Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Averill
Review by: Peter Lyman
Contemporary Sociology, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Mar., 1984), pp. 202-203
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2068914 .
Accessed: 07/01/2015 10:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Contemporary Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
BOOK REVIEWS
202
World, 1983). Treatment of regional inequalities, rural-urbandifferences, and an unsatisfactory definition of changes in lowerclass status are other problemswith this book.
Nevertheless-approached with caution-this
study offers new insights concerningmobility
in a highly inequitableand generallyimmobile
society.
Measures of Socioeconomic Status: Current
Issues, edited by MARY G. POWERS. Boulder:
University of Maryland
BOOK REVIEWS
biological facts, and thus are governed by
culturalnorms which guide our interpretation
of our own feelings and their expression to
others. Thus, "The person who says, 'I am
angry with you' or 'I love you' is not simply
labelinga state of physiologicalarousal; he is
entering into a complex relationshipwith another person. The meaningof the relationship,
not only for the individualsinvolved but also
for the larger society, is embedded in the
feeling rules (social norms) for that emotion"
(25). This "social constructivist" perspective
is applied to the problem of understanding
anger by exploringliteraturefrom biology and
psychology to law, anthropology, and
philosophy. This prepares the way for constructingquestionnairesto identify the feeling
rules which govern our anger.
In five studies Averill reconstructs angry
relationships:anger as it is subjectivelyexperienced; as experienced by its target; the difference between angerand annoyance;the duration of anger; and sex differences in the
experience of anger. The sample included
college students in a small town, thus the
study does not encompass possible class,
ethnic, or racial differences in feeling rules.
Following are some of his findings:
A friend or loved one is more likely to be
the target of anger than is a stranger.Averill
explains that we have more opportunityto be
angry at those we care for, and this in turn
means that our anger is more likely to be
constructive than malevolent. Psychoanalytic
theory might point to the ambivalence of
emotions and the aggressive content of sexuality here, but Averill is focusing upon everyday anger, not aggression or sexuality.
Anger is likely to be self-centered,intended
to assert our authorityor improve our image
in order to achieve personal control and
status. Yet angeris not necessarilyaggressive.
While 93 percent felt like engaging in aggressive conduct, and 83 percent actually did so,
nonaggressiveresponses were also very common; 73 percent chose to talk over the incident with the instigatoror a third party. Averill argues that anger can be a form of
problem-solving,pointing to the constructive
uses of rule-governedanger.
Averill challenges the feminist view "that
women do not experience angeras frequently,
intensely and/or in the same manneras men"
(287), concludingthat there are no majordifferences between the sexes in everyday anger.
This conclusion is curious given his findings.
Womenratedtheir angera more intense expe-
203