Understanding Affect in Organizations

http://opr.sagepub.com/Organizational Psychology Review

http://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/147The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/2041386610390257

2011 1: 147Organizational Psychology ReviewJennifer M. George

Dual tuning : A minimum condition for understanding affect in organizations?

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology

can be found at:Organizational Psychology ReviewAdditional services and information for

http://opr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://opr.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/147.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Apr 8, 2011Version of Record >>

by Dan Stoica on January 29, 2012opr.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://opr.sagepub.com/http://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/147http://www.sagepublications.comhttp://www.eawop.org/web/http://opr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://opr.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/147.refs.htmlhttp://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/2/147.full.pdfhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://opr.sagepub.com/

Article

Dual tuning: A minimumcondition for understandingaffect in organizations?

Jennifer M. GeorgeRice University

AbstractWhile research on affect in organizations has flourished, affect has tended to be approached in apiecemeal or asymmetrical fashion. Traditionally, researchers have focused on potential benefits ofpositive affect or potential downsides of negative affect. This paper suggests that both positive andnegative affect are functional and adaptive and should be considered in tandem or from adual-tuning perspective (George & Zhou, 2007). Positive and negative emotions are automaticallyand adaptively triggered in response to stimuli that have implications for well-being. Evolutionarypsychology, the social-functionalist perspective, the nature of organizing, antecedents of emotions,emotional ambivalence, and the positivity offset and negativity bias all suggest that positive andnegative emotions should be considered from a dual-tuning perspective. The effects of positive andnegative mood on cognitive processes, motivation, and effort support a dual-tuning approach tomood. Implications of a dual-tuning approach for understanding affect in organizations arediscussed.

Keywordsaffect, emotion, mood, dual tuning

Paper received 15 June 2010; revised version accepted 21 October 2010.

Research on affect (i.e., mood and emotion) in

the workplace has flourished in the past few

decades. However, this research has, by and

large, considered affect in a somewhat piece-

meal or asymmetrical fashion. That is, many

studies have focused on the potential benefits of

positive affect. For example, recent reviews

highlight the fact that positive affect has been

shown to be positively related to a number

of organizationally functional outcomes (e.g.,

Corresponding author:

Jennifer M. George, Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Business and Department of Psychology, Rice University, 6100 Main

Street, Houston, TX 77005, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Organizational Psychology Review1(2) 147164

The Author(s) 2011Reprints and permission:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/2041386610390257

opr.sagepub.com

OrganizationalPsychologyReview


http://opr.sagepub.com/

Barsade & Gibson, 2007; Brief & Weiss, 2002).

In fact, in her recent review, Elfenbein (2008,

p. 325) goes so far as to suggest that There is a

temptation in the management literature to

argue for the inherent goodness of positive

emotion and the inherent badness of negative

emotion. Consistent with this observation,

George (2009) suggests that in job design

research, an implicit assumption is that positive

affective reactions are desirable and negative

affective reactions are undesirable.

Nonetheless, contemporary research indi-

cates that the effects of negative affect in

organizations are more nuanced (e.g., van

Kleef, De Dreu, & Manstead, 2004; van Kleef

et al., 2009). For example, Sy, Cote, and

Saavedra (2005) found that while groups with a

leader in a positive mood had higher coordi-

nation than groups with a leader in a negative

mood, the groups with a leader in a negative

mood exerted higher levels of effort. As another

example, Forgas (2007) found that people in

negative moods developed better persuasive

messages than people in positive moods. And

research by Tamir et al. suggests that people

sometimes want to experience negative emo-

tions when they believe that such experience

will be useful for goal attainment (e.g., Tamir,

2009; Tamir, Chiu, & Gross, 2007; Tamir &

Ford, 2009).

Both positive and negative affect are func-

tional and adaptive in peoples everyday lives

as well as in the workplace. Moreover, rather

than considering each type of affect or emotion

separately or in a piecemeal fashion, a greater

understanding of the role of affect in organi-

zations might be achieved by considering their

combined or joint effects (i.e., dual tuning;

George & Zhou, 2007). In the course of a work

day or work week, organizational members are

bound to experience both positive and negative

affect. To understand how the experience of

affect arises and influences organizational

members and their behaviors, focusing on one

type of affect (e.g., positive affect) to the

exclusion of another (e.g., negative affect)

likely provides an incomplete and potentially

misleading account of affect in the workplace.

In the next sections of the paper, I highlight

the functions that positive and negative affect

serve in peoples lives and in the workplace.

I present theorizing and research which

suggests that rather than studying positive or

negative affect in a separate or piecemeal

fashion, a more veridical account of the role of

affect in organizations might be obtained by

considering their combined effects. Lastly,

I draw some implications for future theorizing

and research that considers the dual-tuning role

of affect. Throughout this paper, I use the term

affect to refer to both moods and emotions

(George, 1996). Additionally, in this paper

I am primarily concerned with the experience

of affect while acknowledging that the expres-

sion, regulation, and perception of affect in

others are also of fundamental importance in

organizations. At times, I briefly touch upon the

latter topics but my primary concern is with the

intraindividual experience of affect.

Positive and negative affect arefunctional and adaptive

In order to understand the adaptive and

functional value of positive and negative affect,

it is important to distinguish between emotions

and moods. As I will describe below, while

emotions are relatively intense, short-lived

feelings that are linked to their antecedent

causes, demand attention, and interrupt ongoing

cognitive processes and behaviors (Forgas,

1992; George, 2000; W. N. Morris, 1989;

Simon, 1982), moods are less intense states that

are not linked to their causes and do not inter-

rupt thought processes and behaviors (Brady,

1970; Clark & Isen, 1982; Forgas, 1992;

George, 2000; George & Brief, 1992; W. N.

Morris, 1989; Nowlis, 1970; Ryle, 1950).

Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind that

in the organizational psychology/behavior

literature, these distinctions are often blurry

(Gooty, Gavin, & Ashkanasy, 2009).

148 Organizational Psychology Review 1(2)



Positive and negative emotions

Emotions are nonconsciously and automatically

triggered by encounters with stimuli that are

relevant for survival and well-being (Damasio,

1999). While emotions can and often are

consciously experienced, researchers appear to

concur that a substantial amount of emotional

processes occur without conscious awareness,

there is a progression from nonconscious emo-

tions to experienced or felt emotions, and that

this progression occurs only some of the time

(e.g., Bargh & Ferguson, 2000; Berridge & Win-

kielman, 2003; Damasio, 1994, 1999, 2003;

George, 2009; Scherer, 2005; Winkielman,

Berridge, & Wilbarger, 2005). In particular,

Damasio (1999, p. 51) defines emotions as

. . . complicated collections of chemical and

neural responses, forming a pattern; all

emotions have some kind of regulatory role to

play, leading in one way or another to the

creation of circumstances advantageous to the

organism . . . emotions are biologically deter-

mined processes, depending on innately set

brain devices, laid down by a long evolutionary

history.

When emotions are consciously experienced,

they tend to be intense, relatively short-lived,

feelings that are linked to specific stimuli or

events, demand attention, and interrupt ongoing

thought processes and behaviors (Forgas, 1992;

George, 2000; W. N. Morris, 1989; Simon,

1982). Consciously experienced emotions

provide signals to individuals of factors in the

environment that are in need of focused attention

or no longer need attention (Frijda, 1988, 2007).

