Negative Social Emotions 1

DRAFT COPY

Dimensions of Filipino Negative Social Emotions

Presented by

Dr. Madelene Sta. Maria Dr. Carlo Magno

Department of Psychology Counseling and Educational Psychology
College of Liberal Arts Department
De La Salle University-Manila College of Education
De La Salle University-Manila
At the
th
7 Conference of the Asian Association of Social Psychology
July 25-28, 2007 in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Introduction

When negative social emotions, such as anger, are studied from the cultural perspective,
researchers look into how the system of symbols, categories, and models generate meaning
structures to shape emotional experience, expression, and action. Emotional experience and
expression will thus be observed to exhibit variations according to how personhood and social
relationships are defined within a group of individuals sharing the same culture. Lutz (1982)
clearly states the role of culture in our study of emotion with the following statement:

The distinctive nature of emotion as a phenomenon lies in the fact that it appears
to the individual to originate both in the self and in the world. Cultural variation
exists in the extent to which either the former or the latter is emphasized. In either
case, emotion words do not simply serve to bring private into the social realm.
The cultural values and theories that inform the meanings of emotion words give
those words an important role in aiding individuals in the interpretation and
understanding of their situated selves (p.126)

Therefore, the cultural study of emotions aims to explore the particular ways cultural meaning
and social structure are related to the characterizations about relationship problems and
existential dilemmas (Lutz & White, 1986). For example, whereas in Western cultures, emotion
words are used to label internal feeling states and are communicated as such in everyday
language, emotion words used among Oceanic peoples (e.g., the Samoans, the Pintupi
Aborigines, and the A’ra speakers of the Solomon Islands) are seen to be more of representing
the relationships between the person and event involving another person (Lutz, 1982).

The association between cultural meaning and characterizations of human problems can take
different modes. Culture can give emphasis to a particular aspect of the problem. The Japanese,
according to Lutz & White (1986), would focus on the audience for errors, while the Ilongot
youth is more likely to focus on his inadequacy as a challenge to be overcome. The Americans,
on the other hand, would focus on what the error says about one’s character. Lutz & White go
on to point out that culture can also influence the nature of the problem as it is encountered in
 Negative Social Emotions 2

everyday life. Cultural meaning systems are said to present social relationship problems and
existential dilemmas in a number of emotional idioms. Some of these problems and dilemmas
include the other person’s violation of the ego’s expectations, the other’s or the ego’s own
violation of the cultural codes, the awareness of danger to one’s physical and psychological self
and significant others, or the actual or threatened loss of relationships that are significant to the
ego.

The emotion of anger, like fear, can therefore no longer be considered a universal category of
nature. This means that the equivalents of the English word “anger” in other languages do not
have the same meaning and do not share the same cognitive scenarios that are associated with the
English term anger (Wierzbicka, 1995). Wierzbicka (1993) points out, for example, that
analyses on the Ilongot concept of liget, the Ifaluk concept of song, the Pitjantjatjara concept of
pika, and the Polish concept of gniew have stressed the importance of cultural meaning systems
in emotional experience and have challenged the basic dichotomy of reason vs. emotion, culture
vs. personality, and public vs. private that predominate theoretical language on emotions (Lutz &
White, 1986).

Situating emotion in the world of cultural values and theories has become possible through the
emphasis on the self in research on culture exemplified in the works of Michelle Rosaldo and
Clifford Geertz in the 1980s. Both Rosaldo and Geertz took emotion out of the psychobiological
realm and made it accessible for anthropological analysis (Lyon, 1995). Concepts of emotion
began to be viewed as a form of language of the self, that is, as codes for statements about the
person’s intentions, actions and social relations (Lutz & White, 1986). Emotions likewise play
the role of forming the person’s relations with the world, and are therefore used as codes for
defining and negotiating social relations of the self within a moral order (Lutz & White, 1986).
Now studied in terms of their implications to the construction of self in a particular cultural
context, the interest in emotions took on a social constructionist frame (Lyon, 1995). Emotions
may now be construed as part of psychological life both produced by culture and subject to
cultural influence (Lyon, 1995).

Another trend that led to the view of emotions as codes was the rise of cognition-dependent
theories in anthropology, psychology, and philosophy in the 1980s. These theories resulted to
the emphasis on cognitive processes in emotional experience, i.e., by defining them in terms of
appraisals or judgments about social situations and as an aspect of cultural meaning (Goddard,
1991; Leavitt, 1996). The view to emotion as cognition led to an increased recognition of the
role of the sociocultural context (Goddard, 1991). According to Goddard, this theoretical
development in the study of emotions culminated in explanations which allowed the view to
emotions as “socioculturally constructed.” Emotion concepts are thus studied as culture-specific
constructions that embody shared understandings of human nature and social interactions which
now allow individuals to make sense of other’s actions.

The present research seeks to explore the understandings of human nature and social interactions
embedded in the Filipino cultural representations of negative social emotions, such as anger.
The exploration will involve determining the dimensions of these emotions through a clustering
technique, as well as investigating the patterns (i.e., focal events, appraisals, action tendencies
 Negative Social Emotions 3

and regulation) that characterize the experience of the negative social emotions within each
dimension.

The Social Constructionist Approach to the Study of Emotion

Clifford Geertz’s claim that emotions, like ideas, are “cultural artifacts,” conveying sociocultural
messages, ushered in an approach that allowed the study of emotions from the cultural
perspective (Goddard, 1991; Leavitt, 1996). Emotion concepts were seen as culture-specific
constructions of how people should interpret their actions and the actions of others within a
social context as these embody the understandings shared by a group about human nature and
social interactions. According to Leavitt (1996), the social constructionist approach allowed for
the interpretation of emotions as cultural categories, or as constituting another cultural domain.
Interpretation was made possible by investigating emotional experience within the social
situations which were expected to produce them. Emotions were then viewed as complex
phenomena that are “socially and symbolically produced, expressed, and felt” (Leavitt, 1996, p.
532). To justify their argument about social norms as determinants of emotion, social
constructionists point to the differences in emotional expression in different cultures, as well as
to the existence of normative rules in situations that involve feelings and emotions (Kemper,
1981). Support for the social constructionist argument was also found in research that report
variations in the reports of emotional experiences in some cultures (Kemper, 1981).

Using the symbolic interactionist model as a starting point, social constructionists suggest that
emotional experience is preceded by the actor’s definition of a situation, and generally reject,
with this position, the importance of the physiological bases for emotional experience and
suppose that emotions are largely determined by social norms (Kemper, 1981). Social
constructionists also take the Vygotskian perspective by positing that emotions do not arise in
private states but in contexts of social interaction (Myers, 1988). Emotions thus represent the
forms of relationships between the person and the actions or events in his or her world. Myers
(1988) points out that by taking the Vygotskian position, social constructionists gave emphasis
on the total construction of the self, thus avoiding the issue of universals.

