Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2019 An investigation of forgiveness in an honor culture Vanessa A. Castillo Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.edu/etd Part of the Social Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Castillo, Vanessa A., "An investigation of forgiveness in an honor culture" (2019). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.edu/etd/16982 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository.
For more information, please contact digirep@iastate. An investigation of forgiveness in an honor culture by Vanessa A. Castillo A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Psychology Program of Study Committee: Susan E. Cross, Major Professor Carolyn E.
Prieto The student author, whose presentation of the scholarship herein was approved by the program of study committee, is solely responsible for the content of this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2019 Copyright © Vanessa A. All rights reserved.
ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES. iv LIST OF TABLES. 2 Confronting or Withdrawing after Conflict. 4 Forgiving or Holding a Grudge after Conflict.
6 Conceptualization of Forgiveness. 7 Forgiveness and Reputation. 16 Results and Discussion. 22 Measures and Materials.
24 Revenge and avoidance motivation. 35 How Do Latinx and Northern European Americans Evaluate Responses to Conflict?. 41 Does Prevention Focus Explain the Interaction of Cultural Group Reactions on Morality Judgements?. 46 Limitations and Future Directions.
PILOT STUDY 1 MEASURES. PILOT STUDY 2 SCENARIOS. PRIMARY STUDY: SCENARIOS AND ALTERNATIVE ENDINGS. PRIMARY STUDY: MEASURES.
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL FORM. 70 iv LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Mediated Moderation Model. 11 Figure 2 Effects of Conflict Reactions on Morality Judgement for Each Reputation Threat Scenario. 44 v LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Categories of Conflicts Recalled in Pilot Study 1.
18 Table 2 Conflict Characteristics from Pilot Study 1. 20 Table 3 Relationships Between Participants and Offenders in Pilot Study 1. 20 Table 4 Scenario Ratings from Pilot Study 2. 27 Table 5 Analysis of Revenge and Avoidance Motivations for Latinx Americans and Northern European Americans.
27 Table 6 Percent of Participants who Correctly Identified the Offender. 33 Table 7 Correlations and Descriptive Statistics for Latinx and Northern European American. 35 Table 8 Manipulation Checks by Cultural Group. 37 Table 9 ANOVA and Simple Effects for Masculine Reputation Threat Scenario.
39 Table 10 ANOVA and Simple Effects for Family Reputation Threat Scenario. 41 Table 11 ANOVA and Simple Effects for Feminine Reputation Threat Scenario. 43 Table 12 Mediated Moderation Model. 47 vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my major professor, Dr.
Cross, for her guidance and support throughout the course of this research. I would also like to thank my committee members for their support and feedback in this process. I would not be able to conduct this research without the assistance of my colleagues at Texas A&M and the University of Texas. Also, I want to offer my appreciation to those who were willing to participate in my surveys, without whom, this thesis would not have been possible.
Last but not least, I am very grateful for the constant love and support from my mother and my partner. vii ABSTRACT Latinx Americans are members of an honor culture because of their Mediterranean cultural heritage whereas northern European Americans are members of a dignity culture. Members of an honor culture feel the need to maintain a positive reputation especially when that reputation is threatened. When there is a reputation threat, members of an honor culture perceive confronting as more appropriate than withdrawing from the situation.
What has not been examined is forgiveness in the context of a reputation threat. Forgiveness is not seen positively in cultures of honor because it is perceived as risky to one’s reputation. I proposed that members of an honor culture may perceive forgiveness as moral if their reputation has been restored (in the scenario where they confronted the offender). I conducted an online scenario study to examine four different combinations of conflict reactions; confront and forgive, confront and hold a grudge, withdraw and forgive, and withdraw and hold a grudge.
Participants read and indicated how moral they thought the protagonist’s conflict reaction was in response to a reputation threat (masculine, family, or feminine). Results showed that Latinx and northern European Americans rated the morality of the protagonist similarly across reputation threat scenarios. Specifically, they thought that withdrawing and forgiving the offender after a reputation threat was the most moral response. INTRODUCTION In 1794, Antonio Pilmo went for a walk in the street after his lunch where he encountered his neighbor José María Troncoso.
In passing, Antonio mentioned he would “unmask” José. This was a serious offense, as it implied that José was not who he appeared to be. Immediately, a loud scuffle began, and bystanders stepped in to intervene. Later that day, José armed himself and killed Antonio for the humiliation (Johnson & Lipsett-Rivera, 1998).
People often encounter this type of conflict, where someone insults them or makes a rude comment about them such as in the example described above. How people handle these conflicts depends upon many factors such as their cultural upbringing. Depending on how they were raised, some individuals would say José should have walked away from the conflict without retaliating because they follow the idea that “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.” In contrast, others have been raised to agree that José should have confronted the neighbor, because “A mal nudo, mal cuño” (English equivalent: You must meet roughness with roughness). This idea of aggressive reciprocity is a common phenomenon in honor cultures such as Latin America.
