Universal Psychology

In the 1970’s, clinical psychologist Dr. Paul Ekman published a series of papers on his ground-breaking research which suggested there are universal emotions. That is, across cultures, people facially express certain emotions the same way. Based on Dr. Ekman’s research, it is commonly accepted that there are seven universal emotions: anger, disgust, fear, surprise, happiness, sadness, and contempt.

Universality refers to the idea that certain psychological concepts, behaviors, or experiences exist across all cultures. Many in psychology tend to assume that the psychological concepts they teach, learn, and study are universal, when in fact, they are culture-specific. When concepts or behaviors do appear to be universal, such as the seven facial expressions described above, there are often cultural constraints. For example, Dr. Ekman noted that despite some facial expressions for emotions being universal, different cultures had different display rules: different expectations about when it is acceptable to display a certain facial expression. Dr. Ekman’s explanation in his own words about this clarification and discovery can be found here.

What is universal?

Different branches of psychology (e.g., developmental, social, clinical) tend to endorse different perspectives on whether psychological concepts can be universal. For example, evolutionary psychologists (scholars who work from the assumption that human behaviors are a product of natural selection and serve adaptive purposes) tend to endorse the universality of many psychological concepts, while social psychologists tend to assume a person’s context or situation as being a powerful influence on whether or how a psychological concept occurs (of course, some scholars are social evolutionary psychologists, and work with both sets of assumptions!). In the case of universal emotions and facial expressions, the truth may be somewhere in the middle. From an evolutionary perspective, it makes sense that humans would develop to have similar facial expressions for the same emotion. Imagine two cavemen from different tribes meeting for the first time. With different languages, it would be critical that they be able to communicate their boundaries and needs to each other in some universal manner. However, within each tribe, different situations and experiences may have led the groups to develop unspoken rules or expectations about when and how certain emotions can be expressed.

Fiske’s Core Social Motives

Dr. Susan Fiske, a social psychologist from Princeton, suggests that there are universal social motives to explain human behavior, and each of these universal motives is shaped by the culture in which a person exists. She terms this to be a “social evolutionary perspective,” noting that humans have survived and evolved because we have worked together. Working together for survival assumes that humans by nature are social beings. In other words, across all cultures, humans who were socially oriented were more likely to survive. This is quite similar to Paul Ekman’s breakdown of universal emotions. Similar to Dr. Ekman’s addition of display rules, Dr. Fiske also states that each core motive may manifest in different ways across various cultures. For now, we will focus on the core motives themselves. Here are Fiske’s core social motives:

Belonging, the need to bond with other humans, motivates individuals to develop and maintain relationships. According to Fiske, belonging is the foundational social motive upon which the remaining four motivates exist. There are benefits for both individuals and groups to developing relationships. Individuals obtain safety in numbers and have access to more resources if the resources are pooled together. Groups are more efficient and effective when people want to belong – everyone is more willing to cooperate to accomplish tasks. When people feel as though they belong, they tend to feel better. When people feel ostracized, they feel physically and psychologically worse (in fact, a common theory to explain suicide suggests that individuals who feel they do not belong, termed “thwarted belongingness,” Orden et al., 2010).

The second universal motive is to understand. All individuals are driven to make sense of events around them. All of us have theorized about events in our lives and often we develop these theories in group. For example, have you ever sat with friends or family members and discussed why someone acted in a particular way? On a larger scale, social groups have developed an array of theories and explanations for global events, such as COVID-19, terrorist attacks, and climate change. As these larger events and accompanying explanations suggest, these understandings are generally tied to our group memberships, that is, to our sense of belonging. If many of you friends and loved ones endorse a particular explanation for climate change, you may also endorse it – partly because you wish to understand and also partly because you wish to belong.

All people wish to believe they have control over their environment. When people do not feel in control, they will seek out more information in order to re-gain control. When people feel they cannot impact their environment or those around them, they feel disconnected from their group (i.e., no belonging) and incompetent. Sometimes individuals will cede control to their group (e.g., the family unit, a government system, a religious community, etc.), and selecting who and what is in control can help the individual feel safer.

The fourth universal motive is a drive for self-enhancement. In general, people want to preserve positive feelings toward themselves and/or wish to improve themselves. This returns to the need for belonging – when someone in your “group” gives you positive feedback, you feel good. People who feel good are more motivated and healthier, which in turn strengthens the group. According to Fiske, people who feel poorly about themselves often also feel rejected (the opposite of belonging) and are more likely to engage in health destructive behaviors, like substance abuse.

Finally, humans are driven to interpret the world and others as good. This drive requires trusting others. Of course, people do not trust everyone, but think about how you feel when you engage with a person or group you cannot trust – you do not feel good. In order to feel assured and secure, humans need to be able to trust those around them. Imagine a group where trust does not exist – belonging will not exist, either.

Conclusions

At the beginning of the chapter, you read that many in psychology mistakenly assume their experiences and their study of psychology is universal. In reality, the psychology that you have learned as a student at a U.S. university is the study of U.S. Psychology. It has developed using Western theories, values, and scientific methods (Ashdown & Buck, 2018).

Beliefs about whether something is universal can have significant implications. Imagine that you are a psychologist conducting an assessment on a teen boy from a culture different than yours. Perhaps he does not make eye contact or speak at a volume that you would expect given your experiences and cultural background. If you assumed that eye contact and speaking behaviors are universal, you may conclude that the boy is behaving abnormally, and therefore categorize his behaviors as symptoms. This could lead to mis-diagnosis. While this seems like a simplistic example, countless studies demonstrate how common this is (cite, cite).

This brings up several issues. There are two that you will read about throughout this text. First, can any psychological concept be truly universal? What does this assumption mean for proposed “universal” concepts? Second, how can someone attempt to study universal or cross-cultural ideas?

References

Ashdown, B. K., & Buck, M. (2018). International aid as modern imperialism – what does cross-cultural psychology really have to offer? A commentary on “The positive role of culture: What cross-cultural psychology has to offer to developmental aid effectiveness research, by Symen A. Brouwers.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(4), 545-553. SageJournals, International Aid as Modern Imperialism

Ekman, P. (1970). Universal facial expressions of emotions. California Mental Health Research Digest, 8(4), 151-158.

Ekman, P. (1972). Universals and Cultural Differences in Facial Expressions of Emotions. In Cole, J. (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 207-282). Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.

Fiske, S. T. (2004). Social beings: A core motives approach to social psychology. Wiley.

Media Attributions