This paper overviews a research article titled Owning Your Emotions: Reactions to Expressions of Self- versus Other-Attributed Positive and Negative Emotions.
It was written by two researchers, Amy M. Bippus and Stacy L. Young. Amy M. Bippus was the Associate Dean of Enrollment Management and Outreach in the College of Liberal Arts at at California State University in Long Beach. She is currently the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs at California State University in Los Angeles. Stacy L. Young is the Professor of Communication Studies at California State University in Long Beach.
The research article was published in a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal named Journal of Applied Communication Research in February 2005.
The volume of the journal is 33 and its number is 1.
The first word of the abstract is ‘this’ and the last word is ‘discussed’.
Bippus and Young (2005) conducted two studies within one research article. For their first study, the researchers drew 720 participants from business, communication, and psychology classes at a large university in an unnamed city. Their ages ranged from 17 to 67; 470 were women, 248 were men, and 2 did not identify themselves in terms of gender. 364 participants were Euro-Americans, 113 Latin Americans, 86 Asian Americans, 57 African Americans, and 6 Native Americans. 86 self-identified as ‘Other’, and 8 did not identify themselves in terms of ethnicity.
Participants were provided with one of 16 possible scenarios, each of them reflecting a design of 2 (relationship type) x 4 (emotion) x 2 (locus of attribution). All scenarios presented a conflict between a participant and either their roommate or co-worker. Four emotional states were represented by the other person in the scenario, with them either saying that they were feeling a positive emotion (happiness or relief) or a negative emotion (anger or frustration). Upon reading these scenarios, participants completed a number of measures to recognize their reactions to what they read.
For their second study, Bippus and Young (2005) drew a new sample of 330 participants from communication classes at a large university in an unnamed city. Their ages ranged from 17 to 50; 213 were women and 117 were men. 160 participants were Euro-Americans, 51 Latin Americans, 25 Asian Americans, 22 African Americans, and 5 Native Americans. 59 self-identified as ‘Other’, and 8 did not identify themselves in terms of ethnicity.
Participants were provided with one of 18 possible scenarios, this time based on a design of 3 (relationship type) x 2 (emotion) x 3 (message type). All scenarios presented a conflict between a participant and either their romantic partner, roommate, or a co-worker. Two emotional states were represented by the other person in the scenario, with them saying that they were feeling either happy or angry. The message the other person used was in one of three forms: ‘I am X’ (condition I); ‘You made me X’ (condition You); or ‘I am X with you’ (condition I-You). Upon reading these scenarios, participants completed a number of measures to recognize their reactions to what they read.
In the ‘Rationale for the Present Project’ section of the article, the researchers present their research hypotheses and research questions. There are three research hypotheses, and they are as follows:
- “H1: Respondents will rate self-attributed negative emotion statements as more effective than other-attributed negative emotion statements.
- H2: Respondents will report less negative emotional reactions to self-attributed negative emotion statements than to other-attributed negative emotion statements.
- H3: Respondents will rate self-attributed negative emotion statements as more polite than other-attributed negative emotion statements” (Bippus and Young, 2005).
- Furthermore, there are three research questions as well, and they are as follows:
- “RQ1: Will respondents rate other-attributed positive emotion statements as more effective than self-attributed positive emotion statements?
- RQ2: Will respondents report more positive emotional reactions to other-attributed positive emotion statements than self-attributed positive emotion statements?
- RQ3: Will respondents rate other-attributed positive emotion statements as more polite than self-attributed positive emotion statements?” (Bippus and Young, 2005).
The research hypotheses are focused on the interpretation of negative emotion statements by respondents depending on the phrasing. Bippus and Young (2005) believe that when a person expresses their negative emotion through the I message, it is perceived as more effective and polite and less negative than when they do it through the You message. That is, when one states how they feel about the situation rather than how the other person is at fault, it is reported to be better perceived by the other person. In their turn, the research questions are focused on whether the same thing but in reverse can be said in regard to positive emotion statements. That is, Bippus and Young (2005) intend to discover whether when a person expresses their positive emotion through the You message, it is perceived better than when they do it through the I message.
The conclusions of the authors of this article do not support the profound effects found by their colleagues for I vs. You negative emotions expression. No effect for self-attributed vs. other-attributed expressions of anger or frustration on the ratings of respondents’ emotional reactions in Study 2 is found. However, in Study 1, there is strong evidence that positive emotional expressions attributed to the participant rather than the other person were preferred. In general, You messages are reported to be perceived as more effective and polite than I messages. In Study 2, at least in the context of a romantic partner, participants rated You messages as less threatening and more polite and positive; however, as more likely to contribute to self-consciousness than I messages.
Reference
Bippus, A. M., & Young, S. L. (2005). Owning your emotions: Reactions to expressions of self- versus other-attributed positive and negative emotions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(1), 26-45.