Daily Archives: June 15, 2010

Vuvuzela: cultural symbol or plain annoying?

The vuvuzela, a plastic horn, has become the official villain of the 2010 World Cup. There was a debate about whether vuvuzela should be banned before the World Cup. Recently, FIFA president Sepp Blatter cleared the air on Monday, saying he fully supported the use of vuvuzelas and that it would be disrespectful for FIFA to come in and change an African tradition. It will always be difficult and controversy to make the banning decision. On the one hand, the vuvuzela makes life difficult for players and audiences, both at the match or watching from home. Players have trouble hearing the whistle or their teammates, audiences at home have trouble hearing the commentary on TV, and chanting fans at the match are drowned out by the monotonous vuvuzelas. However, as Trmon Zamba, a South African fan, said “It’s our culture. It can be loud, but it’s good for us supporters.”

People may wonder, dose every South African fan really enjoy the noise made by vuvuzela. Probably not. However, because the vuvuzela has been determined by the South African culture to be the “right” way to show fans’ supports in that situation, personal value and preference do not matter anymore. Psychological research has shown that the psychological processes that shape the effects of personal values on behavior are strongly affected by the social context in which people operate. These processes are strongly cultural bound. As previous research has showed, one of the best-known factors believed to moderate the effect of personal attributes is ‘situational strength’: when the social context provides uniform expectations regarding appropriate behavior, the situation is defined as strong. In strong situations, all people follow the same course of action, and there is little variation in behavior. Thus, let’s face it. The vuvuzela which is rooted in South African tradition has been considered as an appropriate way to show fans’ passion and supports in its culture. No matter people like it or not, fans of every team will keep blowing them delightedly to show support for their national teams in this World Cup. 

But, really, I don’t mind it so much

Question of the day: Is the vuvuzela a cultural delight or just plain annoying?

Sonia Roccas & Lilach Sagiv (2010). Personal Values and Behavior: Taking the Cultural Context into Account. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 30–41.

England players wear their emotions on their faces

By, Adam K. Fetterman
One of the most anticipated matches in the 2010 FIFA World Cup took place on the second day of the tournament. The US and England faced off and ended the game in a 1 – 1 tie. Both teams should be happy with the result. While the US is definitely happy, as they were considered the underdogs, England does not share the enthusiasm. With a one point lead, the goalkeeper from England, the game’s proclaimed country of origin, allowed an easily blocked ball to sneak into the goal off the foot of one of their US rivals, a country in which soccer has yet to catch on. The disappointment over the goal, and the subsequent tie with the little favored underdog, left despair on the faces of those associated with the team. Indeed, the news media and bloggers have devoted much space to writing and showing pictures of dejected England players, including goalkeeper Robert Green and injured star David Beckham.

The facial expressions depicted in these images can give us insight to what these men were feeling. When someone sees a facial expression of emotion humans automatically mimic the expression of positive and negative emotion (Dimberg, Thunberg, & Elmehed, 2000). Through these mimicked facial movements, we are able to recognize the emotion being expressed. Therefore, when someone sees a picture of a sad-faced David Beckham, then one can get an idea of how he is feeling in that moment. In fact, we may even be able to feel what he is feeling. Ruys and Stapel (2008) showed that facial expressions are indeed emotion messengers, but are also emotion elicitors. So, one may feel bad for Robert Green when presented with his saddened face. However, since facial recognition acts the same with positive emotions (Dimberg et al., 2000), a different emotion would likely be recognized on US soccer players’ and fans’ faces: Happiness.

Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M., & Elmehed, K. (2000).Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science, 11, 86-89.

David Beckham’s Matchface!: a gallery. By, Brian Phillips – Dirty Tackle Yahoo! Blog

Ruys, K. I. & Stapel, D. A. (2008). Emotion elicitor or emotion messenger? Subliminal priming reveals two faces of facial expressions. Psychological Science, 19, 593-600.

Rob Green makes no excuses, reminds us that he’s 30. By, Brooks Peck – Dirty Tackle Yahoo! Blog

U.S. fans discover use for tie. By, Les Carpenter – Yahoo! Sports

Does isolation reduce violent behavior among psychiatric inpatients?

By Kevin R. Betts

The Joint Commission, an independent health care oversight group, recently expressed alarm over violence in U.S. hospitals. Russell L. Colling, a consultant who advised the Joint Commission said, “The reality is, there is violence every day in the emergency department.” On inpatient units in psychiatric hospitals, violent behavior among patients is often met with forced isolation. A primary goal of isolating these patients is to ensure their safety, as well as that of other patients and staff. However, isolation is also thought by many to act as a deterrent for potential future acts of violence. Having been directly involved in this process as a mental health technician, I often pondered the effectiveness of isolation as a way to combat violent behavior among patients.

Perhaps counterintuitively, research on social ostracism suggests that isolation may promote later aggressive acts (Williams, 2007). In order to understand why this may be the case, imagine yourself in the position of a patient involuntarily committed to an inpatient unit at a local psychiatric hospital. Disagreeing with your involuntary admission, you verbally express your anger to the staff. Told that you may not leave, you become even angrier, perhaps trying to access locked doors. You feel an utter lack of control over your situation. Making matters worse, the staff expresses concern that you may become violent as a result of your distress and “for your safety,” escorts you to a locked room so that “you may reflect on your acting out behavior.” You are in isolation. Your anger further increases and you find yourself behaving in ways you could not previously imagine, yelling “let me out” and banging on the only door in a windowless room. You think to yourself, “They will regret this once they let me out of here.” What you (and many other patients placed in similar situations) are experiencing is an impaired sense of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence―direct consequences associated with social ostracism (Williams, 2007). In the eyes of an isolated patient, these needs may wrongly be perceived as restorable through aggressive means.

If isolation can promote violent behavior, what should be done to combat violence among distressed psychiatric inpatients? Solutions that prevent violent behavior in the first place may be most successful. Listening to patient complaints in a timely manner is essential. Empathizing with these complaints, helping patients manage their distress, and ensuring patients that their distress is temporary should also be effective.

Read more:

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/healthday/639936.htmlViolence on the rise at U.S. health care centers (Businessweek)

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120185263/abstractWilliams, K.D. (2007). Ostracism: The kiss of social death. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 236-347.

View other posts by Kevin R. Betts

Like This!