Nostalgia is a bittersweet emotion, but more sweet than bitter

The Hedonic Character of Nostalgia: An Integrative Data Analysis. Joost Leunissen et al. Emotion Review, August 30, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073920950455

Abstract: We conducted an integrative data analysis to examine the hedonic character of nostalgia. We combined positive and negative affect measures from 41 experiments manipulating nostalgia (N = 4,659). Overall, nostalgia inductions increased positive and ambivalent affect, but did not significantly alter negative affect. The magnitude of nostalgia’s effects varied markedly across different experimental inductions of the emotion. The hedonic character of nostalgia, then, depends on how the emotion is elicited and the benchmark (i.e., control condition) to which it is compared. We discuss implications for theory and research on nostalgia and emotions in general.

Keywords: ambivalence, integrative data analysis, negative affect, nostalgia, positive affect

Ambivalence and the Function of Nostalgia

The ambivalent hedonic character of nostalgia can provide
clues to its functional value. The dynamic model of affect
(Zautra et al., 2000) and the coactivation model of health (J. T.
Larsen et al., 2003) point to the resilience and coping functions
of ambivalent affect. According to the dynamic model of affect,
positive and negative affect function to provide information
about one’s immediate environment that is relevant to one’s
well-being. In calm and predictable times, positive and negative
affect are relatively independent. However, during times of
stress, an attentional shift occurs where negative affect gains
priority, resulting in a stronger inverse association between positive
and negative affect (Davis et al., 2004; Zautra et al., 2002).
The key to maintaining psychological well-being during times
of stress is the “uncoupling” of positive and negative affect
(Reich et al., 2003, p. 77). This uncoupling allows one to experience
positive and negative affect simultaneously, and this emotional
complexity is a key driver to cope with stressful life
circumstances. For example, dispositional resilience is positively
associated with emotional ambivalence (Ong &
Bergeman, 2004), emotional ambivalence is positively associated
with resilience during bereavement (Coifman et al., 2007),
and emotional ambivalence is positively associated with psychological
well-being during psychotherapy (Adler &
Hershfield, 2012). The coactivation model of health similarly
proposes that ambivalent affect facilitates coping with stressful
life events (J. T. Larsen et al., 2003). The results of a 10-year
longitudinal study are consistent with the idea that ambivalent
affect is positively associated with well-being (Hershfield et al.,
2013). The ability to tolerate and harness emotional ambivalence,
then, is a resource for coping with stressful life experiences
(Lindquist & Barrett, 2008; Ong et al., 2009).

Research on the psychological functions of nostalgia dovetails
with the demonstrated benefits of emotional ambivalence.
Ambivalent affect could influence cognitive flexibility (Mejía &
Hooker, 2017; Rothman & Melwani, 2017). Ambivalent affect
facilitates contradictory appraisals of a situation (e.g., certain
and uncertain, under control and not under control). This, in turn,
may activate a wider range of (atypical) information, give awareness
to new priorities, and encourage the pursuit of novel options
(Mejía & Hooker, 2017; Rothman & Melwani, 2017). Indeed,
emotional ambivalence (e.g., recalling an event such as a graduation)
fosters creativity (Fong, 2006). This literature is in line
with findings illustrating that nostalgia boosts inspiration
(Stephan et al., 2015) and creativity (van Tilburg et al., 2015). In
addition, emotional ambivalence (i.e., the blend of positive and
negative emotions) enhances judgmental accuracy (Rees et al.,
2013). Nostalgia may do the same. By extrapolation, nostalgia
may also aid in decision making by reducing susceptibility to
biases such as anchoring, escalation of commitment (Rothman &
Melwani, 2017), or risk aversion (Zou et al., 2019).

Nostalgia is triggered by stressful experiences, such as loneliness
(Zhou et al., 2008), meaninglessness (Routledge et al.,
2011), and identity discontinuity (Sedikides, Wildschut,
Routledge, & Arndt, 2015). In turn, nostalgia restores a sense of
social connectedness (Sedikides & Wildschut, 2019; Wildschut
et al., 2011), meaningfulness (Leunissen et al., 2018; Sedikides
& Wildschut, 2018), and identity continuity (Sedikides et al.,
2016; van Tilburg, Sedikides, et al., 2019). Nostalgia has a similar
function in the workplace, counteracting the deleterious
effects of low procedural justice on cooperation (van Dijke
et al., 2015), and the detrimental effects of low interactional justice
on intrinsic motivation (van Dijke et al., 2019). In all, the
extant literature supports the notion that nostalgia acts as a coping
resource for stressful life experiences. A key direction for
future research is to substantiate the postulated role of affective
ambivalence in mediating nostalgia’s capacity to enhance cognitive
flexibility and foster resilience to adversity. Testing such
mediational models poses theoretical and methodological challenges
(Spencer et al., 2005), not least because the effect of nostalgia
on affective ambivalence was relatively small, even at its
strongest point (i.e., in ERT experiments). Nevertheless, even
small, short-term effects can produce larger, long-term benefits
(Cohen & Sherman, 2014; Walton & Wilson, 2018).