Appraisal Theory
Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R., & Frijda, N. H. (2013). Appraisal Theories of Emotion: State of the Art and Future Development. Emotion Review, 5(2), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912468165
Contemporary appraisal theories define emotions as processes, rather than states. This is reflected in the fact that the term emotion is often used as shorthand for an emotional episode. Appraisal theories are componential theories in that they view an emotional episode as involving changes in a number of organismic subsystems or components. Components include an appraisal component with evaluations of the environment and the person–environment interaction; a motivational component with action tendencies or other forms of action readiness; a somatic component with peripheral physiological responses; a motor component with expressive and instrumental behavior and a feeling component with subjective experience or feelings. The emotion process is continuous and recursive. Changes in one component feed back to other components. For example, changes in appraisal may lead to changes in physiological and behavioral responses. These may, in turn, lead to changes in appraisal, either directly or indirectly (via a change in the stimulus situation). As a consequence, several emotional episodes may run in parallel. Some appraisal theories build on the notion of immediate efference (e.g., Ellsworth, 1991; Scherer, 2009): The processes in each of the components do not need to be completed before they can produce changes in later components. Appraisal theories are not the only theories that treat the emotional episode as a process of changes in components. Many emotion theorists casually mention the term appraisal and some even describe it as a component (e.g., Ekman, 1994; Matsumoto & Ekman, 2009; Russell, 2003). The mere mention of appraisal, or even the inclusion of an appraisal component, is not sufficient for calling a theory an appraisal theory. In the remainder of this Introduction, we point to important differences between appraisal theories and other theories. Major differences include (a) the definition of appraisal, in terms of both content and type of process, (b) the role of appraisal in emotion and predictions about the relation between changes in appraisal and changes in other components, and (c) predictions about individual, cultural, and developmental differences.
Appraisal Variables
In some theories, appraisal variables are categorical, with a discrete number of possible values. For example, Lazarus (1991) proposed two values for goal congruence: goal congruence and goal incongruence. In other theories (Ellsworth, 1991; Scherer, 1984), appraisal variables are dimensional, with potentially infinite values. For example, goal congruence ranges from entirely goal congruent to entirely goal incongruent. In still other theories (e.g., Roseman, 1996), appraisal variables are dimensional but the system provides anchor points so that it can produce a discrete number of values. The number and nature of the appraisal variables and/or values is closely related to the number and nature of the emotions that one can or wishes to explain. In general, more emotions require more appraisal variables and/or more appraisal values. Turning it around, more appraisal variables and/or more appraisal values allow more variety in emotions. Two appraisal variables with two values each can account for four emotions.
Last updated
Was this helpful?