Psychology of Uncertainty Issues - Essay Example

Psychology of Uncertainty Name: Institution: Date: Topic 2: Psychology of Uncertainty Anxiety/Uncertainty management (AUM) is a theory advanced by William Gudykunst where explains that communication is a function of a person’s abilities to manage their anxiety and uncertainty. There is a moderate and negative relationship between anxiety and attributional confidence, which is the inverse of uncertainty. Anxiety negatively predicts perceived effectiveness and attributional confidence and attributional confidence on the other hand positively predicts perceived effectiveness across cultures and relationship (Gudykunst & Nashida, 2001). Contrary to encounters with stalled cars, falling tree branches, or other inanimate objects, an understanding of other individuals requires that the tacit recognition that their behavior is impacted by the contents of their minds. Affective states that are generated by uncertainty Substantial affective system research and spoken dialogue have demonstrated that users display a range of affective states while interacting with a system. To this day, only a few systems are able to adapt to multiple affective systems although none have yet demonstrated significant improvements in task success. Other benefits that include increased user satisfaction, motivation, and rapport have been shown. Performance can depend on to whom and when the adaptations are provided; users with high expertise never benefitted from system responses as studies indicated to their frustration, confusion, and boredom. High levels of predictability are associated with overconfidence and boredom. Therefore uncertainty can bread confusion and frustration as well as boredom. People with high risk behavior also seem to exhibit sadness. The same event is capable of producing different emotions depending on the manner in which it is appraised. For instance, failure on an exam that is attributed to oneself may induce feeling of shame or guilt; while failure on the same test attributed to another individual (e.g. “my roommate did not give me ample time to study”) may result in anger. Emotional states like anger, sadness, boredom, confusion, or frustration will depend on the contributing factor that results into such states. To comprehend the impacts of different affective states on decision making, it is vital to look at their typical underlying meaning structures (Raghunathan & Pham, 1999). The meaning structure; apart from determining the type of affect a person is likely to experience in response to an event, they also determine the type of information a person is likely infer from going through a given affective state. Affective stats like anxiety and sadness will possess distinct influences on decision making since people experiencing them will draw various inferences on their affective experiences. Consequently, they end up bringing different implicit goals to decision making tasks. The implicit goals will have an influence on the decision making process regardless of the decision being related to the event that resulted into the affective state. Appraisal theorists observe that the distinctive meaning structure underneath sadness emotions is absence or loss of a reward. Sadness related emotions like despair and sadness are basically experienced in response to the absence or loss of a cherished person or object like breakup of relationship, loss of favorite jewel, or the death of a family member. Therefore, whenever individuals experience feelings of sadness, they should be inclined to interpret these feelings as meaning something which is rewarding is missing. It can be predicted that sad people can be motivated by the implicit goal of reward substitution or acquisition. Consumers will tend buy gifts for themselves whenever they experienced feelings of depression. On the other hand, the meaning structure underneath fear-like emotions, even anxiety, is characterized by high uncertainty over an outcome and having low control over a situation. Various negative states like sadness and anxiety can possess clear influences on the processes of decision making. These affective states tend to prompt distinct implicit goals during the process of decision making. Negative affective states do not have equal influence in decision making. Studies show that predicting specific emotions in response to a complex social event can be very inaccurate. Women who imagine or foresee encountering gender harassment predict feelings of anger, whereas in reality, a much higher proportion will report feelings of fear (Carver & Harmon-Jones, 2009). Studies have suggested that there is high degree of accuracy in affective forecasting for positive affect as compared to negative affective states, showing an overall tendency of overacting to events that are perceived to be negative. Are all affective states generated by uncertainty negative? Nashida and Gudykunst have explained that “anxiety is the effective (emotional) equivalent of uncertainty”. There are other affective that are generated by uncertainty or are accompanied by it that is not negative. Happiness can be a state of uncertainty which is not negative. The accuracy of forecast can be misleading hence making one to be excited for something that he has not yet achieved. Accuracy of forecast has indicted that people are amazingly poor judges of their future emotional states (Seo, Barrett & Bartunek, 2004). For instance, in the predicting occurrences like winning the lottery might affect their happiness, it is possible to overestimate future positive feeling while ignoring other factors which are able to contribute to the emotional state that is outside the single event. Some of the cognitive biases connected to the systematic errors in the affective forecasts are empathy gap, impact bias, and focalism. For effective communication, uncertainty has to be between the maximum threshold and the minimum thresholds. When uncertainty is below the minimum threshold people become overconfident and bored. When people are not overconfidence they reorganize cues that show potential misunderstandings when they do happen. The reality of losing the lottery will sink in if all factors are considered. The feeling of happiness comes from feeling overconfident when the threshold of uncertainty falls below the minimum required threshold (Gudykunst & Nashida, 2001). Happiness is tied around the concepts of utility and