J Adult Dev (2013) 20:76–86 DOI 10.1007/s10804-013-9158-6
Emotional Expression During Autobiographical Narratives as a Function of Aging: Support for the Socioemotional Selectivity Theory Sarah M. C. Robertson • Derek R. Hopko
Published online: 4 April 2013 Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
Abstract People communicate personal stories in very different ways. These variations in communication patterns may be affected by many variables, particularly age. Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST) predicts young adults are focused on information gathering to function in society, whereas older adults become increasingly motivated to regulate emotions and pursue emotionally salient yet stable goals and activities. What is not understood is whether communication patterns reflect this developmental transition. Younger and older adults (n = 120) completed negative and positive autobiographical narratives that were analyzed with a Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count Program. Results indicated that younger adults utilized more affective words in general, including more positive, negative, and anxious words during autobiographical narratives. In the positive autobiographical task, older adults used a higher percentage of ‘‘family’’ words, whereas in the negative autobiographical task, younger adults more frequently utilized ‘‘friend’’ words. In terms of pronoun use, there was evidence for increased second and third person pronouns among older adults. Results related to affective, social, and pronoun word use are largely supportive of SST. However, other important findings that were not predicted were noteworthy, including the finding that results varied as a function of narrative valence.
Keywords Autobiographical narrative Aging Depression Anxiety
S. M. C. Robertson (&) Department of Psychology, College of Charleston, 66 George St., Charleston, SC 29424, USA e-mail:
[email protected]
Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST)
D. R. Hopko University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
123
Introduction People communicate personal stories or narratives in qualitatively different ways and for multiple purposes. Some recount stories that are incredibly detailed and intricate, while others communicate stories that are vague and lack complexity. Some primarily focus on the emotional aspects of experiences, while others prefer to present largely factual information. This communication variability could be related to many variables, including mental health status, personality and cultural differences, relationship satisfaction, and level of comfort and familiarity with the recipient(s) in a communicative context (Di Luzio et al. 2000; Fussell 2002; Ng and Bradac 1993; Robertson and Hopko 2009; Segrin 1998; Ting-Toomey 1983; Weiss and Heyman 1997). One factor that might account for significant variability within autobiographical narratives is the process of aging. The primary aim of this study was to better explicate communication patterns as a function of age. Central hypotheses were based on Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST) and included the predictions that relative to younger adults, older adults would demonstrate differences in emotion word, social word, and pronoun usage in emotional autobiographical narratives.
SST asserts that social and communicative behaviors are largely motivated by the attainment of expansive and emotional rewards. Expansive rewards involve garnering novel information, as might be obtained when interacting
Emotional Expression During Narratives
with new people or being exposed to novel experiences. Emotional rewards are more directly related to the process of experiencing positive affect, as when an individual feels emotionally balanced or regulated, as well as feeling socially validated or needed by other human beings (Carstensen et al. 1999). Although it is recognized that expansive and emotional rewards are not mutually exclusive, the primary distinction is that the former is based on the attainment of knowledge and the latter a function of desirable emotional experiences. An important tenet of SST is that motivation to engage in behaviors likely to result in expansive and emotional rewards shifts throughout adulthood. Specifically, SST posits that perceived time limitations lead to a motivational shift toward increasingly emotionally salient experiences (Carstensen et al. 2003). Accordingly, the more one perceives one’s lifespan as shortened or mortality as imminent, the more emotional goals are likely to be pursued. It is theorized that as people age, they are increasingly likely to have certain experiences that increase awareness of the idea that life is finite (e.g., physical changes, significant illness, loss of a friend or family member, observing a child become married). As exposure to such experiences increases throughout adulthood, individuals become more invested in learning how to better understand and regulate emotional experiences and social motivational emphasis shifts from knowledge attainment to emotional gratification and stability (Carstensen et al. 2003, 1999). In the past decade, substantial empirical research has supported the SST model (Hicks et al. 2012; Hendricks and Cutler 2004; Fung et al. 2008). Emotional Regulation and Aging Emotion regulation refers to emotional awareness and the ability to process and accept emotional experiences and engage in healthy strategies to manage uncomfortable emotions when necessary. Emotion regulation is thereby the process of managing emotions and the methods of communicating these feelings (Lopes et al. 2005). Based on SST, the premise is that older adults generally will be more motivated toward emotionally salient objectives such as regulating emotions with efficiency, and therefore less emotionally expressive when describing personally relevant emotional experiences. It is important to recognize that SST predicts that older adults will be more focused on emotional goals when compared to young adults. This does not necessarily mean that older adults will be more emotive, but alternatively that they will be more focused on regulating their emotions. Therefore, it is predicted that older adults will demonstrate less emotion in personal narratives, given that they will be focused on demonstrating emotional control. Empirical support for this notion includes studies that demonstrate older adults may
