Conway Psychology

Forums

Post Reply
Forum Home > 4th quarter wiki discussions > Topic 1: Emotion

k conway
Site Owner
Posts: 28

Schachter's (p. 501) and Lazarus' (p. 504) theories of emotion would support the idea that we can change some of our emotional reactions by changing our cognitive responses to various situations.  How might you go about changing your thinking so that you can change your emotional reactions? Provide specific examples in your discussion.

March 20, 2011 at 9:16 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Michael Nguyen
Member
Posts: 9

Emotional reactions are usually instantaneous, and happen typically without thought, sometimes causing actions to be done that later harbor regret. Lazaurus' theory on emotion states that every emotion requires thought, whether or not we realized we were thinking about it, for example, seeing a cockroach causes fear, even though we know the cockroach is harmless, the fear happens anyways. An emotion such as fear that is caused by something like that cannot be easily changed by changing the way we think, in my opinion. We are conditioned to fear things such as rats/spiders/bugs. It becomes a habit, that we claim to be a natural reaction. Even if I consciously think that a spider is harmless, I will still scream like a little girl and throw heavy objects at it. However, strong feelings such as anger and depression can be easily changed/repressed, in my opinion, by changing how we think. By thinking logically, and by being aware that interpretations are not always correct, we can keep thoughts that are provoking back, preventing words that might be rashly said, or actions that are hatefully done, from happening. Our interpretation of an event might not be correct, but by not thinking about it, the emotion takes over, from what we think happened. 

March 21, 2011 at 7:21 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Christina Coffee
Member
Posts: 13

Christina Coffee: Per.. 4


Schachter'sand Lazarus' theories of emotion are very similar. Both believe that cognitionis necessary for emotion, and that our interpretations arouse certain emotions.I do believe that a person can change their emotion with their cognitive ability.Interpreting an event in a more positive way will lead to a happier emotionthan say if you were experiencing the event while being in an irritated state.As believed by Lazarus we appraise eventsas harmful or beneficial to our well-being. For instance someone is walkingdown the street and a passing car yells something to them, but they do not hearit clearly. If this person was in an agitated mood they would likely yellsomething nasty back to the car even though the statement made by the car couldhave been something positive. But if the person decided to try to think positivelyabout the jumble of words given to them they can view the shouted statement as maybea compliment that car gave to them. In the first example the person appraised the comment made by the car tobe something rude so their emotion of anger was aroused. In the second examplethe person attempted to think positively about the event so they appraised the incoherent statement as acompliment and displayed an emotion of delight.

 

 


March 21, 2011 at 8:39 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Christina Coffee
Member
Posts: 13

Michael Nguyen at March 21, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Emotional reactions are usually instantaneous, and happen typically without thought, sometimes causing actions to be done that later harbor regret. Lazaurus' theory on emotion states that every emotion requires thought, whether or not we realized we were thinking about it, for example, seeing a cockroach causes fear, even though we know the cockroach is harmless, the fear happens anyways. An emotion such as fear that is caused by something like that cannot be easily changed by changing the way we think, in my opinion. We are conditioned to fear things such as rats/spiders/bugs. It becomes a habit, that we claim to be a natural reaction. Even if I consciously think that a spider is harmless, I will still scream like a little girl and throw heavy objects at it. However, strong feelings such as anger and depression can be easily changed/repressed, in my opinion, by changing how we think. By thinking logically, and by being aware that interpretations are not always correct, we can keep thoughts that are provoking back, preventing words that might be rashly said, or actions that are hatefully done, from happening. Our interpretation of an event might not be correct, but by not thinking about it, the emotion takes over, from what we think happened. 

Christina Coffee: Per.4


 

As you had stated “…strong feelings such as anger and depression can be easilychanged/repressed…” I can totally understand where you are coming from. Schachter's and Lazarus' theoriesagreed that emotions require cognitive abilities and having cognition in suchsituations, I believe, can really change your emotions. Though it is a lot moredifficult to hone in on your emotional awareness in such situations it isdefinably possible. I always have remembered a time when I was young watchingFairly Odd Parents and Timmy wished away his emotions. When in emotionalsituations he didn’t respond with any emotion. So later in that day when mymother and I got into a fight at first I argued with her, but then rememberedhow Timmy reacted to these emotional situations and changed my emotions topretty much “off”.  Believe it or notthat plan worked out pretty well, and proves that with cognition you can changeyour emotions.

