The Journal of Social Psychology

ISSN: 0022-4545 (Print) 1940-1183 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

Gender Differences in the Social Cost of Affective Deviance Christina M. Brown, Yevgeniy M. Olkhov, Veronika S. Bailey & Emily R. Daniels To cite this article: Christina M. Brown, Yevgeniy M. Olkhov, Veronika S. Bailey & Emily R. Daniels (2015) Gender Differences in the Social Cost of Affective Deviance, The Journal of Social Psychology, 155:6, 535-540, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2015.1018859 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2015.1018859

Accepted author version posted online: 19 Feb 2015. Published online: 19 Feb 2015. Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 81

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vsoc20 Download by: [University of Lethbridge]

Date: 11 November 2015, At: 00:36

The Journal of Social Psychology, 155: 535–540, 2015 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0022-4545 print / 1940-1183 online DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2015.1018859

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

REPLICATIONS AND REFINEMENTS

Gender Differences in the Social Cost of Affective Deviance CHRISTINA M. BROWN YEVGENIY M. OLKHOV VERONIKA S. BAILEY EMILY R. DANIELS Arcadia University

ABSTRACT. The current study tested whether men and women receive different degrees of social punishment for violating norms of emotional expression. Participants watched videos of male and female targets (whose reactions were pre-tested to be equivalent in expressivity and valence) viewing either a positive or negative slideshow, with their emotional reaction to the slideshow manipulated to be affectively congruent, affectively incongruent, or flat. Participants then rated the target on a number of social evaluation measures. Displaying an incongruent emotional expression, relative to a congruent one, harmed judgments of women more than men. Women are expected to be more emotionally expressive than men, making an incongruent expression more deviant for women. These results highlight the importance of social norms in construing another person’s emotion displays, which can subsequently determine acceptance or rejection of that person. Keywords: deviance, emotion expressions, facial expressions, gender differences, sex differences

FACIAL EXPRESSIONS OF EMOTION CONVEY INTENTIONS and evoke complementary behavior (Marsh, Ambady, & Kleck, 2005), so inappropriate emotion expressions can cause conflict (Beer, Heerey, Keltner, Scabini, & Knight, 2003) and rejection (Szczurek, Monin, & Gross, 2012). In the current article, we tested whether men and women are evaluated differently when displaying deviant affect. People believe that women experience and express emotions more often than men (e.g., Durik et al., 2006; Plant, Hyde, Keltner, & Devine, 2000), and this can result in men and women being held to different standards of emotion expression. For example, when people with Parkinson’s disease are evaluated by others, the presence of facial immobility does Address correspondence to Christina M. Brown, Arcadia University, Department of Psychology, 450 S. Easton Road, Glenside, PA 19038, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

536

THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

not affect perceptions of men with Parkinson’s, whereas women with high (vs. low) facial immobility are perceived as less supportive and desired less as friends (Hemmesch, Tickle-Degnen, & Zebrowitz, 2009). To examine gender differences in the social cost of affective deviance, we borrowed Szczurek and colleagues’ (2012) affective deviance paradigm. Their participants watched videos of men viewing a slideshow of pleasing or disturbing images. The men’s reactions were manipulated to be flat (i.e., unemotional), congruent (e.g., smiling at pleasing images), or incongruent (e.g., smiling at disturbing images). Participants judged men displaying incongruent expressions more harshly than men displaying flat or congruent affect. We predicted that evaluations of women would be harmed by displays of incongruent affect more than evaluations of men, regardless of whether the affect is in response to positive or negative stimuli (Hypothesis 1 [H1]). Women are expected and encouraged to be more expressive than men, making incongruent expressions more clearly deviant for them. One specific gender-emotion norm is that women are expected to be happier than men (e.g., Plant et al., 2000). This association is so strong that happiness is actually detected faster (Hugenberg & Sczensy, 2006) and is perceived as more intense (Hess, Blairy, & Kleck, 1997) on female faces. As such, we predicted that inappropriate happiness would be especially punishing for women: When targets are supposedly responding to negative stimuli, we predicted a larger difference between participants’ evaluations of incongruent (i.e., happy) and flat targets when the target was female (H2). Likewise, the absence of happiness when it is expected should also harm women more: When targets are supposedly responding to positive stimuli, we expected a larger difference between participants’ evaluations of congruent and deviant (both flat and incongruent) targets when the target was female than male (H3).

METHOD Participants We recruited 514 participants from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk; see Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). We excluded data of participants who were suspicious (n = 5), reported video problems (n = 6), or did not disclose their sex (n = 2). The final sample was 501 participants (350 men, 151 women; 78% White; M age = 32.68, SDage = 11.05). Materials Slideshows. Each slideshow contained 13 images. For the neutral and positive slideshows, we used Szczurek and colleagues’ (2012) images. For the negative slideshow, because we could not monitor our participants for distress in the lab, we replaced the three most gruesome images (showing corpses) from Szczurek et al.’s study with slightly less intense images (e.g., an infant with a facial growth) from the International Affective Picture System database (Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 2008). Video stimuli. We recorded, with permission, videos of White men and women (approximately 20 years old) watching the slideshows. Based on pilot testing, we selected videos of

BROWN ET AL.

