Content uploaded by Ittay Mannheim
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ittay Mannheim on Jul 31, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=pcem20
Cognition and Emotion
ISSN: 0269-9931 (Print) 1464-0600 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pcem20
Together we cry: Social motives and preferences
for group-based sadness
Roni Porat, Eran Halperin, Ittay Mannheim & Maya Tamir
To cite this article: Roni Porat, Eran Halperin, Ittay Mannheim & Maya Tamir (2016) Together we
cry: Social motives and preferences for group-based sadness, Cognition and Emotion, 30:1, 66-79,
DOI: 10.1080/02699931.2015.1039495
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1039495
Published online: 28 May 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 619
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 15 View citing articles
Together we cry: Social motives and preferences for
group-based sadness
Roni Porat
1,2
, Eran Halperin
2
, Ittay Mannheim
1
, and Maya Tamir
1
1
Psychology Department, The Hebrew University, Herzliya, Israel
2
Department of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya, Israel
(Received 31 August 2014; accepted 6 April 2015)
Group-based emotions play an important role in helping people feel that they belong to their group.
People are motivated to belong, but does this mean that they actively try to experience group-based
emotions to increase their sense of belonging? In this investigation, we propose that people may be
motivated to experience even group-based emotions that are typically considered unpleasant to satisfy
their need to belong. To test this hypothesis, we examined people’s preferences for group-based
sadness in the context of the Israeli National Memorial Day. In two correlational (Studies 1a and 1b)
and two experimental (Studies 2 and 3) studies, we demonstrate that people with a stronger need to
belong have a stronger preference to experience group-based sadness. This effect was mediated by the
expectation that experiencing sadness would be socially beneficial (Studies 1 and 2). We discuss the
implications of our findings for understanding motivated emotion regulation and intergroup relations.
Keywords:Emotion regulation; Motivation; Social belonging; Group-based emotions.
We, the Israelis, are unlike any other people. Our
joy is always incomplete. A cloud of sadness
envelops us. It is hidden deeply but stares out of
our eyes. (Remarks of President Shimon Peres at
the opening commemoration ceremony of Israel’s
Memorial Day, 5 May 2014)
In his blog, 16-year-old Ido, a Jewish-Israeli
teenager, talks about his feelings during ceremon-
ies at his school that commemorate days of
national significance. Ido is confused and fru-
strated because he does not cry on the Jewish
Holocaust Memorial Day. To point out that this
is uncharacteristic of him, Ido says that on the
Israeli National Memorial Day—a day commem-
orating Israeli soldiers who died during their
military service and civilians who died in terror
attacks—he feels sad. On that day, he also feels
the most connected to his country. He describes
this feeling as “a feeling of unity with all of my
people in pain”. In his experience, although
sadness is painful, it connects him to other
members of his group.
As conveyed in this real-life example, group-
based emotions, like sadness, may help people
establish a sense of belonging. People can influ-
ence their emotional experiences through pro-
cesses of emotion regulation (Gross, 1998).
Previous research also demonstrated that people
sometimes prefer emotions that help them achieve
Correspondence should be addressed to: Roni Porat, Psychology Department, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel. E-mail:
porat.roni@gmail.com
© 2015 Taylor & Francis
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016
Vol. 30, No. 1, 66–79, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1039495
66
their goals, even when they consider the experi-
ence of these emotions as unpleasant (e.g., Tamir,
2009; Tamir & Ford, 2012; Tamir, Mitchel, &
Gross, 2008). To date, however, instrumental
emotion regulation has been studied primarily in
the service of intrapersonal motives (e.g., improved
performance). We propose that instrumental emo-
tion regulation is also used in the service of social
motives, such as the need to belong to a group
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The goal of the
current investigation, therefore, is to test whether
people may be motivated to experience even
group-based emotions that are typically considered
unpleasant in order to satisfy social group-based
motives.
THE INSTRUMENTAL APPROACH
TO EMOTION REGULATION
Emotion regulation is the process by which
individuals try to influence the type or amount of
emotion they (or others) experience, when they (or
others) have them, and how they (or others)
experience and express these emotions (Gross,
1998). Importantly, people can regulate their
emotions in both individual (e.g., Gross, 2007;
Gross, Richards, & John, 2006) and in group
contexts (e.g., Halperin, Pliskin, Saguy, Liberman,
& Gross, 2014; Halperin, Porat, Tamir, &
Gross, 2013).
The direction in which people regulate their
emotions depends on what they want to feel (e.g.,
Mauss & Tamir, 2014; Tamir, 2009). According
to the instrumental approach to emotion regula-
tion (e.g., Bonanno, 2001; Parrott, 2001; Tamir,
2009), individuals may be motivated to experience
emotions that are instrumental in pursuing their
goals, even when they consider them to be
unpleasant (e.g., Tamir & Ford, 2012; Tamir,
Mitchel, & Gross, 2008). For example, people
wanted to experience anger when they prepared
for a task that required aggression (e.g., Tamir
et al., 2008), but fear when they prepared for a
task that required avoidance (e.g., Tamir & Ford,
2009). Such cases of motivated emotion regulation
were mediated by the expectation that emotions
would have beneficial effects on performance (e.g.,
Tamir & Ford, 2012).
