Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jecp
Children’s recognition of pride
Darren J. Garcia a, Rebecca Janis b, Ross Flom c,⇑
a
Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee, USA
Department of Psychology, Penn State University, USA
c
Department of Psychology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 24 March 2014
Revised 9 March 2015
Keywords:
Emotion
Emotion recognition
Self-conscious emotions
Pride
non-Verbal Expression
Affective cognition
a b s t r a c t
The purpose of this experiment was to examine when children
identify their own experience as one of pride after they complete
a difficult and competitive task (i.e., race a confederate in building
a tower of blocks). A sample of 144 children between 3 and 6 years
of age participated in one of three conditions. Children were told to
try to build a tower of blocks taller than a confederate’s tower
(exceed standard) or tried and failed to build a tower of blocks taller than the confederate’s tower (fail standard), or children were
asked to build a tower of blocks alongside a confederate (no standard). Results revealed a developmental progression of recognizing
pride in which children first began showing nonverbal behaviors
that were reliably coded as conveying pride at around 4 years of
age. Children began to apply the label/term ‘‘pride’’ to a photograph conveying pride in another peer at around 4 years of age
and recognized their own experience as one of pride following a
competitive task at around 5 years of age.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Introduction
During the past 20 years, research examining children’s discrimination and recognition of secondary emotions such as shame, guilt, and pride has received growing attention within developmental
psychology (e.g., Baldwin, Baldwin, & Ewald, 2006; Barrett, 2005; Kemeny, Gruenewald, & Dickerson,
2004; Parker & Thomas, 2009; Stuewig, Tangney, Heigel, Harty, & McCloskey, 2010). Pride, for example, is often described as a positive and prosocial moral emotion associated with higher self-esteem
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fl[email protected] (R. Flom).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.03.010
0022-0965/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
86
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
and an increased motivation to achieve. In addition, pride is typically experienced when one exceeds a
standard or goal for a specific behavior or task. In the current experiment, we examined children’s
intrapersonal and interpersonal recognition of pride where pride was defined as a positive emotion
generated by self-reflection and self-evaluative appraisal that one is responsible for exceeding a
socially valued standard or expectation (Lewis, 2008; Mascolo & Fischer, 1995, p. 66).
Pride has also been described as a self-conscious emotion because it requires an awareness of the
self as a separate entity in making a self-evaluative appraisal against a goal or standard (Holodynski &
Kronast, 2009; Lewis, Sullivan, Stanger, & Weiss, 1989). Lewis (2008, pp. 742–747) further suggested
that experiencing pride requires the ability to process information about the self and make self-evaluative appraisals against culturally defined standards, rules, and goals (see Holodynski & Kronast,
2009; Stipek, Recchia, & McClintic, 1992; see Stipek, 1995, for a similar point). For instance, Stipek
and colleagues (1992) showed that by around 2 years of age, children begin learning that their behavior will elicit approval or disapproval; however, it is not until after 3 years of age that children begin to
internalize social standards and evaluate their behavior against these standards (Lewis, Alessandri, &
Sullivan, 1992; Stipek, 1995; Stipek et al., 1992). Thus, children’s capacity to experience pride is likely
dependent, at least in part, on how social interactions are perceived and appraised in relation to the
goals and standards they have adopted as their own (Lewis et al., 1992).
Although self-awareness and self-evaluation are two factors that contribute to the experience and
(likely) recognition of pride, other factors have also been shown to contribute to the elicitation and
experience of pride. Seidner, Stipek, and Fesbach (1988), for example, asked 5-, 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds
and adults to describe events that made them feel proud, embarrassed, happy, and sad. Within the
context of pride, their results indicate that 5-year-olds reported situations that invoked personal
responsibility when experiencing pride (e.g., ‘‘when I won a trophy’’). In addition, across all ages
(5 years to adulthood), their results also indicate that the presence of an audience contributes to
the experience of pride and embarrassment. Similarly, Seidner and colleagues also reported that external reinforcement (e.g., praise, tangible rewards) was also present when describing an experience that
elicited pride. In addition to the presence of an audience and external reinforcement, Weiner,
Heckhausen, and Meyer (1972) found that tasks of intermediate difficulty were most likely to elicit
effort attributions that in turn produced pride-like behaviors compared with relatively easy tasks
(see also Lewis et al., 1992). Finally, Belsky and Domitrovich (1997) demonstrated that children
express more pride-related behaviors such as increased smiling, erect posture, pointing at outcome,
and positive self-statements (e.g., ‘‘I won,’’ ‘‘I did it!’’) when the same task was framed as ‘‘difficult’’
as opposed to being described as ‘‘easy.’’ Thus, if one is attempting to elicit pride using achievement
tasks, these tasks should be challenging, yet attainable, so that children may take responsibility for the
outcomes.
In terms of when children first recognize pride, research does reveal some slight age discrepancies—likely due to methodological variations. For example, Kornilaki and Chloverakis (2004) examined
whether 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds could identify situations in third-person vignettes designed to elicit
pride or happiness. Their results revealed that only 11-year-olds were able to differentiate situations
that would elicit pride from those that would elicit happiness. Based on previous research (e.g., Belsky
& Domitrovich, 1997; Kasari, Sigman, Baumgartner, & Stipek, 1993; Lewis et al., 1992), Tracy and
Robins (2004, 2008) created a set of photographs of adults conveying achievement-oriented pride
(see Fig. 1). As described by Tracy, Robins, and Lagattuta (2005, p. 251), and as depicted in Fig. 1, pride
is often physically communicated by having an expanded chest, head tilted slightly back, arms raised
either above the head or akimbo, and a small non-Duchenne smile. Using the photographs in Fig. 1,
Tracy and Robins (2004, 2008) showed that college-aged adults, as well as adults from different cultural backgrounds, reliably identified the photos in Fig. 1 as conveying pride. In addition, and again
using the photos in Fig. 1, Tracy and colleagues (2005) further examined whether children between
3 and 7 years of age could reliably ‘‘point to the photo where Joe [Jan] is feeling proud.’’ The results
of Tracy and colleagues (2005) reveal that by 4 years of age, children correctly identified the image(s)
conveying pride.