 


March 22, 2011 at 8:34 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Michael Nguyen
Member
Posts: 9

Christina Coffee at March 21, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Christina Coffee: Per.. 4


Schachter'sand Lazarus' theories of emotion are very similar. Both believe that cognitionis necessary for emotion, and that our interpretations arouse certain emotions.I do believe that a person can change their emotion with their cognitive ability.Interpreting an event in a more positive way will lead to a happier emotionthan say if you were experiencing the event while being in an irritated state.As believed by Lazarus we appraise eventsas harmful or beneficial to our well-being. For instance someone is walkingdown the street and a passing car yells something to them, but they do not hearit clearly. If this person was in an agitated mood they would likely yellsomething nasty back to the car even though the statement made by the car couldhave been something positive. But if the person decided to try to think positivelyabout the jumble of words given to them they can view the shouted statement as maybea compliment that car gave to them. In the first example the person appraised the comment made by the car tobe something rude so their emotion of anger was aroused. In the second examplethe person attempted to think positively about the event so they appraised the incoherent statement as acompliment and displayed an emotion of delight.

 

 


I completely agree, my answer was basically the same. I just thought of the movie "Rat Race" where the guy yelled to this woman in a motorcycle, "Nice bike", and she totally heard it inappropriately, then proceeded to attack his car with chains. Because of her negative mindset, she had a negative interpretation, and also a negative reaction.

March 23, 2011 at 4:45 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Kaydee Penn
Member
Posts: 5

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times; color: #ff6600}

Kaydee Penn pd4


As explained in Lazarus' theory, emotional responses are effortless and natural.  They come about without us even consciously being aware of it. The emotions explained in Lazarus' theory stem from expectations and how we interpret the situation.  In most cases, a highly emotional person will have the tendency to personalize situations, thinking that what someone does is directed at them.  Lazarus' theory is similar to Schachter's theory in the sense that they both deal with emotion.  He believes that emotions are a result of physical arousal and a cognitive label.  For example,  a woman was in a  car accident because she was in the blind spot of a merging car's view and the car hits her.  She may be physically aroused by a quick heartbeat, leading to a cognitive label of being afraid, resulting in the emotion of fear.  When aroused, people are more prone to act hostile, or angry.  The woman may feel as though the incident was personal, because she is very emotional from being hit.  She can change her thinking to change her emotional reactions by viewing the situation from the other driver's point of view.  The incident was an accident, therefore nobody was deliberately trying to hit her.     

March 26, 2011 at 9:23 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Drew Walker
Member
Posts: 4

P.4

Lazarus' and Schaeter's theories of emotion, which claim that cognitive appraisal precedes emotional reactions, are concepts that can be seen readily throughout daily social situations. Imagine two different scenarios: your best friend in class yells out a popular phrase (perhaps from a recent movie or Jersey-Based Television series) in class, or, inversely, someone you harbor a negative predisposition for yells out the same phrase. As the best friend yells it out, you laugh at the joke. While finding the actual impression of the character to be bad, you think it's endearing, so you laugh, and make a point to laugh hard. On the otherhand, as the other person (whom you dislike) says the joke, the sound of their voice is instantly like nails on a chalk-board. You scoff at the poor impersonation, and you make a point not to laugh. The same joke was said, but because of your preconceived notions of the people telling it, you reacted in different ways. In this way, both theories are exemplified. The element of manipulation of these emotions could be as simple as the act of befriending the person that you dislike, or, at ones inclination, defriending the one you like. Changing one's preconceived notions about people, or, if possible, eliminating them, would manipulate the emotional reactions to the joke in this situation, and can be readily appled to a number of others.

March 26, 2011 at 9:45 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Kaydee Penn
Member
Posts: 5

Michael Nguyen at March 23, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Christina Coffee at March 21, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Christina Coffee: Per.. 4


Schachter'sand Lazarus' theories of emotion are very similar. Both believe that cognitionis necessary for emotion, and that our interpretations arouse certain emotions.I do believe that a person can change their emotion with their cognitive ability.Interpreting an event in a more positive way will lead to a happier emotionthan say if you were experiencing the event while being in an irritated state.As believed by Lazarus we appraise eventsas harmful or beneficial to our well-being. For instance someone is walkingdown the street and a passing car yells something to them, but they do not hearit clearly. If this person was in an agitated mood they would likely yellsomething nasty back to the car even though the statement made by the car couldhave been something positive. But if the person decided to try to think positivelyabout the jumble of words given to them they can view the shouted statement as maybea compliment that car gave to them. In the first example the person appraised the comment made by the car tobe something rude so their emotion of anger was aroused. In the second examplethe person attempted to think positively about the event so they appraised the incoherent statement as acompliment and displayed an emotion of delight.