In addition to their intrapersonal benefits,
emotions also offer interpersonal benefits (e.g.,
Frijda & Mesquita, 1994; Keltner & Haidt,
1999). For instance, emotions can promote social
bonding and create a sense of belonging (Kessler
& Hollbach, 2005). If people are motivated to
experience emotions to gain their instrumental
benefits, such benefits should extend beyond
intrapersonal ones. Therefore, we hypothesized
that people may be motivated to experience
emotions to satisfy social motives, such as the
need to belong to social groups.
To examine this hypothesis, we assessed the
motivation to experience group-based emotions.
Previous research has demonstrated that group
members tend to simultaneously experience certain
emotions (e.g., Bar-Tal, Halperin, & de Rivera,
2007; Peters & Kashima, 2007; von Scheve &
Ismer, 2013). We suggest that such group-based
emotional experiences do not result exclusively
from emotional contagion but also from active
regulation in pursuit of social group–based
motives.
THE BENEFITS OF GROUP-BASED
EMOTIONS
Group-based emotions refer to emotions that are
felt by individuals as a result of their membership
in and identification with a certain group or
society (Mackie, Devos, & Smith, 2000; Smith,
1993; Smith & Mackie, 2008). Such emotions
arise in response to events that have perceived
relevance for the group as a whole. For example, a
person is likely to experience individual sadness
when hearing that a loved one has passed away.
She may also experience group-based sadness
when hearing that someone significant in the
group has passed away, even if she had no personal
acquaintance with that group member.
Group-based emotions foster group formation
and influence how one relates to one’s group
(Peters & Kashima, 2007). For example, different
scholars have demonstrated that stronger levels of
67
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
group-based happiness (Kessler & Hollbach,
2005) and group-based pride (Smith, Seger, &
Mackie, 2007) were linked to increased identifica-
tion with the group. Similarly, collective angst
enhanced individuals’commitment to their group,
as indicated by an increased desire to engage in
group-strengthening behaviours (i.e., behaviours
that are deemed desirable by the group; Wohl,
Branscombe, & Reysen, 2010). Thus, whether
they are typically experienced as pleasant or
unpleasant, group-based emotions may promote a
sense of belonging to the group.
If people are inherently motivated to belong to
social groups (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), and
group-based emotions connect people to their
group, then people may be motivated to experi-
ence group-based emotions in order to attain their
social benefits. Therefore, we hypothesized that
social group–based motives would motivate people
to experience group-based emotions, even when
they are considered unpleasant.
THE CURRENT INVESTIGATION
To test our hypotheses, we conducted four studies
in the context of the Israeli National Memorial
Day, focusing on preferences for group-based
sadness. The experience of sadness usually occurs
with respect to a meaningful loss (Lazarus, 1991;
Levenson, 1999), when one feels helpless about
preventing that loss (Frijda, 1986; Seligman,
1975) or restoring it (Smith & Lazarus, 1993).
Group-based sadness occurs when the group
experiences a meaningful loss that cannot be
prevented.
In Israel, Memorial Day is a day of national
grief and mourning. As demonstrated in the
opening example, many Israelis experience sadness
during Memorial Day, as members of the Israeli
nation, regardless of whether they have personally
suffered as a result of war or terror attacks.
Building on the unique context of the Israeli
National Memorial day, we examined the associa-
tions between the need to belong to the in-group,
the expected social impact of sadness and prefer-
ences for group-based sadness. We predicted that
the higher people’s need to belong to the Israeli
society, the more motivated they would be to
experience group-based sadness on Memorial Day.
In Study 1a we examined whether people with
a higher need to belong to the Israeli society were
more motivated to experience group-based sadness
on Memorial Day. We predicted that this associ-
ation would be mediated by the expectation that
sadness would promote one’s connection to the
Israeli society. To establish the external validity of
these predicted findings, in Study 1b we tested
these associations immediately prior to Memorial
Day. Next, to test our causal model, in Studies 2
and 3 we manipulated the need to belong using
two distinct manipulations. We predicted that
those who were motivated to belong would be
more motivated to experience group-based sad-
ness, compared to those who were not. For all
studies, we report how we determined our sample
size, all data exclusions (if any), all relevant
manipulations and measures.
STUDY 1A
In the context of the Israeli National Memorial
Day, we expected Israelis who were more moti-
vated to belong to the Israeli society to consider
group-based sadness on that particular day more
socially instrumental. As a consequence, we
expected these individuals to be more motivated
to experience group-based sadness that day.
Methods
Participants
We recruited 94 Jewish-Israeli undergraduate
students
1
(M
age
= 23.28 years, standard deviation
[SD] = 2.33, 68 females) from two Israeli aca-
demic institutions to participate in an online study
in exchange for course credit. In terms of political
orientation, 42.6% of participants self-defined as
leftists, 22.3% as centre, and 35.1% as rightists.
1
Four additional participants were excluded from the analyses because they were not Jewish.
68
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
Procedure
Participants were told the study examined atti-
tudes and emotions regarding Memorial Day. To
measure the need to belong, participants rated
their agreement (1 = not at all; 7 = very much)
with the following item: “It is important for me to
feel a part of the Israeli society.”Adapting
previous measures of the expected utility of
emotions (e.g., Tamir & Ford, 2012), participants
also rated (1 = not at all; 6 = very much) their
agreement with the following item: “Sadness on
Memorial Day helps me feel a part of the Israeli
society.”Finally, as in prior research (e.g., Ford &
Tamir, 2012, Tamir, Ford, & Ryan, 2013), to
assess emotional preferences, participants rated the
extent to which they wanted to feel sad on
Memorial Day. Such self-report measures have
been proven valid in studies that established their
convergence with behavioural indices of emotional
preferences and their predictive validity (e.g.,
Tamir & Ford, 2012; Tamir et al., 2013). These
items were not rated consecutively, but instead
interspersed between various other items, includ-
ing unrelated items for other research projects.
