SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF HUMAN EMOTIONS analysis operate every time individuals interact in face-to-face encounters. Collins (19 1, 2004)borrows from both Durkheim and Goffman to forge a more robust theory that seeks to explain the arousal of positive and negative emotional energy Collins(2004)distinguishes between two types of rituals: (a) polite and transient rituals such as greetings that arouse low-intensity positive emotional energy, and (b )more enduring emotions that develop from copresence, mutual awareness and attention, a common focus, a shared emotional mood, rhythmic synchronization of conversation and bodies, a representation of the focus and mood with symbols, and a sense of moral righteousness. In essence, Collins views what Goffman(1961 1967)had termed"the encounter"as a more inclusive interaction ritual revealing the elements enumerated by Durkheim In such interaction rituals, emotional en- rgy is built upon and is sustained across encounters that are strung together in time and space. In fact, Collins(1981)goes so far as to view such emotionally charged rituals as the microfoundations of macrostructures For interaction rituals to increase positive emotional energy, they must acti- vate all the key elements: first, the gathering of individuals in proximate space next, the emission of stereotyped greeting rituals that raise the level of transient emotions that, in turn, increase the shared mood and focus of attention; then the ensuing rhythmic synchronization of talk and bodies that increases collective ef fervescence, followed by rising levels of positive emotional energy. As positive emotional energy escalates, group solidarity increases, leading to symbolization of this solidarity, and with group symbols, particularized cultural capital consisting of the experiences of members in the group increases. Once symbols are built up, conversations or even thoughts reinvoke the symbols and, as a result, charge up the positive emotional energy. Conversely, when this sequence of ritual elements breaks down during the interaction, individuals experience much lower levels positive emotional energy. In fact, the level of emotional energy can turn negative and reduce group solidarity There is the assumption in interaction ritual theory that individuals always seek to maximize their emotional energy in an encounter and that they try to ncrease their stores of cultural capital that can either be particularized or unique to particular groups, or be generalized or acknowledged and understood by all in a ty. However, the capacity to increase positive emotional energy and augment cultural capital is mediated by power and status. Those with power and prestige are able to increase their positive emotional energy and reveal more commitment to group symbols and thus augment their cultural capital, whereas those with less power must give deference and, as a consequence, experience less positive and perhaps even negative emotional energy, leading to much less commitment to group symbol A more recent extension of Collins's theory by Summers-Effler(2002)tries to ccount for the fact that individuals are often trapped in interaction rituals in which they have little power and in which, as a result, they experience negative emotional energy, such as fear, anxiety, shame, and guilt. Under these conditions, individuals31 May 2006 17:32 AR ANRV280-SO32-02.tex XMLPublishSM(2004/02/24) P1: JRX SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF HUMAN EMOTIONS 33 analysis operate each and every time individuals interact in face-to-face encounters. Collins (1975, 1981, 2004) borrows from both Durkheim and Goffman to forge a more robust theory that seeks to explain the arousal of positive and negative emotional energy. Collins (2004) distinguishes between two types of rituals: (a) polite and transient rituals such as greetings that arouse low-intensity positive emotional energy, and (b) more enduring emotions that develop from copresence, mutual awareness and attention, a common focus, a shared emotional mood, rhythmic synchronization of conversation and bodies, a representation of the focus and mood with symbols, and a sense of moral righteousness. In essence, Collins views what Goffman (1961, 1967) had termed “the encounter” as a more inclusive interaction ritual revealing the elements enumerated by Durkheim. In such interaction rituals, emotional en￾ergy is built upon and is sustained across encounters that are strung together in time and space. In fact, Collins (1981) goes so far as to view such emotionally charged rituals as the microfoundations of macrostructures. For interaction rituals to increase positive emotional energy, they must acti￾vate all the key elements: first, the gathering of individuals in proximate space; next, the emission of stereotyped greeting rituals that raise the level of transient emotions that, in turn, increase the shared mood and focus of attention; then, the ensuing rhythmic synchronization of talk and bodies that increases collective ef￾fervescence, followed by rising levels of positive emotional energy. As positive emotional energy escalates, group solidarity increases, leading to symbolization of this solidarity, and with group symbols, particularized cultural capital consisting of the experiences of members in the group increases. Once symbols are built up, conversations or even thoughts reinvoke the symbols and, as a result, charge up the positive emotional energy. Conversely, when this sequence of ritual elements breaks down during the interaction, individuals experience much lower levels of positive emotional energy. In fact, the level of emotional energy can turn negative and reduce group solidarity. There is the assumption in interaction ritual theory that individuals always seek to maximize their emotional energy in an encounter and that they try to increase their stores of cultural capital that can either be particularized or unique to particular groups, or be generalized or acknowledged and understood by all in a society. However, the capacity to increase positive emotional energy and augment cultural capital is mediated by power and status. Those with power and prestige are able to increase their positive emotional energy and reveal more commitment to group symbols and thus augment their cultural capital, whereas those with less power must give deference and, as a consequence, experience less positive and perhaps even negative emotional energy, leading to much less commitment to group symbols. A more recent extension of Collins’s theory by Summers-Effler (2002) tries to account for the fact that individuals are often trapped in interaction rituals in which they have little power and in which, as a result, they experience negative emotional energy, such as fear, anxiety, shame, and guilt. Under these conditions, individuals Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2006.32:25-52. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org by HARVARD UNIVERSITY on 11/14/07. For personal use only