We wish to discuss Vigil's views regarding emotions in light of data collected either in a “neutral” context (i.e., lab experiments) or in a more social one (i.e., field research). From his target article we gathered that the exhibition (or perception) of capacity displays is associated with risk-taking tendencies (see sect. 3.3), whereas trustworthiness displays give rise to altruism (sect. 2.1.1.1). In addition, the author claims that capacity cues are more specific to male than to female behavior as opposed to trustworthiness ones (sect. 3.2.1.1). Nevertheless, both compose the cost-benefits trade-offs that constitute the core of the social sphere.
To apprehend individual emotive behavior from a functional and conscious perspective, we have decided to consider results from experimental economic games. In general, these protocols not only pay little attention to, but do their best to elude the role played by facial expressions and gesture in social interactions (but see Oullier & Basso Reference Oullier and Basso2010, for novel perspectives). In spite of this obvious reductionism, these games offer original insights on risk-taking and altruistic behaviors, therefore allowing the implementation of contexts in which interactions favor the analysis of trade-offs occurring in these social spheres.
Here, we focus on two settings from experimental economics: The Dictator Game (DG) and Ultimatum Games (UG). In both, a first player A offers a share of the amount of money he owns to a second player B. The DG is a true unilateral division of A's initial capital since what B decides regarding the money sent to him has no effect on what A can keep (Forsythe et al. Reference Forsythe, Horowitz, Savin and Sefton1994). The UG extends the DG to a situation where B can refuse A's offer. If he does so, both players lose their respective share (Guth et al. Reference Guth, Schmittberger and Schwarze1982). Player A is somewhat forced to anticipate B's emotions if he does not want to be punished. In the DG, the average share offered to B is 20% of A's capital, whereas another 20% is added in the UG (Elster Reference Elster2009). The UG is therefore a true revelator of the functional role of emotions.
Interestingly, a meta-analysis of results collected in both games does not permit one to conclude that women exhibit more trustworthiness or less capacity than men (Croson & Gneezy Reference Croson and Gneezy2009). However, men appear to have more capacity since they are less risk-averse than women. As such, empirical evidence seems to favor Vigil's views: “Recent findings suggest that women are more reluctant than men to engage in competitive interactions like tournaments, bargaining and auctions” (Croson & Gneezy Reference Croson and Gneezy2009, p. 464). It is noteworthy that this claim is not verified for a certain category of women: namely, managers and entrepreneurs. For instance, it has been reported that such women's aversion to risk is of the same order as that found with men (Masters & Meier Reference Masters and Meier1988). They are therefore less risk-averse than other women.
Two hypotheses can be made to interpret these observations. First, low risk aversion could be considered to be one of these women's intrinsic features that perhaps led them to become managers or entrepreneurs – a kind of autoselection. Second, it is possible that the particular training they underwent to prepare for these specific careers modified their aversion to risk (Johnson & Powell Reference Johnson and Powell1994). A recent study shows that differences could also emerge between managers and entrepreneurs in their attitude towards risk. Nevertheless, training as well as social and cultural norms are to be considered key factors that can minimize risk aversion (Lawrence et al. Reference Lawrence, Clark, Labuzetta, Sahakian and Vyakarnum2008). This second interpretation has major consequences for Vigil, for, as Croson and Gneezy (Reference Croson and Gneezy2009, p. 454) observe: “This result [i.e., modified risk-aversion] could also be an adaptive behavior to the requirements of the job.”
The importance of one's professional activity in his or her relation to risk entices us into considering the role of organizations in our emotions. Thus, it appears difficult not to include organizations in the socio-relational framework. Economically, they account for 80% of America's economic activity (Simon Reference Simon1996). Socially, they are the product of social interactions that are shaped by multiple kinds of emotions (Simon Reference Simon1967). As suggested by the aforementioned study, emotions are not only to be considered at the level of our social individual sphere but also as a by-product of the organization, therefore leading to the concept of emotional work (Hochschild Reference Hochschild1979).
Emotions in the emotional work exist, as pointed by Vigil, at the social and behavioral levels (face-to-face or voice-to-voice) and preserve their conscious and functional features. However, in that context, they somewhat lose their purely individual dimension. The cost-benefit trade-off is implemented to extend the social sphere of the organization while being put in emotional conformity with its expectations (Hochschild Reference Hochschild1983; Rafaeli & Sutton Reference Rafaeli and Sutton1987) or to influence of the emotions of others (Sutton & Rafaeli Reference Sutton and Rafaeli1988) as suggested in quadrant II (controlled and emotional processes) of the typology provided by Camerer et al. (Reference Camerer, Loewenstein and Prelec2005).
In summary, the organizational context brings the behavior and the individuals that constitute the organization much closer. Indeed, as we saw that women's professional activity can make them exhibit risk aversion similar to men's, it should also be noted that men, as members of an organization, can be constrained to adopt altruistic behaviors to the level generally exhibited by women (Simon Reference Simon1996).
All in all, Vigil's conclusions on social status (sect. 4.1.1) might need to be put in perspective by stressing that “the imaginary presence of organization” (a kind of panopticon) influences the emotions of its members, although there exists a debate as to whether these prescribed emotions would not be basically inspired (or prescribed) by men (Mumby & Putnam Reference Mumby and Putnam1992).
