wellbeing), and h) unclassifiable.

17 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 12 Question 5 was also an open-ended question and asked how the participant would let others know what he/she felt. Responses to question 5 were coded into the following 12 categories: a) direct verbal communication of emotion, b) communication of emotion through subtle verbal cues), c) direct verbal communication of the situation, d) discreet/indirect verbal communication of the situation, e) facial expression f) nonverbal gestures and behaviors (other than facial expression), g) aggressive behaviors, h) avoidance/withdrawal behaviors, i) affective behaviors, j) prosocial behaviors, j) intuitive knowledge of the other, and k) unclassifiable. Discreet and direct verbal communication of the situation categories were combined in the second (grades) and third (sick friend) hypothetical vignettes due to similarities among the categories and a low number of responses provided for each individual category. Facial expression and nonverbal behaviors were combined in the second (grades) and fourth (sibling admission) vignettes for the same reason. The sixth question asked the participants to indicate the extent to which the situation described in the vignette had happened or could happen to them. Participants responded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ( not at all likely ) to 5 ( very likely ). The purpose of this question was to assess relevance of the interpersonal situations depicted for the participants.

18 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 13 Results Preliminary Analyses To assure that there were no order of presentation effects, an independent samples-t- test and Chi Square analyses were conducted, which showed no significant main effect of order of presentation of vignettes. Participant reports of the actual likelihood of hypothetical vignettes occurring in their day-to-day lives were analyzed as a function of participant culture and gender using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). There was a main effect of type of situation (F(4, 254) =19.72, p<.001, η 2 =.08), and type of situation x culture interaction (F(4, 254) =16.24, p=.000, η 2 =.06). Post Hoc analyses revealed no significant mean differences with respect to poor grades scenario, sick friend scenario, and compete for job scenario. US participants (M=3.89, SD=.09) reported a higher likelihood of the bank scenario as actually taking place in their real life than Indian participants (M=3.15, SD=.11) (p<.001) and Indian (M=3.05, SD=.13) participants reported higher likelihood of the sibling admission scenario than US participants (M=2.32, SD=.10) (p<.001). Main Analyses Felt emotion. A Chi Square analysis was used to examine participants reports of likely emotions elicited in response to hypothetical vignettes across participant culture and gender. In the first hypothetical vignette (bank scenario), a majority of the US and Indian participants endorsed anger as the primary emotion (see Table 1). A higher percentage of US participants reported anger than Indian participants if another individual would cut in front of the line at a bank (χ 2 (1) =8.75, p =.003).

19 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 14 In response to the second hypothetical vignette (poor grades), three primary emotions were identified by a majority of US and Indian participants: sadness, embarrassment, and fear (see Table 1). A higher percentage of US participants reported feeling embarrassed upon having to talk to their parents about their poor grades more than Indian participants (χ 2 (1) =39.63, p<.001). In contrast, a higher percentage of Indian participants reported feeling scared (χ 2 (1) =3.91, p =.048) or sad (χ 2 (1) =21.01, p <.001) in this situation. With respect to gender, a higher percentage of US females reported feeling sad than US males (χ 2 (1) =4.34, p =.037). In response to the third hypothetical situation (sick friend), the majority of US and Indian participants reported feeling sadness with no significant differences across culture (χ 2 (1) =.31, p =.58) or gender (χ 2 (1) =.58, p =.44) (see Table 1). In response to the fourth hypothetical situation (sibling admission), three primary emotions were identified by a majority of US and Indian participants: sadness, embarrassment, and neutral (see Table 1). A higher percentage of US participants reported feeling neutral (χ 2 (1) =75.80, p <.001), whereas a higher percentage of Indian participants reported feeling sad (χ 2 (1) =17.52, p <.001) or embarrassed (χ 2 (1) =15.03, p <.001). In response to the fifth hypothetical scenario (compete for job), happiness and sadness were two primary emotions reported by a majority of the participants. A higher percentage of US participants reported feeling happy for themselves for getting the job (χ 2 (1) =98.50, p <.001), whereas a higher percentage of Indian participants reported feeling sad for their friend who did not get the job (χ 2 (1) =109.98, p <.001).