77
experience less negative and positive emotion, may be more capable of controlling emotional responses, and may endorse fewer symptoms of pathology than younger adults (Crittendon and Hopko 2006; Gross et al. 1997; Lawton et al. 1992; Segal et al. 2005; Bluck and Alea 2009). Given that older adults often demonstrate increased emotional control, it is reasonable to speculate that older adults might be less emotionally expressive in the context of an autobiographical emotional narrative task. Research on the relationship between aging and narrative discourse has demonstrated that older adults utilize less emotional language when writing about an event and exhibit less negative emotion (yet greater positive emotion) when responding to both experienced and hypothetical emotion-eliciting scenarios (Kennedy et al. 2004; Lockenhoff et al. 2008; Rice and Pasupathi 2010). In contrast, other findings have indicated that older adults are more expressive of negative affect when writing about historical events (Alea et al. 2004). Importantly, research conducted to date has not examined emotion word use in both positive and negative unstructured autobiographical narratives. There is much benefit to providing individuals with an unstructured format to explore emotional experiences. For example, they are free to develop their own structure and generate as much or as little information as desired. Accordingly, this type of narrative task is conceptually similar to a traditional projective assessment whereby meaningful information may be imperceptibly obtained that might be more readily avoided and less reliably assessed when using more direct assessment methods such as simply asking individuals whether they are emotionally expressive. Expression of Social Words Research suggests that rates of social interaction decrease with age, despite the fact that social activity in late life is associated with improved cognitive, mental, and physical health (Holt-Lunstad and Smith 2012; James et al. 2011; Carstensen 1987). Disengagement theory asserts that decreased social interaction functions to prepare one for impending death (Cumming and Henry 1961). More contemporary theorists argue that as people age, they become increasingly selective in their social partners. Older adults are often more cautious and highly selective regarding their social partners and spend significantly less time generating novel friendships (Frederickson and Carstensen 1998; Cloutier-Fisher et al. 2011). Rather than perceiving this downward shift in social interactions as a decline in social functioning, geropsychologists conceptualize this trend as older adults opting to invest themselves more deeply in meaningful existing relationships (Carstensen 1992a; Carstensen et al. 2003). Conversely, younger adults are
123
78
generally known to broadly search for prospective social contacts and are developmentally more motivated to engage in behaviors that function to extend their social support network (del Voile et al. 2010; Sher-Censor and Oppenheim 2010). These data are consistent with SST, given that younger adults are theoretically more motivated toward expansive goals and rewards. Given this difference in social motivation between younger and older adults, it is hypothesized that differences in social references will be reflected within autobiographical narratives such that younger adults will be more focused on friendships than older adults. Importantly, it is not argued that friendships are unimportant to older adults. Rather, it is asserted that because younger adults are developmentally primed to seek new friendships and generate social contacts, they will discuss friendships more often within autobiographical narratives. Older adults, on the other hand, are more developmentally focused on pruning existing relationships. Part of this pruning process involves becoming increasingly attentive to meaningful relationships and less focused on generating new relationships. This increased attention is often focused on family, and it is therefore predicted that older adults will discuss family more in their narratives. Empirical support for this notion include data that indicate when given options, older adults choose to spend time with immediate family members significantly more than younger adults (Frederickson and Carstensen 1998; Lang and Carstensen 2002). It is not predicted that there will be differences in overall frequency of social words per se, given that social interaction is of high importance for both younger and older adults (Carstensen 1992b; Seeman 2000; White et al. 2009). Rather, it is the type of social interaction (friends vs. family) emphasized in the narratives that is of most relevance.
S. M. C. Robertson, D. R. Hopko
suggesting that pronoun usage could vary as a function of age. Based on SST, it is predicted that younger adults will utilize a higher percentage of first person pronouns (e.g., I, we), given their theorized focus on the self, expanding knowledge, and acquiring information. Older adults might be more apt to include the perspectives of other people in their narratives, given their theorized focus on accomplishing emotional goals (e.g., emotion regulation) and their desire to decrease the intensity of unwanted emotion. According to SST, it is developmentally appropriate for a young adult to be engaged in exploring people, experiences, or objects that provide them with new knowledge. Older adults may comparably be less concerned with gaining information and more focused on arranging their environment to maximize their social rewards and be more focused on the needs of those in their social network. By focusing on the perspectives of others, they will necessarily utilize more second (e.g., you, yours) and third person pronouns (e.g., he, she, they). Based on this collective body of work, the following study hypotheses were proposed. Age will be associated with differences in the percentage of (a) emotion words whereby younger adults will utilize a higher percentage of emotion words; (b) social words in autobiographical narratives whereby older adults will utilize a higher percentage of family words while young adults will utilize a higher percentage of friend words, and (c) pronouns in autobiographical narratives whereby older adults will utilize a higher percentage of pronouns focused on other people and younger adults will utilize a higher percentage of pronouns focused on the self.