Finally, participants indicated their levels of reli-
giosity (1 = Secular; 5 = Ultra-Orthodox), political
ideology (1 = extreme right; 7 = extreme left), age
and gender.
Results and discussion
Table 1 presents means, SDs, and simple correla-
tions between our key variables. As expected,
participants with a stronger need to belong were
more likely to expect group-based sadness to
connect them to their group and wanted to
experience more group-based sadness. Further-
more, the more participants expected feeling sad
on Memorial Day to help them connect to their
group, the more they wanted to experience sadness
on Memorial Day.
We employed the regression procedure of
Baron and Kenny (1986) and found evidence for
mediation when predicting preferences for group-
based sadness (Figure 1). This was confirmed
when using the procedure of Hayes (2013) PRO-
CESS bootstrapping macro (model 4: 5000 itera-
tions). The total effect of the need to belong on
preferences for group-based sadness (b= 0.25,
standard error [SE]=.07, t= 3.51, p<.001; 95%
confidence interval [CI] [0.10, 0.39]) became
insignificant when the expected social impact of
group-based sadness was entered in the model (b=
0.09, SE = .06, t= 1.39, p= .16; 95% CI [−0.03,
0.22]. The indirect effect was statistically different
from zero (b= 0.15, SE = .05; 95% CI [0.06,
0.27]). Participants with a stronger need to belong
to the Israeli society expected group-based sadness
to be more socially instrumental, which in turn,
was associated with stronger preferences for
group-based sadness on Memorial Day. These
results remained unchanged when we entered
religiosity, political orientation, age and gender as
covariates. These results suggest that at the group
level, people might pursue emotions that are
typically considered unpleasant, if they expect
them to promote the need to belong.
Table 1. Means, SDs and correlations of key variables (Study 1a)
Mean (SD) 1234567
1. Need to belong 5.83 (1.67) 1
2. Expectations about group-based sadness’
instrumentality
4.40 (1.33) .40* 1
3. Preferences for group-based sadness 4.56 (1.23) .34* .58* 1
4. Religiosity 1.71 (1.02) .26* .14 −.02 1
5. Political orientation 4.12 (1.35) −.19 −.12 −.04 −.45* 1
6. Age 23.28 (2.33) .09 .04 .20* −.13 .28* 1
7. Gender 1.74 (0.44) .16 .24* .11 .18 −.25* −.43* 1
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
69
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
STUDY 1B
Study 1b was designed to replicate and establish
the external validity of the findings in Study 1a by
testing our predictions several days before Memor-
ial Day in a larger sample. As the study was
conducted in close proximity to Memorial Day (3
days to 2 hours before the beginning of national
commemoration), we also controlled for current
sadness. This enabled us to rule out the possibility
that our effects could be explained by state-
congruent preferences.
Methods
Participants
We recruited 237 Jewish-Israeli undergraduate
students
2
(M
age
= 26.16 years, SD = 6.26, 104
females) from two academic institutions in Israel
to participate in a short study in exchange for 10
New Israeli Shekel. In terms of political orienta-
tion, 30.4% of participants self-defined as leftists,
17% as centre and 52.6% as rightists (one parti-
cipant did not report his political orientation).
Procedure
We approached participants on campus 3 days to
3 hours before the beginning of Memorial Day
and invited them to participate in a study on
attitudes and emotions towards Memorial Day.
Participants first rated (1 = not at all; 5 = to a large
extent) the extent to which they currently felt sad.
Then they were asked to answer a series of
questions containing the research variables (as in
Study 1a) and provide socio-demographic
information.
Results and discussion
Table 2 presents means, SDs, and simple correla-
tions between our key variables. Similar to Study 1a,
the need to belong was positively associated with
the expected social instrumentality of group-based
sadness, as well as with participants’preferences to
experience group-based sadness. Furthermore, the
more participants expected feeling sad on Memorial
Day to help them connect to their group, the more
they wanted to experience sadness on Memorial
Day.
We used the same procedure as in Study 1a to
test for mediation. As shown in Figure 2,we
found evidence for mediation. The total effect of
the need to belong on preferences for group-based
sadness (b= 0.26, SE = .07, t= 3.47, p<.001;
95% CI [0.11, 0.41]) became insignificant when
the expected social instrumentality of group-based
sadness was entered in the model (b= 0.08, SE =
.07, t= 1.16, p= .24; 95% CI [−0.05, 0.23]). The
indirect effect was statistically different from zero
(b=0.18,SE = .04; 95% CI [0.10, 0.28]).
Participants with a stronger need to belong to the
Israeli society expected group-based sadness to be
more instrumental to them, which in turn, was
associated with stronger preferences for group-based
The expected social
instrumentality of
group-based sadness
Need to belong Preferences for group-
based sadness
.40* .58*
.34* (.12)
Figure 1. Need to belong and preferences for group-based sadness as mediated by the expected social instrumentality of group-based sadness
(Study 1a).
2
Twenty-two additional participants were excluded from the analyses, because they were not Jewish.
