10.22.08
Posted in Anthropology, Consumer Culture, Jacob Canon, Relationships, The Oscar Show, UVa College of Arts & Sciences, University of Virginia, ethics, happiness, philosophy, sociology at 11:04 am by Jacob Canon
In today’s show, adapted from an article written by Anne Broomley, Senior Writer, Editor for UVa’s Office of Public Affairs, we look at the University of Virginia’s Kath Weston and the journey that led to her new book, Traveling Light: On the Road with America’s Poor.
Author Kath Weston, an Anthropology PhD from Stanford University, grew up in a working-class family and attended college with the help of financial aid, took her first bus trip alone when she was 16, and that unforgettable trip showed her that traveling on the bus was much more than just a way to get somewhere.
Before joining the University of Virginia faculty this fall, she spent more than five years crisscrossing the nation on buses, chronicling the lives of Americans who travel via the least expensive mass transportation option. She refers to her new book, Traveling Light: On the Road with America’s Poor, as a journey full of unexpected richness. Her new book describes her fellow passengers’ colorful humanity and tackles issues of class, race and dubious access to America’s opportunities.
On the Road With America's Poor [5:20m]:
Play Now |
Play in Popup |
Download
Weston said she wanted her social commentary to reveal “the artistry of living poor”—the ingenuity of getting by in a system that often fails to reckon with the widening material gap between rich and poor.
The book’s introduction says “By riding the buses, I hoped to get at aspects of living poor that have eluded community studies of poverty… The road trip has become its own American art form, yet few have bothered to chronicle what happens when people without money take to the road.”
Along the way, the riders she traveled with might have been struggling, hungry or penniless, but she found they were also helpful, creative and philosophical.
For example, take T. J… Traveling in Flagstaff, Arizona , he was almost arrested because a white woman, who was probably insane, thought he was a witch and started screaming at him in a bus terminal snack bar, bringing the police. They were about to haul off T.J., who was black, but a white trucker from the bus talked them out of it.
The trucker loved the road, he said, but he had to give up his rig to have surgery—that’s why he was riding the bus.
When everyone got back on the bus, a Hispanic man walked back to T.J., handing him a foil-wrapped package of burritos his wife had made. It turned out T.J. had no money to buy food as he rode to Oklahoma, en route to a new job in a meat-processing plant.
Then there is a story of a divorced middle-aged man, who had custody of his daughter during the summer. So he took her on the bus for the only kind of vacation he could afford, to show her another side of America.
Or, the story of a teenage girl, traveling from one city to another, looking for her younger brother, whose mother had taken off with him and then left him someplace. The sister didn’t know much more than that.
Then, there is the soon-to-be all too familiar story of a once-middle-class woman, who fell onto harder times when her now-deceased husband was laid off. She told Weston, she hated taking the bus, and even though it was obvious why, the woman stood up for a non-English-speaking passenger when the bus driver started yelling at him. She also changed seats so a young woman and her toddler could sit next to each other.
With America’s appetite for travel and adventure alive and well, and the shrinking economy looming as a back drop, Weston’s story of kindness and humanity, in spite of hardship may become a more familiar one for millions in this country. And, a tale of humility and grace that may salvage the American ideal, in the face of the difficult times ahead.
You’ve been listening to the Oscar Show, I’m Jacob Canon. Join us next week when we will preview the upcoming Virginia Film Festival.
Permalink
04.30.08
Posted in Consumer Culture, Jacob Canon, Psychology, Social Psychology, The Oscar Show, UVa College of Arts & Sciences, University of Virginia, happiness, sociology at 12:04 pm by Jacob Canon
In last week’s show we examined the research of we examined the works of Tobias Lear, secretary to George Washington and envoy to North Africa for President Thomas Jefferson.
Material World [6:21m]:
Play Now |
Play in Popup |
Download
In today’s show, adapted from an article recently published on the Oscar Web site written by Melissa Maki, research communications coordinator for the Office of the Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies, we look at the research of Allison Pugh, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, and her study of how families deal with the increasing demands of a consumer culture.
Parents in the U.S. have become all too familiar with the latest fashion trends, toys and electronic gadgets as children regularly plead for the next best thing. But how do parents — especially those with limited incomes — comply with their children’s demands?