Method Participants
Expression of Pronoun Words Research on the expression of pronouns in narratives has recently begun to be examined, with an estimated 50 % of all spoken and written words categorized as pronouns (Pennebaker et al. 2003). Pronouns are of particular interest to narrative researchers, given that utilizing pronouns requires a unique ability to engage in the task of perspective taking. Speaking about other people during a narrative requires thinking about behaviors, events, and consequences from another’s perspective. Research has indicated that pronouns are processed differently in the brain (Miller 1995) and changes in pronoun use can occur following traumatic events (Niederhoffer and Pennebaker 2009). Recent research indicates that as people progress through the lifespan, they utilize a smaller percentage of words that are self-referent (Niederhoffer and Pennebaker 2009),
123
Younger adults (age 18–25) were recruited from the University of Tennessee (n = 60) and registered for the study through the departmental research website. Older adults (age 60?) were recruited from a regional Senior Citizen’s Center (n = 60). Younger adults received course credit for their participation, while older adults received a monetary compensation of $10. The protocol was reviewed and approved by the University of Tennessee’s Institutional Review Board. Recruitment flyers were placed in the Senior Center, and interested persons contacted the researcher to schedule an appointment. Demographical characteristics of the study sample are presented in Table 1. Inclusion criteria included specified age requirements, English fluency, and lack of cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment was based on a Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) score of 23 or lower (Tombaugh and
Emotional Expression During Narratives
McIntyre 1992), and one older adult participant was excluded for this reason. Participants scored an average of 28.4 on the MMSE, with a range of 24–30. A total of 91.7 % of older adult participants (n = 55) scored at least a 26 on the MMSE. Chi-square tests were utilized to assess differences on categorical demographical variables as a function of age group. There were no significant gender and ethnicity differences as a function of age. There were significant differences in occupational status [v2(4) = 60.06, p \ .05] and marital status [v2(4) = 101.29, p \ .05] as a function of age. Regarding occupational status, relative to older adults, significantly more young adults were employed part-time and unemployed, and fewer younger adults were retired (p \ .05). Regarding marital status, a significantly greater proportion of young adults were single and significantly more older adults had been married, divorced, and widowed (p \ .05). Given these significant differences, marital status and occupational status were included as covariates in all analyses. Measures Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE; Folstein et al. 1975) This measure was designed to assess cognitive impairment, defined as an MMSE score of 23 or lower (Tombaugh and
79
McIntyre 1992). This measure has been demonstrated to have strong construct validity (r = .78) and test-retest reliability (r = .89) in older adult samples (Folstein et al. 1975). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III, Vocabulary Subtest (Wechsler 1997a) The vocabulary subtest consists of 35 words that participants are asked to define. This subtest is highly correlated with full-scale intelligence (r = .84; Wechsler 1997b) and was used to assess potential age group differences on verbal intelligence, which could be a confounding variable in the encoding, organization, coherence, and recall of autobiographical narratives (Fivush et al. 1992; Ornstein and Haden 2002). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count Program-2007 (LIWC; Pennebaker et al. 2007) This computer program analyzes the linguistic content of narratives. Researchers were responsible for transcribing all narratives immediately after data were collected. A second member of the research team reviewed the transcription for accuracy and data were then entered into the LIWC software program. This program has good psychometric properties and has been utilized by several narrative researchers in recent studies (Fivush et al. 2003;
Table 1 Demographics of sample
Young (n = 60)
Old (n = 60)
Total sample (n = 120)
Age (mean, SD)
19.63 (0.23)
72.03 (1.15)
45.83 (27.07)
Education in years (mean, SD)
13.27 (0.15)
14.07 (.37)
13.67 (2.21)
Gender (women)
36 (60.00 %)
43 (71.67 %)
79 (65.83 %)
Ethnicity Caucasian
50 (83.33 %)
56 (93.33 %)
106 (88.33 %)
African American
6 (10.00 %)
3 (5.00 %)
9 (7.50 %)
Latino
2 (3.33 %)
0 (0.00 %)
2 (1.67 %)
Asian
2 (3.33 %)
0 (0.00 %)
2 (1.67 %)
American Indian
0 (0.00 %)
1 (1.67 %)
1 (.83 %)
Single
59 (98.33 %)
4 (6.67 %)
63 (52.30 %)
Married
1 (1.67 %)
14 (23.33 %)
15 (12.50 %)
Separated
0 (0.00 %)
2 (3.33 %)
2 (1.67 %)
Divorced
0 (0.00 %)
18 (30.00 %)
18 (15.00 %)
0 (0.00 %)
22 (36.67 %)
22 (18.33 %)
Employed full-time
2 (3.33 %)
1 (1.67 %)
3 (2.50 %)
Employed part-time
28 (46.67 %)
14 (23.33 %)
42 (35.00 %)
Unemployed (seeking employment)
8 (13.33 %)
2 (3.33 %)
10 (8.33 %)
Marital status
Widowed Occupational status
Unemployed (not seeking employment)
22 (36.67 %)
4 (6.67 %)
26 (21.67 %)
Retired
0 (0.00 %)
39 (65.00 %)
39 (32.50 %)
123
80
Pennebaker et al. 2007; Smith et al. 2005). All data, as is consistent with the LIWC program, is expressed as percentages of total words utilized. The following word categories were examined in this study: Emotion words Total Affect. All affective words within a narrative, both negatively and positively valenced (e.g., happy, cried, abandon). Negative Emotion. A subcategory of Total Affect, including only negative emotion words (e.g., hurt, ugly, nasty). Anxiety (e.g., anxiety, worried, fearful, nervous), Anger (e.g., hate, kill, annoyed), and Sadness (e.g., crying, grief, sad) were also assessed separately. Positive Emotion. A subcategory of Total Affect, including only positive emotion words (e.g., love, nice, sweet). Social Words. Humans (e.g., adult, baby, boy), Friends (buddy, friend, neighbor), and Family (e.g., daughter, husband, aunt) were assessed separately. Pronouns. First Person. First person pronouns consist of singular and plural references in the first-person voice (e.g., I, I’ll, we, we’ll). Second Person. Second person pronouns consist of singular and plural references in the second-person voice (e.g., thee, y’all, you, yours). Third Person. Third person pronouns consist of singular and plural references in the third-person voice (e.g., he, she, it, they). Procedure All participants initially completed informed consent procedures, administration of the Mini-Mental Status Examination (Folstein et al. 1975), and a brief demographical form (see Table 1). Participants then completed the Vocabulary subtest of the WAIS-III. Next, participants moved to the narrative phase of the study. During this phase, participants were asked to speak about a positive and negative life experience. Participants were asked to recall as much about these experiences as possible. All narratives were recorded on audiotape. The specific instructions were as follows: ‘‘Today I am interested in hearing about the different experiences that people have in life. Please describe a positive emotional experience that you went through. Try to imagine the event in your mind and talk continuously about your thoughts and feelings related to the event you are describing. Please try to do this with as much detail as possible and please begin now.’’ After describing this positive emotional experience, participants were asked to describe a negative emotional
123
S. M. C. Robertson, D. R. Hopko
experience. Narrative order was counterbalanced. Participants had up to 10 min to describe each emotional experience. All participants were prompted with the question, ‘‘What else can you remember about that event?’’ if they stopped talking before 5 min had elapsed. Younger adults completed study procedures at the University of Tennessee and older adults completed the study at the Senior Center.
