Hi All I need some help on one of my assignments in psychology and would appriciate the help ------ ------ People have been trying to understand the subject of emotion for thousands of years but its only recently that its been systematically studied. If there is a commen-sense view that goes back a long way, its is that something occurs which produces a subjective emotional experience in us, and as a result of this we experience certain bodily changes or our behaviour is altered. example : A friend dies , so we feel sad and tears fall from our eyes. Another theory is: James-Lang theory:He challenged the commen-sense theory and said that perhaps the physical change come first and only afterwards that we that call them 'love' or 'anger' or whatever Example: When you trip down the stairs and in a split second you catch hold of the banister to save yourself.This is far to quick for any of the bodily changes to occur, but a couple of seconds later your heart begins to beat faster your breathing changes and your hand sweat, among other signs of arousal. It is at this point james argues, that we 'feel' fear. In other words, for James and Lange, humon emotions comes from our percieving the physical state we are in, and not vice versa. As James said, 'We dont weep because we feel sorrow; we feel sorrow because we weep' * I would like to hear your point of view on this subject and if you have your own theory please post it and explain it * If there is any other theories you believe in then please post it here and explain why Thanks .
I remember learing about this in my psychology course. I believe in the James-Lang theory. I remember my professor mentioning that people who smile (even if they fake it) tend to feel slightly happier than those who frown (again, even if its faked). You might want to look this study up somewhere.
I personally believe more in the commen-sense view but there is part of james-lang theory that i agree on, maybe thats just the part thats still commen-sense I did re-search on this subject and i can say that in every theory there is some parts i agree and disagree on and for that reason cannot believe in it. For example : I dont believe in james-lang theory because they say 'you cry and there for you feel sorrow' .If someone i dont really know should die i will feel sorrow without crying so that doesn't make sense to me .
Okay, that's a good point but maybe the emotion isn't AS stronge.. or maybe you really don't feel sorrow. Maybe it's a social construction of how you are suppose to react when such situtations do occur (you know: social norms. It's kind of forced by society..) What about actors who cry is soap operas? That's another interesting field to explore.. though they tell you to think of something sad to bring upon those fake tears..
You made a good points but the last one about the actors agrees with what i said.They need to feel sorrow first to make them cry. Well, actors practise these things without the need to feel sad and later on its like second nature to them anyway .
I wonder if there's a study on this! The best you can do for your assignment is refer to a bunch of studies (there must be tons out there), of course make sure they state the possible confound effects. (for the most accurate studies)
knock knock can I come in? looks like it's a conversation between two people Anyway, I'm not that too much familiar with the psychology thing, but for my understanding there are different types of tears: joy anger lonely fear and just like to cry The reason why a certain person cry is because of this things either tears of happiness or loneliness. And the usual reaction of let us say a girl who fall in love to a guy, but the guy has somebody else. Isn't it painful to know that the man you love is happy with the girl he loves? That makes you cry right?
I agree , with you you cry because your sad and not like james-lang theory 'you cry and there for you feel sorrow'
I think the reason why he said that is because he never experienced to fall in love or to feel what the common person does.