Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Affect Control Theory: A Primer

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Affect Control Theory: A Primer"— Presentation transcript:

1 Affect Control Theory: A Primer
Lynn Smith-Lovin Duke University June 22, Dartmouth University

2 1960s The Intellectual Terrain
Parson’s Structural-Functionalism Structures evolve to fulfil necessary societal functions Actors internalize norms and gain from fulfilling expectations The over-socialized view of man (Wrong, 1961) The attitude-behavior controversy in psychology

3 The Question AND How does an orderly society exist
But, through repeated, spontaneous individual actions? AND How do people readily respond to new circumstances Unclear situations Repair misunderstandings And so on?

4 The Elements of the Theory
Define the Situation Cultural Sentiments– EPA Impression Change The Control Principle

5 The Elements of the Theory
Define the Situation (Mead) Cultural Sentiments– EPA (Osgood) Impression Change (Gollob) The Control Principle (Powers) Then Dave Heise Put It All Together

6 The Answer Came Earlier Than I Thought
The control part came FIRST Norms, reality and angst when they don’t match But, reality on what dimension? Then The Measurement of Meaning Browsing in the stacks Dave’s dissertation and early monograph (1966) Then Dave followed up on Gollob the year after Gollob’s first impression formation paper ( )

7 Scope Conditions (Robinson 2008)
Directed social behavior Including self-directed ABO– Actor, Behavior, Object At least one observer who is a member of an identified language culture The theory applies only to labeled aspects of social experience

8 Advances in Definition of the Situation
Institutions are central Originally taken for granted BUT Doctors shouldn’t nuzzle people! Goffman: A definition of situation is usually to be FOUND, not invented Originally fairly ad hoc, but now a new theory of institutions Cultural theory of people Lots of new work now on how important institutional frames are Perceived Likelihood Variance of Meanings or Impressions Formed

9 A Picture from the Past

10 A Picture from MacKinnon and Heise (2010)

11 Some Questions in Passing
Do situations need to be consciously labeled? What about Bayesian uncertainty? Can master identities (gender, race) be under the radar? Are identities and behaviors at different levels of abstraction different in some way? More neutral in meaning? More variant in meaning?

12 Cultural Sentiments: EPA
Core importance: Mapping all elements of a social reality into one set of dimensions Allows for the mathematical statement of the theory Long history Osgood (and Dave’s scanning of that earlier work) Dave’s dissertation, Sewell and Heise 2010, the 1978 compendium

13 The EPA Dimensions Evaluation Potency Activity
Good, nice vs bad, awful Linked to status, esteem Potency Powerful, big vs. weak. Small Linked to power Activity Fast, young, noisy vs slow, old, quiet Linked to Expressiveness, Arousal

14 Evaluation Potency Activity deadbeat dad hero priest youngster
-3.30 -2.16 -2.39 hero 3.04 2.85 2.34 priest 2.07 1.69 -1.14 youngster 1.46 -1.19 2.15 prostitute -2.72 -2.21 1.59

15 The More Recent Work US – 1978 to 2013-- UNC, Indiana, UGA, Mturk
Northern Ireland, Canada, Japan, China, S Korea, Germany A flurry of investigations about whether structural position influences sentiments: Wisecup dissertation Rogers dissertation Ambrasat, Jens, Christian von Scheve, Markus Conrad, Gesche Schauenburg, and Tobias Schröder 2014, 2016 Kait Boyle’s work

16 Heise’s Measurement Model for EPA

17 Some Tensions in Our Thinking about EPA
It is this model that allows us to combine individuals’ ratings into mean EPA values for measures of cultural sentiments But we also treat them as internalized, individual meanings (SI) Recent ACT summaries: “Importing cultural meanings into local interactions” Reasons for the shift: Challenges by people of color (the Slave) The situational nature of ACT (the Traffic Violater)