Results Prior to statistical analyses, a manipulation check was performed to determine whether counterbalancing of narratives was successful. Regarding both the positive and negative narrative, there were no significant differences between the percentage of emotion words, social words, or pronouns utilized as a function of narrative order. An independent-samples t test revealed no significant difference in the verbal intelligence scores of younger and older adults, t(118) = 1.64, p [ .05. The average scaled score for younger adults was 10.90 (SD = 1.40), and the average scaled score for older adults was 10.40 (SD = 2.10). Participants utilized an average of 412.58 words in their positive narrative (SD = 462.85) and 493.17 words in their negative narrative (SD = 475.00). Number of total words varied as a function of age during positive narratives, F(1,118) = 5.54, p \ .05. Young adults utilized an average of 314.98 words (SD = 358.37), while older adults utilized an average of 510.18 words (SD = 533.19). Number of total words did not vary as a function of age for negative narratives, F(1,118) = 3.38, p [ .05. Participants utilized an average of 186.01 s for their positive narrative (SD = 183.25) and 216.14 s for the negative narrative (SD = 181.55). Number of seconds varied significantly as a function of age for both positive and negative narratives, F(1,118) = 13.47, p \ .05; F(1,118) = 9.70, p \ .05, respectively. Older adults utilized significantly more time in both the positive (Young: M = 127.60, SD = 13.88; Old: M = 244.42, SD = 28.64) and negative (Young: M = 166.35, SD = 17.23; Old: M = 265.93, SD = 26.96) narrative conditions (See Table 2). A one-way between-group multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was used to investigate age differences in word usage during the autobiographical narratives. Marital status and occupational status were covariates. Multivariate analysis was utilized to reduce Type 1 error associated with conducting several individual univariate analyses. Preliminary statistics were conducted to assess normality, linearity, univariate and multivariate outliers, homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, and multicollinearity, with no serious violations observed.
Emotional Expression During Narratives Table 2 Descriptive statistics for narrative duration (mean and standard deviation)
81
Young (n = 60)
Old (n = 60)
Total sample (n = 120)
Total words used
430.12 (399.09)
556.22 (536.39)
493.17 (475.00)
Total time utilized (in seconds)
166.35 (17.23)
265.93 (26.96)
216.14 (181.55)
Total words used
314.98 (358.37)
510.18 (533.19)
412.58 (462.85)
Total time utilized (in seconds)
127.60 (13.88)
244.42 (28.64)
186.01 (183.25)
Negative narrative analyses
Positive narrative analyses
Negative Narrative Analyses Emotion Words There was a significant difference between younger and older adults on the following variables: negative emotion, F(1,116) = 7.60, p \ .05, and anxiety F(1,116) = 7.74, p \ .05.1 Younger adults demonstrated a higher percentage of negative emotion words (Young: M = 2.69, SD = 1.61; Old: M = 2.04, SD = 1.46) and anxiety words compared to older adults (Young: M = .73, SD = .87; Old: M = .33, SD = .52). There was not a significant difference in emotion word use as a function of age for total affect, F(1,116) = 2.74, p [ .05, anger, F(1,116) = 2.19, p [ .05, or sadness, F(1,116) = 1.27, p [ .05. There was no significant effect of age on positively valenced emotion words, F(1,116) = .55, p [ .05. See Table 3 for descriptive statistics. Social Words Regarding age, there was a significant difference between younger and older adults on the following variable: friends, F(1,116) = 4.25, p \ .05. Younger adults (M = .54, SD = .77) utilized a higher percentage of friend words than older adults (M = .17, SD = .27). There was not a significant difference in word use for family, F(1,116) = 2.61, p [ .05 or humans, F(1,116) = 1.47, p [ .05. Pronoun Words There was a significant difference between younger and older adults on Second Person Pronouns, F(1,116) = 5.52, p \ .05 and Third Person Pronouns, F(1,116) = 3.91, p \ .05. Older adults demonstrated a higher percentage of both Second Person Pronouns (Young: M = .58 SD = .94; Old: M = .91, SD = .91) and Third Person Pronouns 1
Measures of depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II) and anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) assessed prior to the autobiographical narratives did not vary as a function of age group.
