ArticlePDF Available

Emotional Expressivity in Men and Women: Stereotypes and Self-Perceptions

Taylor & Francis
Cognition and Emotion
Authors:
  • Independent Researcher

Abstract and Figures

Three studies were conducted to assess prevalent stereotypes regarding men's and women's emotional expressivity as well as self-perceptions of their emotional behaviour as indicated by emotion profiles. Studies 1-3 used samples of 544, 360, and 171 college students, respectively. In Study 1, the authors asked how men and women in general would react to a series of hypothetical emotional events. In Study 2, they asked how Ss themselves expected to react to these same situations, and in Study 3, they asked Ss to report a personal emotional event in narrative form. Two gender differences emerged across all 3 studies. Specifically, women were expected to be more likely to react with sadness to negative emotion-eliciting events in general. They also expected themselves to be more likely to react with sadness as well as to cry and to withdraw more when experiencing negative emotional events. Women report more sadness when describing personal events. In contrast, men were expected to react with more happiness/serenity during negative emotional situations. Also, they expect themselves to react more frequently this way as well as to laugh and smile more and to be more relaxed in negative situations. Finally, men tend to report more happiness when describing negative personal events.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Emotional expressivity in men and women:
Stereotypes and self-perceptions
Ursula Hess and Sacha Sene´cal
University of Quebec at Montreal, Canada
Gilles Kirouac
Laval University, Quebec, Canada
Pedro Herrera
University of Quebec at Montreal, Canada
Pierre Philippot
University of Louvain-La-Neuve , Belgium
Robert E. Kleck
Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
Three studies were conducted to assess prevalent stereotypes regarding men’s and
women’s emotional expressivity as well as self-perceptions of their emotional
behaviour. Emotion profiles were employed to assess both modal emotional
reactions and secondary emotional reactions to hypothetical events and personal
experiences. In Study 1 we asked how men and women in general would react to a
series of hypothetical emotional events. In Study 2 we asked how participants
themselves expected to react to these same situations and in Study 3 we asked
participants to report a personal emotional event in narrative form. Two gender
differences emerged across all three studies. Specifically, women were expected to
be more likely to react with sadness to negative emotion-eliciting events in
general. They also expected themselves to be more likely to react with sadness as
well as to cry and to withdraw more when experiencing negative emotional events.
Finally, women report more sadness when describing personal events. In contrast,
men were expected to react with more happiness/serenity during negative
emotional situations. Also, they expect themselves to react more frequently this
way as well as to laugh and smile more and to be more relaxed in negative
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2000, 14 (5), 609–642
Please send correspondenc e and requests for reprints to Ursula Hess, Department of Psychology,
University of Quebec at Montreal, P.O. Box 8888, Station A, Montreal, Qc H3C 3P8, Canada.
This research was funded by grant from the Conseil de Recherche en Sciences Humaine s to the
first and fourth author. The authors wish to thank Nathalie Houlfort, Nathalie Collet te, Vale´rie
Ve´zina, Pascal Thibault, and Maxime Le´ vesque for their help in conducting the research described .
Ó2000 Psychology Press Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/02699931.html
situations. Finally, men tend to report more happiness when describing negative
personal events. In sum, the present study gives a more detailed portrayal of how
men and women are expected and expect themselves to react to specific emotional
situations and presents some evidence that these expectations may influence the
way they reconstruct emotional events from their past.
One of the most consistent empirical findings in the current literature on sex
differences regards emotional expressivity. Differences in emotional express-
ivity between men and women are found when considering self-reports of
emotional expressiveness, when using observational studies, as well as when
considering beliefs and stereotypes about emotional expressiveness. The present
research investigates beliefs and stereotypes concerning emotional expressivity
and investigates to what degree these beliefs and stereotypes overlap with self-
perceptions of emotional expressivity, as well as with personal narratives
involving emotional events.
Stereotypical beliefs regarding emotions are culture-specific and reflect shared
notions regarding the prevalence of certain feelings and behaviours experienced
and expressed by men and women. At the same time, these stereotypes can also
influence self-reports of emotional events based on autobiographi c memory. For
example, Sherman and Bessenhoff (1999) provide convincing evidence of
stereotype influences on source attributions in autobiographic memory under
conditions of limited processing capacity. Also, Feldman-Barrett, Robin,
Pietromonaco, and Eysell (1998) suggest that global self-reports of emotional
expressivity are influenced by cultural beliefs as individuals have to summarize
over many types of events from their past—a process that may lead to the use of
heuristics that bias recollections in favor of culturally shared beliefs. Yet,
accounts of emotional events constitute a significant part of our daily social
exchanges with friends and family members as research on emotional sharing
demonstrates (e.g., Rime´, Mesquita, Philippot, & Boca, 1991). This leads to the
speculation that some accounts of events that happened to us in the past and such
statements as ‘‘I am one of those people who often cry when watching sad films’’,
which make up a significant part of our social exchanges, may reflect our
culturally shared beliefs as well as actual events.
Gender stereotypes of emotional expressivity
In Western cultures women are believed to be more emotionally expressive in
general than are men. Specifically, they are expected to smile more as well as to
show more sadness, fear, and guilt. In contrast, men are believed to show more
overt emotional displays only in terms of physically aggressive anger (for
reviews see Brody & Hall, 1993; Fischer, 1993). These gender stereotypes
appear to be socialised into children’s belief systems as early as 3–5 years
(Birnbaum, 1983). Studies on the parental socialisation of emotions suggest that
610 HESS ET AL.
both mothers and fathers use more varied emotion terms, and more of them,
when talking to daughters than when talking to sons. Further, some emotions,
such as sadness, are mentioned more often to daughters than to sons (Adams,
Kuebli, Boyle, & Fivush, 1995; Dunn, Bretherton, & Munn, 1987; Fivush,
1989). These socialisation practices are obviously consistent with a belief on the
part of parents that females should be more interested in emotion as well as
expressive of it than should males. To the extent that this belief of greater
emotional expressivity in females reflects actual behavioural differences across
the genders we would obviousl y be hesitant to label it a stereotype, though a
stereotypical belief could ultimately be the source of the differences. Whereas
those studies that have examined observed expressivity in minimal social
situations (noninteractive), found that females tend to be somewhat more
expressive than are males (see e.g., Fischer, 1993), studies that have examined
actual male versus female expressivity in a larger context paint a relatively more
complex picture (see e.g., Kring & Gordon, 1998).
Yet, although the general gender stereotype and global self-descriptions
suggest a large differenc e in expressivity between men and women, observed
differences and self-reports of specific events yield little or no gender effects.
For example, Feldman-Barrett et al. (1998) found sex-related differences for
global self-descriptions of emotions but not for ratings obtained in a diary study
where participants rated their emotions following social interactions. In a similar
vein, Jussim, Milbourn, and Nelson (1991), who used telephone interviews to
assess self-perceptions of emotional expressivity as well as perceptions of
emotional expressivity in men and women in general , found that although both
men and women believed that women are more emotionally expressive than
men, there were little or no differences in self-perceptions. This effect was
stronger for older participants than for younger participants. Jussim et al. (1991)
interpret this finding as support for a self-fulfilling prophec y effect of
stereotypes on actual behaviour.
An exception regards smiling behaviour that is both believed and observed to
be more typical for women and aggressive anger reactions which are found to be
more typical for men (see Briton & Hall, 1995; Brody & Hall, 1993; Fischer,
1993). However, despite these exceptions, evidence is accumulating that
observed emotional expressivity depends on the details of the social situation as
well as on personality factors as has been underlined in previous research
(Feldman-Barrett, et al., 1998; Fischer, 1993; Hall, 1984; LaFrance & Banaji,
1992; Tucker & Riggio, 1988).
Thus, when studying stereotypes and sel f-perc ept ions of emotional
expressivity we need to distinguish three different levels. First, beliefs regarding
the emotional behaviour of men and women in general. Second, self-
descriptions by men and women of emotional reactions to certain types of
specific emotion-inducing events (e.g., learning that a supposed friend is
spreading unpleasant rumours) and finally, men’s and women’s autobiographic
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 611
narratives of a specific emotion event. All three types of reports should reflect
the influence of cultural beliefs regarding emotional expressivity but to different
degrees. The level of similarity between these different reports should help us
better understand the prevalence and influence of these beliefs for situations in
which people report emotions. Further, as Jussim et al. (1991) suggest,
describing one’s emotional experiences in terms of culturally shared beliefs
about the nature of these experiences may, in the long run, lead to changes in the
way events are experienced.
``Pure’’ emotions vs. emotion profiles
The body of research on gender stereotypes for emotions briefly reviewed
earlier, is based primarily on studies that focus either on ‘‘pure’’ emotional
states such as in studies on the self-reporte d frequency of experience of certain
emotions, on beliefs regarding the frequenc y with which these emotions are
experienced, or on certain behavioural modes for such pure states as in studies
on crying when angry.
Yet, ‘‘pure’’ emotional states are rare and most emotional situations elicit
more than one emotion, with some being more prominent than others (Izard,
1972; Plutchik, 1980). An interesting implication of this is that gende r
stereotypes regarding difference s in emotional expressiveness may not only
involve differences in the expression of a principal emotion (e.g., sadness in
response to an irrevocable loss) but also differences regarding the presence of
secondary emotions, such as anger or guilt. The presence or absence of these
secondary emotions in a particular context is likely to have important
implications for how individuals cope with a given event. For example, an
assertive expression of ‘‘self-righteous’’ anger may not be possible when
feelings of guilt or shame occur at the same time. This suggests that a study on
emotional stereotypes should focus not only on ‘‘core’’ emotions but should
include an analysis of the secondary emotions that are expected to be elicited in
men and women as well.
Overview
Three studies were conducted. The first assessed emotional reactions of men and
women to various emotion-eliciting events. Specifically, respondents were
asked to indicate the percentage of women and men who would react with each
of nine emotions to a series of short vignettes. Study 2 assessed the level to
which participants’ self-perceptions of their emotional reactions paralleled the
general stereotypes found in Study 1. For this, a subset of the vignettes used in
Study 1 were employed. The participants’ task was to indicate for each event the
likelihood, as a percentage, that they personally would react with each of the
nine emotions from the emotion profile when they were confronted with the
situations described in the vignettes. Finally, in Study 3, participants were asked
612 HESS ET AL.
to describe an event that had happened to them in the past and to indicate the
emotions they had felt during the event.
