Management Techniques of Emotions in Communicative
Conflict Reduction
Anna Rostomyan
Abstract: Our human nature incorporates a rich variety of factors which shape our
behaviour in general. Being a specific form of social behaviour, speech is based on
a number of essential features which form the general framework of the
communicative context. The present paper focuses on the problem of human
emotivity alongside with the display of emotions via verbal and non-verbal means
of communication, trying to reveal the intrinsic value of emotivity in the process of
face-to-face communication, since far too much of what happens in the process of
communicative interaction occurs on the emotional level. Interpersonal
communication is highly influenced by the interlocutors’ inner world, their feelings
and emotions, beliefs and desires, positive or negative predisposition towards each
other. At work place particularly tense relations between the employer and
employees, may have a negative impact on the labour output. It can be deduced
from the analysis of the factual material, which has been carried out on samples of
discourse taken from fiction and film scenarios, that by analyzing our own
emotions, trying to have cognitive control over the latters and adhering to certain
emotion management techniques recognized by the given speech community, it is
mostly possible to build empathy towards the others and to create a healthy work
place which will definitely ensure efficiency and excellence. The problem is being
viewed from the pragmatic perspective, taking into account the essence of the
supreme cognitive processes which ensure a better understanding of the
multifaceted nature of emotions. The paper gives a detailed analysis of five
expression management techniques of emotions: simulation, inhibition, masking,
intensification and de-intensification, with the help of which people try to handle
their emotions in some situations to avoid speech conflicts and to become much
more proficient communicators.
Key words: emotions, emotion management techniques, display rules.
*****
Everyday life progresses in the form of regular verbal and non-verbal
interactions with our potential social partners – relatives, friends, colleagues,
members of the public whom we encounter on various occasions. No doubt the
ability to converse, to share our thoughts and feelings with others, has been
originally encoded so that speakers should have a positive predisposition to their
Management Techniques of Emotions
__________________________________________________________________
co-partners. In fact, our human nature incorporates a rich variety of factors which
altogether shape our behaviour, and emotions partake in the formation of the
general framework of the communicative context as well.
The present paper focuses on the problem of human emotivity alongside with
the display of emotions via verbal and non-verbal means of communication, trying
to reveal the intrinsic value of emotivity in the process of face-to-face
communication, since far too much of what happens in the process of
communicative interaction occurs on the emotional level. The problem is being
viewed from the pragmatic perspective since the conveyance of emotions is
necessarily linked with the perlocutionary level of the speech act. The research has
sought for ways to reveal the pragmatic impact of emotions on verbal behaviour
and to show its implicit effect on interpersonal relations of the speaking partners.
Human interpersonal communication, in general, is subconsciously inclined
towards mutual understanding and respect. It aims at building a cohesive, tolerant
society and establishing peaceful relations with the members of speech community.
Thus, speakers usually have a natural propensity to communicate amicably, unless
there is some reason for them to ruin up their harmonious public relations by
arguing, disputing, debating and quarrelling with each other. As a matter of fact,
whenever we are emotionally upset we are very often more inclined to misinterpret
the decoded messages, attaching to them extra negative emotive emphasis; on the
contrary, positive emotions usually lead us into positive evaluations, sympathetic
disposition and mutual understanding.
The field of emotions is very complex, interesting, as well as challenging when
one tries to reveal the nature of human emotiveness, to penetrate into the inner
world of the speaker and to examine how this or that emotion is manifested in
linguistic behaviour. Being humans we always experience some sort of emotion or
feeling. Moreover, our emotional state varies throughout the day depending on
what happens to us and on the positive or negative stimuli that we perceive. The
experience and expression of emotions truly comprise a routine, yet extraordinarily
complex and influential facet of the human experience, particularly in the realm of
interpersonal communication. Actually, interpersonal communication is highly
influenced by the interlocutors’ inner world, their feelings and emotions, beliefs
and desires, as well as positive or negative predisposition towards each other. It is
generally believed that emotion plays the role we expect it to, i.e. communicating
information about our internal states, feelings, beliefs, hopes and desires. However,
while communicating with each other we are always limited by diverse predefined
display rules set by a particular society, which are referred to as guidelines for
when, where and how to appropriately manage the display of an emotion and
which may naturally vary across cultures.
