Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Announcements for April 18 1. Papers due at start of class on Thursday. 2. Class will meet in 223D.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Judgment & Decision Making Based on High Consumer Effort
Advertisements

Psychological biases In Negotiation. Anchoring and adjustment In the face of uncertainty, people fix on the first piece of information and subconsciously.
COGNITIVE SCIENCE 17 Why Emotions Are Necessary Jaime A. Pineda, Ph.D.
Emotion and Personality. Emotions  Components of Emotions (e.g., fear):  Distinct subjective feelings (e.g., anxiety)  Accompanied by bodily changes.
Emotion Psychology, 4/e by Saul Kassin CHAPTER 12: Emotion 4/12/2017
An Exploration of Decision Processes in an Evolutionary Perspective: the Case of the Framing Effect.
Agenda for February 24 Announcements: Mosaic conference Dimensions events Smith & Ellsworth’s Cognitive Appraisal Theory Presentation by Discussants Review.
Samantha Nicholas & Khrys Nugent Hanover College
1 Intuitive Irrationality: Reasons for Unreason. 2 Epistemology Branch of philosophy focused on how people acquire knowledge about the world Descriptive.
Thinking: Concept Formation Concept formation: identifying commonalities across stimuli that unite them into a common category Rule learning: identifying.
Reason, Passion, & Social CognitionWeek 8, Part 2 Announcements for March 9 General Announcements April 20 th Meet in SDS Conference Room Party at my house,
TAMAR KUGLER, LISA ORDÓÑEZ, TERRY CONNOLLY ICSD, AUGUST 2009 Emotion, Decision and Risk: Betting on Gambles vs. Betting on People.
CHAPTER 14 Utility Axioms Paradoxes & Implications.
Decision making and economics. Economic theories Economic theories provide normative standards Expected value Expected utility Specialized branches like.
Reasoning What is the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning? What are heuristics, and how do we use them? How do we reason about categories?
Running Experiments with Amazon Mechanical-Turk Gabriele Paolacci, Jesse Chandler, Jesse Chandler Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 5, August 2010.
Or Why We’re Not Really As Rational As We’d Like to Believe.
Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 11, Part 1 Announcements for April 4 1. The web page is up and running. Check it out for new links and course.
Evolution Universals v. Diversity. Battle of Universals and Cultures Human universals: Search for unifying parameters of functioning –Emphasizes biology.
Cognitive Processes PSY 334 Chapter 10 – Reasoning & Decision-Making August 21, 2003.
Sensemaking and Performance During Change: Some Preliminary Ideas Scott Sonenshein and Scott Baggett Rice University.
Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 10, Part 1 Announcements for March 21 Announcements: 1. The URL of the page should be:
Cognition Thoughts, Beliefs, and Attitudes. Moving from thoughts to behavior Concepts Propositions Behavior Mental Models.
Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 15, Part 1 Agenda for May 2 1. Logistics for class dinner party What to bring Where to meet Guest 2. Finish emotional.
Reason, Passion, & Social CognitionWeek 9, Part 2 Announcements for March 16 Announcements: 1. Website will be available by Monday The URL of the page.
The Unfolding and Function of Emotions
Goal Motivation Chapter 11. Chapter 11 Goal Motivation Reinforcers, Incentives, Goals Reinforcers  Have increased the rate or probability of behavior.
Human Resources Training and Individual Development Personality Theories and Assessment March 3, 2004.
Review of Related Literature Different decision-making: – Budget decisions of managers – Irrationality of continuing the risk of losing a prospect – Decision-making.
Specifying autobiographical information alters emotion activation, but not the way you think it does… Pierre Philippot Université de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve,
Decision making Making decisions Optimal decisions Violations of rationality.
© 2009 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. C H A P T E R 9 Complex Cognitive Processes.
Decision Making choice… maximizing utility framing effects
Framing Effects From Chapter 34 ‘Frame and Reality’ of Thinking Fast and Slow, by D. Kahneman.
1 Psychology 307: Cultural Psychology Lecture 22.
Individual Preferences for Uncertainty: An Ironically Pleasurable Stimulus Bankert, M., VanNess, K., Hord, E., Pena, S., Keith, V., Urecki, C., & Buchholz,
A Heuristic Solution To The Allais Paradox And Its Implications Seán Muller, University of Cape Town.
RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS Special Lectures University of Kuwait Richard Wilson Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics Harvard University January 13th, 14th and.
RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS Special Lectures University of Kuwait Richard Wilson Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics Harvard University January 13th, 14th and.
Chapter 13 The Subjective and Physiological Nature of Emotions.
Decision Making choice… maximizing utility framing effects.
Some factors leading to initial attraction Proximity (more likely to form relationships with those who live near us, or that we interact with on a regular.
PSY 323 – Cognition Chapter 13: Judgment, Decisions & Reasoning.
Module 16 Emotion.
1 DECISION MAKING Suppose your patient (from the Brazilian rainforest) has tested positive for a rare but serious disease. Treatment exists but is risky.
Cognitive Processes PSY 334 Chapter 10 – Reasoning & Decision-Making.
Emotions and Learning (David Nash) Describe learning process as a feedback loop Describe how motivational processes lead to cognitive growth Describe ways.
Complex Cognitive Processes
Attitudes and Attitude Change
Building Positive Attitude & Motivation into Your Course… Adapted from Thomas Koballa’s “Framework for the Affective Domain in Science Education”
Framing Effects and Focusing Illusion Psychology 355: Cognitive Psychology Instructor: John Miyamoto 6/2/2016: Lecture 10-4 Note: This Powerpoint presentation.
Judgment and Decision Making Based on High Consumer Effort
Emotion Theories and Mixed Emotions
Effects of Foreign Language on Decision Making
PSY 323 – Cognition Chapter 13: Judgment, Decisions & Reasoning.
Cognition and Emotion November 25, 2003.
A Cognitive Theory of Emotion
LOs 3.11 and : To what extent do cognitive and biological factors interact in emotion? 3.12: Evaluate one theory of how emotion may affect one.
The cognitive approach Lecture # 4: October 6, 2004
Framing Effects and Affective Forecasting
How should we classify emotions?
Framing Effects and Affective Forecasting
Persuasion and Message Effects in Communication Research
DIS 280 Social Science Research Methodology: Problem Framing
Choices, Values and Frames
Sensemaking and Performance During Change: Some Preliminary Ideas
POLI 421 January 14, 2019 Tversky and Kahneman on Heuristics and Biases Slovic on misperceptions of risk POLI 421, Framing Public Policies.
Module 16 Emotion.
POLI 421, Framing Public Policies
Presentation transcript:

