3.4 Emotional processes in the three-level model of CPS
3.4.3 Emotions and observable outputs (E3)
The sharing of emotions is embedded in verbal, para-verbal and non-verbal behav-iors. Collaborative acts convey verbal and para-verbal communication of emotions.
First, emotions can be conveyed through words (e.g., “I’m happy”, “I’m frustrated”) belonging to a given collaborative act. Second, emotional meaning can also come from para-verbal components (e.g., pitch, volume, speaking rate). Non-verbal be-haviors also convey emotional meaning regarding how their partner solve the task (e.g., facial expression of confusion can indicate a difficulty to understand an aspect of the problem), how they are motivated (e.g., a posture of boredom can indicate low intrinsic value) or how they regard the relationship (e.g., facial expression of con-tempt can indicate low liking for another partner). Therefore, verbal and para-verbal communication of emotions can complement, strengthen, substitute, or contradict the collaborative intentions conveyed by non-emotional verbal communication. Be-sides, non-verbal emotional communication can also provide additional information that may also complement, strengthen, substitute, or contradict the meaning of col-laborative acts (Jones, 2013).
Van Kleef (2009) and Van Kleef et al. (2010) proposed a model that unifies several findings regarding the expression of emotions at the interpersonal level. It high-lights that verbal and non-verbal expressions of emotions convey social information to observers, which in turn affect their behaviors. In other words, people observe the emotional expressions of others and are influenced by them. According to the
model, two core processes are mobilized when people come across emotional ex-pressions. Firstly, emotional expression triggers inferential processes. Individuals use emotional expressions as cues allowing them to infer social information. This social information concern not only the type of emotion observed but also various inferences about the causes and consequences of it. In other words, emotional ex-pressions also help the observer to understand the status of the interpersonal interac-tion more deeply. Secondly, emointerac-tional expressions can also elicit affective reacinterac-tions in observers. They involve emotional contagion, i.e., “the tendency to unintention-ally and automaticunintention-ally catch other people’s emotions through their facial expression, vocalizations, posture or bodily movements” (Van Kleef et al., 2010, p. 54). Accord-ing to Van Van Kleef et al. (2010), emotional contagion can pervade the observer’s judgment through different types of affect infusion. For example, if positive feel-ings arise from the other’s emotional expression, the observer is likely to assume that the situation is safe and exploration is possible (see Broaden-and-Build theory, Fredrickson, 2013). Second, affective reactions experienced by the observer may also affect the building of impressions regarding the other group members (e.g., disposi-tional knowledge about the other group members). The three-level model assumes that these inferences and affective reactions of expression of emotions can relate to cognitive, motivational and relational aspects of collaborative problem-solving.
The expression of emotions can serve both affiliative and social distancing func-tions (Fischer, Manstead, et al., 2016). As describe by Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2012), individuals experience a wide range of emotions related to the re-lationship they have (e.g., admiration, envy), called social emotions. Therefore, in-ferences about others’ emotions and affective reactions resulting from others’ emo-tional expressions can promote affiliation or social distancing between group mem-bers. However, this aspect is not only circumscribed to the relational dimension be-tween individuals. For example, satisfaction can indicate that people are willing to negotiate or make collaborative decisions in the cognitive dimension. Affiliative and social distancing functions of emotions can result in three kinds of action tendencies in the context of work interactions (moving toward, moving away, moving against;
Van Kleef et al., 2010). We propose that, in collaborative problem-solving, mov-ing toward action tendencies promote collaborative behaviors (i.e., group members primarily rely on each other to solve the common problem). Conversely, moving away action tendencies promote cooperative behaviors (i.e., group members primar-ily rely on themselves to solve the common problem). Finally, moving against action tendencies promote competitive behaviors (i.e., group members primarily seek per-sonal benefits in solving the common problem).
As the expression of emotions can have disruptive effects on collaborative problem-solving, it needs to be regulated to prevent their disruptive effects on collaborative problem-solving (e.g., provoking social distancing and moving away or against ac-tion tendencies). Similarly to the personal level, emoac-tional competencies also have
a key role at the interpersonal level, and group members can benefit from harness-ing the expression of emotions accordharness-ing to the situation and regulatharness-ing them to foster goal achievement. Some motives for interpersonal regulation have been de-scribed in Niven (2016) and Rimé (2009) and are particularly relevant in the frame-work of collaborative problem-solving. Affiliative positive emotions are thought to be primarily shared because they promote moving toward action tendencies in the cognitive (e.g., seek advice and solutions, obtain feedback, advice or guidance from others, seek legitimization or validation of one’s ideas), motivational (e.g., seek or bring support) or relational (e.g., revive positive experience, seek comfort, arouse empathy, build trust) that benefit collaborative problem-solving. Affiliative nega-tive emotions (e.g., shame, guilt, confusion, distress) can also be shared as they can trigger others’ attention and help. However, sharing affiliative negative emotions of-ten requires good preexisting socio-relational quality (e.g., trust, respect, empathy) as they can involve more intimate disclosure. Conversely, when positive or nega-tive emotions are shared, interpersonal emotional regulation allows group members to prevent their social distancing effect, i.e., moving away or against action tenden-cies (e.g., the expression of excessive pride following success or irritation following a socio-cognitive conflict). Failure to regulate interpersonal emotions appropriately can be a source of collaborative dysfunctionality and impair group performance.