537

actors who were rated as equally expressive (details are available upon request). We edited these videos to have either the positive, negative, or neutral slideshow playing in the upper left corner.

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

Measures Social evaluation. Szczurek et al. (2012) measured evaluations of the target with a social judgment composite scale and a one-item social distance scale. The social judgment composite measure involved rating the target on positive (e.g., intelligent, balanced) and negative (e.g., cold, inappropriate) traits, likelihood of future successes (e.g., getting married) and failures (e.g., becoming homeless), and suitability for warm jobs (e.g., babysitter). Our participants responded to these items on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). Szczurek et al.’s social distance scale was a one-item measure of the closest interaction the participant was comfortable having with the target. Their original scale referenced participants’ university, so we edited the labels to apply to an MTurk sample. We also added a one-item feeling thermometer ranging from 0 (very cold/negative) to 100 (very warm/positive) to assess general warmth toward the target. The seven evaluation measures—positive traits, negative traits (reverse scored), likelihood of future successes, likelihood of future failures (reverse scored), suitability for warm jobs, social distance (reverse scored), and the feeling thermometer—formed a reliable scale, α = .87, so we created a single overall evaluation measure by standardizing each measure and calculating the mean of the standardized scores. Procedure Like Szczurek et al.’s (2012) study, the procedure began with a practice trial in which participants watched and rated both a neutral slideshow and a video of an inexpressive person watching the neutral slideshow. Next, participants watched either a positive or negative slideshow and rated their own affect and the slideshow. They then saw the critical video, which was either a male or female with a congruent, incongruent, or flat expression supposedly in reaction to the same slideshow. Our 2 (target sex: male, female) × 2 (slideshow: positive, negative) × 3 (expression: congruent, flat, incongruent) between-subjects design resulted in 12 video conditions, but we had two versions (with different actors) of each video to be sure the effects weren’t actor-specific. Participants rated the critical target’s affect and completed the evaluation measures. The survey concluded with demographic items, a prompt for comments about the survey and videos, and a debriefing statement.

RESULTS We conducted a 2 (target sex) × 2 (slideshow) × 3 (expression) × 2 (participant sex) ANOVA on social evaluations. H1. As predicted, there was a significant 2 (target sex) × 3 (expression) interaction, F (2,477) = 8.61, p < .001, ηp 2 = .04, and this was not qualified by a three-way interaction with

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

538

THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

FIGURE 1 Social evaluations by target sex, expression, and slideshow valence. Evaluation scores were calculated by standardizing each of the seven evaluations of the target and then computing the mean of these standardized scores.

slideshow, F (2,477) = .08, p = .92, ηp 2 < .001, or any other higher-order interactions (ps > .14, ηp 2 s < .009). Simple effects for this interaction reveal that in both the flat (p < .001; d = .92, 95% CI [.60, 1.23]) and congruent (p = .002; d = 1.03, 95% CI [.71, 1.35]) expression conditions, women (flat M = .31; SD = .61; congruent M = .69; SD = .42) were perceived more positively than men (flat M = −.25; SD = .63; congruent M = .24; SD = .46). However, women (M = −.52; SD = .78) and men (M = −.54; SD = .66) were perceived equally negatively in the incongruent condition (p = .86; d = .03, 95% CI [−.28, .34]). Put another way, an incongruent expression, relative to a congruent or flat one, harms perceptions of women more than men (see Figure 1). As expected, the three expression conditions produced the same pattern with both male and female targets (i.e., congruent rated most favorably, flat in the middle, and incongruent least favorably), with the difference being one of degree. The remaining hypotheses concerned differences in effect size for male and female targets. H2. In the negative slideshow condition, flat and incongruent targets significantly differed in both target sex conditions (ps < .002). The effect size of this difference was more than twice as large for female (d = 1.36, 95% CI [.87, 1.83]) than male (d = 0.61, 95% CI [.17, 1.03]) targets, supporting the hypothesis. H3. In the positive slideshow condition, congruent targets were rated significantly more positively than flat targets regardless of target sex (ps < .001 for both male and female targets), but the effect size of the difference between congruent and flat targets was actually slightly larger for male targets (d = 1.26, 95% CI [.78, 1.71]) than female targets (d = 1.17, 95% CI [.70, 1.63]), which is contrary to our prediction. Congruent targets were also rated significantly more positively than incongruent ones for both sexes (ps < .001), but the effect size was substantially larger when the target was female (d = 2.27, 95% CI [1.69, 2.80]) compared to male (d = 1.50, 95% CI

BROWN ET AL.

