Fewer EMA studies have examined the qualities of social experiences that influence social emotion experience in people with SZ. Granholm and colleagues found that people with SZ reported more happiness and less sadness in response to interactions they appraised as being worthwhile and successful, as well as interactions where they believed others perceived them as likeable, smart, and interesting [ 20 ]. However, to our knowledge, no study to date has examined whether other qualities, such as involvement in a given social interaction or how close one feels to the person they are interacting with, are related to EMA-reported social emotion experiences in people with SZ.
Feeling close to others, including friends, is related to better functioning and quality of life in people with SZ in non-EMA studies e. Through EMA, we can better understand the relationship between these subjective qualities of relationships and experiences of social pleasure in daily life.
EMA is an ideal method to examine emotion experiences during or immediately following specific types of social interactions e. EMA does not rely as heavily on retrospective reporting as other methods susceptible to recall bias e. Further, EMA does not rely as heavily on cognitive abilities or insight needed to summarize past or hypothetical subjective experiences of social interactions as some self-report methods.
Additionally, we can disentangle differences in social emotion experiences from other related factors that trait-based assessments may not capture, such as whether people with SZ differ from those without in the opportunity to engage in social experiences, or the difference between reduced social pleasure and heightened negative affect during social interactions.
Based on previous EMA studies, we predicted: 1 People with and without SZ would not differ in proportion of time spent with others, extent of involvement during a given interaction, or average number of social interactions in between EMA signals; and 2 people with and without SZ would report more positive happiness and less negative anxiety, sadness emotion experience when with others compared to when they were alone.
Due to the dearth of previous evidence on the relationship between qualities of social interactions and emotion experience in people with SZ, we explored whether certain qualities of social experiences or number of social interactions were associated with positive and negative emotions during social interactions, and whether this differed between people with and without SZ.
As an exploratory aim, we examined correlations between EMA-reported social experiences and psychiatric symptoms and social functioning assessments in people with and without SZ. Twenty people with schizophrenia SZ and 15 people without SZ healthy controls; HCs participated see Table 1 for demographic information. Participants were recruited from the San Francisco Bay Area. HC participants were recruited via community flyers and public advertisements on websites typically used to recruit for psychological research studies.
Exclusion criteria were the following: a history of head trauma, stroke, neurological disease, or loss of consciousness; a current mood episode; substance dependence within the past six months; not fluent in English; or above the age of All participants reported their age and gender. There is missing data for all other demographic information for three participants with SZ.
Using the Ethica Data application, participants completed brief surveys three times per day for seven consecutive days on researcher-provided smartphones. Similar frequencies have been used in prior EMA studies assessing social behavior in people with serious mental illness [ 20 , 28 ]. As part of a larger EMA study other data in preparation for publication , participants were asked a variety of questions related to their current social context see Table 2 for EMA questions and forced-choice responses.
To determine whether a participant was interacting with another person, an initial forced-choice question of whether the participant was alone alone or alone with someone else around or with others was asked. When participants reported being with others, they were also asked to report on how well they knew the person they were with i. Regardless of whether participants were with others or not, they were also asked to report on how happy, anxious, and sad they felt in that moment.
Finally, participants were asked to report on the number of social interactions they experienced since the last EMA signal, regardless of whether they were currently with others or not. Potential participants completed a brief phone screening prior to being invited to participate in the study.
Once invited to participate, participants met with a trained research assistant and completed informed verbal and written consent. Next, participants completed the SCID-P to confirm diagnostic status and provided demographic information.
The researcher then provided the participant with a smartphone and introduced them to the Ethica Data application, including the EMA portion of the study. One week later, participants returned the phone to the researcher either by returning to the research laboratory where the original assessment took place, or during a home visit the researcher made as part of a larger ongoing study.
The clinical assessments were not the main focus of this study and were completed for a subset of participants see Results for n sizes for each assessment. We examined emotions across experiences i. Parameters were estimated with full-information maximum likelihood. EMA responses were treated as repeated measures Level 1 that were nested within persons Level 2.
