Interpersonal Responding to Discrete Emotions: A Functionalist Approach to the Development of Affect Specificity

Abstract

Emotion is a dynamic and reciprocal interaction; a psychological bridge connecting the goals of one person with the goals of another. While researchers of emotion have long sought to study the experience of the person on the emoting side of this interpersonal bridge, a chasm exists in our understanding of how emotion communication is responded to. This article attempts to highlight this gap and begin building the bridge between communicator and receiver.Crucial for emotion understanding is the individual's capability to appreciate and use the emotional communication of others to regulate their behavior and the behavior of others. In order for one to engage with and respond to an increasingly complex social world, one must discriminate the quality of the specific emotion being communicated (i.e., affect specificity) and respond with behaviors appropriate and adaptive to that specific emotion given the context (what we term functional affective responding). Providing care to an angry enemy is just as inappropriate as recoiling in horror at a friend's sadness. The development of functional affective responding to discrete negative emotions is essential if the individual is to take part in a relational world. This important skill is the basis of this article.To illustrate the importance of this phenomenon for theoretical and empirical research, we begin by emphasizing a functionalist framework for the study of differential discrimination and responding to discrete emotions. We then provide an overview of studies investigating the development of infant discrimination of emotion valence and discrete negative emotions. Next, we review the few studies that have contrasted infant behavioral responding to discrete negative emotions. We then use this review to propose some factors that may account for and facilitate the development of functional affect responding. We go on to propose the functions of behaviors we believe should be evident by infants' responding to discrete emotions. This will include providing examples from various studies that demonstrate the types of differentiated behaviors researchers have described in infancy and early childhood. Finally, we lay out some considerations and suggestions for future studies of differential responding to distinct negative emotions. Although much of the work reviewed in the following pages is rooted in developmental research, the principles highlighted are relevant to all investigators in the field of emotion. AbstractTo date, emotion research has primarily focused on the experience and display of the emoter. However, of equal, if not more, importance is how such displays impact and guide the behavior of an observer. We incorporate a functionalist framework of emotion to examine the development of differential responding to discrete emotion, theorize on what may facilitate its development, and hypothesize the functions that may underlie such behavioral responses. Although our review is focused primarily on development, the theoretical and methodological ideas laid out are re...

Surprise! 20-month-old infants understand the emotional consequences of false beliefs

“…If infants can attribute these internal states to agents, then it seems plausible that they can attribute internal emotional states to agents as well. Evidence from studies of infants' behavioral responses to emotional displays supports this possibility (for a review, see Walle & Campos, 2012). For instance, 18-month-olds who witnessed an adult express anger at another adult's action were less likely to imitate that action if the emoter was watching them with a neutral expression than if she was looking away or had her eyes closed (Repacholi, Meltzoff, & Olsen, 2008).…”

Social Referencing: Defining and Delineating a Basic Process of Emotion

“…Likewise, social referencing (i.e., social appraisal) research with adult populations will further our appreciation of the social complexities and influences of emotion. The inherently interpersonal aspects of emotion in social referencing contexts provide a means for placing emotion back "in context," a critical call from many researchers (e.g., Hassin, Aviezer, & Bentin, 2013;Parkinson, 2001;Parkinson & Manstead, 2015;Walle & Campos, 2012) and a theme gradually gaining traction in the field of emotion research.…”

“…Furthermore, research is sorely needed to examine how the individual is affected by emotions of varying quality (e.g., anger, disgust, awe, contentment, contempt). The study of various emotions will likely necessitate that researchers include multiple converging research operations to assess subtle variations in individuals' responses to each emotion (see Walle & Campos, 2012). Bruder et al (2012) employed such an approach in an interpersonal context to reveal that emotion contagion and social appraisal (i.e., social referencing) are differentially observable across discrete emotions and measures.…”

Infant differential behavioral responding to discrete emotions.

“…In order to systematically investigate infants' differential responding to expressions of different discrete emotions, it is necessary that research aimed at identifying differentiated behavioral responses include a range of emotions and afford the infant flexibility to deploy a range of organized behaviors (Walle & Campos, 2012). The present investigation emphasized three considerations to address these criteria.…”

“…A similar emphasis on coding the function of interpersonal behaviors can be found in emotion research with adolescents (e.g., Hollenstein, Allen, & Sheeber, 2016; Main, Paxton, & Dale, 2016) and adults (e.g., Carstensen, Gottman, & Levenson, 1995; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989). Although functionally-oriented coding systems could be considered to involve an undesirable degree of subjective judgment, a number of researchers have convincingly argued that it is both feasible and often preferable to utilize such a system because of its greater validity (e.g., for reviews, see Gottman, McCoy, Coan, & Collier, 1996; Sroufe & Waters, 1977; Walle & Campos, 2012). Additionally, whereas specific behaviors may be bound by affordances or constraints inherent in the context, functional coding is more likely to be applicable across contexts.…”