Bio-genetic Approaches to Culture and Health
By Shinobu Kitayama, Professor of Psychology Robert B. Zajonc Collegiate, University of Michigan Presented at NTU on 27 September 2017.
Six learning points:
Two main causes of death are the malfunctioning of the cardiovascular system and the suppression of immunity. As inflammation is controlled by genes, it can be activated by injury or stress. In a situation of prolonged and chronically activated of such genes, this can affect the cardiovascular system of a person. Often, this co-occurs with a lowered immunity. The overall model that Professor Shinobu shared considered how adverse social conditions, such as loss, lower social economic status, prejudice, stress etc, can affect chronic health problems. This relationship is mediated by increased inflammation and decreased antiviral defence.
One adverse social condition is the experience of social exclusion. With social exclusion, our bodies perceive potential hostility from the environment. Our central nervous system triggers inflammation when anticipating the prospect of negative injury. This can be physical injury, as well as symbolic injury (e.g. to pride, self-esteem). On the other hand, with social integration, inflammation is suppressed and injury to the cardiovascular system is lowered as the threat of hostility reduces.
In his research, Professor Shinobu uses biological markers as a measure of biological health risk (i.e. objective measures of health), instead of self-reported surveys (i.e. subjective measures of health). He uses samples of blood, cholesterol levels, and blood pressure - specifically Interleukin 6, C-reactive protein, Triglyceride/HDL Cholesterol Ratio, and SBL. His independent variables are negative affect, anger expression, neuroticism, and wellbeing (happiness).
Summary of his findings include: (1) Negative affect in USA is associated with poor health, while no effect is observed in Japan; (2) Anger expression is associated with poor health in USA but better health in Japan; (3) Japan scored higher on behavioural adjustment, which is associated with better health, while USA scored lower on behavioural adjustment and therefore poor health; (4) Eudomonia (meaning of life) is associated with better health, while hedonia (pleasure) is associated with poor health.
Professor Shinobu shares his theories on the relationship, and I’ll elaborate on (2) here. Anger expression in USA reflects the venting of frustration because personal goals are hindered, and hence poorer health with the threat of potential hostility experienced. On the other hand, anger expression reflects a show of dominance in Japan, which is mostly expressed by those in higher social economic status (and higher SES is associated with better health).
On the overall, his research shows that whether any particular emotion is linked to better or poorer health is dependent on the meaning and function of these emotions. This emphasises the culture of these emotions, such as negative affect can represent despair or hope. As a result, sociocultural moderations might be the rule, rather than the exceptions of these relationships.
Two afterthoughts:
This research is so exciting because it pushes the field to using objective measures, which makes such findings so fascinating and engaging. Yet, the challenge of collecting such data is real. That’s one reason why I’m venturing into qualitative data collection for my thesis - archival data is really limited in understanding socio-cognitive processes. Nevertheless, there is value in collecting subjective measures, as it reveals a different side to the story.
This research considers broader societal issues of culture and health. For example, Professor Shinobu shared about the effects on loneliness on gene activation of inflammation, while social integration activates genes for higher anti-viral defense. I am musing about how these findings relate to the business school. One aspect is the experience of employees within the organization and within a broader societal culture. For example, how social exclusion (a result of social dynamics or job design) within the organization may result in employee health risks, and consequently negatively affecting firm level outcomes (e.g. productivity).
