The Japanese Character of Interpersonal Relations and Norms Around “Meiwaku”

"Nuisance" has traditionally been defined by the norm of reciprocity in Japanese communities, but in modern times, the scope of what constitutes "nuisance" has expanded greatly as individual feelings have replaced norms

• "Annoyance" and support
• Usage of "nuisance"
• Japanese human relationships and "nuisance"
• Community and the norm of reciprocity
• Changing norms governing "nuisance"
• Personality as a factor in support
• Initiatives to encourage proactive support

"Annoyance" and support

In recent years, society as a whole has witnessed a trend toward making it more difficult to seek support for problems. Even leaving work early because of a sick child is sometimes met with harsh criticism, and society is gradually losing its tolerance for deviations from what is "supposed."

This may be due to a mentality that views providing support to others as a burden or a "nuisance." With a view to restoring mutual assistance in society, this article examines the concept of "meiwai" (a form of

"meiwai") and its role in Japanese human relationships to date. First, let's examine the psychology of the people behind the use of the expression "meiwai." Yokogawa (1997) states that "meiwai" is often used to express the disadvantage, burden, or discomfort felt as a result of a certain action." He also states, "It seems to emphasize the emotional aspects—specifically, the unpleasantness—that accompany inflicting or receiving disadvantage in interactions with others" (Yokogawa 1997).

Yoshida et al. (2009), who studied social nuisance, which refers to violations of rules and manners on trains and in public places, state: "Behind the feeling of 'nuisance,' perhaps there is a feeling of blaming the perpetrator based on social consensus.... It assumes the existence of shared, agreed-upon social norms such as 'everyone,' 'common sense,' and 'manners,' and classifies and condemns the behavior as a 'nuisance' because it deviates from those norms" (Yoshida et al. 2009).

Furthermore, Oshima (2014), referring to social nuisance, states, "'Nuisance' is an expression that expresses feelings such as discomfort, repulsion, caution, and exclusion."

These studies suggest that when the word "nuisance" is used, negative feelings are generally directed toward the perpetrator.

Usage of "nuisance"

Regarding the classification of behavioral dimensions, Oshima (2014) reviewed research related to "nuisance" and classified it into the following four categories: 1) research on the meaning of "nuisance" in Japanese, 2) research on "nuisance behavior," 3) research on "nuisance facilities," and 4) research on expressions of nuisance related to the elderly and caregiving (Oshima 2014)

Source: Created by the author based on Oshima (2014)

Research on the meaning of the word (1) can be said to be research that generally indicates the meaning of "nuisance" regardless of specific situations. Yokogawa (1997) is included here. In research (2), "nuisance" refers to social nuisance. In research (3), it refers to the impression given by facilities that are necessary but may be deemed "harmful," such as nuclear fuel disposal sites and waste disposal facilities. In research (4), the word "nuisance" refers to the elderly expressing "I don't want to be a nuisance" when receiving or imagining receiving care or nursing care, and refers to the burden placed on those providing care or nursing. It is

important to note here that the negative connotation of "nuisance" includes the burden and disadvantages that the provider of support experiences when receiving care or nursing care from others, as in research (4).

Japanese human relationships and "nuisance"

Japanese people are quite sensitive to the notion of "meiwaku" (a sense of burden associated with providing support for someone in need).

When considering the role of "meiwaku," the analysis of human relationships from the perspective of the "amae" theory advocated by psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Takeo Doi is helpful. Below, we review the gist of Doi's (2007) analysis of the role of "meiwaku" in Japanese human relationships.

According to Doi (2007), "amae" is a concept that represents the "passive desire for affection" people have toward others. The psychological prototype of "amae" is found in the psychology of infants in the mother-child relationship: "It refers to the infant's desire for their mother after their mind has developed to a certain extent and they have come to recognize that their mother is a separate entity" (p. 148). He also states that more generally, "it is an emotion that relies on the other person's affection, an emotion that arises when integration is permitted" (p. 291).

Source: Created by the author based on Doi (2007)

According to Doi (2007), Japanese relationships are divided into three layers based on the degree to which people are willing to depend on others. The first layer is "uchi" (inner) relationships, such as with family members, where complete dependence is permitted. Next, there are "chu" (inner) relationships, such as with neighbors, where dependence is permitted but not to the same extent as with family members. Outside of "chu" are "soto" (outside) relationships, a world of strangers where people can behave bluntly because they are unrelated. In "soto" relationships, dependence is not consciously considered.

