↓ Skip to main content

Emotions in “the world”: cultural practices, products, and meanings of anger and shame in two individualist cultures

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Emotions in “the world”: cultural practices, products, and meanings of anger and shame in two individualist cultures
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00867
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Boiger, Simon De Deyne, Batja Mesquita

Abstract

Three studies tested the idea that people's cultural worlds are structured in ways that promote and highlight emotions and emotional responses that are beneficial in achieving central goals in their culture. Based on the idea that U.S. Americans strive for competitive individualism, while (Dutch-speaking) Belgians favor a more egalitarian variant of individualism, we predicted that anger and shame, as well as their associated responses, would be beneficial to different extents in these two cultural contexts. A questionnaire study found that cultural practices promote beneficial emotions (anger in the United States, shame in Belgium) and avoid harmful emotions (shame in the United States): emotional interactions were perceived to occur more or less frequently to the extent that they elicited culturally beneficial or harmful emotions. Similarly, a cultural product analysis showed that popular children's books from the United States and Belgium tend to portray culturally beneficial emotions more than culturally harmful emotions. Finally, a word-association study of the shared cultural meanings surrounding anger and shame provided commensurate evidence at the level of the associated response. In each language network, anger and shame were imbued with meanings that reflected the cultural significance of the emotion: while culturally consistent emotions carried relatively stronger connotations of emotional yielding (e.g., giving in to anger and aggressing against the offender in the United States), culturally inconsistent emotions carried relatively stronger connotations of emotional containment (e.g., a stronger emphasis on suppressing or transforming shame in the United States).

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 110 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 23%
Student > Master 23 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Professor 8 7%
Other 6 5%
Other 29 25%
Unknown 13 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 71 62%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 15 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2014.
All research outputs
#2,730,928
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,438
of 35,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,535
of 294,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#234
of 967 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 967 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.