welfare when it comes to the economic setting. Affective states that are low in motivational intensity cause broadening while affective states high in motivational intensity result in narrowing of cognitive. Roles of these affective states play in social interaction Not all affective states that accompany uncertainty are negative. Positive affective states play an important role in making individual deal with different situations in life. They bring a balance between an individual and his environment reconciles him to the reality of the situation. Social interaction is enhanced through positive affective states since they increase motivation and individual confidence. People are able to deal with strangers and uncertainty in the course of social interaction. People use positive affective to deal with unpleasant situations in while interacting. People with positive emotions view the probability of gains more optimally. People who are in good mood will tend to avoid risky ventures since losing may diminish their good mood. Consequently, they may try to avoid meeting strangers or dealing with affairs that involve a lot of uncertainty. Risk aversion is due to a motive to avoid losses as a result of positive emotions. Someone with positive affective state with people he is not sure about their history. Confidence and high motivation is the best characteristic of positive affective states. Positive affective states would encourage a person to maintain the same status so as to avoid disappointments or being frustrated. Individuals will interact with people who know they know and go to places they are familiar with in order to maintain positive affective states like happiness. Apart from positive emotions influencing people’s risk-taking behavior, they also impact on the way information is processed in the risky situation. People having positive emotions are less motivated to process information and apply a more simplified, heuristic processing style, and hence the process of decision making is faster. Individuals make quick decisions about strangers and are quick to make new friend without intense scrutiny or inhibitions. High motivation due to positive affective state is important when dealing with difficult or unfamiliar circumstances. Motivation is described as the condition or state of being stimulated to act (Ainley, 2006). High achievers are highly motivated and have the confidence to take on risk ventures. It was established that positive emotions are responsible for impairing systematic processing and hence leading to superficial thinking and poor judgment. Positive emotions herald that the environment is safe and benign, and thus reduce the motivation of scrutinizing information (Zhao, 2006). Positive emotions occasion careful and systematic processing and can lead to more thorough and more efficient decision making, as long as a situation is important or interesting to the decision maker. Positive emotions result in integration of decision material and enhance efficiency; hence the process of decision making is quicker. Positive emotions result into more top-down processing as opposed to bottom-top processing as they offer better access to prevailing cognitive structures, and will result into fewer responses to data presented. Positive affective states therefore speed up the process of decision making. Positive affective states boost the self esteem of a person and his confidence in regard to a given task. Prevailing explanations for incidental mood and processing findings, which entails those based on motivation, capacity as well as information, stipulate that the information processing consequences arise from the valence of the affective state (Harmon-Jones, Price & Gable, 2012). Capacity explanations are related are associative with so many conceptual nodes, it occasions a state of cognitive busyness. Motivational explanations are based on the desire to avoid negative states, observing that careful and systematic thinking is necessary to find the means to reduce negative experiences. People employ affective states as signals concerning the current situation or on the judgment (Tiedens & Linton, 2001). The experience of negative affect shows a threat to the attainment of the desired goal and, thus, that the situation require systematic and attentive processing, while positive affect indicates that the situation is safe and, therefore, general knowledge constructs are substantial basis for judgment. Positive affect indicate that one has adequate information to make a decision. Positive affective states are higher in approach motivation. These states happen when people actively pursue desirable and obtainable goals. Some descriptions that may be used to express high motivationally intense positive affective states include excitement, desire, lust, enthusiasm, interest, happiness, and joy. A person in positive affective state will find it easy to interact with people he does not even know. References Ainley, M. (2006). Connecting with learning: Motivation, affect & cognition in interest process, Educational Psychology Review, 18: 391-40. Carver, C. S., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2009). Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications, Psychological Bulletin, 135: 183–204. Gudykunst, W.B. & Nashida, T. (2001). Anxiety, uncertainty, and perceived effectiveness of communication across relationships and cultures, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25, 55-71. Harmon-Jones, E., Price, T. F., & Gable, P.A. (2012). The influence of affective states on cognitive Broadening/Narrowing: Considering the importance of motivational intensity, Social and Personality Compass, 6 (4): 314-327. Seo, M.-G., Barrett, L. F., & Bartunek, J. M. (2004). The role of affective experience in work motivation, Academy of Management Review, 29(3): 423-439. Raghunathan, R. & Pham, M.T. (1999). All negative moods are not equal: Motivational influences of anxiety and sadness on decision making, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Decision Process, 79 (1): 56-77. Tiedens, L.Z. & Linton, S. (2001). Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: The effects of specific emotions on information processing, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (6): 973-988. Zhao, J. (2006). The effects of induced positive and negative emotions on risky decision making, Department of Psychology, American College Dublin, Ireland. Read More