Evolutionary psychology suggests that

emotions are orchestrated responses that have

evolved to respond to adaptation challenges

(Cosmides & Tooby, 2000). More specifically,

Cosmides and Tooby (2000, p. 92) indicate that

Each emotion entrains various other adaptive

programs deactivating some, activating

others, and adjusting the modifiable parameters

of still others so that the whole system

operates in a particularly harmonious and

efficacious way when the individual is confront-

ing certain kinds of triggering conditions or

situations.

As such, emotions have the potential to

influence multiple aspects of human function-

ing such as attention, perception, memory,

information acquisition and processing, goals,

motivation, communication, and behavior as

well as physiological states (Cosmides &

Tooby, 2000).

Positive and negative emotions serve impor-

tant functions for individuals that can be viewed

at multiple levels of analysis. More specifically,

Keltner and Haidt (1999) suggest that the social

functions of emotions can be considered at four

levels of analysis: the individual, the dyad, the

group, and the culture. As mentioned above, at

the individual level of analysis, emotions provide

important signals to individuals about stimuli

and events that have implications for well-being

and lead to action readiness to respond to

relevant cues in the environment (e.g., Frijda,

1988, 2007; Parrott, 2002). Emotions enlighten

individuals about potential threats and

opportunities and prepare individuals to respond

to them (Campos, Campos, & Barrett, 1989;

Frijda, Kuipers, & ter Schure, 1989; Keltner,

Haidt, & Shiota, 2006; Lerner & Keltner,

2001; Levenson, 1999). For example, the fear

that workers experience upon learning about

impending layoffs is an important signal that

can prompt workers to address issues pertain-

ing to their economic security. As another

example, the anger a manager experiences

upon learning about questionable activities is

functional as it is an important signal that

things are not as they should be and prepare

the manager to take corrective action.

While from a hedonistic perspective, positive

emotions are clearly desirable, oftentimes there

are real problems in organizations, sources of

threat and harm, instances of wrongdoing, and so

forth (George, 2009; Parrott, 2002). When

George 149



organizational members encounter these kinds

of problems, negative emotions are valuable and

adaptive for their signaling and action-readiness

functions (Elfenbein, 2008; Frijda, 1988, 2007;

George, 2009; Parrott, 2002).

The social functions of emotions at higher

levels of analysis (i.e., dyad, group, and culture;

Keltner & Haidt, 1999; Keltner et al., 2006)

clearly are relevant to understanding affect in

organizations as well. At each of these levels,

the experience, expression, and perception of

emotion as well as reactions to the emotions of

others help collectives to achieve their goals

(Keltner & Haidt, 1999). For example, at the

group level of analysis, George and King (2007)

suggest that groups working on complex,

ambiguous, and dynamic tasks in uncertain

environments might benefit from affective het-

erogeneity. Consistent with this reasoning,

Doucet, Wang, Waller, and Phillips (2005)

found that differences in positive affect in dyads

were positively associated with dyad effective-

ness on a flight simulation. Importantly, Doucet

et al. (2005) and George and King (2007) are

concerned with affective states, not affective

traits (see Barsade, Ward, Turner, & Sonnenfeld,

2000, for an alternative trait perspective).

At the organizational level of analysis, the

case has been made for considering both positive

and negative emotions (e.g., Fineman, 2006;

J. Martin, Knopoff, & Beckman, 1998). As Weick

(2003) suggests, organizations are inherently

equivocal systems, an excessive focus on the

positive or the negative is dysfunctional, and a

certain degree of ambivalence between optimism

and wariness is beneficial. Naturally occurring

emotions provide organizational members with

powerful signals of both salient opportunities and

threats. Thus, both positive and negative emotions

should be seen as functional and adaptive in

organizational life.

From evolutionary and social-functionist

perspectives, positive emotions and negative

emotions are purposeful (Cosmides & Tooby,

2000; Keltner & Haidt, 1999). While the orga-

nizational literature traditionally has tended to

implicitly or explicitly equate positive emotions

with functional outcomes and negative emo-

tions with dysfunctional outcomes (Elfenbein,

2008; George, 2009), clearly both kinds of

emotions are experienced in organizations and

the potential benefits of negative emotions are

receiving increasing attention in the literature.

In any case, rather than operating from the

premise that positive emotions should be

promoted and negative emotions minimized in

organizations, organizational scholars should

focus on understanding the dual-tuning role that

emotion plays (George & Zhou, 2007). That is,

positive emotion and negative emotion tune

organizational members to respond appropriately

to the changing landscape of organizational life.

A dual-tuning perspective on emotion sug-

gests that rather than treating a negative emo-

tion such as anger as harmful and something

to be minimized as much as possible, research

should focus on the functions that anger serves

in organizations. As Gibson and Callister

(2010, pp. 7272) note in their recent review,

. . . there has been a substantial shift in the

research literature from identifying ways in

which anger expressions primarily lead to

harmful effects (e.g., Glomb, 2002) to empha-

sizing the utility of emotions in responding

and adapting to events and circumstances, a

social functional approach (Frijda, 1986;

Keltner & Gross, 1999). (Original emphasis)

Thus, while anger has been linked to what

are often thought of as dysfunctional outcomes

in organizations (e.g., Aquino, Douglas, &

Martinko, 2004; Aquino, Tripp, & Bies, 2001;

Bies & Tripp, 1998), Gibson and Callister

(2010) also review research which suggests the

positive functions of anger at different levels of

analysis (e.g., Bies, 1987; Frijda, 1986; Tafrate,

Kassinove, & Dundin, 2002). For example,

experienced and expressed anger can commu-

nicate and inform organizational members

about salient causes of unfairness and injustice

in organizations which can be beneficial in




terms of rectifying inequities (Bies, 1987;

Gibson & Callister, 2010). However, to the

extent that an organizations culture and norms

dictate that negative emotions like anger

are dysfunctional and should be suppressed

(Gibson & Callister, 2010), when organiza-

tional members do experience anger, they may

nonetheless remain silent due to fear of

negative ramifications (Kish-Gephart, Detert,

Trevino, & Edmondson, 2009). This silence can

be dysfunctional to the extent that there are real

injustices.

Research in the social-functional tradition

suggests that specific emotions that have the

same valence may have differential effects on

judgment and decision making (e.g., Tiedens

& Linton, 2001). For example, fear results in

pessimistic judgments whereas anger results

in optimistic judgments (Lerner & Keltner,

2000, 2001). Moreover, the specific emotions

that interaction partners such as partners in

negotiations display can differentially affect

subsequent behavior directed toward those part-

ners (M. W. Morris & Keltner, 2000; van Kleef,

De Dreu, & Manstead, 2006). More generally,

the emotions as social information model sug-

gests that expressed emotions influence observ-

ers emotions and provide observers with social

information about interaction partners and the

context (van Kleef, 2010; van Kleef, Anastaso-

poulou, & Nijstad, 2010).

