Motivated to confront: How experiencing anger affects anchoring bias

Jung, Heajung; Young, Maia J.

doi:10.1002/bdm.2126

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It can fuel a biassed search for information to attack the violator 56 along with confirming evidence to bolsters one's views while downplaying opposing evidence and arguments 54 . Anger is an other condemning emotion 49 associated with feelings of being antagonistic and punitive 57,58 . It lessens chances for reconciliation 47 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The shift from disbelieving underperformance to recognising failure: A tipping point model

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Coming face to face with a trainee who needs to be failed is a stern test for many supervisors. In response, supervisors have been encouraged to report evidence of failure through numerous assessment redesigns. And yet, there are lingering signs that some remain reluctant to engage in assessment processes that could alter a trainee's progression in the programme. Failure is highly consequential for all involved and, although rare, requires explicit study. Recent work identified a phase of disbelief that preceded identification of underperformance. What remains unknown is how supervisors come to recognise that a trainee needs to be failed. Methods Following constructivist grounded theory methodology, 42 physicians and surgeons in British Columbia, Canada shared their experiences supervising trainees who profoundly underperformed, required extensive remediation or were dismissed from the programme. We identified recurring themes using an iterative, constant comparative process. Results The shift from disbelieving underperformance to recognising failure involves three patterns: accumulation of significant incidents, discovery of an egregious error after negligible deficits or illumination of an overlooked deficit when pointed out by someone else. Recognising failure was accompanied by anger, certainty and a sense of duty to prevent harm. Conclusion Coming to the point of recognising that a trainee needs to fail is akin to the psychological process of a tipping point where people first realise that noise is signal and cross a threshold where the pattern is no longer an anomaly. The co‐occurrence of anger raises the possibility for emotions to be a driver of, and not only a barrier to, recognising failure. This warrants caution because tipping points, and anger, can impede detection of improvement. Our findings point towards possibilities for supporting earlier identification of underperformance and overcoming reluctance to report failure along with countermeasures to compensate for difficulties in detecting improvement once failure has been verified.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The shift from disbelieving underperformance to recognising failure: A tipping point model

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, it is possible that if an individual feels angry while viewing a situation (e.g., witnessing a person engage in political ideologies they disagree with), the observer makes an appraisal of their safety risk (e.g., emotional) in the situation. If the observer feels that the safety risk is low (e.g., a political advocate who has extensive knowledge on the topic and feels they can comfortably defend their views), they may want to approach the situation that caused their anger to engage in confrontation (e.g., political debate; e.g., Jung & Young, 2019).…”

Section: The Role Of Appraisalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivational direction diverges from valence for sadness, anger, and amusement: A role for appraisals?

Campbell¹,

Dawel²,

Edwards³

et al. 2023

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work has cast doubt on whether the strength of motivation (strength of avoidance or approach tendencies) experienced while viewing emotion-eliciting pictures is dissociable from felt valence (negative versus positive). The present study extended this work by testing specific discrete emotions (amusement, anger, awe, desire, sadness). Previous work has proposed separate motivational direction (avoid versus approach) from valence. In Study 1, participants (N = 60) rated the motivational direction or valence they experienced while viewing 100 pictures that each evoked one of the five discrete emotions. We found significant differences between average motivational direction and valence ratings for sadness, anger, and amusement. Critically, underlying these averages, we found that while valence responses were highly consistent, there was large variability in motivational direction, with some people indicating they wanted to approach and others indicating they wanted to avoid while viewing the same picture. Individual differences in motivational direction were largest for sadness, so in Study 2 (N = 100) we tested whether they were predicted by appraisals of the situation (e.g., ratings of how welcome or useful people believed their help would be). The three appraisals tested accounted for 64% of the variance in motivational direction, after which valence made a very small unique contribution. These findings highlight that motivational direction and valence can diverge. Given the variability in individuals' motivational direction responses, future studies designed to assess the effects of motivational direction on cognitive processes need to tailor stimuli for each participant to ensure they activate the intended motivational direction.

show abstract

“…For example, while an individual experiencing fear may flee from danger and seek refuge, the sad person may become withdrawn and focus inwardly on their own state of emotion. The angry person, in contrast, becomes stronger and more energized and seeks to move against and rectify the injustice -to reassert their power or status and restore their version of the state of affairs (Shaver et al, 1987;Jung and Young, 2019). In these actions, the person expressing anger may respond in an outraged posture and communicate their anger verbally in a loud voice by yelling, screaming, shouting, and snapping at another party and exhibit non-verbal cues through body expression such as stomping, stalking, or striding.…”

Section: Clarifying the Fuzziness Of Anger Expressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dimensions of Leader Anger Expression Unveiled: How Anger Intensity and Gender of Leader and Observer Affect Perceptions of Leadership Effectiveness and Status Conferral

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While significant organizational research evaluates effective leadership traits and decades of psychological research have investigated emotion, there is a lack of consensus in organizational behavior research related to whether emotion expressed by a leader elicits positive or negative outcomes. We seek to augment existing research by exploring the effect of three dimensions, namely, the intensity of anger expressed, the gender of the leader, and the gender of the observer on perceptions of leadership effectiveness and future status conferral. In Study 1, we recruited 40 participants from a well-known U.S. university to select appropriate terms attributable to intense, moderate, and neutral levels of anger expression. In Study 2, we recruited a diverse pool of 296 participants and employed a quasi-experimental method by randomly assigning participants into one of the six conditions created by three levels of anger expression intensity and the leader gender. Participants were asked to read a vignette in which a male or a female leader responds to an anger-provoking situation with different levels of anger expression and evaluate the leader on perceived leadership effectiveness and future status conferral. Our study findings demonstrated that a leader demonstrating no anger was perceived higher in leadership effectiveness than a leader showing either moderate or intense anger. Juxtaposed to these results, for future status conferral, a leader expressing no anger was perceived as higher in future status than a leader expressing moderate anger without significant difference found between no anger and intense anger. We also found a significant main effect of observer gender with female participants giving lower ratings for leadership effectiveness and status conferral than male participants. Possible explanations and practical implications regarding gender-specific findings are discussed.

show abstract

Motivated to confront: How experiencing anger affects anchoring bias

Cited by 10 publications

References 56 publications

The shift from disbelieving underperformance to recognising failure: A tipping point model

The shift from disbelieving underperformance to recognising failure: A tipping point model

Motivational direction diverges from valence for sadness, anger, and amusement: A role for appraisals?

Dimensions of Leader Anger Expression Unveiled: How Anger Intensity and Gender of Leader and Observer Affect Perceptions of Leadership Effectiveness and Status Conferral

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About