Like Tracy and colleagues (2005), Nelson and Russell (2012) also examined children’s recognition of
pride. In contrast to the static images used by Tracy and colleagues (Tracy & Robins, 2008; Tracy et al.,
2005), Nelson and Russell (2012) presented 4- to 11-year-olds with 5-s dynamic video clips of an adult
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
87
Fig. 1. Stimuli used by Tracy and colleagues (2005). Expressions A and B represent the two versions of the pride expression,
Expression C represents the happiness expression, and Expression D represents the surprise expression. Reprinted from Tracy, J.
L., Robins, R. W., & Lagattuta, K. H. (2005). Can children recognize pride? Emotion, 5, 251–257. Copyright 2005 by the American
Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission from APA.
woman that conveyed pride using various physical features (i.e., head and face only, body posture
only, or multi-cue). Using a spontaneous response format, the results of Nelson and Russell demonstrated that 4- to 6-year-olds failed to describe any of the video clips as conveying pride. However,
6- and 7-year-olds attributed pride only to the multi-cue expressions, whereas 8- to 11-year-olds
attributed pride to the multi-cue expressions, head-and-face-only videos, and body-posture-only
videos. Based on these results (Nelson & Russell, 2012; Tracy & Robins, 2008; Tracy et al., 2005), it
appears that children recognize pride between 4 and 8 years of age. Moreover, the recognition of
the secondary emotion of pride is in part dependent on whether the stimulus is dynamic or static,
the physical features that are presented to children, and children’s understanding of, and/or the inclusion of, the label ‘‘proud.’’
The purpose of the current experiment was to examine children’s ability to recognize pride following their experience and participation in a competitive task designed to elicit pride. In many studies
examining children’s recognition of pride, researchers have asked children either to identify the image
conveying pride in a series of pictures or short video clips (Nelson & Russell, 2012; Tracy et al., 2005;
Widen, 2013) or to describe/identify different emotions communicated in third-person vignettes
(Kornilaki & Chloverakis, 2004; Seidner et al., 1988). In the current experiment, we attempted to elicit,
or generate, the feeling of pride by having children participate in a competitive task with a clear standard to exceed (i.e., building a taller tower of blocks than a confederate) and subsequently asked children to identify the emotion they ‘‘felt’’ from a series of photographs, thereby reducing children’s need
to linguistically comprehend the meaning of pride or other emotion-related words or make interpretations of another’s behavior. In addition, and like previous research, we also asked children to identify
a photo that ‘‘shows pride.’’ Finally, we also recorded and had undergraduates judge the nonverbal
behavior displayed by the children after completing their respective tasks.
88
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
Method
Participants
A sample of 144 children (62 girls) between 3 and 6 years of age participated. Participants comprised four age groups, with 36 children in each age group and 12 children per age group within each
of the three conditions. Age groups consisted of 3-year-olds (15 girls, Mage = 3 years 3 days,
SD = 78 days, range = 30–41 months), 4-year-olds (19 girls, Mage = 4 years 54 days, SD = 89 days,
range = 42–54 months), 5-year-olds (15 girls, Mage = 5 years 1 day, SD = 89 days, range = 55–
66 months), and 6-year-olds (23 girls, Mage = 5 years 355 days, SD = 95 days, range = 67–78 months).
Fully 90% of the participants were White not of Hispanic origin, 5% were Asian American, 3% were
Pacific Islanders, and 2% were of Hispanic origin. Most children (n = 98) were recruited from a preschool located on the Brigham Young University campus, and the remaining participants (n = 46) were
older siblings of infants who participated in a separate study. Parents were able to observe their children’s participation from an adjoining room via a one-way mirror.
The data from 14 additional children (n = 9 at 3 years, n = 2 at 4 years, and n = 3 at 5 years) were
excluded for failure to comply with the procedure (e.g., refused to build a tower or point to a picture).
The data from 2 additional children (n = 1 at 3 years and n = 1 at 4 years) were excluded because they
did not speak English and we lacked the capacity for adequate translation.
Stimuli and apparatus
Based on the images used by Tracy and colleagues (2005), two sets of four photos were created.
Each set, composed of one male actor and one female actress, consisted of a happy, sad, surprised,
and achievement-oriented pride photo, and their ages were 4 or 5 years. Like Tracy and colleagues’
study, each photo captured the child’s torso and face, and each child was photographed standing in
front of a white background wearing a blue T-shirt. Each child was instructed on how to convey each
of the four expressions. The children were provided with modified instructions based on the Directed
Facial Action (DFA) task (Ekman, Levenson, & Friesen, 1983) for the happy, sad, and surprised expressions. Posing instructions for pride were based on previous research on the pride expression (i.e., Tracy
& Robins, 2004). Specifically, children were shown the images of Tracy and Robins (2004) and were
told that we wanted them to make the same expressions as the actor/actress in the picture. We also
described to the children how to position their arms, the type of smile, the degree of eye widening, and
the like for each expression. Each child was also photographed approximately 20 times conveying
each expression for a total of 80 images.
