1. Managing Emotions (continued) Class 16

2. Important Dates and Times DIARY STUDY WRITE-UP: Due on Thursday, end of class FINAL: Tuesday, May 12; 11:45-2:45 Guest Lectures: Thursday (4/30): Ross Ellenhorn, Conation and Morale Tuesday (5/3): Jessica Benson, Emotions and Perception

3. Suppression Suppression is ACTIVELY, CONSCIOUSLY hiding or not- showing arousing thoughts and/or feelings. -- Upset in argument with boss, don't want to show it -- Stifling a fit of giggles in church. -- Attracted to someone, but don't want to be obvious Suppression is NOT repression, which is done unconsciously. Suppression = intentionally hide thoughts/feelings from others Repression = unconsciously hide thoughts/feelings from self

4. Serendipity and Scientific Discovery: Pennebaker’s Inhibition and Illness Hypothesis 1.Communication studies: People like groups more when they get to talk more. 2.Polygraph (lie detector) studies: Liberation through confession 3. Personal Experience: Asthma and parents; relief about marital problems; career problems through writing

5. Warren Case Study: Body Signs vs. Overt Reports Girlfriend 77 Some disagreements about intimacy, but we are close. College courses71Most have been interesting … tests another matter Failing exams 76It’s been hard on my ego. Parents84We were a close family until divorce Parents’ divorce 103 It was no big deal, really. TOPIC HEART RATECOMMENTS The future79It scares me.

6. Clues Leading to Suppression and Illness Hypothesis 1. People like to talk and learn from talking about themselves. 2. Certain kinds of events create communication conflicts — want to talk but afraid to talk. 3. Response to this conflict is inhibition, which is a stressor. 4. Confronting difficult topics reduces inhibition, reduces stress.

7. Inability to Discuss Childhood Trauma “I had always been close to my mother. If she had known what [my stepfather] was doing to me, it would have broken her heart. I wanted to tell her so much.” “Looking back on it all, the very worst thing was that I couldn’t talk to my mother anymore. I had to keep a wall between us. If I wasn’t careful, the wall might crumble and I’d tell her everything.” NOTE: Those who report trauma have more health problems than other groups in survey.

8. MORE EVIDENCE RE. TRAUMA / ILLNESS Psychology Today Survey, May 1982 a. Question re. sexual trauma b. 22% women, 10% men report trauma c. Traumas linked to ulcers, infections, heart problems. d. Childhood traumas most health-debilitating. Why? Hardest to talk about. Zale Corporation employee study a. Interviews employees b. Those with childhood trauma most often ill c. Nature of trauma (sexual, death of parent, etc.) didn't determine illness. What did? d. Whether or not person talked about trauma.

9. Effects of Disclosure on Health, Survey Samples

10. Bereavement and Disclosure Study Are all kinds of traumas equally "disclosable"? Are some kinds more likely to be kept to yourself, others easier to share? Someone close to you dies. What is a "socially acceptable" kind of death? What is a "socially unacceptable" kind of death? Pennebaker interviews people who loose spouse due to auto accident or suicide. Predicts which group will suppress more? Predicts which group will get more illnesses? Spouses of suicide Finds: NO Differences between spouses of accident/suicide BUT: Among all survivors, those who DO disclose get sick less often

11. Pennebaker Disclosure and Health Model Emotional suppression is hard work (Wegner studies) Short term suppression  physiological arousal (physio studies) Long term suppression is chronic stressor  immunocompromise Immunocompromise  illness

12. Catharsis vs. Insight Catharsis Insight * Emotional buildup causes stress. * Release pent-up emotions (catharsis) releases stress. * Language provides an outlet for venting pent up emotions. * Uncompleted problems are emotionally arousing. * Uncompleted tasks stay alive until finished. * Language helps people get “closure” on unfinished business. Why do people need to disclose?

13. Initial Test of the Inhibition of Health Model Pennebaker & Beal, 1986 Subjects ( n = 46) assigned to one of four writing conditions: 1. Thoughts and Feelings (Insight) 2. Emotions only (Catharsis) 3. Facts only (Suppress) 4. Trivial topics (Control) Conditions 1-3 write about some past, negative event. Condition 4 writes about trivial, non-emotional topic Subjects write on four consecutive days, 15 minutes each time.

14. “Insight Writing” Instructions “I want you to write continuously about the most upsetting or traumatic experience of your entire life. Don’t worry about spelling, grammar, or sentence structure. In your writing, I want your deepest thoughts and feelings about your experience. …. Ideally, it should be something you have not talked about with others in detail. It is critical, however, that you let yourself go and explore those deepest emotions and thoughts that you have. Your choice of trauma for each session is up to you.