Allison Pugh, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, began looking at parents’ buying habits as a doctoral student at the University of California at Berkeley. Based on her findings, and with the help of an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation grant, Pugh is currently completing a book, Longing and Belonging: Parents, Children and Consumer Culture, scheduled to be published by the University of California Press in the spring of 2009.
Pugh said, “I wanted to look at consumption and how the standards for an adequate childhood are ratcheting up, and how affluent and low-income parents are handling that.” She spent three years conducting ethnographic research: interviewing parents, volunteering and observing in three different California schools, including a private school and two public schools, one low-income and one affluent.
During this time, Pugh found common themes among the study’s economically and racially diverse participants. She said, “In all these schools, children feel the need to have certain things or experience certain things — like going to popular movies or local attractions — to be visible or to belong in their social groups.”
The need to belong transcends class boundaries, as does the parental tendency to comply with children’s desires. Pugh found that even those parents struggling to put food on the table and pay bills at the end of the month find ways to provide their kids with expensive, popular items so that their children achieve a sort of “dignity” among their peers.
Yet, Pugh did find differences in the specific buying habits of poor and wealthy families. She said, “Low-income and affluent families are all buying, and they are all buying in response to this need to belong on the part of their children. And in some cases they are even buying the exact same thing, like Game Boys, but the way they buy is different and the way they talk about buying is different.”
Affluent families engage in what Pugh terms “symbolic deprivation,” deemphasizing their spending, not wanting to appear materialistic, and focusing on specific items they don’t buy for their child, whether it be electronics or Barbie dolls. In contrast, she said, low-income families engage in “symbolic indulgence.” Since poor families can’t provide their child’s every desire, they focus on key items with the highest social value, like Sony PlayStations.
Much of the current literature in this area explains the growing culture of spending around kids in the past few decades as parents acting in a rational way in an increasingly materialistic society. The argument is that people are simply trying to get ahead and have more. Pugh’s research is unique in that it brings the significance of emotions into this equation.
Pugh explained, “The proliferation of commodities in childhood has changed what possessions mean. Now they mean belonging to children and they mean care to parents and to children.” She argues that buying for children has created a new dynamic in parent-child relationships. “It’s about recognition of desire, it’s about empathy, and about the parent realizing how difficult it is to be different in American culture.”
Pugh notes that parents today are confronted with two choices, neither of which is good. They can give in to the consumer culture, even if they can’t really afford to, or they can deprive their children of goods, putting kids at risk of being ostracized by their social groups.
Regulating how companies are allowed to market goods to children may be part of the solution to this dilemma, but Pugh asserts that items achieve social value not immediately after children are exposed to advertisements, but when kids get together in small groups and talk about them.
With this in mind, Pugh concludes her book with suggestions of how parents and schools can collectively organize around consumption issues in order to drain commodities of some of their social power. Some promising examples include a Michigan group that is fighting the escalation of party bags and other birthday phenomena, informal groups of parents agreeing to limit their children’s exposure to popular culture, and schools banning cell phones and iPods on their campuses.
You’ve been listening to the Oscar Show, I’m Jacob Canon. Join us next week when our topic will be the research of Richard Handler, UVa professor of anthropology, and how the popularized story of colonial Williamsburg, upon reexamination reveals different side of tale.
Permalink
03.05.08
Posted in Business, Jacob Canon, The Oscar Show, UVa College of Arts & Sciences, Uncategorized, University of Virginia, ethics, happiness at 12:04 pm by Jacob Canon
In today’s show, adapted from an article published this month on the Oscar Web site written by Anne Bromley, a senior editor/writer for UVa Media Relations, we look at a recent study by University of Virginia Sociologist Elizabeth Gorman which said, no matter how the data was sliced or certain variables controlled: women say they have to work harder than men.
The statement, “Whatever women do, they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good,” may not be totally off the mark in the workplace states a recent study by University of Virginia Sociologist Elizabeth Gorman and Julie Kmec of Washington State University.
The study analyzed five surveys of men and women in Britain and the US, given in 1977, 1992, two in 1997, and 2001. They concentrated their analysis on the two surveys conducted in 1997, both comprising cross-sectional interviews of about 3,500 workers in the US and almost 2,500 in the UK. To yield comparable answers, they evaluated results from the following survey question: “My job requires that I work very hard.” And, according to the results, a gender gap persisted in ratings of the statement. Women were significantly more likely to say they strongly agreed or agreed, than men.