20 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 15 Decision to express. The participants likelihood of expressing felt emotion across the five situations was analyzed using ANOVA with culture and gender as independent variables. Results showed a main effect of the type of situation (F(4, 249) =64.72, p<.001, η 2 =.21), which was qualified by two two-way interactions: type of situation x cultural group interaction (F(4, 249) = 10.56, p=.000, η 2 =.04), and type of situation x gender (F(4, 249) = 3.63, p=.006, η 2 =.01). Posthoc analysis for type of situation x cultural group interaction revealed that Indian participants were more likely to report expressing their emotions in the following situations more than US participants: grades scenario (M=3.71, SD=.14, and M=3.34, SD=.12; respectively; p=.049), sibling admission scenario (M=2.35, SD=.13; and M=1.88, SD=.11; respectively; p=.006), and compete for job scenario (M=2.70, SD=.12; M=2.12, SD=.15; respectively; p=.026). In contrast, in the sick friend scenario, US participants (M= 4.11, SD=.11) were more likely than Indian participants (M= 3.27, SD=.14) (p<.001) to report expressing their emotions. No significant differences were found between cultural groups with respect to the bank scenario. Posthoc analysis for type of situation x gender interaction revealed that males (M=3.80, SD=.14) were more likely than females (M=3.58, SD=.11) to express their emotions in the sick friend scenario (p<.001). Females (M=3.77, SD=.11), on the other hand, were more likely than males to express their emotions in the poor grades scenario (M=3.28, SD=.15). Reason for control. Participants reasons for not wanting others to know how they felt (question 3) were analyzed using a Chi-Square analysis. In response to the first

21 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 16 hypothetical vignette (bank), a majority of the participants (US more than Indian participants) chose reappraisal of the situation or the emotion and concluding that it is insignificant as the primary reason for not expressing their emotions (χ 2 (1) = 15.63, p<.001) (see Table 2). A higher percentage of Indian participants reported a desire to avoid creating a negative impression (χ 2 (1) = 6.52, p=.011) or prosocial reasons (χ 2 (1) = 27.54, p<.001), while a higher percentage of US participants, primarily US females, reported a desire to avoid discomfort or trouble (χ 2 (1) = 7.11, p=.008). A higher percentage of Indian males reported reappraisal of the situation, while a higher percentage of Indian females reported prosocial reasons (χ 2 (1) = 4.22, p=.040). In response to the second hypothetical vignette (grades), a higher percentage of Indian participants reported that they would not want their parents to know that they received poor grades because of prosocial reasons, while none of the US participants provided this response (χ 2 (1) = 27.54, p<.001) (see Table 2). The US participants (and some Indian participants), instead, reported a desire to avoid discomfort or trouble (χ 2 (1) = 3.416, p=.065) and a desire to avoid creating a negative impression as dominant reasons to control their emotions (χ 2 (1) = 3.73, p =.053). A higher percentage of Indian males reported a desire to avoid discomfort than Indian females (χ 2 (1) = 3.85, p=.050) In response to the fourth hypothetical vignette (sibling admission), US participants primarily reported desire for privacy as the main reason for not wanting to tell a family acquaintance that their sibling did not get into a top-ranked college (χ 2 (1) = 48.84, p<.001) (see Table 2). Indian participants, on the other hand, primarily reported a desire to avoid creating a negative impression as their main reason to control their

22 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 17 emotions (χ 2 (1) = 31.65, p<.001). Another fairly dominant response for Indian participants included prosocial reasons (χ 2 (1) = 7.39, p=.007) In response to the fifth hypothetical vignette (compete for job), the majority of participants reported prosocial reasons as reasons to not want to tell their friend that they got the job (see Table 2). A higher percentage of Indian participants reported prosocial reasons than US participants (χ 2 (1) = 5.41, p=.020). In response to the third (sick friend), a majority of participants reported prosocial reasons for wanting to control their emotions. No significant differences were found between cultural groups or gender for this situation (χ 2 (1) =.884, p =.347; (US gender): χ 2 (1) =1.6, p =.21; (India gender: χ 2 (1) =.01, p =.92; respectively). Reason for expression. Participant s responses for wanting others to know how they felt (question 4) were also tested using a Chi-Square analysis. In response to the first hypothetical vignette (bank), participants reasons for expression were relatively similar across culture and gender with a desire to communicate information about the situation to others as a primary reason across both cultures (χ 2 (1) =.2.11, p =.146) (see Table 3). A higher percentage of US participants expressed expectation of instrumental assistance than Indian participants (χ 2 (1) =.11.03, p =.001). Reference to other s personal attributes, and expectation of emotional support were other dominant reasons reported, however, no significant cultural differences were found (χ 2 (1) =.2.59, p =.108; (χ 2 (1) =.1.01, p =.314; respectively). In response to the second hypothetical vignette (grades), a majority of US participants reported a desire to communicate information about the situation (χ 2 (1)

