Emotion suppression has been found to have negative psychological and social consequences in Western cultural contexts. Yet, in some other cultural contexts, emotion suppression is less likely to have negative consequences; relatedly, emotion suppression is also more common in those East-Asian cultural contexts. In a dyadic conflict study, we aim to (a) conceptually replicate cultural differences found in previous research with respect to the prevalence and consequences of emotion suppression, and (b) extend previous research by testing whether cultural differences are larger for some than for other types of negative emotions. We postulate that cultural differences in suppression are less pronounced for socially engaging emotions (e.g., guilt) than socially disengaging emotions (e.g., anger), because the former foster the relationship, whereas the latter emphasize individual goals. Belgian (N = 58) and Japanese (N = 80) couples engaged in a 10-min conflict interaction followed by video-mediated recall, during which participants rated their emotions and emotion suppression every 30 s. As predicted, Japanese participants reported more suppression than their Belgian counterparts, but the cultural difference was more pronounced when participants experienced more socially disengaging emotions than when they experienced more socially engaging emotions. These results suggest that the type of emotion should be considered when describing cultural differences in emotion suppression. Finally, and consistent with previous research, emotion suppression was negatively associated with interaction outcomes (i.e., conflict resolution) in Belgian couples, but not in Japanese couples.

In the present study, we propose that the emotional "bumps" that couples experience during relationship disagreements differ systematically among cultures. We predicted that self-assertive emotions such as anger or strength play a central role in Belgium, where they are instrumental for relational independence. In comparison, other-focused emotions such as shame or empathy for the partner should play a central role in Japan, where they support relational interdependence. Romantic couples from Belgium (n ϭ 58) and Japan (n ϭ 80) discussed relationship disagreements in the lab, which were video-recorded. After the interaction, participants separately rated their emotional experience during video-mediated recall. We identified the emotions that played a central role during the interactions in terms of attractors; these are the emotions around which couples stabilize and that likely play a central role in realizing different relationship ideals. In line with our predictions, attractors reflected states of the interpersonal emotional system that support independence in Belgium (e.g., angry or strong feelings) and interdependence (e.g., empathy) in Japan. Moreover, we found that-at least in Belgium-having more culturally typical interactions was associated with a stronger endorsement of culturally valued relationship ideals and, in turn, better relational functioning.

Couples who argue together, stay together" is a popular English saying suggesting the necessity of disagreement for a healthy and stable romantic relationship.The present study explores whether Belgian and Japanese participants similarly view couple disagreement as a necessity, and whether conceptions of disagreement have implications for partners' ideas of how to deal with disagreement. We conducted four focus groups in each culture and analyzed them using thematic analysis. The findings suggested that Belgian participants thought that partners' needs unavoidably clash. They thus saw disagreement as inevitable. In contrast, Japanese participants thought of disagreement as avoidable. To avoid disagreement, they reported that they adjusted to and accepted the differences of their partner. Consistent with these respective conceptions of disagreement, Belgian participants highlighted the importance of addressing disagreement through open communication, while Japanese participants reported to frequently engage in indirect forms of communication such as mindreading. The differences Statement of Relevance: This study is one of the first to offer a cross-cultural perspective on the meaning of couple disagreement. It explores whether 'Western' assumptions of couple disagreement, such as disagreement being inevitable and requiring verbal problem-solving, also hold in non-Western cultural contexts. Findings from focus groups suggest that Belgian conceptions were similar to, yet Japanese conceptions were different from popular assumptions in (Western) relationship literature. Implications for cross-cultural couple research and therapy are discussed.