18 Challenges of the Measurement Model
Problems with Measurement for Research If we really want measures of individuals’ sentiments… Single item measures (high error) Or shift to multiple item measures of each dimension Especially important for new self-sentiment research A Long-forgotten Aspect of Our Scales Where did the +4.3, -4.3 come from? Successive Interval Scaling

19 The Scales and the Sliders
Mother Bad Awful -4.3 4.3 Good Nice Powerless Little -4.3 4.3 Powerful Big Slow Inactive Quiet Fast Active Noisy -4.3 4.3

20 What the Values Really Look Like

21 Impression Change Equations
Sentiments Dictionaries of concept ratings (out of context) 3- number profiles Evaluation, potency, activity Impressions Event ratings (in context) Actor-Behavior-Object events Basic grammar of interaction Regress impressions on sentiments

22 EPA Ratings In the Context of an Event
Mother Plays with Child Evaluation Bad Awful -4.3 4.3 Good Nice Potency Powerless Little -4.3 4.3 Powerful Big Activity Slow Inactive Quiet Fast Active Noisy -4.3 4.3

23 Impression Change Equations
Actor-Behavior-Object sentences A’ B’ O’ Mother Plays with Child A’= a + b + o regressions help us see how actors’ impressions are shaped by their actions and the objects of those actions

24 Impression Change Equations
Mother Plays with Child A’e = Ae Ap Aa Be Bp Ba Oe Op Oa AeBe BeOe ApBp BpOp AaBa AeBp AeBa ApBe ApOa BeOp BpOe BpOa BaOe +.014BaOp ApBpOp Stability term Actors seem good when they occupy positive identities

25 Impression Change Equations
Mother Plays with Child A’e = Ae Ap Aa Be Bp Ba Oe Op Oa AeBe BeOe ApBp BpOp AaBa AeBp AeBa ApBe ApOa BeOp BpOe BpOa BaOe +.014BaOp ApBpOp Morality term Actors seem good when they behave in positive ways

26 Impression Change Equations
Mother Plays with Child A’e = Ae Ap Aa Be Bp Ba Oe Op Oa AeBe BeOe ApBp BpOp AaBa AeBp AeBa ApBe ApOa BeOp BpOe BpOa BaOe +.014BaOp ApBpOp Network term Actors seem good when they hang out with positive others (Your mother was right!)

27 Impression Change Equations
Mother Plays with Child A’e = Ae Ap Aa Be Bp Ba Oe Op Oa AeBe BeOe ApBp BpOp AaBa AeBp AeBa ApBe ApOa BeOp BpOe BpOa BaOe +.014BaOp ApBpOp Consistency terms BeOe Balance: People seem nicer when they do good things to nice others (or harsh things to bad others)

28 Impression Change Equations
Mother Plays with Child A’e = Ae Ap Aa Be Bp Ba Oe Op Oa AeBe BeOe ApBp BpOp AaBa AeBp AeBa ApBe ApOa BeOp BpOe BpOa BaOe +.014BaOp ApBpOp Congruency terms BeOp and BpOe: People seem nicer when they do good things to weak others (or diss powerful others); doing weak (gentle?) things to good people is nice

29 Since 1978, a Major Cottage Industry
U.S., Canada, Japan, China, Germany, Egypt, Morocco One repeat measure: UNC78 and Duke10 New methodological advances (Heise 2015; Morgan et al 2016) BUT: The details are interesting for impression change, but not so important for predicting behavior or emotion EPA sentiments are most important Go for substance rather than just prediction?

