Bliss is ignorance: How the magnitude of expressed happiness influences perceived naiveté and interpersonal exploitation

Emotion in Organizations: Theory and Research

The workplace elicits a wide range of emotions and, likewise, emotions change our experience of the workplace. This article reviews the scientific field of emotion in organizations, drawing from classic theories and cutting-edge advances to integrate a disparate body of research. The review is organized around the definition of emotion as an unfolding sequence of processes: We interpret the world around us for its subjective meaning, which results in emotional experience. Emotional experience, in turn, has consequences for behaviors, attitudes, and cognition. Emotional experience also elicits expressive cues that can be recognized by others. Each process in the emotion sequence can be regulated. Processes can also iterate until emotion is shared throughout workgroups and even entire organizations. A distinct body of organizationally relevant research exists for each process, and emotional intelligence refers to effectiveness across all. Differences across culture and gender, future research directions, and practical implications are discussed.

Emotions and ethics: How emotions sensitize perceptions of the consequences for self and others to motivate unethical behavior

In this work, we suggest that emotions differentiated by cognitive appraisals may promote self-concern or other-concern that alter the utilitarian calculus of weighing the harm and benefits associated with moral decision-making. We introduce the Emotions and Ethics Framework to elucidate the intrapsychic effect of emotion on deception. When emotions promote self-concern, individuals are more likely engage in selfish deception. By contrast, when emotions promote other-concern, individuals are more likely to exhibit honesty. Furthermore, we extrapolate our theoretical model to consider how felt emotions influence different types of deception: selfish lies, prosocial lies, spiteful lies, and pareto lies. Finally, we theorize about the interpersonal effect of emotional expressions on deception, suggesting that the ethical consequences of emotion contagion and reverse-appraisal processes are distinct.

Deception in negotiations: Insights and opportunities

Deception pervades negotiations and shapes both the negotiation process and outcomes. In this article, we review recent scholarship investigating deception in negotiations. We offer an integrative review of recent theoretical and empirical research, and we argue that the dominant experimental paradigms that scholars have used to study deception have limited our understanding of deception in negotiations. We call for future work to develop new paradigms to investigate the role of relationships, reputations, emotions, and negotiation experience. We also call for future work to expand our understanding of practical prescriptions to curtail a negotiator's risk of being deceived.

Leaders' Windows of Tolerance for Affect Arousal-and Their Effects on Political Decision-making During COVID-19

The recent ‘affect revolution’ in strategic decision-making research has placed greater emphasis on the role of stress and emotions in decision-making, with new theorizing to highlight how leader decisions often differ from rational choice expectations. However, while existing theories add to our understanding of the interplay between affect and cognition, they have not yet explained why affect drives decisions in some situations and not others. Undertheorized connections between leaders’ neurobiological windows of tolerance to affect arousal and their self-regulatory capacity—their capacity to regulate stress and emotions so that these phenomena do not drive resulting decisions—may hold the key to explaining this variation in affect’s influence on decision-making. Furthermore, this article considers how leaders’ windows of tolerance have unique ripple effects in their social environments, thereby affecting their groups’ collective window of tolerance. While regulated leaders can convey a calming and creative influence in their organizations that helps the group access strategic decision-making, dysregulated leaders are likely to convey stress and emotion contagion—which may erode the group’s ability to cooperate, adapt, and learn. It illustrates this argument using evidence from the upper echelons of governmental decision-making, comparing New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s and US President Donald Trump’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic in their respective nations. It concludes by offering hypotheses for testing the argument in future empirical research.

Moving the self and others to do good: The emotional underpinnings of prosocial behavior

The functioning of social collectives hinges on the willingness of their members to cooperate with one another and to help those who are in need. Here, we consider how such prosocial behavior is shaped by emotions. We offer an integrative review of theoretical arguments and empirical findings concerning how the experience of emotions influences people's own prosocial behavior (intrapersonal effects) and how the expression of emotions influences the prosocial behavior of others (interpersonal effects). We identified research on five broad clusters of emotions associated with opportunity and affiliation (happiness, contentment, hope), appreciation and self-transcendence (gratitude, awe, elevation, compassion), distress and supplication (sadness, disappointment, fear, anxiety), dominance and status assertion (anger, disgust, contempt, envy, pride), and appeasement and social repair (guilt, regret, shame, embarrassment). Our review reveals notable differences between emotion clusters and between intrapersonal and interpersonal effects. Although some emotions promote prosocial behavior in the self and others, most emotions promote prosocial behavior either in the self (via their intrapersonal effects) or in others (via their interpersonal effects), suggesting trade-offs between the functionality of emotional experience and emotional expression. Moreover, interpersonal effects are modulated by the cooperative versus competitive nature of the situation. We discuss the emerging patterns from a social-functional perspective and conclude that understanding the role of emotion in prosociality requires joint attention to intrapersonal and interpersonal effects.

