Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Helpful Contextual Information Before or After Negative Events: Effects on Appraisal and Emotional Reaction

  • Published:
Cognitive Computation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of helpful contextual information, presented before and after a negative event, on modifying appraisal and emotional reaction. Through the scenario technique, a basic situation of negative outcome (in health or hobby domain) entailing appraisal of high responsibility and low remediability (control condition) was manipulated by adding—separately or together—two types of contextual information able to modify the two appraisal dimensions: knowing that other people shared the same outcome (sharing) and knowing that it was possible to remediate the negative outcome (remedy possibility). In half scenarios, the information was presented before the event, and in the other half after the event. We expected that sharing and remedy possibility would selectively affect the two appraisal dimensions which in turn would selectively affect the emotions chosen to assess emotional reaction. We also expected that the event-preceding information would be more effective than the event-following information. On the whole, the results corroborated our predictions but also revealed unexpected effects that have been discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. For the risky excursion scenario, mean of responsibility (on a 7-point scale where 1 = not at all, and 7 = extremely) was 5.34 (s.d. = 1.03), and mean of remediability (on the same scale) was 3.21 (s.d. = 0.87); for the gardening competition scenario, mean of responsibility was 5.12 (s.d. = 0.93), and mean of remediability was 3.42 (s.d. = 0.84); across both scenarios, the intensity of negative emotions (assessed on the same scale) ranged from 4.01 (shame) to 5.40 (anger toward circumstances); the intensity of positive emotions ranged from 1,83 (relief) to 3,52 (hope).

  2. Following the suggestion of an anonymous referee, we accounted for the rationale underlying the creation of four levels of the variable “contextual information.” The first level (i.e., the absence of any further information about the event) represented the control condition against which to evaluate the effectiveness of experimental manipulation; the second and third levels were built in order to evaluate the effects of each type of information presented in the experiment; the fourth level (i.e., the presence of both types of information) was built in order to investigate whether the supposed effects of each information added up or whether one of the two types of information was perceived as more relevant than the other: In this case, only the effects of the more relevant information should occur.

  3. Although the main position in the regret literature [e.g., 47, 48] claims that this emotion is elicited by a negative outcome following a bad choice, i.e., that responsibility is a necessary condition for its genesis, other findings from Italian samples [49] did not support this position. They showed that regret is independent from responsibility.

  4. Risky excursion and male were coded as 1; garden competition and female were coded as 0.

  5. This term is used for brevity to indicate the subjective perception of remediability.

  6. The macro is available on http://www.afhayes.com/public/mediate.sps.

  7. The effect of the independent variable on mediators calculated by the macro is not reported here since it was already assessed trough ANCOVAs. It is noteworthy to specify that all tests of homogeneity of regression showed the absence of interaction between the independent variable and the mediators.

  8. This finding, as well as that regarding the inconsistent mediation relative to positive emotions, supports the position of the authors [50, 53, 54] that posit that mediation effects can be met even in the absence of a significant total effect of X on Y.

  9. The only direct effect exerted by the remedy possibility was on positive emotions, whose intensity increased independently from the mediation of remediability.

References

  1. Gross JJ. The emerging field of emotion regulation: an integrative review. Rev Gen Psychol. 1998;2:271–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ochsner KN, Ray RR, Cooper JC, Robertson ER, Chopra S, Gabrieli JDE, Gross JJ. For better or for worse: neural systems supporting the cognitive down-and up-regulation of negative emotion. Neuroimage. 2004;23:483–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ochsner KN, Gross JJ. Cognitive emotion regulation: insights from social cognitive and affective neuroscience. Curr Directions Psychol Sci. 2008;17:153–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Koole SL. The psychology of emotion regulation: an integrative review. Cogn Emot. 2009;23:4–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arnold MB. Emotion and personality. New York: Columbia University Press; 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lazarus RS. Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw Hill; 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Frijda NH. The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lazarus RS. Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. Am Psychol. 1982;37:1019–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Speisman JC, Lazarus RS, Mordkoff AM, Davison LA. Experimental reduction of stress based on ego-defense theory. J Abnorm Psychol. 1964;68:367–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lazarus RS, Alfert E. Short-circuiting of threat by experimentally altering cognitive appraisal. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1964;69:195–205.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Campos JJ, Frankel CB, Camras L. On the nature of emotion regulation. Child Dev. 2004;75:377–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gross JJ. Antecedent and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:224–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McRae K, Ciesielski B, Gross JJ. Unpacking cognitive reappraisal: goals, tactics, and outcomes. Emotion. 2012;12:250–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sheppes G, Scheibe S, Suri G, Radu P, Blechert, J, Gross JJ. Emotion regulation choice: a conceptual framework and supporting evidence. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012; 1–19. doi:10.1037/a0030831.