The assumptions held by social constructionists about the nature of emotions are not without
their limitations. To begin with, subsuming emotions under the culturally constructed concept of
person produces a kind of circularity and puts constraints in our ability to determine the bases of
emotions (Lyon, 1995). Further, Leavitt (1996) contends that to lose the feeling side of the
phenomenon and to reduce emotion as a kind of meaning will not permit a complete
understanding of emotion because the experience and expression of emotion do not always take
place in explicit categories (Leavitt cites the arguments of Crapanzano in 1992 and Levy in
1984). The constructionist account has thus equated the social with the cognitive and the
conceptual as opposed to the bodily and felt (Leavitt, 1996). The debate is largely about whether
emotions have a physiological base that will allow cross-language and cross-cultural
comparisons or whether emotions are entirely socially constructed. Psychologists, who argue
that emotions serve a biological function and are therefore evolutionary inherited, tend to favor
the first position (Bender, Spada, Seitz, Swoboda & Traber, 2007). Bender & her associates also
contend that those who take this position argue that there are universally identifiable emotional
expressions and are interested in determining the links that appears between action and
 Negative Social Emotions 4

physiological changes when a person is confronted with a specific event. Another limitation of
the social constructionist approach is found in its failure to explain how actors define situations
before emotions are experienced. Social constructionists maintain that social and cultural norms
determine what emotions would be appropriate for a certain situation, and that individuals
experience emotions after they have interpreted and defined a situation. Unfortunately, social
constructionists provide little insight on how situations are defined for specific emotions and
have not provided a framework to predict emotions (Kemper, 1981). Kemper points out that the
social constructionist approach leaves us with unanswered questions: Is there a way to define
situations that would make emotions predictable? Can we identify a set of categories for defining
situations that can be linked with emotions? These tools are now being offered to us through an
integration of the conceptual and the felt, specifically through the componential theory of
emotions.

Integration of Perspectives for a Cultural Study of Emotions

Scholars interested in the culture and emotions are now in general agreement that physiological
processes do indeed vary for different emotions and that this fact does not negate the possibility
of explaining emotions from a cultural perspective. Kemper, for example, argues that
perspectives that view emotion in terms of social stimulus need not be inconsistent to
perspectives that regard emotion as physiological processes. These views may be related in a
lock-and-key fashion: “particular social stimulus keys fit particular physiological locks to
produce particular emotions” (Kemper, 1981, p. 338). Moreover, a convergence has also
occurred between the socio-cultural and psychodynamic approaches to emotion. This integration
of perspectives adopts a view to emotions that both emerge from bodily sensations and are
mapped out by culture (Leavitt, 1996). Individuals are therefore seen as essentially human
bodies that exist in groups and are in interaction. According to Leavitt (1996):

A model of emotions that takes their complexity as everyday concepts seriously

would see them as experiences that we recognize as involving both cultural
meaning and bodily feeling. While they are subjectively felt and interpreted, it is
socialized human beings – that is, thinking human bodies – who are feeling them
in specific social contexts. This means that they are socially and symbolically
produced, expressed, and felt. (p. 531-532)

Bender and her associates, in their research comparing the emotion of anger among the
peoples of Tonga and Germany, used such an approach that integrates both evolutionary
and social aspects of emotion. Deriving their approach from appraisal theories, these
researchers regard the cognitive processes underlying emotions as universal, while
positing that the conceptual content on which these processes operate are culture-specific.
Through their approach, they contend that they are able to determine when and why
emotions are elicited in specific situations.

The integration between the socio-cultural and the psychodynamic-biological is likewise

achieved through a functionalist approach. This approach views emotions as a cluster of
processes that consist of “an assortment of socially shared and collectively enacted
scripts, which are made up of physiological, subjective, and behavioral components, but
 Negative Social Emotions 5

which are also embedded in and, further, importantly constituting the immediate
sociocultural, semiotically constituted environment” (Kitayama & Masuda, 1995, p. 219).
Kitayama & Masuda claim that internal components are “configured” through
sociocultural processes in the individual’s development to form emotions. They further
maintain that there exists a “fit” between the cultural environment the person finds
himself/herself in and his or her intramental organization of emotion. Intramental
emotion processes may differ according to ecological conditions and prototypic models
of social relationships.

The functionalist view as explained by Kitayama & Masuda further demonstrates that the
integration between the individual vs. the cultural, the internal vs. the external dimensions of
experience is possible and can be achieved through emotion scripts:

… emotion can function as an interpretive schema or script that locates internal

sensations within a dynamically changing pattern of interaction with the social
and nonsocial environment. That is, emotion scripts may be applicable, on the
one hand, to internal sensations and bodily experience and, on the other hand, to
the external realities in which the internal processes are embedded. These scripts
will integrate the internal sensations with the external realities to simultaneously
yield both a “deeply felt” and “moving” perception of the external realities and a
personally and socially meaningful construal of the internal sensations. (p.221)

An integrated cultural view to emotion made possible through a functionalist perspective defines
emotion as constructed through cultural practice, or what Kitayama & Masuda claim to be the
“collective habit of interpersonal coordination” of communicating in emotion scripts (p. 222).
These authors further assert that

Through this collective practice, these scripts are made personally and
individually available for use in perceiving and interpreting one’s own internal
bodily sensations. Once this is established in the social domain, the emotional
experience can become private: One can “simulate” the same sort of scripts in
private without having any inducement of these ideas by others around. (p. 222)

In the Kitayama & Masuda’s discussion of emotional scripts as the focus of study of emotions,
both the Vygotskian and symbolic interactionism perspectives in the development of social
constructionist thought are preserved. Individuals experience feelings as elicited by external
stimulus, and are able to interpret these feelings through the meaning systems about the self,
human nature, and relationships made available in culture

What Bender and her colleagues would call “central cognitive processes,” and what Kitayama &
Masuda have identified as an interpretative schema or script for emotional experience are
incorporated in what Mesquita & Frijda (1992) call an emotion sequence which is made up of an
event, its appraisal, the components of the emotional response/bodily state (e.g., physiological
changes and feeling states), an action tendency, and an actual behavior. The central aspect of
this sequence is a universal cognitive process which links the appraisal with the person’s bodily
state and his or her action tendency. Both bodily states and action tendencies are regarded as
 Negative Social Emotions 6

spontaneous and automatic, while the appraisal or event coding, as well as the actual behavior
(i.e., the emotion as expressed or regulated) may be influenced by culture (Bender et al., 2007).
Bender and her associates explain how culture comes into play in emotional experience: Social
context determine which events will occur and give rise to certain type of emotions. How events
will be coded or appraised will be dependent on the values and norms of a given culture. How
expression of emotion will be exhibited will be determined by social display rules. Emotions are
therefore not automatic responses to events, but can be elicited and differentiated by the
cognitive appraisal of an event, such that an event appraised in the same way should lead to
similar emotions; events appraised in different ways will lead to the experience of different
emotions (Bender et al., 2007).

