Complaining

Consequences

Acceptance and rejection of complaints

When receiving a complaint from another party, one chooses to either accept or reject the complaint. As mentioned before, complaining serves many functions, but accepting or rejecting a complaint also have several functions depending on the context. These contexts refer to who is complaining, what or who is being complained about and who the complaint recipient is.

In the special issue by Heinemann & Traverso (2009), two categories of complaints were investigated in multiple contexts: direct and indirect.

Direct complaints: Context and social roles play a big part in the dynamic of complaints. When a third party is present in a parent-child argument, the complainant will gain support from the witness to promote the complainants’ views as the complaints serve the purpose of behaviour regulation, but the witness will also actively attempt to prevent the formation of an overly aggressive argument. In the context of emergency phone services however, the reaction to a complaint is not as simple. The emergency phone service worker who in this case, is the subject and receiver of the complaint, will accept the complaint as true but will deflect the blame away from themselves. This serves the function of alleviating responsibility to avoid any potential legal repercussions.

Indirect complaints: Complaints in conversations between friends and family are usually accepted. However, similar to direct complaints, the institutional role one possesses and context may impact their reaction towards certain complaints. For instance, if the complaint is about a work client or an institutional competitor, there will be more acceptance of the complaint. However, there will be rejection when the complaint is about one’s peers. This rejection indicates that institutional roles may influence one’s reaction towards complaints through the need for maintaining loyalty, and their relationships colleagues. The acceptance of complaints against clients may help build a defence against complaints addressed to themselves by constructing a joined front, redirecting the blame to the client. Finally, the acceptance of complaints towards competitors serves the function of building rapport with clients to promote further preference for their own institution.

These studies were done in real-life settings with real caretakers, patients, families, workers etc. This shows that the effects of context and social/institutional roles exist in real-life setting. The sample in the studies were too small due to the time-costly nature as interview studies, meaning that these results cannot be generalised to the whole population until further replication is done.

Emotional contagion

Bogdan Wojciszke, Wiesław Baryła, Aleksandra Szymków-Sudziarska, Michał Parzuchowski, and Katarzyna Kowalczyk found that when participants listened to or uttered affirmations or complaints, their moods would increase and decrease in equal strength, respectively. The results show that complaining can induce a negative affect within co-participants and the complainer, named the “saying is experiencing effect”. This effect is explained by the underlying mechanism of mood contagion and the dual process theory for social cognition.

Our impulsive system relies on automatic links of similar cues and representations as suggested by Elliot R. Smith and Jamie DeCoster, and due to this it functions under a compatibility principle, where perception, affect and behaviour must be compatible to facilitate each other. Therefore, when one listens and perceives a complaint, a negative event, they will start to experience a negative affect as result of automatic association and mood contagion.

Worsening of anger

Psychologist Lennis Echterling notes that "[m]erely venting negative emotions by screaming or yelling does not have any health benefits." Research on the subject has noted that venting could make anger worse, not better.

Types of complaining behaviour

Research has identified several distinct types of complaining behaviour with each serving different purposes for the complainer.

Instrumental complaining

Instrumental complaining is goal-directed and aimed at changing an undesirable situation. When consumers complain about a defective product seeking a replacement, or when employees raise concerns about workplace conditions to management, they are engaging in instrumental complaining. This type of complaining is typically solution-focused and motivated by the desire to rectify a specific problem.

Singh further categorised instrumental consumer complaints into voice responses (complaints directed to the seller), private responses (negative word-of-mouth to friends and family), and third-party responses (complaints to external agencies like consumer protection organisations). Research indicates that these different instrumental channels are often chosen based on the perceived likelihood of successful resolution, with direct voice responses typically attempted first when consumers believe the company will be responsive.

Expressive complaining

In contrast to instrumental complaining, expressive complaining primarily serves to release emotional tension or express negative feelings without necessarily seeking a solution. This form of complaining is often characterised by venting frustrations about situations that may be beyond one's control, such as complaining about bad weather or traffic congestion. Research suggests that expressive complaining can provide short-term emotional relief through catharsis, though its long-term effectiveness remains debated.