When members of an honor culture face an honor threat, such as in the example above, retaliation is an expected response (Cohen, Nisbett, Bowdle, & Schwarz, 1996). Many studies have examined aggressive, retaliatory behavior in response to conflicts; however, prosocial behaviors such as forgiveness have not been thoroughly investigated. LITERATURE REVIEW To understand a behavior or reaction, one must understand the cultural logic that underlies this behavior. Leung and Cohen (2011) stated that “cultural logic weaves together various scripts, behaviors, practices, and cultural patterns around [a] central theme, giving them a meaning and a certain logical consistency and coherence for the people of a culture” (p.
Therefore, in one culture, beating up someone because they had insulted one’s integrity may seem like an appropriate response to an honor threat, whereas in another culture, it may seem like an inappropriate response. Cultural logic helps one to understand the reason retaliation is appropriate in one situation but not in another. Latinx Americans represent an honor culture due to their Mediterranean cultural heritage. Anthropological research has demonstrated a main concern of the Mediterranean was honor (Peristiany, 1965; Pitt-Rivers, 1966; Stewart, 1994).
Honor was said to be “the value of a person in his own eyes, but also in the eyes of his society” (Pitt-Rivers, p. Therefore, honor is a combination of an individual’s self-worth and reputation. Because honor is socially conferred, it can be given and taken away by others. When the Spanish and Portuguese established colonies in the Americas, they brought over these cultural values of honor to the Western hemisphere (Johnson & Lipsett-Rivera, 1998).
Honor values can still be seen today in individuals with Iberians roots such as Latinx individuals. These honor values tend to be reflected in concepts such as machismo, marianismo, and familism. Machismo and marianismo reflect gendered components of honor—masculine and feminine honor—that prescribe different honor codes for men and women. Men maintain their reputation by being assertive, virile, and standing up for one’s self and family.
Women maintain their reputation by being pure/modest, self-sacrificing, and loyal to the men and the family (De La Cancela, 1986; Rodriguez Mosquera, 2011; Stevens, 3 1973; 1994). Familism reflects a family component of honor, where the individual has the responsibility to maintain the family’s reputation by their own behavior and to defend the family’s reputation when attacked (Steidel & Contreras, 2003). The cultural logic of honor is not limited to the Mediterranean, but also can be found in the South of the United States (Nisbett & Cohen, 1996) and Middle Eastern countries such as Turkey (Bagli & Sev’er, 2003). Northerners in the United States and people of Northern European countries such as the Netherlands are members of a dignity culture (Leung & Cohen, 2011; Rodriguez Mosquera, Manstead, & Fischer, 2002a, 2002b).
The cultural logic of dignity cultures revolves around the idea that an individual has inherent worth independent of reputation (Leung & Cohen, 2011). This means that self-worth is not conferred by others nor can it be taken away by others. Therefore, a person behaves properly not because others will see that behavior, but because of his or her own internal standards. Members of honor and dignity cultures both understand the idea of honor, but value different aspects of honor.
According to Pitt-Rivers (1966) and Peristiany (1965), honor is thought of as a combination of self-worth and social-worth. Self-worth or self-esteem is an aspect of honor which both members of dignity and honor cultures have in common. When members of honor (Spain) and dignity (Netherlands) cultures were asked what honor meant, they both gave similar proportions of self-worth-related responses (Rodriguez Mosquera et al. The aspect of honor that seems to differentiate members of honor and dignity cultures is social worth or reputation.
Members of an honor (Spain) culture feel the need to maintain a positive social self-image more so than do members of a dignity culture (Rodriguez Mosquera, 2011; Rodriguez Mosquera, Fischer, Manstead, & Zaalberg, 2008). In honor cultures, it is important to protect one’s reputation, because those who do not protect their reputation are often 4 ostracized, gossiped about, discriminated against, and sometimes killed (Gilmore, 1987; Schneider, 1971; Wikan, 2008). Confronting or Withdrawing After Conflict As mentioned in the story at the beginning of this introduction, Antonio insulted José, which was a threat to José’s honor/reputation. Because honor is socially conferred by others, it can be easily lost and difficult to regain (Stewart, 1994).
Therefore, to avoid the loss of honor conferred by others, one needs to confront/retaliate against the offender in a way that will be noticed by others, because doing nothing or withdrawing from the situation will lead to dishonor (Gilmore, 1987; Peristiany, 1965). This behavior is reinforced by strong norms of reciprocity among members of honor cultures (Leung & Cohen, 2011). Therefore, an honorable person is a person who repays people for their kindness and maliciousness. After a reputation threat, negative reciprocity is endorsed and expected by members of an honor culture.
In honor cultures, when there is a reputation threat, aggression and retaliation are common responses. When members of an honor culture (Turkey) were given a scenario where someone was insulted (a reputation threat), members said they would respond more aggressively compared to members of a dignity culture (van Osch, Breugelmans, Zeelenberg, & Bölük, 2013). When members of an honor culture (Turkey and Latinx Americans) were given honor threatening scenarios, they were more likely than members of a dignity culture to indicate they and the average person would retaliate against the offender (Pilot Study 2 below; see also Shafa, Harinck, & Ellmers, 2017). Not only do members of an honor culture self-report they will behave aggressively and retaliate, but in experimental studies using behavioral measures they were found to be more aggressive and more likely to retaliate than members of a dignity culture (Cohen et al.