Assessing Natural Language: Measuring Emotion-Words within a Sentence or Without a Sentence?

Gausel, Nicolay; Salthe, Gunnar

doi:10.5539/res.v6n1p127

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though one should be very cautious about interpreting the meaning of a single‐item (Gausel & Salthe, )—especially when it is removed from a uni‐dimensional (and multi item) scale (Carmines & Zeller, )—some readers might wonder whether the word ‘humiliation’ belongs more to the risk of social‐image, rather than to the shame, scale. Thus, we allowed the item ‘humiliated’ to cross‐load onto the risk to social‐image factor in an alternative model.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social‐image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict

Gausel

Leach

Mazziotta

et al. 2017

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conflicts with reciprocal violence, individuals belong to a group that has been both perpetrator and victim. In a field experiment in Liberia, West Africa, we led participants (N = 146) to focus on their group as either perpetrator or victim in order to investigate its effect on orientation towards inter‐group reconciliation or revenge. Compared to a perpetrator focus, a victim focus led to slightly more revenge orientation and moderately less reconciliation orientation. The effect of the focus manipulation on revenge orientation was fully mediated, and reconciliation orientation partly mediated, by viewing the in‐group's social‐image as at risk. Independent of perpetrator or victim focus, shame (but not guilt) was a distinct explanation of moderately more reconciliation orientation. This is consistent with a growing body of work demonstrating the pro‐social potential of shame. Taken together, results suggest how groups in reciprocal conflict might be encouraged towards reconciliation and away from revenge by feeling shame for their wrongdoing and viewing their social‐image as less at risk. As victims and perpetrators are widely thought to have different orientations to inter‐group reconciliation and revenge, we suggest that work on reciprocal conflicts should account for the fact that people can belong to a group that has been both perpetrator and victim.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social‐image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict

Gausel

Leach

Mazziotta

et al. 2017

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Methodologically speaking, we can be most confident of an emotion construct's measurement when it is embedded in a psycho-semantic network that uses reported appraisals to validate reported feelings (e.g., Leach & Spears, 2008; for discussions, see Leach, 2010;Gausel, 2014a;Gausel & Salthe, 2014). A non-situated conceptualization of shame that views it as necessarily tied to a feeling of global or stable inferiority is too broad to capture the important nuances in people's subjective experiences.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving the paradox of shame: Differentiating among specific appraisal-feeling combinations explains pro-social and self-defensive motivation

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do I Say or Let it Go? Emotions Predict How People Respond to Receiving Sexual Objectification at Work

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many people are reluctant to report sexual objectification at work. We tested whether emotions determine how people respond to sexual objectification at work. In Study 1 (N = 159) women recalled a time that they had experienced sexual objectification at work. Participants then rated their emotions in this situation and how they responded. Anger positively and a shame-based emotion (rejection) negatively predicted taking action against the perpetrator (active response). In contrast, shame positively predicted women blaming themselves (self-blame). Moreover, pride positively and anger negatively predicted women viewing the action positively (e.g., as flattering, benign response). In Study 2 (N = 135) women imagined themselves receiving either a highly objectifying or ambiguous comment at work. Being objectified increased negative emotions and decreased pride. Moral outrage (i.e., anger and disgust) positively whilst shame-based emotions negatively predicted active responding. Shame-based emotions positively predicted self-blame, whilst pride positively and anger negatively predicted benign responding. Therefore, emotions determine how people respond to sexual objectification at work. Promoting moral outrage and reducing other emotions (e.g., shame, fear, and pride) may make women (a) more willing to report sexual objectification at work and (b) less likely to blame themselves or view such actions positively (i.e., benign responses).

show abstract

Assessing Natural Language: Measuring Emotion-Words within a Sentence or Without a Sentence?

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social‐image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict

Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social‐image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict

Resolving the paradox of shame: Differentiating among specific appraisal-feeling combinations explains pro-social and self-defensive motivation

Do I Say or Let it Go? Emotions Predict How People Respond to Receiving Sexual Objectification at Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About