15. Types of Traumas Disclosed 1.Parents’ divorce: “Son, the problem with me and your mother was having kids in the first place. Things haven’t been the same since you and your sister’s birth”. 2. Responsibility for grandmother’s death. 3. Molestation by grandfather, at age 13. 4. Hiding sexual orientation from parents “Family abuse, alcoholism, suicide attempts, public humiliation were frequent topics”

16. Pennebaker & Beale (1986) Results Immediate Moods: Thoughts & Feelings (T & F) lowest moods. Disclosure DOES NOT improve moods immediately Health Center visits over 6 months: Thoughts & feelings= 0.5 visits All other groups = 1.5 visits Long term coping (after 4 months) T& F higher on:* Moods * Optimism * Self-reported health

17. Disclosure and Immunocompetence Pennebaker, Kiecolt-Glaser, & Glaser, 1988 Questions: 1. Are initial disclosure and health findings "real"? 2. Direct evidence that disclosure improves immune functioning. Method: Same as initial study, but 1. Just two groups Thoughts and Feelings vs. Control 2. Write 20 min., over 4 days Blood samples taken at: 1. Day one of study 2. Last day of writing 3. Six weeks after study ends Use "mitogen test" -- bodies that stimulate antibody production

18. Disclosure and Immunocompetence (continued) Results: Which group produced more antibodies to mitogen? Thoughts and Feelings Control group X Role of Insight: 80% of T&F writers report insight-related benefits (perspective shift, new ideas about self, etc.) Quality of Writing : Writing that improved health was: 1. More emotional 2. Images and analogies 3. Clear organization: Beginning, middle, end.

19. Other Disclosure Studies Show: Disclosure  higher T-Cell count  improved antibody response to Epstein-Barr  improved antibody response to Hepatitis B Improved management of chronic illness: Diabetes Asthma Other chronic illness Effect replicated in scores of studies, by many different researchers

20. Why Does Writing Promote Coping? Harber & Pennebaker, 1991 Thought Intrusions classic symptom of trauma Ironic effect of suppression Emotions and recurring thoughts

21. A short funny story with a punch line is a: Mighty tree that sheds acorns is a: Popular soft drink, not Pepsi Open an egg, white part is: Where there is fire there is:Smoke Joke Oak Coke Albumin Emotions and Schemas

22. Discrepancy Theories of Emotion and Trauma Emotions arise from schema violations Emotions alert us when schemas (beliefs) and experience (facts) conflict Emotions stay active until schemas and experience difference is resolved Traumas arise when fundamental beliefs are violated by experience Changing fundamental beliefs very hard, people resist doing so Victim blaming, traumatic amnesia, emotional dissociation Listeners don't want to hear stories that offend their own basic beliefs. Trauma victims in compound double bind: internal and external resistance to revealing trauma. World is well-ordered World is just Self is good, competent, worthy

23. Writing and Traumatic Recovery Writing about negative events may boost morale. How so? Active coping Purposeful activity Improved self-image Psychologically and socially safe

24. Bonanza Model of Writing and Traumatic Recovery

25. Class 17: Collective Coping

26. Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989

27. The Loma Prieta Earthquake Characteristics of Quake 7.1 on Richter scale Duration: 15 seconds Most intense seismic event since 1906 quake, which destroyed SF Effects of Quake Deaths= 60 + Injured= 3700 Displaced= 12,000 Damage= $6 billion

28. Disclosure and Coping Schacter Anxiety and Affiliation Studies a. Clarify causes of distress b. Validates own emotions Sympathetic Listening as Key to Social Support a. Making sense of trauma b. Perspective, insight Failure to Disclose is a Health Risk a. Suppression physically effortful b. Prolonged suppression  chronic stress c. Disclosure stops suppression, reduces illness

29. Health Benefits of Disclosure Immediate Lowered heart rate Lowered skin conductance Reduced muscle tension Long term health Fewer MD visits Fewer symptoms Stronger immune system Long term coping Reduced depression, stress higher grades, less absenteeism Quicker re-employment after loss

30. Listening Isn’t Easy Contagion of Distress Holocaust survivors study Vicarious traumatization among therapists Avoidance of the supporter role Pseudo-sympathetic responses Outright rejection

31. Social Dilemma of Collective Coping People simultaneously placed in two roles: 1. Seek out others for support 2. Sought out as a support source for others AND 1. Telling your problem advances coping 2. Hearing others disclose is a stressor

32. Survey of Disaster Research from 1959 to 1989: A Review of 73 Published Studies. Gathered comparison group data:27% Gathered data two times after event30% Gathered data 3 + times after event14% Gathered data no later than weeks after event25% Meet all the above criteria0

34. Quake Study Survey Locations

35. Timeline of Quake Study Q WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK --- WEEK --- WEEK --- WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 16 28 50

36. Quake Study Method Sample size:789 residents (SF, Sac, S. Cal, Dallas) Data gathering method: Phone survey Random digit dialing Calls made 6:30 – 9:30, weeknights only Survey lasts 10 minutes

37. Survey Content Communication: Thinking, talking, listening Emotional reactions Physical symptoms Coping tactics : praying, joking, drinking

38. Rates of Talking and Thinking Following the Loma Prieta Earthquake: Bay Area Only

39. “Thank you for not sharing your earthquake experience with me” T-shirts in Palo Alto during weeks 3-6 after the quake

