The emotion–valuation constellation: Multiple emotions are governed by a common grammar of social valuation

Abstract

Social emotions are hypothesized to be adaptations designed by selection to solve adaptive problems pertaining to social valuation-the disposition to attend to, associate with, and aid a target individual based on her probable contributions to the fitness of the valuer. To steer between effectiveness and economy, social emotions need to activate in precise proportion to the local evaluations of the various acts and characteristics that dictate the social value of self and others. Supporting this hypothesis, experiments conducted in the United States and India indicate that five different social emotions all track a common set of valuations. The extent to which people value each of 25 positive characteristics in others predicts the intensities of: pride (if you had those characteristics), anger (if someone failed to acknowledge that you have those characteristics), gratitude (if someone convinced others that you have those characteristics), guilt (if you harmed someone who has those characteristics), and sadness (if someone died who had those characteristics). The five emotions track local valuations (mean r = +.72) and even foreign valuations (mean r = +.70). In addition, cultural differences in emotion are patterned: They follow cultural differences in valuation. These findings suggest that multiple social emotions are governed (in part) by a common architecture of social valuation, that the valuation architecture operates with a substantial degree of universality in its content, and that a unified theoretical framework may explain cross-cultural invariances and cultural differences in emotion.

Social emotions are governed by a common grammar of social valuation: Theoretical foundations and applications to human personality and the criminal justice system

“…More recently, Sznycer and Lukaszewski (2019) have reported similar findings regarding other social emotions. Participants from the United States and India rated 25 hypothetical scenarios developed by Sznycer, Al-Shawaf, et al (2017) in which someone's actions, traits, or circumstances might lead them to be viewed positively by others.…”

“…The more an action or trait is valued in culture A compared to culture B, the more that action or trait is expected to elicit various social emotions in culture A compared to culture B. Sznycer & Lukaszewski (2019) found evidence for this prediction as well. This approach can therefore account for -and more importantly, predict in advance -cross-cultural regularities and cross-cultural differences in social emotions.…”

“…In sum, participants rated, for each of 25 scenarios describing positive acts and traits, either: (i) valuation of another individual, if those things were true of that individual; (ii) guilt, if those things were true of another individual on whom the participant has imposed costs-in the absence of any incriminating evidence that publicly reveal this imposition of costs; (iii) sadness, if those things were true of a recently deceased neighbor; (iv) pride, if those things were true of themselves; (v) anger, if a friend failed to acknowledge those things about them; or (vi) gratitude, if a friend convinced others that those things are true of the participant. Sznycer & Lukaszewski (2019) found that the degree to which local audiences positively value a target individual if various acts or traits are true of the target is positively associated with the degree to which people feel each of the five different social emotions (Figure 1). Not only did the results hold in both the US and India, but audience valuations in each country were associated with the intensities of the five emotions in the other country (Figure 2).…”

“…United States data: panels A-E; India data: panels F-J. Reprinted with permission from:Sznycer, D. & Lukaszewski, A. W. (2019). The emotion-valuation constellation: Multiple emotions are governed by a common grammar of social valuation.…”

Fitness interdependence as indexed by shared fate: Factor structure and validity of a new measure.

“…In addition, we aimed to measure a related aspect of shared fate: the emotional reactions that one has to the outcomes of interdependent others (Gervais & Fessler, 2017; Sznycer & Lukaszewski, 2019). The inclusion of emotional shared fate in our scale distinguishes our scale from others because it allows us to assess how one’s emotional responses to changes in a target’s welfare affect interdependence as opposed to focusing on how the value placed on the target’s welfare shapes overall affect toward a target (as in welfare trade-off ratios and emotions associated with helping in the absence of reciprocity; Brown, 1999; Delton & Robertson, 2016; Sznycer et al, 2019; Tooby et al, 2008).…”