How Different Cultures Perceive and React to Anger? Based on the EQ Skills in Each Culture
Since human character depends on cultural practices and social composition, it affects people’s perception and response towards anger. People express anger through emotional changes, which are triggered by threats and tresses. Anger varies in intensity since it is an emotional feeling but this depends on the ability of someone to manage unfolding circumstances and causal factors. According to research findings, anger occurs either as mild, high level of frustrations or range and in each case, the victim exhibits different reactions. Nonetheless, most people fight back whenever they are angry. Psychologists describe fighting back as how people release pain and stress to attain normalcy. Noteworthy, rarely do people react to anger by holding back or withdrawing from unfolding circumstances. Here, someone is able to manage the effects of anger by holding back.
Various scholars agree that there is a link between someone’s emotional control and cultural background together with a range of environmental factors. People’s social composition and varying trainings they undertake are essential in understanding certain behavioral changes and reactions towards anger. Thus, to gain an understanding of the factors, which determine people’s reactions to anger, it is paramount to carry out thorough research on the target population and make comparisons before adopting a resolution. This paper focuses on cultural differences and their impact on response towards anger. With reference to Emotional Quotient, psychologists hold that human beings have a balanced approach towards behavior and posses mechanisms to overcome the unforeseen effects of anger. Therefore, the main area of study stems from the thesis statement, captured by the research question: how do different cultures perceive and react to anger? The survey will draw comparisons between the Middle East Communities and those in the U.S, Japan and Europe. It will have significance to national and global spectrum. It is worth noting that culture plays a core role in determining people’s response to anger and the quality of relations hips they form through interactions. Thus, cordial relationships thrive where individuals focus on appreciating their cultural differences. By mastering one’s EQ, it becomes easy to avoid provocative approaches in discussions and achieve solution to a problem through meaningful communication techniques.
In this research, we shall analyze human character and how different communities in the world exercise humility during threatening circumstances. Any response you get during discussions largely determines the final decision during discussions. Naturally, anger and EQ intertwine when addressing issues of social cohesion in any setup. This research draws a lot of reference from the works of a philosopher who holds that human character keeps changing and that an understanding of social culture and composition is essential in nurturing good relationships with other communities. In essence, this study lays emphasis on the need to understand other people’s EQ and applying the knowledge in developing an environment that upholds good ethics mutual coexistence. This is because social ethics form the pillar of every society by giving guiding norms and principles.
Review of Background
The issue of response and perceptions towards anger is not new. Research on this topic dates back to 1994. During this time, the need to understand the link between anger and aggression often related with a social cognitive framework. Through investigations, researchers established a model for social information processing approaches through six steps that are key in understanding anger, perception and response. These steps are encoding social cues, interpretation, means to identify social goals, generation of solutions to problems, evaluation of solutions and implementation of chosen behavior response. The steps became paramount in assessing reactions of different communities when addressing anger and aggression with other people from diverse communities.
The main purpose of this research was to ascertain the differences between aggressive children and non-aggressive ones in their social cognitive. Additionally, the study aimed at coming up with social interventions and program which would tame aggression in children. To achieve this, it was essential for communities to address errors in social integration and cognitive processes. The study reveals how aggressive children have higher tendencies of social deficits with limited social acceptance as opposed to their non-aggressive counterparts. A good example is the U.S where social cognitive children do not get love and acceptance from their families. Such children are fast to anger whenever an opportunity presents itself and do not subscribe to jokes during arguments. Numerous researchers have also proved this. It therefore follows that children need special intervention during their childhood in order to handle cases related to anger when they mature. This is because social orientation and cultural understanding play a pivotal role in determining the character of a person.
More importantly, the society has the greatest responsibility in shaping a person’s character, in six steps listed above. Encoding is crucial at an early stage because the person is still aggressive and can remember limited cues within specific cases. In this scenario, someone would employ very few cues to interpret events or become hostile and not depicting neutral cues when arguing with friends or those perceived to be enemies.
Anger, Suzy. 2001. Knowing the past: Victorian literature and culture. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Boyd, M. 2007. Psychiatric nursing. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Braund, Susanna Morton, and Glenn W. Most. 2003. Ancient anger: perspectives from Homer to Galen. New York: Cambridge University Press.
DiGiuseppe, Raymond, and Raymond Chip Tafrate. 2006. Understanding Anger Disorders. New York: Oxford University Press. http://public.eblib.com/EBLPublic/PublicView.do?ptiID=273328.
Feindler, Eva L. 2006. Anger-related disorders: a practitioner’s guide to comparative treatments. New York, New York: Springer.
Fernandez, Ephrem. 2013. Treatments for anger in specific populations: theory, application, and outcome.
Garnett, Mark. 2008. From anger to apathy: the British experience since 1975. London: Vintage.
Gilbert, Paul, and Bernice Andrews. 1998. Shame interpersonal behavior, psychopathology, and culture. New York: Oxford University Press. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10278538.
Kövecses, Zoltán, and Bálint Koller. 2006. Language, mind, and culture: a practical introduction. New York: Oxford.
Potegal, Michael, Gerhard Stemmler, and Charles Donald Spielberger. 2010. International handbook of anger: constituent and concomitant biological, psychological, and social processes. New York: Springer.
Russell, James A. 1995. Everyday conceptions of emotion: an introduction to the psychology, anthropology and linguistics of emotion : [proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Everyday Conceptions of Emotion, Almagro, Spain, May 3-8, 1994]. Dordrecht [u.a.]: Kluwer.
Stevenson, Howard C. 2003. Playing with anger: teaching coping skills to African American boys through athletics and culture. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
Videbeck, Sheila L. 2011. Psychiatric-mental health nursing. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1992. Semantics, culture, and cognition universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. configurations. New York: Oxford Univ Press.
 Boyd, M. 2007. Psychiatric nursing. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
 Kövecses, Zoltán, and Bálint Koller. 2006. Language, mind, and culture: a practical introduction. New York: Oxford.
 Wierzbicka, Anna. 1992. Semantics, culture, and cognition universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. configurations. New York: Oxford Univ Press.