Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSell, Aaronen_US
dc.contributor.authorSznycer, Danielen_US
dc.contributor.authorAl-Shawaf, Laithen_US
dc.contributor.authorLim, Julianen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrauss, Andreen_US
dc.contributor.authorFeldman, Anetaen_US
dc.contributor.authorRascanu, Ruxandraen_US
dc.contributor.authorSugiyama, Lawrenceen_US
dc.contributor.authorCosmides, Ledaen_US
dc.contributor.authorTooby, Johnen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-12T11:12:51Z
dc.date.available2018-04-12T11:12:51Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.issn0010-0277
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11693/37416
dc.description.abstractAccording to the recalibrational theory of anger, anger is a computationally complex cognitive system that evolved to bargain for better treatment. Anger coordinates facial expressions, vocal changes, verbal arguments, the withholding of benefits, the deployment of aggression, and a suite of other cognitive and physiological variables in the service of leveraging bargaining position into better outcomes. The prototypical trigger of anger is an indication that the offender places too little weight on the angry individual's welfare when making decisions, i.e. the offender has too low a welfare tradeoff ratio (WTR) toward the angry individual. Twenty-three experiments in six cultures, including a group of foragers in the Ecuadorian Amazon, tested six predictions about the computational structure of anger derived from the recalibrational theory. Subjects judged that anger would intensify when: (i) the cost was large, (ii) the benefit the offender received from imposing the cost was small, or (iii) the offender imposed the cost despite knowing that the angered individual was the person to be harmed. Additionally, anger-based arguments conformed to a conceptual grammar of anger, such that offenders were inclined to argue that they held a high WTR toward the victim, e.g., “the cost I imposed on you was small”, “the benefit I gained was large”, or “I didn't know it was you I was harming.” These results replicated across all six tested cultures: the US, Australia, Turkey, Romania, India, and Shuar hunter-horticulturalists in Ecuador. Results contradict key predictions about anger based on equity theory and social constructivism. © 2017 Elsevier B.V.en_US
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.source.titleCognitionen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.06.002en_US
dc.subjectEvolutionary psychologyen_US
dc.subjectArgumentsen_US
dc.subjectWelfare tradeoff ratioen_US
dc.subjectAngeren_US
dc.subjectRecalibrational theoryen_US
dc.titleThe grammar of anger : mapping the computational architecture of a recalibrational emotionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.departmentDepartment of Psychologyen_US
dc.departmentNational Magnetic Resonance Research Center (UMRAM)en_US
dc.citation.spage110en_US
dc.citation.epage128en_US
dc.citation.volumeNumber168en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cognition.2017.06.002en_US
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1873-7838en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record