Classifying Emotions and Their Effects

Reference Notes
The following is an analysis of:
Oatley, K., and E. Duncan. 1994. The experience of emotions in everyday life. Cognitive and Emotion 8, 369-381.

Reference from the course reading:
Thagard, P. 1998. Mind: Introduction to Cognitive Science. MIT Press, Mass., p 141.

Background of Study

What causes emotions? And how frequently do they occur? These are the questions that are needed in order to completely understand the role emotions play in psychology and on a larger scale, cognitive science. However, little evidence has been purposely gathered and used to uphold theories about emotions. Thus it is the objective of this study to provide such data and evidence to support Oatley and Johnson-Laird’s theory of goal relevance. The experiment will provide results to three hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that basic emotions appear whenever a goal relevant event occurs. Secondly, Oatley and Johnson-Laird predict that emotions occur one at a time and mixed emotions are rare, if any. The last hypothesis theorizes that positive emotions help the current goal and negative emotions impeded the goal.

Method of Investigation

There are forty-seven subjects for this experiment. Twenty-four of them are male and twenty-three are female. The scope of availability limits each of these forty-seven to be either librarians or laboratory technicians with ages ranging from eighteen to fifty-six. They were each provided with a diary of which they are to identify the cause and effect of the emotions they have experienced. There are five specific emotions to watch out for and they are: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, and disgust. These in turn are assigned in order to five generic elicitors: achievement, loss, frustration, threat, and repellent. Other emotions were assigned to the unclassified category. Once the subjects have completed their diaries, any mentions of emotions are deleted, leaving only the events to be classified as achievement, loss, etc. Then the classifications are matched to the deleted emotions. This resulting data and further calculations of preliminary data are then used to prove or disprove the hypotheses.

Discussion

In the realm of this experiment, several conclusions can be made. Hypothesis number one was supported by the data. The deliberate separation of events and emotions clarifies the connection between goal relevant events and emotions. In fact, 69% of this categorization of elicitors matched with the corresponding emotions. Considering that emotions are at times difficult to categorize and identify, the majority percentages presents a rather a strong case for the theory that emotions are elicited by goal relevant events. The second hypothesis, however, was disproved. 31% of the emotional episodes recorded mixed emotions. Only 51% were purely stated as a specific emotion. Thus nearly half of the episodes studied had the potential of having mixed emotions. And overall, the data of the study supported the third hypothesis, proving that positive and negative emotions have their respective effect on goals. Nevertheless, the unbound variable of mixed emotions makes this proof susceptible to refutation.

Although using a diary to extract emotion data seems to be work in this case, there were other problems for the study. There was practically no random assignment. Only two occupational groups were used in this experiment. More different groups should have been used to diversify the subjects. In addition, the confounds such as mixed emotions took a significant percentage of the emotional episodes. This can disrupt the validity of this experiment. In hypothesis three, both the mixed emotions and various other unknown variables, such as changing emotions and long-lasting emotions, can complicate the result of the study.

Looking back at the diary method, it seems to be the best method at the moment. Emotion itself is an illusive subject because different people feel them differently. If the study is not personalized and internally observed, as done with the diary, there would be a need for a standard. However, when it comes to setting standards with something as volatile as emotions, the task is perhaps too difficult to pursue at the present. Thus result of this method is not without its merit, as can be seen with hypothesis one.

Future Directions

At the very most, the experiment favors certain hypothesis, thus the study should not end here. I believe that there needs to be more subjects from diversified backgrounds and interests in order to get more accurate data. There should also be further investigation into the representation of mixed emotion in the process of achieving the goal. Do they impede or accelerate goals? Perhaps a similar diary method can be used to categorize how mixed feelings affect the goals.