Appraisal: What is the dependent?

By Nico Frijda, M. Zeelenberg. 2001

137 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f3051b41ab8fe6f94708bf7cbad44e8de90775a2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modeling (2005, background): “Appraisal theorists have become increasingly concerned with the relations between parts and wholes and have begun to develop process models capable of connecting them realistically (Frijda & Zeelenberg 2001; Reisenzein 2001; Roseman & Smith 2001; van Reekum & Scherer 1997).”
Understanding the power of the picture: the effect of image content on emotional and political responses to terrorism (2014, background): “Although our hypothesized model is consistent with previous work showing appraisals to predict emotions (e.g., Gordijn et al., 2006; Iyer et al., 2007), an alternative perspective indicates that emotions can also shape appraisals (e.g., Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”
Discrete Negative Emotions and Customer Dissatisfaction Responses in a Casual Restaurant Setting (2008, result): “…consistent with research in psychology showing that specific emotions can have a differential impact on people’s evaluations (DeSteno, Petty, Rucker, Wegener, & Braverman, 2004) and behavioral consequences (Frijda et al., 1989; Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001; Shaver, Schwartz, Donald, & O’Connor, 1987).”
What determines a feeling's position in affective space? A case for appraisal (2006, background): “We agree with Lewis (1996, 2005) and Frijda and Zeelenberg (2001) that there are recursive effects (i.”
Putting appraisal in context: Toward a relational model of appraisal and emotion (2009, background): “…and empirical effort have been directed at examining the degree to which appraisals are actually causal antecedents of emotion as hypothesised (Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001; Parkinson, 1997; Roseman & Evdokas, 2004; Smith & Kirby, 2009); as well as the degree to which specific patterns of…”
A systems approach to appraisal mechanisms in emotion (2005, unknown): “The assumption is that the proﬁle of integrated information in the four major classes will activate potential response mechanisms (e.g. in the form of action tendencies; see Frijda & Zelenberg, 2001).”
Anger and Prosocial Behavior (2014, background): “Thus, even though the anger experience may be the same in dyadic and triadic situations, the different affordances in these situations allow for different behavioral consequences (Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”
What do we talk about when we talk about disappointment? Distinguishing outcome-related disappointment from person-related disappointment (2002, background): “Others, however, state that although appraisals may characterise emotions, they do not always cause emotions or determine which specific emotion is experienced (e.g., Parkinson, 1997; Frijda, 1993; Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”
A domain-independent framework for modeling emotion (2004, methodology): “We adopt an attentional model motivated by several psychological theories (Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001; Smith & Kirby, 2001) to compute a moment-to-moment subset of appraisals to bring into focus.”
Different emotional lives (2002, background): “Another important reason is that situations that touch mostly on independent or mostly on interdependent concerns give rise to very different coping possibilities (cf. Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”
Appraisal Theory: Old and New Questions (2013, background): “But, as Frijda points out, an ingredient, no matter how essential to the emotional experience, is not the same thing as a cause (Frijda, 1993; Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”
On emotion specificity in decision making: Why feeling is for doing (2008, background): “Research on appraisal processes, however, remains relatively mute when it comes to predicting behavior (Frijda & Zeelenberg, 2001).”