Additionally, time point of a possible 21 EMA signals over the course of seven days was included in each model as a Level 1 predictor, although these results are not reported. Group status SZ vs. HC was examined as a Level 2 predictor. We used chi-square and independent-samples t tests to examine between-group differences in demographic factors and EMA-assessed means of emotion and social experience variables.
See Table 1 for demographic information. Data on age and gender for all participants are reported. Three participants with SZ had incomplete demographic information—additional demographic data e. A subset of participants completed all clinical measures see Table 1.
Thus, intimacy of relationship was positively associated with happiness during social interactions only in the HC group. In summary, how close a participant felt to the person they were interacting with in a given EMA signal was significantly related to more happiness during social interactions across participants, but this relationship only remained significant in the HC group. Intimacy of a relationship was also related to more sadness during social interactions across groups.
However, intimacy of relationship was unrelated to anxiety during social interactions. Thus, involvement in social interactions appears to only be related to less anxiety during social interactions for HCs. In summary, the extent of involvement in social interactions was significantly related to more happiness and less anxiety during social interactions, but these relationships only remained significant in HCs.
There was a trend that, across participants, involvement in social interactions was related to more sadness during interactions. In summary, enjoyment of social experiences during EMA signals was related to more happiness during social interactions across groups. Enjoyment of social experiences was not significantly related to either sadness or anxiety during interactions in either group.
In summary, the number of social interactions in between EMA signals was significantly related to more happiness during interactions, but this relationship was only trending towards significance in the HC group and was not significant in people with SZ. The number of interactions in between EMA signals was not significantly associated with sadness or anxiety during interactions in either group.
In people with SZ, the UCLA-LS was significantly negatively correlated with happiness when with others and intimacy of relationship during interactions.
In other words, higher trait loneliness was related to less happiness during social interactions and interactions that involved less intimacy for people with SZ. The QLS-IR trended towards a significant positive correlation with happiness during social interactions and involvement in interactions, suggesting trends that better social functioning was related to more happiness when with others and more involvement during social interactions for people with SZ.
Thus, in HCs, negative symptoms were related to less enjoyment of social experiences, lower intimacy during interactions, and a lower frequency of interactions in between EMA signals. The CAINS-MAP was also positively correlated with anxiety when with others and a trend association with less happiness when with others, suggesting that negative symptoms are related to more anxiety and less happiness when with others in HCs.
The QLS-IR was positively correlated with enjoying interactions, intimacy of interactions, and number of interactions in between EMA signals, while it was negatively correlated with anxiety when with others.
Thus, better social functioning was related to more enjoyment of social experiences, more intimacy during interactions, higher frequency of interactions in between EMA signals, and less anxiety during social interactions for people without SZ. We assessed the connections between EMA-reported emotion in the context of daily social interactions and qualities of these interactions in people with and without SZ.
Overall, groups did not differ in various qualities of social experiences assessed through EMA, including the proportion of time spent alone, as well as the intimacy, involvement, enjoyment, and average number of social interactions. People with and without SZ reported more happiness than sadness or anxiety when interacting with others, replicating other studies that show no difference between these groups in social emotion experiences [ 12 , 14 , 19 ].
However, the relationships between qualities of social experiences and emotion differed between groups: the connections between social pleasure i. To our knowledge, this is the first EMA study to examine the relationship between intimacy of and involvement in social interactions and social emotion experiences in people with and without SZ.
Our results suggest that qualities related to intimacy and involvement may be less related to social pleasure in people with SZ compared to others.
While intimacy and involvement might be thought to reflect interpersonal closeness, they do not necessarily indicate a positive or pleasant interaction.
