Lauren Fine and Brian Jackson, English
Introduction
We’ve all experienced moments where we walk in and feel the tension in the room. Even before our minds can process what’s happening, we start to mirror the emotions of the people we’re around. Instances like this, where the emotion (or affect) one person is feeling subconsciously triggers a similar affect in someone else, are possible through what neuroscientists refer to as the transmission of affect. The physiological shift that influences the receiver’s emotions is triggered through visual, auditory, and olfactory cues (pheromones).
Obviously this emotional communication between bodies influences how we relate to each other, and according to rhetorician Kenneth Burke, how we identify with each other determines who we are. He said “the so called ‘I’ is merely a unique combination of partially conflicting ‘corporate we’s’” (Attitudes Toward History 264). So the question becomes how are these “we’s” formed? Howe does a group come to identify as a group, especially when the group identity is formed in a short period of time such as in a protest group?
This ORCA project suggests that affect transmission can play a part in the formation of these group identities. Transmission can lead a whole group to experience the same emotion, and if the members of the group also interpret the emotion in a similar way (either through situation or communication), the crowd will develop a sense of group identity—a feeling of togetherness and an impression that they are all part of the same group. This explains why large groups are able to begin thinking and acting in a unified manner so quickly. This type of non-verbal, emotional communication has clearly had an effect on many crowds, including the protestors at Occupy Dayton, which I use as my primary example.
Methodology
As this is a humanities-based project, my methods primarily consisted of research and writing. I began by researching scholarship in five areas: the history of emotional rhetoric; how affect is transmitted; what other scholars have said about rhetorical identity, particularly regarding Kenneth Burke’s definition; how all of this relates to group psychology and behavior; and finally how people behaved during a recent case of group thinking and identity referred to as the Occupy Movement. My question throughout this research process was this: how does the knowledge of how affect is transmitted between individuals change how we view identity, and how does that apply to a contemporary example of group thinking (the Occupy Movement)?
After gaining a base understanding of these areas and finding text to use for my occupy case study (interviews of participants in Occupy Dayton done by a graduate student in Ohio), I completed my project by outlining, drafting, and revising with the help of my mentor.
Results
By analyzing how transmission of affect influences how we identify with each other and then looking at how it applies to the participants of the Occupy Movement, we learn that affect transmission can cause people in groups to experience the same emotions, which can lead to a sense of unity crucial to forming group identities. However, as we will see in the Occupy example, this emotional identification only creates an abstract group identity—a feeling of unity when, upon closer examination, there are few commonalities binding the group together. Thus, while transmission can create the affective undercurrent necessary to incite action, a more permanent, truly unified group often needs language to bring group members from feeling the same thing to interpreting their feelings the same way.
Discussion
It’s clear that affect transmission can have a significant impact on how we form group identities, but what does this mean for the study and practice of rhetoric? First of all, just acknowledging the role of transmission can help us understand rhetorical situations a lot better as a third party observer or analyst. In addition, this knowledge also has the potential to shape how we respond to affect transmission when we find ourselves in groups. We may not be able to stop our bodies from receiving someone else’s affect, but we can regulate how we interpret and respond to affects. Those who recognize how much others’ presence can influence their emotions can “reflect on their experience” and “consciously make the connection between the stimulus and the emotional response” (Redekop and Paré 44). Even though the received emotion will still be affecting the reflection, a person can let go of the emotion “by examining its course or by allowing the course of other, calmer, feelings to assert itself” (Brennan 128).
But perhaps most importantly, understanding how affect transmission shapes group identity actually allows us to better use rhetoric to influence groups. In order for affect transmission to lead to a unified group identity, the members of the group have to interpret the emotion they are experiencing in the same way. Sometimes, the interpretation is provided by the context (at a rock concert, people will assume they feel connected with other members of the audience because they share an appreciation for the particular music being played), but sometimes a leader can help create a sense of unity by helping group members attribute their feelings to the same source. And just as clinicians use a received affect as “information about that patient’s state of mind” (Brennan 27), affect transmission can help leaders perceive how the audience is feeling in order to harness these emotions. Even though transmission itself might be out of our control, our discernment and interpretation of affect is not, and that means the formation of group identities can be consciously influenced by group members and leaders alike.
Conclusion
Overall, transmission is clearly a factor to consider when analyzing group dynamics. The effects of transmission can be unpredictable, but recognizing its presence helps us understand how large groups can assemble, unify, and begin behaving as one in very short periods of time. In the Occupy Dayton Movement, for example, transmission seems to have played a part in the feeling of togetherness participants expressed at some of the early rallies, despite the diversity of the group. Although experiencing a shared affect is only one step in forming a strong group identity (it must be supplemented by a shared interpretation if the group is to become truly unified, which is, eventually, where Occupy Dayton fell apart), it is an essential step since emotion is often what drives people to act. As the cognitive sciences discover more, I expect we will understand even better how transmission occurs and how it influences our daily lives. But one thing is certain: whether we’re trying to persuade a group or simply understand it, we can no longer study group behavior or group identity without at least considering the role of affect transmission.