When negative emotions are viewed as

dysfunctional, their signaling value may be

lost and opportunities to rectify problems may

go unaddressed. For example, an extensive

body of literature focuses on workplace stress

which entails negative emotions (Motowidlo,

Packard, & Manning, 1986). However, this

literature does not tend to view experienced

stress as a powerful signal for the need to

change. As Elfenbein (2008, p. 326) notes,

stress . . . pernicious effects result fromignoring its helpful side stress is supposed to

be a warning signal for the need to change,

but its underlying causes often do not get

changed in spite of the warning.

Importantly, a dual-tuning perspective on

emotion in organizations suggests that positive

and negative emotion should be considered

jointly or in tandem, not in isolation from each

other. Several lines of reasoning bear on this

assertion. First, at multiple levels of analysis, the

same factors or events that can trigger positive

emotions in organizations also have the potential

to trigger negative emotions and vice versa.

At the individual level of analysis, working

on difficult projects and trying to achieve

challenging goals can lead to both positive

emotions (e.g., when important progress is

made and successes achieved) and negative

emotions (e.g., when interruptions, setbacks,

and unanticipated problems occur) (Zohar,

Tzischinski, & Epstein, 2003). In fact, the

very kinds of work tasks that are likely to lead

to positive emotions also have a strong

potential to lead to negative emotions and vice

versa as it is on these kinds of tasks that

discrepancies, inconsistencies, or interruptions

are more likely to occur or be removed or

overcome (George & Jones, 2001; Weick,

1995). For example, trying to publish in top

journals likely yields more positive and neg-

ative emotions for professors than simply

trying to get their work in print no matter

what the quality of the publication outlet. To

understand the emotional underpinnings of the

process, both types of emotions need to be

taken into account. While not focused on tasks

per se but rather on the core job dimensions in

the job characteristics model, Saavedra and

Kwun (2000) found that task significance and

autonomy were positively related to enthusi-

asm; task identity and feedback were nega-

tively related to nervousness; and skill variety

was positively related to nervousness.

Proposition 1a: Work tasks that elicit positive

emotions also elicit negative emotions (at dif-

ferent times).

Proposition 1b: Work tasks that elicit negative

emotions also elicit positive emotions (at dif-

ferent times).

George 151



At the dyadic level of analysis, while

interpersonal relationships in organizations are

sometimes of short duration, they often entail

high intensity and close interdependence (Weick,

1995). As such, they can result in positive

emotions (e.g., when one party serves to unex-

pectedly accelerate or facilitate the others goals,

plans, or projects) and negative emotions (e.g.,

when one party serves to unexpectedly interrupt

or disrupt the others goals, plans, or projects)

(Weick, 1995). Both kinds of reactions are likely

over the course of the relationship (as is true of

close relations in life). In order to understand the

nature of relationships and their consequences in

organizations, both positive and negative emo-

tions need to be taken into account.

Proposition 2a: Dyadic relations in the work-

place that elicit positive emotions also elicit

negative emotions (at different times).

Proposition 2b: Dyadic relations in the work-

place that elicit negative emotions also elicit

positive emotions (at different times).

At the organizational level of analysis, the

fact that organizations are inherently complex,

fragile, difficult to comprehend, and vulnerable

to mistakes and errors (Weick, 2003) suggests

that negative emotions lurk under the surface of

positive emotions and positive emotions can

arise in the aftermath of negative emotions. As

Weick (2003, p. 69, 79) suggests:

When people organize, they often create a con-

text where people are thrown into equivocal

streams of events that can be interrupted by

unexpected events [ . . . ] The interface between

positivity and tragedy is especially visible in

the phenomena of mistakes, contradictory

adaptive tendencies, the threat of disorganiza-

tion, and organizational defenses [ . . . ] previ-

ous actions that looked neutral or negative

were seen as nonobvious outcroppings of

positivity [ . . . ] many of the most conspicuous

examples of positive organizing are relatively

rare and appear mostly after organizing breaks

down.

Qualitative studies at the organizational

level of analysis suggest that both positive and

negative emotions are experienced by organi-

zational members at different times (Huy, 2002;

J. Martin et al., 1998).

Proposition 3: Within organizations, organiza-

tional members experience positive emotions

and negative emotions (at different times).

A second line of reasoning in support of a

dual-tuning approach to emotion in organizations

comes from work on emotional ambivalence.

Emotional ambivalence refers to the fact that

stimuli and events can create emotional blends

or mixed emotional experiences (Fong, 2006;

Scherer & Tannenbaum, 1986). For example,

an important job interview has the potential to

create both excitement and fear in a job applicant;

excitement over the prospects of landing the

position and fear about not making a good

impression. As another example, a performance

appraisal review session with a supervisor can

create both excitement and fear; excitement over

the possibility of receiving a positive review

and fear about receiving negative feedback.

Consistent with this reasoning, Scherer and

Tannenbaum (1986) found that blended emotions

are often experienced in reaction to emotionally

significant events. Results of a laboratory study

conducted by Fong and Tiedens (2002) suggest

that women in high-status positions may experi-

ence blends of positive and negative affect and

experiments conducted by Fong (2006) suggest

that emotional ambivalence may be related to

making unusual associations. In Experiment 1,

Fong (2006) induced emotional ambivalence by

asking respondents to remember and describe

an event in which they felt happy and sad and in

Experiment 2 emotional ambivalence was

induced by watching a film clip.

The evaluative space model (ESM) of affect

and emotion provides one potential explanation

for why emotional ambivalence or mixed emo-

tions sometimes occur (Cacioppo & Berntson,

1994; Cacioppo, Gardner, & Berntson, 1997,




1999; Larsen, McGraw, & Cacioppo, 2001).

Consistent with the theorizing of Lang (1995) and

others, the ESM posits that experienced affect is

the result of two partially separable neural pro-

cesses or evaluative channels that can operate in

parallel, one related to approach, nurturance,

safety, and positivity and the other related to

threat, aversion, avoidance, and negativity

(Cacioppo & Bernston, 1994; Cacioppo et al.,

1997, 1999; Larsen et al., 2001). These two eva-

luative channels can be reciprocally activated

(e.g., a stimulus has opposite effects on the acti-

vation of positivity and negativity), activated in

an uncoupled fashion (e.g., a stimulus activates

only positivity or negativity), or nonreciprocally

coactivated (e.g., a stimulus increases both posi-

tivity and negativity) (Cacioppo et al., 1999;

Larsen et al., 2001). With reciprocal activation,

both channels operate in a consistent fashion to

facilitate a unified reaction to a stimulus; this is

likely to be common and can explain why people

typically do not feel happy and sad at the same

time (Larsen et al., 2001). With nonreciprocal

coactivation, the response to stimuli is ambiva-

lent. As Larsen et al. (2001, p. 687) indicate, If

the affect system evolved to guide behavior [ . . . ]we would expect coactivation to be unpleasant,

unstable, and often short-lived.

