This item is under embargo and not available online per the author's request. For access information, please visit http://libanswers.wustl.edu/faq/5640.

ORCID

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8325-437X

Date of Award

Spring 5-15-2017

Author's School

Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

Author's Department

Psychology

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Degree Type

Dissertation

Abstract

There is a tradition of research in affective science suggesting different affective states (e.g., anger vs. anxiety) are associated with relatively unique goals and motives (Frijda, 1986; 1988; Schwarz & Clore, 2007, Lerner & Keltner, 2000; 2001). Although this approach has received considerable empirical support, this work has yet to fully resolve an important issue. For any given type of emotion (say, anger), such feelings can be activated in a variety of different "triggering" contexts. If so, to what extent does the triggering context matter when examining the consequences of that emotion for attitudes? Some findings suggest that context does not matter (Johnson & Tversky, 1983), whereas others imply that context should matter (Frijda, 1988; Smith & Ellsworth, 1985). In my dissertation, I examine the role of context as it bears on the relationship between affect and judgment, across different threatening contexts (terrorism, healthcare). Across 3 Experiments, I find the role of affect, and its effects on attitudes, are contingent on the context in which the affect is activated. These findings demonstrate that the role of context plays an important role in understanding when, if, and in which direction, affect plays a role in shaping attitudes and behavior.

Language

English (en)

Chair and Committee

Alan J. Lambert

Committee Members

Hillary A. Elfenbein, Joshua J. Jackson, Michael J. Strube, Heike Winterheld,

Comments

Permanent URL: https://doi.org/10.7936/K7K64GHM

Available for download on Wednesday, April 24, 2019

Share

COinS