Indeed, our findings suggest that higher intimacy of interactions was associated with more sadness across groups. This finding may reflect the types of conversations that occur with loved ones e. Previous studies have found that people with SZ experience heightened interpersonal conflict compared to others, particularly with close others such as family members [ 31 ]. While speculative, it may be that people with SZ in our sample experienced more interpersonal conflict than HCs during their social interactions, particularly in interactions higher in intimacy or involvement, resulting in a lack of connection between quality of social experience and social happiness.
Differences in rates of interpersonal conflict may also partially explain why involvement in social interactions was related to less anxiety during interactions, but only for HCs. Future EMA studies should incorporate assessments of interpersonal conflict to better understand associations between intimacy and social emotion experience in people with SZ.
While people with and without SZ in our study did not differ in reported experiences of anxiety or sadness during social experiences, inclusion of a broader array of negative emotion words may better capture interpersonal stress e.
Further, to better understand the dynamic nature of social emotion experiences within a specific relationship, future work could incorporate EMA reports from a caretaker or close other in study design [ 32 ]. None of the qualities of daily social interactions we studied were significantly related to happiness when with others in people with SZ. It may be that beliefs regarding the interactions themselves, rather than qualities such as involvement and intimacy, are more directly related to social emotion experience in people with SZ.
One previous EMA study found that positive interaction appraisals e. People with SZ report defeatist performance beliefs e. Thus, factors such as whether one perceived the interaction as successful or that one was perceived as likeable may be more tied to momentary experiences of social pleasure in people with SZ than the qualities we measured. Additionally, other qualities of interactions may be more closely related to social pleasure in people with SZ than the factors we assessed, such as whether the participant initiated the interaction or not, the reason for the interaction e.
Future studies should continue to examine these factors and their relationship with social emotion experience in people with and without SZ. Goffman contends that each performance is a presentation of self and that everyone seeks to create specific impressions in the minds of others. This universal drive is called impression management.
People present themselves to others based on cultural values, norms, and expectations. If an individual wishes to convey that she does not agree or identify with social norms, she must use a commonly legible system of symbols in order to communicate that information. As such, she is still engaging in impression management by trying to present herself in a particular way to society.
From a dramaturgical perspective, a performance of identity is successful when the audience sees the performer as he or she wishes to be viewed. An individual invests energy in portraying a particular identity to other people. The performer is always aware that the audience is doing evaluative work on its own and might doubt the authenticity of the performance.
Goffman explains this awareness in terms of front stage and back stage behaviors. Front stage actions are those that are visible to the audience and are part of the performance, while back stage actions only occur when the audience is not around. An example of this would be the type of customer service embodied by baristas at the local coffee shop.
While on the clock and in front of customers, baristas will typically do what the customer wants and try to look untroubled by obnoxious requests. However, as soon as the customer leaves, the barista might deride the customer to coworkers. This shows how individuals are constantly attuned to audience and will alter their behaviors accordingly. Performance Stage : Erving Goffman uses the metaphor of a stage to explain human behavior in everyday life.
Privacy Policy. Skip to main content. Social Interaction. Search for:. Understanding Social Interaction. Understanding Social Interaction In sociology, social interaction is a dynamic, changing sequence of social actions between individuals or groups. Learning Objectives Review the four types of social interactions: accidental, repeated, regular, and regulated.
Key Takeaways Key Points A social interaction is an exchange between two or more individuals and is a building block of society. What We Think At South University, we hope that you learn from these studies and continue to build the support networks in your lives.
In addition to the psychological and physical benefits of having a support system, having friends and family who know about your academic and professional goals may help you to achieve them. The support and encouragement from your friends and family will motivate you, and you can ask them to check in regularly on how you are doing in classes. For the last week of the Student Hero Contest , we hope you continue to network with other students online and also start talking with your family and friends about your online education experiences.
If your hero is a family member or a friend you see every day rather than a student, we encourage you to still enter the contest and tell us about why he or she is so important to you! Sources Cohen, S. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 50 5 , Sirven, N. Steptoe, A. Journal of Personality , 77 6 ,
0コメント