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Announcements for April Papers due at start of class on Thursday. 2. Class will meet in 223D Porter Hall. Come prepared to describe your paper to the class in a 3-minute summary (snacks provided!). 3. Paper preparation: Be sure to follow “5 tips” from last Thursday’s lecture.

Positive & Negative Emotion: Examining Content & Process Effects Johnson & Tversky (1983) Lerner & Keltner (in press) Bodenhausen et al. (1994)

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Presentation by Discussants Melissa, Rachel, & Reen

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Content Effects Valence Theories: Main Hypothesis: Positive emotions trigger optimistic judgments/choices & negative emotoins trigger pessimistic/judgments choices. Possible explanations for effect: Affect-as-information (direct transfer) Affect priming (indirect influence on cognitive processes) Example: Johnson & Tversky

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Content Effects Appraisal-Tendency Theory: Main Hypothesis: Emotions trigger a proclivity to perceive new information in ways that are consistent with the original appraisal dimensions of an emotion (Lerner & Keltner, in press). Valence is only one dimension, not necessarily the most important one. Possible explanation for effect: Appraisal tendency Proponents: Lerner & Keltner

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Cognitive-Appraisal Theory Specific emotions are defined by their variation along six cognitive appraisal dimensions (Smith & Ellsworth, 1985): Certainty (low, high) Control (individual, situational) Responsibility (self, other) Attention (low, high) Pleasantness (pos., neg.) Effort (low, high) Each emotion has core appraisal themes

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Cognitive-Appraisal Tendencies Research strategy: Compare emotions that are highly differentiated in their appraisal themes on judgments/choices that relate to that appraisal theme.