70
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
sadness on Memorial Day. These results remained
unchanged when we entered the concurrent experi-
ence of sadness, religiosity, political orientation,
age and gender as covariates.
Taken together, Studies 1a and 1b demonstrate
the predicted associations between the need to
belong and preferences for group-based sadness on
Memorial Day. In Studies 2 and 3, we tested the
causal role that social motives might play in
shaping preferences for group-based sadness.
STUDY 2
Previous research showed that the need to belong
is especially prevalent under social threat (Elder &
Clipp, 1988; Hogg, 2000; Hogg, Sherman, Die-
selhuis, Maiter, & Moffitt, 2007; Rofe, 1984).
Therefore, to experimentally increase the need to
belong to one’s group, we threatened participants’
perceived ability to recognize faces of in-group
members. We did so by providing participants
with bogus feedback on a face recognition task.
Participants in the experimental condition were
told they failed to differentiate faces of in-group
members (i.e., Israelis) from faces of out-group
members (i.e., Palestinians). Our assumption was
that people believe that as loyal group members
they should be able to easily identify other group
members and that when they fail to do so, they
might think their connection to the group is under
threat. This is especially true when the failure to
identify faces of other group members involves
confusion with faces of the rival out-group (i.e.,
Palestinians). We suggest that in this context, the
need to connect with the in-group increases to
cope with the experienced threat.
In Study 2 we also wanted to test whether the
need to belong influences preferences for group-
based sadness, in particular. In the Israeli society,
sadness in the context of Memorial Day is
considered a collective emotion because it is shared
Table 2. Means, SDs and correlations of key variables (Study 1b)
Mean (SD) 12345678
1. Need to belong 4.32 (0.90) 1
2. Expectations about group-based
sadness’instrumentality
3.51 (1.19) .33* 1
3. Preferences for group-based sadness 3.68 (1.08) .22* .46* 1
4. Concurrent sadness 2.31 (1.28) .00 .17* .12 1
5. Religiosity 1.94 (1.10) .19* .19* .17* .03 1
6. Political orientation 3.60 (1.39) −.18* −.26* −.17* −.04 −.45* 1
7. Age 26.16 (6.26) .04 .05 .01 .19* −.01 .18* 1
8. Gender 1.44 (0.49) .10 .20* .17* .07 .05 −.06 −.07 1
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The expected social
instrumentality of
group-based sadness
Need to belong Preferences for group-
based sadness
.33* .46*
.22* (.07)
Figure 2. Need to belong and preferences for group-based sadness as mediated by the expected social instrumentality of group-based sadness
(Study 1b).
71
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
by the majority of the group, considered the
appropriate emotion to experience and by that is
linked to the joint identity of Israelis at large. We
compared preferences for sadness to preferences
for fear, because this emotion is also typically
considered unpleasant and prevalent in the Israeli
society. However, it is not considered appropriate
in the context of Memorial Day and therefore can
be considered as individual rather than group-
based emotion, in that context. We assumed that
when considering Memorial Day, participants
with a stronger need to belong would want to
experience the appropriate group-based emotion
(i.e., sadness), but not necessarily other emotions
(i.e., fear).
Methods
Procedure
Participants were invited to participate in two
ostensibly unrelated studies. To disguise the fact
that the two studies were related, participants were
told that the first study was conducted by
researchers from the psychology department,
whereas the second was conducted by researchers
from the political science department. The first
was presented as a study examining individual
differences in recognition of facial expressions.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two
conditions. In both conditions, participants were
presented with four pairs of pictures depicting
male faces. They were told that each pair con-
tained a picture of an Israeli (i.e., in-group
member) and a picture of a Palestinian (i.e., out-
group member). For each pair of pictures, partici-
pants were asked to specify which of the two men
was a member of their in-group (i.e., Israeli). We
manipulated the need to belong by creating a
threat to one’s perceived ability to recognize in-
group members. Participants in the experimental
condition received bogus feedback suggesting that
they failed to identify their in-group member in
three out of the four trials. Participants in the
control condition were told that they succeeded in
identifying their in-group member in three out of
the four trials. We then thanked participants and
asked them to proceed to the second study.
The second study was presented as examining
attitudes and emotions of Israelis towards a highly
debated topic in the Israeli society—the separation
of Memorial Day from Independence Day.
3
Participants were told they would soon be pre-
sented with an article related to this topic. Before
presenting the article, participants rated the per-
ceived instrumentality of group-based sadness (as
in Studies 1a and 1b) and their motivation (1 =
not at all; 6 = very much) to experience sadness
and fear when reading the article. To disguise the
goal of the study, participants were presented with
an article related to the topic, followed by ques-
tions regarding their emotions and attitudes.
Participants were then asked to provide socio-
demographic information. To ensure the manip-
ulation affected participants’need to belong to the
Israeli society, they were asked to rate three items
(α= .85), for example: “It is important to me to
feel a part of the Israeli society.”Finally, to probe
for suspicion, participants were asked about the
goal of the study and what the researchers
expected to find. None of the participants sus-
pected that the studies were related.
Participants
We recruited 55 Jewish-Israelis (M
age
= 31.78
years, SD = 9.28, 27 females)
4
via the Internet
using snowball techniques, to participate in an
online study. In terms of political orientation, 20%
of participants self-defined as leftists, 27.3% as
centre and 52.7% as rightists.
