Mad enough to see the other side: Anger and the search for disconfirming information

Young, Maia J.; Tiedens, Larissa Z.; Jung, Heajung; Tsai, Ming‐Hong

doi:10.1080/02699930903534105

Cited by 34 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, we conducted two experiments to systematically investigate the effectiveness of the AEMT. This research is informative for the use of AEMT, considering common emotion manipulation checks do not sufficiently ensure that only the intended emotions, but not incidental emotions, are induced at different levels between conditions [37], [40], [53]–[65]. Pre-writing emotion levels were also not considered in these previous studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Validity of the Autobiographical Emotional Memory Task for Emotion Induction

Mills

D’Mello

2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Autobiographical Emotional Memory Task (AEMT), which involves recalling and writing about intense emotional experiences, is a widely used method to experimentally induce emotions. The validity of this method depends upon the extent to which it can induce specific desired emotions (intended emotions), while not inducing any other (incidental) emotions at different levels across one (or more) conditions. A review of recent studies that used this method indicated that most studies exclusively monitor post-writing ratings of the intended emotions, without assessing the possibility that the method may have differentially induced other incidental emotions as well. We investigated the extent of this issue by collecting both pre- and post-writing ratings of incidental emotions in addition to the intended emotions. Using methods largely adapted from previous studies, participants were assigned to write about a profound experience of anger or fear (Experiment 1) or happiness or sadness (Experiment 2). In line with previous research, results indicated that intended emotions (anger and fear) were successfully induced in the respective conditions in Experiment 1. However, disgust and sadness were also induced while writing about an angry experience compared to a fearful experience. Similarly, although happiness and sadness were induced in the appropriate conditions, Experiment 2 indicated that writing about a sad experience also induced disgust, fear, and anger, compared to writing about a happy experience. Possible resolutions to avoid the limitations of the AEMT to induce specific discrete emotions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Validity of the Autobiographical Emotional Memory Task for Emotion Induction

Mills

D’Mello

2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The notion that emotions affect subsequent decisions by changing one's action tendencies has been asserted in some prior work (e.g., Raghunathan & Pham, ; Young et al, ). However, the majority of empirical research on differential effects of discrete emotions on decision making theoretically draws on the Appraisal‐Tendency Framework (Lerner & Keltner, ) when selecting comparison emotions, and most findings are explained using cognitive appraisal tendencies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivated to confront: How experiencing anger affects anchoring bias

Jung

Young

2019

Behavioral Decision Making

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has asserted that emotions affect anchoring bias in decision making through the emotion's certainty appraisal or through the emotion's action tendencies, but these prior studies investigate the role of each component—appraisal or action tendency—without accounting for potential effects of the other one. The current research investigates whether anger exerts a significant effect on anchoring bias by activating a desire to confront a potential anchor. Importantly, the studies compare the effect of anger versus disgust, emotions that differ in their action tendency but are similar in their certainty appraisal. In Study 1, participants completed an emotion induction task and then a negotiation task where the first offer from the negotiation partner served as a potential anchor. Anger led to more deviation from the anchor compared with disgust or neutral feelings. Subsequent studies provide evidence that the angry participants are less anchored when the anchor value comes from a more confrontable source (someone else vs. themselves in Study 2 and an out‐group member vs. an in‐group member in Study 3).

show abstract

“…The associated appraisal tendencies carry over to affect appraisals of subsequent events, even those that are unrelated to the situation eliciting the emotion (e.g., Keltner, Ellsworth, & Edwards, 1993;Tiedens & Linton, 2001). In addition, the motivational properties of the emotion can be carried over to subsequent situations and influence people's judgments and decisions (Young, Tiedens, Jung, & Tsai, 2011). According to this line of research on emotions and decision making, resentment developed by personal injustice can affect attributions about others' outcomes.…”

Section: The Carryover Effect Of Resentment and Angermentioning

confidence: 97%