Lecture 8 - Cognition and Emotion

Question 1

Overview of this lecture

Answer 1

Overview
 Multiple roles of cognition in emotion
 Appraisal theory
 Role of appraisal
 cause, constituent, or consequence of emotion?
 Content of appraisal
 Empirical evidence
 Alternative causal sequences
 How does appraisal affect psychological well-
being?

Question 2

What are the multiple roles of cognition in emotion?

Answer 2

 In Schachter’s two-factor theory, emphasis is on
the labelling of arousal
 In other cognitive accounts of emotion, emphasis is
on the generation of emotion
 These two accounts are not mutually exclusive!

Question 3

What is appraisal theory (Lazarus 1991)

Answer 3

 The basic claim of all appraisal theories is that
emotion is based on an appraisal of the meaning and significance of an event
 Lazarus is one of the most influential appraisal theorists
 He (Lazarus, 1991) distinguished between
 primary appraisal (“whether something of relevance to the
person’s well-being has occurred” [p. 133])
 secondary appraisal (“concerns coping options – that is, whether
any given action might prevent harm, ameliorate it, or produce
additional harm or benefit” [p. 133])
 reappraisal (“distinguished from appraisal only by coming later”
and by the fact that it includes “appraisals that are constructed
by the mind to regulate emotional distress or protect one’s ego-
identity” [p. 134])

Question 4

What are the content of appraisals?

Answer 4

Role of appraisal in the emotion
process
 “… each emotional reaction … is a function of a particular kind of cognition or appraisal” (Lazarus et al.,
1970, p. 218)
 This idea is nicely captured in Frijda’s (1988) law of
situational meaning:
 “Emotions arise in response to the meaning structures of
given situations; different emotions arise in response to
different meaning structures” (p. 349)

The content of appraisals
 Lazarus discusses 6 appraisal components
 Primary appraisal
 goal relevance (cf. Frijda’s [1988] law of concern: “Emotions
arise in response to events that are important to the
individual’s goals, motives, or concerns” [p. 351])
 goal congruence or incongruence
 type of ego-involvement (e.g., self-esteem, or moral values, or life goals)
 Secondary appraisal
 blame or credit (who is accountable or responsible?)
 coping potential (how can I deal with this situation?)
 future expectancy (are things likely to change for better or worse?)

Question 5

What studies are there looking into whether emotion is caused by appraisal?

Answer 5

Empirical evidence
 Laboratory experiments
- e.g., Speisman et al. (1964)
 Correlational studies
- e.g., Smith and Ellsworth (1985)

Question 6

Tell me about the lab study

Answer 6

Speisman et al. (1964)

 Participants were shown a film titled “Subincision”
depicting adolescent aborigines undergoing a circumcision
ritual
 Different voiceover soundtracks were used to manipulate
the viewers’ appraisal of the film’s emotional content as
follows:

[Graph on slides]

 Intellectualization: Encouraged viewers to adopt a detached
anthropological perspective on the depicted events
 Denial: Suggested that the subincision operation was an occasion for
joy rather than pain
 Trauma: Emphasized the unpleasant aspects of the procedure
 Emotional response assessed in terms of physiological
measures: skin conductance and heart rate

Question 7

What about correlational studies?

Answer 7

 Participants first recalled autobiographical episodes of each of 15 emotions and answered questions about them (as if they were explaining the experience to a Vulcan)
 Each episode then rated for:
 pleasantness
 degree of own versus others’ responsibility/control
 uncertainty
 attentional activity
 anticipated effort
 degree of situational control
 Different emotions were associated with distinctive
appraisal profiles

[Graph on slides]

Question 8

What are some problems with these lines of
evidence?

Answer 8

In experimental research
 often no measure of appraisal
 what is it exactly that is being manipulated?
 strength of emotion is shown to vary, not the
quality

In correlational research
 no manipulation
 often dependent on memory
 are we aware of ongoing appraisals?
 what about emotions with sudden onset?

Question 9

What are some alternative casual sequences?

Answer 9

 Feedback from face and body
- (e.g., facial feedback; cf. William James)

 Affective primacy (Zajonc)
- Preferences need no inferences. We can even form evaluations
without being aware of having been exposed to stimuli (‘mere
exposure’ effect)

 Context (action and social)
- In many everyday situations there is no need to appraise what is happening:
The context provides enough information for emotion to occur
- Lazarus: “Much in life is a restatement of past struggles, which as a feature
of our personal history is an integral part of the emotion process. … In
effect, many appraisal decisions have been all but made, and need only the
appropriate environmental cue to trigger them”

Question 10

Tell be about the alternative casual explanation of facial feedback

Answer 10

 Idea is that how we feel is partly shaped
by feedback from the facial musculature

 Test of this notion was conducted by
Strack, Martin, and Stepper (1988)

 Participants evaluated cartoons while holding
a pen either with their lips or with their teeth

 Cartoons judged funnier in ‘teeth’ condition
than in ‘lips’ condition

Question 11

Tell me about the alternative casual sequence of Mere Exposure Effect

Answer 11

Moreland and Zajonc (1979)

 Stimuli were Japanese ideographs
 These were seen 0, 1, 3, 9, and 27 times
 Participants then made recognition and liking judgments
 The relationships between the measures were then examined
 Note that exposure influenced affect independently of
recognition

Question 12

How does appraisal affect well-
being? (Stein et al)

Answer 12

 Stein et al. analyzed transcripts of interviews with the partners of men who
died from AIDS
 Interviews analysed to extract measures of appraisals, goals, emotions, and
plans.
 Primary measures were proportions of:
 positive belief appraisals
 positive appraisals of goal outcomes
 positive emotions
 overall positive appraisals
 4 measures of psychological well-being:
 positive morale
 positive states of mind
 depressive mood
 impact of death
 Two measurement moments:
 at bereavement (average scores at 2 and 4 weeks after partner’s death)
 12 months later

Question 13

Can I answer the following study questions:

Answer 13

1. What is the key difference between Schachter’s two-factor
   theory and Lazarus’ appraisal theory with respect to the
   role of cognition in the emotion process?
2. What are the three main types of appraisal, according to
   Lazarus?
3. What is the difference between ‘goal relevance’ and goal
   congruence’, according to Lazarus, and how do these
   appraisals influence emotion?
4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of experimental
   versus correlational studies of the appraisal–emotion
   relation?
5. On what grounds did Zajonc object to the idea that
   appraisals are the basis of emotion?