Results and discussion
Table 3 presents means and SDs for our key
variables. To test the effects of our manipulation,
3
In Israel, Memorial Day and Independence Day are commemorated sequentially. In recent years, voices in the Israeli
society have called for the separation of these days to allow the bereaved families to celebrate Independence Day as well.
4
Ten additional participants were excluded from the analyses for the following reasons: three were under-aged, three
were not Jewish and four were not Israeli.
72
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
we conducted independent-sample t-tests. Results
confirmed that participants in the experimental
condition had a higher need to belong (M= 5.20,
SD = 0.99) compared to participants in the control
condition (M= 4.56, SD = 1.23), t(53) = −1.97, p
= .05, Cohen’sd=−.57. They also expected group-
based sadness to be more instrumental in con-
necting them to their group (M= 4.52, SD = 1.02)
compared to participants in the control condition
(M= 3.57, SD = 1.53), t(52) = −2.42, p<.05,
Cohen’sd=−.73.
5
In addition, participants in the
experimental condition (M= 3.50, SD = 1.23) had
stronger preferences to experience group-based
sadness than control participants (M= 2.49, SD
= 1.44), t(53) = −2.63, p<.05, Cohen’sd=−.75.
In contrast, participants in the experimental
condition did not show a stronger preference to
experience fear (M= 1.25, SD = 0.44) compared
to control participants (M= 1.26, SD = 0.65),
t(53) = .04, p= .96.
We used the same procedure as in Studies 1a
and 1b to test for mediation and found that the
effects of our manipulation on preferences for
group-based sadness were mediated by the
expected social instrumentality of group-based
sadness (see Figure 3). The total effect of the
manipulation on preferences for group-based sad-
ness (b= 1.04, SE = .39, t= 2.64, p<.05; 95% CI
[0.24, 1.83]) became insignificant when the
expected social instrumentality of group-based
sadness was entered in the model (b= 0.71, SE
=.39, t= 1.80, p= .07; 95% CI [−0.07, 1.50]. The
indirect effect was statistically different from zero
(b= 0.32, SE =.16; 95% CI [0.07, 0.77]. These
results remained unchanged when we entered
religiosity, political orientation, age and gender as
Table 3. Means and SDs of key variables (Study 2)
Experimental condition,
Mean (SD)
Control condition,
Mean (SD)
1. Need to belong 5.20 (0.99) 4.56 (1.23)
2. Perceived instrumentality of group-based sadness 4.52 (1.02) 3.57 (1.53)
3. Preferences for group-based sadness 3.50 (1.23) 2.49 (1.44)
4. Preferences for fear 1.25 (0.44) 1.26 (0.65)
5. Religiosity 1.60 (1.04) 1.54 (0.91)
6. Political orientation (1 = extreme right;
7 = extreme left)
3.45 (1.43) 3.17 (1.54)
7. Age 30.35 (7.28) 32.60 (10.26)
8. Gender (1 = male; 2 = female) 1.55 (0.51) 1.46 (0.50)
The expected social
instrumentality of
group-based sadness
Manipulated need
to belong
Preferences for group-
based sadness
.41*.31*
.34*(.23)
Figure 3. Manipulated need to belong and preferences for group-based sadness as mediated by the expected social instrumentality of group-
based sadness (Study 2).
5
We omitted one participant from the analysis because his score on this item was more than 2.5 SDs from the mean.
73
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
covariates. These findings suggest that social
motives play a causal role in shaping preferences
for group-based emotions (i.e., group-based
sadness), but not other emotions (i.e., fear).
STUDY 3
Study 3 was designed to further test the validity of
our causal predictions, by using a different manip-
ulation of the need to belong and by using more
reliable multiple-item measures. To manipulate
the need to belong in Study 3, participants were
assigned to read a short paragraph that either
described the importance of group belonging or
personal autonomy.
6
We expected participants
who learned about the benefits of belongingness
to be more motivated to belong and, as a result, to
have a stronger preference for group-based sad-
ness, but not fear, which is not a group-based
emotion.
Methods
Procedure
Participants were invited to participate in a study
about the way people deal with various situations,
as individuals or in groups. They were randomly
assigned to one of two conditions. Participants in
the belonging condition read a paragraph about
the basic human need to belong to a social group
and its benefits (e.g., “In order to thrive and
succeed in life, people need to feel a part of a
larger social group”). Participants in the autonomy
condition read a paragraph that was equivalent in
length and content, but highlighted the basic
human need for personal autonomy and its
benefits (e.g., “In order to thrive and succeed in
life, people need to act according to their personal
goals and desires”). After reading the paragraph,
participants were asked to describe two advantages
of group belonging (or personal autonomy).
To ensure the manipulation affected partici-
pants’need to socially belong, we conducted a
pilot study (n= 42). In the pilot study, following
the manipulation, participants rated (1 = highly
disagree; 7 = highly agree) three items measuring
their need to belong, for example: “being part of a
group is important to me”(α= .81). We also
measured participants’levels of attachment to the
Israeli society, using the eight-items scale of
Roccas, Klar, and Liviatan (2006) (e.g., “It is
important to me to view myself as an Israeli,”and
“being an Israeli is an important part of my
identity”;(α= .94). Results confirmed that, com-
pared to participants in the autonomy condition,
those in belongingness condition had a higher
need to belong (M= 4.68, SD = 1.65 and M
= 5.95; SD = 1.06, respectively), t(40) = 3.04, p<
.01, Cohen’sd= .91, and felt more attached to the
Israeli society (M= 4.43, SD = 1.63 and M= 5.71,
SD = 1.22, respectively), t(39) = 2.87, p<.01,
Cohen’sd= .88.