STUDY 1
The goal of Study 1 was to assess the beliefs held by young adults regarding the
emotions likely to be expressed by men and women in specific emotion eliciting
situations. Unlike previous research, we were interested in assessing these
beliefs on a ‘‘profile’’ measure of expressivity. That is, we wanted to discover
not just what individuals perceived to be the modal emotion expressed by males
and females in any given situation, but also their views regarding the probability
that any of several other basic emotions would be expressed in that situation.
Consistent with previous research, we expected that women would be perceived
to be more expressive of all emotions than would men, with the exception of
anger. Further, we anticipated that the profile measure would reveal consistent
gender differences in the secondary, or nonmodal, emotional responses
associated with particular eliciting events.
Method
Materials. The emotion scenarios were taken from a large database of self-
reported emotion eliciting events (ISEAR , International Survey on Emotion
Antecedents and Reactions).1This database contains self-descriptions of
emotion related events from 2921 participants from 37 countries. For each of
seven basic emotions, events that were frequently reported as involving this
emotion were selected from the database. These descriptions were translat ed
into French and any reference to the gender of the protagonist was replaced with
a gender neutral noun or preposition.
Four men and four women then estimated, on 7-point scales, to what
extent each event represented each of seven core relational themes. Core
relational themes (Lazarus, 1991) refer to the common content of events
likely to elicit a certain emotion (e.g., for sadness the core relational theme
involves an irrevocable loss). A 7-point scale regarding the social versus
individual character of each vignette was also completed by the participants
in this pre-test. Using these data, four vignettes for which the target emotional
theme was identified and which were perceived as describing social situations,
1The data are part of an international project ISEAR (International Survey on Emotion
Antecedents and Reacti ons) initiated by Klaus Scherer, University of Geneva. The development of
the databank has been supported by the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme (Paris, France), the
Thyssen Foundation (Germany), and the Socie´ te´ Acade´ mi que de l’Universite´ de Gene`ve
(Switzerland). The data bank consortium consists of Agneta Fi scher (University of Amsterdam),
Pierre Philippot (University of Louvain at Louvain-la-Neuve), and Harald Wallbott (University of
Salzburg). Readers interested in the databank should contact Harald Wallbot: e-mail
wallbotthara@edvz.sbg.ac.a t or fax: 43 0662 8044 5126.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 613
were chosen for each of seven basic emotions (happiness, sadness, fear,
disgust, anger, shame, and guilt). The following is an example of a guilt
vignette: ‘‘Someone does not fully participate in a team effort which leads to
a bad result for everyone on the team’’. An example of an anger vignette is:
‘‘Someone learns that somebody close to him has been spreading negative
rumours about him’’. (The complete set of 28 vignettes is available from the
first author).
Dependent measures. Participants were asked to indicate for nine emotions
(happiness, serenity, sadness, fear, disgust, contempt, anger, shame, and guilt),
the percentage of men and women, as well as the percentage of Anglophones
and Francophones,2who would react by expressing each of these emotions in
the situation described in the vignette. Although the stimulus events were
selected to involve only seven of these basic emotions, ‘‘serenity’’ was added to
the rating scale to provide a second positive affective state that could be viewed
as a different level of happiness. ‘‘Contempt’’ was included because some
investigators argue that it is separable from disgust, thoug h often confused with
it (Ekman & Friesen, 1986).
Participants. A total of 544 male and female participants were recruited
from junior colleges in a suburb of a large urban centre and in a small town in a
rural area of Quebec. Table 1 shows the number of subjects for each condition
and location.
Procedure. Participants completed the questionnaire in various sized
mixed-sex groups. They were told that it assesses the types of emotional
reactions that we generally expect from members of various social groups. They
were informed of their right to discontinue participation at any time and for any
reason. The experimenter then distributed the questionnaires, explained the use
of the scales, and responded to any questions regarding the procedure. To limit
the duration of the experiment to approximately 30 minutes so as to avoid
fatigue, each questionnaire contained only 8 or 12 of the 28 vignettes. The
vignettes were arbitrarily divided into three sets for presentation to the
participants: those describing anger and disgust situations, those for sadness and
fear situations, and finally, those for guilt and shame situations. For a third of the
participants, the four happiness vignettes were included in the set of situat ions
they responded to.
Data reduction and analyse s. The ratings for the four vignettes associated
with each specific emotion were averaged. All analyses were conducted on these
2The last two ratings served as distractors for this study and were not included in the analyses
(see Eagly & Mladinic, 1989 , for a similar approach).
614 HESS ET AL.
means. To assess differences in expected emotional reactions for men and
women, profile analyses were employed. Profile analyses permit us to assess
whether emotion ratings varied as a function of the sex of the protagonist . If men
and women are perceived to react differently, then the profiles will be
nonparallel. If they are expected to react in a similar manner, even though
possibly at different overall levels, the profiles will be parallel. Differences in
the overall level of emotional responding can be diagnosed by assessing whether
the profiles are coincident.
Results
Sex of rater. The emotion expression profiles for male and female
participants were compared for each of the seven emotion situations separately
for the rural and the urban sample and for men’s and women’s expected
reactions. The results from 26 of the resulting 28 profile analyses show that the
profiles are parallel and coincident. That is, male and female participants’
judgements described the same emotion profiles with comparable levels for all
emotions. The data from male and female participants were therefore collapsed
for all further analyses.
TABLE 1
Number, sex, and location of participants as a
function of condition (Study 1)
Number of subjects
Condition Men Women Total
Anger-Disgust
Urban 55 37 92
Rural 31 58 89
Total 86 95 181
Shame-Guilt
Urban 35 56 91
Rural 32 56 88
Total 67 112 179
Sadness-Fear
Urban 55 43 98
Rural 23 56 86
Total 78 106 184
Happiness
Urban 75 56 141
Rural 45 87 132
Total 120 143 263
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 615
Emotion profiles. As expected, distinct profiles emerged for each of the
emotion themes (see Figures 1a–g). Further, the profiles describing men’s and
women’s perceived reactions were not parallel (see later); however, the profiles
were generally similar with regard to their major features. As the focus of the
present paper concerns sex differences, we will restrict the discussion of the
overall form of the profiles to two general observations. First, the profiles for all
negative emotion situations show a prominent peak for the target emotion as
well as secondary peaks. That is, the perceived reactions to the emotional events
used here typically involved both secondary emotions as well as a modal
emotion. It should be noted that an inspection of the raw data suggests that the
peaks for both modal and secondary emotions are reflected in the individual
ratings and are not an artefact of averaging over divergent ratings. Put another
way, the derived ‘‘average’’ profiles reflect those obtained from individual
perceivers.
As Figure 1 shows, anger, sadness, and contempt were frequently expected to
co-occur. Further, participants expected similar levels of shame and guilt for
vignettes involving either of these specific emotions. This suggest s that these
two emotions were not well differentiated by the participants; a finding that is in
accordance with the notion that in Western cultures shame and guilt are not as
separate as is the case in some other cultures (see e.g., Wallbott & Scherer,
1994). Second, the profile for the happiness-eliciting events was characterised
by the absence of any other expected emotion, with the exception of a small
percentage of occasions where serenity was also anticipated. This suggests that
happiness was expected to occur as a relatively ‘‘pure’’ emotion. However, as a
caveat one should note that only two positive emotions (happiness and serenity)
were included in the list of possible emotional reactions and that serenity can be
seen as a level of happiness rather than as an emotion distinct from it.
Perceived sex differences. To assess whether the profiles for men’s and
women’s expected reactions to the different emotion eliciting situations were
parallel and coincident, profile analyses were conducted on the mean ratings for
the four vignettes representing each emotion. These analyses were conducted
separately for the rural and urban samples. However, the general findings for the
two samples are identical and most post-hoc comparisons that reach significance
in one sample do so in the other. Therefore, to facilitate the visual presentation of
the data, Figure 1 shows the data combined over the two samples. However, the F-
values for the analyses are presented in Table 2 separately for the two samples.
All analyses and post-hoc tests were conducted with an alpha level of .05.
For all emotion situations except shame and happiness, profiles for men’s and
women’s expected reactions were nonparallel for both samples (see Table 2).
For shame vignettes, the two profile s from the urban sample were parallel
whereas for happiness the profiles were parallel for both the urban and rural
groups.
616 HESS ET AL.
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. Emotion profiles for men’s and women’s expected emotional reaction as a function of
emotion theme (Study 1).
(Continued overleaf)
617
(c)
(d)
Figure 1. (Continued)
618
(e)
(f)
Figure 1. (Continued) (Continued overleaf)
619
In general, the same differences between men’s and women’s expected
emotional reactions were found for all negative emotion vignettes. Regardless of
the central emotion theme of the vignettes, univariate post-hoc tests on the
participants’ ratings of expected anger, happiness, and serenity, either revealed
no differences in expected reactions between men and women, or they revealed
that a higher percentage of men than women were expected to react with these
emotion displays. Men were judged to be significantly more likely to express
anger in sadness, anger, shame, and fear situations. Further, men were judged to
be significantly more likely than women to express happiness in guilt, shame,
and sadness situations and to express serenity in guilt situations.
On the other hand, a different pattern emerged for participants’ ratings of
expected sadness, fear, disgust, contempt, shame, and guilt. For these emotional
reactions differences emerged for almost all negative emotion situations and in
all cases women were expected to be more likely to react with these emotions
than were men. Specifically, univariate post-hoc analyses revealed that women
were judged to be significantly more likely to react with sadness, fear, and guilt
in all emotion-relevant situations. Further, women were judged to be
significantly more likely to react with disgust and shame in all emotion
situations except for sadness situations. Finally, women were judged to be
significantly more likely than men to react with contempt in disgust, guilt, and
(g)
Figure 1. (Continued)
620 HESS ET AL.
shame situations. For happiness, the profiles for both genders were parallel and
coincident, suggesting that raters not only expected the same pattern of reactions
from men and women but also at the same level for each emotion.
Discussion
In summary, the analyses of the emotion profiles suggest the presence of clear
expectancies regarding not only the core emotion for a given type of situation,
but also for the secondary emotional reactions that are expected in the situation.
