Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Editors' Preface -- Affect Control Theory: Concepts and Model -- Impressions From Events -- The Affective Control of Events Within Settings -- Modified Social Identities: Amalgamations, Attributions, and Emotions -- Affective Bases of Likelihood Judgments -- Expectations, Intentions, and Behavior: Some Tests of Affect Control Theory -- Affect Control Theory: An Assessment
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Modern societies are highly differentiated, with relatively uncorrelated socially salient dimensions and a preponderance of weak, unidimensional (as opposed to strong, multiplex) ties. What are the implications of a society with fewer strong ties and more weak ties for the self? What do these changes mean for our emotional experience in everyday life? I outline a structural view of self, situated identity, and emotion. It is an ecological theory in which interpersonal encounters are the link between the macro-level community structure and the micro-level experience of self-conception, identity performance, and emotion. In this ecology of encounters, multiple-identity enactments (especially of salient self-identities) are quite rare. But where they occur, they are important indicators of potential social change.
Economists invoke emotions narrowly to solve commitment problems; sociologists view emotions as a more pervasive basic feature of social life. A complete approach to integrating emotionality and choice requires attention to the interactional sources of emotions and examination of the role that emotions play in directing attention to different domains of comparison and choice. Systematic analysis of the situational determinants of emotional response will allow us to see how both interaction structures and emotional responses are selected by the social environment.
▪ Abstract The gender system includes processes that both define males and females as different in socially significant ways and justify inequality on the basis of that difference. Gender is different from other forms of social inequality in that men and women interact extensively within families and households and in other role relations. This high rate of contact between men and women raises important questions about how interaction creates experiences that confirm, or potentially could undermine, the beliefs about gender difference and inequality that underlie the gender system. Any theory of gender difference and inequality must accommodate three basic findings from research on interaction. (a). People perceive gender differences to be pervasive in interaction. (b). Studies of interaction among peers with equal power and status show few gender differences in behavior. (c). Most interactions between men and women occur in the structural context of roles or status relationships that are unequal. These status and power differences create very real interaction effects, which are often confounded with gender. Beliefs about gender difference combine with structurally unequal relationships to perpetuate status beliefs, leading men and women to recreate the gender system in everyday interaction. Only peer interactions that are not driven by cultural beliefs about the general competence of men and women or interactions in which women are status- or power-advantaged over men are likely to undermine the gender system.