Following the manipulation, participants were
told they would read an article on Memorial Day.
Participants rated their preferences (1 = not at all;
6 = very much) to experience sadness, melancholy
and gloom when reading the article (α= .75), as
well as fear. To rule out the possibility that
participants’preferences merely reflected their
current emotional states, participants rated (1 =
not at all; 6 = very much) the extent to which they
currently felt sadness, melancholy and gloom (α=
.83). As in Study 2, to support the cover story,
participants were then presented with an article,
followed by questions regarding their emotions
and attitudes. Participants provided socio-demo-
graphic information and were asked about the goal
of the study and what the researchers expected
to find.
Participants
We recruited 109 Jewish-Israeli undergraduate
students
7
(M
age
= 23.35 years, SD = 2.09, 75
6
To minimize the possibility of carry-over effects, in this study we did not assess the perceived utility of sadness.
7
Six participants were omitted from the analysis either because they were not Jewish, were more than 2.5 SDs from the
mean score or came from bereaved families and therefore for them, Memorial Day carries a unique personal meaning that
may or may not be associated with their group membership.
74
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
females) from two academic institutions in Israel
to participate in a short study in exchange for
course credit. In terms of political orientation,
33% of participants self-defined as leftists, 19.3%
as centre and 47.7% as rightists.
Results and discussion
Table 4 presents means and SDs for our key
variables. To test the effects of our manipulation
on preferences for group-based sadness, we con-
ducted an independent-sample t-test. Results
confirmed that participants in the experimental
condition (M= 3.62, SD = 1.15) wanted to
experience more group-based sadness than parti-
cipants in the autonomy condition (M= 2.97, SD
= 1.30), t(107) = 2.74, p<.01, Cohen’sd= .52.
Participants in the two conditions did not differ in
their preference for fear, t(107) = −1.03, p= .30
(M= 2.60, SD = 1.63 in the belongingness
condition and M= 2.28, SD = 1.55 in the
autonomy condition). These results remained
unchanged when we entered current sadness,
religiosity, political orientation, age and gender as
covariates.
These findings further demonstrate that social
motives play a causal role in shaping preferences
for group-based emotions. Importantly, as in
Study 2, we found that the need to belong was
related to preferences for sadness and not fear.
Although fear may be an appropriate group-based
emotion in some contexts (e.g., under external
threat), it is not considered appropriate in the
context of Memorial Day, and therefore, it cannot
serve the need to belong to the group.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
This investigation demonstrates that people seek
out emotions to improve their connection with
their group. Focusing on group-based sadness, we
demonstrated that the more people wanted to
connect to their group, the more motivated they
were to experience group-based sadness.
In Studies 1a and 1b, people with a stronger
need to belong to the Israeli society expected the
experience of group-based sadness on the Israeli
Memorial Day to be instrumental in helping them
connect to the Israeli society. This expectation, in
turn, was associated with a stronger preference to
experience group-based sadness. In Study 2, we
demonstrated that social group–based motives
might play a causal role in shaping preferences
for group-based emotions. We found that partici-
pants who were motivated to increase their con-
nection to their group through a social threat
wanted to experience more sadness when consid-
ering the Israeli Memorial Day. Study 3 provided
further evidence to this effect using a more direct
manipulation of the need to belong.
THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS
The findings of the current investigation demon-
strate the importance of considering the uniquely
social implications of emotions when studying
what people want to feel. In this respect, our
findings have important implications for the study
of motivated emotion regulation. They demon-
strate for the first time that the need to socially
Table 4. Means and SDs of key variables (Study 3)
Experimental condition Mean (SD) Autonomy condition Mean (SD)
1. Preferences for group-based sadness 3.62 (1.15) 2.97 (1.30)
2. Preferences for fear 2.60 (1.63) 2.28 (1.55)
3. Current sadness 1.52 (0.67) 1.49 (0.70)
4. Religiosity 1.69 (1.03) 1.81 (1.07)
5. Political orientation 3.87 (1.23) 3.72 (1.44)
6. Age 23.34 (2.20) 23.35 (2.19)
7. Gender 0.68 (0.46) 0.69 (0.46)
75
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
belong may shape emotional preferences. Whereas
other research has shown that people want to
experience emotions to influence their behaviour
(in both intrapersonal and interpersonal contexts;
Fischer & Manstead, in press), we show that
people want to experience emotions to influence
their sense of group connection. In addition,
whereas other research has suggested that people
may want to regulate their emotional expression
for social reasons (e.g., Clark, Pataki, & Carver,
1996; Fischer, Manstead, & Zaalberg, 2003), we
show that group-based reasons may drive the
regulation of emotional experience as well. Finally,
our findings extend the instrumental approach to
emotion regulation to group-based emotions.
Our findings also have important implications
for the study of group-based emotions. Scholars
studying emotional experience at the group level
have long established that emotions can be felt
simultaneously by the majority of the group and
that such experience can strengthen group bond-
ing and identification (e.g., Bar-Tal et al., 2007;
von Scheve & Ismer, 2013). The current findings
shed new light on the processes that influence
such collective emotional experiences, as they
demonstrate that group-level emotional processes
may be instrumentality motivated. Emotions that
are experienced by group members could, there-
fore, be a function of active regulation, driven by
group-based motives. This investigation also high-
lights the role of context in shaping emotional
preferences. While a number of emotions may play
a role in connecting the individual to his/her
group, we found that people are likely to desire
the emotion that is deemed most appropriate by
the group in the given context.