Although the profile s for men and women are relatively similar with regard to
their major features, a number of systematic differences in expectations
regarding men’s and women’s emotional reactions emerged for the negative
emotion events but not for the positive.
This latter finding is in contrast to the literature on the self-reported
frequency of happiness expressions/experiences in men and women (e.g., Allen
& Haccoun, 1976) and with the finding that wome n are both believed and
TABLE 2
Results of profile analyses on expected emotional
reactions for men and women in general (Study 1)
Vignettes F df p
Anger
Urban 5.32 8,175 .001
Rural 3.33 8,169 .001
Disgust
Urban 5.07 8,175 .001
Rural 4.61 8,169 .001
Fear
Urban 6.89 8,187 .001
Rural 2.94 8,163 .004
Sadness
Urban 4.89 8,187 .001
Rural 2.67 8,163 .009
Guilt
Urban 4.14 8,173 .001
Rural 2.88 8,167 .005
Shame
Urban 2.77 8,173 .007
Rural 1.56 8,167 .140 (n.s.)
Happiness
Urban 1.74 8,273 .090 (n.s.)
Rural 1.27 8,255 .257 (n.s.)
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 621
observed to smile more than men (Briton & Hall, 1995). However, given the
multiple functions of smiles (see e.g., Fernandez-Dols, & Ruiz-Belda, 1995;
Frank & Ekman, 1993; LaFrance & Hecht, 1995) differences in smiling may not
reflect differences in happiness. One explanation for this lack of continuity with
the existing literature is that the results of the present study are based on specific
vignettes and not on global recollections. Thus, possible differences in real-
world exposure to happiness-eliciting situations are less likely to influence our
findings than they are to influence more global assessments.
For all negative emotion events the profiles were nonparallel,3that is, the
ratings revealed different expectations for men and women. The differences are
consistent with the notion that the gender stereotype for emotional expressiveness
does not assume women to be more expressive for all emotions. For example,
women are not expected to express more disgust and shame in sadness situations
than are men. Also, women are expected to react with more contempt than are
men only in disgust, guilt, and shame situations while for all other situations no
differences emerge. However, women are thought to express more sadness, fear,
shame, and guilt for all emotion-eliciting situations except for happiness events.
That is, regardless of the emotion theme prevalent in the vignettes, women are
always expected to react with more sadness, fear, shame, and guilt.
An interesting case regards happiness as a secondary emotion in situations
with a negative core emotion. The data reveal that men are typically expected to
experience more happiness in these situations than are women. The differences
are strongest for guilt and shame vignettes, which involve notions of cheating
and public misbehaviour, and might reflect a difference in value structure
inherent in the gender stereotype.
In sum, the results of Study 1 expand our knowledg e regarding gender
differences in emotion stereotypes by considering secondary emotional
responses as well as modal emotional responses. Specifically, women are not
only expected to react with more sadness, fear, shame, and guilt in situations for
which these emotions are central, but are expected to do so in all situations
involving negative affect. Men, on the other hand, are expected to react with
more anger in a wide variety of situations involving negative affect as well as
with more happiness in some situations involving negative affect. This suggest s
that the prevalent emotion stereotype describes women’s predominant emotional
reactions to be more withdrawing (fear and sadness) and self-directed (shame
and guilt), whereas men’s emotional reactions are seen as more active and
aggressive.
But to what degree are these general stereotypes/expectations reflected in
the self-perceptions that people have of their own emotional reactions? As
Jussim et al.’s (1991) findings show, self-perceptions can diverge from the
cultural stereotypes. Yet, Jussim et al. also suggest that over time these
3An exception are the shame profiles for the rural sample.
622 HESS ET AL.
stereotypical beliefs may act as a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy and move
self-perceptions in the direction of being consistent with the stereotype. Also,
it is possible that widely held cultural beliefs become prescriptive and thus
lead individuals to describe their own behaviour as being in accordance with
the stereotype. Gallois (1994), in a review of emotion communication in
interpersonal situations, conclude s that emotion communication in such
situations is highly rule-governed . A similar perspective underlies Averill’s
(1997) argument regarding the notion of emotion roles that have entrance
requirements such that, for example, a successful display of anger presupposes
sufficient power to a dequately address the anger elic iting issue. Also,
Stoppard and Gruchy (1993) found that individuals anticipate costs and
rewards for showing certain emotions in certain contexts. Specifically, women
expect more costs when not expressing positive emotions in an ‘‘other’’-
oriented context, whereas men expect rewards for showing positive emotions
regardless of context.
Taken together, these findings from diverse domains suggest that self-
perceptions of emotional reactions should show a clear overlap with
stereotypical expectations within any particular culture. To the degree that we
assume that these influences are due to recollection biases, we may further
speculate that the overlap is less pronounced when asking about behavioural
reactions in particular social contexts than when asking for reactions in
‘‘general’’ or independent of a specific social situation. Specifically, as data on
actual behaviour suggest relatively few sex differences in emotional behaviour
whereas the stereotype suggests a wide range of such differences, differences in
self-perceptions are more likely to be due to the influence of the cultural
stereotypes than to actual behavioural differences between the genders. Study 2
is focused on an analysis of this possibility.
STUDY 2
Study 1 confirmed that, at least in the Quebec culture, there are widely shared
beliefs concerning how men and women differ in their emotion-relevant
expressive behaviour. The central issue to be addressed in Study 2, therefore, is
the degree of parallelism that exists between perceptions of how typical males
and females are perceived to respond to emotional events (Study 1) and self-
perceptions of one’s own emotional expressivity.
To answer this question, men and women, drawn from the same population as
in Study 1, were asked to indicate for each of the seven types of emotion
situations employed in Study 1 to what degree they expected to react themselves
with each of nine emotions if this event should happen to them. In addition, we
asked participants to indicate the likelihood that they would show each of nine
types of behaviours corresponding to the nine emotions of the emotion profile.
These measures were embedded in a larger questionnaire that assessed beliefs
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 623
regarding emotional reactions of other social groups.4This placement made sure
that the cultural beliefs and stereotypes held by the participants regarding
emotional expressivity in general were evoked. However, the specific issue of
sex differences was not alluded to.
Method
Participants. A total of 360 students attending junior colleges in the
Montreal urba n region participated in the study. Of these, only those
participants whose first language learned and still spoken was French, who
were born in the province of Quebe c (Canada), who had not lived outside of
Quebec for more than five consecutive years, and who identified themselves
as either Canadian or Quebecois and not as a member of any other group
were retained.5The resulting sample consisted of 289 individuals. In total,
163 women and 126 men with a mean age of 18.86 years participated in
groups of between 15 and 40 participants. Of these, 63 men and 85 women
completed the emotion profiles and 63 men and 78 women completed the
behavioural reactions scale.
Procedure. Participants were informed of their right to discontinue
participation at any time and for any reason. The experimenter then distributed
the questionnaires. The instructions as well as an example were provided on the
first page. The same instructions as employed in Study 1 were used, the only
difference being that participants were told to think about how they would react
and to indicate the likelihood in percent that they themselves would react with
each of the emotions/behaviours indicated. The same instructions were given for
both the emotion profile and the behavioural reactions scale with the only
difference being that for the latter the word ‘‘emotion’’ was replaced with
‘‘behaviour’’.
Materials. For each of seven emotions (happiness, anger, fear, sadness,
disgust, shame, and guilt) two of the four vignettes employed in Study 1 were
retained. Each participant responded to only one vignette for each emotion and
vignettes were counterbalanced across participants.
4In the present context only data from the part of the questionnaire asking participants about how
they themselves would react in the described situation will be presented.
5These selection criteria were included because the participants for Study 2 were recruited from
several Montreal junior colleges with an ethnically diverse population. Emotion stereotypes are well
known to differ between cultures (Kirouac & Hess, 1999) and the participants in Study 1 were
recruited from an ethnically homogenous population. To ensure comparability between the two
samples, it was therefore necessary to exclude participants from groups not present in the first
sample.
624 HESS ET AL.
Dependent measures.
Emotion profiles. These were compute d in the same manner as in Study 1.
That is, responses were averaged across the vignettes representing each specific
emotion theme.
Behavioural re acti ons scale. This sc ale is inte nded to a ssess the
behavioural reactions that are expected for someone who is experiencing the
emotional state in question. To construct the scale, a two-step procedure was
employed.
First, 68 students of the University of Quebec at Montreal, 54 women and 14
men, with a mean age of 27.9 years, were asked to list for each of nine
emotions (happiness, serenity, anger, disgust , fear, contempt, sadness, shame,
and guilt) the behaviours and observable reactions they associate with each
specific emotion. The answers were compiled into frequency lists and
synonyms were grouped together. The t hree most fre quently named
behaviours for each emotion were retained. Due to overlap between some
emotions this procedure yielded a list of 22 behaviours. For the second step, a
total of 44 participants, 28 women and 16 men with a mean age of 22.6
years, were asked to rate for each behaviour and each of the nine emotions
the likelihood of observing the behaviour in a person experiencing the
emotion using a 7-point scale (1, very unlikely; 7, very likely). Behaviours
that received a mean rating of 6 or above for only one emotion comprise the
final scale.
These consisted of the following items:6to laugh/to get excited (happiness),
to tremble/t o freeze (fear), to hit/to insult/to criticise (anger), to cry/to isolate
oneself (sadness), to grimace/to vomit (disgust), to stare/to look hard at
(contempt), to smile/to relax/to contemplate (serenity), to withdraw/to lower
one’s head/to blush (shame), to justify oneself/to apologise (guilt). On the
profile measure, participants were asked to indicate the likelihood, as a
percentage, that they would show each of the behaviours in a situation like the
one described in the vignettes.
Data analyses. Each participant responded to one scenario for each of the
seven emotions themes and used only one type of scale. As in Study 1, the
data were collapsed over scenarios. Because we had responses from more
women than men for both dependent measures, the data for the female
participants were weighted to create equal cell sizes. Profile analyses across
the nine emotional reactions/behaviours were conducted to assess sex
differences.
6These items were translated from the original French by the authors.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 625
Results and discussion
As noted earlier, the goal of Study 2 was to assess to what degree the self-
perceptions of the men and women who participated in this study overlap with
the general stereotypes found in Study 1. To accomplish this, the emotion
profiles from Study 1 were compared with the self-reported emotional profiles
and with the behavioural reaction profiles collected here.
