Two factor theory of emotion

Two factor theory of emotion By Mr Daniel Hansson

Questions 1. What would be your subjective experience and bodily changes (heartbeat, breathing) if you: • Heard that your best friend is in a hospital because of a car accident? • Learn that you have been accepted to a top university? • Are attacked by a vicious dog in a dark soi? 2. In what way are the cognitive and biological reactions similar for these scenarios? In what way are they different?

Schachter & Singer’s two factor theory of emotion • We need two factors to feel emotional. One is physiological arousal, the other is attribution (appraisal, cues in the environment of how we should feel) • Without arousal or attributions we will not experience any emotion

The order of the emotional components in two factor theory of emotion External stimulus = General physiological arousal = Cognitive appraisal of arousal (attribution) = Subjective experience of emotion = Behaviour

The labelling of arousal will depend on the situation if there is no other explanation If a reason for arousal is known the participant will not look for another reason No arousal will result in no emotion Hypotheses in the Schachter & Singer experiment

Sample • 184 male college psychology students • Received credits towards finals • Health records checked

Method • Controlled experiment • At the start of the experiment, all participants had an injection of epinephrine (causes shaky hands, pounding heart, increased breathing) • Experimenter pretended that they were investigating “side effects of “Suproxin” (pretend vitamin)

Information of effects - conditions • EPI informed: Participants were informed of the real effects of epinephrine • EPI misinformed: Participants were misinformed of the effects of epinephrine (instead were told that there would be itching, numb feet, headaches) • EPI ignorant: Participants were told that there would be no side effects • Control group: Participants were injected a placebo (a saline solution with no side effects)

Condition - Euphoric • Participants from the different information of effect conditions were put in a waiting room with a stooge, one at a time for 20 minutes (EPI effects last 15-20 minutes) • Stooge was friendly, played with paper (basketball, aeroplanes)

Condition - Angry • Same but had to complete questionnaire during 20 mins • Stooge moaned about injections • Personal; questions, e.g. “Do you bathe and wash regularly?” • Stooge angry, ripped up questionnaire, left

Question • Which group should be most affected by the stooge’s behaviour? Based on Schachter & Singer’s theory and hypotheses, order the groups from most angry/happy to least angry/happy: EPI informed, EPI misinformed, EPI ignorant, Control group

Experimenter returns, takes pulse Participants are asked to complete a questionnaire Participants are debriefed Procedure for both

Crucial questions on the questionnaire • Euphoric condition: 5 point scale – 0=“I don’t feel happy at all or good” – 4=“I feel extremely happy and good” • Angry condition: 5 point scale – 0=“I don’t feel at all irritated or angry” – 4=“I feel extremely irritated and angry” • The measure of emotion was decided by deducting the self rating of anger from the self raing of happiness

Question • If you were very happy in this experiment, would you get a low or a high score? • If you were very angry in this experiment, would get a low or a high score?

Results table- Euphoric

Results table – Anger

Question • Compare the results with your predictions. To what extent do the results support the two factor theory of emotion?

Controls • Double blind – stooge did not know what condition the participant was in • Data questionnaire included irrelevant questions, e.g. current mental health. Some questions open-ended • 11 participants expressed suspicion – data was taken out

Methodological evaluation + Participants were randomly allocated to different conditions + Procedure was standardized + Stooge did not know which condition the participant was in

Methodological evaluation - No assessment of the subjects’ emotional state before the experiment, or the emotional effect of receiving an injection - Experiment lacked ecological validity. Injection of epinephrine does not produce the experience of a true emotion • Sample might not be representative (male college students taking introductory psychology at the university of Minnesota)

Ethical evaluation -Participants were not informed about the purpose of the experiment - Participants were injected epinephrine without consent

Ethical evaluation + Participants were given health checks before the experiment + Participants were debriefed after the experiment

Activity • Do the multi-choice quiz and matching quizzes of the study on: http://www.holah.karoo.net/schachter.htm

Two factor theory of emotion