The appraisal basis of anger: specificity, necessity and sufficiency of components.
Level 4 - case-series / case-control
Non-clinical experimental/survey recall studies (level graded by design analogy)
PubMed 14498795 · doi:10.1037/1528-3542.3.3.254
What was done
Across two studies, participants recalled and described recently experienced unpleasant situations in which one of five appraisal-action tendency components (goal obstacle, other accountability, unfairness, control, and antagonism) was either present or absent. Participants indicated which emotions they experienced to evaluate the specificity, necessity, and sufficiency of each component for anger.
What was found
The abstract reports no numerical values, effect sizes, or statistical tests. Qualitatively, other accountability and arrogant entitlement (as an instance of unfairness) were identified as specific appraisals for anger, but none of the five components was necessary or sufficient to produce anger.
Why it matters
This paper clarifies cognitive appraisal theory by demonstrating that appraisals traditionally linked to anger operate as contingent, co-occurring associations rather than deterministic prerequisites or triggers.
Limits
The abstract does not state sample sizes, participant demographics, or numerical findings. The methodology relies on retrospective self-report of emotional recall, which is subject to memory bias.
Cited by
- context The psychological appraisal and definition underlying the emotion of anger is perceived injustice.