Gorman noted, “The statement in the survey about required work effort is not one in which employees are comparing themselves to the opposite sex, it’s also not asking for a perception of how hard the work is or how much effort they actually exerted. Our focus is on required work effort, the effort that an employee is expected to exert in order to perform her or his job at a level that is satisfactory to the employer. It is important to distinguish required effort from an employee’s actual exerted effort.”
The researchers analyzed the survey data to see if, in fact, women did have more difficult jobs, but that was not the case. Even when the jobs were almost identical, women still were significantly more likely to say they had to work very hard. And, while controlling for physical and mental demands of a particular job, Gorman and Kmec found that neither group of factors explained the different findings about work effort.
Looking for other potential reasons, the sociologists considered domestic responsibilities outside of work. They stated, “Marriage and parenthood had the same effect on reports of required effort for women and men. In the U.S. sample, the researchers matched the number of hours spent on childcare and housework. Between men and women who performed the same amount of time on these tasks, women were still more likely to say their jobs required them to work very hard.”
So what explains the difference between genders and perceived required effort in the work place?
In their paper, “We (Have to) Try Harder: Gender and Required Work Effort in Britain and the United States,” released in the December issue of the journal “Gender and Society” the researchers said, “We argue that the association between sex and reported required work effort is best interpreted as reflecting stricter performance standards imposed on women, even when women and men hold the same jobs.”
Gorman said, “A lot of experimental research has shown that people rate the same performance as better when told it was done by a man. People give lower marks to an essay, a painting or a résumé when it has a woman’s name on it. And when a man and a woman work together on a project, people assume the man contributed more than the woman did. Even when a woman’s work is indisputably excellent, people don’t believe she’s good — they think she got lucky.” It follows then, that women have to do better than a man in order to get the same evaluation.
Gorman then added, “This is what women are up against. They have to work harder… And in light of this previous research, it makes sense to conclude that women have to work harder to win their bosses’ approval.”
Some possible consequences of this “effort gap” in the workplace include: the quality of women’s work experience is likely to be lower than men’s; this difference in required effort could also have consequences for women’s careers, making it harder for them to be recognized and promoted. Also, the physical and emotional effects could, in turn, have negative repercussions for families.
Gorman went on to say, “It wouldn’t be fair to use this research to reinforce stereotypes.”
Kmec added, “Instead, employers should take into account women’s hard work when considering who to promote and reward. We do not want to insist that female workers shirk their job responsibilities to make this gap go away. Rather, we hope employers make job performance standards more transparent and be held accountable for their evaluations of women at work.”
You’ve been listening to the Oscar Show, I’m Jacob Canon. Join us next week when we will look at the work of Maurie McInnis and her perspective of class politics, social structures and hierarchies of antebellum South through the examination 19th century art and material objects.
Permalink
11.29.07
Posted in Asian-Americans, European-Americans, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Psychology, Uncategorized, University of Virginia, happiness at 12:06 pm by Jacob Canon
Are you happy? Well don’t try to be happier; you might become less happy. That is the essence of a multi-cultural study published this month in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. The study was produced by University of Virginia psychology professor Shigehiro Oishi and his co-authors Ed Diener, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign and The Gallup Organization, Dong-Won Choi of California State University, East Bay, Chu Kim-Prieto of the College of New Jersey, and Incheol Choi of Seoul National University.
When Less is More [5:01m]:
Play Now |
Play in Popup |
Download
Professor Oishi and his colleagues found that, on average, European-Americans claim to be happy in general, more happy than Asian-Americans or Koreans or Japanese. But it is much easier for them to become less happy by negative events. And they tend to recover at a slower rate from negative events than their counterparts in Asia or with an Asian ancestry. On the other hand, Koreans, Japanese, and to a lesser extent, Asian-Americans, are less happy in general, but recover their emotional equilibrium more readily after a setback than European-Americans.
Oishi said, “We found that as a person experiences more positive events, the more they feel the effects of a negative event, people seem to dwell on the negative thing when they have a large number of good events in their life. It is like the person who is used to flying first class and becomes very annoyed if there is a half-hour delay. But the person who flies economy class accepts the delay in stride.”
