Berkowitz L. Thinking, and not only

Chapters 2 and 3 emphasized the relatively unaccountable and impulsive nature of many acts of angry aggression. However, it is obvious that people sometimes still think about what is happening to them and how they could act in these circumstances. Undoubtedly, these thoughts can influence how people feel and how they will act.

In this chapter, I will concentrate mainly on the role of cognitive processes, in particular thoughts, in the formation of both emotional states and the behavior caused by them. Much attention will be devoted to discussing how people’s specific feelings and behaviors can be influenced by their beliefs about the causes of emotional arousal and what might happen next.

In addition, I will talk about how the thoughts we have at any given moment can influence our interpretations of the behavior of others and how we will behave towards them. Although the emphasis will be on cognitive processes, I will also demonstrate that bodily reactions also contribute to emotional experience. Not everything is defined only by thoughts.

In order to clarify some of the theoretical issues of understanding emotions that we will encounter in the future, I will present the results of research and my own argument in the context of historical and modern theories of emotions.

Theories of emotion

What determines the emotional state

From the outset, the reader should be clear about the differences between the views I will be discussing here and the formulations I have set forth in previous chapters. I suggest that when people encounter unpleasant events (either that which is inherently unpleasant or that is interpreted as negative), then a variety of reactions are activated in them: mental, mnemonic and bodily. I also believe that ideational, physiological, and expressive-motor responses form the basis of emotional experience. Thoughts and beliefs seem to come into play after the initial basic emotional responses are aroused. The cognitive concepts described in this chapter take a very different approach. Being much closer to the everyday understanding of emotions, they regard thoughts as necessary determinants of emotional reactions. We probably become angry only when we think that we have been treated badly or that someone is intentionally threatening us, but the desire to harm another person appears in us as a consequence of anger.

I would not like to reject such an approach in general; it seems to be true for most of us, and has a solid empirical basis. From my point of view, this approach, however, suffers from significant incompleteness. We can say that the development of emotional experience is much more complicated than what is seen in the cognitive/everyday approach. First of all, let’s take a quick look at how emotions are understood from a cognitive perspective.

Cognitive Concepts of Emotions

Although psychologists who adopt the cognitive approach differ on the details, they all share the same basic premise: the interpretation of the arousal event is essential (Weiner, 1985). Let’s take the following situation as an illustration:

Jane Smith, an unmarried woman in her 35s, met a handsome man. They seemed to like each other and agreed to meet after work at a nearby restaurant. Jane comes first. After waiting for about an hour, she decides that the man will not come on a date.

How will Jane react? See →

Experimental confirmation of the role of attributions in determining emotions

Much of the empirical evidence supporting the above analysis comes from field studies asking ordinary people about their emotional states. These messages are sources of valuable information about emotions, but they are subject to distorting influences. Among them are the thoughts of the respondents about the desired (wishful thinking), post factum attempts to present this event in the best light, previously learned ideas about the nature of this or that specific emotional state, etc. The only way to eliminate such sources of error is to supplement studies in natural conditions with experiments in which situational influences are deliberately manipulated. Fortunately, many experiments have been conducted by social psychologists that demonstrate the effects of attributions on emotional responses. See →

Attributions in the transfer of excitation

…We don’t expect noise to contribute to aggression (unless the noise is too obnoxious), but loud noise can actually increase attack power. This effect of loud noise includes many aspects, and some of them are related to attributions.

First, noise can be aversive. As we recall from Chapter 3, unpleasant stimuli—abnormally high temperatures, foul odors, irritating cigarette smoke, or even harsh sounds—can generate aggressive urges. Secondly, noise can, in general, be arousing, and this arousal sometimes energizes already active aggressive tendencies. See →

Evidence for non-cognitive influences on emotions

I have described the influence of thoughts on emotional responses and, in particular, on anger or aggressive responses. Although our beliefs about how we feel and why we are aroused can influence our emotional states and behavior, these beliefs, evaluations, and attributions are not necessary for emotional responses to occur. Complex thought processes don’t always «work that way,» at least not when it comes to emotional responses. The main rivals of the cognitive interpretation of emotions are concepts that emphasize the importance of bodily reactions in the course of emotional experiences. See →

Body reactions and cognitions: the model of the associative network

We cannot say exactly why bodily reactions affect emotional states. However, it seems quite possible to interpret these effects in terms of the associative network hypothesis I have proposed. If an emotional state can be viewed as a network of interconnected thoughts, memories, feelings, and expressive-motor reactions, then the activation of any of these components must activate all the other components as well. See →

The meaning of thoughts

People, of course, act the way they think, and their thoughts, of course, can influence what they do and how they feel when they are in a state of emotional arousal. Grades and attributions are not, of course, overwhelming, but can certainly have a significant impact. At the very least, interpretations can determine whether an event will be pleasant or unpleasant, how strong the resulting feelings will be, and whether restraining forces (limitations) will come into play.

It must also be borne in mind that cognitive processes can act in other ways, and not only through assessments and attributions. Later in this chapter, I will discuss some of these influences. See →

Thoughts affect the containment of aggression

In addition to being an arousing influence, thoughts can influence us by weakening or strengthening the action of psychological inhibition mechanisms. So far, I have emphasized the negative side in this book, the conditions that motivate us to behave goo.e. or aggressively, but said little about the positive side of the human character. Any holistic description of human aggression must also take into account positive human qualities and, in particular, the relatively civilized nature of our behavior in everyday life. The vast majority of people only rarely show physical aggression. We are not in the business of looking for someone to attack, and we do not seek to enter into a fight with the first comer. If we attack someone physically or verbally, it doesn’t happen very often — in general, most of us are more or less inclined to harm other people. See →

Why people can adhere to non-aggressive standards of behavior and still be aggressive

The undeniable existence of aggression as an important aspect of human behavior does not contradict what I have said about the non-aggressive values ​​and standards of most people. Research and theoretical analysis allow us to identify at least two groups of possible reasons why people do not always manage to live in accordance with their beliefs. See →

Summary

This chapter has dealt primarily with the effects of cognitive processes on emotional responses. A review has been made of some of the better known cognitivist-oriented theories of emotion. These concepts are based on the fact that people experience a state of anger when they are exposed to unpleasant events and at the same time believe that they are caused by external causes and that certain persons are responsible for these events and were able to control them. Some theorists go further, suggesting that other factors are also necessary for the emergence of anger — processes of perception (or persuasion, or evaluation). These include, for example, the interpretation of those responsible for the incident as having violated social rules and the assessment of the aversive event as personally significant. See →

Part 2. Aggressive personality

Chapter 5

Do some people really have a persistent propensity for aggressive behavior? Examples of various forms of simultaneous sequence. Stability of aggressive behavior over several years: long-term consistency. How aggressive people act. Different types of aggressive people. See →