40. Percent Reporting an Earthquake-Related Dream, SF vs. Other Locations

41. Percent Reporting an Argument with Family or Co-Workers During the Prior Week

42. Percentage Change in Aggravated Assaults From Year Before Quake to Year After Quake

43. Rates of Quake Related Joking

44. A Need to Be Shaken and Stirred? “But deep in my heart I know not that a major disaster would be deliverance from my drab, wretched life – salvation from the old week-by-week, a chance for two-bit heroics blown up on the front page …. I’ve talked to others, and I’m not alone. Maybe we crave a chance to be stouthearted for once and have a real situation to cope with.” Michael Hood, NPR Reporter Commenting on minor quake in Seattle, WA 05/09/96

45. The Three Stage Model of Collective Coping

46. Persian Gulf War I 500000 US soldiers in harms way Experts predict 1000s of US casualties Fears of nuclear weapons, poison gas Fears of terrorism at home Yellow ribbons, prayer sessions Media barrage of war-relate stories

47. Persian Gulf War Study Survey nearly identical to that used in Quake Study Participants contacted randomly All participants were Dallas, TX residents No “comparison sample” possible

48. Rates and Talking and Thinking Following the Persian Gulf War

49. Rates of Event-Related Dreaming, Following the Quake and Following the War

50. Rate of Increased Aggravated Assaults, Dallas, 1991 (War) vs. 1990 (Pre-War)

51. Implications of Collective Coping Research 1.Coping appears to occur in a three-stage manner 1.Emergency 2.Inhibition 3.Recovery 2.Public safety should be on especial alert during inhibition stage 3.Emotions are negotiated events; we need to share the burden of disclosure and listening.

52. Why Does Coping Require Disclosure? The Emotional Broadcaster Theory

53. Daily Talking Following the Loma Prieta Earthquake and the Persian Gulf War Pennebaker & Harber, 1993

54. Intra-Personal Reasons to Disclose Schachter Anxiety and Affiliation Studies a. Clarify causes of distress b. Validate one's own reactions Sympathetic Listening as Social Support a. Making sense of Trauma b. Perspective c. Insight d. Belongingness, acceptance Failure to Disclose can be a Health Risk a. Prolonged suppression → chronic stress. b. Disclosure reduces illness.

55. The Emotional Broadcaster Theory Proximal need to disclose  Intra-psychic benefits Distal result of disclosure  Information transfer

56. Personal News is Widely Broadcasted Disclose copiously after major events Disclose with minimal prompting Disclose when asked not to do so Disclose unconsciously Disclose against self-interest Disclosure is cross-cultural Disclosure is ancient

57. Well-Told Disclosures are the Most Therapeutic Disclosures that create “movies” in listeners minds predict success in therapy (Bucci, 1997) Disclosures with best narrative structure advance illness recovery (Harber & Pennebaker, 1992) Disclosures Benefit Listeners Testimony therapy (Agger & Jensen 1990) Gossip is informative (Baumeister et al., 2004)

58. Emotions Propel Disclosures “The Social Telegraph”

59. The Morgue Study Harber, K.D & Cohen, D., Jou. Language and Soc. Psych, 2005 Participants: 33 undergrads (55% female) Event: Field trip to UM hospital morgue Self-reported reactions: 3 days after morgue visit Story tracking exercise

60. 123456123456 Marlow (M) told 3 Ilana (F) told 2 Deb (F) told 0 Max (M) told 1 Gabe (M) told 0 Andrea (F) told 1 Hannah (F ) 624-8324 told 1 Maja (F ) 873-2345 told 0 Lew (M) 927-8743 told 1 Primary Sharing Secondary Sharing Tertiary Sharing

61. Story Sharing Following Morgue Field Trip Primary Sharing (Sharing by students) ( n = 33) Secondary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends) ( n = 32) Tertiary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends’ Friends) ( n = 27) Number/rate of sharing 32.00 (97%) 27.00 (82%) 16.00 (48%) Mean contacts per sharer 6.21 (4.06) 1.46 (1.21) 1.26 ( 1.20) Total no. contacts this level 205 299 377 Total hearing about event: ≈ 881

62. Students’ Emotional Reactions and Story Sharing Primary Sharing (Sharing by students) ( n = 33) Secondary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends) ( n = 32) Tertiary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends’ Friends) ( n = 26) Students’ reactions.73**.24.46* Students’ disclosures.56**.61** Note: Students’ disclosures represent proxy index of emotional reaction.

63. Violation of Expectations and Story Travel Misfortune Vignettes Study (Harber, in prep) Sample n = 403, 67% female, age = 19.63

64. “Stories of Misfortune” Teller Upset Story Unusual Hal breaks a small desk lamp he bought on sale at K-Mart.No Your friend feels very strongly about someone, and plans to propose they move in together. Unexpectedly, this person tells your friend "I think we should cool things off”. YesNo Diane finds her window broken and a note tied to a rock. The note says, "Hey Didi, remember me?" She hasn't been called Didi since high school, 5 yrs. ago and 200 miles away. Yes Racing to her spa, Jane almost hits a small boy, who is left shaking. A cop stops her, but by flirting Jane gets only a warning. She says she often gets away with stuff like this. No Yes

65. Anticipated Sharing of Misfortune Stories, Due to Teller Distress and Story Unusualness