As a matter of fact, display rules are learnt so early in life that they become
habitual in due course of time. In addition to the expression of emotions, the
Anna Rostomyan
3
__________________________________________________________________
display rules provide people with expectations about how others should act and
react so that social interaction could become to some extent predictable. In fact,
this common ground among people ‘makes the joint construction of reality and
action in concert possible’.1 Viewing the problem from the linguistic angle,
Camras explains that:
…communication of emotion via choice of language could be
particularly important in situations where display rules militate
against the use of emotional facial expressions.2
Ekman and Friesen propose four sources of display rules: 1) cultural display
rules, 2) personal display rules, 3) vocational requirements, and 4) need of the
moment. Cultural display rules are the conventions ‘followed by all (nonrebellious) members of a given social class, sub-culture, or culture’.3,4 Examples of
cultural display rules comprise instances of exhibiting grief at funerals, displaying
joy at weddings and birthdays, or men not exhibiting fear or tears in public, and
women not exhibiting anger in public. It is notable that some nations are generally
considered to be more inclined to handle their emotions as do the English, the
Japanese, etc. whereas other nations rarely tend to suppress them, i.e. the Italians,
the Spanish, etc. Malatesta and Izard explain that in Western cultures, many
display rules:
…are directed at augmenting the more social, sanguine emotional
expressions (smiling, interest, empathy) and exhibiting or muting those
with potential to escalate benign interaction into conflict encounters
(anger, jealousy, contempt) or those with potential to disturb others
through contagion (sadness, anxiety).5
Ekman and Friesen suggest that, in fact, the so-called sub-cultures develop and
sustain their own specific characteristic display rules. These rules may change in
due course of time, circumstances (e.g., the presence of children, the presence of
unfamiliar people, etc.), or according to the level of relationship (e.g., close
friends, married couples, employer-employee, parent-infant, etc.). It should also be
mentioned that individuals may also differ in the way in which they adhere to
and/or manifest cultural display rules. In other words, some people may be more
likely to intensify emotions across cultures and situations, whereas others may
generally be more inclined to suppress their emotions. This phenomenon leads to
the observation that besides cultural display rules there are personal display rules
which can also be detected in interpersonal communication.
Personal display rules are considered to stem from families. Matsumoto speaks
about the existence of such personal display rules, suggesting that different
Management Techniques of Emotions
__________________________________________________________________
families ‘may allow the expression of certain emotions but not others’.6
Consequently, it is considered that family predefined display rules which solidify
in maturity might encourage overt displays of anger, resentment or aggression, and
suppression of excitement, amusement or joy, and so on, irrespective of the general
culturally governed display rules.
The third influential component that has an impact on the expression
management of emotions is the vocational requirements. In this group we consider
people who have to act in certain ways according to their profession. Many jobs
require what Hochschild calls an emotional labour.7 His use of this concept
involves flight attendants who, because of the demands of their occupation, engage
in surface and deep structures of acting in order to shape the outward appearance
of a tranquil, unworried, distressed, and pleasant emotional state. For instance, the
employees of a bank have to manage their emotions and when dealing with their
customers in conflict situations by no means let their emotions govern their
behaviour, without explicitly demonstrating the felt negative emotions in speech.
Likewise, during presidential debates the candidates do not display their irritation
or negative disposition towards one another. Actually, politicians, doctors,
teachers, lawyers, economists, as well as other specialists can be included in the
category of those who have to control their emotions as part of their vocations.
Finally, Ekman and Friesen suggest that the need of the moment influences
greatly emotion expression as well. This proposed group includes examples of
controlling the expression of emotions for personal gain, e.g. a guilty criminal who
lies displaying a seemingly innocent face when pleading guiltless. While these may
seem congruent with general culturally-governed display rules, the authors view
such incidents of emotion management as a distinct kind.
