510 v. AFFECTI vE PROCESSES
nations—  is consistent with the strong de -
valuation of shame in these cultures (Tang -
ney & Dearing, 2002). The finding that 
congenitally blind athletes across cultures, 
including several from Western nations, did 
reliably display shame in response to loss in 
this research suggests that the observed cul -
tural difference in sighted athletes is likely to 
be a result of display suppression—  sighted 
individuals from cultures in which shame is 
devalued inhibiting the expression in accor -
dance with local cultural norms (Tracy & 
Matsumoto, 2008).
Researchers have failed to find a distinct 
nonverbal expression for guilt (Haidt & 
Keltner, 1999), which may mean that shame 
is the evolved negative self-  conscious emo -
tion and guilt is a highly cognized version 
that exists in many but not all cultures. Al -
ternatively, guilt might be an evolved emo -
tion that is simply not associated with a 
distinct nonverbal expression. In contrast, 
embarrassment is associated with a distinct 
nonverbal display, which includes head tilt -
ed down and to the side, a controlled smile, 
and movement of the hand to touch the face 
(Keltner, 1995). In North American samples, 
this display is recognized at rates compara -
ble to—and often better than—those found 
for shame (Tracy, Robins, et al., 2009). Kelt -
ner (1995) uncovered this display by coding 
videos of participants experimentally ma -
nipulated to feel embarrassed, suggesting 
that the recognizable display is in fact shown 
during experiences of the emotion.
Few studies have tested whether the em -
barrassment expression generalizes across 
cultures, but Haidt and Keltner (1999) 
found that villagers in Orissa, a relatively 
underdeveloped Indian state, identified the 
embarrassment display as lajya,  a term that 
conveys both shame and embarrassment. In -
dividuals in this sample also described the 
situations that elicit lajya  in similar terms 
as Americans use for embarrassment, such 
as self-  exposure, being praised in front of 
others. Although they used the same word 
to refer to shame situations (“doing some -
thing wrong”), they made a distinction be -
tween the lajya  a person feels in one situa -
tion versus the other. These results suggest 
that the distinction between embarrassment 
and shame may generalize across cultures 
that do not have distinct words for the two emotions—  in much the same way as Ameri -
cans use the word pride  to refer to both 
hubristic and authentic pride. Together, the 
accumulated evidence suggests that pride, 
shame, and possibly embarrassment are as -
sociated with nonverbal displays that may 
be universal, consistent with evolutionary 
accounts of these emotions.
The Adaptive Functions 
of Self‑Conscious  Emotions
A growing body of research suggests that 
pride functions to motivate status-  seeking 
efforts and help individuals communicate to 
others their increased deservedness of status 
(Tracy et al., 2010). Pride arises in response 
to achievements that are likely to promote 
high status (Tracy & Matsumoto, 2008; 
Weidman, Tracy, & Elliot, 2016), individu -
als intuitively assume that people who feel 
pride hold high status (Tiedens, Ellsworth, 
& Mesquita, 2000), and individuals induced 
to feel pride tend to engage in high-  status 
behaviors and be perceived by others as 
dominant (Williams & DeSteno, 2009). In 
addition, pride experiences and the desire to 
attain these experiences, motivate achieve -
ment, perseverance, and positive behavioral 
change in status-  relevant domains (Verbeke, 
Belschak, & Bagozzi, 2004; Williams & 
DeSteno, 2008; Weidman et al., 2016). Con -
sequent achievements are in turn rewarded 
with social approval and high status.
It thus seems self-  evident that pride func -
tions to promote status, but this conclu -
sion is complicated by the strong evidence 
that pride is not a singular experience. Al -
though authentic pride is linked to achieve -
ment, hubristic pride tends to be a weaker 
response to success (Tracy & Robins, 2007; 
Weidman et al., 2016). Furthermore, given 
the notably negative personality correlates 
of hubristic pride, it is not immediately ob -
vious how this form of the emotion might 
be adaptive. However, there is evidence to 
suggest that both facets ultimately promote 
increased social influence, but via different 
avenues. Whereas authentic pride may be 
ideally suited to promoting a prestige -based 
status, hubristic pride may be functional by 
promoting dominance .
This distinction comes from Henrich and 
Gil-White (2001), who differentiated be -