(Young: M = 10.17, SD = 2.72; Old: M = 11.88, SD = 2.94) compared with young adults. There was not a significant difference in first person pronouns as a function of age, F(1,116) = .55, p [ .05. Positive Narrative Analyses Emotion Words Regarding age, there was a significant difference between young and older adults on total affect, F(1,116) = 8.12, p \ .05 and positive emotion, F(1,116) = 5.65, p \ .05. Young adults (M = 5.99, SD = 2.28) demonstrated a higher percentage of total affect words compared to older adults (M = 4.67, SD = 2.02). Young adults (M = 5.01, SD = 2.28) also demonstrated a higher percentage of positive emotion words compared to older adults (M = 3.99, SD = 1.97). There was no significant effect of age on any negatively valenced emotion words: Negative Emotion, F(1,116) = 1.87, p [ .05; Anxiety, F(1,116) = 1.20, p [ .05; Anger, F(1,116) = .09, p [ .05; and Sadness, F(1,116) = .10, p [ .05. Social Words Regarding age, there was a significant difference between young and older adults on the following variable: family, F(1,116) = 10.74, p \ .05. Older adults (M = 1.59, SD = 1.63) demonstrated a higher percentage of family words than younger adults (M = .57, SD = .80). There were not significant differences in friend words, F(1,116) = 2.90, p [ .05 or Human words, F(1,116) = .36, p [ .05 as a function of age. Pronoun Words Regarding age, there were no significant differences between young and older adults on first person pronouns, F(1,116) = 2.81, p [ .05, second person pronouns, F(1,116) = .20, p [ .05, or third person pronouns, F(1,116) = 1.38, p [ .05.
123
82 Table 3 Descriptive statistics for word usage (reported as percentages; mean and SD)
S. M. C. Robertson, D. R. Hopko
Young (n = 60)
Old (n = 60)
Total sample (n = 120)
Negative narrative analyses Total affect
4.86 (2.02)
4.11 (1.92)
4.49 (2.00)
Positive emotion
2.16 (1.40)
2.03 (1.17)
2.09 (1.28)
Negative emotion
2.69 (1.61)
2.04 (1.46)
2.36 (1.57)
.73 (.87)
.33 (.52)
.53 (.74)
Anxiety Anger
.56 (.72)
.39 (.57)
.47 (.65)
Sadness
.77 (.82)
.87 (2.46)
.82 (1.82)
Humans
.48 (.54)
.97 (.93)
.73 (.80)
Family
1.40 (1.40)
1.42 (1.51)
1.41 (.80)
Friends
.54 (.77)
.17 (.27)
.35 (.61)
11.04 (3.01)
9.68 (2.59)
10.36 (2.88)
.58 (.94)
.91 (.91)
.74 (.93)
10.17 (2.72)
11.88 (2.94)
11.02 (2.95)
5.99 (2.28) 5.01 (2.28)
4.67 (2.02) 3.99 (1.97)
5.33 (2.25) 4.50 (2.19)
First-person Second-person Third-person Positive narrative analyses Total affect Positive emotion Negative emotion Anxiety
.64 (.58)
.77 (.70)
.15 (.23)
.19 (.28)
Anger
.12 (.31)
.13 (.27)
.13 (.29)
Sadness
.20 (.32)
.18 (.26)
.19 (.29)
Humans
.53 (.69)
.94 (.96)
.73 (.86)
Family
.57 (.80)
1.59 (1.63)
1.08 (1.38)
Friends
.47 (.58)
.17 (.34)
.32 (.49)
10.79 (2.86)
9.99 (2.76)
10.39 (2.82)
First-person Second-person Third-person
Discussion In general, hypotheses related to the expression of emotion, social, and pronoun words as a function of age were modestly supported. Pertaining to Hypothesis A, it was predicted that age would be associated with variability in emotion word use. Young adults demonstrated higher percentages of negative emotion and anxiety words during the negative narrative and higher percentages of total affect and positive emotion words in the positive narrative. These data are supportive of SST, given that the theory predicts that emotion regulation capacities increase with age. It is important to note, however, that other researchers have found older adults to demonstrate greater or similar emotional expression to young adults (Alea et al. 2004; Yoder and Elias 1987; Carstensen and Turk-Charles 1994). However, this work utilized descriptions of historical events (e.g., the OJ Simpson trial), pictorial sequences, and fictional stories rather than autobiographical narratives to assess emotionality. It appears that methodology related to emotional assessment plays an especially important role in the development of narratives. Accordingly, future work aimed at analyzing differences in word choice as a function
123
.89 (.79) .24 (.32)
.63 (1.63)
.71 (.85)
.67 (1.30)
8.60 (2.94)
9.81 (3.42)
9.20 (3.23)
of narrative methodology (autobiographical, historical, semi-structured, unstructured) is indicated to more systematically assess between-group differences. Interestingly, there were no differences in emotional words that were incongruent with the task (e.g., positive emotions in the negative narrative and negative emotions in the positive narrative) as a function of age. Participants utilized emotion-incongruent words, but age was not associated with differences in the percentage of these words utilized. Some previous research has also examined the role of aging in blending one’s emotions (Lockenhoff et al. 2008). In other words, what role does age play in the degree to which both positive and negative emotional words are utilized? While some data indicate that people utilize more blends of emotion as they age, data from the present study indicates that in terms of total affect (both positive and negatively valenced emotion words), young adults utilized more total affect words in the positive narrative only. It is possible that the difference in positive emotion words (5.01 % for young adults and 3.99 % for older adults) accounts for significant variance in total affect. It is also possible that young adults have more mixed feelings about positive events in their lives due to
Emotional Expression During Narratives
their more limited repertoire of events from which to draw. For example, most college students were not married (98 %), which was an event that many older adults spoke of with great positive emotion. The second hypothesis predicted that age would be associated with variability in the percentage of social words utilized. Valence played an important role in these data, given that in the negative narrative, young adults utilized a higher percentage of friend words than older adults. During the positive narrative, older adults utilized a higher percentage of family words than young adults. According to SST, older adults prune their social network in late life to include very intimate friends and family members. Alternatively, young adults more broadly extend their network of potential social partners. It seems likely that when asked to discuss a negative emotional event, young adults would speak more to their experiences with friends, given they are more often in the process of meeting many new people and potentially having disappointing experiences. Older adults, on the other hand, would be less apt to speak about friends during a negative experience because they have pruned their social network to include the most intimate relationships that help them meet emotional goals. Similarly, when asked to report a positive emotional experience, older adults utilized more family words than young adults. As per SST, young college students are not developmentally primed to first consider their relationships with family members, given the SST prediction that they are broadly focused on enlarging their social circles, which could account for the significant difference in social word use during the positive autobiographical narratives. The third hypothesis was that age would be associated with variability in the percentage of pronoun words utilized, with older adults utilizing a higher percentage of pronouns focused on others and young adults utilizing more words focused on the self. Findings in relation to the negative narrative indicated that older adults utilized more second and third pronouns. A large part of this variation could be related to the older adults’ propensity to emotionally distance themselves from painful experiences of their past, while this motivation for distancing is less relevant for young adults. Importantly, the prediction that first person pronouns would be utilized more by young adults was not supported. While there was an aggregate difference of 1.36 % between young and older adults on first person pronouns in the negative narratives, this difference did not reach statistical significance. It is possible that a larger sample size would have yielded significant results, given larger sample sizes allow researchers to detect relatively small between-group differences. Another potential reason for insignificant results related to first person pronouns relates to the idea that reliable differences might occur at