Mesquita & Frijda (1992) presents a cognitive model of emotion, where appraisal becomes a
central process. According to these authors, the model consists of the seven components: an
antecedent event, event coding, appraisal, physiological reaction patterns, action readiness,
emotional behavior, and regulation. Antecedent events refer to the range of events that are said
to be emotionally sensitive to. Cross-cultural differences in terms of antecedent events for a
given emotion may be dependent on what events members of a group are most exposed to and
are thus more sensitive to within a given time period. Event coding refers to the process of
categorization in which the person recognizes concerns inherent in a specific event. The event is
thus coded through event type schemata. These schemata correspond to the culturally
recognized issues of concern. These schemata also contain social perspectives and moral values
that now come into play in the process of appraisal. Cross-cultural variation may be a result of
culture-specific beliefs about which objects and situations, as well as expectations members of a
group have about specific situations, for example, differences in cultural conceptions and
expectations about relationships and their threats. According to Mesquita & Frijda, differences
in event coding may also be determined by the focality of particular issues found in a particular
event or situation. According to the authors:

Focal events types may also be expected to be highly available. This implies,
first, that focal events never remain unnoticed to the individual or his or her
environment. When they do occur, the individual can hardly escape from being
emotionally affected. It also implies that many events are recognized as instances
of the focal event type. (p.184)

An example of a focal event would be the danger of losing one’s dignity or honor, and
emotions that are related to shame are thus most likely elicited by these events. When a
situation is less defined and is not consistently categorized as one that elicits a particular
emotion, like anger, then anger will not be easily recognized and becomes a “less visible”
emotion in the given situation. According to Mesquita & Frijda,

The high availability of focal event types does not necessarily affect their
frequency. Occasionally, focal events are so aversive that their anticipation
arouses active avoidance behavior. Even mildly relevant situations may be
recognized as instances of the focal event type and signal the possibility of the
most central issues of concern, which may give rise to their avoidance. (p. 185)
 Negative Social Emotions 7

In the third component of appraisal, the events that were coded are now appraised in terms of
their implications to the person’s well-being and capacities to cope with the event. Appraisal
involves checking the event in terms of the following dimensions: valence, blameworthiness,
outcome uncertainty, controllability, or malleability. Cultural differences may occur in the ways
by which groups appraise situations in a particular way, i.e., in the differential availability of the
appraisal dimensions (e.g., in the attribution of blame). Cultural differences in appraisal may
also occur in the processes of regulation that may inhibit undesirable appraisals. Cultural
differences that may likewise be found in the events that elicit emotions can be consequences of
the differences in appraisal propensities. For example, there may be some cultures where the
propensity to interpret unfamiliar situations as sources of danger would be prominent, or there
may be prominent appraisal pattern of viewing negative events as modifiable or controllable.
According to Mesquita & Frijda, the noticeable presence or absence of a given type of emotion
in a group may be a result of an enhanced or diminished appraisal propensity in that given group.
Solomon (1978 in Mesquita & Frijda, 1992), for example, discusses that the low incidence of
anger among the Utku may be a result of the reluctance to blame another person for a negative
event. Negative events are instead tolerated and not struggled against. To aggress against the
other because of anger can enhance the unpleasantness of the experience. Within situations that
elicit anger, the person then adopts the attitude of resignation and acceptance. Levy (1993 in
Mesquita & Frijda, 1992) made a similar observation among Tahitians. The appraisal process
that is adopted by these people allows them to view negative events as modifiable, controllable
and not unduly affecting personal concerns. Levy further observed that there is an observed
emphasis on the substitutability of goals and desired objects, which may explain the relative
absence of anger among the Tahitians. Mesquita & Frijda contend that cultural differences in
appraisal can be due to a process of re-appraisal, that is events are appraised no longer in terms
of the nature of those events but on the basis of reducing pain and increasing acceptability for the
person. Reappraisal may also involve emphasizing an aspect of the event and neglecting others.

The fourth component of the cognitive model of emotions consists of physiological reaction
patterns which pertain to the person’s awareness and expectation of physiological changes that
are associated with the emotional experience. Action readiness, which forms the fifth
component of the cognitive model to emotion, includes the action tendencies that serve to
establish or disrupt one’s relationship with an object. Action tendencies may be inferred from
the intent of behaviors or sequence of behaviors (e.g., approaching, avoiding, etc.). The sixth
component of the model consists of emotional or overt behaviors that result from the action
tendencies. Lastly, the component of regulation refers to the capacity of the person to control or
to enhance an emotional expression which is determined by individual experiences and by socio-
cultural norms about the expression of various emotions. Differences and similarities in the
patterns that emerge from these seven components are said to determine differences and
similarities in emotional experiences.

The complex that results from the interplay of the above-mentioned components of emotion is
represented in the labels given by members of a culture for a particular experience. These are
what Mesquita & Frijda call the cultural representation of emotional events. According to
Mesquita & Frijda, emotion concepts
 Negative Social Emotions 8

…generally involve cultural evaluations. Labeling emotions would imply relating

them to culturally shared concepts or meanings; the process is assumed to be
similar to that of event coding. Recognizing an experience as an instance of some
emotion concept may determine the degree to which the experience is viewed as
manageable, and it may prescribe particular behaviors or elicit expectations about
forthcoming behavior. Attribution of some emotion concept may also lead to
regulation of, for instance, the emotion recognized is not favorable or socially
desirable. (p.201)

Mesquita (2001) presents how the components in emotional experience may differ between
collectivist and individualist cultures. These key differences are again shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Key differences between individualist and collectivist emotions

Components of emotions
Concerns
Appraisal
Source of appraisal
Action readiness
Nature of shared emotions Social sharing involves
Emotions as meanings
Source: Mesquita, 2001, p. 69
Collectivist emotions Individualist emotions
One’s own social worth and Focus on personal concerns
the worth of the in-group only
Attention to the impact of Less focus on the impact on
other people’s behavior on relative social position
relative social positions
(intentionality)
The meaning of situations Awareness of the
appears as given (obvious) subjectivity of emotional
appraisals
Focus on relationships and Focus on bounded self and
therefore more action therefore less action
readiness readiness
Social sharing involves the
ensuring that others share in sharing of information.
the concern and believe
accordingly
Emotions signal changes of Emotions signal internal,
reality: changes of beliefs subjective feelings: few
about self, others, and the implications for beliefs.
relationship between self
and others.