When discussing the complexity of human emotions in their book “Principles
of Communication and Emotion in Social Interaction” P.A. Andersen and L.K.
Guerrero speak about five expression management techniques of emotions8: 1)
intensification, 2) de-intensification, 3) simulation, 4) inhibition, and 5) masking,
with the help of which people try to handle the expression of their emotions to
reach communicative conflict reduction. When speaking about speech act theory, it
is notable that intensification is commonly used to make the utterance more
convincing and to influence the listeners’ emotive state of being. In pragmatic
terms, intensification aims at strengthening the perlocutionary level of the speech
act. Respectively, de-intensification is used for softening the categoricity of the
speech act. Consequently, we may come to conclude that these two expression
management techniques of emotions symbolize two opposite poles, whenever
needed harmonizing each other in the process of communication. The nature of the
aforementioned five expression management techniques of emotions is briefly
discussed below:
Anna Rostomyan
5
__________________________________________________________________
Intensification (or maximization) refers to creating the appearance that
emotions are felt more strongly than they are in reality. It is of utmost importance
to note that intensification involves the display of an emotion that is genuinely felt;
its display is simply exaggerated. In fact, people sometimes when feeling an
emotion do express it more strongly than they actually feel it. For instance, if a
person is slightly surprised, he/she may act as if the surprise is exceedingly high.
Likewise, if someone feels somewhat sad, he/she may express an overwhelming
portion of grief. Other examples of intensification include laughing generously at
something which is only slightly amusing, etc. It is also noteworthy that
intensification seems to be used both with positive and negative emotions. Via
intensification the speaker may basically have a great emotive impact on his/her
interlocutors, subtly suggesting to them what emotions they should feel. To
elucidate this, let us examine the following pair of examples: the first one
represents a case of intensification bearing positive implication, whereas the
second one carries overall negative implication:
1. She sat down rather stiffly in the straight-backed armchair
beside the fire.
‘How pretty the fire is,’ she said.
‘Jeanne, I think I’m crazily in love with you,’ said Andrews in an
excited voice.9
2. ‘A big society party.’
‘Which raises money for charity.’
‘Which you don’t give a damn about. It’s just another step up the
Highland Park social ladder for you. You’re social climbing and
Boo’s being raised by Consuela!’10
In the first example Andrews is feeling positive emotions towards his
interlocutor. As we know, there are a number of intensifying adverbs which
amplify the positive meaning of the word they are attached to and/or to the whole
sentence, i.e. completely, greatly, entirely, fully, totally, extremely, tremendously,
crazily, terrifically, really, truly, marvellously, wondrously, etc. In this case the
speaker uses the intensifying adverb crazily to reinforce the actual positive
implication of his expressive speech act and to stress his inner positive emotional
state of being in love. His positive emotions are not only manifested on the verbal
level, but also on the vocal level: said Andrews in an excited voice.
In the second example we observe a case of negative emotive emphasis. As we
know, in familiar conversation between equals a few somewhat vulgar intensifiers
often occur as premodifiers of adjectives or adverbs, such as darned, damn(ed),
goddam, goddamn(ed), goldarn(ed)/goldurn(ed) (a euphemistic substitution for
Management Techniques of Emotions
__________________________________________________________________
goddamn), bloody, devilish, hellish, all-fired(ly) (meaning extremely) and a few
others which can also be used both for positive and negative evaluations. In the
adduced extract the intensifying adjective damn attaches negative emotive
emphasis to the act of reproach: the conversation occurs between spouses; the
husband is dissatisfied with his wife’s addiction to being a renowned person in the
social circles of Highland Park; hence, he undergoes emotions belonging to the
negative scale, such as resentment, anger, annoyance and the like, which are being
expressed in his speech act. He reproaches his wife for not taking care of their
child, Boo, and leaving the maintenance of the child only to their housemaid.
De-intensification (or minimization) refers to giving the impression that
emotions are felt less strongly than they are in reality. However, it should by all
means be mentioned that only part of the felt emotion is hidden, while some
portion of it is being displayed. As with intensification, de-intensification involves
the display of an emotion that is genuinely felt; its display is simply softened.