While mixed or ambivalent emotions may be

somewhat uncommon, the ESM suggests that in

emotionally complex situations, ambivalent

emotions can occur because both positivity and

negativity channels might be activated simul-

taneously (Larsen, McGraw, Mellers, &

Cacioppo, 2004). Consistent with this reason-

ing, Larsen et al. (2001) found that immediately

after movie-goers watched the film Life is

Beautiful, college students moved out of their

dormitories, and college students graduated

from college (all three presumably representing

emotionally complex situations), mixed emo-

tions of happiness and sadness were more likely

to be experienced than were experienced by

similar participants in more usual situations

(e.g., a regular day in college). On a laboratory

gambling task, Larsen et al. (2004) found that

disappointing wins (winning a smaller amount

in the context of the possibility of a larger win)

and relieving losses (losing a smaller amount in

the context of the possibility of a larger loss)

reported experiencing simultaneous positive

and negative affect.

As mentioned earlier, given the equivocality

of much of organizational life, emotionally

complex situations are likely to arise in the

workplace and to the extent they do, have the

potential to generate ambivalent emotions. For

example, both collaboration and competition

often occur in the workplace. When workers

cooperate with each other, close personal rela-

tions often result. However, at certain points,

cooperators are put into competitive situations

(e.g., only one person out of a group will receive

a valued promotion). If your friend gets pro-

moted and you do not, simultaneous feelings of

happiness and sadness may result; happiness for

your friends good fortune and sadness for

not being promoted yourself. As another

example, based on a qualitative study of Amway

distributors, Pratt (2000) suggests that organi-

zational members can have ambivalent identi-

fications with their employers resulting in

ambivalent affective reactions.

To the extent that ambivalent emotions occur

in organizations, focusing asymmetrically on

positive emotions (e.g., as in positive psychol-

ogy research) or on negative emotions (e.g., as in

job stress research) provides an incomplete and

potentially misleading picture of emotional life

in organizations. Positive emotions that are

accompanied by the simultaneous experience of

negative emotions and vice versa are likely to

have different antecedents and consequences

than are nonambivalent emotions.

Proposition 4a: Positive emotions that are

accompanied by the simultaneous experience

of negative emotions have different antecedents

and consequences than nonambivalent positive

emotions.

Proposition 4b: Negative emotions that are

accompanied by the simultaneous experience

George 153



of positive emotions have different antecedents

and consequences than nonambivalent negative

emotions.

A third line of reasoning in support of a

dual-tuning approach to emotion comes from

work on the positivity offset and negativity bias.

The positivity offset is the tendency for there

to be a weak positive (approach) motivational

output at zero input [ . . . ] the motivation toapproach is stronger than the motivation to avoid

at very low levels of evaluative activation

(Cacioppo et al., 1999, p. 847, original emphasis).

The positivity offset has evolutionary value as it

suggests that in relatively neutral environments,

people will be oriented toward exploration and

learning (Cacioppo et al., 1999). And research

in a variety of domains supports the existence

of a positivity bias. For example, studies have

found that people tend to have exaggerated

predictions of the chances that they will have pos-

itive outcomes occur in the coming week, believe

that they have lower health risks than others, feel

that joining a club will yield them more positive

relative to negative outcomes than others, and

more generally tend to have their day-to-day

affective experience comprised of low levels of

positive affect (Brinthaupt, Moreland, & Levine,

1991; Cacioppo et al., 1999; Diener & Diener,

1996; Hoorens & Buunk, 1993; Pulford &

Colman, 1996; Watson, 2000).

However, the positivity offset which is rel-

evant to affect in relatively neutral situations or

forecasting of future events needs to be con-

sidered in conjunction with the negativity bias.

The negativity bias refers to the fact that neg-

ative information, events, and stimuli receive

more attention than positive information,

events, and stimuli (Cacioppo et al., 1999).

As Vaish, Grossman, and Woodward (2008,

p. 383) indicate based on their review:

There is ample empirical evidence for an

asymmetry in the way that adults use positive

versus negative information to make sense of

their world; specifically, across an array of

psychological situations and tasks, adults

display a negativity bias, or the propensity to

attend to, learn from, and use negative infor-

mation far more than positive information.

Thus, both in everyday life and in the

workplace, people are more likely to recall

negative events and information (Dasborough,

2006; Scherer & Tannenbaum, 1986).

The combination of a positivity offset and a

negativity bias likely serve important evolu-

tionary adaptive value in both encouraging

curiosity, exploration, and learning, while also

protecting people from harm and potentially

dangerous situations (Cacioppo & Bernston,

1999; Cacioppo et al., 1997, 1999; Vaish, et al.,

2008). This combination also suggests that in

organizational psychology, positive and nega-

tive affect should be considered in tandem. That

is, research focused on positive affect needs to

acknowledge the role of the negativity bias as

negative feedback, events, and situations occur

in the workplace and even seemingly positive

experiences can have some negative undertones

that might receive a significant amount of

attention. For example, a subordinate receiving

a generally positive performance review might

nonetheless focus on the minority of perfor-

mance dimensions in which a supervisor indi-

cates that improvement is needed and come

away from the experience feeling somewhat

demoralized. On a somewhat different, but

related note, Fredrickson (1998) suggests that

positive emotions may help to dissipate the

effects of negative emotions that cease to be

relevant.

As another example, the combined effects of

the positivity offset and the negativity bias have

important implications for our understanding of

trust in the workplace. Peoples initial reactions

to others in the workplace is to suspend belief

that they are untrustworthy and proceed as if

they are to be trusted (Jones & George, 1998;

Luhmann, 1980). At work and as in everyday

life, it is far easier to assume that the people one

encounters are trustworthy than it is to presume




otherwise and put forth the effort to discover

their true values, motives, and goals (Deutsch,

1958, 1960). Thus, when encountering a new

coworker, new supervisor, or new customer or

client, employees are likely to suspend belief

that they are untrustworthy and trust them in a

conditional manner (Jones & George, 1998),

consistent with the positivity offset. None-

theless, the negativity bias protects against

being gullible; by paying more attention to

negative information, employees are protected

against being harmed by someone who is not to

be trusted. Hence, the negativity bias provides a

potential explanation for why trust can be very

quickly dissolved following a transgression.

More generally, the positivity offset likely

facilitates exploration and learning in organi-

zations while the negativity bias protects

against errors and mistakes.

Proposition 5: The positivity offset facilitates

exploration and learning in organizations

while the negativity bias protects against

errors and mistakes.

All in all, positive and negative emotions are

functional and adaptive for people both in the

workplace and in everyday life, helping them to

respond appropriately to the situations and

events they encounter. While their evolutionary

and adaptive functions alone speak to the need

to consider them in tandem or from a dual-

tuning perspective, the fact that the same kinds

of events or circumstances have the potential to

trigger both positive and negative emotions,

emotional ambivalence, and the positivity off-

set and negativity bias provide further evidence

in support of a dual-tuning approach.

Dual tuning typically takes place over time

except in the case of emotional ambivalence in

which dual tuning takes place at the same

moment in time. In either case, a dual-tuning

perspective suggests that understanding the

causes and consequences of emotion requires

consideration of both positive and negative

emotion. In considering the stream of affect and

behavior in an organization, the effects of

positive affect on behavior and outcomes will

vary depending on the extent to which negative

affect is experienced (at different times) and

vice versa.

Proposition 6a: Positive emotion experienced

over a time period has differential effects on

behavior and outcomes to the extent that neg-

ative emotion is also experienced over that

time period.