Of these three relationships, it is in "chu" relationships that people are conscious of causing or being inconvenienced. In "chu" relationships, dependence is permitted due to the common belief that relationships should be based on human feelings (giri), but people are hesitant to depend on others for fear of being disliked for being too dependent.

Furthermore, of the three relationships, the emotion of "sorry" is most commonly experienced in "chu" relationships. The origin of the word "sumanai" is that one is "not sorry" for what one should have done, and it is used when apologizing for the fact that a kind act has become a burden on the other person, or in other words, a "nuisance." This is because one fears that not doing so will leave a bad impression on the other person.

In a "middle" relationship, one must fulfill one's obligation by accepting a favor, and if one is allowed to depend on another (if one has caused trouble), one must return the favor. A relationship of mutual assistance is established through being allowed to depend on another.

This is the relationship between Japanese human relationships and "nuisance" as seen from Doi's "amae" theory.

Community and the norm of reciprocity

"Bother" is recognized when "depending" on others in "intermediate" relationships, that is, when providing mutual assistance, and can be seen as forming a norm of reciprocity, such as not being too dependent on others, or the need to return the favor if someone allows them to depend on you. "Intermediate" relationships can be said to be the human relationships we encounter in our daily lives, excluding family and other close relatives, and it is thought that "bother" was originally recognized as a norm within the community

Source: Compiled by the author

Even today, this norm of reciprocity remains relatively valid. For example, Hoshino et al. (2012) compared the norm of helping attitudes between Japan and Sweden, finding that Japan places a strong emphasis on repaying the kindness of others, but is less likely than Sweden to help an unspecified number of people. Survey results showed that Japanese people rated statements such as "I should make up for any inconvenience I have caused others, no matter what the cost," and "I should be especially kind to people who have helped me in the past" more highly applicable than Swedes (Hoshino et al. 2012). This suggests that Japanese people's sense of support is linked to the feeling of having caused inconvenience, and is more suited to people in mutual aid relationships than society in general

Changing norms governing "nuisance"

So far, we have outlined how "nuisance" is encompassed within community norms in Japanese interpersonal relationships. From here, we will explore the possibility that the circumstances surrounding the concept of "nuisance" are changing in modern times and consider the impact of these changes on contemporary society.

As seen in Doi's analysis, "nuisance" constitutes a norm of reciprocity within communities that practice mutual aid. However, in the modern era following rapid economic growth, the spread of lifestyles premised on mobility and the separation of work and residence have become entrenched, making it difficult to maintain the close-knit communities of the past, and reviving them will be challenging. In addition, particularly since the 1990s, companies that previously functioned as pseudo-communities have undergone transformation, with efficiency-focused personnel strategies and an increase in temporary workers resulting in an increase in people who are not incorporated into the company. As a result, agreement on shared norms among people has weakened.

Furthermore, Kato (2019) points out that consumer society has created an atmosphere that prioritizes individual preferences and circumstances over community values. According to Kato (2019), until around the 1980s, consumers were homogeneous in that they consumed with an awareness of others. However, since the 1990s, with the decline in purchasing power following the collapse of the bubble economy, 100-yen shops, drugstores, and private brands have come into the spotlight, and consideration of others when making purchases has become less important, with more and more decisions being made based on personal circumstances (Kato 2019).

As community norms have become diluted, "sociality" has taken their place as the social norm. Takikawa (2017) states the following about modern norms and consideration for others: "As we enter a highly consumerist society, people have come to value individuality and self-interest more than belonging to a community or unity. The ethic (norm) of hard work has disappeared, replaced by an ethic of 'sociality.' The ethic of 'sociality' also requires consideration for others, but whereas the former consideration for others was role-based, such as 'not causing trouble for colleagues at work,' it has changed to a more personal and private consideration, such as not causing discomfort or dislike to others" (Takikawa 2017, p. 437).

In other words, the norm is to work well cooperatively without offending others.

As Takikawa (2017) states, this shift in norms has also expanded the scope of what constitutes "nuisance" in the sense of failing to show consideration for others. Whether or not someone is sociable is largely subjective, and each person's assessment of the other person's communication skills and what offends them will differ. It is a matter of feeling, and there is no limit to how much consideration is required. Therefore, it can be said that there is no limit to when consideration is required, and it is difficult to know how to improve.