23 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 18 =.29.98, p<.001) and a desire to change current or future outcomes (χ 2 (1) =.6.62, p =.010) (see Table 3), while a majority of Indian participants reported expectation of emotional support (χ 2 (1) =10.11, p<.001) and a desire to maintain the relationship (χ 2 (1) =24.19, p<.001) as primary reasons to express. No significant cultural difference was found for reports of expectation of expectation of instrumental assistance (χ 2 (1) =2.06, p =.151). No significant gender differences were found across any of these reasons to express. In response to the third hypothetical vignette (sick friend) participants, across both cultural groups reported prosocial reasons as the primary reason to express, however, a higher percentage of US participants reported this reason to express their emotions to their sick friend than Indian participants (χ 2 (1) = 17.99, p<.001) (see Table 3). In the US sample, a higher percentage of females reported prosocial reasons than males (χ 2 (1) = 5.05, p =.025), while in India, no significant gender differences were found. A higher percentage of Indian participants (χ 2 (1) = 17.71, p<.001), primarily Indian females (χ 2 (1) = 3.84, p =.050), reported a desire to maintain the relationship as another reason for emotion expression than US participants. In response to the fourth hypothetical vignette (sibling admission), a higher percentage of Indian participants reported expectation of instrumental assistance (χ 2 (1) = 30.46, p<.001), while a higher percentage of US participants reported prosocial reasons (χ 2 (1) = 10.74, p =.001) and a desire to communicate information about the situation (χ 2 (1) = 7.72, p =.005) (see Table 3). No significant cultural differences were found in reports of expectation of emotional support (χ 2 (1) = 2.87, p =.090). A higher percentage

24 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 19 of US males reported prosocial reasons than US females (χ 2 (1) = 4.90, p =.027), however, no other significant gender differences were found. In response to the fifth hypothetical vignette (compete for job), primary reasons for expression included prosocial reasons, a desire to communicate information about the situation, and a desire to maintain the relationship. Across cultural group and gender, a substantial proportion of participants reported prosocial concerns as their primary reason for expression, however, no cultural differences were found (χ 2 (1) =.043, p =.835). A significantly higher percentage of US participants reported communicating information about the situation to others (χ 2 (1) = 19.78, p<.001), while a higher percentage of Indian participants reported desire to maintain the relationship (χ 2 (9) = 43.16, p<.001). No gender differences were found across reported reasons for expressing emotions in this situation. Method of expression. Participants methods of expression were analyzed using a Chi Square analysis. In response to the first hypothetical vignette (bank), a substantial proportion of US males and females, as well as Indian females reported facial expression as the primary method of expression, however, there were no significant culture or gender differences (χ 2 (1) =.911, p =.340; US gender: χ 2 (1) =.048, p =.826; India gender: χ 2 (1) = 3.704, p =.054; respectively) (see Table 4). Significant cultural differences were found in reports of aggressive behavior as a method of expressing emotions; a higher percentage of Indian participants reported this method than US participants (χ 2 (1) = 8.95, p =.003). A higher percentage of US participants reported direct verbal communication of the

25 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 20 emotion than Indian participants (χ 2 (1) =4.81, p =.028). Although direct verbal communication of the situation was another common method of expression reported, there were no significant cultural differences (χ 2 (1) =.137, p =.712). In response to the second hypothetical vignette (grades), a majority of US participants reported direct verbal communication of the emotion as their primary method of expression χ 2 (1) = , p<.001, while a higher percentage of Indian participants reported discreet or direct verbal communication of the situation (χ 2 (1) = 62.36, p<.001) and facial expression and other nonverbal behaviors (χ 2 (1) = 31.48, p<.001) as their primary method of expression (see Table 4). With respect to gender differences, a higher percentage of US males reported facial expression and other nonverbal behaviors than females (χ 2 (1) = 4.53, p<.033). A higher percentage of US males reported discreet or direct communication of the situation than US females (χ 2 (1) = 5.86, p =.015), while a higher percentage of Indian females reported this method of expression than Indian males (χ 2 (1) = 3.94, p =.047). In response to the third hypothetical vignette (sick friend), a majority of the US participants reported engaging in direct verbal communication of their emotions (χ 2 (1) = 46.47, p<.001), while a majority of Indian participants were distributed almost equally among three categories of methods of expression (discreet/direct verbal communication of the situation: χ 2 (1) = 24.18, p<.001; nonverbal behaviors: χ 2 (1) = 10.34, p =.001; and prosocial behaviors: χ 2 (1) = 4.70, p =.030). No significant gender differences were found across participants reports of how they will express their emotions to their sick friend.