3.5 Conclusion
A growing interest in the role of emotions has emerged over the last twenty years. Various research in diverse disciplines (cognitive psychology, cognitive neu-rosciences, social psychology, educational psychology) has highlighted how emo-tions affect thoughts and behaviors at the personal and interpersonal levels. How-ever, these numerous contributions have not been yet integrated to capture how they impact the functioning of collaborative problem-solving. After reviewing diverse scientific work related to emotions in personal and interpersonal settings, this chap-ter enriches the model described in the previous chapchap-ter in describing how emotions impact the three levels (individual processing, mental models, observable outputs) of collaborative problem-solving afore-described. This work organized the research presented in the rest of this manuscript.
Chapter 4
OBJECTIVES OF THE
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
The model we have described in the foregoing sections aims at creating a testable framework that addresses a comprehensive picture of the different aspects that in-tervene in the dynamics of collaborative problem-solving, including bothpersonal andinterpersonal processes. The emphasis was also put on separating the collabo-ration process into three distinct levels, namely theindividual processesmobilized by the group members, themental modelswhere personal and interpersonal infor-mation are aggregated, weighed and assessed to trigger personal and interpersonal behaviors, and theobservable outputsavailable to all group members. This model also clearly distinguishes three types of collaborative matters that have specific func-tions in collaborative problem-solving, namely thecognitive dimensionthat allows group members to solve the problem in question, themotivational dimensionthat allows them to persevere in the task, and the relational dimension that refers to the relationship between collaborators. Based on this model, different assumptions about how the different levels intervene and interact during collaborative problem-solving can be raised and experimentally tested. The objective of the empirical re-search reported in the present dissertation is to focus on some of these assumptions.
As only some aspects of this model have been explored as part of this thesis, several directions for further research will be proposed in section 8.3.
Themain purposeof this thesis work is to highlight the pervasive role of emotional processes in collaborative problem-solving. We have focused mainly on the cog-nitive and relational aspects from the viewpoint of mental models (i.e., perception of collaboration) and collaborative acts (real-time communicative exchanges). More specifically, we have tried to deepen the understanding of the role of emotions in collaborative problem-solving in exploring how three kinds of emotional processes (i.e., self-experienced emotions, explicit sharing of emotions and disposition to reg-ulate self and others’ emotions) play a role in the co-modulation/co-regulation of the cognitive and relational dimensions.
Study 1 (Chapter 5) focused on the interaction between the interpersonal level (observable outputs) and the personal level of collaboration (mental models) and more specifically on the perception of socio-cognitive and socio-meta-cognitive acts.
We analyzed how self-experienced achievement emotions (Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012) triggered by task-achievement appraisals influence how group mem-bers use collaborative acts during a problem-solving task. The experiment involved pairs of participants solving a simulation of a collaborative problem-solving task (3D puzzle game).
This study aimed to address the following research questions:
• How different group task-achievement appraisals (low vs. high control and failure vs. success) trigger various achievement emotions?
• How different group task-achievement appraisals change group members’
perception of how they use collaborative processes?
• Do achievement emotions have a modulation effect on the relationship be-tween task-achievement appraisals and collaborative processes?
Study 2a andStudy 2b (Chapter 6) focused in the interpersonal level (observable outputs) and more specifically on actual socio-cognitive and socio-meta-cognitive acts. We analyzed how the explicit sharing of emotions influences the use of col-laborative acts in a colcol-laborative problem-solving task where pairs of participants created a slogan together. Two different ways of analysis have been adopted. In study 2a (see section 6.1), we explored how the sharing of emotions influences how dyads mobilize collaborative acts globally.
This study aimed to address the following research question:
• How the explicit sharing of emotions through an emotion awareness tool shapes the general use of collaborative acts?
In study 2b (see section 6.2), we investigated the dynamics of collaborative problem-solving exchanges in addressing whether and how explicit sharing of emotional sharing induces real-time adaptation of both emitter’s and receiver’s collaborative acts.
This study aimed to address the following research questions:
• Do emotion sharing modulates collaborative acts in real-time?
• Do specific patterns of collaboration can be highlighted, considering the triad emitter’s collaborative acts, emotional sharing, and receiver’s collaborative acts?
Finally,Study 3(Chapter 7) focused on the interaction between interpersonal level (observable outputs), the personal level of collaboration (mental models and indi-vidual processing), more specifically, interpersonal emotion regulation dispositions
and explicit sharing of emotions in relation to the relationship between group mem-bers during collaborative problem-solving. The experiment involved pairs of partic-ipants solving a collaborative problem-solving task (optimization problem).
This study aimed to address the following research questions:
• How explicit sharing of emotions and interpersonal emotion regulation dispo-sitions interact to influence the perception of the relationship between group members?
To avoid some redundancy, the hypotheses for each of these studies are detailed in their corresponding chapters. The main contributions are summarized in section 8.1 and discussed in relation to the three-model of collaborative problem-solving.