2. Schachter and Singer (1962) Theory:We need two factors to feel emotional. One is arousal, the other is attribution (the label) Cognitive labelling theory

3. Hypothesis The labelling of arousal will depend on the situation if there is no other explanation If an reason for arousal is known the participant will not look for another reason No arousal will result in no emotion, they will be objective

4. Method Controlled experiment Design – 4 independent groups “Effect of vitamin on vision” Epinephrine injected by doctor Data collected by observation and self report measures

5. Conditions EPI informed, shaky hands, pounding heart, increased breathing. Fight/flight EPI misinformed, itching, numb feet, headaches EPI ignorant, no side effects Control group, saline solution, no side effects

6. Sample 184 male college psychology students Received credits towards finals Health records checked

7. Procedure - Euphoric One at a time Injected (EPI effects last 15-20 minutes) Put in room with stooge – 20 mins (“let injection take effect”) Stooge friendly, played with paper (basketball, aeroplanes), Behaviour standardised but adjusted

8. Procedure - Angry Same but had to complete questionnaire during 20 mins Stooge moaned about injections Personal; questions, e.g. “Do you bathe and wash regularly?” Stooge angry, ripped up questionnaire, left

9. Controls Double blind – stooge did not know what condition the participant was in Data questionnaire included irrelevant questions, e.g. current mental health. Some questions open-ended 11 participants expressed suspicion – data taken out

10. Procedure for both Experimenter returns, takes pulse “Side effects of “Suproxin” (pretend vitamin) needs assessing “Please complete questionnaire” Crucial question on emotion on 5 point scale – 0=“ I don’t feel at all irritated or angry ” – 4=“ I feel extremely irritated and angry ” Debriefed

11. Results table- Euphoric ConditionNumber of P’sSelf report Happiness - anger Informed25.98 Misinformed251.9 Ignorant251.78 Control251.61

12. Results table – Anger ConditionNumber of P’sSelf-report (happiness – anger) Informed221.91 Misinformed0 Ignorant231.39 Control231.63

13. Results – euphoric Scores for anger were subtracted from scores of happiness Misinformed group in euphoric condition were more happy than all others P’s more susceptible to mood of stooge when they had no explanation for arousal

14. Results - angry Ignorant group least happy Then placebo group Then informed

15. Behaviour Behaviour matched self-reports P’s appeared angry or euphoric depending on condition

16. Conclusions Arousal labelled according to situational cues Arousal explained by injection Arousal labelled in control group! Strange situation?

17. Evaluation EPI effects people differently – arousal levels differ Some “ignorant” and “misinformed” blamed injection No-one angry (compliance?) Not assessed before