26 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 21 In response to the fourth hypothetical vignette (sibling admission), a substantial proportion of US participants reported engaging in direct verbal communication of the emotion (χ 2 (1) = 30.16, p<.001), while a majority of Indian participants reported facial expression or other nonverbal behaviors (χ 2 (1) =8.48, p =004), discreet verbal communication of the emotion (χ 2 (1) = 14.26, p<.001) and direct verbal communication of the situation (χ 2 (1) = 10.59, p =001) as their primary methods of expression. A higher percentage of Indian males reported direct verbal communication of the situation than Indian females (χ 2 (1) = 5.99, p =.014), while a higher percentage of Indian females reported discreet verbal communication of the situation than Indian males (χ 2 (1) = 4.36, p =.037). In response to the fifth hypothetical vignette (compete for job), a majority of US participants reported direct verbal communication of the emotion (χ 2 (1) = 65.99, p<.001), while a majority of Indian participants reported discreet (χ 2 (1) = 19.89, p<.001) or direct (χ 2 (1) = 21.21, p<.001) verbal communication of the situation as a method of expression (see Table 4). With respect to gender differences, a higher percentage of US males reported discreet verbal communication of the situation than US females (χ 2 (1) = 4.11, p =.043). Also, a higher percentage of Indian males reported direct verbal communication of the situation than Indian females (χ 2 (1) = 8.66, p =.003). Discussion The present study sought to compare Indian and American college students reports across several components of emotional experience and expression. Overall, there

27 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 22 was cultural variation with respect to reports of felt emotion, the likelihood of expressing felt emotion, reasons for expression and control, and methods of expression. Cultural Differences in Felt Emotions The results indicated that a majority of participants reported feeling emotions that the hypothetical vignettes were intended to elicit in respondents. For three of the five situations (grades scenario, sibling admission scenario, and compete for job scenario), multiple emotions were reported. College students in India and the US reported primarily feeling angry if someone were to cut in front of them in line at a bank, and both groups reported feeling sad to learn about a friend s illness. Interestingly, a somewhat higher proportion of US college students reported feeling angry in response to the bank scenario compared to Indian college students. Cultural differences were observed in the types of emotions elicited with respect to two (sibling admission, and compete for job) of the five scenarios presented. Consistent with the theoretical frameworks that suggest an emphasis on interdependence in Asian cultures, including India (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Triandis, 2001; and Hofstede, 1991), Indian college students reported emotions in these two scenarios that reflected the relevance of interpersonal relationships. Specifically, in response to the sibling admission situation, a substantial proportion of Indian participants reported feeling sad that their sibling did not get into the top-ranked college or university that he/she was expected to get into. In contrast, a substantial proportion of US participants reported feeling neutral, which may be reflective of their more independent and self-focused

28 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 23 tendency. In response to the vignette depicting a competition for job situation, a majority of Indian participants reported feeling sadness as their primary emotion, while a majority of US participants ranked happiness as their primary emotion. These findings demonstrate that Indian participants may be more other focused as they reported feeling sad for their friend who did not get the job, while US participants may be more self focused as they reported feeling happy for themselves for getting the job. Cultural Differences in Decisions to Express Emotion. Contrary to predictions, Indian participants reported being more likely to express their emotions than US participants across three of the five situations (poor grades, sibling admission, and compete for job). Consistent with the prediction, US participants were more likely than Indian participants to report expressing their emotions in one hypothetical situation, when they learned that their close friend has a serious medical condition. Perhaps an examination of the interpersonal themes of the three hypothetical vignettes in which Indian college students reported higher likelihood of expression may help explain these unexpected findings. Two of the three vignettes in which Indian college students reported higher likelihood of expression focused on academic achievement. One vignette involved the participants themselves receiving poor grades and the other vignette involved participant s sibling not getting admission into a topranked college. Indian participants reported feeling emotions such as fear and sadness in these situations (while US participants reported feeling neutral or embarrassed), and communication of these feelings may be culturally acceptable, particularly given the emphasis on academic achievement in India (Verma, Sharma, & Larson, 2002). In fact,