According to Mesquita, the issues focused on in emotional experience in collective cultures are
mainly those that deal with the relationships with others. Perceived changes in these
relationships, e.g., changes in social worth, are associated with emotions. Emotion situations are
appraised in terms of the capacity of the self or the other to control the situation so that changes
in relationships can be brought to a desired state. Mesquita emphasizes that collectivist
emotions are relational phenomena and reveal the state of relationships. Emotions represent an
objective reality for members of collectivist cultures rather than the inner world of an individual,
as is the case among members of individualist cultures. Therefore, among members of
collectivist cultures, emotions are events likely to be defined by public, contextually furnished
criteria, rather than by the subjective sense of being affected by a given situation (cf., Myers,
 Negative Social Emotions 9

1988). We would expect a member of a collectivist culture to talk about emotions in terms of the
context which formed the emotional experience, rather than the subjective feelings that are
experienced and associated with the emotion.

Culture and Anger

As a focal emotion, anger has been frequently studied due to the possibility of discovering the
plurality of meanings across cultural groups. Bender and her associates (2007) contend that
studies on anger from a cultural perspective basically agree that the emotion of anger is a
response to an event that is appraised to have a negative or an unpleasant outcome. Cultural
variation in the notion of anger, as the studies describe below demonstrate, would be based on
the differing notions of personal identity within the system of social relations.

Myers (1988), in his ethnographic study on anger among the Pintupi Aborigines in the Australian
Western desert, showed that the Pintupi anger signified a negative evaluation of a person’s social
state. For the Pintupi, being angry was not bad in itself, but the emotion carried with it a
realization of social rejection. The Pintupi understanding of emotions is based on the
significance held in their culture for shared identity. Consequently, they tend to evaluate actions
in terms of this notion of shared identity. People get angry when they interpret the rejection by
another to signify a denial of shared identity, or sympathy or compassion. A person will get
angry when s/he is refused a request or is not supported in times of need. This rejection signifies
an unwillingness on the part of the other to recognize their relationship. This led Myers to
contend that the Pintupi concepts of emotion are internally structured in terms of relationships
with others, rather than simply referring to an internal state. Their notion of anger is embedded
in a concern of having to complete themselves through identity with others. According to
Myers, the Pintupi anger is an expression of a frustration of one’s need and right to shared
identity. In contrast to the Pintupi, Myers (1988) cites the work of Lutz on the concept of
“justifiable anger” or song among the Ifaluk. To become justifiably angry is to react to instances
that threaten a moral order. Anger that is associated with an overarching order is morally
justified. Otherwise, to be angry because of personal slights would be untenable.

The study by Bender, Spada, Seitz, Swoboda & Traber (2007) comparing the German and
Tongan notions of anger demonstrated that variations in notions are fundamentally based on the
impact the expression of the emotion has on the relations with others. German participants in the
study reported that the showing of anger may be necessary in certain situations to achieve one’s
goal. Expressing anger is a form of giving feedback to another who has behaved annoyingly and
this serves as an efficient strategy to change the other person’s behavior. Displaying anger is
acceptable and is not seen as shameful. This is contrasted to the Tongan evaluation of anger
expressions. Among the Tongans, anger is a socially disruptive emotion. It is evaluated as
negative and is socially disapproved.

These differing notions of anger can therefore stem from variations in the nature of threat that is
appraised in specific events. Members of some cultures, like the Ifaluk, can become angry when
the nature of threat is the danger to the moral order that keeps the group together. Whereas for
the Pintupi, anger emerges when social relations are threatened. Variations in the understanding
of anger may also be shaped by the norms associated with its expression or regulation. The
 Negative Social Emotions 10

regulation of anger is related to how norms of social interaction and personal identity in these
interactions influence the acceptability of expression. In cultures where forms of expression are
regarded as acceptable or “justifiable” in so far as they conform to the values and norms of social
relations, the enhancement of the emotional experience and expression may be discerned.
Members of different cultures may view events that elicit anger in terms of a variation of issues
(e.g., violations of moral order, rejection of social relatedness, disruptions of one’s state of
equilibrium, or hindrances to one’s personal goals). Events may also be appraised differently in
terms of responsibility and causation. These issues and processes of appraisal, which form the
representations for emotional events in various cultures, will influence the regulation and form of
emotional expression.

Hypercognized Emotion of Anger and Filipino Social Interaction

Differences between universal models and culture-specific understandings of emotion suggest

that some emotions may be muted or amplified in a person’s awareness (Lutz & White, 1986).
Levy came up with the terms “hypocognized” and “hypercognized” emotions to refer to the
tendencies in some cultures to mute or elaborate conscious recognition of particular emotions (in
Lutz & White, 1986). Lutz and White (1986) claim that if emotions signify statements about a
person’s relationship with the world and if particular problems are often encountered in this
relationship, the most common emotions can be seen as markers of the tension most often
experienced by the person in relationships. Wierzbicka (2003), for example, illustrates this by
pointing out the differences in Latin and Greek for the emotion of love. Latin has one single
word for love, but the Greek has several terms. Wierzbicka contends that the plurality of terms in
Greek for love does not signify that in the Greek culture there are subtypes corresponding to the
emotional category of love. She argues that these terms refer to distinct types of experience.

An examination of emotion words in a Filipino-Filipino dictionary shows that there are a total of
34 negative emotions compared to 15 positive emotions that can be experienced with and for
another. This may suggest that negative social emotions are “hypercognized” emotions in the
Filipino culture, suggesting further that tensions that are felt by the Filipino in his or her social
world are more elaborated and enhanced than are other types of emotions. The study of emotion
words that denote these tensions may pave the way to a greater understanding of the
ethnotheories Filipinos have about the nature of self and the nature of social relations.

The nature of the modes of the Filipino social interaction has been the focus of the late Dr.
Virgilio Enriquez in many of his writings on Filipino indigenous psychology (cf. Enriquez, 1978;
Enriquez, 1994). Enriquez identified conceptual distinctions among several modes of Filipino
interaction. According to him, these modes range from “uninvolved civility” (pakikitungo) to a
total sense of identification with the other (pakiki-isa). Behaviorally, these levels can be further
categorized in terms of relating as an outsider (ibang-tao) and of relating with an insider (hindi
ibang-tao). The concept that unites both insider and outsider categories is that of kapwa, which
Enriquez defines to be “a recognition of shared identities´(Enriquez, 1976, p. 103). Enriquez
further points out that the concept of kapwa contains both the ideas of interaction
(pagtutunguhan) and value or conviction (paninidigan). Enriquez maintains that value or
conviction is attached to one’s feelings to the other so that hypocrisy is avoided in a relationship.
The relationship is thus characterized by kapwa, or being-one-with-the-other. An absence of
kapwa is viewed by the Filipino as a most negative state a person can have:
 Negative Social Emotions 11

Pakikipagkapwa is much deeper and profound in its implications. It also means

accepting and dealing with the other person as an equal. The company president
and the clerk in an office may not have an equivalent role, status, or income but
the Filipino way demands and implements the idea that they treat one another as
fellow human beings (kapwa-tao). This earns a regard for the dignity and being of
others.

