The influence of anger expressions on credibility

Emotion displays do not only signal emotions but also have social signal value. A study was conducted to test the hypothesis that expressing anger when complaining may lead to positive outcomes for the complainant because anger signals goal obstruction and hence the presence of real harm. The results suggest that the social signal value of anger enhances the credibility of the complainant and hence leads to better compensation, but only when the complaint itself presents room for doubt. For highly justified complaints the additional expression of anger does not add information and is discounted. In contrast, showing an affiliative-smiling demeanor was found to enhance credibility for both types of complaints. Overall, the present research confirmed the important role of emotion expressions as social signals. Anger and Credibility When scowling may be a good thing: The influence of anger expressions on credibility One of the most pervasive research questions in the psychology of emotions regards the perception of emotion expressions. Most of this research has focused on the decoder’s ability to “get” the emotional message. In effect, investigations into the decoding process generally stop once an emotion label is affixed to the expression. In contrast, less attention has been devoted to the issue of the inferences that a decoder might draw from that label (Glaser & Salovey, 1998; Hess, Adams, & Kleck, 2008; Manstead, 1991). That is, this line of research often ignores the social implications of showing a certain emotion in a certain context. Emotional expressions do not only express emotions, but also have social and communicative functions (e.g., Fridlund, 1991; Fridlund, 1994; Hareli & Rafaeli, 2008; Hess, Kappas, & Banse, 1995; Keltner & Haidt, 1999; Parkinson, 1996; Parkinson, Fischer, & Manstead, 2005), including the signaling of authenticity. Specifically, a communication that includes an emotional signal that matches the meaning of the verbal message will be perceived as more credible than an identical verbal message that does not include such a signal. The goal of the present research was to test this notion in the context of complaints accompanied by anger expressions. The notion that emotional signals interact with verbal content with regard to the perceived credibility of a message is grounded in appraisal theory of emotion. According to appraisal theories of emotion, emotions are elicited and differentiated Anger and Credibility through a series of appraisals of (internal or external) stimulus events according to the perceived nature of the event. Observers are aware of the "stories" that underlie emotions (Parkinson, 1999, 2001) and hence can ‘reverse engineer’ the relationship between the person and the event based on the emotion expressed (Frijda, 1986). This information then can serve to inform the observer about the person’s actual experience of the situation and hence the credibility of their verbal message. Emotional signals that match the meaning of verbal messages amplify their perceived credibility, discrepancy between emotional and verbal message reduces credibility (cf. DePaulo et al., 2003). Even though in a given situation more than one expression is plausible and hence would not be perceived as discrepant -for example, in case of a perceived injustice one may plausibly show either sadness or anger -the specific emotion shown should have nonetheless divergent effects on the perceiver. The factors that influence the credibility of statements have been most extensively studied in the context of eyewitness or victims’ testimonies. Two studies, which investigated the impact of the emotional tone of the message in mock-jury studies, found that statements accompanied by situation congruent affect, rather than presented in a neutral or indifferent tone, were perceived as more credible (Golding, Fryman, Marsil, & Yozwiak, 2003; Kaufmann, Drevland, Wessel, Overskeid, & Magnussen, 2003). Yet, too much emotion also led to decreased credibility just as did too little (Golding et al., 2003). However, the studies reported above did not focus on Anger and Credibility discrete emotions, but rather on somewhat diffuse affect displays such as crying (Golding et al., 2003) or despair and sobs (Kaufmann et al., 2003). By contrast, in the present study we focus on the specific and contrasting signal value of discrete emotions. One context in which credibility is a crucial concern and which is commonly accompanied by -often strong -emotions are complaints. The recipient of the complaint needs to take the validity of the complaint into account and complainants are often motivated by strong emotions to present a complaint. Since complaints are usually the result of some sort of goal obstruction, appraisal theories of emotion (Scherer, 1987) would predict anger to be most likely in this context. In fact, complaints are often motivated by anger (Bougie, Pieters, & Zeelenberg, 2003) and