How is emotion socially constructed?

HOW EMOTION IS SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED
by Name
Class
Name Of Professor
Institution
City and State
Date
Introduction
Emotions are states of the mind of an individual that occur naturally and are usually instinctive. Emotions are derived from a person’s circumstance, relationship with other people or mood. Through emotion an individual is capable of experiencing feelings such as joy, hate, love, anger, and fear among other feelings (Solomon, 2003). Emotions can either be tense or more contained and can be spurred in a number of ways such as through telling and listening to a story. People can have their emotions out of control and thus the need for a therapist. Emotions can also either change a person’s life or transcend a person’s mind and body. “Emotions can be viewed as culturally delineated types of feelings and affects” (Thoits, 1989). Social science defines emotions as “social objects”. This is because emotions can be referred to and acted towards, and can be used to make statements (McCarthy, 1989).
Indicators To Emotional Social Construction
The first indicator of emotional social construction is the gendered meanings of emotions. In the society today, women are generally viewed as nurturing while men on the other hand as aggressive. These natures of men and women are believed to be as a result of socialization of boys and girls identities of their respective genders. Considering emotion as a kind of language also indicates its social construction. In this consideration two types of distinctions exist: the “I” and the “me” kinds of people.

The “I” is as a result of lack of social interaction and is mainly focused on self needs and wants. The “me” on the other hand result from social interactions.
Approaches To Social Emotional Construction
There are two approaches to social-emotional construction. The first approach is the micro-level approach. In this approach emotion is treated as a dependent variable that is constructed from social influences by social scientists. In this approach emotions are shaped and these emotions act as both mediators and motivators. Emotions are believed to implicitly or explicitly motivate behaviors of a person. Emotions also act as mediators in pressing issues and therefore affect the relationships of people in the contexts in which they occur (Thoits, 1989).
The second approach to social emotional construction is the macro-level approach. In this approach emotions are treated as dependent variables. According to scientists, in this approach the intensity of emotional experiences are as a result of the surrounding social environment. The social environment in which this individual lives influences emotions of a particular individual. Common influence to emotion in this approach is the culture of the social life of an individual (Thoits, 1989).
Durkheim Theories To Social Construction
Different scientists had different approaches to social-emotional construction, and so did Durkheim. Durkheim’s major theory to emotional construction was the social constructionist approach to the emotions of people. Durkheim also used emotions that are biologically constituted as the center of his social solidarity theory. According to Durkheim, gatherings and assemblies of people are responsible for the creation of the human society and its renewal. Durkheim argues that when people react emotionally to collective sentiments solidarity is created among them. They start to reason in the same way as a result of sharing of ideas. However, when people are separated, what he calls “division of labour”, people experience different independent emotions leading to numerous emotions and that are diverse. These numerous and diverse emotions are usually tied to different social objects. According to Durkheim, numerous diverse emotions are dangerous and are the major cause of actions such as suicide because they create feelings such as anger, loneliness and depression. On the contrary, when emotions are collective among individuals, they can be suppressed and this reduces their capability of being dangerous (Fisher & Chon, 1989). Three major theories therefore exist that attempt to explain how emotions are social constructed:
Emotional Construction Through Culture
The first theory is the emotional constructions through culture. “Our culture is a cupboard, as it were, of available narratives for people’s lives, which they try on and wear” (Evans, 2012). Cultural models create a platform in which behaviors that are emotional take place and thus are responsible for information and guidance of emotional responses (Mesquita & Frijda, 1992). “Culturally normative emotions help individuals to achieve important cultural tasks” (Mesquita, Boiger & Leersnyder, 2016).
A good example of social-emotional construction through cultural models is the difference in emotions between the Japanese and the European Americans. The emotional pattern in European Americans is majorly focused on high self-esteem maintenance and pursuit of independent goals. The European Americans tend to prefer self-independence and to be unique, autonomous and free from other people. The emotions of the Japanese on the other hand are majorly created through independence to oneself (Boundless, 2016). The Japanese are more focused on maintaining harmony in the society through making adjustments that are acceptable to their environment. Generally, emotions of the western group are as a result of a person’s individual feature while the emotions of the eastern group are as a result of different emotions of the people that surround an individual (Tsai, 2013).
