Emotional ratings of help-related picture content

100 Pages·2014·6.95 MB·English

by  Aenne A. Brielmann

Abschlussarbeit zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Master der
Naturwissenschaften (MSc.)
It matters how you ask:
Emotional ratings of help-related picture content
Eine Frage der Fragestllung: Emotionale Bewertungen hilferelevanter Bildinhalte
vorgelegt von:
Aenne A. Brielmann
Matrikelnummer: 01/755188
an der
Fachbereich Psychologie
am 22. August 2014
Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Thomas Go¨tz
Zweitgutachter: Dr. Tobias Flaisch
Konstanzer Online-Publikations-System (KOPS)
URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-284350
CONTENTS
Contents
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Abstract (German) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
1 Introduction 1
1.1 The importance of emotional experiences in social cognition . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Emotional responses to others’ need foster prosocial behavior . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Operationalization of help-related content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Measurement of subjective emotional experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4.1 Scale types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4.2 Consideration of further rating material characteristics . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Purpose of this thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Methods 9
2.1 Ethics approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Stimuli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 Design and procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 Data analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 Results 18
3.1 Relation between ratings on different scales and dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.1.1 Strong relations between ratings within and across scale types . . . . . . 18
3.1.2 Modulation of rating dimensions’ relations by language and participants’
gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1.3 Independence of rating dimensions’ relations from scale and dimension
order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.2 Mixed feelings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2.1 Unipolar ratings reveal presence of mixed feelings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2.2 Mixed feelings’ relation to bipolar valence is sensitive to language but not
dimension order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3 “Need of help” stimulus subset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3.1 Need of help is rated sadder and more arousing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
i
3.3.2 Need of help is rated less pleasant and more unpleasant . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.3 Mixed feelings are scarcely affected by need of help content . . . . . . . . 27
3.3.4 Interim summary: “need of help” stimulus subset . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4 “Social context” stimulus subset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4.1 Seeing someone helping has no discernible effect on valence and arousal
ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4.2 Social context increases pleasantness, but does not affect unpleasantness
ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.4.3 Social context affects mixed feelings differently in men and women . . . . 31
3.4.4 Interim summary: “social context” stimulus subset . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.5 Content effects on aggregated unipolar and bipolar ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.6 Impact of language and dimension order on mean ratings and help-related con-
tent effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.6.1 Language does not affect content effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.6.2 Order affects help-content’s effects only regarding mixed feelings . . . . 38
4 Discussion 44
4.1 Self-reported emotions on bipolar and unipolar scales are closely related . . . . . 45
4.2 Feeling others’ need as sadder, more arousing, and less pleasant . . . . . . . . . 47
4.3 Social context, but not the act of helping, influences emotional ratings . . . . . . 48
4.4 Aggregated unipolar ratings can replicate help-related content effects on bipolar
scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.5 Gender matters, but far less than content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.6 Additional effects of language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.7 Additional effects of rating order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.8 Limitations and future directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.9 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
References 62
Backmatter I
List of tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
List of figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III
Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIV
ii
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. Dr. Thomas G¨otz and Dr. Tobias Flaisch
who were evaluating this thesis. My special thank goes to Dr. Margarita Stolarova who enabled
the realization of the study presented and greatly contributed to developing the extension of the
stimulus set. I would also like to thank the students who participated in this study and extend my
gratitude to the students who assisted with data collection: Marcus Kicia, Joana Chomakova,
and Jennifer Mu¨ller.
My personal thank goes to my family for always supporting me and encouraging my dedica-
tion to scientific research.
Parts of this thesis will be published as a journal article.
iii
ABSTRACT
Abstract
Emotions play a vital role in human social behavior. One important aspect of emotional
experiences in social contexts is that people are able to experience and report similar emotions
as a person they observe. This capability is thought to be one major motivation for prosocial
behavior. In this thesis I explore the influence of help-related picture content on self-reported
emotions. Within this framework the impact of different types of rating scales and of rating
material’s characteristics on self-reported emotional experiences is assessed.