Expressive complaining sometimes takes the form of what Alberts termed "blowing off steam," characterised by heightened emotional expression, repetition, and elaboration of grievances beyond what would be necessary for instrumental purposes. This type of complaining is often recognised as such by both the complainer and the recipient, with an implicit understanding that solutions are not being sought. Studies by Alicke et al. found that approximately 45% of everyday complaints fell primarily into this expressive category.

Social complaining

Social complaining serves to build or strengthen social bonds through shared grievances. This type of complaining often occurs in group settings where individuals bond over common dissatisfactions, such as colleagues complaining about workplace policies or friends commiserating about relationship challenges. Kowalski notes that social complaining can facilitate group cohesion by highlighting shared values and expressions, creating an "us verses them" dynamic that reinforces social identity.

Chronic complaining

While most complaining behaviours are situational responses to specific dissatisfactions, chronic complaining represents a more pervasive pattern characterised by frequent complaints across diverse contexts. Chronic complainers tend to perceive more negative events in their environment and have lower thresholds for expressive dissatisfactions.

Research suggests that chronic complaining may be associated with personality traits such as negative affectivity and neuroticism. These individuals often use complaining as their primary mode of social interaction, which can strain relationships over time. Importantly, chronic complaining appears to be self-reinforcing; frequent complainers develop cognitive schemas that facilitate the detection of problems and deficiencies, creating a cycle that maintains their complaining behaviour.

Psychological functions of complaining

Beyond its communicative purposes, complaining serves various psychological functions for individuals.

Self-presentation management

Complaining can be strategically used to manage others' impressions of oneself. For example, by complaining about high standards not being met, individuals can signal their own elevated standards and values. Similarly, complaining about being overworked may serve to convey dedication and importance. This self-presentation function helps individuals shape how they are perceived by others.

Tactical complaining allows individuals to position themselves favorably within social hierarchies. Alicke et al. found that subjects who complained about intellectual challenges were rated as more intelligent than those who complained about mundane issues. This suggests that the content of complaints can be strategically selected to project desired personal attributes. Similarly, researchers have observed that complaints about high-end products often serve to signal affluence and discernment, rather than merely expressing dissatisfaction.

Emotional regulation

Complaining can function as an emotional regulation strategy, providing an outlet for negative emotions that might otherwise remain internalised. By expressive dissatisfaction verbally, individuals may experience a reduction in physiological arousal associated with negative emotions. However, research suggests that venting anger through complaining might actually reinforce negative emotional states rather than dissipate them.

Bagozzi et al. demonstrated this complexity in a series of experiments showing that while the immediate act of complaining provides emotional relief, the cognitive rehearsal and elaboration of negative events required for complaining may simultaneously intensify and prolong negative emotions. This paradox helps explain why chronic complainers often report greater dissatisfaction despite (or perhaps because of) their frequent complaining behaviour.

Control and agency

Complaining can restore a sense of control in situations where individuals feel powerless. By voicing dissatisfaction, complainers assert agency and position themselves as active rather than passive participants in challenging situations. This psychological function is particularly evident in consumer complaints, where the act of complaining transforms the consumer from a victim of poor service to an agent seeking justice.

Research has demonstrated that this sense of regained control contributes significantly to post-complaint satisfaction, independent of whether the original issue is resolved. Their study found that merely having one's complaint acknowledged provided psychological benefits through increased perceived control, even when full redress wasn't provided.

Social validation and bonding

Complaining often serves a social validation function, where individuals seek confirmation that their perceptions and standards are shared by others. When others agree with or validate a complaint, the complainer receives social confirmation that their expectations and evaluations are reasonable, reinforcing their worldview.

Successful complaints (those that receive agreement or validation) also significantly improved mood and social cohesion among group members. This social validation function helps explain why complaining often occurs in group settings where the complainer can reasonably expect agreement from others. The phenomenon of "reciprocal complaining" (where one person's complaint triggers related complaints from others) further illustrates the social bonding potential of shared grievances.