Actually, sometimes people feel an emotion and display it on the outside, without
being able to manage the expression of the felt emotion, yet they express it not as
strongly as they feel it. For instance, if a person is angry with someone, he/she may
simply exhibit mild irritation rather than revealing all of his/her anger. To illustrate
this phenomenon, let us examine a situation in which a man tries to hide his actual
emotions by minimizing the degree of the experienced emotions:
‘Look, honey, I’m kind of busy, so if everything’s under control
there, I need to get back to work.’10
It is truly obvious that the speaker feels irritated and embarrassed because of
being disturbed while working. This is the reason why he probably undergoes
rather negative emotions at the moment of uttering the statement. Nevertheless, he
does not explicitly manifest those very negative emotions not to upset the
interlocutor who obviously is a close person to the speaker, as the latter, when
addressing the interlocutor, uses the noun honey as a vocative expression which is
generally used to denote close rapport in interpersonal relations. Besides, he uses
the approximator kind of to minimize the degree of his categoricity and, thus, tries
to soften and to minimize the overall negative emphasis of the act of reproach.
Simulation refers to displaying an emotion that is not genuinely felt. Such
efforts seem to be misleading; here deception is embodied in intentionally
encoding a message by a sender to foster a false deduction by the receiver. 11
However, in contrary to its reputation, deception can be viewed as a behavioural
competent in interpersonal relations under certain circumstances. Knapp and
Comadena suggest the notion of ‘collaborative deception’ which is recognized by
Anna Rostomyan
7
__________________________________________________________________
all the parties involved and is being practiced to maintain a presumably shared
desire for the smooth flow of interaction and co-operation.12 One form of the socalled collaborative deception occurs ‘when lies are used to mutually benefit the
self-esteem of the participants’.13 Collaborative deception seems especially related
to the display rules that foster predictable social encounters. Simulation, in
particular, seems likely to be used for this purpose as it is the only management
technique which involves no genuine experience of emotion. The most frequently
cited example of this emotion management technique is smiling when one does not
experience such positive emotions as: gladness, happiness, delight, glee, joy,
cheerfulness, etc. Let us consider an illustration of simulation by adducing the
following situation:
As the applause grew louder, the corporate tax lawyer whom Scott
was campaigning to succeed as the next state bar president leaned in
close and whispered, ‘You know, Scotty, you’ve got an impressive line
of bullshit. Now I see why half the coeds at SMU dropped their
drawers for you.’
Scott squeezed the knot of his silk tie, smoothed his $ 2000 suit, and
whispered back through brilliant white teeth, ‘Henry, you don’t get
laid or elected telling the truth.’ 10
As it can be concluded from the given passage, the speaker does not feel any
emotion at all but shows an emotion that is not genuinely felt, i.e. he smiles a big
smile showing his brilliant white teeth, displaying falsified positive emotions, such
as happiness, gladness, cheeriness and the like. As he himself explains to the
corporate tax lawyer whom he was campaigning, he plays sincerity in front of the
audience to acquire their positive disposition, since by telling the truth he won’t be
elected. In such cases, a person is not feeling an emotion on the inside, but shows
or expresses an emotion on the outside. Here, Scott adheres to the display rule of
vocational requirements as it is a part of his profession to simulate his emotions.
Inhibition involves exposing the appearance of no emotion when in reality one
is feeling a definite sort of emotion at the moment of communication. Sometimes
people feel an emotion, but do not express it for some reason or another. Prime
examples of inhibition include keeping a straight face when something seems
funny, hiding attraction towards one’s beloved person, keeping calm voice when
feeling angry, etc. It has been proved by diverse linguistics and psychologists that
people learn to exhibit the expression of certain emotions in due course of time.14
This phenomenon is evidenced by the fact that often children’s interactions are
generally uninhibited as compared with adult interactions. We most often observe
children’s honest communication; they normally do not strive to hide, mask,
Management Techniques of Emotions
__________________________________________________________________
minimize, intensify or falsify their emotions, on the contrary, they express their
opinions and emotions in a natural, simple and genuine way. Whereas when
observing adult communication, we often reveal that in certain circumstances
adults inhibit their genuine emotion for certain reasons as can be detected in the
following illustration that depicts an incident when one of the interactants has to
hide his emotions:
The judge was eyeing Scott over his reading glasses; a wry smile
crossed his face.