In this theory, emotional construction varies from one culture to another and is dependent on the different cultural models. People are often committed to different interactions and relations. This majorly affects the type of emotions that they experience, perceive and express. This therefore means that peoples’ emotions differ from one person to another depending on the cultural models that they embody.
Emotional Construction Through Interactions
According to this theory emotions are not pre-wired into the brain. They are constructed through individual interactions with other people (McCarthy, 1994). A person’s emotion is influenced by social interaction. Currently, developmental literature has provided evidence of how interaction between individuals has affected emotions (Moore, 2016).
A good example of emotional construction through interaction is a research based on the development of infants’ emotions as compared to adult emotions. The researchers found out that infants do not have a systematic way of showing any facial expressions in any contexts that are emotion-eliciting as commonly predicted by discrete emotional theories. The emotions in infants are developed in the occurrence of repeated interactions with their caregivers and are either undifferentiated positive or negative valences with different intensities (Christianson, 2014). According to this study, children use different behaviors such as smiling, crying and fussing to express their emotions. These findings were the exact opposite of those of adults.
In this theory, therefore, it can be concluded that the feelings of an individual are influenced by the interactions that these people have with other people (Kyle, Espie & Biello, 2015). These emotions are also dependent on the time of the interaction. Also, emotions are not only shaped by the interaction contexts in which they are shared but they also shape the relationships of the people in the places where they are experienced (Beale & Creed, 2009).
Emotional Construction Through Relationships
Among other factors the emotions of an individual are also influenced by relationship history that the individual shares with the person he or she is interacting with (Trommsdorff & Kornadt, 2003). The emotional construction through relationships is based on two major factors: the current relationship of individuals and the future projections of where these current relationships are headed. According to researchers, the meaning and predictability of emotion can be derived from the relationship that exists in the context in which it takes place. Also, emotions are responsible for shaping these contexts in which they occur.
A good example showing how emotions and socially constructed through relationships is the study emotional convergence. In this study couples were found behave more alike after being married for 25 years in contrary to how they behaved in their first anniversary (Christianson, 2014). Furthermore, the more the couples were close during the marriage and the more the satisfying the marriage was, the more alike they behaved These couples also reacted similarly to one another during interactions with other people.
In conclusion, emotional construction through relationships takes place through subconscious imitation of emotions among individuals who have close relationships. Closeness of relationships is likely to lead to copying of emotions as well as empathy. Emotions also shape the relationships that exist in the contexts in which they occur and are important in developing new and established relationships (Desautels, 2016). Emotions whether positive or negative can influence people in manners that are profound (Jones, n.d). Healthy relationships are needed to maintain good health and thus the importance of learning how to control our emotions (Umberson & Montez, 2010).
Interdependencies Between Contexts Of Construction
Social-emotional construction is as a result of three major factors. These factors include culture, relationships, and interactions. Each of these factors influences emotional, social construction in different ways. However, these three factors are interlinked and supplement one another
A good example in which all the three factors are intertwined is a study that was carried out across culture on the interactions between a mother and a child. This study took place in Japan and Germany and involved the study of disobedient children. In the study, it was found out that German mothers quickly and angrily reacted to their naughty children. They insisted on compliance, which led to their children protesting. This would then create an argument within the mother and the child, which in the end would result in both the mother and the child hurt and angry. The Japanese mothers, however, approached disobedience in a child from the perspective of the child. The approach was empathetically, and they reacted in a manner that accommodated the child. However, as a result of misconduct, the friendly and pitiful demands of the Japanese mothers would still irritate the child ending in these parents regretting and being hugely disappointed in their children. The mothers would then reconsider the initial demands of the children and partially give in to them for fear of jeopardizing the peaceful relationships they have with their children. The mother- child relationship, the Japanese and German cultures, and the and the interactions between the mothers and the children used in the above example vividly show the interplay of culture, relationship, and interaction in influencing emotions.
