Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Mar 8:7:325.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00325. eCollection 2016.

The Arithmetic of Emotion: Integration of Incidental and Integral Affect in Judgments and Decisions

Daniel Västfjäll  1 , Paul Slovic  2 , William J Burns  2 , Arvid Erlandsson  3 , Lina Koppel  3 , Erkin Asutay  3 , Gustav Tinghög  3
Affiliations
Review

The Arithmetic of Emotion: Integration of Incidental and Integral Affect in Judgments and Decisions

Daniel Västfjäll et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Research has demonstrated that two types of affect have an influence on judgment and decision making: incidental affect (affect unrelated to a judgment or decision such as a mood) and integral affect (affect that is part of the perceiver's internal representation of the option or target under consideration). So far, these two lines of research have seldom crossed so that knowledge concerning their combined effects is largely missing. To fill this gap, the present review highlights differences and similarities between integral and incidental affect. Further, common and unique mechanisms that enable these two types of affect to influence judgment and choices are identified. Finally, some basic principles for affect integration when the two sources co-occur are outlined. These mechanisms are discussed in relation to existing work that has focused on incidental or integral affect but not both.

Keywords: decision making; emotions; incidental affect; integral affect; judgment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Three different forms of affect integration previously proposed in the literature. (1) Mood-congruent effects are obtained when the valence of the incidental affect influences the target so that positive incidental affect makes the evaluation of the target more positive, and negative incidental affect influences evaluations so that the target is perceived as more negative (upper). (2) Mood-incongruent effects are obtained when positive incidental affect makes the judgmental target be perceived as more negative, than a negative incidental affect state does (middle). (3) Affect additivity is the case where congruent valences of incidental and integral affect are added and incongruent valences cancel each other (bottom).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The influence of incidental affect is contingent on the intensity of integral affect. Left bars for strong integral affect, incidental affect has little possibility to influence the overall affective reaction. Middle bars for weak integral affect, incidental affect is allowed a relatively large influence. Right bars if integral affect is absent, incidental affect will have a stronger contribution to the overall affective reaction.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Anderson N. H. (1981). Foundation of Information Integration Theory. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    1. Barrett L. F. (2015). “Construction as an integrative framework for the science of emotion,” in The Psychological Construction of Emotion, eds Barrett L. F., Russell J. A. (New York, NY: Guilford; ), 448–458.
    1. Bechara A. (2011). “Human emotions in decision making: are they useful or disruptive?,” in Neuroscience of Decision Making, eds Vartanian O., Mandel D. (New York, NY: Psychology Press; ), 73–90.
    1. Bodenhausen G. V., Mussweiler T., Gabriel S., Moreno K. N. (2001). “Affective influences on stereotyping and intergroup relations,” in Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition, ed. Forgas J. P. (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; ), 319–343.
    1. Bradley M. M., Lang P. J. (2000). “Measuring emotion: behavior, feeling and physiology,” in Cognitive Neuroscience of Emotion, eds Lane R., Nadel L. (New York: Oxford University Press; ), 242–276.