hence are often accompanied by anger expressions (Stephens & Gwinner, 1998). There are two reasons to believe that anger increases the credibility of complaints. First, anger should be the most situation congruent emotion in this context, and hence, according to the logic described above, result in increased credibility. Further, anger is not only situation congruent but anger by itself communicates to others that damage was caused and someone was hurt, (Hareli & Katzir, 2002). Nevertheless, there are also good reasons to expect that expressions of anger, even if they increase credibility, elicit negative reactions on the part of the recipient. First, anger is closely associated with hostility and aggression and hence considered to be socially undesirable (Parkinson et al., 2005). In addition, reactions of anger may also Anger and Credibility elicit anger in the recipient because perceivers match their reactions to those of others (Burgoon, Le Poire, & Rosenthal, 1995). In fact, people who express their dissatisfaction in a derogatory or otherwise negative manner are more likely to receive a hostile response from the target of the complaint (Grandey, Dickter, & Sin, 2004), whereas a non-threatening, nondestructive manner of complaining is more likely to be met with a constructive, supportive reception (Kowalski, 1996). Finally, sadness may also impact on the perception of complaints. Specifically, sadness has a strong appeal function for the provision of succor (e.g., Averill, 1968; Frijda & Mesquita, 1994). Thus, presenting a complaint with a sad demeanor may solicit helping behavior from participants. However, it is important to consider that the emotional tone of a complaint will only have an effect on the recipient to the extent that recipients are attentive to these expressions (van Kleef, De Dreu, & Manstead, 2004a, 2004b). In addition, not everyone perceives a given emotion expression in the same way. Even such very extreme stimuli as the Pictures of Facial Affect (Ekman & Friesen, 1976) are not recognized by 100% of participants (Elfenbein & Ambady, 2002) and this is even more so when ecologically valid stimuli appropriate for a complaint are used. Accordingly, in the present study we assessed the effect of observer's perception of the emotional tone of the message. In sum, we predict that presenting a complaint with an angry demeanor enhances its credibility because the anger message parallels and hence supports the Anger and Credibility verbal complaint message. However, anger may also entrain social punishment because it is perceived as inappropriate. Increased credibility, therefore, may not lead to higher compensation due to the fact that the angry complainant is punished for expressing an inappropriate emotion. By contrast, showing sadness or an affiliative demeanor may not increase credibility but could nonetheless lead to higher compensation either because of the appeal for help implicit in sadness (Averill, 1968; Frijda & Mesquita, 1994) or because the complainant is perceived as cooperative (Kowalski, 1996). Figure 1 shows the conceptual model that was assessed. Specifically, we assume that perceived emotional tone of the complaint influences the degree to which the observer believes that harm was indeed done – damage credibility. Damage credibility mediates both the effect of perceived emotion expression on perceptions of suffering credibility and – indirectly through suffering credibility – on compensation. Since the independent variable is an individual difference variable and two levels of mediation were assessed, structural equation modeling was used to test the model described in Figure 1, following Baron and Kenny (1986). OVERVIEW We used audio-visual records, which showed two men and two women who uttered a complaint using different emotional tones. In addition, we manipulated the situational context. Specifically, some situations are obviously undesirable and hence not much persuasion should be needed to justify such a complaint. Other complaints Anger and Credibility may be more ambiguously justified and it may not be immediately obvious that compensation is warranted. We predict that anger is more relevant to establishing credibility when the complaint is ambiguously justified. In contrast, we expected that sadness might increase credibility for suffering and hence the likelihood that participants receive compensation, especially if the complaint dealt with a serious, that is, highly justified, problem, which is likely to cause distress to the complainant and justifies an appeal for help signaled by sadness. As an affiliative-smiling stance should signal cooperative intent it may increase at least suffering credibility. That is, the participant should assume that the complainant is complaining in good faith and really experienced harm at least in their own eyes. Thus, the effect of an affiliative-smiling stance should not depend on the justifiability of the complaint. Method Participants. A total of