A total of 25 undergraduates judged the 160 photos for each of the expressions for both actors in
terms of how well they exemplified each emotion. Undergraduates were told that they would see series of pictures of a boy and girl conveying various emotional expressions. Undergraduates were asked
to indicate which emotion (happy, sad, pride, surprise, anger, or no emotion) they thought the child
was conveying and then to rate, on a 7-point Likert scale, how strongly they thought the photo conveyed the selected emotion. Given that each of the 20 photos for each emotional expression was correctly identified by undergraduates as conveying happiness, sadness, surprise, or pride, we selected
the photo for each expression that had the highest overall rating using a 7-point Likert scale. The average mean Likert ratings for the male expressions were as follows: happy, M = 6.7, SD = 1.2; surprise,
M = 6.4, SD = 1.6; pride, M = 6.8, SD = 1.8; and sad, M = 6.5, SD = 1.1. The average mean ratings for
the female expressions were as follows: happy, M = 6.8, SD = 1.1; surprise, M = 6.3, SD = 1.8; pride,
M = 6.6, SD = 1.3; and sad, M = 6.4, SD = 1.8. Although the final images used in the current study are
consistent with many of those components articulated by Tracy and Robins (2007a), we readily
acknowledge that the current images using child actors have not been validated to the same degree
as the adult actors in Tracy and colleagues (2005). The final sets of 8 11-inch color photos were laminated and placed in a 2 2 grid on a 24 24-inch posterboard (see Fig. 2). The positioning of the photos on the posterboard was counterbalanced between participants. Two sets of 20 wooden blocks
(3 3 2 inches) were constructed and were painted red or blue. A video camera was used to record
each session.
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
89
Procedure
Familiarization period
Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: exceed standard, fail standard, or
no standard. Prior to starting the experiment, each child was shown the set of blocks and asked
whether he or she knew how to build a tower out of blocks and was then given the chance to explore
the blocks. In no condition, however, was the child allowed to practice building a tower. All children
reported that they had built towers or at least played with blocks.
Exceed standard condition
Following the familiarization period (1–2 min), the participant was introduced to a second experimenter (i.e., confederate). The child was told, ‘‘Ben [or Becca] is one of the fastest tower builders in the
world. Today we brought you here to see if you can build a tower higher than Ben [Becca] builds his
[her] tower without it falling down before I say ‘stop.’ Okay?’’ If the child responded that he or she
understood the task, the first experimenter commenced by saying, ‘‘On your mark, get set, go!’’
Following this instruction, both the child and confederate began building their individual towers. In
the exceed standard condition, the child built his or her tower until it exceeded the height of the confederate’s tower by two or three blocks, after which the primary experimenter said, ‘‘Stop. Wow, you
did it! You beat Ben [Becca]! You are the best tower builder ever! Great job!’’ This same procedure
was repeated for the second trial. On average, it took each child 15 to 20 s to build a tower of approximately 48 cm that was 10 to 15 cm taller than the confederate’s tower. The confederate was
instructed to build a tower such that it was always just slightly shorter than the child’s tower.
Immediately after a second identical trial, the primary experimenter showed the same-sex set of photographs to the child and asked him or her to ‘‘point to the picture that shows how you feel.’’
A
B
C
D
Fig. 2. Photographs used as stimuli for female participants. Expression A represents sad, Expression B represents pride,
Expression C represents surprise, and Expression D represents happiness.
90
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
Fail standard condition
The fail standard condition was identical to the exceed standard condition with the following
exceptions. In this condition, the confederate built a tower two or three blocks higher than the child’s
tower. After each trial where the child ‘‘lost,’’ the primary experimenter said, ‘‘Stop, oh no, [child’s
name], you almost beat Ben [Becca], but you lost.’’ Like the exceed standard condition, after the second
trial the child was asked to point to the picture that showed how he or she felt. After that, a third trial
commenced where the child won and both the experimenter and confederate praised the child (e.g.,
‘‘Great job, you did it!’’). This third trial was included to reduce possible feelings of dejection and was
not included in the analyses.
No standard condition
The no standard condition was identical to the first two conditions with the following exceptions.
The child was not told that the confederate was the fastest and was not instructed to ‘‘beat’’ the confederate. Moreover, the performance of the child was not evaluated, and the child did not receive any
verbal praise or feedback. The child was simply asked to build a tower of blocks alongside the confederate. Like the previous two conditions, each trial lasted approximately 20 s. Also like the previous
conditions, after the second trial the child was asked to point to the picture that showed how he or
she felt.
Pilot testing revealed that the block tower building task was enjoyable for children of all ages and
both genders. Pilot testing also revealed that after more than two test trials, older children became
bored with the task and no longer wanted to participate. In addition, and as described for the fail standard condition, we did not want to repeatedly expose children to a task where they failed or ‘‘lost’’ to a
confederate; thus, each condition consisted of only two trials. We chose to ask children to point to the
picture that showed how they felt after the second trial (as opposed to asking after each trial) because
it has been shown that repeatedly probing children using the same or slightly modified question
across multiple trials may lead to inconsistent results because children often change their answers
when repeatedly questioned (Nelson & Russell, 2011; Widen, Christy, Hewett, & Russell, 2011).
Finally, in an attempt to make our procedure convergent with previous research (Tracy et al., 2005),
in each of the three conditions after the child completed both trials and had pointed to the picture that
showed how he or she felt, we presented the same set of now rearranged photos to the child and simply asked him or her to ‘‘point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud.’’ The child again
pointed to a picture, and the response was recorded. This task was done after the experimental phase
in order to reduce the possibility of priming the child toward a particular response.
