Lazarus' Cognitive Appraisal Theory

[Yap]

I've been lurking up my old material from Psychology and I can't get a clear grip of how the Cognitive Appraisal Theory Works... Is there anyone with a kind soul who can explain this theory to me?

[Hens48]

I can have a go:

Basically Lazarus said there are two main types of 'appraisal' (so when a situation happens, how we label (appraise) that situation emotionally, so do we feel sad, angry, happy etc).

The two types of appraisal are: Primary and secondary appraisals.

In primary appraisal there are 3 'variables':

Motivational relevance: Is the situation relevant to my goals? An emotion will only really be developed if the answer is yes.

Motivational congruence: Is the situation favorable to my goals? If the answer is yes, the emotion will be positive, if it is not then the emotion will be negative

Accountability: Who is responsible?

Once this is all worked out you have the foundations for an emotion, but the specific emotion is not yet fully worked out.

The next type of appraisal is secondary appraisal, this is more to do with how you are going to cope with the situation. Again, there are 3 components:

Problem based coping: Can I cope with this situation by adapting it in order to make it more favorable to my own goals?

Emotion based coping: Can I cope by changing how I feel about it? (This doesn't make too much sense to me, but go with it)

Future expectancy: How likely and to what extent is this situation going to change in the future?

And then, at last, an emotion is developed. Each emotion has what Lazarus called the 'core relational theme' and this is a summary of all the components of emotion.

So for some examples: We feel happy when the situation is relevant to our goals and we are responsible... so perhaps when you work really hard in a subject that it is important and get a good grade. We feel angry when the situation is not favorable to our goals and another person is accountable.

I hope this helps and feel free to PM me.

Edited May 4, 2013 by Hens48

[Yap]

Wow, thanks O.o

But your version is... far more detailed than mine.... O.o

My version simply states that... uh, something with (We observe our environment, and acts out of that)

Basically, the Cognitive Labelling Theory reversed (if you have been taught it in the same way as me)

Labelling Theory says (Summarised): You have an arousal (Say High Heart Rate) and you see a nice looking girl/guy and then you label your high heart rate to this girl/guy as the reason...

And the Appraisal Theoryy simply states the same reversed? Sort of? But I can't find any good words to describe this

Edited May 4, 2013 by Yap

[Hens48]

Ok, your 'labeling theory' sounds a lot like Schachter and Singer's 'two factor theory of emotion'. This refers to the idea, like you said, that we experience a physiological arousal which we then appraise based on the context.

I guess to an extent Lazarus' theory is the two factor theory reversed... we appraise first and then experience the emotion. However, it depends on how you define arousal as either an emotion or a physiological change. Probably best not to think of it like that!

I will suggest you have a look at 'Schachter and Singer's' experiment with adrenaline injections.... im sure there are some good explanations on the interweb, it's far too long for me to type here!

[Yap]

Yeah, as you said it can also be called Two-Factor Theory of Love. (Perhaps easier to understand if you use psychological research such as (Dutton & Aron) and other type of attractive-arousal studies.)

Schachter and Singer's I've been studying They inject adrenaline (some Decieved it was a Vitamine) and then joins a room with a stooge of euphoric/angry behaviour.

Participants observed the extent they joined in with the behaviour (+ handed in questionnaires)?

But aren't these for the Labelling Theory? I have put the Schacter & Singer and Dutton & Aron under the use of the Labelling theory and the studies supporting the Appraisal Theory being Coan (2006) and Speisman (1964), if you know any of them.

I guess

in Speisman, the Appraisal is manipulated by the different sound tracks

in Coan, the Appraisal is manipulated by them being informed about the 20% risk of recieving an electric shock.

But I still fail to make a clear description of the theory, buhuu ...

If you have any good idea of how to alter Schacter & Singer or Dutton & Aron to the Appraisal theory (I.e. not Labelling) that'd be great!

Edited May 4, 2013 by Yap

[Hens48]

Yeah you're right. Labeling theory is the two factor theory (TFT), because you are 'labeling' the physiological arousal, whichever name suits you best I suppose, TFT sounds a little more 'scientific' in my opinion....

I'm not sure what you mean by altering S&S's study to the Appraisal theory, after all they are different theories! You can at least talk about how both revolve around some kind of cognitive process (it's in the CLOA so it's really important to relate it to that!).

Don't know the Dutton & Aron i'm afraid, and it's too close to start learning new studies

[Yap]

Haha, yeah you are right about that.

I was just wondering why you suggested me to look up S&S, that's why I asked you if you uses S&S for a support of the Labelling Theory.

The Appraisal Theory still isn't too clear for me, but I guess I will do fine if I just think about the studies and manipulate the research. I believe my teacher has made us use the theories not as a piece of research but just as a piece of material for introduction for further analysis of studies in the text, hence the poor amount of information.

Edited May 4, 2013 by Yap

[Hens48]

The S&S study is an excellent example of the TFT (or labeling theory), mostly because S&S developed both the theory, and the study... thus there is a great link to be made.

If you are still struggling trawl through as many sources as you can for info, one is bound to make sense to you, failing that you will probably know more than you think just by having looked at it and thought about it so much!