1. AS level Psychology The Core studies

2. Cognitive, Social and Physiological Determinants of Emotional State
Stanley Schachter and Jerome E. Singer (1962)

3. Stanley Schachter

4. Schachter and Singer (1962)
The Question...
How do we recognise the emotions we feel?
Cognitive labelling of emotional states

5. Some background…. If we see a bull charging towards us
Do we run because we are scared or
Are we scared because we run?

6. Some background…. How do we know which emotion we are feeling?
Write down FIVE different emotions

7. The James-Lange theory
That emotions are ‘read out of’ the physiological signs
heart rate, blood pressure, sweat, breathing. etc
but that would mean a different physiological state for each emotion

8. The Cannon-Bard theory
We see the charging bull
and then
(a) Physiological changes occur
(b) We cognitively recognise fear
independent processes with no direct link between them
but with a common trigger

12. Schachter and Singer
James was wrong - there are not enough physiological states
Cannon Bard wrong - ANS arousal and emotional states are linked

13. Schachter and Singer Testing the theory that
a stimulus causes the physiological arousal
(the charging bull)
and then that …..
We look around for cues to tell us what the emotion is?

14. Schachter and Singer What they did? The participants
The cognitive labelling theory of emotion
The participants
184 male students of psychology
(American)
rewarded by two extra points on their final exam for every hour they took part

15. Schachter and Singer Procedure
Ps were told that the experiment was testing how a vitamin compound called SUPROXIN affects vision
That they were to be injected with this VITAMIN but that any who objected could withdraw.. Some did

16. Schachter and Singer All told they were receiving a SUPROXIN injection
Group 1 - given an injection of adrenaline - which causes increased heart rate, blood pressure and flushing
Group 2 given a placebo - an injection of saline which causes no effect

17. Schachter and Singer ADRENALINE group divided into three groups
INFORMED - told of the side effects of adrenaline
IGNORANT - told nothing
MISINFORMED - told they might experience head ache, numbness in their feet

18. Schachter and Singer Placebo group told nothing
So the scene is set for the physiological arousal of some participants

19. Schachter and Singer
How did Schachter and Singer produce the emotional state?
In order to create the emotional cues the participants were placed into two further groups
Another IV
Euphoria or Anger condition

21. Schachter and Singer
Each participant taken and introduced to another participant (a stooge)
Euphoria - the stooge engaged in manic activities aimed to create a sense of euphoria - threw balls at waste paper basket, flew paper planes, twirled a hula hoop and other such hilarious games

22. Schachter and Singer
Each participant taken and introduced to another participant (a stooge)
Anger - both participant and stooge given long questionnaire
VERY personal and insulting questions - the stooge ‘pretended’ to get VERY angry
Finally - ripped up his questionnaire and stamped out

23. Schachter and Singer
NOTE
Ps in the misinformed condition were only exposed to the euphoric stooge -
S & S thought this would be enough to evaluate their ‘state’

24. Schachter and Singer SUMMARY of CONDITIONS
informed ignorant misinformed
placebo E/A
adrenalin E/A E/A E

29. Schachter and Singer THE RESULTS
2 ways of measuring the emotional states?
1st DV
Ps behaviour observed through a one way mirror - two experimenters recorded how the Ps behaved in response - did they join in, or ignore - (Activity index)

30. Schachter and Singer THE RESULTS
2 ways of measuring the emotional states?
2nd DV
Self report scales - Ps told that mood could affect vision, asked to self report ‘emotions’

31. Schachter and Singer THE RESULT 2nd DV critical questions -
How irritated or angry do you feel now
How good or happy are you at present
measured on a FIVE point scale
0 = not at all angry
4 = I feel extremely angry

32. Schachter and Singer THE RESULTS also asked
Did you feel any palpitations, own heart beat
the misinformed group
Did you feel any numbness
(also rated on 5 point scale)

33. Schachter and Singer THE DEBRIEFING
Participants were told the true purpose of the experiment
asked if they had any suspicions about the experimental procedures

34. Schachter and Singer RESULTS
Ps in the ADRENALIN condition showed more sympathetic arousal than those in the placebo condition
Ps in the ignorant or misinformed groups rated their euphoria higher than in the informed condition

35. Schachter and Singer RESULTS
Ps in the ignorant or misinformed groups rated their euphoria higher than in the informed condition
supports the hypothesis as they had no other explanation for their physiological response (to the adrenalin )

36. Schachter and Singer RESULTS
Misinformed behaved more euphorically than did the ignorant
Ignorant behaved more euphorically than the informed
mis ig inf

37. Schachter and Singer RESULTS
ANGER - there was less difference between the groups
but they might have been reluctant to show anger as they may have feared losing their exam points!

38. Schachter and Singer RESULTS
the results of the placebo group were ambiguous

39. Schachter and Singer CONCLUSION
people label their emotional state according to available cognitions
If there is NO physiological arousal, cognitive cues to emotion have no effect

40. Schachter and Singer SUMMARY Schachter and Singer conclude that
First we feel the physiological state
Then we look around for a clue to tell us what we are feeling.

41. EVALUATION & Criticism
Another REDUCTIONIST explanation for emotion
BUT
You should read up the
Dutton and Aron study
Falling in love on a suspension bridge

42. Schachter and Singer
ETHICS?
How can this be criticised?

43. Schachter and Singer METHODOLOGY? LAB Experiment
What are the disadvantages?
What are the advantages?

44. Schachter and Singer How many groups? What were the IVs?
How were the DVs measured?

45. Schachter and Singer This experiment has never been replicated
The results may not be reliable
THE END