Self-described emotion profiles. The means and standard deviations for the
nine scales of the emotion profiles for male and female participants are
presented in Table 3. A comparison of these means with those of the profiles
from Study 1 reveals substantial similarities between the emotional reactions
expected for oneself and those expected for men and women in general.
Behavioral reactions. Table 3 shows the means and standard deviations for
the nine behavioural reaction profiles. These profiles represent the participants
self-report of the likelihood that they would display these specific behaviours in
the situations described by the vignettes. As the focus of this paper is on sex
TABLE 3
Means and standard deviations for self-perceptions of emotional reactions/behaviours
for men and women (Study 2)
Men Women
Situation Mean SD Mean SD
Anger
Happiness 2.62 12.24 0.06 0.54
Laugh/get excited 7.90 18.26 4.29 11.68
Serenity 2.62 8.27 1.35 5.32
Smile/relax/contemplate 8.65 20.68 4.35 11.85
Sadness 23.59*** 23.90 44.05 31.51
Cry/isolate oneself 9.35* 20.83 18.25 22.50
Fear 6.03 15.89 4.86 10.70
Tremble/freeze 3.32 8.14 6.30 11.55
Anger 62.68 28.73 60.76 29.28
Hit/insult/criticise 35.40 30.42 26.54 28.73
Disgust 11.75 24.47 10.94 19.97
Grimace/vomit 1.94 5.53 2.86 8.54
Contempt 18.65 25.05 21.02 25.43
Stare/look hard at 20.65* 27.18 11.56 22.16
Shame 2.86* 8.27 8.02 18.87
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 10.44 21.87 10.38 16.42
Guilt 3.49 8.26 4.91 15.82
Justify oneself/apologise 20.45 30.72 17.61 26.63
(Continued)
626 HESS ET AL.
TABLE 3
(Continued)
Men Women
Situation Mean SD Mean SD
Disgust
Happiness 6.11* 17.14 1.43 5.75
Laugh/get excited 19.89* 26.69 9.15 18.25
Serenity 6.11 18.55 2.08 11.59
Smile/relax/contemplate 11.59t21.13 5.78 14.82
Sadness 5.16 15.37 4.90 15.31
Cry/isolate oneself 0.73 4.03 3.46 13.52
Fear 3.73t10.66 9.11 20.18
Tremble/freeze 4.76t11.54 10.15 19.77
Anger 13.59 21.46 14.37 25.21
Hit/insult/criticise 12.14 22.10 11.86 21.51
Disgust 50.86 32.57 58.81 31.78
Grimace/vomit 11.67 21.21 16.92 22.36
Contempt 17.98 22.26 17.50 27.06
Stare/look hard at 19.91 23.62 16.86 23.63
Shame 10.23 19.72 16.83 27.38
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 6.45 16.63 11.69 23.37
Guilt 2.62 9.37 1.19 3.78
Justify oneself/apologise 9.92 25.11 7.44 19.24
Sadness
Happiness 3.17 12.80 4.12 15.94
Laugh/get excited 1.23 7.89 1.28 1.14
Serenity 8.87t20.17 3.18 14.56
Smile/relax/contemplate 6.21 18.48 3.46 11.96
Sadness 76.90 28.16 82.51 22.58
Cry/isolate oneself 60.08 31.31 67.36 30.59
Fear 8.49t18.20 15.46 26.37
Tremble/freeze 15.95 27.63 11.35 20.68
Anger 18.25 26.41 22.61 29.19
Hit/insult/criticise 5.32 13.99 6.41 15.17
Disgust 6.51t20.15 1.76 9.40
Grimace/vomit 7.90 20.17 3.53 13.18
Contempt 6.59 21.25 3.32 11.21
Stare/look hard at 0.00 0.00 0.45 3.97
Shame 2.14 10.50 1.41 7.11
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 20.08* 29.16 7.24 16.80
Guilt 15.24 24.94 21.41 29.85
Justify oneself/apologise 3.15 10.65 3.91 14.78
Fear
Happiness 3.17 14.87 0.06 0.54
Laugh/get excited 2.03 10.54 0.58 3.61
Serenity 5.87* 16.98 0.82 3.27
(Continued overleaf)
627
TABLE 3
(Continued)
Men Women
Situation Mean SD Mean SD
Smile/relax/contemplate 10.48** 22.43 1.82 6.66
Sadness 23.33 30.51 29.29 35.88
Cry/isolate oneself 13.06** 25.36 30.22 35.82
Fear 51.11*** 32.07 75.35 27.15
Tremble/freeze 20.08* 25.65 33.78 33.78
Anger 24.68 32.97 19.54 29.49
Hit/insult/criticise 12.22* 20.98 4.46 14.10
Disgust 7.87 18.08 10.06 22.06
Grimace/vomit 4.29 12.70 3.65 11.15
Contempt 11.92 22.16 11.41 20.78
Stare/look hard at 6.77 18.22 3.91 14.05
Shame 1.43 4.70 2.00 6.15
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 16.06 25.79 10.00 21.17
Guilt 7.94 21.99 3.69 9.95
Justify oneself/apologise 2.82 12.63 2.76 13.19
Shame
Happiness 4.52 15.96 1.44 10.39
Laugh/get excited 18.25 29.05 13.87 19.90
Serenity 4.44 14.92 1.82 10.28
Smile/relax/contemplate 12.06t23.33 6.23 12.62
Sadness 11.51* 21.21 20.77 23.61
Cry/isolate oneself 3.34 8.77 4.26 11.07
Fear 12.46 24.31 11.35 17.00
Tremble/freeze 7.76 15.69 8.94 14.91
Anger 12.62 22.59 14.32 24.08
Hit/insult/criticise 5.65 14.78 3.14 11.40
Disgust 2.06 9.66 3.47 12.44
Grimace/vomit 2.02 5.90 2.31 10.86
Contempt 7.30 15.32 8.11 18.80
Stare/look hard at 3.47 8.33 3.04 11.60
Shame 48.19* 35.34 59.68 29.48
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 25.63 29.74 28.85 29.08
Guilt 30.95** 34.42 47.88 32.82
Justify oneself/apologise 43.79 31.44 42.56 30.74
Guilt
Happiness 10.24* 24.32 3.55 11.89
Laugh/get excited 7.34 22.59 5.84 17.61
Serenity 2.62 10.08 2.23 7.71
Smile/relax/contemplate 6.45 16.92 4.16 14.09
Sadness 20.03t27.05 29.71 33.90
Cry/isolate oneself 9.60** 19.92 22.73 29.79
Fear 17.78 26.67 26.53 33.05
(Continued)
628
differences, we will not discuss these data in detail. However, two things are
noteworthy. First, both men and women report lower probabilities that they
would react with a certain behaviour, for example, ‘‘to laugh/to get excited’’,
than with the emotion that corresponds to the behaviour (happiness). This
finding is not unexpected as individuals do not always express their emotions
outwardly or may have developed idiosyncratic means of expressing certain
emotions. Second, the profile data for the behaviours resemble strongly the
emotional reactions reported. For example, for anger the highest means are
found for to hit/to insult/to criticise, for to cry/to isolate one self, and for to stare/
TABLE 3
(Continued)
Men Women
Situation Mean SD Mean SD
Tremble/freeze 12.06 22.12 12.27 20.24
Anger 17.62 29.80 19.26 29.50
Hit/insult/criticise 1.29 5.43 2.21 7.20
Disgust 12.48 25.69 11.52 24.02
Grimace/vomit 5.81 16.42 3.51 13.85
Contempt 16.03 28.57 14.64 26.11
Stare/look hard at 1.29 4.95 1.36 4.85
Shame 26.67** 32.27 53.75 34.67
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 19.52 24.72 17.69 23.33
Guilt 50.71 38.85 57.53 33.72
Justify oneself/apologise 44.84 35.81 42.86 36.08
Happiness
Happiness 89.13 19.81 91.06 14.71
Laugh/get excited 57.63 34.20 60.69 32.83
Serenity 27.38t36.50 39.06 37.97
Smile/relax/contemplate 54.51 34.45 46.47 34.32
Sadness 1.27 9.46 0.20 1.23
Cry/isolate oneself 0.40 3.18 0.29 1.41
Fear 1.03 3.72 2.06 6.80
Tremble/freeze 4.19t13.13 0.90 0.57
Anger 0.32 2.52 0.00 0.00
Hit/insult/criticise 0.00 0.00 0.13 1.14
Disgust 0.48 3.78 0.00 0.00
Grimace/vomit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Contempt 0.81 5.22 0.00 0.00
Stare/look hard at 3.55 13.92 1.47 3.88
Shame 1.11 7.64 0.00 0.00
Withdraw/lower one’s head/blush 7.18 19.05 6.87 18.59
Guilt 2.70 15.26 0.00 0.00
Justify oneself/apologise 3.55 15.35 0.90 3.40
Note: Significant differences between men and women: tp<.1; * p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 629
to look hard at, which correspon d to anger, sadness, and contempt reactions,
respectively.
However, a numbe r of differences between these two types of profiles can
also be observed. For example, for the emotional reaction profiles for anger and
sadness the second highest mean is found for guilt whereas for the behavioural
reaction profiles for these emotions the second highest mean is found for shame
behaviours (to withdraw/to lower one’s head/to blush). This findings may be due
to the general confusion between shame and guilt that has been observed for
Western cultures (see e.g., Wallbott & Scherer, 1994).
Sex differences. To assess whether male and female participants differed
with regard to their expected emotional reactions and behaviours in the different
emotion eliciting situations, profile analyses were conducted on the ratings for
each emotion situation. All analyses and post-hoc tests were conducted at an
alpha level of .05. The results are shown in Table 4.