‘Didn’t really want to be another Atticus Finch after all, huh, Mr.
Fenney?’
Scott knew better than to respond. The judge’s smile dissolved into
a look of disappointment that, for some odd reason bothered Scott.10
In the present stretch of discourse we observe that the Judge is dissatisfied with
the work of Mr. Scott Fenney and scolds him for not being really devoted to the
lawyer’s duties as Atticus Finch was, the hero of Harper Lee’s novel “To Kill a
Mockingbird”, who preferred to be the lawyer of an Afro-American woman, which
was out of question in those times, and to fight for justice rather than to follow the
society’s acknowledged norms and principles of the era.
The author implicitly hints to the Judge’s discontent pointing to his wry smile;
the smile, which is generally a universal sign of transmitting positive emotions, in
this case is used for negative implications, hence the use of the adjective wry. He
expresses an indirect act of reproach, at the end of which he adds the phrase after
all, thus intensifying the negative implicit meaning of the act of reproach. Scott
feels embarrassed and bothered, but being conscious of the fact that he does not
have to exhibit those very negative emotions in the presence of the Judge; he
inhibits his genuinely felt emotions and just remains silent without responding to
avoid subsequent tense relations with the Judge. In this case we again witness an
instance of emotion management according to predefined vocational requirements.
Masking differs drastically from the other expression management techniques
of emotions in the way that it involves showing a particular emotion when one is
feeling a completely different emotion. For instance, under certain circumstances a
person may express happiness when he/she feels anger. Likewise, someone may
show hatred towards another person when he/she truly loves that very person.
Masking is believed to be much more difficult to apply than any other emotion
management technique ‘probably because it is easier to moderate an existing
emotion than to express an emotion that is very different from what one is feeling’.8
This includes cases when people do not display worry and anxiety when one of
their close friends or relatives has, for example, to undergo surgery. Instead, they
Anna Rostomyan
9
__________________________________________________________________
display such emotions as: felicity, hope, faith, and the like, in order to encourage
the sick person. As it can be observed in the following example, one of the
interlocutors masks her really felt emotions not to flirt with the boyfriend of her
best-friend:
We should hang up now. This is going in a bad direction.
‘Rach?’ His voice is low and intimate.
I feel breathless, hearing him say my name like this. The one
syllable is familiar, warm. ‘Yeah?’
‘You still there?’ he whispers.
I manage to say, ‘Yes, I’m still here.’
‘What are you thinking?’
‘Nothing,’ I lie.
I have to lie. Because what I am thinking is; maybe you are my type
just a little bit more than I once thought.15
In the aforementioned piece of discourse the interlocutors have previously been
merely friends. Thus, it is unfamiliar for Rachel that her former best friend
addresses her so warmly and intimately; only using the first syllable of her name,
i.e. Rach, even pronouncing it in a low and cherished tone. Eventually, she does
not know how to response properly since although she undergoes similar emotions
towards her interlocutor, such as warmth, attraction, caring, and the like, analyzing
her emotions cognitively and not letting the emotional part of the brain overrule the
rational one, she lies to him, masking her truly felt positive emotions and giving
the appearance as if she is cool and chilly, since she is well-aware of the fact that
she is not allowed to express such emotions towards the boyfriend of her best
friend. In fact, she intentionally hampers the encoding process of her real emotions
not to ruin their friendship. Actually, she manages to do so due to her strong
cognitive processes which in this case manage to claim superiority over the
speaker’s emotivity.
We have carried out a research within a group of 25-45 year-old 50 Armenians
trying to reveal which emotion management technique they would mostly tend to
adhere to when experiencing such basic emotions as happiness, anger, and sadness.