Oishi, a social psychologist who grew up in Japan and then moved to the United States at 23, is interested in comparing how people from East Asia and the United States respond to the daily events of life. He and his colleagues surveyed more than 350 college students in Japan, Korea and the United States over a three-week period. The students recorded daily their general state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with life, as well as the number of positive and negative events they had during the course of each day. The researchers found that the European-Americans needed nearly two positive events,such as getting complimented or getting an A, to return to their normal level of happiness after each negative event, such as getting a parking ticket or a lower grade than expected. The Koreans, Japanese and Asian-Americans generally needed only one positive event to make up for each negative event.
Oishi said that people who become accustomed to numerous positive or happy events in their life are more likely to take a harder fall than people who have learned to accept the bad with the good. And because negative events have such a strong effect when occurring in the midst of numerous positive events, people find it difficult to be extremely happy. They reach a point of diminishing returns. This is why the extreme happiness people may feel after buying a new car or a house, or getting married, can be rapidly diminished when the payments come due or the daily spats begin. It becomes a problem of ratio, or perspective.
Oishi said, “In general, it’s good to have a positive perspective, but unless you can switch your mindset to accept the negative facts of everyday life — that these things happen and must be accepted — it becomes very hard to maintain a comfortable level of satisfaction.”Professor Oishi’s advice: “Don’t try to be happier.”
You’ve been listening to the Oscar Show… I’m Jacob Canon. Join us next week when our topic will be… The research of UVa professor Glenn Gaesser and his work concerning nutrition and what are commonly referred as “BAD” carbohydrates.
Permalink
11.22.07
Posted in Jacob Canon, James Coan, MRI, Psychology, Relationships, The Oscar Show, University of Virginia, anxiety, brain, emotions, environmental conditions, happiness, hypothalamus, immune, nervous system, neurobiology, neurophysiology, physical health, physiology, sensory inputs, stress at 3:46 pm by Jacob Canon
How did you react the last time you had a fight with that significant someone in your life? With couples, the woman might apologize, or the man might make a joke or express understanding. By doing this, they subtly and briefly lighten the tension as they work their way through a disagreement.
Psychology Professor James Coan discovered a long time ago that by doing this, even when couples fight, they take care of each other. This interplay was significant when Coan designed a study exploring what happens in people’s brains when they behave emotionally or observe other people’s emotions. Coan said, “what we are learning is our emotions are more heavily involved in our day-to-day physical health than we previously thought.
How we deal with our relationships is closely tied to how long we live, how frequently we go to the doctor, how rapidly we recover from injury, how happy we tend to be in our lives.” With his colleagues, Hillary Schaefer and Richard J. Davidson from the University of Wisconsin, Coan sought to demonstrate the neurobiological basis of emotional expression and regulatory processes.
In the study, they used MRI technology to view these responses at the level of glucose metabolism and blood oxygenation in the brain. Because of the importance of emotional connectedness to the study, 16 happily married, heterosexual couples were recruited as test subjects. Wives were placed in the scanner so brain activity could be recorded as each was exposed to the anxiety-producing possibility of an electric shock to the ankle.
Researchers wanted to see what effect different types of emotional support would have in areas of the brain related to the body’s normal fight-or-flight stress response. Readings were taken when the woman was alone in facing this challenge, When a stranger, a male, was present to support her And when her husband offered support. Coan stated, “the scanning environment is pretty hostile to looking at interactions between people.” The MRI machine surrounds the subject’s body and restricts movement. The women weren’t even able to see the support person during the scanning process.
Having the man offer his hand for the woman to hold was about the only intervention possible in this setting. Not surprisingly, the results show there was a healthy reduction in the stress response when test subjects were supported. Stimulation in the regions of the brain that regulate physiological arousal and coordinate large muscles and joints was significantly decreased, no matter who was holding the woman’s hand. However, when it was her husband’s hand she was holding, the response was significantly greater.
Coan said, “When you’re holding a spouse’s hand, you get down-regulation in all of those same systems. But all the other systems that have to do with the conscious regulation of your emotions — having to pay attention to what’s happening with your body and having to become more vigilant for future dangers — all of these other systems come down as well. Your brain doesn’t work as hard when it’s your spouse. What surprised Coan and his colleagues most was the relaxation response demonstrated by what they called “super couples.” In those couples with exceptionally high-quality relationships, “Hand-holding had a significantly greater effect on soothing their brains.”