TABLE 4
Results of profile analyses on self-reported likelihood
of emotional reactions/behaviours for men and
women (Study 2)
Vignettes F df p
Anger
Reactions 2.95 8,116 .005
Behaviours 1.83 8,113 .079
Disgust
Reactions 1.69 8,115 .107
Behaviours 1.73 8,116 .099
Fear
Reactions 3.30 8,116 .002
Behaviours 3.90 8,116 .001
Sadness
Reactions 2.07 8,116 .044
Behaviours 1.70 8,115 .105
Guilt
Reactions 1.86 8,117 .071
Behaviours 1.30 8,115 .251
Shame
Reactions 2.15 8,116 .037
Behaviours .70 8,116 .689
Happiness
Reactions 1.06 8,116 .397
Behaviours 1.09 8,116 .376
630 HESS ET AL.
Emotional reactions. For all e motion situations except disgust and
happiness the emotional reactions profiles were nonparallel or marginally
nonparallel (see Table 4). For the nonparallel profiles post-hoc tests revealed
that a similar pattern of sex differences emerged across the different emotion
themes. For happiness and serenity there were either no significant differences
between men and women, or men reported experiencing these emotions with a
higher probability than did women. Conversely, for sadness, fear, shame, and
guilt there were either no significant sex differences or women reported feeling
these emotions with a higher probability than did men. For anger, disgust, and
contempt reactions no significant differences emerged.
Emotional behaviour profiles. Only the fear profile was significantly
nonparallel (different) for men and women. The profiles for anger and disgust
were marginally nonparallel and the remaining profiles were all parallel and
coincident. Thus, fewer significant differences between men’s and women’s
expected behaviours in the situations described by the vignettes were found than
was the case for the expected emotional reactions in Studies 1 and 2. Yet, it is
important to note that the probabilities reported for the behavioura l profiles were
lower overall and it is thus possible that this lack of differences is due to a lack
of sensitivity of the measure.
As postulated based on previous research (e.g., Crawford, Clippax, Onyx,
Gault, & Benton, 1992) as well as on the emotional reactions profile, women
report a higher probability of either crying or isolating oneself in an anger
situation than do men. Conversely, and in accordance with both the literature on
anger expression (see earlier) and the results from the emotional reactions
profile, men report it more likely to hit/to insult/to criticise than women, though
this difference is not significant. In addition, they report that they are
significantly more likely to stare/to look hard (contempt) than do women, a
behaviour that could also be interpreted as aggressive when shown in response
to an insult.
As regards the disgust situations, men report that they are more likely to
laugh/to get excited. This sex difference matches the finding for the emotional
reactions profile but was not found in Study 1. Finally for the fear situation, men
report that they are more likely to hit/to insult/to criticise as well as to smile/to
relax/to contemplate (serenity) than do women. The emotional reactions profile
for fear from this study shows that men report a highe r probability of reacting
with serenity, but not with anger, than do women. As these behaviours
correspond to a macho or cool demeanour in a threatening situation they fit the
general stereotype of masculine behaviour. Conversely, women report to be
more likely to tremble/to freeze as well as to cry/to isolate one self in fear
situations.
In sum, although many fewer sex differences reached significance when
comparing self-reported expected behaviours for men and women, the pattern of
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 631
results is largely congruent with previous findings. Specifically, women reported
a higher probability of showing behaviours congruent with sadness and fear than
did men, whereas men reported higher probabilities for anger and serene
behaviours. In addition, men reported a higher probability of showing a
contempt behaviour in an anger situation, yet the relevant behaviour (to stare/to
look hard) could be interpreted as aggressive in that context.
How congruent are the findings from
Studies 1 and 2?
As mentioned earlier, not all significant differences found in Study 1 for the
expected reactions for men and women in general, were also found for self-
reports of expected reactions by men and women for themselves. Yet, as the
results for the two studies are based on different degrees of freedom,
significance levels cannot be directly compared. To assess whether stereotypical
and self-reported sex differences were of similar magnitude, we computed the
effect sizes for both studies. Table 5 shows Cohen’s dfor the post-hoc
TABLE 5
Cohen’s dfor sex differences in Studies 1 and 2
Study 1 Study 2
Situation
Emotional
reactions
Emotional
reactions
Emotional
behaviours
Anger
Happiness 70.23
Serenity 70.25
Sadness 2.03 0.73 0.41
Fear 1.23 0.30
Anger 70.55 70.30
Disgust 0.68
Contempt 70.26
Shame 1.17 70.35
Guilt 1.29
Disgust
Happiness 70.32 70.37 70.47
Serenity 70.45 70.26 70.21
Sadness 0.95 0.27
Fear 1.89 0.33 0.33
Anger
Disgust 1.60 0.24 0.24
Contempt 0.50
Shame 0.62 70.28 0.26
Guilt 0.62 0.20
(Continued)
632 HESS ET AL.
TABLE 5
(Continued)
Study 1 Study 2
Situation
Emotional
reactions
Emotional
reactions
Emotional
behaviours
Sadness
Happiness 70.53
Serenity 70.32
Sadness 1.84 0.22 0.24
Fear 1.71 0.31
Anger 70.65 0.42
Disgust 70.30 70.25
Contempt 0.21
Shame 0.20 70.46 0.54
Guilt 1.76 0.22 70.33
Fear
Happiness 70.21 70.30
Serenity 70.26 70.41 70.52
Sadness 1.89 0.55
Fear 2.21 0.82 0.46
Anger 70.84 70.43
Disgust 0.67
Contempt
Shame 0.49 70.26
Guilt 1.72 70.25
Shame
Happiness 70.45 70.23
Serenity 70.27 70.20 70.31
Sadness 1.75 0.41
Fear 1.28
Anger 70.69
Disgust 0.65
Contempt 0.54
Shame 1.54 0.35
Guilt 1.53 0.50
Guilt
Happiness 71.07 70.35
Serenity 70.51
Sadness 1.98 0.32 0.51
Fear 1.62 0.29
Anger
Disgust 1.28
Contempt 0.75
Shame 1.78 0.51
Guilt 1.83 0.20
633
comparisons for each emotion in the profile for the six negative emotion
situations across the two studies. For Study 1 the effect sizes for the urban and
the rural sample were combined. To facilitate the reading of the table only
differences for which dwas at least 0.20 (i.e., equivalent to a small effect) are
shown. In general, effect sizes for Study 1 are larger than those for Study 2. For
emotional reactions the expected differences between men and women were of
medium (>0.50) to large (>0.80) size, whereas for self-perceptions the expected
differences between men and women were small to medium in size.
The most stable sex difference across the two studies was found for sadness,
both as a core emotion in sadness vignettes and as a secondary emotion. That is,
for all negative emotions the general stereotype describes women as reacting
with more sadness, and women also perceive themselves as reacting with more
sadness and/or report more sadness behaviours. Further, women are expected to
react with (and they self-report) more shame and guilt reactions/behaviours in
shame and guilt situations. However, for the other negative emotions (anger,
disgust, sadness, and fear) men report higher levels of shame reactions or shame
behaviours (but not both). Finally, fear reactions and behaviours are described as
more likely for women in general and women perceive themselves as reacting
with more fear in disgust, sadness, fear, and guilt situations.
Another very stable sex difference across studies regards happiness and
serenity reactions for negative emotion vignettes. Men consistently are both
expected to react with and self-report more happiness reactions as well as
happiness behaviours for disgust, fear, and shame vignettes. To a lesser degree
this pattern also emerges for sadness and guilt vignettes. As mentioned in the
discussion of Study 1, this may reflect differences in the value structure between
men and women.
In sum, a comparison of effect sizes shows considerable consistency across
the two studies. Specifically noteworthy is the very consistent finding for both
the stereotypical beliefs and the self-reports with regard to sadness reactions,
which are considered as more likely for women than for men for all negative
emotion situations studied.
However, a number of differences between the general stereotypes and the
self-perceptions also emerged, specifically with regard to shame reactions.
Whereas women are generally believed to be more likely to react with shame
to negative emotion events, the self-reporte d likelihood for shame as a
concomitant emotion is higher for men for all situations except for guilt
(given the general confusion regarding these states observed in Western
cultures, this may be due to shame being a core rather than a concomitant
emotion for guilt scenarios). Yet, self-reported shame behaviours are more
likely for women than for men in sadness and disgust situations. A possible
explanation is that men are actively trying to not show shame reactions—to
conform to the general stereotype—but are aware that they nonetheless are
likely to feel shame in those situations.
634 HESS ET AL.
To conclude, the general stereotype and self-perceptions of emotional
reactions and behaviours suggest that women react with more sadness to all types
of negative emotion events. Further, the stereotypes and the self-perceptions are
in agreement on men’s greater likelihood to react with happiness and serenity to a
variety of negative emotions. In contrast, differences between the general
stereotypes and self-perceptions emerge for shame reactions with men reporting,
in situations when shame is a secondary emotion, a higher likelihood of shame
reactions, but not necessarily shame behaviours, than do women.
STUDY 3
The results from Study 2 suggest that the stereotypical beliefs regarding men’s
and women’s emotional reactions and behaviours in a variety of emotion-
inducing situations converge with self-perceptions of men’s and women’s
emotional reactions and behaviours in those same situations. This finding is
consistent with the notion that autobiographic statements that require
participants to summarise over a number of related experiences may be biased
by stereotypical expectations (see e.g., Feldman-Barrett et al., 1998). This leads
to the question of whether a similar overlap can also be found for narratives of
single, specific emotional events from the participants’ past. If stereotypes
indeed influence the way emotional events are reconstructed in a narrative, we
would expect to find that women report more sadness events and express more
sadness overall as well as more intense target emotions for all but anger events.
Conversely, we would expect men to report more situations involving anger as
well as experiencing more happiness and serenity overall.
However, as Study 3 is based on personal narratives and not on standardised
vignettes, such a finding could simply be due to the fact that the emotion
antecedent events in a real-life setting differ for men and women. To assess this
possibility we decided to measure the emotion antecedent events by means of an
appraisal questionnaire that assesses the participants’ perception of the emotion
antecedent situation. To the degree that perceptions of emotion antecedents are
similar for men and women while reported emotional reactions differ we can
conclude that observed sex differences are not due to differences in the
perception of the event per se. For example, if women’s tendency to report more
sadness were due to a difference in the perception of the emotion antecedent
situation, we would expect women to report more often that they did not feel that
they could do anything to change the situation or that they had to adapt to the
situation (as sadness is generally associated with the notion of irrevocable loss).
Overview
For this study we translated and adapted a questionnaire reported by Scherer
(1988) that consists of two parts. The first part invites the participants to
describe an event during which they experienced an emotion. The second part
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 635
asks specific questions regarding the appraisal process. We added a section in
which we asked participants to complete an emotion profile for the event. To
avoid the possibility that men and women would relate narratives from widely
different types of situations we asked participants to describe an event related to
family interactions. This class of situations should be readily accessible to all
participants and ensure that emotional events involving human interaction
partners were reported.