Participants (N = 278) were shown two different subsets of black-and-white drawings vary-
ing systematically regarding help-related content. In the first subset, half of the drawings
depicted a child or a bird needing help to reach a trivial goal, the other half showed the agent
reaching the goal. The second subset showed adults either actively helping a child or passively
present next to it. Control pictures of the adult and the child alone were also included. Par-
ticipants reported their subjective emotional experiences while viewing the stimuli using two
types of 9-point scales. For one half of the pictures scales of arousal (calm to excited) and of
bipolar valence (sad to happy) were employed, for the other half scales of unipolar pleasantness
and unpleasantness (strong to absent) were used. This design allowed comparison of emotional
ratings on two types of scales within one population. The order of rating scale types as well as
of each scale types’ rating dimensions was counter-balanced across participants. Moreover, the
study was conducted in English (N = 125) and German (N = 117).
Varianceinmeanbipolarvalenceratingscouldbeinferredfromthedifferencebetweenpleas-
antness and unpleasantness ratings. The overall intensity of reported pleasant and unpleasant
feelings accounted well for variance in arousal ratings. Participants reported to have pleasant
and unpleasant feelings at the same time. Pictures showing everyday need of help situations
were rated lower in valence, higher in arousal, less pleasant and more unpleasant than corre-
sponding pictures in which the agent did not need help. Pictures of adults helping a child were
rated similar to control pictures showing a passive adult on all dimensions. Consideration of
one scale order or language, however, would not have changed the principal interpretation of
help-relevant picture content’s effects.
Insum,resultssuggestthatarousalandbipolarvalenceratingsarecloselyrelatedtounipolar
pleasantness and unpleasantness ratings. Moreover, valence should not solely be regarded as
a bipolar construct, as participants reported to have pleasant and unpleasant feelings at the
same time. Hence, these so called mixed feelings should be assessed, too. The large effects of
need of help content in everyday situations on self-reported emotional experiences highlight the
iv
ABSTRACT
strength and reflexiveness with which emotions congruent to observed others are experienced.
Rating material’s language and order of scales may have an impact on participants rating
behavior but is unlikely to distort major effects of manipulated content.
v
ABSTRACT
Zusammenfassung
Emotionen nehmen eine Schlu¨ßelrolle im menschlichen Sozialverhalten ein. Ein wichtiger
Aspekt hierbei ist, dass Menschen dazu in der Lage sind, die Gefu¨hle eines anderen so zu er-
leben und zu berichten, wie es der Beobachtete tut. Es wird angenommen, dass diese Fa¨higkeit
eine wichtige Motivation fu¨r prosoziales Verhalten darstellt. Diese Masterarbeit untersucht,
wie hilferelevante Bildinhalte selbstberichtete Emotion beeinflussen. In diesem Rahmen wird
der Einfluss der Nutzung verschiedener Arten von Bewertungsskalen auf selbstberichtetes emo-
tionales Erleben untersucht. Zudem werden die Einflu¨sse der formalen Charakteristika des
Bewertungsmaterials beru¨cksichtigt.
Den Teilnehmer*innen dieser Studie (N = 278) wurden zwei Sets schwarz-weißer Zeichnun-
gen, die systematisch in ihrem hilferelevanten Inhalt variierten, gezeigt. Im ersten Set zeigte
die H¨alfte der Bilder ein Kind oder einen Vogel, der Hilfe braucht, w¨ahrend die zweite H¨alfte
der Bilder dieselben Protagonisten dabei zeigte, wie sie ihr Ziel erreichen. Das zweite Set von
Zeichnungen zeigte Erwachsene, die einem der Kinder aus dem ersten Set von Bildern helfen,
oder passiv neben diesem abgebildet sind. Kontrollbilder zeigten zum einen den Erwachsenen,
zum anderen das Kind alleine. Die Teilnehmer*innen bewerteten ihr emotionales Empfinden
wa¨hrend sie diese Bilder betrachteten auf zwei unterschiedlichen 9-Punkt Likert-Skalen. Fu¨r
je eine Ha¨lfte der Bilder wurden Skalen bipolarer Valenz (glu¨cklich bis traurig) und Erre-
gung (ruhig bis aufgeregt) genutzt. Die jeweils andere H¨alfte der Bilder bewerteten die Teil-
nehmer*innen auf unipolaren Skalen fu¨r die Intensit¨at ihrer angenehmen und unangenehmen
Gefu¨hle (keine bis starke). Dieses Studiendesign erlaubt es, emotionale Bewertungen auf beiden
Arten von Skalen innerhalb einer Population zu vergleichen. Die Reihenfolge der Skalentypen
sowie der Bewertungsdimensionen wurde u¨ber die Teilnehmer*innen hinweg gegen-balanciert.
