No abstract

Despite a long-standing interest in the intrapersonal role of affect in persuasion, the interpersonal effects of emotions on persuasion remain poorly understood-how do one person's emotional expressions shape others' attitudes? Drawing on emotions as social information (EASI) theory (Van Kleef, 2009), we hypothesized that people use the emotional expressions of others to inform their own attitudes, but only when they are sufficiently motivated and able to process those expressions. Five experiments support these ideas. Participants reported more positive attitudes about various topics after seeing a source's sad (rather than happy) expressions when topics were negatively framed (e.g., abandoning bobsleighing from the Olympics). Conversely, participants reported more positive attitudes after seeing happy (rather than sad) expressions when topics were positively framed (e.g., introducing kite surfing at the Olympics). This suggests that participants used the source's emotional expressions as information when forming their own attitudes. Supporting this interpretation, effects were mitigated when participants' information processing was undermined by cognitive load or was chronically low. Moreover, a source's anger expressions engendered negative attitude change when directed at the attitude object and positive change when directed at the recipient's attitude. Effects occurred regardless of whether emotional expressions were manipulated through written words, pictures of facial expressions, film clips containing both facial and vocal emotional expressions, or emoticons. The findings support EASI theory and indicate that emotional expressions are a powerful source of social influence.

How do emotional expressions of group members shape conformity versus deviance in groups? We hypothesized that angry and happy responses to a group member's deviating opinion are interpreted as signals of imminent rejection versus acceptance. In 5 studies, the majority's expressions of anger led the deviant individual to feel rejected, whereas expressions of happiness made the deviant feel accepted. Because conformity can be seen as strategic behavior aimed at gaining (re)acceptance, the effects of emotional expressions on conformity should be moderated by social-contextual factors that determine the motivation to be accepted by the group and by the extent to which conformity is a means to this end. Accordingly, in Study 2, the availability of alternative groups determined whether a deviant conformed to the current group or abandoned the group after an angry reaction. In Study 3, anger and happiness were only associated with conformity pressure in situations that were perceived as cooperative (rather than competitive). Employing an interactive group task in Study 4, we showed that individuals who received an angry reaction contributed less in a cooperative group task than did those who received a neutral or happy reaction. Finally, in Study 5, peripheral group members conformed more after an angry reaction than after a happy reaction, but prototypical group members did not. Moreover, conformity was still manifest 3 weeks after the experiment, and this effect was mediated by feelings of rejection. We discuss implications of these findings for theorizing about social functions of emotions and the role of emotions in groups.

The notion that emotional expressions regulate social life by providing information is gaining popularity. Prior research on the effects of emotional expressions on observers' inferential processes has focused mostly on inferences regarding the personality traits of the expresser, such as dominance and affiliation. We extend this line of research by exploring the possibility that emotional expressions shape observers' construal of social situations. Across three vignette studies, an interaction partner's expressions of anger, compared to expressions of happiness or disappointment, led observers to construe hypothetical situations as less cooperative, both in dyads and groups. These effects occurred even when factual information regarding the cooperativeness or competitiveness of the situation was provided, attesting to the power of emotional expressions in shaping the construal of social situations. Results are discussed in relation to appraisal theory, reverse appraisals, emotions as social information theory, and the emergence of cooperation in groups and cultures.

No abstract

Happy expressions signal more acceptance than other emotional expressions.• Angry expressions signal more rejection than other negative emotional expressions.• The predicted associations are reliable at presentation times of only 50 ms.• Effects are consistent across three conceptualizations of acceptance and rejection.• These findings help explain consequences of expressed emotions in dyads and groups. a b s t r a c tInclusion in social groups is vital to human survival and wellbeing. We propose that emotional expressions signal acceptance versus rejection to observers. Based on this idea, we hypothesized that happy facial expressions prime acceptance, whereas angry expressions prime rejection. In six experiments using the Affect Misattribution Paradigm (Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005), we tested to what extent observers associate facial expressions (angry, happy, sad, fearful, and neutral) with three different operationalizations of acceptance and rejection (accept/reject, warm/cold, close/distant). A meta-analysis on these experiments revealed that angry expressions were more strongly associated with rejection than other (negative) expressions, and that happy expressions were more strongly associated with acceptance than other facial expressions. Effects were stable and robust at presentation times of 50 ms and higher and were similar across conceptualizations of acceptance/rejection. We discuss implications for theorizing on the social functions of emotions and the processing of emotional expressions.

Risk-taking can fuel innovation and growth, but it can also have devastating consequences for individuals and organizations. Here we examine whether risk-taking affords social-hierarchical benefits to risk-takers. Specifically, we investigate how risk-taking influences perceived dominance, prestige, and the willingness to endorse risk-takers' leadership. Integrating insights from costly signaling theory and the dominance/ prestige framework of social rank, we theorized that risk-taking increases leadership endorsement to the degree that it fuels perceptions of prestige, but decreases leadership endorsement to the degree that it fuels perceptions of dominance. However, we also hypothesized that risk-induced perceptions of dominance do translate into leadership endorsement in competitive (rather than cooperative) intergroup settings. We tested these hypotheses in four studies involving different samples, methods, and operationalizations. In Study 1, participants performed an implicit association test (IAT) that revealed that people associate risk with leader positions, and safety with follower positions. Study 2 was a longitudinal field survey conducted during the September 2019 Israeli elections, which showed that voters' perceptions of politicians' risk-taking propensities prior to the elections positively predicted perceived dominance and prestige as well as voting behavior during the elections. Finally, Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that people are willing to support risktakers as leaders in the context of competitive (as opposed to cooperative) intergroup situations, because perceived dominance positively predicts leadership endorsement in competitive (but not cooperative) intergroup settings. We discuss implications for understanding the social dynamics of organizational rank and the perpetuation of risky behavior in organizations, politics, and society at large.

Groups are a natural breeding ground for emotions. Group life affords unique opportunities but also poses critical challenges that may arouse emotional reactions in group members. Social-functional approaches hold that these emotions in turn contribute to group functioning by prompting group members to address concerns that are relevant to the group's success. Guided by Emotions as Social Information (EASI) theory, this paper reviews research on the affective, cognitive, and behavioral consequences of emotional expressions in groups. Affective processes include emotional contagion and affective convergence, and resulting states such as group affective tone and affective diversity. Cognitive processes include inferences group members draw from each other's emotional expressions. We discuss how these affective and cognitive processes shape behavior and group functioning. We conclude that the traditional (over)emphasis on affective processes must be complemented with a focus on cognitive processes to develop a more complete understanding of the social dynamics of emotions in groups.