Affect Control Theory

Affect Control Theory (ACT)

Symbolic Interactionism:

Event is the minimum unit of analysis

Smallest event:

Actor Behavior Object

_____ ______ ______

We can extent the event:

Setting emotion modifier actor behavior emotion modifier object

_____ ______ _____ ____ ______ ______ ______ ____

Attitudes

Toward the components of an event

Attitudes have two components

1. beliefs: mental association with a concept

2. affect: a feeling component => ACT

Affective meaning is measured with semantic differential ratings on three dimensions: Evaluation, Potency, and Activity

Basic premises of ACT:

I. The affective component of attitudes towards identities, behaviors, traits, emotions, and social settings are most important determinants for the symbolic representation of each event.

II. The affective meaning of identities, behaviors, traits, emotions and settings are called fundamental sentiments.

Culture and Socialization

How do we learn attitudes? Through socialization!

Socialization in turn is very dependent on cultural values.

In this way we learn culture though socialization.

III. Fundamental sentiments are determined by socialization and therefore depend on culture and subculture.

Identities are self attitudes.

We engage in Impression Management to keep our impression in line with our chosen identities.

Basis Premise:

IV. In a given event we try to confirm fundamental sentiments.

Balance Theory

However, real life situations do not allow immediate confirmation of our identities.

Sometimes an event unbalanced. In this case we change the affective meaning of the actor (, and/or behavior, and/or the object).

In the unbalanced example of a mother hitting her child,

the mother would loose some of her positive evaluation.

This changed meaning is called a transient sentiment.

V. If we cannot fully confirm identities they will be changed in the situation. We will create an transient impression of this identity.

VI. The difference between the fundamental sentiment and the transient sentiment is called deflection.

Deflection can be expressed in emotions:

If the person who plays the role of a mother (fundamental sentiment E+1) is seen as negative in the event (transient sentiment E-1), the resulting deflection (E-2) reflects her emotion. We are motivated to create vents that bring our emotions in line with our identities. In this way, deflection is a motivator, similar to the concept of Cognitive Dissonance. Dissonance motivates us to look for alternative interpretations of the event.

Labeling

Example: A mother does not hit a child

Who would be a person who hits a child?

An abuser.

Trait attribution

What kind of mother would hit a child?

Alternatively we could

make a reinterpretation of the behavior

we can label the object of the event.

Or we could attribute a trait to the object.

Or we could show subsequent behavior that reestablishes the original interpretation.

Summarize in Proposition VII

VII. We want to restore the original meaning and minimize deflection by:

choosing consequent behavior
labeling: assign new identities to actor or object
attribution: assign traits to the actor or object
reinterpretation of the behavior

For the Connoisseur: Mathematical Model

Remember Heider=s Balance theory (POX)

Here we worked with crude - and + evaluations of this event.

ACT refined the simple + definition of a situation

by using empirical data that works with a real scale
by using three dimensions to measure attitudes EPA

out of context ratings (fundamental sentiments):

a mother

a child

to hit

in context ratings (transient sentiments) of the underlined element of the event.

a mother hits a child

ACT uses impression formation equations:

Out of context ratings are regressed on in context ratings:

mother in event = b+ x*mother + x*hitting + x*child

Since we have the EPA profiles of all components in this equation we can estimate the equation. We have the cultural mechanism that is employed to render an event

Back to the homepage of Dr. Andreas Schneider http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/Schneider/

Disclaimer: The documents linked to other sources on the WWW, others than http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/Schneider/ and its subdirectories, do not necessarily express the views of Texas Tech University or Dr. Andreas Schneider. @Copyright 2007 Andreas Schneider