Außerdem wurde die Studie auf Deutsch (N = 117) und Englisch (N = 125) durchgefu¨hrt.
Im Hinblick auf das gesamte Bildmaterial konnte von der Differenz zwischen der Intensita¨t
angenehmer und unangenehmer Gefu¨hle auf die Varianz in Valenzbewertungen geschlossen
werden. Zudem kla¨rte die Gesamtintensita¨t der berichteten angenehmen und unangenehmen
Gefu¨hle einen Großteil der Varianz in den Erregungs-Bewertungen auf. Dabei berichteten die
Teilnehmer*innen, beim betrachten desselben Bildes sowohl angenehme als auch unangenehme
Gefu¨hlezuempfinden. Bilder, diejemandenzeigten, derHilfebraucht, wurdenimVergleichmit
Bildern, die keine Hilfebedu¨rftigkeit zeigten, als trauriger, erregender, weniger angenehm und
unangenehmer bewertet. Abbildungen von Erwachsenen, die einem Kind helfen, wurden auf
allen Dimensionen ¨ahnlich wie Kontrollbilder, die einen passiven Erwachsenen zeigen, bewertet.
vi
ABSTRACT
Betrachtung einer einzelnen Sprach- oder Reihenfolgen-Variante hatte keinen Einfluss auf die
allgemeine Interpretation der Effekte hilferelevanter Bildinhalte.
Diese Ergebnisse legen nahe, dass Bewertungen bipolarer Valenz und Erregung eng mit
der Intensita¨t angenehmer und unangenehmer Gefu¨hle zusammenh¨angen. Daru¨berhinaus kann
Valenz nicht ausschließlich als bipolares Konstrukt aufgefasst werden, da die Teilnehmer*innen
berichteten, angenehme und unangenehme Gefu¨hle gleichzeitig zu empfinden. Daher sollten
auch solche gemischten Gefu¨hle erfasst werden. Der starke Einfluss der Abbildung von Hil-
febedu¨rftigkeit in Alltagssituationen auf das berichtete emotionale Erleben unterstreicht wie
stark und automatisch Emotionen, die denen eines beobachteten Anderen ¨ahneln, ausgelo¨st
werden. Sprache des und Reihenfolgen im Bewertungsmaterial k¨onnen mittlere Bewertungen
beeinflussen, nicht aber die hauptsa¨chlichen Effekte der manipulierten Variablen verzerren.
vii
1 INTRODUCTION
1 Introduction
1.1 The importance of emotional experiences in social cognition
What do you feel if you see a child cry? The answers to this question given by diverse people
will be astonishingly fast and similar: sadness, distress, the urge to help, and so on. The reason
for this spontaneous and homogeneous response pattern is the fascinating human tendency to
adopt other person’s emotional states. In this way, emotions play a key role at multiple levels
of social cognition and behavior (Keltner and Haidt, 1999). As noted e.g. by Gallese and
colleagues (2004) “we do not just ‘see’ or ‘hear’ an action or an emotion. Side by side with the
sensorydescriptionoftheobservedsocialstimuli,internalrepresentationsofthestateassociated
with these actions or emotions are evoked in the observer, ‘as if’ they were performing a similar
action or experiencing a similar emotion.”. Humans’ ability to feel what (they believe that)
others feel has been given many names; the most comprehensive and famous one is “empathy”.