Conclusion
Social-emotional construction takes place through interactions, cultures, and relationships. Interactions involve how people live among one another and are dependent on the physical location of an individual. Interactions are influenced and shaped by the social norms within a group of people and vary from one community to another. Cultural, emotional construction is also variable from one community to another and is usually dependent on both physical location of an individual and time spent within a particular community. Culture constructs the emotions of a person over a long period and the more an individual adheres to his/her culture the more intense the emotional construction. Finally, emotional construction through relationships, on the other hand, involves emotional convergence for individuals who are close to one another. These individuals imitate one another, and after a certain amount of time, they start to show similar emotions. Cultures, interactions, and relationships are interconnected and work together in constructing emotions of an individual.

References
Boiger, M., & Mesquita, B. (2012). The Construction of Emotion in Interactions, Relationships, and Cultures. Emotion Review, 4, 221-229.
doi: 10.1177/1754073912439765
Beale, R. & Creed, C. (2009). Affective Interaction: How emotional agents affect users. Science Direct, 67, 9, 755-776. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581909000573Boiger, M., Mesquita, B., Tsai, A. Y., & Markus, H. (2012). Influencingand adjusting: Asian and European Americans’ action styles in dailyemotional situations. Cognition & Emotion, 26, 332–340.
Boundless (2016). Influence of Culture on Emotion. Boundless. Retrieved from https://www.boundless.com/psychology/textbooks/boundless-psychology-textbook/emotion-13/influence-of-culture-on-emotion-411/influence-of-culture-on-emotion-263-12798/Christianson, S.A., 2014. The handbook of emotion and memory: Research and theory. Psychology Press.
Desautels, L. (2016). How Emotions Affect Learning, Behaviours, and Relationships. Edutopia. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/emotions-affect-learning-behavior-relationships-lori-desautelsEvans, J. (2012). Jerome Bruner and the cultural construction of emotions. The History of Emotions Blog. Retrieved from https://emotionsblog.history.qmul.ac.uk/2012/04/the-role-of-meaning-and-culture-in-emotional-constructions/Fisher, A. G. & Chon, K. K. (1989). Special Issue: Sentiments, Affect and Emotion. Durkheim and the Social Construction of Emotions, 52, 1-9.
Jones, S. (n.d). Emotions and Your Relationships. Date Hookup. Retrieved from http://www.datehookup.com/singles-content-emotions-and-your-relationships.htmKyle, S. D., Espie C. A., & Biello, S. M. (2015). Social interactions, emotion and sleep: A systematic review and research agenda. Sleepmedicine Reviews, 24, 83-100. Retrieved from http://www.smrv-journal.com/article/S1087-0792(14)00157-9/abstract?cc=y=
Mesquita, B., & Frijda, N. H. (1992). Cultural variations in emotions: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 179–204.
Moore, P. (2016). Emotions in Social Interactions: Unfolding Emotional Experience. Academia. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/5039357/Emotions_in_Social_Interactions_Unfolding_Emotional_ExperienceMesquita, B., Karasawa, M., Banjeri, I., Haire, A., & Kashiwagi, K. (2010).Emotion as relationship acts A study of cultural differences. Unpublished manuscript, University of Leuven, Belgium.
McCarthy, E. D. (1994). The Social Construction of Emotions: New Directions from Culture Theory. Social Perspectives On Emotion, 2, 267-279.
Mesquita, B., Boiger M., & Leersnyder, J. D. (2016). The cultural construction of emotion. ScienceDirect, 8, 31-36. Thoits, P. A. (1989). The Sociology of Emotions. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 317-342.
Solomon, R. C. (2003). Not passion’s Slave: Emotions and Choice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Tsai, J. (2013). Culture and Emotion. In R. Biswas-Diener & E. Diener (Eds), Noba textbook series: Psychology. Champaign, IL: DEF publishers. DOI:nobaproject.com.
Thoits, P. A. 1984. Coping, social support, and psychological outcomes: The central role of emotion. In Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 5, ed. P. Shaver, pp. 219-38. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage
Trommsdorff, G., & Kornadt, H. (2003). Parent-child relations in cross-cultural perspective. In L. Kuczynski (Ed.), Handbook of Dynamics in Parent-child Relations (pp. 271–305). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thoits, P. A. (1986). Social support as coping assistance. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 54:416-23