83
the level of individual words rather than the aggregate group. For example, researchers have found differences in ‘‘I’’ versus ‘‘We’’ words as a function of age and narrative priming (Ku¨hnen and Oyserman 2002). Exploratory post hoc analyses of the current dataset revealed a significant difference in ‘‘I’’ words during the negative narrative as a function of age, with young adults using ‘‘I’’ more often than older adults. Future research aimed at understanding differences in both aggregate types of word and individual words is indicated. There are several limitations to address in this study. First, as data were cross-sectional in nature, a longitudinal research design would allow causal interpretations of findings. Second, the sample size of this study might have precluded identification of important age differences. Replication with larger sample sizes could help elucidate the role of age as it pertains to emotional, social, and pronoun expression. Third, the current version of the LIWC program does not allow for subdivisions within the positive emotion category, which would allow for a more refined understanding of positive emotion word change as a function of age. Fourth, personality traits have recently been demonstrated to be associated with variability in verbal fluency (Sutin et al. 2011). A study design that includes personality variables as potential covariates would clarify the role of extraversion, openness, and emotional stability in the recall of autobiographical narratives. Next, mood has been associated with variability in autobiographical memory (Harris et al. 2010). In future studies, it will be important to assess change in mood as a result of autobiographical narrative (pre- and post-narratives) procedures, and its relation to verbal expression. In addition to examining mood during experimental procedures, it is proposed that other forms of psychopathology may also influence the production of autobiographical narratives. For example, older adults frequently experience depression, anxiety, and disrupted sleep patterns (Blazer 2003; Wolitzky-Taylor et al. 2010). Depression and anxiety are often associated with increased rumination and self-focused attention, while people without these forms of psychopathology are better able to focus on others (Mor and Winquist 2002). Therefore, it is important to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how psychopathology influences narrative production. Another limitation of the current study pertains to sample characteristics. Specifically, it should be noted that college students are not necessarily representative of the entire younger adult population. College students are immersed in classes that are designed to facilitate intellectual development and challenge their schemas, and college students might demonstrate strengths in perspective taking when compared to younger adults not enrolled in enriching college environments. It is also possible that several other variables may
123
84
play important roles in the ability to take the perspectives of others as a function of aging, including physical health, employment stability, failure-to-launch issues, and knowledge and utilization of modern technology. Finally, there are issues related to the quality of autobiographical narratives that were not adequately captured in this dataset. Anecdotally, some participants were very open with their descriptions of negative emotional experiences (e.g., an older adult who went through the experience of losing a spouse, a college student who described the intensity of emotion surrounding a missing friend following the Virginia Tech shootings), while others seemed reticent to share emotionally meaningful experiences. Future work that addresses the motivation and willingness to emotionally disclose as a function of various psychological and personality constructs will contribute much to this field of study. It is important to consider the practical implications of the aforementioned findings. In particular, these data allow understanding of how aging potentially affects our way of reflecting on past experiences. In particular, results of the study indicate that as we age, personal narratives become less driven by emotion and more focused on other individuals. This finding supports Erikson’s (1959, 1968) proposition that in late life, older adults are faced with the developmental challenge of ego integrity versus despair, which frequently involves reflecting on past experiences of achievement and fulfillment. Adults who successfully navigate this stage demonstrate increased wisdom, while difficulty or failure to recognize such experiences may result in bitterness and despair. Data from this study supports the notion that older age is associated with less emotional lability, higher degrees of perspective taking, and decentered thinking in the storytelling process. Indeed, these are key components of successful aging as proposed by Erikson (1959, 1968). In summary, these data exposed some provocative findings insofar as expression relates to aging. First, relative to older adults and unassociated with narrative type, younger adults consistently express more emotional words. Younger adults were more expressive of negative emotion and anxiety during negative narratives and total affect and positive emotion in positive narratives. This finding is quite supportive of SST, given that SST argues for decreased emotional expression and increased emotion regulation in older adults. Also, this age effect seems to be particularly pronounced in the expression of anxiety, as young adults expressed about twice as many anxious words relative to older adults. This finding likely reflects the significant challenges and transitions experienced by college students and the richness of their emotional experiences (Bernier et al. 2005; Lee 2005). The life of a college student is often filled with uncertainty and angst, with concerns
123
S. M. C. Robertson, D. R. Hopko
manifesting in the academic and social realms. While it is true that older adults also experience life challenges and uncertainty, it is conceivable that they regulate associated emotions with greater efficiency than young adults. Further research aimed at understanding variables associated with emotional expression and their implications toward mental health status and quality of life could help researchers and clinicians better understand the aging process as well as potentially lead to refinement of assessment and treatment interventions applied across the lifespan.