Aside from the socio-psychological dimension, pakikipagkapwa has a moral and

normative aspect as a value and paninidigan (conviction). Situations change and
relations vary according to environment. For example, pakikpagkapwa is
definitely inconsistent with exploitative human transactions. Giving the Filipino a
bad deal is a challenge to kapwa (-tao). (Enriquez, 1977 in Enriquez, 1978, pp.
106-107)

Covar (1998) and Salazar (1991, 1999) extended Enriquez’s theory on Filipino social relations
with their concepts of kapatiran/pamayanan (community) and sambayanan/bayan (nation).
Covar stressed the importance of studying the prevailing structures of Filipino society that shape
Filipino social relations. These structures found in Filipino households (sambahayan) and
communities (pamayanan), according to Covar, should frame subsequent analyses of Filipino
society. Salazar, on his part, directed our attention to the “great cultural divide” existing in
Filipino society and culture. He pointed out the existence of two cultures existing in Filipino
society, the culture of the elite, who predominantly speak in the colonial language, and the
culture of the masses, whose discourse is in Pilipino. The elite, according to Salazar, form 5-
10% of the Filipino population, while the masses form the greater portion of the population. The
culture of those who make up the greater portion of the population constitutes the nation (bayan).
The split in these cultures within Filipino society has contributed, according to Salazar, to the
split that exists in consciousness and action of the Filipino. A direction towards a unified nation
can be initiated by dissolving this split, that is, by focusing on bayan as representing Filipino
consciousness. Aquino (1999) attempted an integration of these three perspectives from these
leading scholars in Filipino society and culture. According to Aquino, the relations that
characterize kapwa are rooted in the self and is first expressed or manifested within familial
relationships (i.e., Covar’s sambahayan). After relational activities are strengthened within the
family, these extend to communal relations and activities (i.e., Covar’s pamayanan) until these
reach the level of nationhood (i.e., Covar’s sambyanan and Salazar’s bayan). At this level of
nationhood, the various forms of social relations (i.e., kapwa, pamayanan, bayan) co-exist to
actualize the dissolution of the great divide between cultures that Salazar claims to be existing in
Filipino society and culture. The dissolution of the split will bring us to a deeper understanding
of Filipino consciousness as expressed in Filipino social relationships.

A study of Filipino emotion, especially those emotions that signal tensions in social
relationships, should enable us to examine the values and norms that shape interactions and
personhood at each level of social relations. Specifically, the present study seeks to determine
how negative social emotion words in the Filipino language are clustered and to determine the
substantive nature of these clusters through an investigation of the patterns of emotional
experience that characterize each cluster.
 Negative Social Emotions 12

Determining patterns of emotional experience in the dimensions of Filipino negative social

emotions: Method and Findings

The present study consists of two phases. The first phase involved the conduct of a
multidimensional scaling procedure to determine dimensions of negative social emotions. In this
first phase, participants were 200 college students ages 16 to 21 studying in two different
universities in Manila. A survey was conducted to determine the distances of 15 negative social
emotion words: asar, buwisit, galit, inggit, inis, muhi, ngitngit, pikon, poot, sama ng loob, selos,
suklam, suya, tampo, and yamot. The list of these emotion words was drawn from a dictionary
and judgments from three faculty members of the Filipino Department were taken as to which
emotion words in Filipino were most common and most indicative of the existence of a negative
affect towards another person. The survey questionnaire was composed of 105 items where each
of these emotions was paired with each other. In each pair of negative emotion words, the
respondent was to judge the similarity or dissimilarity in meanings through a semantic
differential scale ranging from 1 (very similar) to 10 (very dissimilar). Before administering the
questionnaire, the participants in their classes were asked to read a consent form and affix their
signatures if they agree to participate in the study. The respondents were instructed to judge the
similarity and dissimilarity of each pair of negative emotions and shade the corresponding
number reflecting their judgment. Students who did not understand at least one Filipino emotion
word were not included as respondents. The respondents answered the scale from 40 to 50
minutes. After answering the survey, they were debriefed about the purpose of the study.

The internal consistency of the items using Cronbach’s alpha is .98 indicating high internal
consistency of the 105 items. Principal Components Analysis of the 105 items was conducted
and 15 factors can be extracted with eigenvalues all greater than 1. The principal components
indicate that the items highly correlate with each other under 15 subsets. An overall mean of 5.71
and a standard deviation of 2.58 were obtained for the 200 sample in the study. Given a 10-point
scale in the questionnaire a mean of 5.71 indicates that the judgments tend to fall along the
middle of the scale.

Multidimensional scaling technique enables a researcher to show the proximities between the
factors under study. This proximity quantifies the degree to which the factors are alike
(Davidson, 1992). The factors that will cluster closely are the ones that have most likely the same
nature. In this procedure the factors asar, buwisit, galit, inggit, inis, muhi, ngitngit, pikon, poot,
sama ng loob, selos, suklam, suya, tampo, and yamot were investigated to determine how close
or far (similar or dissimilar) they were from one another. To measure the psychological distance
of each pair of negative emotion words, the average of the perceived distance is obtained and
converted into Euclidian distances. The factors that clustered are then visualized in a two-
dimensional plane. The stress level is reported to determine the goodness of fit of the data into
the plotted dimensions. A stress level close to zero indicates that the data fits as two or three
dimensions. The final configurations of each negative emotion for one dimension, two
dimensions, and three dimensions are reported in order to determine which dimension would be
best to view the distances. A shephard plot for a two-dimension and three-dimension
configurations is also used to determine which points will be closer to the step line.
 Negative Social Emotions 13

The stress level, final configuration, and Shephard Plot for both two dimensions and three
dimensions were compared to decide which dimension to interpret the distances. The stress level
for a three-dimension configuration is .18, while the stress level was .19 for a two-dimension
configuration, although the data is best interpreted using a two-dimensional plane because of its
clarity and there is only a slight difference in the stress levels. The stress levels indicate that the
data has only a moderate goodness of fit for both two and three dimensional plane. The shephard
plot for each dimension has only a slight difference where the slope in a two-dimensional plane
has a smoother steepness (see Figure 1 and 2).