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Applying Appraisal Tendency Approach to Judgments of Risk 1: Identify appraisal dimensions that are conceptually related to risk: Control & certainty map on to Slovic’s (1987)“dread risk” and “unknown risk” 2: Select emotions that fall at opposite ends of these dimensions Fear and anger

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Appraisal Tendency Fear Anger Mood-Congruent Risk Taking Study: Hypotheses

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 N = 75 Ostensibly separate studies “Study A” Same emotion measures as in Study 1 Reliability stable: Anger =.81, Fear =.91 “Study B” Manipulated gain/loss frame Tversky and Kahneman’s (1981) “Asian Disease Problem” Risk Taking Study: Method

Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Program B 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved & 2/3 probability that no people will be saved Program A 200 people will be saved Which of the two programs would you favor, and by how much? Very Much Prefer A Much Prefer A Slightly Prefer A Slightly Prefer B Much Prefer B Very Much Prefer B M = 3.0 Gain frame Risk-Averse: Take the certain gain

Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Which of the two programs would you favor, and by how much? Very Much Prefer A Much Prefer A Slightly Prefer A Slightly Prefer B Much Prefer B Very Much Prefer B M = 3.9 Loss frame Risk-Seeking: Avoid the certain loss Program B 1/3 probability that no one will die & 2/3 probability that 600 people will die Program A 400 people will die

Emotion-tendencies (z-score) Risk-seeking (z-score) 0 Loss Domain Anger Fear b =.36* b =.23 *

Emotion-tendencies (z-score) Risk-seeking (z-score) b =.10 b = Gain Domain Anger Fear

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Two goals: Increase stringency 1: Test appraisal tendency hypothesis in a domain where mood-congruent models and conventional wisdom predict valence effects 2: Test hypothesis in the context of a positive emotion -- happiness -- that shares the same core appraisal themes of certainty and individual control as anger Study Goals

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Hypotheses for Optimism Appraisal Tendency Fear Happiness Anger Mood Congruent

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 N = 601 Ostensibly separate studies “Study A” Emotion measures Fear: same as before, alpha =.89 Anger: only Spielberger (1996), alpha =.84 Happiness: Underwood & Froming (1980), alpha =.81 “Study B” Optimism measure Weinstein’s (1980) unrealistic optimism questionnaire Optimism Study: Method

Emotion-tendencies (z-score) 0 Optimism (z-score) Support for Both Hypotheses: Appraisal Tendency & Mood-Congruent b =. 38* b =.15* Happiness Fear

Emotion-tendencies (z-score) 0 Optimism (z-score) Anger Fear Happiness Support For Appraisal Tendency Hypothesis b =. 38* b =.15* b =.13*

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Process Effects Main Hypothesis (Bodenhausen et al./Forgas): Pos. emotions, such as happiness, trigger heuristic thought Example: Happy people more likely to rely on stereotypes (Bodenhausen et al.)

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Process Effects, cont. Possible explanations for effects: 1. Preoccupation with pleasing events constraines capacity for systematic thought 2. Disruptive arousal or excitement constrains systematic thought 3. “Effort conservation”: happy people not motivated to engage in cognitive effort, unless tasks have relavence to well-being. (Similar to “mood maintenance” idea)

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Process Effects, Cont. Tests of Possible Explanations: Preoccupation with pleasing events???? No: Mood inductions with various degrees of cognitve content all produce same results: Memories of happy events (Study 1) Facial feedback (Study 2) Pleasant music (Study 3)

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Process Effects, Cont. Tests of Possible Explanations: Arousal constrains processing??? No: Excited happy people do not stereotype more than do calm, happy people (music study)

Reason, Passion, & Social Cognition Week 13, Part 1 Process Effects, Cont. Tests of Possible Explanations: Effort conservation??? Possibly: Accountable subjects less likely to stereotype than non-accountable subjects.