Abstract
The target article (Han, Lerner, & Keltner, 2007) presents the Appraisal‐Tendency Framework as a basis for predicting the influence of specific emotions on consumer decision making. The 3 thought‐provoking commentaries by Shiv (2007); Yates (2007); and Cavanaugh, Bettman, Luce, and Payne (2007) highlighted the need to (a) distinguish different types of emotional inputs; (b) specify constructs and mechanisms more concretely; and (c) extend the framework in new, creative ways. This response integrates the specific comments into overarching themes and addresses them.
Highlights
Marketing experts have long known that people behave differently in good moods versus bad moods
We present the Appraisal-Tendency Framework (Lerner & Keltner, 2000, 2001; Lerner & Tiedens, 2006) as a general theory of emotionspecific influences on consumer judgments and choices
One stream addresses the assessment of risk; the other addresses the assessment of monetary value
Summary
Marketing experts have long known that people behave differently in good moods versus bad moods. The researchers reasoned, should exert different influences upon risk perception To test this, they asked participants to estimate the number of annual fatalities due to 12 events that lead to a certain number of death each year in the United States (e.g., brain cancer, strokes, floods) (Lerner & Keltner, 2000), or to estimate the likelihood that specific positive and negative events would occur in their own life compared to the lives of relevant peers (Lerner & Keltner, 2001). When asked to indicate their preferences between a risk-averse and a risk-seeking solution to a hypothetical Asian Disease problem (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981), fearful people favored the risk-averse option while angry people favored the risk-seeking option These studies reveal that emotions sharing the same valence – namely fear and anger – influence risk assessment in ways that are more specific than global valence, and in ways that follow emotion-specific appraisal tendencies. The results of their empirical tests were consistent with the ATF prediction (Figure 3)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