Allowing participants to choose the type of emotional events they report has
several advantages. Most importantly, we can assess what type of emotional
events men and women choose to report spontaneously. It also permits
participants to choose a salient event for which they can recollect the
information necessary to respond to the appraisal questions. On the other hand,
this approach is unlikely to result in a well-balanced distribution of emotion
topics, thus making it difficult or impossible to analyse the data separately for
different emotion themes. Yet, in the context of the present study we were only
interested in sex differences in reports and not in absolute levels of responses.
Studies 1 and 2 suggest that sex differences are very stable across all negative
emotions. We therefore decided to allow participants to choose the emotion
theme and analysed the data collapsed across all negative emotion themes.
Method
Participants. A total of 171 students, 87 men and 84 women with a mean
age of 18.62 years, participated in this study. Most of the participants (147) were
recruited from an ethnically homogenous junior college in the larger Montreal
urban area (Ce´gep Lionel-Groulx, Ste-The´re`se, Que´bec, Canada) and partici-
pated in groups. An additional 24 participants were recruited individually.
Procedure. The experimenter explained that the study concerned emotional
events in people’s lives. Participants were informed of their right to discontinue
participation at any time and for any reason. The experimenter then distributed
the questionnaires and responded to questions regarding the procedure. The task
took between 10 and 30 minutes. Most of this time difference can be attributed
to the amount of detail provided in the event description; that ranged from a
couple of words (e.g., birth of my daughter) to well over a page.
Dependent measures. The questionnaire consisted of four parts. The first
part was an open-ended question asking the participants to describe any event
involving their family life that led them to experience an emotion. Sadness,
shame, anger, guilt, joy, fear, and disgust were provided as examples of
emotions. Participants were asked to give a detailed description of the situation
including the events that led up to it, their reactions and those of others present.
In addition, they were asked to identify the people involved with respect to their
636 HESS ET AL.
relationship with them (e.g., my partner, my sister, etc.) as well as to identify the
main emotion theme of the story. This served to ensure that the participants
based their answers to the following questions on a specific event and not on a
class of similar events.
Emotion description. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of
questions regarding when the event happened, for how long they felt the
emotion, and the intensity of the core emotion identified as the emotion theme of
the story. Participants were also asked to indicate whether they tried to hide or
control their feelings and to what degree. This part also contained the emotion
profile used in Studies 1 and 2. Using this measure, participants were asked to
indicate to what percentage they had felt each of the nine emotions from the
profile.
Appraisal questionnaire. A series of questions regarding the appraisal process
were used to assess the emotion antecedent events. These questions were
translated from the questionnaire reported by Scherer (1988). Specifically,
participants were asked to what degree they had expected the situation to occur,
how pleasant or unpleasant they considered the event, whether the event helped
or hindered them in achieving their aims, to what degree they considered that the
situation or the event that caused the emotion was unjust or unfair, whether the
event was caused by their own or by someone else’s behaviour, to what degree
they considere d that the behaviour that caused the event would be judged as
improper or immoral by their acquaintances, how the event affected their
feelings about themselves such as their self-esteem or self-confidence, and
finally to what degree the event changed their relationships with the people
involved (all on negative-positive 7-point bipolar scales).
In addition, participants were given a list of 11 specific potential causes of the
event (caused it myself, natural causes, act of god, etc.). They also evaluated
their ability to act upon or to cope with the event and its consequences using a
scale involving 5 options. The last part of the questionnaire consisted of
questions regarding the participants’ sex, their age, and whether they were
currently seeing someone in a love-based relationship and if so for how long.
Results
Of the 171 reported emotion events, 147 (74 reported by men and 73 reported by
women) concerned negative emotional events. Of these, a total of 62 were
sadness events, 22 were anger events, and 11 were guilt events. The remaining
events were distributed over a large numbe r of negative emotions.
As expected, the very low frequency of reports for specific emotion themes
made separate analyses of reports of these events unfeasible. We therefore
decided to perform analyses on the data summed over all negative emotion
themes. The 24 events with positive emotion themes were obviousl y excluded
from these analyses.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 637
Do women report more sadness events and men more anger events? To
address this question a chi-square test was performe d on the frequency with
which men and women labeled the reported event as a sad versus an anger event.
In line with the results of Studies 1 and 2, we found men to report more anger
events and women to report more sadness events. Specifically, 14 men and 8
women reported anger events and 25 men and 37 women reported sad events, w2
= 3.55, p= .06, d= .42.
Do women report more intense core emotions than men? For the intensity of
the core emotion experienced during the event women reported significantly
higher levels (M = 5.93, SD = 1.01) than men (M = 5.54, SD = 1.23), t(145) =
2.22, p= .028, d= .37.
Do women and men report different levels of negative emotions across the
emotion profile? Figure 2 presents the emotion profiles separately for men and
women. An inspection of the profiles shows that overall men report more
happiness/serenity whereas women report higher levels of all other emotions.
The profiles are nonparallel, F(8 137) = 58.77, p<.001. Post-hoc analyses
revealed a significant sex difference in self-reported sadness with women
reporting higher levels than men. To compare the sex differences in the profiles
Figure 2. Emotion profile for men’s and women’s self-reported emotiona l reactions to negative
emotion events (Study 3).
638 HESS ET AL.
found in this study with those from Studies 1 and 2, effect sizes were calculated.
Using the same cut-off point as previously (small effect size d= 0.20), only two
differences were found to be stable across the three studies. Men report higher
levels of happiness for negative emotion events (d=70.22) and women report
higher levels of sadness (d= 0.43). As the latter difference may be due to the
higher frequency of reported sadness events by women, we also verified whether
women report higher levels of sadness when sadness events are excluded from
the analysis. An inspection of the means revealed a marginally significant
difference in the same direction: M= 64.72, SD = 32.47 and M= 51.08, SD =
36.84, for women and men respectively, t(83) = 1.81, p= .074, d= .40.
Are there differences in appraisal patterns between men and women? As
mentioned earlier, the reported differences in emotional reactions could be due
to differences in the perception of the emotion antecedent events. Yet, no
differences in appraisal patterns were found, suggesting that emotion antecedent
events were perceived similarly. In addition, despite the more frequent and more
intense reports of sadness, women did not report different coping styles than
men and did not seem to feel more helpless (38 men vs. 34 women report this
reaction). In fact, women more frequently report that they felt able to ‘‘influence
the situation positively’’ (19 women vs. 9 men report this reaction, though the
difference is not significant).
Discussion
Study 3 extended the study of emotion stereotypes and self-perceptions based on
vignettes to narratives of emotional events that the participants had in fact
experienced themselves. The goal of the study was to investigate whether the
findings from Studies 1 and 2 generalise to such recollections of personal events.
The results strongly suggest this to be the case. Women again report higher
levels of sadness for negative emotion events. They also report more sad events
in general. Men on the other hand, report more anger events as well as more
happiness for negative emotion events as was found in both Studies 1 and 2. Yet,
no reported differences in appraisal or coping emerged. This suggests that the
observed differences in emotional reactions are not due to a bias in the appraisal
process nor to an inability to act upon the event.
If emotion antecedents do not differ why are differences in emotional
reactions reported? We suggest that such differences represent an influence of
the general emotion stereotype on the narrative reconstruction of a personal
event. This conclusion is based on the observation of a null effect and thus open
to the critique that the present study lacked the power necessary to detect real
differences in appraisal between men and women. To assess this critique we
calculated the absolute mean effect size for the interval-scaled appraisal
questions to be d= 0.15. To achieve 80% power a sample of 1100 participants
would be needed. These data underscor e the very slim differences in appraisals
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 639
between men and women, making it highly unlikely that the effects observed in
this study are mediated by a difference in appraisal and thus by a difference in
the perception of the underlying event.
CONCLUSIONS
The present series of studies had the goal to assess general emotion stereotypes
and their influence on self-perceptions of emotional reactions by men and
women. We wanted to both describe these stereotypes in more detail with regard
not only to the modal emotion for a specific event (such as sadness reactions to a
loss) but also with regard to the secondary emotions present in these situations.
Further, we wanted to assess to what degree such expectations for men and
women in general, are endorsed by individuals for themselves as well as whether
they would be spontaneousl y reported when relating a personally experienced
event.
Two gender differences were found to be stable across all three experimental
paradigms. Women are expected to be more likely to react with sadness in all
negative emotion situations, they expect themselves to be more likely to react
with sadness as well as to cry and to withdraw more, and finally women report
more sadness in personal events. In contrast, men are expected to react with
more happiness/serenity during negative emotional situations, they expect
themselves to react more frequently this way as well as to laugh and smile more
and to be more relaxed. They also tend to report more happiness when
describing negative personal events.
Not all general emotion stereotypes were found in the self-perceptions
studied in Studies 2 and 3. Specifically, according to Study 1 women are
expected to be more likely to react with shame and guilt in all negative emotion
situations. Yet, women did not expect to do so for themselves in situations other
than shame and guilt situations and, in fact, men reported to be more likely to
react with shame in a variety of situations. Further, men and women did not
report any differences with regard to experiences of shame and guilt during the
personal events.
Study 3 included an appraisal questionnaire to address the question whether
the self-reported differences in emotionality between men and women are due to
differences in the appraisal of the emotion antecedent events or rather to the
influence of the prevalent norms. No differences in appraisals were detected
suggesting that the self-reported differences may be due to the normative forces
of the general stereotype rather than to appraisal differences.
It may be argued that the Study 3 is based on recollections of past events and
that self-reports of emotional experiences represent after the fact reconstructions
that differ from the actually experienced emotions during the event (see
Parkinson & Manstead, 1993). A related argument may be made for Study 2
where participants had to estimate the likelihood of their emotional reactions to
640 HESS ET AL.
hypothetical events (even though the latter were chosen to be common everyday
events). This may well be true. Yet, the question remains why did men and
women reconstruct the events differently in terms of their emotional reactions?
The answer would then be that the prevalent emotion stereotype, which is
largely endorsed by the population studied, influenced this reconstruction. Yet,
as peoples’ sense of self depends on their past histories this would imply, that
reconstructions of emotional events in line with emotion stereotypes may
eventually lead individuals to conform more closely to these stereotypes as they
become more and more part of their emotional history and eventually of their
emotional self.
