↓ Skip to main content

Culture Moderates the Relationship Between Emotional Fit and Collective Aspects of Well-Being

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Culture Moderates the Relationship Between Emotional Fit and Collective Aspects of Well-Being
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01509
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sinhae Cho, Natalia Van Doren, Mark R. Minnick, Daniel N. Albohn, Reginald B. Adams, José A. Soto

Abstract

The present study examined how emotional fit with culture - the degree of similarity between an individual' emotional response to the emotional response of others from the same culture - relates to well-being in a sample of Asian American and European American college students. Using a profile correlation method, we calculated three types of emotional fit based on self-reported emotions, facial expressions, and physiological responses. We then examined the relationships between emotional fit and individual well-being (depression, life satisfaction) as well as collective aspects of well-being, namely collective self-esteem (one's evaluation of one's cultural group) and identification with one's group. The results revealed that self-report emotional fit was associated with greater individual well-being across cultures. In contrast, culture moderated the relationship between self-report emotional fit and collective self-esteem, such that emotional fit predicted greater collective self-esteem in Asian Americans, but not in European Americans. Behavioral emotional fit was unrelated to well-being. There was a marginally significant cultural moderation in the relationship between physiological emotional fit in a strong emotional situation and group identification. Specifically, physiological emotional fit predicted greater group identification in Asian Americans, but not in European Americans. However, this finding disappeared after a Bonferroni correction. The current finding extends previous research by showing that, while emotional fit may be closely related to individual aspects of well-being across cultures, the influence of emotional fit on collective aspects of well-being may be unique to cultures that emphasize interdependence and social harmony, and thus being in alignment with other members of the group.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Professor 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 14 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 30%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 15 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,986,372
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,894
of 30,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,820
of 334,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#572
of 729 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 729 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.