After having explained to them the essence of each expression management
technique of emotions, a questionnaire was given to them to fill in. The results,
which are illustrated in Table 1, come to suggest that with each emotion one of the
expression management techniques of emotions tends to prevail; namely, when
experiencing anger, they usually tend to inhibit the felt emotion; it is the same case
is with sadness, while happiness is generally being intensified. Of course, each
nation has its own specific characteristic features and the picture will not be
exactly the same with others.
Management Techniques of Emotions
__________________________________________________________________
Table 1
Expression M anagement T echniques of Emotions
18
16
People Interviewed
14
12
Simulatin
Inhibition
10
Masking
8
Intensification
6
Deintensification
4
2
0
Anger
Happiness
Sadness
Emotions
In summary, people are generally believed to attempt to control the expression
of their emotions: overt bodily movements, facial expressions, as well as vocal and
verbal means of displaying emotivity. The discussed display rules and expression
management techniques of emotions provide universal specific tools used to avoid
speech conflicts and, as an outcome, to reach an integration of the emotive and
cognitive processes. Human communication generally is inclined towards mutual
understanding; it aims at building a cohesive, tolerant society. Thus, by means of
analysing our emotions cognitively and handling them correspondingly, we stand a
better chance of reaching conflict reduction and establishing peaceful relations
with the members of the given speech community.
Bibliography
1. Backman, C.W. Identity, Self-presentation, and the Resolution of Moral
Dilemmas: Toward a Social Psychological Theory of Moral Behaviour. In B. L.
Schlenker eds. The Self and Social Life, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985.
2. Camras, L. A. Socialization of Affect Communication. In M. Lewis and C.
Saari eds. The Socialization of Emotions, New York: Plenum Press, 1985, 141-160.
3. Ekman P. and Friesen W.V. Unmasking the Face: A Guide to Recognizing
Emotions from Facial Clues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1975.
4. Ekman P., Friesen, W.V. and Ellsworth, P. Emotion in the human face:
Guidelines for research and an integration of findings. New York: Pergamon
Press, 1972.
Anna Rostomyan
11
__________________________________________________________________
5. Malatesta, C.Z. and Izard, C.E. Conceptualizing Emotional Development in
Adults. In Malatesta, C.Z. and Izard, C.E. eds. Emotion in Adult Development,
Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1984, 13-21.
6. Matsumoto, D. Cultural Influences on Facial Expressions on Emotion.
Southern Communication Journal 56, (1991): 128-137.
7. Hochschild, A. R. The Manage Heart. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1983.
8. Andersen, P.A. and Guerrero, L.K. Principles of Communication and
Emotion in Social Interaction. In Andersen, P.A. & Guerrero, L.K. eds., Handbook
of communication and emotion, San Diego: Academic Press, 1998, 49-96.
9. Dos Passos, J., Three Soldiers, New York: Modern Library, 1921.
10. Gimenez M. The Colour of Law. London: Sphere, 2007.
11. Buller, D.B. and Burgoon, J.K. Emotional Expression in the Deception
Process. In. Andersen, P.A and Guerrero, L.K. eds. Handbook of Communication
and Emotion, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1998, 381-402.
12. Knapp, M. L. and Comadena, M. E. Telling It Like It Isn’t: A Review of
Theory and Research on Deceptive Communications. Human Communication
Research 5, (1979): 270-285.
13. O’Hair, H. D. and Cody, M. J. Deception. In W. R. Cupach and B. H.
Spitzberg eds. The Dark Side of Interpersonal Communication, Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum, 1994, 181-213.
14. Brannigan, C. and Humphries, D. I See What You Mean. New Scientist 42,
(1969): 406-408.
15. Giffin, E. Something Borrowed, London: Arrow Books, 2011.
16. Burgoon, J. K. Interpersonal Expectations, Expectancy Violations, and
Emotional Communication. Journal of Language and Social Psycology 12, (1993):
30-48.
17. Grice, H. P. Utterer’s Meaning and Intentions. Philosophical Review, New
York: Academic Press, 1969.