This research stems from a recent finding (Klonowicz, 1987) that reactivity, which is considered as a basic dimension of temperament (Strelau, 1983), controls both the level of anticipatory arousal and its emotional tone. High reactives responded to conditions of uncertainty with a high level of general arousal and negative affect as reflected by their lesser readiness to work and higher self-reported levels of anxiety and tension. ‘Uncertainty’, in this study, referred to the questions of ‘what will happen’ and ‘when’ which constitute major sources of stress (Folkman, Schaefer and Lazarus, 1979; Lazarus and Launier, 1978). The negatively biased anticipation may reflect at least two phenomena. It seems possible that high reactives expect the worst and believe an unknown event to be potentially harmful. This pessimistic attitude may be the result of previous experience or general beliefs, like a belief in one’s own helplessness. The negative expectancy may interfere with effective coping both directly, through avoidance or unwillingness to initiate activity, and indirectly, by stimulating disruptive, negative emotions. Meichenbaum and Turk (1980) concluded that inadequate performance is related to self-referent negative thoughts involving preoccupation with imagined personal deficiencies, exaggerations of potential difficulties, and expectations of inefficacy. Carver and Scheier (1981) claim that worries are likely to reduce performance because they focus attention on the self rather than the relevant task. Another possibility is that the anticipatory ‘work of worrying’ may actually be a cognitive rehearsal which can facilitate the coping with future events (Breznitz, 1971; Fenz, 1975; Janis, 1958). This alternative suggests that there can be an advantage in the negative expectancy (cf. Epstein, 1973) even though it is inaccurate and will be eventually discarded (Klonowicz, 1987), because it may reduce the actual impact of a stimulus event. The current study was undertaken to investigate the effect of anticipated emotions on performance and aftereffects of performance in high and low reactive persons. The contrast in the two suggested outcomes of anticipatory arousal, increased or reduced performance, indicates that the empirical findings are thus far equivocal. While some data show that people can learn to modulate and use their emotions to good advantage, other data suggest the contrary. The effect of initial expectancies, or anticipation, depends on a number of factors such as the nature of the stressor and its duration (Averill, 1973; Harsh and Abbott, 1979), prior experience with the stressor (Epstein, Rosenthal and Szpiler, 1978; Fenz, 1975), controllability of the stressor or availability of means for coping, the duration of preparation time (i.e. the time allowed for anticipatory activity; Averill, O’Brien and Dewitt, 1977; Badia et al., 1979; Breznitz, 1967; Miller, 1979) accuracy of expectancies (Breznitz, 1976); individual differences in coping strategies (Averill et al., 1977; Miller, 1979), and stress relevant information (Averill, 1973; Cohen and Lazarus, 1973; Janis, 1958). Moreover, the literature suggests that there is no simple relationship between any of these factors and subsequent functioning and that the various factors interact in affecting performance. As an example, the classical studies of Fenz (1975) and Epstein indicated that the timing of anticipatory arousal depended on the experience with the stressor. The complexity of the variables and their effects is the reason why no specific hypotheses were formulated for the current study which concerns the effects of anticipation on subsequent functioning of lowand highreactive persons. An additional problem investigated in this study concerns the positive aftereffects of work. The literature in this area (Cohen, 1980; Klonowicz, 1973, 1974, 1985) suggests a great preoccupation
Read full abstract