Fiori Marina, Shuman Vera
Department of Organizational Behavior, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of LausanneLausanne, Switzerland.
Department of Economics, University of LausanneLausanne, Switzerland.
Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 25;8:1435. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01435. eCollection 2017.
Carryover effects of emotions that lead to biases in social judgments are commonly observed. We suggest that such effects may be influenced by the ability to engage or disengage attention from emotional stimuli. We assessed the ability to activate and inhibit attention to anger stimuli, experimentally induced anger in a demanding task, and measured social judgment toward an ambiguous target. Results show that higher activation and higher inhibition of anger-related information predicted more biased evaluations of the ambiguous target when individuals were experiencing anger, but not in an emotionally neutral condition. Interestingly, the effect of activation and inhibition in the anger condition emerged only when such variables were entered simultaneously in the regression model, indicating that they had an in predicting carryover effects of anger on social judgement. Results are consistent with a cooperative suppression effect (Conger, 1974) of activation and inhibition and may be explained by either an increased accessibility of anger-related cues leading to more biased social judgments, or by an instance in which being good at engaging in and disengaging attention from emotional cues might have depleted participants' resources making carryover effects of anger more likely to occur. Ultimately, the finding highlight that individual differences in attentional processes are important moderators for carryover effects of emotions.
情绪的遗留效应会导致社会判断产生偏差,这是普遍存在的现象。我们认为,这种效应可能会受到个体对情绪刺激集中或分散注意力能力的影响。我们评估了个体激活和抑制对愤怒刺激注意力的能力,在一项具有挑战性的任务中通过实验诱发愤怒情绪,并测量了对一个模糊目标的社会判断。结果显示,当个体处于愤怒情绪中时,对愤怒相关信息更高程度的激活和抑制预示着对模糊目标的评价会出现更多偏差,但在情绪中性的条件下则不然。有趣的是,只有当这些变量同时纳入回归模型时,愤怒条件下激活和抑制的效应才会显现,这表明它们在预测愤怒对社会判断的遗留效应方面具有协同作用。研究结果与激活和抑制的协同抑制效应(Conger,1974)一致,可能的解释是,愤怒相关线索的可及性增加导致了更有偏差的社会判断,或者是擅长对情绪线索集中和分散注意力的个体可能耗尽了自身资源,使得愤怒的遗留效应更易发生。最终,研究结果凸显出注意力过程中的个体差异是情绪遗留效应的重要调节因素。