29 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 24 Raval, Raval, Daga, and Panchal (2011) found that middle school children in India were more likely to report expressing emotions in response to hypothetical vignettes depicting themes related to academic achievement than interpersonal relations. With respect to gender differences, consistent with the expectation, females were more likely than males to express their emotions in one of the five hypothetical situations (e.g., when they received low grades and their parents were eager to learn their academic status). Inconsistent with the expectation, males were more likely than females to express their emotions in another hypothetical situation (e.g., when they learned that their friend had a serious illness). Cultural Differences in Reasons for Expression and Control As predicted, significant cultural differences were found across the majority of the situations in regards to the reasons participants gave for controlling their emotions. Consistent with expectations, Indian participants primarily reported reasons for control that focused on others expectations and maintaining group harmony across all situations such as prosocial reasons, desire to avoid creating a negative impression of the self or family, and desire to avoid discomfort. US participants, on the other hand, primarily reported reasons that both focused on the self and others such as desire to avoid discomfort, desire for privacy, prosocial reasons, and desire to avoid creating a negative impression. A strong cultural difference was seen in the second hypothetical vignette where participant s grades were very low and their parents were eager to know how they are doing academically. While Indian participants primarily reported prosocial reasons (a

30 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 25 higher percentage of Indian females than Indian males) to control emotions, US participants reported avoiding discomfort or creating negative impression. This finding corresponds with previous research on independent and interdependent self-construals. Individuals with an independent self-construal (US participants) have a primary focus on the self and thus reported controlling their emotions to avoid discomfort for themselves (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Individuals with an interdependent self-construal (Indian participants), on the other hand, have a primary focus on others, thus explaining why Indian participants reported thinking about their parents feelings (prosocial reasons) instead of their own when deciding not to share their feelings about their grades. With respect to reasons for emotional expression, as predicted, significant cultural differences were found in participants reports. Across situations, a majority of Indian participants reported reasons that focused on relationships or maintaining harmony such as expectation of emotional support, desire to maintain relationship, expectation of emotional support, and prosocial reasons. US participants, on the other hand, reported a variety of self, other, and relationship-focused reasons to express their emotions such as a desire to change current or future outcomes, reference to other s personal attributes, and prosocial reasons. These findings are also consistent with literature on independent and interdependent self-construals. In respect to gender differences, in the third hypothetical vignette, a higher percentage of females than US males reported prosocial reasons as their primary reason to share their feelings with their sick friend. These findings are consistent with literature by Brody and Hall (1993) which suggests that US females are more likely than US males

31 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 26 to experience prosocial emotions. Contrary to expectations, a higher percentage of US males, than US females, reported prosocial reasons when expressing their emotions about a sibling not getting into college in the fourth hypothetical vignette (sibling admission). It is possible that US males may be more sensitive to their siblings feelings than US females when discussing academic-related circumstances. Cultural Differences in Method of Expression As predicted, cultural differences were found in participant s report of methods of expression across all five hypothetical vignettes. Consistent with the primary hypothesis, a substantial proportion of Indian participants reported indirect methods of expression such as discreet or direct verbal communication of the situation, and facial expression along with other nonverbal behavior. A majority of the US participants, on the other hand, reported more direct methods of expression such as direct verbal communication of the emotion (e.g., state that one is angry), and direct verbal communication of the situation(e.g., describe the situation). These findings make sense in the context of low context versus high context communication theorized by Hall (1976). By communicating their emotions directly, US participants engaged low context communication as proposed by Hall (1976) while Indian participants communicated to others about the situation or communicated the emotion through nonverbal behaviors. Indian participants likely assumed that their interactive partners would infer the emotion they were experiencing from the description of the situation or from their nonverbal gestures. An interesting gender effect was observed in the Indian sample in the sibling admission scenario, where a higher percentage of Indian males reported direct verbal

32 REPORTS OF EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION AND CONTROL 27 communication of the situation, while a higher percentage of Indian females reported discreet verbal communication of the situation. A possible explanation for these results could be due to cultural expectations and norms for individuals of different genders. Males could be in a more powerful position as Fischer and Jansz (1995) suggest, thus explaining why they reported communicating directly about their situation, while females reported communicating discreetly about the situation, (a more indirect form of conveying how they feel). Another interesting finding was found in regards to the second hypothetical vignette (grades) where a higher percentage of US males reported discreet or direct communication of the situation than US females, while a higher percentage of Indian females reported this method of expression than Indian males. It is possible that cultural expectations and norms could affect behaviors in this type of situation (Ekman & Frissen, 1975). In India, females may be less direct and refer to the situation when discussing academic performance, while in the US, males tend to be less direct when expressing their emotions about their grades. Limitations and Future Implications The present sample of college students was recruited from the Northwestern Indian state of Gujarat and from the Midwestern US state of Ohio. India and the US are diverse countries and the present sample cannot be considered representative of the entire country. Future research may compare reports of emotional expression and control within different communities in India and the US. The present study utilized participants self-reports of their emotion expression and control in response to