Coding
The primary dependent variable was the photo selected by each child after completing the second
trial within each condition. We also recorded each child’s response to which picture ‘‘shows Jan [Jon]
feeling proud.’’ The primary experimenter recorded the child’s responses immediately after the child
made each selection. Based on videotape records, we initially scored whether the primary experimenter made any coding errors in recording which photo was selected by the child or whether the
confederate made any errors during the procedure. Results failed to reveal any coding or procedural
errors.
We also examined, based on the videotapes, whether naive undergraduates judged participants at
each age and within each condition as conveying a particular emotion. To address this question, 124 of
the 144 children (86%) who participated were videotaped and subsequently coded. The remaining 20
children (14%) were only partially videotaped because the children moved in and out of the video
frame too much during the experiment to allow reliable coding and were not judged by
undergraduates.
Each video clip judged by undergraduates was edited so that it showed the 20 s immediately after
the child ‘‘won,’’ ‘‘lost,’’ or completed the task in the case of the no standard condition of the second
trial. In other words, we captured the child’s behavioral/facial expressions immediately after exceeding, failing to exceed, or simply completing the task, but before the child pointed to the picture that
showed how he or she felt. In each clip, the completed block towers or the interaction between the
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
91
confederate and child were not visible to the judges. We chose to code only the second trial to allow
sufficient opportunity for each child to react to the outcome of the event. We chose a 20-s window
rather than one static frame or image because children were moving around on the floor with the confederate where it would have been impossible to consistently pick one specific instance to capture for
coding.
Four DVDs of participants were created. Each DVD included 36 children, randomized across age
groups and conditions, and was rated by 20 independent raters (N = 80 raters). Each clip was edited
so that the confederate was never visible, and all sound was removed from the video. Only after viewing each 20-s video clip in its entirety were undergraduate judges allowed to ‘‘indicate which emotion
most closely resembles the emotion the child is displaying’’ (i.e., happy, sad, surprise, pride, or ‘‘none
of the above’’) because access to the response sheet was controlled by the experimenter.
Results
The primary dependent variable was the photo selected by each participant conveying the emotion
he or she was feeling after participating in the tower building event. Because the data derived are discrete and categorical, we used a nonparametric chi-square test and a binomial test to address our
research questions.
Recognition of pride
Overall, children’s frequency of selecting any one photo or emotion did not systematically differ by
gender within any one condition or across all conditions combined (all ps > .10); thus, gender differences are not analyzed or discussed further. Fig. 3 shows children’s frequency of selecting pride by age
and condition.
A chi-square test revealed a significant relationship among age, condition, and children’s frequency
of selecting pride, v2(5, N = 144) = 10.20, p = .006, V = .71. Specifically, 5-year-olds, v2(2, N = 36) = 7.47,
p = .024, V = .46, and 6-year-olds, v2(2, N = 36) = 9.00, p = .011, V = .50, pointed to the picture conveying pride more frequently in the exceed standard condition than in the other two conditions. In no
other age group or condition did children reliably point toward or select a specific photo (all
ps > .10). Thus, 5- and 6-year-olds, compared with younger children, more frequently chose the photograph conveying pride as representing how they felt in the exceed standard condition compared
with the other conditions.
No Standard
Fail Standard
Number of children slecting pride
12
Exceed Standard
10
8*
8
8*
7
6
6
5
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
0
3 Years
4 Years
Age
5 Years
6 Years
Fig. 3. Children’s frequency of selecting pride for each age group and condition when asked to point to the picture that shows
how they feel (n = 36 in each age group with n = 12 in each condition). The dotted line represents chance (33% or 4 of 12).
⁄
p < .05.
92
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
A two-tailed binomial test was also used to examine at each age, and within each condition, children’s frequency of selecting pride. Chance was set at 33% (happy, surprise, and pride) rather than 25%
because children in the exceed standard condition, with the exception of 2 3-year-olds, did not pick
the photo conveying sad. The results of the binomial test revealed that 3-year-olds, as well as 4year-olds, failed to select any emotion at a rate greater than chance in any of the three conditions
(all ps > .05). However, at 5 years of age, as well as at 6 years of age, 8 of 12 children in the exceed standard condition selected pride, and this frequency for both age groups exceeded chance using a twotailed binomial test (both ps = .018). Of the 4 5-year-olds in the exceed standard condition who did
not select pride, 3 children selected happy and 1 child selected surprise. All 4 of the 6-year-olds
who did not select pride in the exceed standard condition selected happy. Together, the results of
the chi-square test and the binomial test are convergent because they demonstrate that 5-year-olds,
as well as 6-year-olds, selected or pointed toward the photo conveying pride at a frequency greater
than chance within the exceed standard condition.
Point to Jan [Jon] feeling proud
After children had completed the two experimental trials and had pointed to the picture indicating
how they felt, children were asked to ‘‘point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud.’’
Children’s frequency of correctly identifying which picture showed or conveyed pride is shown in
Fig. 4.
In this task, chance was conservatively set at 33% (happy, surprise, and pride) even though there
were four options (happy, surprise, pride, and sad) because children rarely selected the photo conveying sadness when asked to point to the picture conveying pride. Children’s frequency of selecting pride
was again assessed using a two-tailed binomial test. Results revealed that the 4-year-olds reliably
selected the photo conveying pride (p = .011). The 5- and 6-year-olds also reliably pointed to the picture conveying pride (both ps < .01). Thus, from 4 years of age, children reliably point to a picture that
shows another child of around the same age and gender conveying pride.