References Alea, N., Bluck, S., & Semegon, A. B. (2004). Young and older adults’ expression of emotional experience: Do autobiographical narratives tell a different story? Journal of Adult Development, 11, 235–250. doi:10.1023/B:JADE.0000044527.52470.5d. Bernier, A., Larose, S., & Whipple, N. (2005). Leaving home for college: A potentially stressful event for adolescents with preoccupied attachment patterns. Attachment & Human Development, 7, 171–185. doi:10.1080/14616730500147565. Blazer, D. (2003). Depression in late life: Review and Commentary. The Journals of Gerontology, 58, 249–265. doi:10.1093/gerona/ 58.3.M249. Bluck, S., & Alea, N. (2009). Characteristics of positive autobiographical memories in adulthood. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 69, 247–265. doi:10.2190/AG.69.4.a. Carstensen, L. (1987). Age-related changes in social activity. In L. L. Carstensen & B. A. Edelstein (Eds.), Handbook of clinical gerontology (pp. 222–237). New York: Pergamon Press. Carstensen, L. (1992a). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7, 331–338. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.7.3.331. Carstensen, L. (1992b). Motivation for social contact across the life span: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. In J. Jacobs (Ed.), Developmental Perspectives on Motivation (pp. 209–254). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Carstensen, L. L., & Turk-Charles, S. (1994). The salience of emotion across the adult life span. Psychology and Aging, 2, 259–264. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.9.2.259. Carstensen, L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54, 165–181. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165. Carstensen, L., Fung, H. H., & Charles, S. T. (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 103–123. doi: 10.1023/A:1024569803230. Cloutier-Fisher, D., Kobayashi, K., & Smith, A. (2011). The subjective dimension of social isolation: A qualitative investigation of older adults’ experiences in small social support networks. Journal of Aging Studies, 25, 407–414. doi:10.1016/ j.jaging.2011.03.012. Crittendon, J., & Hopko, D. R. (2006). Assessing worry in older and younger adults: Psychometric properties of an abbreviated Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ-A). Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 20, 1036–1054. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2005.11.006. Cumming, E., & Henry, W. H. (1961). Growing old: The process of disengagement. New York: Basic Books. Del Voile, J. F., Bravo, A., & Lopez, M. (2010). Parents and peers as providers of support in adolescents’ social network: A
Emotional Expression During Narratives developmental perspective. Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 16–27. doi:10.1002/jcop.20348. Di Luzio, A., Gunthner, S., & Orletti, F. (2000). Culture in communication: Analysis of intercultural situations. New York: John Benjamins. Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. New York: International Universities Press. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth and crisis. New York: Norton. Fivush, R., Kuebli, R., & Clubb, J. (1992). The structure of events and event representations: A developmental analysis. Child Development, 63, 188–201. doi:10.2307/1130912. Fivush, R., Edwards, V. J., & Mennuti-Washburn, J. (2003). Narratives of 9/11: Relations among personal involvement, narrative content and memory of the emotional impact over time. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 1099–1111. doi:10.1002/acp. 988. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198. doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6. Frederickson, B. L., & Carstensen, L. L. (1998). Choosing social partners: How old age and anticipated endings make people more selective. In M. P. Lawton & A. T. Salthouse (Eds.), Essential papers on the psychology of aging (pp. 511–538). New York, NY: New York University Press. Fung, H. H., Stoeber, F. S., Yeung, D. Y., & Lang, F. R. (2008). Cultural specificity of socioemotional selectivity: Age differences in social network composition among Germans and Hong Kong Chinese. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 63B, 156–164. doi: 10.1093/geronb/63.3.P156. Fussell, S. R. (Ed.). (2002). The verbal communication of emotions: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gross, J. J., Carstensen, L. L., Pasupathi, M., Tsai, J., Gotestam Skorpen, C., & Hsu, A. (1997). Emotion and aging: Experience, expression and control. Psychology and Aging, 12, 590–599. doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.12.4.590. Harris, C. B., Sharman, S. J., Barnier, A. J., & Moulds, M. L. (2010). Mood and retrieval-induced forgetting of positive and negative autobiographical memories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 399–413. doi:10.1002/acp.1685. Hendricks, J., & Cutler, S. J. (2004). Volunteerism and socioemotional selectivity in later life. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 59B, S251–S257. doi:10.1093/geronb/59.5.S251. Hicks, J. A., Trent, J., Davis, W. E., & King, L. A. (2012). Positive affect, meaning in life, and future time perspective: An application of Socioemotional Selectivity Theory. Psychology and Aging, 27, 181–189. doi:10.1037/a0023965. Holt-Lunstad, J., & Smith, T. B. (2012). Social relationships and mortality. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 41–53. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00406.x. James, B. D., Wilson, R. S., Barnes, L., & Bennett, D. A. (2011). Late-life social activity and cognitive decline in old age. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 998–1005. doi:10.1017/S1355617711000531. Kennedy, Q., Mather, M., & Carstensen, L. L. (2004). The role of motivation in the age-related positivity effect in autobiographical memory. Psychological Science, 14, 208–214. doi:10.1111/j.09567976.2004.01503011.x. Ku¨hnen, U., & Oyserman, D. (2002). Thinking about the self influences thinking in general: Cognitive consequences of salient self-concept. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 294–499. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00011-2.