Proposition 6b: Negative emotion experienced


behavior and outcomes to the extent that pos-

itive emotion is also experienced over that

time period.

Positive and negative mood

Moods are less intense than emotions and are

pervasive and generalized affective states that

are not directly linked to any particular stimu-

lus, object, event, individual, or behavior

(Brady, 1970; George, 2000; George & Brief,

1992; W. N. Morris, 1989; Nowlis, 1970; Ryle,

1950). Given their relatively low intensity,

moods do not interrupt ongoing thought pro-

cesses or behaviors or demand attention (Clark

& Isen, 1982; Forgas, 1992). Moods provide the

affective coloring or context for day-to-day life

and can have profound effects on thoughts pro-

cesses and behaviors (e.g., Bower, 1981; Fie-

dler, 1991; Forgas, 1995; Forgas & George,

2001; George, 1989; George & Brief, 1992;

Isen & Shalker, 1982; Isen, Shalker, Clark, &

Karp, 1978). Emotions can lead to moods such

that when the intensity of an emotion abates

because its causes have been addressed, it goes

on to influence thought processes and behaviors

through an ongoing mood state of a similar

valence to the prior emotion (George, 2000).

An overarching reason why it is important to

consider positive and negative mood together is

the fact that both mood states are experienced in

the workplace at different times and more

importantly, each mood state leads to distinct

George 155



kinds of cognitive processes including the

processing of information, and effective func-

tioning requires both kinds of cognitive pro-

cessing. More generally, an extensive body of

theorizing and research suggests that in order to

understand how moods influence behavior, the

effects of both negative mood and positive

mood need to be considered (e.g., Kaufmann,

2003; Parrott, 1993; Schwarz, 2000, 2002;

Schwarz & Clore, 1983, 1996, 2003).

More than 25 years ago, Schwarz and Clore

(1983) proposed that moods provide people

with information and that in order to understand

the effects of moods on thought processes,

judgment, and behavior, researchers should

consider the kinds of information that moods

provide. In providing information, moods align

cognitive processes to be in tune with the cir-

cumstances an individual finds him or herself in

(Schwarz, 2002). An extensive body of litera-

ture supports mood-as-information theory (e.g.,

see reviews by Schwarz, 2002; Schwarz &

Clore, 1996, 2003).

Positive moods provide people with infor-

mation that all is going well and the task

environment is more or less trouble-free

(George & Zhou, 2007). Therefore, when peo-

ple are in positive moods, they tend to engage

in less systematic and effortful cognitive pro-

cessing and rely on top-down approaches, pre-

existing schemas, and heuristics (e.g., Park &

Banaji, 2000; Ruder & Bless, 2003; Schwarz,

2002; Schwarz & Clore, 2003) and be more

integrative, playful, and expansive in their

thinking (e.g., Bless & Schwarz, 1999; Clore,

Gasper, & Garvin, 2001). Positive moods pro-

mote global information processing favoring

integration into holistic perspectives (Clore,

Gasper, et al., 2001; Clore, Wyer, et al., 2001)

with global features of stimuli being the focus

of attention (Avramova & Stapel, 2008).

Negative moods provide information that

the status quo is troublesome and the task

environment is problematic (George & Zhou,

2007). Signaling a troubling state of affairs,

negative moods prompt people to focus on

problems, determine what is wrong, and

improve matters. Negative moods result in a

careful, bottom-up, systematic, and analytical

approach to information processing focused

on the facts at hand (Kaufmann, 2003; Schwarz

& Clore, 2003). Negative moods promote

local information processing based on current

data rather than assimilation into global mind-

sets and thus have the potential to lead to

learning when circumstances have changed

(Clore, Gasper, et al., 2001; Clore, Wyer,

et al., 2001). People in negative moods focus

on the specifics and what is distinctive about the

current situation (Avramova & Stapel, 2008).

Clearly, in organizational settings, both

types of cognitive processing are important and

valuable. Organizational members need to

think broadly and expansively and rely on their

existing knowledge structures including their

schemas. Expansive and integrative thinking

can be helpful in charting new directions for a

group or organization to take. At the same time,

however, organizational members need to be

attuned to changing circumstances and recog-

nize when their preconceived mindsets and

assumptions bear reconsideration because the

situation has changed. Systematic and analy-

tical decision making can be helpful in evalu-

ating the feasibility of new directions and in

successfully implementing new initiatives.

Thus, it is not so much that positive moods are

beneficial and negative moods are detrimental,

as has been traditionally assumed (implicitly or

explicitly) in the organizational psychology

literature, but rather that both moods states are

functional to the extent that they are experi-

enced at different times.

Proposition 7a: Positive mood experienced


behavior and outcomes to the extent that

negative mood is also experienced over that

time period.

Proposition 7b: Negative mood experienced


behavior and outcomes to the extent that




positive mood is also experienced over that

time period.

Additionally, positive moods can be bene-

ficial in terms of providing people with a sense

of enthusiasm, optimism, and self-efficacy

when approaching difficult tasks while negative

moods can propel people to exert more effort on

these tasks and persist in the face of setbacks

(George & Zhou, 2007). Consistent with

mood-as-information theory, the mood as input

model suggests that when actually working on

tasks, people may use their mood as an indica-

tor of their progress on tasks (when objective

indicators are not available) (George & Zhou,

2002; L. L. Martin, Abend, Sedikides, & Green,

1997; L. L. Martin, Achee, Ward, & Harlow,

1993; L. L. Martin & Stoner, 1996; L. L. Martin,

Ward, Achee, & Wyer, 1993). In essence,

positive mood signals that good progress has

been made and more effort may not be needed.

Particularly on highly ambiguous tasks when

people have to judge for themselves if the end

result is good enough or if it is somehow lack-

ing, people in positive moods are more likely to

feel that they have done a good job and more

effort is not needed. In signaling a problematic

state of affairs, negative moods may result in

people being more critical of their progress and

propel them to exert more effort to achieve a

desired outcome or level of performance

(George & Zhou, 2002).

When organizational members experience

positive and negative moods at different times

throughout the work day or week, the work that

they are engaged in will benefit from the tuning

effects of each type of mood state. Consider the

case of a financial analyst employed by a major

book publishing company preparing a report on

the feasibility of opening up a new subsidiary in

another country. There are high levels of

uncertainty and ambiguity entailed in this

potential venture and the analyst is charged

with taking into account multiple factors to

portray a well-researched and unbiased per-

spective and recommendation. Naturally

occurring positive moods experienced while

working on the report help the analyst to think

expansively about how the new subsidiary

might tap into as of yet underserved markets

in the region as well as how the new subsidiary

could help to serve as a test ground for new

initiatives in other established subsidiaries.

Naturally occurring negative moods prompt the

analyst to explore political and environmental

risk factors in the country under consideration,

conduct research to estimate their potential

probabilities and the losses that could be

incurred, and think of ways that the impact of

these risk factors could be potentially mitigated.

While this is clearly an overly simplistic exam-

ple, it does underscore the fact that naturally

occurring fluctuations in mood states can

prompt workers to advantageously approach

problems and opportunities in multiple ways

and from multiple perspectives.