Given that children were asked to ‘‘point to the picture that shows how you feel’’ after completing
the tower building task, and children were also asked to ‘‘point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud,’’ we cross-tabulated children’s picture choices, and these frequencies are shown in Table 1.
Because we were particularly interested in children’s choice after exceeding the standard (i.e., beating
the confederate), only this condition is represented. Unfortunately, because there are only 12 participants in each age group in the exceed standard condition, we do not have an adequate sample size to
compute a categorical correlation. However, these data are still meaningful in describing children’s
picture choice for each task.
Fig. 4. Children’s responses (n = 36 at each age) when asked to point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud. The
dotted line represents chance (i.e., 33%). ⁄p < .05; ⁄⁄p < .01.
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
93
As shown in Table 1, for instance, 3 of the 3-year-olds in the exceed standard condition correctly
identified the photo that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud (column total). In addition, 3 of the 3-year-olds
also identified pride as indicative of how they felt after beating the confederate (row total). However,
only 2 of the 3-year-olds in this condition both selected pride as indicative of how they felt and correctly identified the photo of Jan [Jon] feeling proud (cell marginal). By 4 years of age, 5 of the 12 children both selected pride as indicative of how they felt after beating the confederate and correctly
identified the photo of Jan [Jon] feeling proud. Finally, by 5 and 6 years of age, 8 of the 12 children
at each age both selected pride as indicative of how they felt and correctly identified the photo of
Jan [Jon] feeling proud. Taken together, these data suggest that with increasing age there is increasing
consistency with children’s frequency of correctly identifying the photo that shows Jan [Jon] feeling
proud and their frequency of selecting the photo conveying pride after beating the confederate.
Undergraduate judgments of children’s behavior
As noted earlier, we were also interested in whether naive undergraduates reliably judged children
at each age, and within each condition, as conveying a particular emotion. Previous research (Tracy &
Matsumoto, 2008) using blind and sighted athletes following a competition showed that undergraduates, as well as two trained Facial Action Coding System (FACS) coders, reliably recognized and categorized nonverbal behavioral features associated with pride in static photographs (see also Stipek
et al., 1992; Weisfeld & Beresford, 1982). Our purpose here was somewhat broader and more general.
Specifically, do undergraduates, when asked to indicate the emotion they believe a child is conveying
after completing the tower building task, judge the child to be conveying a particular emotion?
In addressing this question, undergraduates watched a 20-s video clip of each participant immediately after completing the second trial of the tower building task and then judged the emotion they
Table 1
Children’s frequency of selecting a particular emotion after beating the confederate (i.e., exceed standard) (rows) and their
frequency of correctly identifying the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud (columns).
Note: Bolded values indicate children’s frequency of selecting pride and correctly identifying the photo that shows Jan [Jon]
feeling proud. These frequencies represent only the exceed standard condition.
94
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
thought the child or participant was displaying. Because undergraduates rated 20-s video clips that
captured children’s reactions after they won or lost, it is likely that children may have experienced,
and may have displayed, more than one emotion. Given this complexity, we asked undergraduates
to watch the entire clip and then judge the overall or general emotion conveyed by the child.
Each undergraduate rated 36 participants. Table 2 shows the number of children who were reliably
judged by 15 of the 20 undergraduates (p < .05), or more than 15 of the undergraduates (p < .01), as
conveying a particular emotion.
The bolded values in Table 2 indicate the number of children at each age, out of a maximum of 12,
conveying that a particular emotion exceeded chance (with five options: happy, sad, pride, surprise,
and don’t see it; chance was set at 33% because the surprise and don’t see it options were rarely
selected at any age and within any condition).
Results reveal that within the exceed standard condition, 15 or more of the 20 undergraduates reliably judged 3 3-year-olds within the exceed standard condition as conveying happiness and 5 3-yearolds as conveying pride (see the top row of Table 2), yet the number of 3-year-olds within the exceed
standard condition reliably judged to be conveying pride (i.e., 5 of 10) did not exceed chance. At
4 years of age, also within the exceed standard condition, 3 children were reliably judged as conveying
happiness and 9 children were reliably judged as conveying pride by 15 or more undergraduate
judges. Moreover, the 9 4-year-olds judged as conveying pride reliably exceed chance (p < .01). In
addition, 9 5-year-olds and 8 6-year-olds were rated by 15 or more judges as conveying pride within
the exceed standard condition, and the frequency of these 5- and 6-year-olds judged as conveying
pride also exceeded chance (both ps < .01). Thus, the overall pattern of undergraduate judgments of
children’s expression of emotion, pride in particular, is largely consistent with children’s selection
of the photo that shows pride, because both occurred at 4 years of age, but is somewhat discrepant
with the age at which children reliably select pride as the emotion they feel when exceeding a standard, because this did not reliably emerge until 5 years of age. Specifically, at younger ages children
were rated as conveying pride more frequently than they themselves selected pride as the emotion
indicative of how they felt after beating the confederate.
An overall chi-square test was performed to examine whether there is a relationship between
experimental condition and undergraduate judgments of children’s expressed emotion (happy, sad,
pride, surprise, and don’t see it). Across all conditions and ages, the relationship between condition
Table 2
Numbers of children rated as conveying each emotion.