Onebroaderdefinitionofempathyis“anaffectiveresponsethatstemsfromtheapprehensionor
comprehension of another’s emotional state or condition and is similar to what the other person
is feeling [...]” (Eisenberg et al., 2006). However, there is a wealth of different definitions of
empathy. Some of these define empathy in a more narrow sense and incorporate the premise
that the observer knows about the external source of his or her affective state (De Vignemont
and Singer, 2006). Others distinguish between cognitive and affective empathy (Cox et al.,
2012; Hooker et al., 2010). Taking this distinction into account, what has been described so
far corresponds best to affective empathy that is sometimes – but not always – distinguished
from emotional contagion. According to all definitions, however, the observer’s affective state
changes according to what another person is doing or experiencing.
Despite considerable confusion regarding the terminology of “empathy”, the core idea of
emotions’ pivotal role in social cognition cannot be denied (Gallese et al., 2004; Lemerise and
Arsenio, 2000). It seems plausible and well established that affective responses are elicited in
the observer and that these responses are congruent to the ones (believed to be) experienced by
the observed person. It is beyond the scope of the current thesis to discuss the terminology of
empathy any further (but see Preston and Hofelich, 2012, for a recent and careful dissemination
of this term). Instead of being lead astray by trying to (re-)define the concept of “empathy”,
this thesis will focus on examining the process of experiencing the emotions of others. This
more precise construct may be regarded as one key component of most empathy definitions.
The assumption that others’ distress will elicit distinct emotional responses in the observer
1
1 INTRODUCTION
has been present in social psychological theories for decades (Batson and Shaw, 1991; Cialdini
et al., 1973; Piliavin et al., 1982). These established theories assume that seeing another person
in distress will evoke a similar emotional reaction as experienced by the person in need. The
arousal-cost-reward model e.g. assumes that a kind of “arousal” is elicited when seeing someone
in need of help (Dovidio, 1991; Fischer et al., 2006; Piliavin et al., 1982; Schroeder et al., 1995).
In the framework of the arousal-cost-reward model the notion of heightened arousal is often
complemented with a negative, unpleasant valence in this emotional reaction. Thus, “arousal”
in this context does not refer to the same concept as used in theories of core affect (e.g.
Bradley and Lang, 1994; Russell, 1979). Even though the theory is labeled with “arousal” only,
it rather refers to an “empathic arousal” (Hoffman, 1981) that is defined just as vague regarding
components of affected emotions as general definitions of empathy. Other theories explicitly
state that the valence of emotions will be affected by seeing someone in need. For instance
the empathy-altruism hypothesis (Batson and Shaw, 1991) assumes that “[e]mpathy felt for
someone who is suffering will likely be an unpleasant, aversive emotion”. The negative state
relief theory states that seeing others’ need of help elicits unpleasant feelings (initially proposed
by Cialdini et al., 1973, but see Batson et al., 1989, for an in-depth comparison of negative-
state relief and empathy-altruism hypotheses). It is also noteworthy that Batson and colleagues
(1989) employ the term “empathy” much the same as Eisenberg and colleagues “sympathy”
(e.g. Eisenberg et al., 1989; Fabes et al., 1993). In sum, there is vague consensus of these
theories regarding the assumption that others’ need will elicit some kind of unpleasant feeling.
Nonetheless, there is again considerable confusion regarding terminology and little precision
about the exact components of emotions affected.
1.2 Emotional responses to others’ need foster prosocial behavior
Despite their vagueness and inconsistency regarding the exact components of emotion affected,
all of these theories assume that emotional responses to others’ need will likely lead to prosocial
behavior. Evidence for the relation between prosocial acting and emotional responses has been
achieved measuring the ability to respond emotionally to others’ need as a trait (e.g. Carlo
et al., 1999; Prot et al., 2014; Wilhelm and Bekkers, 2010) and as an experience in a given
situation (e.g. Cao, 2010; Stocks et al., 2009; Sze et al., 2012, see also Eisenberg, 2000 for a
reviewonbothaspects). Moreover, recentneuroimagingstudieshaveestablishedalinkbetween
neuronal activity in brain regions related to empathic responses and real-life prosocial behavior
(e.g. Mastenetal.,2011;Ramesonetal.,2012, seealsoChakroffandYoung,2014, forareview).
2