Proposition 8: Positive and negative mood

contribute to behavior and performance in dif-

ferent, complementary ways.

In understanding the multiple ways in which

positive and negative mood can influence

judgment and behavior, the affect infusion

model (AIM) suggests that it is very important

to take into account the work context (Forgas,

1995; Forgas & George, 2001). Essentially the

effects of positive and negative mood can flip-

flop or reverse themselves, depending upon the

context (Forgas & George, 2001).

Proposition 9: The effects of positive and neg-

ative mood on behavior and performance

depend upon the work context.

Considering mood at work from a dual-

tuning perspective suggests that rather than

equating positive mood with desirable out-

comes and negative mood with undesirable out-

comes in organizations, researchers should

focus on how each mood state serves adaptive

functions in organizational life. Additionally,

it suggest that researchers recognize that

George 157



positive moods do not always led to the most

desirable outcomes and also pay greater

attention to the potential benefits of negative

affect (van Knippenberg, Kooij-de Bode, &

van Ginkel, 2010, p. 739). Consistent with this

reasoning, George and Zhou (2007) found that

creativity was highest when workers experi-

enced both positive and negative moods over

time and worked in a supportive context.

Conclusions

While it is certainly heartening to witness the

growing attention that has been paid to the role

of affect in the workplace in the past few

decades, it is time for organizational research-

ers to acknowledge affect from a dual-tuning

perspective. Specifically, rather than regarding

positive affect as largely functional and some-

thing to be promoted and negative affect as

largely dysfunctional and something to be mini-

mized, researchers should consider the com-

bined effects of positive and negative affect.

Both positive and negative affect are adaptive

for different reasons and it is through their com-

bined effects that effective functioning results

in and outside of organizations.

A dual-tuning perspective on affect in orga-

nizations raises several interesting questions for

future theorizing and research. For example,

given the fact that negative emotions and

moods are hedonically unpleasant and the fact

that organizational norms often dictate suppres-

sing negative feelings and being positive and

upbeat, future research might focus on how

workers might be encouraged to understand the

causes of their negative feelings and think of

ways to improve a potentially problematic state

of affairs. Moreover, researchers could focus on

the potential cognitive consequences of sup-

pressing negative emotions in organizations

(Richards & Gross, 1999, 2000). Relatedly,

research could address how managers can be

encouraged to be more receptive to having

problems brought to their attention as well as

potential solutions to these problems. As

another example, research could explore the

causes and consequences of the timing pattern

of alternations in positive and negative emo-

tions and mood states over the course of a day

or a week. As a final example, research could

address the implications of dual tuning in dif-

ferent substantive areas in organizational psy-

chology and identify the key aspects of the

work context that may influence dual-tuning

effects in these areas.

The dominant and essential role that affect

plays in human functioning, in combination

with the inherently fragile and equivocal nature

of organizations (Weick, 1995, 2003), suggests

that a dual-tuning approach to affect holds con-

siderable promise for advancing future theoriz-

ing and research. Hopefully this paper will

encourage researchers to consider the roles of

positive and negative affect in tandem, so as

to gain a better appreciation of the causes and

consequences of affect at work.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from

any funding agency in the public, commercial,

or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Aquino, K., Douglas, S., & Martinko, M. J. (2004).

Overt anger in response to victimization: Attribu-

tional style and organizational norms as modera-

tors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,

9, 152164.

Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., & Bies, R. J. (2001). How

employees respond to personal offense: The

effects of blame attribution, victim status, and

offender status on revenge and reconciliation in

the workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology,

86, 5259.

Avramova, Y. R., & Stapel, D. A. (2008). Moods as

spotlights: The influence of mood on accessibility

effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-

chology, 95, 542554.

Bargh, J. A., & Ferguson, M. L. (2000). Beyond

behaviorism: On the automaticity of higher




mental processes. Psychological Bulletin, 126,

925945.

Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (2007). Why does

affect matter in organizations? Academy of

Management Perspectives, 21, 3659.

Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F., &

Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2000). To your hearts content:

A model of affective diversity in top management

teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45,

802836.

Berridge, K. C., & Winkielman, P. (2003). What is

an unconscious emotion? (The case for uncon-

scious liking). Cognition and Emotion, 17,

181211.

Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: The

management of moral outrage. In B. M. Staw &

L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organiza-

tional behavior (pp. 289319). Greenwich, CT:

JAI Press.

Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1998). The many faces of

revenge: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In

R. W. Griffin, A. M. OLeary-Kelly, & J. Collins

(Eds.), Dysfunctional behavior in organizations

(pp. 4968). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Bless, H., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Sufficient and

necessary conditions in dual process models: The

case of mood and processing style. In S. Chaiken

& Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process models in social

psychology (pp. 423440). New York, NY:

Guilford.

Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American

Psychologist, 36, 129148.

Brady, J. V. (1970). Emotion: Some conceptual

problems and psycho-physiological experiments.

In M. B. Arnold (Ed.), Feelings and emotions:

The Loyola Symposium (pp. 69100). San Diego,

CA: Academic Press.

Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational

behavior: Affect in the workplace. In S. T. Fiske,

D. L. Schacter, & C. Zahn-Waxler (Eds.), Annual

review of psychology (Vol. 53, pp. 279307).

Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.

Brinthaupt, L. J., Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M.

(1991). Sources of optimism among prospective

group members. Personality and Social Psychol-

ogy Bulletin, 17, 3643.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Bernston, G. G. (1994).

Relationship between attitudes and evaluative

space: A critical review, with emphasis on the

separability of positive and negative substrates.

Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401423.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Bernston, G. G. (1999). The affect

system: Architecture and operating characteris-

tics. Current Directions in Psychological Sci-

ence, 8, 133137.

Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Bernston, G. G.

(1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and

measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative

space. Personality and Social Psychology

Review, 1, 325.

Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Bernston, G. G.

(1999). The affect system has parallel and inte-

grative processing components: Form follows

function. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-

chology, 76, 839855.

Campos, J. J., Campos, R. G., & Barrett, K. C.

(1989). Emergent themes in the study of emo-

tional development and emotion regulation.

Developmental Psychology, 25, 394402.

Clark, M. S., & Isen, A. M. (1982). Toward under-

standing the relationship between feeling states

and social behavior. In A. H. Hastorf & A. M.

Isen (Eds.), Cognitive social psychology

(pp. 73108). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.

Clore, G. L., Gasper, K., & Garvin, E. (2001). Affect

as information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of

affect and social cognition (pp. 121144). Mah-

wah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Clore, G. L., Wyer, R. S., Jr., Dienes, B., Gasper, K.,

Gohm, C., & Isbell, L. (2001). Affective feelings

as feedback: Some cognitive consequences. In L.

L. Martin & G. L. Clore (Eds.), Theories of mood

and cognition: A users guidebook (pp. 2762).

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). Evolutionary

psychology and the emotions. In M. Lewis, &

J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of

emotions (2nd ed., pp. 91115). New York, NY:

Guilford Press.

Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes error: Emotion,

reason, and the human brain. New York, NY:

Putnam.

George 159



Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens.

San Diego, CA: Harcourt.