Manuscript received 30 May 1997
Revised manuscript received 23 February 2000
REFERENCES
Adams, S., Kuebli, J., Boyle, P.A., & Fivush, R. (1995). Gender differences in parent-child
conversations about past emotions: A longitudinal investigation. Sex Roles,33, 309–323.
Allen, J.G., & Haccoun, D.M. (1976). Sex differences in emotionality: A multidimensional approach.
Human Relations,29, 711–722.
Averill, J.R. (1997). The emotions: An integrativ e approach. In R. Hogan, J.A. Johnson, & S.R.
Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psycholog y (pp. 513–541). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Birnbaum, D.W. (1983). P reschoolers’ stereotypes about sex differences in emotionality: A
reaffirmation. Journal of Genetic P sychology,143, 139–140.
Briton, N.J., & Hall, J.A. (1995). Gender-based expectancies and observer judgements of smiling.
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,19, 49–65.
Brody, L.R., & Hall, J.A. (1993). Gender and emotion. In M. Lewis & J.M. Haviland (Eds.),
Handbook of emotions (pp. 447-460). New York: Guilford Press.
Crawford, J., Clippax, S., Onyx, J., Gault, U., & Benton, P. (1992). Emotio n and gender:
Constructing meaning from memory. London: Sage.
Dunn, J., Bretherton, I., & Munn, P. (1987). Conversation s about feeling states between mothers and
their children.Developmental P sychology,23, 132–139.
Eagly, A.H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotype s and attitudes toward women an d men.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,15, 543 558.
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1986). A new pan-cultural facial expression of emotion. Motivation and
Emotion,10, 159–168.
Feldman-Barrett, L., Robin, L ., Pietromonaco, P.R., & Eysell, K. M. (1998). Are women the more
emotional sex? Evidence from emotional experiences in social context.Cognition and Emotion,
12, 555–578.
Fernandez-Dols, J.-M., & Ruiz-Belda, M.-A. (1995). Are smiles a sign of happiness? Gold medal
winners at the Olympic Games.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,69, 1113–1119.
Fischer, A. (1993). Sex difference s in emotionality : Fact or stereotype? Feminism and Psychology,3,
303–318.
Fivush, R. (1989). Exploring differences in the emotiona l content of mothe r child conversations
about the past. Sex R oles,20, 675–691.
Frank, M.G., & Ekman, P. (1993). Not all smiles are created equal: The differences between
enjoyment and nonenjoyment smil es. [Special Issue: Current issues in psychological humor
research.] Humor: International Journal of Humor Research,6, 9–26.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSIVITY 641
Gallois, C. (1994). Group membership, social rules, and power: A social psychological perspective
on emotional communication. Journal of Pragmatics,22, 301–324.
Hall, J.A. (1984). Nonverbal sex differences: Communication accuracy and expressive style.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Izard, C. (1972). Patterns of emotions: A new analysis of anxiety and depression. New York:
Academic Press.
Jussim, L., Milbourn, M., & Nelson, W. (1991). Emotional openness: Sex-role stereotypes and self-
perceptions. Representative Research in Social Psychology,19, 35–52.
Kirouac, G., & Hess, U. (1999). Group membership and the decoding of nonverbal behavior. In P.
Philippot, R. Feldman, & E. Coats (Eds.), The social context of nonverbal behavior (pp. 182
210). New York: Cambridg e University Press.
Kring, A.M., & Gordon, A.H. (1998). Sex differences in emotion: E xpression, experience and
physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74, 686 703.
LaFrance, M., & Banaji, M. (1992). Toward a reconsideration of the gender-emotio n relationship. In
M.S. Clark (Ed.), Emotio n and social behavior. R eview of personality and social psychology
(Vol. 14, pp. 178–201). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
LaFrance, M., & Hecht, M.A. (1995). Why smiles generate leniency. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin,21, 207–214.
Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Parkinson, B., & Manstead, A.S.R. (1993). Makin g sense of emotion in stories and social life.
Cognition and Emotion,7, 295–323.
Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion : A psychoevolutionar y synthesis. New York: Harper & Row.
Rime´, B., Mesquita, B., Philippot, P., & Boca, S. (1991). Beyond the emotional event: Six studies on
the social sharing of emotion. Cognition and Emotion,5, 435–465.
Scherer, K.R. (1988). Appendix C: Questionnaire used in the International Survey on Emotion
Antecedents and Reactions (ISEAR). In K.R. Scherer (Ed.), Facets of emotion: Recent research.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sherman, J.W., & Bessenhoff, G.R. (1999). Stereotypes as source monitoring cues: On the
interaction between episodic and semantic memory.Psychological Science,10, 106–110.
Stoppard, J.M., & Gruchy, C.D. (1993). Gender, context, and expression of positiv e emotion.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,19, 143–150
Tucker, J.S., & Riggio, R.E. (1988). The role of social skill s in encoding posed and spontaneous
facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,12, 87–97.
Wallbott, H.G., & Scherer, K.R. (1994). Cultural determinant s in experiencing shame and guilt. In
June Price Tangney & Kurt W. Fischer (Eds.), Self conscious emotions: The psychology of shame
and guilt, embarrasment and pride (pp. 465–487). New York: Guilf ord Press.
642 HESS ET AL.
... Also, men tend to have less knowledge about their male friends' attitudes and feelings than women have about their female friends, which may limit the degree of emotional support that men typically exchange in their interactions with friends (Milardo, 1987). Even when adult participants are asked to report a personal emotional event in narrative form, women tend to express more sadness than men (Hess et al., 2000). The gender difference in disclosing one`s personal experiences and emotions is already evident well before adulthood: Boys in middle childhood and adolescence, as compared to girls of the same age, are already less inclined to disclose to friends (Borowski & Rose, 2022;Rose et al., 2012) and, in some studies, their families (Pasqualini & De Rose, 2020). ...
... Both men and women also tend to perceive emotionality as an undesirable trait for men, but a desirable trait for women (Prentice & Carranza, 2002). Moreover, both implicitly and explicitly, men expect to experience and express emotions like sadness and fear significantly less often and less intensely than they expect women to do (Hess et al., 2000;Plant, Hyde, Keltner, & Devine, 2000). As pointed out by a meta-analysis including studies dating from the 1940s until the 2010s, people have ascribed communal traits, such as being emotional and nurturing, to women than to men (Eagly, women experience an equal amount of negative emotions in their daily lives (Barrett, Robin, Pietromonaco, & Eyssell, 1998;Luginbuehl & Schoebi, 2020;Rusu, Apostu, Turliuc, & Hilpert, 2023) . ...
... Mutually giving and receiving relationships, however, tend to be the healthiest (Chen et al., 2021). Thus, the gender stereotype that men should not express vulnerability (Fivush, 1989;Fivush et al., 2000;Gaia, 2013;Hess et al., 2000;Prentice & Carranza, 2002;van der Pol et al., 2015;Zaman & Fivush, 2013) may pose barriers for men to developing mutually supportive relationships. All people, regardless of their gender, can benefit from jointly seeking and offering emotional support during interactions with significant others. ...
Article
Women are often viewed as more romantic than men, and romantic relationships are assumed to be more central to the lives of women than to those of men. Despite the prevalence of these beliefs, some recent research paints a different picture. Using principles and insights based on the interdisciplinary literature on mixed-gender relationships, we advance a set of four propositions relevant to differences between men and women and their romantic relationships. We propose that relative to women: (a) men expect to obtain greater benefits from relationship formation and thus strive more strongly for a romantic partner, (b) men benefit more from romantic relationship involvement in terms of their mental and physical health, (c) men are less likely to initiate breakups, and (d) men suffer more from relationship dissolution. We offer theoretical explanations based on differences between men and women in the availability of social networks that provide intimacy and emotional support. We discuss implications for friendships in general and friendships between men and women in particular.
... This implies that perceived differences in emotional expression between men and women might be more about societal expectations than inherent traits. Research also suggests that people generally believe women express emotions like happiness and fear more often than men, while men are associated with anger and disgust (Hess et al. 2000;Plant et al. 2000). Perceptions of women as more affiliative and less dominant in interpersonal relations align with these norms (Algoe, Buswell, and DeLamater 2000;Bernardi 2006;Pejičić 2020). ...
Article
This paper explores the complex relationship between cultural norms and gender differences in emotionality, specifically regarding basic emotions. Examining the bio-psycho-social model, the review focuses on socialization practice and situational contexts converging to produce gendered patterns of emotionality. The review further analyzes the implications of gendered emotional schemas and scripts on human functioning. It is argued that while women are often perceived as more emotional, this perception is largely rooted in expressiveness rather than emotional experience. Further, the paper explores interpersonal dynamics, which might be related to these gendered norms, with women generally displaying greater emotional sensitivity and expressiveness, particularly in contexts that value emotional interdependence. This is contrasted with the cultural pressure on men to conform to traditional masculine ideals, which often discourages emotional expressiveness, particularly in public settings. The potential mental health implications of these gendered emotional patterns are also explored, suggesting that women’s greater emotional engagement and reliance on social support may enhance their well-being. The review concludes by underscoring the importance of continued research to further understand the causal links and underlying processes that contribute to these gender differences.
... Men are more likely to display power and dominance while simultaneously hiding the melting mood [30]. However, nowadays these general tendencies start to faint and are considered as gender stereotypes [31]. ...
Preprint
Automatic emotion recognition has become a trending research topic in the past decade. While works based on facial expressions or speech abound, recognizing affect from body gestures remains a less explored topic. We present a new comprehensive survey hoping to boost research in the field. We first introduce emotional body gestures as a component of what is commonly known as "body language" and comment general aspects as gender differences and culture dependence. We then define a complete framework for automatic emotional body gesture recognition. We introduce person detection and comment static and dynamic body pose estimation methods both in RGB and 3D. We then comment the recent literature related to representation learning and emotion recognition from images of emotionally expressive gestures. We also discuss multi-modal approaches that combine speech or face with body gestures for improved emotion recognition. While pre-processing methodologies (e.g. human detection and pose estimation) are nowadays mature technologies fully developed for robust large scale analysis, we show that for emotion recognition the quantity of labelled data is scarce, there is no agreement on clearly defined output spaces and the representations are shallow and largely based on naive geometrical representations.
