Ambivalence

Christian Baden, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
c.baden@mail.huji.ac.il

Ambivalence describes the simultaneous presence of both positive and negative affective or evaluative sentiment, experienced or expressed by the same subject or individual or collective author. It arises from the fact that evaluative and affective appraisals are multidimensional, such that the same object may evoke both positive and negative feelings and evaluations. For ambivalence to exist, there needs to be some intention to evaluate or relate one’s feelings toward some object, while it remains unclear whether positive or negative tendencies prevail. Ambivalence is distinct from neutrality, which denotes the absence of strong evaluations or feelings.

In opinion expression, ambivalence can take several distinct forms. Speakers may expressly refer to both positive and negative feelings or evaluations, or explicitly qualify these as polyvalent (e.g., ‘mixed blessing’); similarly, they directly combine positively and negatively connoted terms (‘poisoned praise’, ‘unbearable lightness’) to express their sentiment. Ambivalence may also be expressed metaphorically or by analogy, referring to known-ambivalent cultural symbols (e.g., ‘Pyrrhic victory’; ‘stopgap’). Depending on the context, single evaluative or affective expressions may also suffice to express ambivalence, either through a collision between expressed sentiments and observed behavior (e.g., ‘I hate saying it, but’), or with situational expectations (e.g., ‘funny’ may be ambivalent when evaluating a policy, which is not supposed to be funny; ‘interesting’ can be positive, ambivalent, or even negative, e.g., when evaluating a dish or a student’s answer). Ambivalence can be explicated or arise from the ambiguity of expressions themselves, which may either fail to specify which out of multiple possible evaluative or affective tendencies is intended, or directly cue competing interpretations that raise contrasting appraisals.

In borderline cases, one tendency may dominate while opposing affects or evaluative considerations remain salient (e.g., ‘I know it is not healthy, but it is so tasty!’). Ambivalence may also arise when univalent appraisals are hedged or ironicised to the point of casting doubt on the expressed dominant tendency, but not to the point of inverting the expressed meaning. Likewise, high degrees of uncertainty about one’s feelings or evaluation may sometimes express ambivalence even if neither positive nor negative aspects are expressly cued. In practice, expressed opinions may contain greater or lesser degrees of ambivalence, from opinions that lean one way while upholding relevant second thoughts, to fully ambivalent expressions.

Keywords: evaluative sentiment; emotions; ambiguity

Related Entries: Ambiguity, Emotions, Sentiment

References:
Conner, M., & Sparks, P. (2002). Ambivalence and Attitudes. European Review of Social Psychology, 12(1), 37–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772143000012
Stamenov, M. I. (2004). Ambivalence as a dialogic frame of emotions in conflict. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Emotion in dialogic interaction: Advances in the complex (pp. 179-204). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.248.12sta