Group-based shame, guilt, and regret across cultures.

To date, there has been no systematic examination of cross-cultural differences in group-based shame, guilt, and regret following wrongdoing. Using a community sample (N = 1358), we examined people's reported experiences of shame, guilt, and regret following transgressions by themselves and by different identity groups (i.e., family, community, country) in Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, the Netherlands, Poland, and the United States. We assessed whether any variation in this regard can be explained by the relative endorsement of individualistic or collectivistic values at the individual level and at the country level. Our findings suggest that people's reported experience of these emotions mostly depends on the transgression level. We also observe some variation across individuals and countries, which can be partially explained by the endorsement of collectivistic and individualistic values. The results highlight the importance of taking into account individual and cultural values when studying group-based emotions, as well as the identity groups involved in the transgression.

When Is Humiliation More Intense? The Role of Audience Laughter and Threats to the Self.

In personal accounts, humiliation is often reported as a very intense, painful, negative emotion. We report two scenario studies in which we explored two factors that may contribute to the intense character of humiliation: (1) unwanted, negative public exposure, and (2) a threat to central aspects of one's identity. Study 1 (N = 115) assessed emotional reactions to a public insult when an audience responded with either laughter or not and when someone from the audience offered support after the insult or no support was offered. Results showed that the intensity of humiliation increased when people laughed after the insult. However, support offered after the insult had no effect on reported humiliation. Study 2 (N = 99) focused on threats to different self-related values and showed stronger reports of humiliation when central self-related values were threatened than when less central self-related values were threatened. Study 2 also replicated the audience-effect from Study 1, but only when central self-related values were threatened and not when less central self-related values were threatened. Limitations of these studies (e.g., the use of scenarios) and potential avenues for future research, such as the (long-term) consequences of humiliation and humiliation in the context of social media, are discussed.

No laughing matter: How the presence of laughing witnesses changes the perception of insults.

Insults always sting, but the context in which they are delivered can make the effects even worse. Here we test how the brain processes insults, and whether and how the neurocognitive processing of insults is changed by the presence of a laughing crowd. Event-related potentials showed that insults, compared to compliments, evoked an increase in N400 amplitude (indicating increased lexical-semantic processing) and LPP amplitude (indicating emotional processing) when presented in isolation. When insults were perceived in the presence of a laughing crowd, the difference in N400 amplitude disappeared, while the difference in LPP activation increased. These results show that even without laughter, verbal insults receive additional neural processing over compliments, both at the lexical-semantic and emotional level. The presence of a laughing crowd has a direct effect on the neurocognitive processing of insults, leading to stronger and more elongated emotional processing.

Withdraw or affiliate? The role of humiliation during initiation rituals.

Initiation rituals can take different forms and empirical evidence is inconsistent as to whether these rituals promote affiliation among novices. We argue that experienced humiliation during initiations leads to less affiliation among novices, in particular when one is initiated as sole group member rather than as part of the group. We examined this hypothesis in three studies, using different paradigms. In Study 1 (N = 123), perceived severity of an initiation in the past was associated with lower affiliation with other novices; this relationship was mediated by experienced humiliation. Study 2 (N = 64) showed that public derogation in the lab led to more humiliation when participants were the only victim than when they were derogated as a group. Study 3 (N = 248), a vignette study, showed that a similar effect of social context was mediated by expected support from other novices. We conclude that severe initiations may, due to experienced humiliation, result in less rather than more affiliation with fellow novices.

From extreme emotions to extreme actions: explaining non-normative collective action and reconciliation.

A key argument of Dixon et al. in the target article is that prejudice reduction through intergroup contact and collective action work in opposite ways. We argue for a complementary approach focusing on extreme emotions to understand why people turn to nonnormative collective action and to understand when and under what conditions extreme emotions may influence positive effects of contact on reconciliation.