Figure 1

Shepard Plot for a Two-Dimensional Plane

Shepard Diagram
Distances and D-Hats vs. Data
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
Distances/D-Hats

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
Data
 Negative Social Emotions 14

Figure 2

Shephard Plot for a Three-dimensional Plane

Shepard Diagram
Distances and D-Hats vs. Data
2.6

2.4

2.2

2.0

1.8
Distances/D-Hats

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
Data

The distances among the 15 negative emotions are interpreted in a two-dimensional graph across
dimension 2 and dimension 3 planes. Four clusters of negative emotions are formed using a two
dimensional graph. Each cluster is within a quadrant of a coordinate plane (see Figure 3). The
division is designated by a value of “0” for both x and y axis. The points of each negative
emotion are coordinates in the dimension 2 and dimension 3 of the graph.
 Negative Social Emotions 15

Figure 3
Distances of the 15 Negative Emotions in a Two-dimensional Graph

Scatterplot 2D
Final Configuration, dimension 2 vs. dimension 3
1.4
GALIT
1.2
Quadrant 2 Quadrant 1
1.0

0.8
ASAR
0.6 BUWISIT INGGIT TAMPO
0.4
Dimension 3

0.2 SUYA YAMOT

0.0 POOT
NGITNGIT
SUKLAM
-0.2

-0.4 SELOS INIS

MUHI
-0.6
PIKON SAMANGLOOB
-0.8
Quadrant 3 Quadrant 4
-1.0
-1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Dimension 2

In the first quadrant, inggit, tampo, and yamot are formed; in the second quadrant, galit, asar,
buwisit, and suya are formed; in the third quadrant, ngitngit, poot, muhi and pikon are formed,
and; in the fourth quadrant selos, suklam, sama ng loob, and inis are formed. The pattern shows
that when the negative emotions are interpreted on the y-axis, the intensity of the negative
emotions is characterized where galit and pikon are the extremes. Across the x-axis, the negative
emotions are characterized according to the direction from person to event in their attribution
where ngitngit and inis are extremes.

The negative emotions in the quadrant 4 is characterized by high intensity toward another
person, quadrant 3 is characterized by high intensity towards an event or non-person entity,
quadrant 1 is characterized by low intensity towards another person, and quadrant 2 is
characterized by low intensity towards an event or non-person entity. The diagram below shows
the dimensions as these emerged from the multidimensional scaling procedure:
 Negative Social Emotions 16

Diagram 1: Dimensions of Negative Social emotions

HIGH INTESITY

Selos, sama ng Pikon, muhi,

loob, suklam, poot, ngitngit
inis

PERSON/ NON-PERSON/
INGROUP Yamot, tampo Suya, buwisit, OUTGROUP
inggit asar, galit

LOW INTENSITY

The second phase of the study aimed to explore the patterns of emotional experience in each
emotion dimension through the use of the componential frame of analysis. Specifically, the
researchers sought to obtain answers to the following questions: 1) what issues of concern are
raised in situations when emotions in each dimension are experienced, 2) what appraisals in
terms of blameworthiness and controllability are undertaken by an actor in emotions within each
dimension, and 3) what action tendencies are exhibited by the individual when experiencing the
emotions in each dimension. In this second phase of the study, focus group discussions (FGDs)
were conducted with 18 participants. In the first discussion, there were three participants, in the
second, seven individuals participated in the discussion, and in the third, there were eight
participants. College and graduate students were recruited to participate in the discussions. Each
discussion session lasted for at least an hour.

An FGD guide was constructed to determine: 1) whether the clusters formed in the
multidimensional scaling are consistent with the views of the participants (i.e., the participants’
judgment regarding the similarities of the negative emotions that were clustered through the
MDS) , 2) the nature of situations that lead to the experience of the negative emotions, 3)
possible ways to control the negative emotions. Specifically, the following issues were raised for
discussion during each focus group:

1. Do the emotions in the clusters presented have similar characteristics? What common
characteristics were possessed by emotions in each cluster?
2. Describe an instance or a situation when the emotions (in each cluster) were experienced.
3. Can these situations be avoided? If these can be avoided, how? If these cannot be
avoided, why not?
 Negative Social Emotions 17

4. How are the emotions expressed?

5. Who or what would be responsible for the experience of such emotions?
6. What changes in relationships resulted from these emotions?

The discussions in the focus group were recorded and the pertinent answers to the questions were
extracted and content analyzed. The analysis was conducted to determine how the responses
from the FGDs answered the following questions: 1) What types of focal events emerged from
the descriptions of emotion situations for each cluster, 2) What appraisal processes were
involved in the emotion situations for each cluster, i.e., blameworthiness and controllability, 3)
what were the behaviors towards the other resulting from the felt emotion, and 4) what was the
nature of regulation when emotions were experienced in each cluster. Meaning units from the
discussion transcripts and from notes from the FGD co-facilitator and facilitator that provided
answers to each of the questions for analysis were identified. The meaning units and notes were
then initially clustered. This helped in identifying the categories of responses to each of the
question posed for analysis.

The respondents were all in agreement that the four clusters of emotions presented to them did
not represent similarities in meaning. The re-clustering process brought about three clusters.
These clusters and the respondents’ judgments about how these are different from each other are
presented below:

CLUSTER 1: SUKLAM, MUHI, POOT

These are “deep”, strong, “heavy” emotions, directed at persons. Examples of situations
mentioned by the participants that cause one to feel these emotions are:

• When one watches a TV news item about a father raping his own child
• When one becomes pregnant and the father of the child does not take responsibility for
the child, one would feel poot for the boyfriend
• If your very expensive cellphone is stolen from you, you would feel these emotions for
the thief.

These and other situations narrated by the participants are situations were someone, who is not
necessarily an acquaintance or is related to the actor, commits an immoral act or an unethical
behavior. The other person, the actor of the immoral act, is to blame for the emotion. The
individual usually has no control of these emotions. At times, one cannot avoid feeling these
emotions: “Hindi pinipigil ang poot.” [One does not control poot]. At times, one can just simply
ignore the emotion: “Huwag mong dibdibin, Pasok mo dito, labas dito.” [Do not take it
seriously. Let is pass into one ear and out the other.] When one cannot control the emotion, one
expresses one’s distress through crying, by being quiet, or by being violent to the other. When
one chooses to ignore, one just makes fun of it. However, one cannot avoid feeling these
emotions. These emotions may disappear as time passes, but the relationship with someone one
felt any of these emotions for will definitely change. The closeness one feels for the other will
no longer be there. It will not be easy to revive old ways of relating with the other. The negative
feelings may be gone, but the relationships have changed.
 Negative Social Emotions 18

CLUSTER 2: SAMA NG LOOB, GALIT, TAMPO

These emotions are temporary, not as intense as those emotions in Cluster 1, and are usually
directed as persons one knows, or is acquainted with. The focal event types found in the
experience of these emotions are those that have to do with other’s violation of the actor’s
expectations, or the inability of the other to fulfill obligations in a relationship:

• “Kapag hindi ka sinipot ng kausap mo.” [When one does not make it for an
appointment],
• “Sabi ng boyfriend ko, magki-quit na siya sa drinking, pero pagna-invite na siya, hindi
naman siya mak-no.” [My boyfriend said that he would quit drinking, but when someone
invites him, he does not say no.]
• ”Mga pamangkin ko pasaway. Sabi ko tama na, ayaw nilang mapapigil.” [My nephews
are disobedient. I asked them to stop, they refused to stop.]
• “Malaman mong may ibang girlfriend ang boyfriend mo. Tapos ite-text ka pa ng
girlfriend.” [You find out that your boyfriend has another girlfriend. And that girlfriend
still texts you.]