30 Affect Control Principle
Control System Reference State – Cultural Sentiments Observed State – Situated Meanings Response – Behavior or Reinterpretation (labeling) Negative Feedback Loop Affect Control Principle: Individuals behave in ways that maintain their affective expectations generated by their definitions of the situation

31 Affect Control Principle Simulation Program INTERACT Uses Parameter Estimates to Model Social Behavior, Labeling, Emotion Deflection: The affective distance between sentiments and impressions created by events Deflection = (A’e-Ae)2 + (A’p-Ap)2 + (A’a-Aa)2 + (B’e-Be)2 + (B’p-Bp)2 +(B’a-Ba)2 + (O’e-Oe)2 + (O’p-Op)2 +(O’a-Oa)2 Deflection is a property of the interaction, not of individuals. (Nelson broke it down into the three subcomponents. Deflection minimized to solve for 3-number profiles of optimal behaviors (predicting action), identities/traits (predicting labeling). Simulation software program INTERACT implements control system to generate predictions using natural language input

32 In 1978– The ENTIRE Theory Fit in 8K

33 Empirical Validation Laboratory Studies Field Studies Surveys
Wiggins & Heise 1987 Journal of Mathematical Sociology. Robinson & Smith-Lovin 1992 Social Psychology Quarterly. Youngreen, Conlon, Robinson & Lovaglia Social Science Research. Schröder & Scholl Social Psychology Quarterly. Field Studies Francis Social Psychology Quarterly. King Social Science Computer Review King, Adam Social Science Computer. Hunt Social Psychology Quarterly. Francis Social Perspectives on Emotion. Smith-Lovin & Douglass Social Perspectives on Emotions. Surveys MacKinnon & Langford Sociological Quarterly. Lively & Heise American Journal of Sociology. Lively & Powell Social Psychology Quarterly. Robinson & Smith-Lovin Motivation and Emotion. Robinson, Smith-Lovin, Tsoudis 1994 Social Forces Cross-national Studies Smith, Matsuno, & Umino Social Psychology Quarterly. Smith, Matsuno, & Ike Social Psychology Quarterly. Smith Journal of Mathematical Sociology. Smith & Francis Social Forces. MacKinnon & Keating Social Psychology Quarterly. Langford &, MacKinnon Social Psychology Quarterly. Smith, Umino, & Matsuno Journal of Mathematical Sociology.

34 So What’s Not to Like? Exactly what IS deflection?
What it’s not: negative emotion What it’s probably not: stress A sense of unreality How do we ask about it? Can we get beyond just EVALUATION? How to better run experiments Determining definition of situation (labeling versus deflection of “real” self) Constraining alternatives for resolving deflection Will vignettes do it for us?

35 The Elements of the Theory
Define the Situation Cultural Sentiments– EPA Impression Change The Control Principle

36 Amalgamation: Modification, Attribution and Emotion
Impression Change, with Two Elements C = a + bM +bI Ce = Me - .36Mp + .47Ie + .OlIp -.07Ia + .12MeIe Cp = l8Me + .65Mp + .59Ip + .05Ia Ca = Me + .07Mp + .53Ma - .02Ie - .02Ip a

37 Even Simpler But you can move the modifier out….
Me = Ie + .OlIp -.07Ia- Ce/(Ce+.12Ie+.69) Mp = OlIe + .59Ip + .05Ia - Cp/.65 Ma = Ie - .02Ip + .64Ia - Ca/.53 And substitute the entire in-context equation for the C’s!!

38 Which leads to M = t + (t-f)
Most interesting for emotions (although we should probably do more with attribution) But it’s only for evaluation: we should work out the others Emotions are a function of the transient impression and deflection (directed movement away from the fundamental) Characteristic emotions: associated with an maintained identity Structural emotions: associated with an maintained identity and a role-alter whose identity is also maintained Situated emotions: emotional responses after a disconfirming event

39 So let’s get this right Who you are (identity) determines what you feel An actor is always feeling some emotion (although sometimes “No Emotion”) Disconfirming identities does not necessarily lead to negative emotion Emotion and deflection are not the same thing, although they are related (distantly)

40 Some Persistent Questions about Emotions
Again, why are we so fixated on evaluation? How can we measure without influencing the outcome? What IS the experienced impact of deflection, and how is it related to emotion? What is going on when INTERACT (so frequently) says that there are no emotions in range? What are the implications of the new Bayesian model for our understanding of situated emotions?


Download ppt "Affect Control Theory: A Primer"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google