Tests showed differences involving two structures that were not affected at all in other test subjects. They observed evidence of reduced release of stress hormones by the hypothalamus. These hormones are responsible for inhibiting immune response and other activities that have critical implications for health and well-being.
Of greater interest was the reduction of activity in the right anterior insula. This brain structure modulates the amount of pain stimulus one experiences subjectively. Reduction of activity in this area means test subjects actually felt less pain when they held their husband’s hand.
So it can be said, having someone you love hold your hand really can take the hurt away.
Permalink
11.15.07
Posted in Buddhist, Elevation, Jacob Canon, Psychology, Relationships, Social Psychology, The Oscar Show, University of Virginia, anxiety, biology, brain, emotions, ethics, happiness, philosophy, physical health, positive psychology, stress at 10:24 am by Jacob Canon
When social psychologist University of Virginia in 1995, he prepared by reading Thomas Jefferson’s writings and making the requisite pilgrimage to Monticello. Little did he realize the impact this Jeffersonian indoctrination would have on his own research.
Haidt’s area of specialization is moral emotions, but before coming to U.Va., he focused his studies on cross-cultural experiences of disgust. He read ancient Buddhist texts and spent time in India, exploring how the beneficial biological aspects of disgust became codified as religious imperatives and keys to social order.
Then he came across Thomas Jefferson’s letter to Robert Skipwith, in which Jefferson describes how “witnessing acts of beauty and moral goodness — whether in literature or reality — swells the chest and inspires a desire to lead a better life.” Suddenly Haidt began thinking about the antithesis of disgust, the psychological effect of uplifting experiences, an emotion he termed “elevation.” Haidt said,“That letter fundamentally changed the course of my research.”
In a moment of zeitgeist, Haidt’s inquiry into elevation coincided with the burgeoning of the academic field, positive psychology, which studies how people find meaning and happiness in life. His research into what prompts elevation and the resulting physical and motivational effects won him psychology’s largest monetary award, the John Templeton Prize for Positive Psychology, in 2001.
While researching elevation, Haidt continued teaching a large undergraduate survey course introducing the study of psychology. In the classroom, he has found it useful to cite quotations and examples from ancient philosophy and world religion to make his points more memorable. Haidt’s colleague, psychology professor Gerald Clore stated, “This penchant for asking what it all means makes him very appealing as an undergraduate lecturer in Introductory Psychology.”
Having received several university and state awards for teaching, Haidt decided to apply his ancient wisdom approach to a study of happiness. Looking at the relationship between what religious and philosophical traditions say about fulfillment and what scientists have discovered about the biological processes involved in the brain’s response to stimuli, Haidt gleaned 10 psychological truths from ancient religious and philosophical texts, which he examines in the 10 chapters of his 2006 book, The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom.
Throughout the work, Haidt analogizes the conscious mind to a rider straddling the elephant of the unconscious mind, trying to guide the giant beast where the rider wants it to go. He cited numerous psychological experiments that demonstrate how at odds the conscious and unconscious minds often are, despite the conscious mind’s skill at rationalizing choices and behavior. His book suggests that by understanding ancient wisdom’s insights into our divided nature, we have a chance of establishing a more harmonious relationship between the conscious and unconscious, gently training our elephants to do as we wish.
Haidt, who has also established an accompanying website, Happinesshypothesis.com , said, “every good idea I’ve ever had in my life is in this book, the book is really a gateway to everything I want to work on for the rest of my life.” Although Haidt spent 2005-2006 at Princeton University as the Laurence S. Rockefeller Visiting Professor of Ethics at the Center for Human Values, his heart remains in Charlottesville. Haidt said,“it really was because of U.Va., because of Jefferson, that I came to study this completely neglected area of emotion.”
Haidt is currently studying the foundations of moral judgment in liberals and conservatives in order to understand how political appeals might be better crafted. In addition, he’s researching how the application of elevation can be used to increase trust in relationships, especially among married couples.
To learn more about his work and this area of study, visit www.happinesshypothesis.com.
Permalink