Hey there, curious minds! Today, I’m thrilled to share some mind-boggling insights about our moods, self-talk, and how we see the world around us. So, grab a metaphorical seat, and let’s dive into the fascinating realm of mood-congruent judgment!
Picture this: a group of Psychology students, myself included, embarked on a journey to understand why a bad day can make everything seem bleaker and why a good day feels like sunshine for the soul. The answer? Mood-congruent judgment. Fancy term, right? Let me break it down for you.
Mood-congruent judgment is like a backstage pass to our minds, revealing that our current emotional state can sway our judgments. For instance, think of a time when you were on cloud nine, and suddenly, even the weather seemed to celebrate your joy. Or the opposite — when a gloomy mood made gloomy things more appealing. It’s a psychological phenomenon that we aim to explore and decode.
Now, let’s get into the nitty-gritty of the experiment. We started by watching videos designed to lift our spirits or pull at our heartstrings. Next up, we threw in a twist — positive self-talk. You know, those moments when you tell yourself, “I am awesome” or “I’ve got this!” The big question: Could this positive self-chat change the game and alter the impact of our emotions on how we see the world?
Drumroll, please! The results were as surprising as they were intriguing. Our hypothesis suggested that combining emotional valence (positive or negative) and positive self-talk would create a dance of influence on mood-congruent judgment. But reality threw us a curveball.
Emotional valence, meaning our emotions’ positive or negative nature, significantly impacts our judgment. Sadness, it turns out, is a bit of a heavyweight in this arena, influencing our judgment more strongly than happiness. Here’s the plot twist: positive self-talk didn’t exactly steal the spotlight. It didn’t significantly push us towards more pleasant judgments.
Hold on, though! Every experiment has its quirks and limitations. We acknowledged that our definition of self-talk might have been a bit like fitting a square peg into a round hole. Plus, the whole controlled setting thing — it might have taken away a bit of the real-life flavor.
So, what’s the big takeaway? Our emotions are complex beasts, and understanding how they shape our view of the world is like peeling back layers of an onion. This study might not have all the answers, but it adds a splash of color to our canvas of knowledge.
Next time you find yourself in a certain mood, take a moment to ponder how it might be painting your perspective. After all, the human mind is an epic novel, and each study is like turning another page. Stick around, and let’s keep exploring the incredible mysteries of our minds together! 🌈
How was your mood today? Were your judgments in sync with your mood or otherwise?
References
Bodenhausen, G. V. (1993). Emotions, arousal, and stereotypic judgments: A heuristic model of affect and stereotyping. Affect, Cognition and Stereotyping, 13–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-088579-7.50006-5
Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36(2), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.36.2.129
Citron, F. M. M., Gray, M. A., Critchley, H. D., Weekes, B. S., & Ferstl, E. C. (2014). Emotional valence and arousal affect reading in an interactive way: Neuroimaging evidence for an approach-withdrawal framework. Neuropsychologia, 56, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.01.002
Clore, G. L. (1992). Cognitive Phenomenology: Feelings and the Construction of Judgment. In The Construction of Social Judgments (1st ed., pp. 10–133). essay, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2021). Social Cognition: From brains to culture. Sage.
Forgas, J. P. (1992). On mood and peculiar people: Affect and person typicality in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(5), 863–875. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.5.863
Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (aim). Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39
Kim, J., Kwon, J. H., Kim, J., Kim, E. J., Kim, H. E., Kyeong, S., & Kim, J.-J. (2021). The effects of positive or negative self-talk on the alteration of brain functional connectivity by performing cognitive tasks. Scientific Reports, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94328-9
Mayer, J. D., & Gaschke, Y. N. (1988). Brief mood introspection scale. PsycTESTS Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/t06259-000
Mayer, J. D., & Hanson, E. (1995). Mood-congruent judgment over time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295213005
Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y. N., Braverman, D. L., & Evans, T. W. (1992). Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(1), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.1.119
Schwarz, N. (1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 527–561). essay, The Guilford Press.
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513–523. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as information: 20 years later. Psychological Inquiry, 14(3–4), 296–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840x.2003.9682896
Singer, J. A., & Salovey, P. (1988). Mood and memory: Evaluating the network theory of affect. Clinical Psychology Review, 8(2), 211–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(88)90060-8
Winsler, A. (2009). Private speech, executive functioning, and the development of verbal self-regulation. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511581533
Wright, W. F., & Bower, G. H. (1992). Mood effects on subjective probability assessment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52(2), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(92)90039-a