Hochschild's Argumentative Analysis

Furthermore, this theorist attests to the commodified of said emotional exchange, as a part of contemporary work expectations. Hochschild uses the example of the social expectations placed upon a stewardess to smile and express warmth to passengers (Hochschild, 1979, p. 569, paras. 2, 3). To that end, the expectations of emotion work, which vary across social classes, are taught to children; thereby reproducing the sociocultural influences upon the experience, assessment, and expression of emotion, not to mention the reproduction of emotional social class structure (Hochschild, 1979, p. 552, para. 3; p. 572, para. 2).

In a more expansive theoretic perspective, Kemper views emotions as being both socially produced, and socially controlled.

For this theorist, certain types of stimuli evoke specific universal primary emotions (Kemper, 1978, pp. 30-33). Two such universal stimuli are noted as being power and status (Thoits, 1989, p. 325, para. 2). Power is delineated as compliance gained from others through coercion or threat of coercion; whereas status is demarcated as deference willingly given by actor ‘A’ who has high regard for actor ‘B’ (Thoits, 1989, p. 325, para. 3). According to Kemper’s theory, interactions involving the maintenance or modification of interpersonal states of power and status result in the arousal of specific emotions and their corresponding physiological states (see Appendix for specific examples); respectively, unpleasant emotions motivate attempts to restore power or status. As some modulation of power and status is a part of every human social interaction, the resulting emotion can be viewed as a social product. (Kemper, 1978, p. 275, paras. 1-3). Further to this, the way in which an individual perspective of power and status, along with the level of importance that is placed upon it, may be modulated through specific sociocultural conditioning, thereby evidentiating the effect of culture upon emotion.
Emotional Appraisal and Language
Their diverse perspectives notwithstanding, Shott, Hochschild, and Kemper agree that
the nuances of sociocultural influences upon emotion differs across time and culture. This variability can be illustrated through a brief look at two distinct cultures.
Evocative of Kemper’s concepts of power and status, the Javanese culture values respect in relation to status to such a degree that they speak two status based levels of language. The specific level of language used at any given time, is directly determined by an individual’s immediate interpersonal social status (MyLanguages.Org, 2015). Thus, the members of this culture may be more pronouncedly influenced by the emotional nuances resulting from power and status relations, than individuals from cultures which hold status as less important. A cross-cultural study designed to determine the degree to which this is the case, would be an enlightening path for future research to follow.
Differentially, the Tahitian culture limits expressions of sadness to such a degree that there are very few words in their language with which to describe deep sorrow or grief.

Furthermore, deep sorrow or grief is interpreted as `illness rather than emotion states. This connection between language and emotional experience is reflective of Hochschild’s theory which holds that emotional labels applied to the basic physiological experience not only mirror cultural and individual perception, but act to shape it (Hochschild, 2012, p. 233, footnote; p. 27 para. 2). Furthermore, this culture limits the expression of hostility, which is in direct contrast to the social norm in New Guinea, whereby venting aggression and aggressive impulses is encouraged (Shott, 1979, p. 1319, para. 2). Albeit all cultures may proscribe to emotional management, but the specific circumstance and emotion managed, is clearly determined by individual cultural and social

groups.
These concrete examples also provide support for the theoretic concept that despite the biological basis for arousal, the interpretation and expression of emotion is culturally influenced. Furthermore, these examples provide support for the concept that language is a manifestation of the emotional norms of a given culture, and that as such, it reveals the existence and level of emotions that can be felt by individuals within that social realm. Thus, specific emotion and the accompanying level of emotional experience, are artifacts of culture.
Thus, it seems clear that the sociocultural appraisal of emotion, and development of language are directly related to individual perception of normative behavior, social status, emotional experience, and health.
To What Extent Is Emotion Influenced by The Individual?

Kemper positions emotion as a mediating link between the meaning attached by an individual to emotion, and the social context through which that meaning is gained (Thoits, 1989, p. 328, para. 1). Yet, to what extent is emotion influenced by the individual?

According to Shott, the influence of an individual upon emotion is “critical”, with personal experience influencing the creation, experience, and interpretation of each emotion (Shott, 1979, p. 1320, para. 4; p. 1323, para. 2). In this frame, individual emotional definitions and interpretations are both mediatory processes and formative processes; meaning that they are both influenced by, and influence, physical emotional states, cultural and social norms, and individual beliefs and experiences. As mentioned earlier, Hochschild similarly theorizes that the personal management of an emotion not only alters what is experienced, but directly affects its creation (Hochschild, 2012, p. 27, para. 2). It is of interest to note that contemporary research has shed light on the practice of personal modification and management emotion by showing the management of emotional facial expressions to begin approximately around the age of two years old (Lewis, Sullivan, & Vasen, 1987). This indicates not only that emotion work is learned very early in life, but presents the possibility that after years of practice, specific emotion work may become a habitual response.

This begs the question then, to what degree does habitual emotional management influence the perception, experience, and interpretation of non-habitual emotions; as well as emotional normative behaviors outside of one’s own sociocultural experience?
In light of Kemper’s theoretic perception of emotional predictability, it is unlikely that he would view an ‘emotional habit’, or habitual response of emotional management as perceptively effecting the creation or experience of emotion. After all, according to his theoretic paradigm, emotion results from stimuli which is “real, anticipated, imagined, or [the] recollected outcomes of social relations” (Kemper, 1978, p. 32, para 1, 2). While this paradigm may leave some room for the individual to influence emotion, it is beyond this author’s current scope of awareness.
Conclusion
Through this paper a basic understanding of the similarities and differences between the theoretic concepts of Shott, Hochschild, and Kemper, in relation to the sociology of emotion, have been illuminated. Likewise, the interaction between physiological, sociocultural, and individual influences upon the construct of emotion have been explored. In conclusion, although this paper only scratches the surface regarding the theorists and theories presented herein, it excites and expands the horizons of possibility. Clearly, the sociology of emotion has much more to offer than what has yet been explored.