The Social Effects of Emotions

We review the burgeoning literature on the social effects of emotions, documenting the impact of emotional expressions on observers' affect, cognition, and behavior. We find convergent evidence that emotional expressions influence observers' affective reactions, inferential processes, and behaviors across various domains, including close relationships, group decision making, customer service, negotiation, and leadership. Affective reactions and inferential processes mediate the effects of emotional expressions on observers' behaviors, and the relative potency of these mediators depends on the observers' information processing and the perceived appropriateness of the emotional expressions. The social effects of emotions are similar across expressive modalities (face, voice, body, text, symbols). We discuss the findings in relation to emotional contagion, emotional intelligence, emotion regulation, emotions as social information (EASI) theory, and the functionality of emotions in engendering social influence. Finally, we identify gaps in our current understanding of the topic and call for interdisciplinary collaboration and methodological diversification. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

The nonverbal expression of power, status, and dominance

This paper reviews the nonverbal display of power, status, and dominance (PSDom). While PSDom are theoretically and often practically separate constructs, in the domain of nonverbal behaviors (NVBs) they are more often expressed similarly. Experimental research and field observations on adult humans were harvested for this review. The goals of this review were to: (1) summarize the list of reliable NVBs of PSDom (with associated references), (2) separately report those behaviors we think are associated with PSDom from those actually associated with PSDom, (3) describe the few existing distinctions between how power, status, and dominance each display NVBs and describe new reports on NVB associated with SES, social network size, and confidence, (4) address the quandary of whether the nonverbal expression of PSDom are universal across gender and culture and (5) provide a resource for researchers wishing to code nonverbal behaviors associated with PSDom.

The Impact of Non-normative Displays of Emotion in the Workplace: How Inappropriateness Shapes the Interpersonal Outcomes of Emotional Displays

When it comes to evaluating emotions as either “good” or “bad,” everyday beliefs regarding emotions rely mostly on their hedonic features—does the emotion feel good to the person experiencing the emotion? However, emotions are not only felt inwardly; they are also displayed outwardly, and others’ responses to an emotional display can produce asymmetric outcomes (i.e., even emotions that feel good to the displayer can lead to negative outcomes for the displayer and others). Focusing on organizational settings, this manuscript reviews the literature on the outcomes of emotional expressions and argues that the evidence points to perceived (in)appropriateness of emotional displays as key to their consequences: emotional displays that are deemed inappropriate generate disadvantageous outcomes for the displayer, and at times also the organization. Drawing on relevant theoretical models [Emotions as Social Information (EASI) theory, the Dual Threshold Model of Anger, and Asymmetrical Outcomes of Emotions], the paper highlights three broad and interrelated reasons why emotion displays could be deemed unfitting and inappropriate: (1) characteristics of the displayer (e.g., status, gender); (2) characteristics of the display (e.g., intensity, mode); and (3) characteristics of the context (e.g., national or organizational culture, topic of interaction). The review focuses on three different emotions—anger, sadness, and happiness—which differ in their valence based on how they feel to the displayer, but can yield different interpersonal outcomes. In conclusion, the paper argues that inappropriateness must be judged separately from whether an emotional display is civil (i.e., polite and courteous) or uncivil (i.e., rude, discourteous, and offensive). Testable propositions are presented, as well as suggested future research directions.

The Cynical Genius Illusion: Exploring and Debunking Lay Beliefs About Cynicism and Competence

Cynicism refers to a negative appraisal of human nature-a belief that self-interest is the ultimate motive guiding human behavior. We explored laypersons' beliefs about cynicism and competence and to what extent these beliefs correspond to reality. Four studies showed that laypeople tend to believe in cynical individuals' cognitive superiority. A further three studies based on the data of about 200,000 individuals from 30 countries debunked these lay beliefs as illusionary by revealing that cynical (vs. less cynical) individuals generally do worse on cognitive ability and academic competency tasks. Cross-cultural analyses showed that competent individuals held contingent attitudes and endorsed cynicism only if it was warranted in a given sociocultural environment. Less competent individuals embraced cynicism unconditionally, suggesting that-at low levels of competence-holding a cynical worldview might represent an adaptive default strategy to avoid the potential costs of falling prey to others' cunning.

Willingness to express emotion depends upon perceiving partner care

Two studies document that people are more willing to express emotions that reveal vulnerabilities to partners when they perceive those partners to be more communally responsive to them. In Study 1, participants rated the communal strength they thought various partners felt toward them and their own willingness to express happiness, sadness and anxiety to each partner. Individuals who generally perceive high communal strength from their partners were also generally most willing to express emotion to partners. Independently, participants were more willing to express emotion to particular partners whom they perceived felt more communal strength toward them. In Study 2, members of romantic couples independently reported their own felt communal strength toward one another, perceptions of their partners' felt communal strength toward them, and willingness to express emotions (happiness, sadness, anxiety, disgust, anger, hurt and guilt) to each other. The communal strength partners reported feeling toward the participants predicted the participants' willingness to express emotion to those partners. This link was mediated by participants' perceptions of the partner's communal strength toward them which, itself, was a joint function of accurate perceptions of the communal strength partners had reported feeling toward them and projections of their own felt communal strength for their partners onto those partners.