Happy
Sad
Pride
Surprise
3-year-olds
Exceed standard
Fail standard
No standard
Don’t see it
N
3⁄⁄
1⁄
4⁄
0
1⁄
0
5⁄
1⁄⁄
2⁄⁄
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
9
10
4-year-olds
Exceed standard
Fail standard
No standard
3⁄⁄
2⁄⁄
4⁄⁄
0
0
0
9⁄⁄
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
9
11
5-year-olds
Exceed standard
Fail standard
No standard
1⁄
0
2⁄
0
2⁄
0
9⁄⁄
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2⁄
12
12
10
6-year-olds
Exceed standard
Fail standard
No standard
1⁄
0
2⁄
0
1⁄
0
8⁄⁄
1⁄
3⁄
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
9
9
Note: Values represent the numbers of participants as rated by 15 of the 20 naive undergraduates (⁄p < .05) or more than 15 of
the 20 naive undergraduates (⁄⁄p < .01) as conveying a particular emotion. Bolded values indicate that the number of children
(out of possible maximum of 12) who were rated as conveying a particular emotion exceeded chance. N represents the number
of children (also out of possible maximum of 12) who were coded.
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
95
and ratings was significant, v2(11, N = 124) = 479.29, p < .001, V = .31, indicating that the undergraduate coding of displayed emotion is dependent on condition and is largely convergent with the previous analysis. Specifically, at around 4 years of age children who participated in the exceed standard
condition were judged as displaying pride more frequently than any other emotion, and this frequency
exceeded chance. Across all children within the exceed standard condition, children were judged as
conveying pride 69% of the time and judged as displaying happiness 18% of the time. In the other
two conditions (i.e., fail standard or no standard), some children were reliably judged by 15 or more
undergraduates as conveying a particular emotion; however, the number of these children did not
exceed chance.
In sum, these results indicate that the judgments of children’s behavioral expressions is dependent
on condition, where children within the exceed standard condition were judged as conveying pride
greater than chance at 4 years of age; however, for the youngest age group (i.e., 3-year-olds) children
were rated as displaying both pride and happy at nearly identical frequencies. Because 20 different
raters scored each of the four DVDs, we could not compute an overall reliability coefficient across
all raters and all children; however, the overall agreement among the 20 raters for each separate
DVD was found to be greater than j = 0.84 (p < .01) with a 95% confidence interval (0.67–0.91) for each
DVD, which is considered to be substantial agreement (Landis & Koch, 1977).
Discussion
Over the past several years, research examining children’s recognition of pride, as well as other secondary emotions, has received growing theoretical and empirical attention. The purpose of this experiment was to examine children’s intrapersonal and interpersonal recognition of pride. Specifically,
when do children categorize their own experience as one of pride after exceeding a standard in a competitive task? We also examined at what age children interpersonally recognize pride by pointing to a
photo of an unfamiliar peer as one conveying pride. Finally, we examined whether children’s observed
behavior, after beating a confederate, conveys pride as judged by naive adults.
The results of the current experiment demonstrate that 3- and 4-year-olds do not identify pride as
the emotion indicative of how they felt after defeating the confederate within the exceed standard
condition. In contrast, 5- and 6-year-olds do identify pride as the emotion indicative of how they felt
after defeating the confederate. The current results are also convergent with prior research because 4-,
5-, and 6-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds, reliably point to a picture that shows a peer conveying pride
when asked to ‘‘point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud’’ (e.g., Tracy et al., 2005). In
addition, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds, were more frequently and reliably rated by
undergraduates as conveying pride when they beat the confederate compared with when they lost
to the confederate or participated in the noncompetitive condition. Together, these results demonstrate that at around 4 years of age children convey, as well as demonstrate, interpersonal recognition
of pride. Results further demonstrate that children’s intrapersonal recognition of pride emerges at
around 5 years of age.
Several explanations exist regarding the performance of the youngest participants. For example, it
is possible that 3-year-olds do not comprehend the word ‘‘proud.’’ In other words, if 3-year-olds’ failure to point to the picture that conveys pride is due to their lack of verbal comprehension of the term
‘‘proud,’’ then one might expect, as we did, 3-year-olds to point to the pride expression/photo after
they defeat the confederate in the exceed standard condition because it does not require a verbal
understanding of the term ‘‘pride.’’ A second possibility, previously examined by Tracy and
colleagues (2005), is that children use a novel nameless strategy in selecting the photo that shows
how they feel and/or when asked to point to the picture that shows Jan [Jon] feeling proud. Our results,
however, do not support either possibility given that 3-year-olds did not consistently point to the picture that conveys pride in any condition (see Tracy et al., 2005, for a similar pattern of results). A third
possibility, and a possibility for future research, is that spontaneous and actual expressions of pride
might not mirror the images of pride used in the current study. For example, Aviezer, Trope, and
Todorov (2012), using spontaneous displays of positive and negative emotion following a competitive
event, showed that body information, not facial information, conveys the emotional valence of the
96
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
individual. Although the images we used, as well as the images of adults used by Tracy and colleagues
(2005), do show much of the body, it is possible that our posed images might not be ideal for intrapersonal recognition of pride within the context of a competitive event. Thus, future research should
use and compare children’s spontaneous images with children’s posed images of pride. Although
our results are silent concerning this third possibility, our results remain consistent with prior
research and suggest that 3-year-olds do not intrapersonally or interpersonally recognize pride or,
as rated by undergraduates, convey pride after winning a competitive event.
As described above, the results of the 4-year-olds are also consistent with prior research because 4year-olds reliably pointed to a picture of an unfamiliar peer that conveys pride when asked to do so
(Tracy et al., 2005). The 4-year-olds, however, did not reliably point to the picture that conveys pride
as indicative of how they felt in any condition, including of course when they beat the confederate in
the tower building task. Thus, one question is why did 4-year-olds reliably identify a photo that conveys pride but did not point to a photo that conveys pride when they exceeded a standard (indicative
of how they felt) even though their own behavior was reliably coded by undergraduates as conveying
pride? One possibility, albeit speculative but based on the current results, is that 4-year-olds display
or convey pride in their own behavior and interpersonally recognize pride in the photo of another
prior to intrapersonally recognizing their own experience as one of pride. To examine this possibility,
and another avenue for future research, one could have children, rather than undergraduates, judge
their own behavior, as well as other children’s behavior, after completing a competitive and noncompetitive task. Such a manipulation would address the question of when 4-year-olds recognize pride in
others and whether this recognition emerges before or after they identify their own experience as one
of pride.