These emotions cannot be avoided because others cannot control their behaviors when they
violate expectations or are not able to fulfill obligations. Who is to blame for such emotions?
The one who feels these emotions is to blame. S/he is responsible for having to feel negative
about the other. There is always the possibility that the other did not act maliciously. One has to
consider the intentions of the other before judging his/her actions. Blame can be attributed to the
person experiencing the emotion because he or she can control these emotions if he or she wants
to, largely by reframing judgments about the other’s intention. When the emotion is expressed
with another who already is close to the actor, then relationships are restored or enhanced. If the
emotion is expressed to another who is not close to the actor, there is a created an avoidance
from the other. The behaviors in the relationship may also not change as a result of these
emotions when the actor first controls the expression of these emotions and waits for other
indications from the other party about how he or she values the relationship. In a sense, the actor
gives the other the benefit of the doubt. However, one can indirectly express one’s
disappointment by being quiet, and not relating with the other in the usual warm way. One
carries the emotion within oneself (”Dala-dala mo sa loob mo.´[You carry it within your inner
self.]) without hurting the relationship.

CLUSTER 3: BUWISIT, ASAR, NGITNGIT, YAMOT, PIKON

The emotions in this cluster are temporary, shallow, and are directed at persons, objects, or
situations. As one respondent stated, “Kung malalim na, hindi na pikon, galit ka na.´[If it gets
deeper, it is no longer pikon, you are already experiencing galit.]. The focal event types are
characterized by situations when the other persistently acts in an undesirable way, e.g., going on
with what was perceived to be an erroneous behavior, joking the actor in a persistent and
inappropriate way, insulting the actor in a mild but irritating way, teasing the actor when the
actor is not in the mood, creating a lot of noise when the actor wishes to sleep or to study. The
situation that evoke these emotions may also be events that block or hinder the actor from
achieving his/her short-term goals: when the heavy traffic causes one to be late for class, when
the line to the photo-copy machine becomes too long and causes one to waste one’s time, when
the driver behind the actor’s car honks incessantly. The actor cannot avoid these emotions when
 Negative Social Emotions 19

such situations arise. As one participant remarked: “Hindi na tao yun kung walang ganoong
nararamdaman.” [The person is no longer human if he cannot experience these (emotions)].
However, the person may switch off from these situations to stop him/her from feeling these
irritations. One is responsible for the experience of these emotions as one is more prone to feel
these emotions when one is too sensitive or not in the mood. Therefore, one can choose to go
with the flow and not be affected. Because these emotions are short-lived, they do not result in
changes in one’s relating with the other: “Hindi muna kausapin, palagpasan mo muna.” [Do not
talk with the person yet. Let (the irritation) pass.], “Huwag mong intindihin.” [Do not let it
bother you.]. An immediate reaction when one feels these emotions is silence and the nonverbal
expressions of irritation are usually displayed.

These clusters represent types of emotional experience where there are distinctions in the
experience of personhood, in the levels of relationships, and in the forms of social identification.
Brewer & Chen in 2007 differentiates between two social selves. One the one hand, there is the
relational self which they define to be personalized and which incorporates primarily dyadic
relationships. On the other hand, there is the collective self which involves depersonalized
relationships within one’s group. It is evident that the person need not have personal
relationships with the other to experience negative emotions toward the other. Indeed, the
emotions of muhi, poot, and suklam may be felt when the moral order of the collective is
violated. Moreover, the experience of self in this level of relationship corresponds to Enriquez’s
description of kapwa psychology. It may be recalled Enriquez describes kapwa to be where
there is a recognition of shared identity in one’s relations with an outsider (ibang tao) and an
insider (hindi ibang tao). In kapwa, there is the demand to treat one another as fellow human
beings. With the construct is implied both moral and normative values that a person must adhere
to in his or her relations with others. Enriquez further mentions that kapwa is inconsistent with
human transactions judged to be exploitative. Therefore, the emotions in Cluster 1 involve a
level of relations characterized by kapwa, and the social self can be characterized as collective,
that is, directed at relationships one has within one’s symbolic group.

On the other hand, the notion of the self embodied in the experience of emotions in Cluster 2
may be said to relational since the emotions of sama ng loob, galit, and tampo are felt in
situations when relational expectations and obligations are not fulfilled. Tensions arise within
the individual when the network of relationships characterized by a system of expectations and
obligations is threatened. These tensions that make up the emotions in Cluster 2 are not as
intense as those that characterize Cluster 1 emotions. It may be hypothesized that the tensions
are experienced more intensely by the person with Cluster 1 emotions because attribution of
blame is placed on the other and this might contribute to the reduced ability of the person to
control the emotions. Cluster 2 emotions, on the other hand, are experienced with less intensity
because during the process of appraisal blame is on the person who experiences the emotions.
The control and regulation of emotions are necessary for the person to monitor the relationship in
these situations of increased tension.

Cluster 3 emotions of buwisit, asar, yamot, inis, and pikon need not be directed at persons.
These emotions may arise in situations which are perceived to hinder the immediate goals of the
person. These emotions are also likely to arise in situations when the other is relating to the
other in an annoying, irritating manner. Therefore, tensions arise when the individual self as a
 Negative Social Emotions 20

separate, unique individual with immediate goals is provoked and threatened. The level of
relationship that is likely to be experienced in these emotions need not be what would be found
in one’s ingroup. The relations of the person with one’s outgroup may be an important element
in the emergence of the emotions in Cluster 3. Table 2 summarizes the pattern of emotional
experience in the three clusters.
Table 2. Patterns of Emotional Experience
EMOTION CLUSTER 1 CLUSTER 2 CLUSTER 3
COMPONENTS Suklam, Muhi, Poot Sama ng Loob, Galit, Buwisit, Asar,
Tampo Ngitngit, Yamot,
Pikon
FOCAL EVENTS The other’s violations The other’s An event or the other
of a moral order and nonfulfillment of posing as a hindrance
exhibition of expectations and to the actor’s
unethical behaviors obligations immediate goals
Actor cannot get into
the flow the pressure
situation.
APPRAISAL The other is to blame The actor is to blame The actor is to blame
The actor can control for feeling the for his or her inability
the emotion by emotion. to get into the flow, to
choosing to ignore the The actor can control be tolerant.
incident the emotion by The actor can control
reframing and the emotion by
suspending judgment ignoring the irritation.
for the other.
ACTION When a relationship Relations do not There is a temporary
TENDENCIES exists with the other, change if the change in relationship
relations change to relationship is close. to the other from
mere civility. Relations can warm to cold.
temporarily change
from warm to cold if
relationship is not
close.
REGULATION The actor controls the The actor controls the The actor controls the
emotion. If the expression of expression of
emotion is too intense, emotion. emotion, but may
distress is commonly display felt irritation
expressed through nonverbally.
crying. Intense
emotionality can also
lead to acts of
violence against the
other.
SELFHOOD AND Collective Self, Relational Self, Independent Self,
LEVEL OF Kapwa relations are Ingroup relations are Outgroup relations are
RELATIONSHIP invoked invoked. invoked.
 Negative Social Emotions 21