Damasio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy,

sorrow, and the feeling brain. San Diego, CA:

Harcourt.

Dasborough, M. T. (2006). Cognitive asymmetry in

employee emotional reactions to leadership

behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 17,

163178.

Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of

Conflict Resolution, 2, 265279.

Deutsch, M. (1960). The effect of motivational

orientation upon trust and suspicion. Human

Relations, 13, 123140.

Diener, E., & Deiner, C. (1996). Most people are

happy. Psychological Science, 7, 181185.

Doucet, L., Wang, L., Waller, M., & Phillips, S.

(2005, May). Affective differences, two-person

flight crew dynamics, and effectiveness. Paper

presented at the Role of Emotions in Organiza-

tional Life: An Interdisciplinary Conference,

Toronto, Canada.

Elfenbein, H. A. (2008). Emotion in organizations:

A review and theoretical integration. In J. P.

Walsh & A. P. Brief (Eds.), The Academy of

Management annals (Vol. 1, pp. 315386). New

York, NY: Erlbaum.

Fiedler, K. (1991). On the task, the measures and the

mood in research on affect and social cognition.

In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Emotion and social judg-

ments (pp. 83104). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon

Press.

Fineman, S. (2006). On being positive: Concerns and

counterpoints. Academy of Management Review,

31, 270291.

Fong, C. T. (2006). The effects of emotional ambiva-

lence on creativity. Academy of Management

Journal, 49, 10161030.

Fong, C. T., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2002). Dueling experi-

ences and dual ambivalences: Emotional and

motivational ambivalence of women in high

status positions. Motivation and Emotion, 26,

105121.

Forgas, J. P. (1992). Affect in social judgments and

decisions: A multi-process model. In M. Zanna

(Ed.), Advances in experimental and social

psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 227275). San Diego,

CA: Academic Press.

Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect

infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin,

117, 3966.

Forgas, J. P. (2007). When sad is better than

happy: Negative affect can improve the quality

and effectiveness of persuasive messages and

social influence strategies. Journal of Experi-

mental Social Psychology, 43, 513528.

Forgas, J. P., & George, J. M. (2001). Affective influ-

ences on judgments and behavior in organiza-

tions: An information processing perspective.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 86, 334.

Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive

emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2,

300319.

Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Frijda, N. H. (1988). The laws of emotion. American

Psychologist, 43, 349358.

Frijda, N. H. (2007). The laws of emotion. Mahwah,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & ter Schure, E. (1989).

Relations among emotion, appraisal, and action

readiness. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 57, 212228.

George, J. M. (1989). Mood and absence. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 74, 317324.

George, J. M. (1996). Trait and state affect. In

K. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differences and

behavior in organizations (pp. 145171). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The

role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations,

53, 10271055.

George, J. M. (2009). The illusion of will in organi-

zational behavior research: Nonconscious pro-

cesses and job design. Journal of Management,

35, 13181339.

George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good

doing good: A conceptual analysis of the

mood at work organizational spontaneity

relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112,

310329.




George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2001). Towards a

process model of individual change in organiza-

tions. Human Relations, 54, 419444.

George, J. M., & King, E. B. (2007). Potential pitfalls

of affective convergence in teams: Functions and

dysfunctions of group affective tone. In E. A.

Mannix, M. A. Neale, & C. P. Anderson (Eds.),

Research on managing groups and teams (Vol.

10, pp. 97123). Boston, MA: Elsevier.

George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2002). Understanding

when bad moods foster creativity and good

ones dont: The role of context and clarity of

feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,

687697.

George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a

supportive context: Joint contributions of positive

mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors

to employee creativity. Academy of Management

Journal, 50, 605622.

Gibson, D. E., & Callister, R. R. (2010). Anger in

organizations: Review and integration. Journal

of Management, 36, 6693.

Gooty, J., Gavin, M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2009).

Emotions research in OB: The challenges that lie

ahead. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30,

833838.

Hoorens, V., & Buunk, B. P. (1993). Social compar-

ison of health risks: Locus of control, the person-

positivity bias, and unrealistic optimism. Journal

of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 291302.

Huy, Q. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organiza-

tional continuity and radical change: The contri-

bution of middle managers. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 47, 3169.

Isen, A. M., & Shalker, T. E. (1982). The influence of

mood state on evaluation of positive, neutral, and

negative stimuli. Social Psychology Quarterly,

45, 5863.

Isen, A. M., Shalker, T. E., Clark, M., & Karp, L.

(1978). Affect, accessibility of material in mem-

ory, and behavior: A cognitive loop? Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 112.

Jones, G. R., & George, J. M. (1998). The experience

and evolution of trust: Implications for coopera-

tion and teamwork. Academy of Management

Review, 23, 531546.

Kaufmann, G. (2003). The effect of mood on

creativity in the innovation process. In L. V.

Shavinia (Ed.), The international handbook on

innovation (pp. 191 203). Oxford, UK: Elsevier

Science.

Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (1999). Social functions of

emotions at four levels of analysis. Cognition and

Emotion, 13, 505521.

Keltner, D., Haidt, J., & Shiota, M. N. (2006). Social

functionalism and the evolution of emotions. In

M. Schaller, J. A. Simpson, & D. T. Kenrick

(Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp.

115142). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Kish-Gephart, J. J., Detert, J. R., Trevino, L. K., &

Edmondson, A. C. (2009). Silenced by fear: The

nature, sources, and consequences of fear at

work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 29,

163193.

Lang, P. J. (1995). The emotion probe: Studies of

motivation and attention. American Psychologist,

50, 372385.

Larsen, J. T., McGraw, A. P., & Cacioppo, J. T.

(2001). Can people feel happy and sad at the same

time? Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-

ogy, 81, 684696.

Larsen, J. T., McGraw, A. P., Mellers, B. A., &

Cacioppo, J. T. (2004). The agony of victory and

the thrill of defeat: Mixed emotional reactions to

disappointing wins and relieving losses. Psycho-

logical Science, 15, 325330.

Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence:

Toward a model of emotion-specific influences

on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion,

14, 473493.

Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and

risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-

ogy, 81, 146159.

Levenson, R. W. (1999). The intrapersonal functions

of emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 481504.

Luhmann, N. (1980). Trust and power. New York,

NY: Wiley.

Martin, J., Knopoff, K., & Beckman, C. (1998). An

alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and

emotional labor: Bounded emotionality at The

Body Shop. Administrative Science Quarterly,

43, 429469.

George 161



Martin, L. L., Abend, T., Sedikides, C., & Green, J.

D. (1997). How would I feel if . . . ? Mood as input

to a role fulfillment evaluation process.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

73, 242253.

Martin, L. L., Achee, J. W., Ward, D. W., & Harlow,

T. F. (1993). The role of cognition and effort in

the use of emotions to guide behavior. In R. W.

Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Advances in social

cognition (Vol. 6, pp. 147157). Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Martin, L. L., & Stoner, P. (1996). Mood as input:

What we think about how we feel determines how

we think. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.),

Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals,

affect, and self-regulation (pp. 279301).

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Martin, L. L., Ward, D. W., Achee, J. W., & Wyer, R. S.

(1993). Mood as input: People have to interpret

the motivational implications of their moods.