 

 


I completely agree, my answer was basically the same. I just thought of the movie "Rat Race" where the guy yelled to this woman in a motorcycle, "Nice bike", and she totally heard it inappropriately, then proceeded to attack his car with chains. Because of her negative mindset, she had a negative interpretation, and also a negative reaction.

Kaydee Penn PD 4 @Christina Coffee:

I agree, as well, that a person can change their emotion with cognitive ability.  I once went to make-up a test for a teacher that wanted to spend thirty minutes reviewing what was on the test even though I had felt confident from the beginning to take it.  Through the process I was becoming angry because I felt as though I was wasting time and that the teacher was just getting me back for waiting so long to re take that test by asking me a bunch of questions about the material before handing me the test.   In reality, the teacher was just making sure I thoroughly understood the chapter and by changing my interpretation of the situation, I was thankful that the teacher had taken the time out of his day to make sure I would do well on the test.

March 26, 2011 at 9:55 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Drew Walker
Member
Posts: 4

Michael Nguyen at March 23, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Christina Coffee at March 21, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Christina Coffee: Per.. 4


Schachter'sand Lazarus' theories of emotion are very similar. Both believe that cognitionis necessary for emotion, and that our interpretations arouse certain emotions.I do believe that a person can change their emotion with their cognitive ability.Interpreting an event in a more positive way will lead to a happier emotionthan say if you were experiencing the event while being in an irritated state.As believed by Lazarus we appraise eventsas harmful or beneficial to our well-being. For instance someone is walkingdown the street and a passing car yells something to them, but they do not hearit clearly. If this person was in an agitated mood they would likely yellsomething nasty back to the car even though the statement made by the car couldhave been something positive. But if the person decided to try to think positivelyabout the jumble of words given to them they can view the shouted statement as maybea compliment that car gave to them. In the first example the person appraised the comment made by the car tobe something rude so their emotion of anger was aroused. In the second examplethe person attempted to think positively about the event so they appraised the incoherent statement as acompliment and displayed an emotion of delight.

 

 


I completely agree, my answer was basically the same. I just thought of the movie "Rat Race" where the guy yelled to this woman in a motorcycle, "Nice bike", and she totally heard it inappropriately, then proceeded to attack his car with chains. Because of her negative mindset, she had a negative interpretation, and also a negative reaction.

I love Rat Race. Additionally, the part where the husband of the family crashes Hitler's car into the WWII rally. He rises from the car with lipstick stained on the middle part of his upper lip, looking like Adolph Hitler. A WWII Veteran stands up and immediately pulls a pistol and fires on him, as a hatred and need to kill Hitler was ingrained in him as a soldier, so the reaction to the stimuli, while "cognitively appraising" (from Lazarus' theory, pg 504) the image of Hitler as an enemy and emotionally reacting in anger to attempt to kill him. This appraisal however, probably happened unconsciously due to the almost instinct-like fashion that he drew his gun.

Although nothing tops the "Shoulda bought a squirrel" scene.

March 26, 2011 at 10:37 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Steven Rogers
Member
Posts: 10

Steven Rogers: According to Schachter and Lazarus theories emotions are displayed by how we interpret situations.  For example, people view different circumstances based off their differences in thinking, the same as the way people emotionally react to different situations.  When someone is thinking in a positive manner a they will most likely react to a stimulus with positive emotions, just as someone with negative thoughts would react negatively to a stimulus.  Also emotions are strongly influenced by the mood that you are in, when asked to do a task in a bad mood someone would react more negatively than they would in a better mood where they would probably react more positively.