... This disparity could partially account for the more pronounced gender differences observed in the Belgian cohort in contrast to the Quebec cohort, where such recruitment strategy variations were not present. Additionally, the more stringent social restrictions imposed in Quebec during the COVID-19 pandemic may have exerted a uniform impact on both genders, potentially mitigating the conventional tendency of men to avoidance or sublimate grieving emotions through work or activity (Hess et al., 2000;Spaten et al., 2011;Stelzer et al., 2019). ...
Article
The loss of a significant person can lead to a broad spectrum of responses. While most individuals gradually recover within a year, a minority develop Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD). The Traumatic Grief Inventory Self-Report Plus (TGI-SR+) was recently developed to ensure that the original scale (TGI-SR) still accurately assesses PGD in line with the latest diagnostic standards of the DSM-5-TR and ICD-11. This study aimed to validate the TGI-SR+ within two French-speaking cohorts: 276 French-Canadian and 469 Belgian participants. Data were collected through an online survey in 2022. Confirmatory factor analysis resulted in a 4-factor model for the TGI-SR+ total scale, but high inter-item correlations favored a 1-factor solution. A 1-factor model was found for the DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 PGD scores. Convergent validity with mental health disorder, depression, and post-traumatic growth, and known-group validity were confirmed. The findings endorse the TGI-SR+ as a valid tool for detecting potential PGD.
... For English-speaking women neither the difference in Dominance nor in Valence scores reached statistical significance (Bąk & Altarriba, 2023). This result plays into the notion that, among other factors, the socialisation into specific genders and what individuals believe to be typical emotional expression for their gender is a factor in how they form their concepts of emotion (Fischer et al., 2004;Hess et al., 2000). ...
Article
The current study explores the differences in conceptualisation of the prototypical basic emotion lexicalisations (anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise) in English and in Polish. Measures of concreteness, imageability and context availability were collected and analysed across the six semantic categories of basic emotions, across different parts of speech and between the self-determined genders of the study participants. The initial results indicate that within these cognitive dimensions the conceptualisations of basic emotions in English and in Polish are only similar on the more general but not the higher levels of conceptualisation. The folk-psychological division between positive and negative emotions and the grammatical parts of speech reveal similar patterns in basic emotion concepts in both Polish and in English. However, on the higher levels of conceptualisations that include specific basic emotion semantic categories and self-identified gender, marked language-specific differences become apparent. Different negative emotions drive the statistical differences in Polish and in English, and the gender effects on the measures of concreteness, imageability and context availability are opposite from one language to the other. In other words, basic emotions may be broadly mutually intelligible, but not exactly the same when communicated across languages and cultures.
Article
Full-text available
The intricate dynamics of gender roles significantly shape emotion regulation (ER) among adolescents, underscoring the importance of understanding these assigned roles in comprehending adolescents' emotional experiences. This study aimed to investigate and analyze in detail the central aspects of disparities between genders in the utilization of ER strategies. The formulation of the hypotheses aimed to predict significant distinctions between boys and girls, particularly in cognitive reappraisal (CR) and expressive suppression (ES) strategies. A cross-sectional design was employed and implemented in 27 public secondary schools across 12 states in Malaysia. A total of 1,718 adolescents, both boys and girls who did not have any current or prior clinical issues became participants in this study. Using the Malay version of the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents (ERQ-CA), the study's findings contradicted the proposed hypotheses. The findings showed no gender disparities in CR and ES. These findings provide valuable insights for parents, caregivers, teachers, and adolescents, offering a nuanced understanding of ER during the critical stages of adolescence. The implications of ER across genders may guide the development of targeted interventions to address potential gender disparities and mitigate the risk of psychopathological issues.
Article
This study aims to compare the emotional reactions of bilingual men and women to affective valence by manipulating positive and negative linguistic stimuli. To achieve this aim, the semantic decision task was used. 56 Persian-English bilinguals, who were divided into two equal groups considering their gender (28 female and 28 male), were asked to decide whether the adjectives loaded with positive or negative valence (i.e., target words) were related in meaning to the preceding nouns (i.e., prime words). In order to find out whether there is any potential interaction between the valence of primes and targets, mixed factorial repeated measure ANOVA was run on reaction time and error rate data. The results of the present study on cognitive gender differences show that males and females, despite some few differences, generally follow a similar pattern in processing affective meaning of words in their second language.
Article
Introduction. Recognition of emotion in facial expressions is the process by which facial features are perceived and analyzed for the identification of the emotional state they denote. While this skill has been extensively studied, data is inconsistent on the topic of gender differences. Objective. To characterize basic emotion recognition in children and adolescents, establishing if there are distinctive profiles based on gender. Method. A digital adaptation of the Test Pictures of Facial Affects was used on a sample consisting of 147 subjects of both sexes, between 9 and 18 years old. Results. Women presented a superior performance in the recognition of expressions of disgust and surprise and lower reaction times in the set of basic emotions, while males stood out in fear recognition. Discussion. This research refreshes the nature vs. nurture debate, considering that processes of socialization, as well as biological and phylogenetic factors, are unavoidable elements to understand this process.
Poster
MS Thesis research identifying varying personality traits and how they collide on with the social interaction anxiety and emotional reactivity of individuals between age 18-23 years, who are currently enrolled in a university program.
Article
Full-text available
One consistent element of Western sex stereotypes is that women are emotional, whereas men are rational. This is also widely spread in psychology and defended by feminist authors who equate women's relationality with their emotionality. In this article the concept of `emotionality' is criticized and the assumption that women are generally more emotional than men is questioned. A large amount of empirical research on sex differences in emotions is reviewed, leading to the conclusion that the general idea that women are more emotional than men tells us more about Western sex stereotypes than about women's actual emotions.
Article
Full-text available
The authors investigated the social significance of human smiles, specifically the penchant for transgressors who smile to be judged more leniently than those who do not. Of particular interest was whether different types of smiles generate different degrees of leniency and what mediated the effect. Subjects judged a case of possible academic misconduct. Materials included a photograph of a female target displaying a neutral expression, felt smile, false smile, or miserable smile. Smiling targets received more leniency than nonsmiling targets, although they were not seen as less guilty. The type of smile did not significantly moderate the amount of leniency shown. Of the variables evaluated for mediating the smile-leniency effect, such as perceiving the target as more likable, submissive, or diplomatic, the one that best accounted for the effect was perceiving the target as a trustworthy person. The implication seems to be—if in trouble, smile.
Article
Full-text available
We argue that emotion cannot only be conceived of as a short-lived and intrapersonal phenomenon. Rather, based on five theoretical arguments, we propose that the social sharing of an emotional experience forms an integral part of the emotional processes. A series of six studies investigated different aspects of this hypothesis. Study 1 showed that an overwhelming majority of people reported sharing their emotional experiences and that the memories of these experiences tended to come back spontaneously to their consciousness. No difference was found among emotions. Using a different procedure, Studies 2 and 3 replicated these findings in two different populations. In addition, these studies provided indications that women share their experiences with a wider array of individuals than do men. The first three studies did not find any differences among emotions, but they did not include shame. It could be argued that people are less inclined to socially share shame experiences which are typically elicited by breaking social rules. Study 4 specifically investigated this hypothesis. No differences among shame and other emotions were found except for the delay of the first sharing of the experience. Study 5 constituted a first investigation of whether the social sharing of emotion is also a significant process in now Western cultures. A comparison between Dutch and Surinamese people failed to reveal any significant difference. Based on the findings of the first five studies, a correlational model was designed in Study 6. It tested the interrelationships among disruptiveness of the emotion, social sharing, mental rumination, and recovery from the emotion disruption. A coherent pattern of findings emerged, showing that social sharing can be conceived as a bi-dimensional concept defined by features of amount and delay of sharing. In addition, both social sharing and mental rumination varied according to the disruptiveness of the emotion. Surprisingly, however, recovery could not be related to social sharing, mental rumination, or to the time elapsed since the episode.
Article
This research examined the use of stereotypic expectancies as source cues for biographical memories. Participants were more likely to misattribute stereotypical than counterstereotypical behaviors to a target person. However, this was true only when the original source of the behaviors was difficult to assess (there was source confusion) and recollective processes were impaired. Thus, when recollection of episodic details is disrupted, perceivers may still rely on semantic knowledge to interpret memories. These results demonstrate that stereotype use is efficient not only during the encoding of social information, but also during its retrieval. However, there are also significant costs associated with using stereotypes as source cues. Implications of these findings for social perception and eyewitness testimony are discussed.
Article
This study investigated whether positive emotion is differentially prescribed for men and women in self-and other-oriented contexts. Subjects read a scene in which the main character either did or did not express positive emotion toward either the self or another person. After imagining themselves as the main character, subjects rated on a rewards/costs scale how others would respond to them if they had behaved as depicted. Females expected more rewards/fewer costs when positive emotion was expressed toward another person than when it was not, whereas expected rewards/costs did not differ when females expressed and did not express self-directed positive emotion. Males expected more rewards/fewer costs when positive emotion was expressed than when it was not expressed in both self-and other-oriented contexts. Findings indicate that norms for expression of positive emotion are gender differentiated in that women are particularly required to express positive emotion toward others.
Article
Attitude theory is used to provide a conceptual analysis of how attitudes toward men and women relate to gender stereotypes. Consistent with this analysis, attitudes toward the sexes related positively to the evaluative meaning of the corresponding gender stereo-types. In addition, attitudes and stereotypes about women were extremely favorable - in fact, more favorable than those about men. The findings also demonstrated that the Attitudes Toward Women Scale assesses attitudes toward equal rights for women not attitudes toward women, and therefore did not relate to the evaluative meaning of subjects' stereotypes about women.
Article
An Emotionality Survey was developed to assess sex differences in three dimensions of emotion: covert responding, interpersonal expression, and attitudes toward responses and expressions. Situational determinants of responses were also investigated. Within each of these areas, four types of emotion were distinguished: anger, fear, joy, and sadness. In general, females exceeded males in reported emotionality, but sex differences varied as a function of dimension and type of emotion. Differences were greatest for interpersonal expression, and for fear and sadness. Females also reported more of an interpersonal basis for their emotional responses. The findings suggest a sex difference in the functional significance of emotion, and support a multidimensional approach to the investigation of sex differences in emotionality.