16 Jan , 00:00
0
Psychologists revealed the evolutionary difference between anger and hatred: they are not degrees of the same emotion, but fundamentally different mechanisms. A sensational study appeared in the prestigious scientific journal Evolution and Human Behavior.
In scientific circles and common consciousness, hatred has traditionally been perceived as a more intense or prolonged form of anger. However, the evolutionary approach calls this idea into question. If various emotions formed as adaptations to different survival challenges, they should trigger completely different behavioral strategies.
"By mixing the concepts of anger and hatred, we risk misinterpreting a person's motives in a conflict situation and applying inappropriate methods to resolve it," emphasized the study leader Mitchell Landers from the University of California in San Diego.
The model developed by scientists presents anger as an emotion of the "negotiation process." It is activated when an interlocutor does not sufficiently take into account a person's interests and acts as a signal of the unacceptability of such an attitude. Anger stimulates confrontation, the desire to explain oneself and demand apologies in order to restore interaction on more fair terms.
Hatred, on the other hand, evolved to solve a completely different task - responding to the presence of a "toxic" individual whose existence is perceived as a constant threat or source of harm. In this case, negotiations are meaningless, and the goal of the emotion is to neutralize the threat: distance oneself, undermine the opponent's reputation, or completely exclude them from one's environment.
To test this hypothesis, the scientists conducted a large-scale survey involving 725 respondents from the USA and Great Britain. Participants were asked to remember a person who provokes strong anger without hatred, or someone they hate the most. Then they were asked to evaluate preferred actions - from attempts at dialogue to complete severance of relations and thoughts of causing harm.
The data obtained was convincing. In an angry state, people clearly preferred strategies for restoring connections - conversation, explaining their position, expecting apologies. In a state of hatred, desires to permanently avoid the person, deprive them of opportunities, or cause damage dominated. These patterns manifested equally among representatives of both countries.
In-depth analysis revealed that intensification of anger increases the desire for "negotiations," however, when these attempts chronically fail, anger can transform into hatred. At the same time, an increase in the intensity of hatred completely blocks the readiness for any dialogue.