  16. John OP, Gross JJ. Individual differences in emotion regulation strategies. In: Gross JJ, editor. Handbook of emotion regulation. New York: Guilford; 2007. p. 351–72.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Folkman S, Lazarus RS. Manual for the ways of coping questionnaire. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56:267–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Garnefski N, Kraaij V. The cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire: psychometric features and prospective relationships with depression and anxiety in adults. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2007;23:141–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gross JJ, John OP. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;85:348–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shiota MN, Levenson RW. Turn down the volume or change the channel? Emotional effects of detached versus positive reappraisal. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012;103:416–29.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Matsumoto D, Yoo SH, Nakagawa S, et al. Culture, emotion regulation, and adjustment. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008;94:925–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Brans K, Koval P, Verduyn P, Leuven KU, Lim YL. The regulation of negative and positive affect in daily life. Emotion. 2013;13:926–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Richards JM, Gross JJ. Emotion regulation and memory: the cognitive costs of keeping one’s cool. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;79:410–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sheppes G, Meiran N. Divergent cognitive costs for online forms of reappraisal and distraction. Emotion. 2008;8:870–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gross JJ, Sheppes G, Urry HL. Emotion generation and emotion regulation: a distinction we should make (carefully). Cogn Emot. 2011;25:765–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gyurak A, Gross JJ, Etkin A. Explicit and implicit emotion regulation: a dual process framework. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:400–12.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lazarus RS. Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Frijda N. The place of appraisal in emotion. Cogn Emot. 1993;7:357–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Siemer M, Mauss I, Gross JJ. Same situation—different emotions: how appraisals shape our emotions. Emotion. 2007;7:592–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tamir M. What do people want to feel and why? Pleasure and utility in emotion regulation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2009;18:101–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tamir M. The maturing field of emotion regulation. Emot Rev. 2011;3:3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Koole SL, Rothermund K. “I feel better but I don’t know why”: the psychology of implicit emotion regulation. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:389–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Williams LE, Bargh JA, Nocera CC, Gray JR. The unconscious regulation of emotion: nonconscious reappraisal goals modulate emotional reactivity. Emotion. 2009;9:847–54.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Koole SL, Fockenberg DA. Implicit emotion regulation under demanding conditions: the moderating role of action versus state orientation. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:440–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Quirin M, Bode RC, Kuhl J. Recovering from negative events by boosting implicit positive affect. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:559–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Moore S, Ferguson MJ, Chartrand TL. Affect in the aftermath: how goal pursuit influences implicit evaluations. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:453–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Tran TB, Siemer M, Joormann J. Implicit interpretation biases affect emotional vulnerability: a training study. Cogn Emot. 2011;25:546–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Wentura D, Greve W. Assessing the structure of self-concept: evidence for self-defensive processes by using a sentence priming task. Self Identity. 2005;4:193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rothermund K, Gast A, Wentura D. Incongruency effects in affective processing: automatic motivational counter-regulation or mismatch induced salience? Cogn Emot. 2011;25:413–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Smith CA, Lazarus RS. Appraisal components, correlational themes, and the emotions. Cogn Emot. 1993;7:233–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lewis M. The development of intentionality and the role of consciousness. Psychol Inq. 1990;3:231–47.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Tangney JP, Tracy JL. Self-conscious emotions. In: Leary M, Tangney JP, editors. Handbook of self and identity. New York: Guilford Press; 2012. p. 446–78.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Siemer M, Reisenzein R. The process of emotion inference. Emotion. 2007;7:1–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Goldman A. The psychology of folk psychology. Behav Brain Sci. 1993;16:15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Gallese V, Keysers C, Rizzolatti G. A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends Cogn Sci. 2004;9:396–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zeelenberg M, van Dijk WW, Manstead ASR, van der Pligt J. The psychology of regret and disappointment. Cogn Emot. 1998;12:221–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Roese NJ, Summerville A. What we regret most… and why. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2005;31:1273–85.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Matarazzo O, Abbamonte L. Regret, choice, and outcome. Int J Hum Soc Sci. 2008;3:464–72.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Hayes AF, Preacher KJ. Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Br J Math Psychol. 2013;. doi:10.1111/bmsp.12028.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kenny DA. Mediation. 2013. http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm. Accessed November 21.

  52. MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS. Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:593–614.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Rucker DD, Preacher KJ, Tormala ZL, Petty RE. Mediation analysis in social psychology: current practices and new recommendations. Soc Pers Psychol Comp. 2011;6:359–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Preacher KJ, Kelley K. Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychol Methods. 2013;16:93–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Parkinson B. Getting from situations to emotions: appraisal and alternative routes. Emotion. 2007;7:21–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Weiner B. An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychol Rev. 1985;92:548–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Zammuner VL. Men’s and women’s lay theories of emotion. In: Fischer A, editor. Gender and emotion: social psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 48–70.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  58. Thomsen DK, Mehlsen MY, Viidik A, Sommerlund B, Zachariae R. Age and gender differences in negative affect—is there a role for emotion regulation? Pers Indiv Differ. 2005;38:1935–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. McRae K, Ochsner KN, Mauss IB, Gabrieli JDE, Gross JJ. Gender differences in emotion regulation: an fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal. Group Process Interg. 2008;11:143–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Manstead ASR, Fischer AH. Social appraisal: the social world as object of and influence on appraisal processes. In: Scherer KR, Schorr A, Johnstone T, editors. Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, method, research. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001. p. 221–32.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Fischer AH, Rotteveel M, Evers C, Manstead ASR. Emotional assimilation: how we are influenced by others’ emotions. Curr Psychol Cogn. 2004;22:223–45.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Dr. Stefania La Gamma for contributing to collect the data for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy

    Olimpia Matarazzo, Ivana Baldassarre, Giovanna Nigro, Marina Cosenza & Lucia Abbamonte

Authors
  1. Olimpia Matarazzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivana Baldassarre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giovanna Nigro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marina Cosenza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lucia Abbamonte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olimpia Matarazzo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matarazzo, O., Baldassarre, I., Nigro, G. et al. Helpful Contextual Information Before or After Negative Events: Effects on Appraisal and Emotional Reaction. Cogn Comput 6, 640–651 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-014-9275-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-014-9275-y

Keywords