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?