General Discussion

Variations in emotional experience are said to be associated with the differences in

models of social relationships (Kitayama & Masuda, 1995). The findings in the present
research reveal possible models of social relationships within the culture shared by
Filipinos. Individuals use these models to make sense of a situation, i.e., these models
serve as appraisal tools in events that produce tension within the individual. The most
significant event type schemata which embody the issues that produce tension in the
individual are those that present a violation of the culture’s moral codes, a disruption of
shared network of obligations and expectations, and a disruption of the individual’s
immediate goals and personal sense of equilibrium.

The process of appraisal within these models of social relationships involves a degree of
control on the part of the individual. Respondents in this research talk about the
modifiability and controllability of emotions, but these capacities do not necessarily end
the emotional experience, i.e., the absence of anger Controlling one’s emotion serve
other purposes, depending on which model of relationship one is engaged in. In social
relationships that are characterized as collective, the person controls emotion by ignoring
the event. By taking the self from the collective or by thinning one’s connection with the
collective, the person successfully erases the tension. The cognitive label to the emotion
remains, but the associated feelings are removed.

When social relationships characterized as relational are threatened, the individual goes
through a process of monitoring the relationship. The monitoring process requires one to
control emotional expression, to reframe the situation by suspending the attribution of
blame to the other, and to assume responsibility for the feelings. This may be a
characteristic appraisal process occurring in collectivistic cultures as described by
Mesquita in 2001. According to Mesquita, members of such cultures appraise emotion
situation in terms of the capacity of the self to control the situation so that a desired state
of relationship with the other is regained. A process of reappraisal becomes an integral
component to patterns of emotional experience. The person transfers the focus of
attention from the violations committed by the other to the relational ties one has with the
other which should be maintained and preserved at all times.

In all of the dimensions of negative social emotions represented by the emotion clusters
in this study, there is a prominent appraisal pattern of viewing negative events as
controllable or modifiable by invoking blame on the self, that is, the self is responsible
for the emotions felt and can thus change the experience of emotion through cognitive
strategies. However, even if expressions of emotions are held back, there is invariably a
change in relating with the other. During the process of control, there is usually a
temporary downplay of one’s warm relations with the other when negative social
emotions are experienced. It is not surprising that a minimized expression of self in
social situations can be indicative, among Filipinos, of a state of negativity or negative
emotionality. The ambiguity of messages that are communicated while the person is
observed to be in this state may likewise be a sign that the self is engaged in a process of
 Negative Social Emotions 22

emotional control. To obtain more definitive answers to issues of control in emotionality,

subsequent studies on Filipino emotions should look deeper into the decoding and display
rules in the expression and control in the types of negative social emotions.

REFERENCES

Aquino, C.C. (1999). Mula sa kinaroroonan: Kapwa, kapatiran, bayan sa agham

panlipunan. U.P., Diliman: CSSP Publications.
Bender, A,, Spada, H. Seitz, S., Swoboda, S. & Traber, S. (2007). Anger and rank in
Tonga and Germany: Cognition, emotion, and context. Ethos, 35(2): 196-235.
Brewer, M. B. & Chen, Y. (2007). Where (Who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward
conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, 114(1): 133-
151.
Covar, P.R. (1998). Larangan: Seminal papers on Philippine Culture. Manila:
Sampaguita Press.
Enriquez, V.G. (1978). Kapwa: A core concept in Filipino social psychology. Philippine
Social Sciences Review, 42(1-4): 100-108.
Enriquez, V.G. (1994). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine
experience. Manila: De la Salle University Press.
Goddard, C. (1991). Anger in the western desert: A case study in the cross-cultural
semantics of emotion, Man, 26(2): 265-279.
Kemper, T.D. (1981). Social constructionist and positivist approaches to the sociology of
emotions. The American Journal of Sociology, 87(2): 336-362.
Kitayama, S. & Masuda, T. (1995). Reappraising cognitive appraisal from a cultural
perspective. Psychological Inquiry, 6(3): 217-223.
Leavitt, J. (1996). Meaning and feeling in the anthropology of emotion. American
Ethnologist, 23(3): 514-539.
Lutz, C. (1982). The domain of emotion words in Ifaluk. American Ethnologist, 4(1):
113-128.
Lutz, C. (1986). Emotion, thought, and estrangement: Emotion as a cultural category,
Current Anthropology, 1(3): 287-309.
Lutz, C. & White, G. (1986). The anthropology of emotion. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 15: 405-436.
Lyon, M.L. (1995). Missing emotion: The limitations of cultural constructionism in the
study of emotion. Cultural Anthropology, 10(2), Anthropologies of the body, pp. 244-263.
Mesquita, B. & Frijda, N. (1992). Cultural variations in emotion: A review.
Psychological Bulletin, 112(2): 179-204.
Mesquita, B. (2001). Emotions in collectivist and individualist contexts. Journalof
Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1): 68-74.
Myers, F.R. (1988). The logic and meaning of anger among Pintupi Aborigines, Man,
New Series, 23(4): 589-610.
Salazar, Z.A. (1991). Pantayong Pananaw bilang diskursong pangkabihasnan In V.V.
Bautista & R. Pe-Pua (Eds.), Pilipinohiya: Kasayayan, Pilosopiya at Pananaliksik [Pilipinohiya:
History, Philosophy, and Research], pp. 46-72. Manila: Kalikasan Press.
 Negative Social Emotions 23

Salazar, Z.A. (1999). Wika ng himagsikan, lengguwahe ng rebolusyon: Mga suliranin ng

pagpapakahulugan sa pagbubuo ng bansa [The language of revolt, the language of revolution:
Problems in meaning in the formation of nationhood]. Bagong Kasaysayan: Mga pag-aaral sa
Kasayasayan ng Pilipinas [New History: Studies in Philippine History] Lathalain Bilang 8 [Issue
no. 8]
Wierzbicka, A. (1993). A conceptual basis for cultural psychology, Ethos, 21(2): 205-
231.
Wierzbicka, A. (1995). The relevance of language to the study of emotion. Psychological
Inquiry, 6(3): 248-252.
Wierzbicka, Q. (2003). Emotion and culture: Arguing with Martha Nussbaum. Ethos,
31(4): 577-621.