March 27, 2011 at 11:05 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Steven Rogers
Member
Posts: 10

Drew Walker at March 26, 2011 at 9:45 PM

P.4

Lazarus' and Schaeter's theories of emotion, which claim that cognitive appraisal precedes emotional reactions, are concepts that can be seen readily throughout daily social situations. Imagine two different scenarios: your best friend in class yells out a popular phrase (perhaps from a recent movie or Jersey-Based Television series) in class, or, inversely, someone you harbor a negative predisposition for yells out the same phrase. As the best friend yells it out, you laugh at the joke. While finding the actual impression of the character to be bad, you think it's endearing, so you laugh, and make a point to laugh hard. On the otherhand, as the other person (whom you dislike) says the joke, the sound of their voice is instantly like nails on a chalk-board. You scoff at the poor impersonation, and you make a point not to laugh. The same joke was said, but because of your preconceived notions of the people telling it, you reacted in different ways. In this way, both theories are exemplified. The element of manipulation of these emotions could be as simple as the act of befriending the person that you dislike, or, at ones inclination, defriending the one you like. Changing one's preconceived notions about people, or, if possible, eliminating them, would manipulate the emotional reactions to the joke in this situation, and can be readily appled to a number of others.

I really agree with your idea of the way people react to a car driving past yelling things that are unable to even be heard, and the way they react based on their emotional state.

March 27, 2011 at 11:11 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Lanie Ogram
Member
Posts: 4

Lanie Ogram Period 3

I agree with both Schachter and Lazarus. Schachter says that emotional experience is conscious and Lazarus believes that an emotional experience doesn’t have to have conscious thinking. When someone gets scared they don’t consciously think about what to do, they just jump because that person was unexpected. But when playing manhunt in the woods and just sitting waiting and they hear something, it’s there to think about and know that it is hopefully not something big, but after they hear it more than once their heart starts pounding and they have the tendency get completely freaked out.

March 28, 2011 at 5:38 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Lanie Ogram
Member
Posts: 4

Kaydee Penn at March 26, 2011 at 9:23 PM

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times; color: #ff6600}

Kaydee Penn pd4


As explained in Lazarus' theory, emotional responses are effortless and natural.  They come about without us even consciously being aware of it. The emotions explained in Lazarus' theory stem from expectations and how we interpret the situation.  In most cases, a highly emotional person will have the tendency to personalize situations, thinking that what someone does is directed at them.  Lazarus' theory is similar to Schachter's theory in the sense that they both deal with emotion.  He believes that emotions are a result of physical arousal and a cognitive label.  For example,  a woman was in a  car accident because she was in the blind spot of a merging car's view and the car hits her.  She may be physically aroused by a quick heartbeat, leading to a cognitive label of being afraid, resulting in the emotion of fear.  When aroused, people are more prone to act hostile, or angry.  The woman may feel as though the incident was personal, because she is very emotional from being hit.  She can change her thinking to change her emotional reactions by viewing the situation from the other driver's point of view.  The incident was an accident, therefore nobody was deliberately trying to hit her.     

Lanie Ogram Period 3 @ Kaydee Penn

I agree with you that if she changes her thinking about the accident and realizes that it wasn't personal and she would be less angry about it and sense she is calmed down a little after the accident it might also help her be less aggitated at the person who hit her.

March 28, 2011 at 5:54 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Shelby Yant
Member
Posts: 14

Both Schachter and Lazarus' theories are very similar. Both theories involve emotion, along with cognitive appraisal towards said emotion. However, Lazarus' theory states that although all emotions require a cognitive process to accompany it, not all are consciously realized. Schachter's theory, on the other hand, states that both physical effects and cognitive labels result in an emotion. I feel that both of these theories are relevant to different situations. In regards to Schachter's Two-Factor Theory, I personally feel that it would be more applicable to extreme situations, as opposed to normal, everyday routines. Along with this, the mood of the person plays a large role in the emotion that would result from the situation. For example, if a fight broke out at school one day between two people, and a bystander, whom was in a very irritable mood, accidentally got hit, they would be more likely to take it personally than another bystander that was in a happier mood, who inversely, would realize that it was an accident. I feel that people could control their emotions better if they put more effort into being optimistic, that way, if a negative event occurred, they would be more likely to think rationally and logically.

March 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Shelby Yant
Member
Posts: 14

Michael Nguyen at March 21, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Emotional reactions are usually instantaneous, and happen typically without thought, sometimes causing actions to be done that later harbor regret. Lazaurus' theory on emotion states that every emotion requires thought, whether or not we realized we were thinking about it, for example, seeing a cockroach causes fear, even though we know the cockroach is harmless, the fear happens anyways. An emotion such as fear that is caused by something like that cannot be easily changed by changing the way we think, in my opinion. We are conditioned to fear things such as rats/spiders/bugs. It becomes a habit, that we claim to be a natural reaction. Even if I consciously think that a spider is harmless, I will still scream like a little girl and throw heavy objects at it. However, strong feelings such as anger and depression can be easily changed/repressed, in my opinion, by changing how we think. By thinking logically, and by being aware that interpretations are not always correct, we can keep thoughts that are provoking back, preventing words that might be rashly said, or actions that are hatefully done, from happening. Our interpretation of an event might not be correct, but by not thinking about it, the emotion takes over, from what we think happened. 

