Chap 7: Appraisal, Knowledge and Experience

Dimensional approach: Ellsworth & Smith: 8 different dimensions of meaning that capture appraisal processes that lead to various emotions

1) Attention 2) Certainty 3) Control/coping 4) Pleasantness 5) Perceived obstacle 6) Responsibility 7) Legitimacy 8) Anticipated effort

Dimensional approaches to appraisals of emotions:

1) Ellsworth and Smith: 8 different dimensions of meaning that capture appraisal processes that lead to various emotions

Stein, Trabasso and Liwag: have extended the idea of goals to plans that are generated from the beliefs on which thet are based. They propose that aspects of emotion- related appraisals unfold as follows:

1) Event changes the status of a valued goal 2) Beliefs are often challenged-> cause bodily changes 3) Plans are formed what to do about the event to modify the goal & the likely results of the plans are considered

Discrete approach to appraisals: Lazarus: created a "decision tree" of 3 features that appraisals are based on

1) Goal relevance 2) Goal congruence 3) Ego involvement

Interesting implications(innebörder i) of taking a prototype perspective to emotion knowledge:

1) It assumes that there is no sharp boundaries between emotion categories 2) This approach helps account for the varieties of experiences that are represented by one category of emotion - it suggests that within a category there are better examples of an emotion

Descrete approaches to secondary appraisals:

1) Lazarus: created a "decision tree" of 3 features that appraisals are based on 2) Oatley & Johnson- Laird: appraisals with two components (similar to Lazarus)

Zajonic: proposed that we process stimuli through several systems. These systems are:

1) One that provides immediate, unconcious evaluation of weather the stimulus is good or bad = primary appraisal. System that makes these appraisals probably involve amygdala. 2) Other systems: that we call secondary appraisals provide more deliberate, concious complex assesments to decide what to think and what to do about it

Discrete approach to appraisals: Oatley & Laird: they postulate appraisals with two components

1) Primary appraisal of an event occurs in relation to goals, according to them not in terms of good/bad but in terms of BASIC emotions-> each sets the brain into a mode adapted to deal with recurring situation 2) Second stage of appraisal: individual considers CAUSAL attribution for the event, how to respond and outcomes

Shaver et al: gave participants 135 emotion terms and asked them to sort them out- captured english speakers organization of emotion knowledge: 3 levels of emotion knowledge

1) Superordinate level - positive/negative 2) Basic level of knowledge 3) Subordinate level- more specific states

Ellsworth: gaps in the discrete approach to appraisals and emotions (2)

1) They highlight differences between emotions in terms of their eliciting appraisals- yet many emotions are fundamentally similar! 2) Their inability to account for transitions between emotions

Russell: read hundreds of ethnographies written by anthropologists who lived in different cultures and painted a fascinating picture of how cultures vary in the language of emotion:

1) They vary in the number of words that represent emotion 2) Vary in which states they represent with emotion terms

Properties (egenskaper) of the language of emotions:

1) Through applying a verbal label to an emotional experience helps identify its intentional object 2) Direct us to the focus of the experience- can guide us to attend specific events 3) Tend to shape difuse states into more specific emotional experiences

"Paradigm Scenarios" - what methodology is this and how has this been useful?

A narrative methodology where participants offer scripts of emotions -> researchers using these have sought to identify the distinct prototypes of self- conscious emotions (embarrassment, shame, guilt)

subordinate level of emotion

More specific states of emotion and can share the same emotion concept above them-> are in important ways similar to each other

How does Agency differentiate three negative emotions: anger, sadness and guilt?

Angry: when we blame others, sad: when we attribute negative events to circumstances, Guilty: when we attribute negative events to ourselves

Weiner and Graham: they found that some distinct emotions depend on...

Attributions = the explanations of the causes of events that people give

Primary appraisal

Automatic process, reflex and need have nothing to do with language

Dimensional approach: Ellsworth & Smith: 8 different dimensions of meaning that capture appraisal processes that lead to various emotions---> the dimensions that stood out in their ability to differentiate among related emotions

Combination of control and responsibility-> agency/attribution

Pennebaker: had 50 students write about emotionally significant issues or superficial topics for 20 mins every day, 4 consecutive days. What did the emotionally sig versus superficial participants report about their experiences and feelings?

Deeper emotional issues->improvements in immune function, fewer medical consultations, were later significantly happier than controls and they said this task was a positive experience.

Secondary appraisal

Describing emotions in words, how they are directed to particular objects and people

Secondary appraisals: two families

Discrete (emphasize that appraisals give rise to distinct emotions) and dimensional approaches (focus on the components of appraisals that can relate to several emotions)

Dimberg and Öhmans evidence on the fact that the automatic appraisals generate emotional experience as well as affecting preferences: Their study with happy/angry masked photos, results:

Happy face-> smile, angry face-> furrow their brow

Alexithymia

Having a few emotional words; difficulty in being able to identify or express emotions verbally

What did Richard Lazarus study and what is his theory about?