Finally, our findings might also carry implica-
tions for the study of intergroup relations, more
generally. Previous research has shown that the
experience of negative emotions leads to more
support of aggressive actions towards the adver-
sarial group (Cheung-Blunden & Blunden, 2008;
Halperin et al., 2013; Skitka et al., 2006). The
current investigation suggests that such emotional
experiences may be driven by a desire to
strengthen group coherence. For instance, if feel-
ing group-based anger towards the out-group
increases the individual’s sense of group belong-
ingness, in-group members may be motivated to
sustain such emotions to feel connected to their
group. Such group-based anger may enhance
group belonging, but come at the cost of an
escalated intergroup conflict.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
DIRECTIONS
The current investigation has a number of limita-
tions. We tested our hypothesis in the context of
Memorial Day, examining preferences for sadness,
in particular. Future studies should examine pre-
ferences for other group-based emotions as well, in
different contexts. In addition, we measured
preferences for group-based sadness using self-
reports. Although such measures have proven to
be valid (e.g., Tamir & Ford, 2012), future studies
could further establish the validity of the current
findings by using behavioural measures as well.
With respect to the study of motivated emotion
regulation, our investigation sought to show that
emotional preferences can operate in the service of
social group–based motives. To do so, we focused
on one of the most basic social motives—namely,
the need to belong (e.g., Baumeister & Leary,
1995). However, people are motivated to satisfy a
variety of group-based motives (e.g., maintain a
positive image of the in-group or changing the in-
group), and to the extent that emotions can serve
such motives, each of these motives could influ-
ence what people want to feel. One important task
for future research is to identify the different social
motives that determine what people want to feel
and distinguish them from behavioural or other
motives (see Tamir & Bigman, 2014).
With respect to the study of preferences for
group-based emotions, our investigation focused
on how social group–based motives shape prefer-
ences for emotions targeted at the in-group.
However, future research should explore whether
group-based motives also shape preferences for
emotions towards out-group members (e.g., anger
or hatred). It would also be important, in the
future, to examine whether and how preferences
76
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
for group-based emotions influence attitudes and
behaviour in group contexts, as mediated by
relevant emotional experiences.
Finally, the current investigation examined the
effect of social group–based motives on emotional
preferences. Future research should build on these
findings and examine how group-based motives
influence the actual regulation and subsequent
experience of emotions. For instance, could people
be driven to decrease group-based anger by
helping them feel connected to their group in
other ways? By studying preferences for group-
based emotions and the motives that underlie
them, our research raises this and other related
questions.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Harry and Sylvia Hoffman Leadership
and Responsibility Program as well as the Leonard
Davis Institute for International Relations for their
support of the first author. We also thank Yelena
Bura, Meyer Ittah and Sarah Brennan for their assist-
ance in collecting the data for Study 2.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
authors.
Funding
This work was supported by the German-Israeli
Foundation [grant I-324-105.1-2012], granted to the
second and last authors.
REFERENCES
Bar-Tal, D., Halperin, E., & de Rivera, J. (2007).
Collective emotions in conflict situations: Societal
implications. Journal of Social Issues,63, 441–460.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00518.x
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–
mediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology,51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.
51.6.1173
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to
belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a
fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin,
117,497–529. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Bonanno, G. A. (2001). Emotion self-regulation. In T.
J. Mayne & G. A. Bonnano (Eds.), Emotions:
Current issues and future directions (pp. 251–285).
New York: Guilford.
Cheung-Blunden, V., & Blunden, B. (2008). The
emotional contrual of war: Anger, fear and other
negative emotions. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace
Psychology,14(2), 123–150. doi:10.1080/1078191080
2017289
Clark, M. S., Pataki, S. P., & Carver, V. (1996). Some
thoughts and findings on self-presentation of emo-
tions in relationships. In G. J. Fletcher & J. Fitness
(Eds.), Knowledge structures in close relationships: A
social psychological approach (pp. 247–274). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Elder, G. H., & Clipp, E. C. (1988). Wartime losses
and social bonding: Influence across 40 years in
men’s lives. Psychiatry,51, 177–198.
Fischer, A. H. & Manstead, A. S. R. (in press). The
social functions of emotion and emotion regulation.
In M. Lewis, J. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett
(Eds.), Handbook of emotions (4th ed.). New York,
NY: Guilford.
Fischer, A. H., Manstead, A. S. R., & Zaalberg, R.
(2003). Social influences on the emotion process.
European Review of Social Psychology,14, 171–201.
doi:10.1080/10463280340000054
Ford, B. Q., & Tamir, M. (2012). When getting angry is
smart: Emotional preferences and emotional intelli-
gence. Emotion,12, 685–689. doi:10.1037/a0027149
Frijda, N. (1986). The emotions. London, UK: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Frijda, N. H., & Mesquita, B. (1994). The social roles
and functions of emotions. In K. Shinobu & M. H.
Rose (Eds.), Emotion and culture: Empirical studies of
mutual influence (pp. 51–87). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused
emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for
experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,74, 224–237.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.224
Gross, J. J. (2007). Handbook of emotion regulation. New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
Gross, J. J., Richards, J. M., & John, O. P. (2006).