The results of the 5- and 6-year-olds are less ambiguous than the results of the 3- and 4-year-olds.
The 5- and 6-year-olds were nearly at ceiling when asked to point to a photo of an unfamiliar peer
conveying pride. The 5- and 6-year-olds also reliably selected the photo conveying pride as the emotion they felt when they beat the confederate. In addition, undergraduates also reliably rated the 5and 6-year-olds as displaying pride after beating the confederate. These results demonstrate that 5and 6-year-olds intrapersonally recognize pride following their own experience in our tower building
task and interpersonally identify pride in the photograph of an unfamiliar peer.
In the current experiment, specifically within the exceed standard condition, we attempted to create an event designed to induce feelings or the experience of pride, and we did not attempt to induce
feelings of sadness or dejection. Given the purpose of the current research, and based on previous
research (e.g., Belsky & Domitrovich, 1997; Lewis et al., 1992; Weiner et al., 1972), we attempted to
create an event that might induce pride by having a difficult task, having a second adult observer present (other than the confederate), and providing external reinforcement such as ‘‘you did it.’’ The fact
that children did not reliably point to the picture that conveyed sadness when they failed to exceed a
standard (i.e., fail standard condition), although somewhat unexpected, is not entirely surprising. Even
though some participants lost to the confederate, and were told that they lost, they were also told that
the confederate was the fastest in the world and that this was a challenging task. Thus, it is possible
that they did not select sadness because they were faced with a difficult task and a challenging competitor. If the task had been easier, and the confederate was perceived as less challenging (or perhaps a
peer), it is possible that the event might elicit feelings of sadness (or perhaps shame) after they lose to
the confederate (see Lewis et al., 1992, for a similar pattern of results). Finally, although we did not
attempt to create an event designed to explicitly induce the experience of sadness, or see evidence
of sadness, our data do not suggest that the recognition of pride (either interpersonal or intrapersonal)
emerges before sadness (see Flom & Bahrick, 2007, and Walker-Andrews, 1997, for evidence regarding
infants’ discrimination and recognition of sadness).
The multi-method approach used in this experiment has several benefits. Some experiments (e.g.,
Tracy & Robins, 2008; Tracy et al., 2005) have asked children to point toward, or select, a photo that
conveys pride, and as such these studies often rely on children’s understanding, or comprehension, of
the word ‘‘pride’’ or ‘‘proud.’’ Other experiments (e.g., Heckhausen, 1987, 1988; Lewis et al., 1992)
have often used various tasks, including building a tower of blocks, designed to elicit feelings of pride
and often record and code children’s behavior as they complete these tasks. In the current experiment,
we incorporated both strategies, and the current results are convergent with and extend the results of
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
97
prior experiments. In addition, and unlike previous experiments, we used photographs of participants’
peers rather than adults in creating our images/stimuli. In the current experiment, we also wanted to
reduce children’s need to comprehend the term ‘‘proud’’ or ‘‘pride’’; thus, we examined whether children would reliably point toward a picture that conveys pride as indicative of how they felt after
exceeding a social standard rather than having them state, or describe, the emotion they were feeling.
Still, it is worth noting that recognizing pride intrapersonally is a qualitatively different task from recognizing pride interpersonally because intrapersonal recognition of pride requires children to make a
social comparison between their own performance and the performance of another. Thus, based on
the current results, as well as prior results, it seems that children display pride-related behaviors,
and identify a photo conveying pride in another, prior to recognizing their own intrapersonal experience as prideful.
Future research could examine a question raised but not adequately addressed: What are the children who did not display pride feeling when they beat the confederate? Although these children often
pointed to the photo conveying happiness, are these children ‘‘feeling happy’’ rather than experiencing
pride? It is also possible that these children are in fact experiencing pride but are simply not displaying pride-related behaviors and are also not self-reporting feelings of pride. Additional research is
needed that continues to extend our understanding of children’s recognition of secondary emotions,
specifically how secondary emotions are related to children’s conception of the self and making
self-evaluative appraisals against a goal or standard (Lewis et al., 1989). Other research in this area
is needed that examines the relationship between the experience of pride and later self-esteem—particularly during adolescence (see Tracy & Robins, 2007b, for a similar point).
Our results are informative to our broader developmental understanding of children’s intrapersonal and interpersonal recognition of pride. The current research examined children’s intrapersonal
recognition of pride as well as their interpersonal recognition of pride. The current experiment also
combined and examined several factors associated with children’s recognition of pride that are often
examined separately. Our results reveal that 4-year-olds convey pride in their own behavior and interpersonally recognize pride prior to their intrapersonal recognition of pride. Finally, our results also
demonstrate that children intrapersonally and interpersonally recognize pride by 5 years of age.
Acknowledgments
The data reported in this article represent partial fulfillment of the M.S. degree by the first author.
This research was supported by a Brigham Young University undergraduate mentoring grant awarded
to the third author. We gratefully acknowledge Ben Hardy, Craig Steiner, David Tate, Sarah Frei, Zac
Cardon, and Joy Williams for their assistance in data collection.
