Banner
    Study Says Pride And Shame Are Biological, Not Cultural
    By News Staff | August 11th 2008 03:00 AM | 5 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    The victory stance of a gold medalist and the slumped shoulders of a non-finalist are innate and biological rather than learned responses to success and failure, according to a University of British Columbia study using cross-cultural data gathered at the 2004 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

    In the first study of its kind, UBC psychology researcher Jessica Tracy investigated how pride and shame are expressed across cultures, and among the congenitally blind. She compared the non-verbal expressions and body language of sighted, blind, and congenitally blind judo competitors representing more than 30 countries, among them Algeria, Taiwan, North Korea, the Ukraine and the United States.

    Asst. Prof. Tracy's findings – published in this week's online Early Edition of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences – show that the individuals displayed pride and shame behaviours in response to the same success and failure situations.

    Pride, unlike fear, anger or joy – which are categorized as primary emotions – has received little research attention in the past, explains Tracy. Her work explores how pride as an innate human biological response has evolved through time and shapes human social dynamics.

    "Since congenitally blind individuals could not have learned pride and shame behaviors from watching others, these displays of victory or defeat are likely to be an innate biological propensity in humans, rather than learned behaviour," says Tracy.

    Tracy and co-author Psychology Prof. David Matsumoto of San Francisco State University analyzed photos taken by an official International Judo Federation photographer who was not told about the specific research goals. The photographer shot the athletes during and immediately after each match, repeatedly for approximately 15 seconds, allowing for a series of moment-by moment images of each behavioural response.

    The researchers coded the athletes' head, arms and body positions. They found that winning athletes, both sighted and blind and across all cultures, tended to raise their arms, tilt their head up and puff out their chest. Also largely universal were the expressions of defeat, which include slumped shoulders and a narrowed chest.

    The researchers found that, to some extent, culture moderated the shame response among sighted athletes. It was less pronounced among individuals from highly individualistic, self-expression-valuing cultures, primarily in North America and West Eurasian countries. However, congenitally blind athletes across cultures showed the shame response, suggesting that the cultural difference found among sighted athletes was due to the Western cultural norm of hiding one's shame.

    "These findings support evolutionary accounts that pride and shame would have been powerful mechanisms in enhancing or inhibiting an individual's social status," says Tracy.

    Comments

    Gerhard Adam
    I think this study is stretching the concepts of "pride" and "shame" a bit. Most social animals have a mechanism for displaying submission or dominance, and these physical manifestations aren't significantly different from what is being discussed. Pride and shame assign more of a value judgement to the action rather than demonstrating any particular social standing. When we consider that these are athletic competitions it isn't too difficult to see that with the adrenaline and energy involved that the physical displays might have different origins. The winner still surging from adrenaline would display a positive attitude, while a loser coming down from the adreline after a loss would tend to be more subdued. I don't think that one can necessarily assume that pride or shame are the emotions being experienced.
    Pride and shame at the time of winning or losing? I would think happiness or disappointment might be experienced first. Shame might never come into play. I think there is more to it than biology.

    With that in mind, what parts of a face most influence first impressions? – Kare Anderson
    http://sayitbetter.typepad.com/say_it_better/2008/08/what-make-us-wa.html

    Gerhard Adam
    I'm not convinced that you can isolate impressions to just the face. If an experiment were artifically conducted to limit the view, then there were be one set of impressions. However, if an individual is seen in person, then a different set of impressions may be obtained. There are numerous elements of body language that will also influence impressions that go far beyond simply taking a look at someone's face. In addition, I think there are many even more subtle cues that we're receptive to that aren't necessarily subject to pure rationalization. This would be driven by instinct or "gut feel" for another person. This is precisely the type of thing that can help someone feel uncomfortable with a threatening individual, where maybe the face is hitting all the right notes, but your instincts or intuition is telling you that something is wrong.
    Hank
    The researchers were trying to show that pride/shame were universal (therefore biological) but first impressions would definitely be a cultural issue.

    Americans tend to go by eyes first but many cultures regard eye contact as aggressive - so two very different first impressions.

    Add a comment

    The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
    • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite><TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe><u><font>
    • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
    CAPTCHA
    If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.