The implicit goals will have an influence on the decision making process regardless of the decision being related to the event that resulted into the affective state. Appraisal theorists observe that the distinctive meaning structure underneath sadness emotions is absence or loss of a reward. Sadness related emotions like despair and sadness are basically experienced in response to the absence or loss of a cherished person or object like breakup of relationship, loss of favorite jewel, or the death of a family member.

Therefore, whenever individuals experience feelings of sadness, they should be inclined to interpret these feelings as meaning something which is rewarding is missing. It can be predicted that sad people can be motivated by the implicit goal of reward substitution or acquisition. Consumers will tend buy gifts for themselves whenever they experienced feelings of depression. On the other hand, the meaning structure underneath fear-like emotions, even anxiety, is characterized by high uncertainty over an outcome and having low control over a situation.

Various negative states like sadness and anxiety can possess clear influences on the processes of decision making. These affective states tend to prompt distinct implicit goals during the process of decision making. Negative affective states do not have equal influence in decision making. Studies show that predicting specific emotions in response to a complex social event can be very inaccurate. Women who imagine or foresee encountering gender harassment predict feelings of anger, whereas in reality, a much higher proportion will report feelings of fear (Carver & Harmon-Jones, 2009).

Studies have suggested that there is high degree of accuracy in affective forecasting for positive affect as compared to negative affective states, showing an overall tendency of overacting to events that are perceived to be negative. Are all affective states generated by uncertainty negative? Nashida and Gudykunst have explained that “anxiety is the effective (emotional) equivalent of uncertainty”. There are other affective that are generated by uncertainty or are accompanied by it that is not negative.

Happiness can be a state of uncertainty which is not negative. The accuracy of forecast can be misleading hence making one to be excited for something that he has not yet achieved. Accuracy of forecast has indicted that people are amazingly poor judges of their future emotional states (Seo, Barrett & Bartunek, 2004). For instance, in the predicting occurrences like winning the lottery might affect their happiness, it is possible to overestimate future positive feeling while ignoring other factors which are able to contribute to the emotional state that is outside the single event.

Some of the cognitive biases connected to the systematic errors in the affective forecasts are empathy gap, impact bias, and focalism. For effective communication, uncertainty has to be between the maximum threshold and the minimum thresholds. When uncertainty is below the minimum threshold people become overconfident and bored. When people are not overconfidence they reorganize cues that show potential misunderstandings when they do happen. The reality of losing the lottery will sink in if all factors are considered.

The feeling of happiness comes from feeling overconfident when the threshold of uncertainty falls below the minimum required threshold (Gudykunst & Nashida, 2001). Happiness is tied around the concepts of utility and welfare when it comes to the economic setting. Affective states that are low in motivational intensity cause broadening while affective states high in motivational intensity result in narrowing of cognitive. Roles of these affective states play in social interaction Not all affective states that accompany uncertainty are negative.

Positive affective states play an important role in making individual deal with different situations in life. They bring a balance between an individual and his environment reconciles him to the reality of the situation.

Read More