539

[1.00, 1.98]). In other words, H3 was only partially supported. However, given that female faces possess structural features that make them appear happy even when their expression is neutral (Becker, Kenrick, Neuberg, Blackwell, & Smith, 2007), it seems possible that the effect size for female flat versus congruent targets is underestimated as a result of participants perceiving the female targets’ neutral expressions as conveying some positive affect.

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

DISCUSSION As expected (H1), displaying affective deviance harmed perceptions of women more than men. We believe this is because women are expected to express their emotions more than men (e.g., Durik et al., 2006), making the display of inappropriate affect more clearly deviant for women. In addition, because happiness is perceived more quickly and intensely on women’s faces (e.g., Hess et al., 1997), we predicted and found that positive affect in response to negative stimuli lowered ratings of women more than men. However, flat reactions to positive stimuli produced similar effect sizes with male and female targets. It may be that perceivers did not expect effusive positivity in response to the pleasing images from either men or women, and thus a flat reaction was unremarkable. Even so, men and women’s flat reactions were clearly perceived differently overall. As Figure 1 shows, target sex and slideshow valence determined whether the mean for flat targets fell directly between congruent and incongruent targets or was closer to one of them. The variability in perceptions of flat targets could reflect their ambiguity, which allows participants to interpret them based on their own expectations. For example, an inexpressive woman watching negative images might be seen as impressively stoic, whereas an inexpressive man watching positive images might appear bored. For these reasons, differences between congruent and incongruent expressions provide the clearest information about perceptions of affective deviance. It’s important to note that the gender difference we observed in the social cost of affective deviance took the form of women being more harmed by incongruent expressions, relative to congruent ones, than men. In the absence of deviance, participants actually evaluated women more positively, which is consistent with past research showing more favorable impressions of women (e.g., Hemmesch et al., 2009). To evaluate the impact of deviant expressions, we focused on comparisons within target sex (i.e., comparing evaluations of congruent versus incongruent male targets, instead of incongruent male vs. incongruent female targets) because participants felt more warmly toward women overall. The general positive bias toward women makes a direct comparison between male and female targets difficult to interpret, and therefore potentially misleading. By making within-sex comparisons, we can determine the magnitude of the cost of affective deviance while holding the sex bias constant. To conclude, the current research shows that, in the United States, judgments of women are more influenced by affective deviance than judgments of men, which is likely a consequence of well-established gender norms for emotion expression (e.g., Plant et al., 2000). The results also affirm the importance of affect as a determinant of social acceptance and rejection. A person’s affect is valuable data about him or her, although the information perceivers extract may depend on gender-based stereotypes and expectations surrounding the person’s expression.

540

THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

AUTHOR NOTES Christina M. Brown, Yevgeniy M. Olkhov, Veronika S. Bailey, and Emily R. Daniels are affiliated with the Department of Psychology, Arcadia University. Yevgeniy M. Olkhov, Veronika S. Bailey, and Emily R. Daniels contributed equally to this project.

Downloaded by [University of Lethbridge] at 00:36 11 November 2015

REFERENCES Becker, D. V., Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Blackwell, K. C., & Smith, D. M. (2007). The confounded nature of angry men and happy women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 179–190. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.179 Beer, J. S., Heerey, E. A., Keltner, D., Scabini, D. K., & Knight, R. T. (2003). The regulatory function of selfconscious emotion: Insights from patients with orbitofrontal damage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 594–604. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.594 Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980 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/s11199-006-9020-4 Hemmesch, A. R., Tickle-Degnen, L., & Zebrowitz, L. A. (2009). The influence of facial masking and gender on older adults’ impressions of individuals with Parkinson’s disease. Psychology and Aging, 24, 542–549. doi:10.1037/a0016105 Hess, U., Blairy, S., & Kleck, R. E. (1997). The intensity of facial expressions and decoding accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 21, 241–257. doi:10.1023/A:1024952730333 Hugenberg, K., & Sczesny, S. (2006). On wonderful women and seeing smiles: Social categorization moderates the happy face response latency advantage. Social Cognition, 24, 516–539. doi:10.1521/soco.2006.24.5.516 Lang, P.J., Bradley, M.M., & Cuthbert, B.N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-8. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Marsh, A. A., Ambady, N., & Kleck, R. E. (2005). The effects of fear and anger facial expressions on approach- and avoidance-related behaviors. Emotion, 5, 119–124. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.119 Plant, E. A., Hyde, J. S., Keltner, D., & Devine, P. G. (2000). The gender stereotyping of emotions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 81–92. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01024.x Szczurek, L., Monin, B., & Gross, J. J. (2012). The stranger effect: The rejection of affective deviants. Psychological Science, 23, 1105–1111. doi:10.1177/0956797612445314

Received July 28, 2014 Accepted February 2, 2015

Gender Differences in the Social Cost of Affective Deviance.

The current study tested whether men and women receive different degrees of social punishment for violating norms of emotional expression. Participant...
314KB Sizes 0 Downloads 5 Views