He studied challenges that people faced in their lives and the capacities that they had to cope with them. Each challenge->promotes different emotion->depending on how it is appraised. Processes go like this: 2 basic themes: 1)Emotion is response to evaluative judgements or meaning 2) These judgements are about ongoing relationships with the environment

superordinate level of emotion

If it is positive or negative

Roseman et al.: Similarities in triggers for emotions that they found for Americans and Indians:

In both countries appraisals of powerlessness-> sadness and fear, appraisal that someone else caused->anger rather than sadness/fear

How do cultures differ in the events that elicit emotion?

Individualistic and collectivistic cultures: culture related differences in appraising emotions in terms of their capacity to engage or disengage with others

How do cultures differ in the events that elicit emotion? In terms of individualistic and collectivistic cultures: being alone-> Europeans/Americans vs inuit peoples appraisal

Middle class Europeans/Americans: may appraise this in positive terms-> elicit contentedness vs Inuit people (eg Ifaluk): may appraise this in terms of isolation->elicit feelings of sadness

According to Cacioppo, Gardner, Baumeister, Rozin and Royzman: is automatic negative or positive appraisals stronger?

Negative evaluations are more potent than positive evaluations

What is alxithymia associated with?

Paucity (=otillräcklighet) of fantasies and a cognitive style oriented to outside events rather than to the inner world, many studies have investigated alexithyma<->psychosomatic disorders (lack of words to emotions->channels emotional experience to be expressed in the body)

Murphy and Zajonic: Study about unconcious appraisal. People were presented with happy/angry face both subliminally and conciously and then evlauate Chinese ideographs. How did the appraisal look like when they were presented with happy/angry faces subliminally vs conciously?

People liked the chinese ideographs more after they had first been subliminally presented with a smile->had activated positive feeling at an unconscious level. When consciously presented-> did not evaluate the ideographs more positively

The prototype approach to emotions:

Prototype= an example of an object in a category that shows off typical features of the category

Tertiary appraisal of emotions

Sharing emotions, a tertiary appraisal carried out with other people, emotions are now verbalized and coordinated with family members and friends

The split- brain patient that Cazzaniga showed a fire safety film to the left side to and then interviewed, what was the patient (Sperry) able to say about what she saw?

She did not really know what she saw since the information did not reach the left hemisphere (only the right, or partially to the left), but seemed to feel fear and she used her linguistically competent left hemisphere to explain that. She does not know what caused the fear so draws the conclusion that it might be Cazzaniga himself (No indication to what caused the fear allthough it was processed by unsplit subcortical regions to the left hemisphere)

What important implications does the finding that causal attributions differentate among emotions have?

That a particular negative event may happen to you -> BUT which emotion you experience will depend on how you appraise the CAUSES. Attribute to yourself-feel guilt, attribute to circumstances- sadness

How did Lazarus agree with Aristotele, Arnold and Gasson?

That appraisals involve evaluative judgements of how good or bad an event is for the person and the second theme that appraisals concern the individuals goals and aspirations

A study of if appraisals actually cause emotions: Roseman and Evdokas: assigned people to groups and told them to expect that they would experience pleasant/unpleasant taste, and either taste group/randomly assigned control group. What did the participants appraise and what was the analyze of this?

That when participants appraised the situation as one in which they would definitely avoid an unpleasant event-> RELIEF was caused. Those were they thought they would experience pleasant event-> HOPE was caused. This study showed experimentally that appraisals actually cause emotions.

The ideas that Stoics came up with regarding emotions:

Their paper is often taken as the founding of the modern notion that emotions are based on appraisals

How is Stein et al.s proposing of emotions consistent with Lazarus treatment of appraisals?

They both propose that how a person SEES AN EVENT -> which depends on person's goals and values - will determine how the event is PERCEIVED and what EMOTIONS are ELICITED

Rime et al: what happens with emotions when they are socially shared?

This does not decrease intensity in the emotions, but social relationships are extended, social support is enabled, and experiences are compared with experiences and intuitions of other members of our community

How do approaches to emotions as discrete highlight the differences between emotions?

Through saying that emotions are different in that sense that different things elicit them- different elicitors

Rime et al: Social sharing

When people confide their emotional experiences to others, these are translated into verbal forms > something extraordinary happens

Lazarus: secondary appraisal

When the individual appraises the event in relation to more specific goals, or issues for the ego

Lazarus: primary appraisal

When the individual does goal relevance evaluation and goal congruence evaluation

core-relational themes

distinct themes, such as danger or offense or fairness, that define the core of each emotion-> summaries of the different classes of events that elicit certain emotions

Metaphor

is a concept that points to something other than itself

At the basic level of emotion: six emotion concepts:

love, joy, surprise,anger, sadness and fear

Categorical approach to emotions: what Etcoff and Magee demonstrate/argue of this?

they argued that if there were basic emotions, then facial expressions would be recognized in categories s. 177

According to Lazarus, early in the appraisal process the individual evaluates...

wether an event is RELEVANT to personal goals -> if it is -> emotion is elicited

According to Lazarus, if the person appraises that the event is relevant to goals, the person then evaluates...

wether the event is congruent or incongruent with goals

Appraisal

when events are evaluated, assigned in terms of individuals concerns, this is the evaluation process