85 Lang, F. R., & Carstensen, L. L. (2002). Time counts: Future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17, 125–139. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.17.1.125. Lawton, M. P., Kleban, M. H., Rajagopal, D., & Dean, J. (1992). Dimensions of affective experience in three age groups. Psychology and Aging, 7, 171–184. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.7.2.171. Lee, C. (2005). Evidence-based treatment of depression in the college population. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 20, 23–31. doi:10.1300/J035v20n01_03. Lockenhoff, C. E., Costa, P. T., & Lane, R. D. (2008). Age differences in descriptions of emotional experiences in oneself and others. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 63B, 92–99. doi:10.1093/geronb/63.2.P92. Lopes, P., Salovey, P., Beers, M., & Cote, S. (2005). Emotion regulation abilities and the quality of social interaction. Emotion, 5, 113–118. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.113. Miller, G. (1995). The science of words. New York: Scientific American Library. Mor, N., & Winquist, J. (2002). Self-focused attention and negative affect: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 638–662. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.4.638->. Ng, S. H., & Bradac, J. J. (1993). Power in language: Verbal communication and social influence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Niederhoffer, K. G., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2009). Sharing one’s story: On the benefits of writing or talking about emotional experience. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Oxford handbook of positive psychology (pp. 621–632). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Ornstein, P. A., & Haden, C. A. (2002). The development of memory: Toward an understanding of children. In L. Eisen, J. A. Quas, & G. S. Goodman (Eds.), Memory and suggestibility in the forensic interview. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum. Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041. Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2007. Austin, TX: LIWC. Rice, C., & Pasupathi, M. (2010). Reflecting on self-relevant experiences: Adult age differences. Developmental Psychology, 46, 479–490. doi:10.1037/a0018098->. Robertson, S. M. C., & Hopko, D. R. (2009). Experiential avoidance: A moderator of the relationship between age and emotional expression. Aging and Mental Health, 13, 611–618. doi: 10.1080/13607860902774477. Seeman, T. E. (2000). Health promoting effects of friends and family on health outcomes in older adults. American Journal of Health Promotion, 14, 362–370. doi:10.4278/0890-1171-14.6.362. Segal, D., Coolidge, F. L., Mincic, M. S., & O’Riley, A. (2005). Beliefs about mental illness and willingness to seek help: A cross-sectional study. Aging and Mental Health, 9, 363–367. doi: 10.1080/13607860500131047. Segrin, C. (1998). Interpersonal communication problems associated with depression and loneliness. In B. H. Spitzberg & W. R. Cupach (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion: Research, theory, applications, and contexts (pp. 215–242). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Sher-Censor, E., & Oppenheim, D. (2010). Adjustment of female adolescents leaving home for the military: Links with earlier individuation. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 625–632. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.001. Smith, S., Anderson-Hanley, C., Langrock, A., & Compas, B. (2005). The effects of journaling for women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Psychooncology, 14, 1075–1082. doi:10.1002/pon.912.
123
86 Sutin, A. R., Terracciano, A., Kitner-Triolo, M. H., Uda, M., Schlessinger, D., & Zonderman, A. B. (2011). Personality traits prospectively predict verbal fluency in a lifespan sample. Psychology and Aging, 26, 994–999. doi:10.1037/a0024276. Ting-Toomey, S. (1983). An analysis of verbal communication patterns in high and low marital adjustment groups. Human Communication Research, 9, 306–319. doi:10.1111/j.14682958.1983.tb00701.x. Tombaugh, T. N., & McIntyre, N. J. (1992). The mini-mental state examination: A comprehensive review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 40, 922–935. Wechsler, D. (1997a). Wechsler adult intelligence scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Wechsler, D. (1997b). WAIS-III and WMS-III technical manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
123
S. M. C. Robertson, D. R. Hopko Weiss, R. L., & Heyman, R. E. (1997). A clinical-research overview of couples interactions. In W. Halford & H. Markman (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marriage and couples interventions (pp. 13–41). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. White, A. M., Philogene, G. S., Fine, L., & Sinha, S. (2009). Social support and self-reported health status of older adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1872–1878. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.146894. Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B., Castriotta, N., Lenze, E. J., Stanley, M. A., & Craske, M. G. (2010). Anxiety disorders in older adults: A comprehensive review. Depression and Anxiety, 27, 190–211. doi:10.1002/da.20653. Yoder, C. Y., & Elias, J. W. (1987). Age, affect, and memory for pictorial story sequences. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 545–549. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1987.tb02267.x.