I really like your posts, Michael. They're always so unique :D Throwing some classical conditioning in there doesn't hurt, props to you!

March 28, 2011 at 8:09 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Ewic Snowden
Member
Posts: 8

Both Schachter and Lazaurus have similar theories about how certain actions trigger a specific response. According to Lazaurus our emotional reaction happens instantly after an experience without any conscious thought as to how or why we feel a certain way, other than using cognition to percieve what is happening to trigger the emotional response. Schachter believes that one emotional response can influence another emotional experience, dirrectly after the initial emotion, in a similar way. For instance, if you had just won the lottery you would be feeling ecstatic! So the next time you experience some type of emotion you would feel a higher arousal regardless of how important the second event was.

March 30, 2011 at 9:25 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Ewic Snowden
Member
Posts: 8

Steven Rogers at March 27, 2011 at 11:05 PM

Steven Rogers: According to Schachter and Lazarus theories emotions are displayed by how we interpret situations.  For example, people view different circumstances based off their differences in thinking, the same as the way people emotionally react to different situations.  When someone is thinking in a positive manner a they will most likely react to a stimulus with positive emotions, just as someone with negative thoughts would react negatively to a stimulus.  Also emotions are strongly influenced by the mood that you are in, when asked to do a task in a bad mood someone would react more negatively than they would in a better mood where they would probably react more positively.

i agree with steven that the mood your in drastically effects the task you have at hand and how efficient you end up doing the job.

March 30, 2011 at 9:28 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Sammmyyyyyyyyy
Member
Posts: 4

Samantha McCollum- Schacter's theory is a two-factor theory, in which emotions have two ingredients: physical arousal and a cognitive label. He says that our experience of emotion grows from our awareness of our body's arousal.  Lazarus disagrees theorizing that our brains process and react to vast amounts of information without our conscious awareness, and he willingly grants that some emotional responses do not require conscious thinking. I don't really know who I believe but if I were supporting Lazarus there would be nothing I could do to change my emotional reactions based on the information above.  If I were supporting Schacter's theory I would arouse my body when I was performing a correct emotional reaction, this changing my thinking and actions when I emotionally react to things.

--

Sammy <3

March 31, 2011 at 5:14 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Sammmyyyyyyyyy
Member
Posts: 4

Ewic Snowden at March 30, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Both Schachter and Lazaurus have similar theories about how certain actions trigger a specific response. According to Lazaurus our emotional reaction happens instantly after an experience without any conscious thought as to how or why we feel a certain way, other than using cognition to percieve what is happening to trigger the emotional response. Schachter believes that one emotional response can influence another emotional experience, dirrectly after the initial emotion, in a similar way. For instance, if you had just won the lottery you would be feeling ecstatic! So the next time you experience some type of emotion you would feel a higher arousal regardless of how important the second event was.

Sammy McCollum- I disagree completely, in our book, word for word it says, "Emotion researcher Richard Lazarus disagrees."

There fore their theories sort of contradict themselves in the way that Lazarus thinks some emotional responses do not require conscious thinking and Schacter thinks we our emotional responses grow from our awarenesses of our body's arousal.

--

Sammy <3

March 31, 2011 at 5:22 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Tatiana Mantuano
Member
Posts: 8

Tatiana Mantuano:Schacter theory is that he believes that the event happens then you get an arousal which gives you the reasoning to have that ceratin emotion. For example you are walking by yourself at night and suddenly you think you hear noises and your heart degins to races causing you to believe that there is someone or something thats going to hurt you. all of these factors give youi the feeling of being scared or the emotion of fear. On the other hand Lazarus believes that when the event happens you have a thought and then the arousal and emotion happen at the same time. for example when you are walking by yourself at night and you hear noises you automatically think that it could be murder,rapist,mugger, etc. which causes you to to be scared and your heart to being beating rapidly. in the case of changing your thinking that couses you to change you emotion you will experience. for example if you are waling at night all by yourself and hear a noise and think that its just the wind or a animal of some sort you wont be as firghtened as if you were to think it was something worse.

April 2, 2011 at 3:48 PM Flag Quote & Reply

You must login to post.