References
Aviezer, H., Trope, Y., & Todorov, A. (2012). Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and
negative emotions. Science, 338, 1225–1229.
Baldwin, K. M., Baldwin, J. R., & Ewald, T. (2006). The relationship among shame, guilt, and self-efficacy. American Journal of
Psychotherapy, 60, 1–21.
Barrett, K. C. (2005). The origins of social emotions and self-regulation in toddlerhood: New evidence. Cognition and Emotion, 19,
953–979.
Belsky, J., & Domitrovich, C. (1997). Temperament and parenting antecedents of individual difference in three-year-old boys’
pride and shame reactions. Child Development, 68, 456–466.
Ekman, P., Levenson, R. W., & Friesen, W. V. (1983). Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotions. Science,
221, 1208–1210.
Flom, R., & Bahrick, L. E. (2007). The development of infant discrimination of affect in multimodal and unimodal stimulation:
The role of intersensory redundancy. Developmental Psychology, 43, 238–252.
Heckhausen, H. (1988). Becoming aware of one’s competence in the second year: Developmental progression within the
mother–child dyad. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 11, 305–326.
Heckhausen, H. (1987). Emotional components of action: Their ontogeny as reflected in achievement behavior. In D. Gorlitz & J.
F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Curiosity, imagination, and play: On the development of spontaneous cognitive and motivational processes
(pp. 326–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Holodynski, M., & Kronast, S. (2009). Shame and pride: Invisible emotions in classroom research. In B. Röttger-Rössler & H. J.
Markowitsch (Eds.), Emotions as bio-cultural processes (pp. 371–394). New York: Springer.
Kasari, C., Sigman, M. D., Baumgartner, P., & Stipek, D. J. (1993). Pride and mastery in children with autism. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 34, 353–362.
98
D.J. Garcia et al. / Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137 (2015) 85–98
Kemeny, M. E., Gruenewald, T. L., & Dickerson, S. S. (2004). Shame as the emotional response to threat to the social self:
Implications for behavior, physiology, and health. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 153–160.
Kornilaki, E. N., & Chloverakis, G. (2004). The situational antecedents of pride and happiness: Developmental and domain
differences. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22, 605–619.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
Lewis, M., Alessandri, S. M., & Sullivan, M. W. (1992). Differences in shame and pride as a function of children’s gender and task
difficulty. Child Development, 63, 630–638.
Lewis, M. (2008). Self-conscious emotions: Embarrassment, pride, shame, and guilt. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F.
Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 742–756). New York: Guilford.
Lewis, M., Sullivan, M. W., Stanger, C., & Weiss, M. (1989). Self development and self-conscious emotions. Child Development, 60,
146–156.
Mascolo, M. F., & Fischer, K. W. (1995). Developmental transformations in appraisals for pride, shame, and guilt. In J. P. Tangney
& K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Self-conscious emotions: The psychology of shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride (pp. 64–113). New
York: Guilford.
Nelson, N. L., & Russell, J. A. (2011). Preschoolers’ use of dynamic facial, bodily, and vocal cues to emotion. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 110, 52–61.
Nelson, N. L., & Russell, J. A. (2012). Children’s understanding of nonverbal expressions of pride. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, 111, 379–385.
Parker, S., & Thomas, R. (2009). Psychological differences in shame vs. guilt: Implications for mental health counselors. Journal of
Mental Health Counseling, 31, 213–224.
Seidner, L. B., Stipek, D. J., & Fesbach, N. D. (1988). A developmental analysis of elementary school-aged children’s concepts of
pride and embarrassment. Child Development, 59, 367–377.
Stipek, D., Recchia, S., & McClintic, S. (1992). Self-evaluation in young children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 57(1, Serial No. 226).
Stipek, D. (1995). The development of pride and shame in toddlers. In J. P. Tangney & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Self-conscious
emotions: The psychology of shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride (pp. 237–252). New York: Guilford.
Stuewig, J., Tangney, J. P., Heigel, C., Harty, L., & McCloskey, L. (2010). Shaming, blaming, and maiming: Functional links among
the moral emotions, externalization of blame, and aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 91–102.
Tracy, J. L., & Matsumoto, D. (2008). The spontaneous expression of pride and shame: Evidence for biologically innate nonverbal
displays. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 20044–20045.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2004). Show your pride: Evidence for a discrete emotion expression. Psychological Science, 15,
194–197.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007a). The prototypical pride expression: Development of a nonverbal behavior coding system.
Emotion, 7, 789–801.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007b). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 92, 506–525.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2008). The nonverbal expression of pride: Evidence for cross-cultural recognition. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 516–530.
Tracy, J. L., Robins, R. W., & Lagattuta, K. H. (2005). Can children recognize pride? Emotion, 5, 251–257.
Walker-Andrews, A. (1997). Infants’ perception of expressive behaviors: Differentiation of multimodal information.
Psychological Bulletin, 121, 437–456.
Weiner, B., Heckhausen, H., & Meyer, W. U. (1972). Causal ascriptions and achievement behavior: A conceptual analysis of effort
and reanalysis of locus of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 239–248.
Weisfeld, D. J., & Beresford, J. M. (1982). Erectness of posture as an indicator of dominance or success in humans. Motivation and
Emotion, 6, 113–131.
Widen, S. C. (2013). Children’s interpretation of facial expressions: The long path from valence-based to specific discrete
categories. Emotion Review, 5(1), 72–77.
Widen, S. C., Christy, A. M., Hewett, K., & Russell, J. A. (2011). Do proposed facial expressions of contempt, shame,
embarrassment, and compassion communicate the predicted emotion? Cognition and Emotion, 25, 898–906.