Emotions dictate how information is processed. Although feelings can lead to many different pathways, depending on the moment of time and situations, Kligyte et al. (2013) focused only on anger and fear as the most contradictory of emotions. They deliver different processing outcomes when faced with decision making, especially in ethics. Anger is associated with certainty, physical obstruction, unfairness, or shattered self-esteem (Kuppens, Van Mechelen, Smits, & De Boeck, 2003), which is opposite to fear that is usually uncertain and lacks sense of situational control (Lerner & Keltner, 2000). Kligyte et al. (2013) tested this understanding and predicted that, to the contrary of fear, anger would inhibit ethical decision making. Finally, the study also considered how emotion regulation affects understanding of consequences and general circumstances of each scenario since this would, as a result, form decisions.
…show more content…
(2013) started their research with the assessment of present emotional states of 163 participants (63 males and 100 females) at a large university. The study used the 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) for this determination. All subjects were then asked to support a socially controversial statement in writing, despite their personal opinion about the matter (Kligyte et al., 2013). Participants were then made to believe that they were getting individualized feedbacks regarding their responses, when they actually received either anger-inducing or fear-inducing feedbacks. Next, researchers implemented another scale to measure emotional cues at that particular moment, followed by scenario-based questionnaires involving ethical decision making. Specifically, each scenario depicted a realistic job context and a hypothetical dilemma with multiple choice questions requiring situational judgment. Some of the ethical issues at hand were informed consent, conflict of interest,
(2013) started their research with the assessment of present emotional states of 163 participants (63 males and 100 females) at a large university. The study used the 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) for this determination. All subjects were then asked to support a socially controversial statement in writing, despite their personal opinion about the matter (Kligyte et al., 2013). Participants were then made to believe that they were getting individualized feedbacks regarding their responses, when they actually received either anger-inducing or fear-inducing feedbacks. Next, researchers implemented another scale to measure emotional cues at that particular moment, followed by scenario-based questionnaires involving ethical decision making. Specifically, each scenario depicted a realistic job context and a hypothetical dilemma with multiple choice questions requiring situational judgment. Some of the ethical issues at hand were informed consent, conflict of interest,