Personality as a factor in support

Given that each individual's judgment of "nuisance" is based on their own subjective and emotional experiences, restoring a sense of mutual help in modern society may require stability in individual personalities.

According to Koike and Yoshida (2007), high levels of empathy as an individual's natural disposition and situation-dependent empathy reduce the perception of annoyance. Situation-dependent empathy is the observer's ability to put themselves in the perpetrator's shoes and infer why the behavior may be perceived as a nuisance, depending on the situation. Furthermore, empathy for the perpetrator and situation-dependent empathy are higher when the observer's relationship with the perpetrator is a friend than when they are merely acquaintances (Koike and Yoshida 2007). In other words, when the perpetrator was a friend rather than an acquaintance, observers tended to respond without perceiving behavior such as listening to complaints as a nuisance.

In a sense, behaviors such as listening to complaints, as discussed by Koike and Yoshida (2007), can be interpreted as a support-seeking request for help calming anxious feelings. Accepting someone's stress can be both a nuisance and a form of emotional support. Based on Koike and Yoshida's (2007) findings, whether the support-seeking request is interpreted as a nuisance or support may also be influenced by the personality of the person receiving the support-seeking request.

In fact, some research has shown that attachment style influences attitudes toward help-seeking. Simpson et al. (1992) found that avoidant attachment styles, which behave as if they are not experiencing unpleasant emotions, provided less support when the other person expressed anxiety. On the other hand, secure attachment styles were more likely to provide support when the other person expressed anxiety (Simpson et al., 1992). Thus, the emotional well-being of the recipient of support influences their response to the help-seeking request.

Similar suggestions are also found in the Basic Survey on Human Connections conducted by the Cabinet Office. Ishida (2024), who analyzed the survey, states that "people are more likely to help women than men, younger generations than older generations, people who are more affluent than those who are struggling financially, people who have someone to talk to, and people who are not or hardly feel lonely" (p. 7).

Initiatives to encourage proactive support

The 2023 (Reiwa 5) edition of the "Basic Survey on Interpersonal Connections" found that 72.9% of participants felt anxiety or distress in their daily lives. Meanwhile, 43.3% of those who felt anxiety or distress did not receive support from family or friends, and of those, 86.7% did not receive support from government agencies or private organizations.

Ishida (2024) states, "In Japanese society, many people have a sense of volunteerism but do not actually engage in volunteer activities. ... A system that can connect these people to actual action is needed." (p. 7) Now that the norm of mutual aid within communities has weakened, we need to explore ways to actively encourage mutual help, including for the sake of individual mental stability.

(Published with additions and revisions in the February 2025 issue of "EN-ICHI FORUM")

References

• 石田光規（2024）「3年間の調査の振り返り」『⼈々のつながりに関する基礎調査−令和３年、４年、５年−調査結果に関する有識者による考察』、pp.1-15.
• 大島操（2014）「高齢者が「迷惑」と表現する状況に関する考察」『熊本大学社会文化研究』12、pp.111-127.
• 加藤祥子（2019）「日本の消費社会60年における個人と他者との関係性 : 横並び志向・差別化・個別化」『流通經濟大學論集』53（3）、pp.131-145.
• 小池はるか・吉田俊和（2007）「共感性と対人的迷惑認知，迷惑認知の根拠との関連」『パーソナリティ研究』15(3)、pp.266-275.
• 滝川一廣（2017）『子どものための精神医学』医学書院.
• 土居健郎（2007）『甘えの構造』増補普及版、弘文堂.
• 星野晴彦・大塚明子・秋山美栄子・森恭子（2012）「日本とスウェーデンの援助規範意識比較に関する研究 : 福祉政策に影響する両国の援助規範意識の特性に着目して」『生活科学研究 = Bulletin of Living Science』34、pp.27-36.
• 横川澄江（1997）「迷惑の意味の変遷についての一考察」『言語文化と日本語教育』14、pp.52-64.
• 吉田俊和・斎藤和志・北折充隆編（2009）『社会的迷惑の心理学』ナカニシヤ出版.
• Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S. & Nelligan, J. S. (1992) Support seeking and support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment style. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, pp.434-446.

Community Issue briefs and Researches