64, 317326.

Morris, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2000). How emotions

work: The social functions of emotional expres-

sion in negotiations. Research in Organizational

Behavior, 22, 150.

Morris, W. N. (1989). Mood: The frame of mind.

New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.

Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R.

(1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and conse-

quences for job performance. Journal of Applied


Nowlis, V. (1970). Mood: Behavior and experience.

In M. B. Arnold (Ed.), Feelings and emotions:

The Loyola Symposium (pp. 261277). San

Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Park, J., & Banaji, M. R. (2000). Mood and

heuristics: The influence of happy and sad

states on sensitivity and bias in stereotyping.


78, 10051023.

Parrott, W. G. (1993). Beyond hedonism: Motives

for inhibiting good moods and for maintaining

bad moods. In D. M. Wegner & J. W. Pennebaker

(Eds.), Handbook of mental control (pp. 278305).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Parrott, W. G. (2002). The functional utility of

negative emotions. In L. F. Barrett & P. Salovey

(Ed.), The wisdom in feeling: Psychological pro-

cesses in emotional intelligence (pp. 341359).

New York, NY: Guilford.

Pulford, B. D., & Colman, A. M. (1996). Overconfi-

dence, base rates and outcome positivity/negativ-

ity of predicted events. British Journal of


Pratt, M. G. (2000). The good, the bad, and the

ambivalent: Managing identification among

Amway distributors. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 45, 456493.

Richards, J. M., & Gross, J. J. (1999). Composure at

any cost? The cognitive consequences of emotion

suppression. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 25, 10331044.

Richards, J. M., & Gross, J. J. (2000). Emotion reg-

ulation and memory: The cognitive costs of keep-

ing ones cool. Journal of Personality and Social


Ruder, M., & Bless, H. (2003). Mood and the reli-

ance on the ease of retrieval heuristic. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 2032.

Ryle, G. (1950). The concept of mind. London, UK:

Hutchinson.

Saavedra, R., & Kwun, S. K. (2000). Affective states

in job characteristics theory. Journal of Organi-

zational Behavior, 21, 131146.

Scherer, K. R. (2005). Unconscious processes in

emotion: The bulk of the iceberg. In L. F. Barrett,

P. Niedenthal, & P. Winkielman (Eds.), Emotions

and consciousness (pp. 312334). New York,

NY: Guilford.

Scherer, K. R., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1986). Emo-

tional experiences in everyday life: A survey

approach. Motivation and Emotion, 10, 295314.

Schwarz, N. (2000). Emotion, cognition, and

decision making. Cognition and Emotion, 14,

433440.

Schwarz, N. (2002). Situated cognition and the wis-

dom of feelings: Cognitive tuning. In L. F. Barrett

& P. Salovey (Eds.), The wisdom in feelings

(pp. 144166). New York, NY: Guilford.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattri-

bution, and judgments of well-being: Informative




and directive functions of affective states.


45, 513523.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1996). Feelings and

phenomenal experiences. In E. T. Higgins & A.

Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook

of basic principles (pp. 433465). New York,

NY: Guilford.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as infor-

mation. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 296303.

Simon, H. A. (1982). Comments. In M. S. Clark & S.

T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition (pp. 333

342). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sy, T., Cote, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The conta-

gious leader: Impact of the leaders mood on the

mood of group members, group affective tone,

and group processes. Journal of Applied Psychol-

ogy, 90, 295305.

Tafrate, R. C., Kassinove, H., & Dundin, L. (2002).

Anger episodes in high- and low-trait anger com-

munity adults. Journal of Clinical Psychology,

58, 15731591.

Tamir, M. (2009). What do people want to feel and

why? Pleasure and utility in emotion regulation.

Current Directions in Psychological Science,

18(2), 101105.

Tamir, M., Chiu, C., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Business

or pleasure? Utilitarian versus hedonic considera-

tions in emotion regulation. Emotion, 7, 546554.

Tamir, M., & Ford, B. Q. (2009). Choosing to be

afraid: Preferences for fear as a function of goal

pursuit. Emotion, 9, 488497.

Tiedens, L. Z., & Linton, S. (2001). Judgment under

emotional certainty and uncertainty: The effects

of specific emotions on information processing.


81, 973988.

Vaish, A., Grossman, T., & Woodward, A. (2008).

Not all emotions are created equal: The negativity

bias in social-emotional development. Psycholo-

gical Bulletin, 134, 383403.

Van Kleef, G. A. (2010). The emerging view of emo-

tion as social information. Social and Personality

Psychology Compass, 4/5, 331343.

Van Kleef, G. A., Anastasopoulo, C., & Nijstad, B. A.

(2010). Can expressions of anger enhance

creativity? A test of the emotions as social

information (EASI) model. Journal of Experi-

mental Social Psychology, 46, 10421048.

Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead,

A. S. R. (2004). The interpersonal effects of

emotions in negotiations: A motivated informa-

tion processing approach. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 87, 510528.

Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead,

A. S. R. (2006). Supplication and appeasement

in conflict and negotiation: The interpersonal

effects of disappointment, worry, guilt, and

regret. Journal of Personality and Social


Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., Beersma, B., van

Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., &

Damen, F. (2009). Searing sentiment or cold cal-

culation? The effects of leader emotional displays

on team performance depend on follower episte-

mic motivation. Academy of Management Jour-

nal, 52, 562580.

van Knippenberg, D., Kooij-de Bode, H. J. M., & van

Ginkel, W. P. (2010). The interactive effects of

mood and trait negative affect on group decision

making. Organization Science, 21, 731744.

Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New

York, NY: Guilford.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Weick, K. E. (2003). Positive organizing and

organizational tragedy. In K. S. Cameron,

J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive

organizational scholarship: Foundations of a

new discipline (pp. 6680). San Francisco,

CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Winkielman, P., Berridge, K. C., & Wilbarger, J. L.

(2005). Emotion, behavior, and conscious experi-

ence: Once more without feeling. In L. F. Barrett,

P. Niedenthal, & P. Winkielman (Eds.), Emotion

and consciousness (pp. 335362). New York,

NY: Guildford.

Zohar, D., Tzischinski, O., & Epstein, R. (2003).

Effects of energy availability on immediate

and delayed emotional reactions to work

events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88,

10821093.

George 163



Author biography

Jennifer M. George is the Mary Gibbs Jones

Professor of Management and Professor of

Psychology in the Jesse H. Jones Graduate

School of Business at Rice University. She

received her PhD in Management and

Organizational Behavior from New York

University. Her research interests include

affect, mood, and emotions in the workplace,

creativity, nonconscious processes, prosocial

behavior, personality, groups and teams, and

stress and well-being.




/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages false /GrayImageMinResolution 266 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 200 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.00000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages false /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages false /MonoImageMinResolution 900 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Average /MonoImageResolution 600 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.00000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier (CGATS TR 001) /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown

/Description > /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ > > /FormElements true /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MarksOffset 9 /MarksWeight 0.125000 /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PageMarksFile /RomanDefault /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] /SyntheticBoldness 1.000000>> setdistillerparams> setpagedevice

Documents

Understanding Affect in Organizations