Emotion regulation in everyday life. In D. K. Synder,
J.A. Simpson, & J.N. Hughes (Eds.), Emotion
77
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
regulation in families: Pathways to dysfunction and
health (pp. 13–35). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Halperin, E., Pliskin, R., Saguy, T., Liberman, V., &
Gross, J. J. (2014). Emotion regulation and the
cultivation of political tolerance: Searching for a new
track for intervention. Journal of Conflict Resolution,
58, 1110–1138. doi:10.1177/0022002713492636
Halperin, E., Porat, R., Tamir, M., & Gross, J. J.
(2013). Can emotion regulation change political
attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory
to the field. Psychological Science,24(1), 106–111.
doi:10.1177/0956797612452572
Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation,
and conditional process analysis: A regression-based
approach. New York, NY: Guilford.
Hogg, M. A. (2000). Subjective uncertainty reduction
through self-categorization: A motivational theory of
social identity processes. European Review of Social
Psychology,11, 223–255. doi:10.1080/147927720
43000040
Hogg, M. A., Sherman, D. K., Dieselhuis, J., Maiter,
A., & Moffitt, G. (2007). Uncertainty, Entitativity,
and group identification. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology,43(1), 135–142. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.
2005.12.008
Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (1999). Social functions of
emotions at four levels of analysis. Cognition &
Emotion,13, 505–521. doi:10.1080/0269993993
79168
Kessler, T., & Hollbach S. (2005). Group-based emo-
tions as determinants of ingroup identification.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,41, 677–
685. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.01.001
Lazarus, R. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York:
Pantheon.
Levenson, R. (1999). The intrapersonal functions of
emotion. Cognition and Emotion,13, 481–504.
doi:10.1080/026999399379159
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000).
Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action
tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,79, 602–616.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.602
Mauss, I. B., & Tamir, M. (2014). Emotion goals: How
their content, structure, and operation shape emotion
regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), The handbook of
emotion regulation (2nd ed.) (pp. 361–375). New
York, NY: Guilford.
Parrott, W. G. (2001). Implications of dysfunctional
emotion for understanding how emotions function.
Review of General Psychology,5, 180–186.
doi:10.1037/1089-2680.5.3.180
Peters, K., & Kashima, Y. (2007). From social talk to
social action: Shaping the social triad with emotion
sharing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
93, 780–797. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.780
Roccas, S., Klar, Y., & Liviatan, I. (2006). The paradox of
group-based guilt: Modes of national identification,
conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group’s
moral violations. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology,91,698–711. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.698
Rofe, Y. (1984). Stress and affiliation: A utility theory.
Psychological Review,91, 235–250. doi:10.1037/
0033-295X.91.2.235
Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression,
development, and death. New York, NY: W. H.
Freeman.
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., Aamovich, N. P., &
Morgan, G. C. (2006). Confrontational and pre-
ventative policy responses to terrorism: Anger wants
fight and fear wants “them”to go away. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology,28, 375–384. doi:10.1207/
s15324834basp2804_11
Smith, E. R. (1993). Social identity and social emo-
tions: Toward new conceptualization of prejudice. In
D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect,
cognition and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group
perception (pp. 297–315). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Smith, C. A., & Lazarus, R. S. (1993). Appraisal
components, correlational themes, and the emotions.
Cognition and Emotion,7, 233–269. doi:10.1080/
02699939308409189
Smith, E. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2008). Intergroup
emotions. In M. Lewis, J. Haviland-Jones, & L. F.
Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed.) (pp.
428–439). New York, NY: Guilford.
Smith, E. R., Seger, C. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2007).
Can emotions be truly group level? Evidence regard-
ing four conceptual criteria. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,93, 431–446. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.93.3.431
Tamir, M. (2009). What do people want to feel and
why? Pleasure and utility in emotion regulation.
Current Directions in Psychological Science,18(2),
101–105. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01617.x
Tamir, M., & Bigman, Y. (2014). Why might people
want to feel bad? Motives in contrahedonic emotion
regulation. In W. G. Parrott (Ed.), The positive side
of negative emotions (pp. 201–223). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
78
PORAT ET AL.
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
Tamir, M., & Ford, B. Q. (2009). Choosing to be
afraid: Preferences for fear as a function of goal
pursuit. Emotion,9, 488–497. doi:10.1037/a0015882
Tamir, M., & Ford, B. Q. (2012). When feeling bad is
expected to be good: Emotion regulation and out-
come expectancies in social conflicts. Emotion,12,
807–816. doi:10.1037/a0024443
Tamir, M., Ford, B. Q., & Ryan, E. (2013). Noncon-
scious goals can shape what people want to feel.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,49, 292–
297. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.009
Tamir, M., Mitchell, C., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Hedonic
and instrumental motives in anger regulation.
Psychological Science,19, 324–328. doi:10.1111/
j.1467-9280.2008.02088.x
von Scheve, C., & Ismer, S. (2013). Towards a theory of
collective emotions. Emotion Review,5, 406–413.
doi:10.1177/1754073913484170
Wohl, M. J. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Reysen, S.
(2010). Perceiving your group’s future to be in
jeopardy: Extinction threat induces collective angst
and the desire to strengthen the ingroup. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin,36, 898–910.
doi:10.1177/0146167210372505
79
SOCIAL MOTIVES AND EMOTIONAL PREFERENCES
COGNITION AND EMOTION, 2016, 30 (1)
