Feeling good, feeling bad, and feeling at‐risk: a review of incidental affect's influence on likelihood estimates of health hazards and life events

Abstract

The recent increased interest among researchers in the ways in which emotion, mood, and affect influence risk perceptions is an important step in better understanding how people understand and perceive health risk information. However, the literature involving incidental affect (ambient mood) is not as well known. The 23 years of research examining incidental affect's influence on likelihood estimates of health hazards and life events has not previously been integrated and examined critically. This comprehensive review found that incidental affect influenced likelihood estimates in a predictable way. Individuals experiencing positive affect made more optimistic likelihood estimates than did individuals experiencing negative affect. Individuals experiencing negative affect made more pessimistic likelihood estimates than did individuals experiencing positive affect. Anger was unique among negatively valenced emotions by influencing judgments in the same way as positive affect (i.e., relatively optimistic likelihood estimates). Three theoretical explanations are offered, including one that addresses the role of anger specifically.

Keywords:

• affect
• mood
• emotion
• perceived risk
• likelihood estimate
• probability estimate

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Gretchen B. Chapman and Daniel Ogilvie for their insightful comments on earlier drafts of this paper and the Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Office of Preventive Oncology, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Notes

1. See Table 2 for topic‐specific references and for a comprehensive overview of the methodology and findings for each non‐experimental study. The format is similar to Table 1.

2. The Affect Infusion Model (AIM) integrates the affect‐as‐information and the associative network theories into one framework (Forgas 2003). However, because none of the studies reviewed here referred to the AIM, it will not be discussed further.

3. It is possible that specific emotions other than anger might have idiosyncratic effects on likelihood judgments but have not yet been identified.