There is no emotion that is so often regulated in early development as the expression of anger. When a child is three years old, he / she is already guided by social considerations. Socio-cultural norms, beliefs and expectations influence what is seen as a social expression and influence the socialization of emotions. Cross-cultural studies focus on the distinction between expressing and suppressing negative emotions, but it is still unclear whether cultural groups differ in response styles for anger.
Anger is one of the three significant emotions of children. The suppression of this can have negative consequences for health, but the expression of anger can lead to problems in interpersonal contact (for example, fewer friends). However, from a functionalistic point of view , anger is a response to a threat to personal goals. However, anger is only adaptive if it is considered justified and if the expression is socially appropriate. What is socially appropriate, however, depends on the cultural background.
In Asian cultures, group interest is more important than individual interest. This encourages emotions in Asian cultures that prevent negative consequences for the social relationship, while in Western cultures emotions are encouraged that support personal needs. Asian children and adults more often suppress negative emotions than Western people. Confrontation techniques , for example, are more often used by Western people, and distancing people is more common among Asians. Asians also less often share negative emotions with others because this can have a negative effect on the relationship.
This study investigates cultural differences in the expression of anger in children. The goals are 1) comparing self-reported use of a large number of angry behavioral responses between Chinese and Dutch children and 2) investigating the verbal manifestations of anger and the expected responses. Chinese children are expected to be more passive and subtle in their expressions of anger, to prevent negative consequences for relationships, while Dutch children are more active and confronting. This is measured with a questionnaire to measure various behavioral responses to anger after a conflict with a friend. Then the children get hypothetical anger-provoking situations where a friend is the aggressor. The children are asked questions related to their verbal measure reaction of anger, the expected reaction of the aggressor and the usefulness of their responses. Gender is also taken into account in the analyzes, because girls generally express their negative emotions less openly.
68 Chinese and 73 Dutch children participated in the study. To measure the responses of anger , an adapted variant of the Behavioral Anger Response Questionnaire for Children (BARQ-C) was used. This describes specific situations of a conflict with a peer, and asks how the child would respond. The children of a number of assertions must then indicate to what extent they can agree with this on a three-point scale. In the modified version of the BARQ-C, two interpersonal response styles of anger are measured: Anger Verbalization (the verbal expression of anger in a controlled manner) and Anger Out (the expression of anger in an aggressive manner), and two intrapersonal response styles: Anger Reflection (reflecting on what happened internally or with another person) and Anger Diversion (cognitive or behavioral distraction from anger).
Furthermore, the verbal expressions of anger are measured with four vignettes. They are then asked: how angry would you feel? What would you say to your friend? How angry do you feel now? Their anger is coded in three categories: tolerant, open and confrontational. Expected responses from the aggressor could be positive or negative, and if they were positive it could be either an excuse or a solution.
Anger Reflection and Anger Diversion were reported more than Anger Out and Anger Verbalization. Chinese children used Anger Reflection more often than Dutch children, and Dutch children used Anger diversion more often. Girls used Anger reflection more often and less often anger out than boys.
Chinese children were more often tolerant than Dutch children, and Dutch children more often confronting. Dutch children more often expected a negative reaction from the aggressor than Chinese children. With Chinese children, the anger decreased more often after the conversation with the aggressor than with Dutch children.
The results show that both groups of children use intrapersonal rather than interpersonal responses. Chinese children worry and reflect more often about the situation, while Dutch children seek cognitive or behavioral distraction from anger more often.
Additional research into how the children would respond verbally shows that children usually respond in an open manner by emphasizing the negative consequences and by asking about the intentions of the aggressor. The more angry the children feel, the less tolerant they would react. Dutch children would more often confront the aggressor , while Chinese children would more often tolerate what happens without making a big deal of it. The Dutch response is less successful in terms of social interaction and emotional experience.
Although earlier research has shown that Asian expressions are more often passive and withdrawn than Western ones, this research shows that both groups show verbal responses just as often . It seems that Dutch children more often use an internally independent reaction style, in which nobody is involved and the situation is left for what it is, while Chinese children want to understand more often what has happened, to prevent a repeat. The reactions of Chinese children reflect acceptance of the situation, while Dutch children would more often confront the aggressor. These differences match the characteristics of the Dutch and Chinese cultural models. Verbal communication with the aggressor led to a greater decrease in anger in Chinese children than in Dutch children. Only with the Chinese children does the decrease in anger appear to be sensitive to the aggressor's response.
Dutch culture can be seen as more loose than tight. The degree of tightness of a culture is "the strength of social norms, or how clear and pervasive norms are within a society, and the strength of punishment, or how much tolerance there is for deviating from norms." Because of this, Dutch children have a larger repertoire of anger reactions. Being able to be yourself is considered important in Dutch culture .
Gender differences were only found in responses when using the questionnaire. Boys respond more aggressively, while girls worry more. In future research, a larger sample and more diverse social situations must be used with the vignettes.
The results of this study cannot simply be generalized due to 1) a small sample, 2) lack of information about the background of the children, 3) there are also cross-cultural differences between European countries and Asian countries.
Add new contribution