Business
Affective Events Theory
Affective Events Theory (AET) proposes that events in the workplace can trigger emotional reactions in employees, which in turn influence their attitudes and behaviors. These emotional reactions can impact job satisfaction, motivation, and performance. AET emphasizes the importance of understanding and managing employees' emotions to create a positive work environment and enhance organizational outcomes.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
12 Key excerpts on "Affective Events Theory"
eBook - PDF- Liu-Qin Yang, Russell Cropanzano, Catherine S. Daus, Vicente Martínez-Tur(Authors)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
58 fletcher, kanfer, and tatel Affective Events Theory According to Affective Events Theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), work events that trigger affective reactions exert their influence on moti- vated behavior in two ways: through (largely) non-conscious behavioral reactions, and through cognitively-mediated work attitudes and beha- viors. AET addresses an abiding issue in the organizational literature: why do individuals who generally hold a positive attitude toward their job sometimes (and often unexpectedly) behave in a counterproductive manner at work? According to the theory, affective reactions to events may produce both affect-driven behaviors (e.g. anger, organizational citizenship behaviors) as well as judgment-driven behaviors (e.g. con- tinuance commitment, turnover). As in the core affect (Seo et al., 2004) model, affect is assumed to play two roles: providing information upon which affect-driven behaviors are instigated, and the adoption of a perceptive lens through which job attitudes are formed and used to guide longer- term-motivated behaviors. AET has been applied to the study of motivated behavior in the context of downsizing (Paterson & Cary 2002), bullying at work (Ayoko, Callan, & Hartel, 2003), organi- zational injustice (Wisenfeld, Brockner, & Martin, 1999; Schaubroeck & Lam, 2004), inter- personal conflict with customers (Grandey, Tam, & Brauberger, 2002), and breaches in psycholo- gical contracts (Conway & Briner, 2002). One important feature of most research investigating AET is the use of experience-sampling methodol- ogies that allow researchers to evaluate momen- tary changes in the relationships between event characteristics, affective states, attitudes, and the direction, intensity, or persistency of behavior.
eBook - ePub- Craig C. Pinder(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Psychology Press(Publisher)
They developed a conceptual model called Affective Events Theory (AET). Represented here as Figure 4.1, this model shows that people have emotional reactions to work events. These affective responses, in combination with the influence of objective features of the work environment, determine an employee’s work attitudes. Fig. 4.1 Affective Events Theory Source: Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective Events Theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 18). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. © Elsevier, 1996. In addition, affective reactions to work events can result directly in job-related behavior, which, in turn, may also affect work attitudes, although this linkage is not central to the model as it is portrayed in Figure 4.1 (H. M. Weiss, personal communication, July 15, 1997). Weiss and Cropanzano’s (1996) model has provoked and guided a number of empirical investigations since it was published more than a decade ago. The creative study that resulted in the affective events–emotions matrix model (summarized earlier) provides a fine example (see Basch & Fisher, 2000). Another study by Fisher (2002), employing a within-subjects design, found considerable support for Affective Events Theory. For example, it demonstrated, as hypothesized, that different factors predicted positive and negative affective reactions: Job characteristics were predictive of positive affective reactions but not negative reactions. By the same token, as hypothesized, role conflict predicted negative affective reactions but not positive reactions. The relationships proposed by the theory between affective reactions and job satisfaction received mixed support
- Charles Wankel, Charles B. Wankel(Authors)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications, Inc(Publisher)
A third innovative aspect of AET is its consideration of the episodic nature of emotions and job performance in that it recognizes the inherent ebb and flow of moods and emotions through-out the workday as individuals are exposed to multiple affectively stimulating events. It is through examining the accumulating effects of multiple performance episodes and an individual’s corresponding affective experiences that AET proves most useful. Finally, AET encompasses a model within its frame-work for understanding both proximal affective reactions to workplace events and the distal effects of trait affective dispositions. According to AET, the workplace environment (i.e., characteristics of the job and organization) leads to work events (e.g., having a meeting, writing a report) that, in turn, lead to affective reactions. These affective reactions are, in part, moderated by trait affective dispositions (PA & NA), and the effect of trait dispositions on work attitudes and behavior is mediated by affective reactions. In the origi-nal AET model, all affect-driven behaviors are considered the result of affective reactions. Recently, however, Weiss Emotion in Organizations • 261 262 • ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR (2002) further distinguished that some behaviors result from the affective state itself, while other behaviors result from attempts to regulate affective states. Without fundamentally altering the original theory, this addition opens the way for affective dispositions to directly influence subsequent affect regulation behavior, whereas the original model does not make this explicit. As such, AET has formed the theoretical basis for a number of recent workplace studies examining the dynamic relationship between work events and emotions within a single person during a workday. This use of “experience sampling” methodologies has allowed researchers to exam-ine the independent effects of state affect beyond trait affect in relation to job attitudes and job performance.
- Neal M. Ashkanasy, Charmine E. J. Härtel, Wilfred J. Zerbe, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Charmine E. J. Härtel, Wilfred J. Zerbe, Neal M. Ashkanasy(Authors)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited(Publisher)
Thus, we suggest that context can be understood by studying specific cultures, industries, organizations or workplace roles. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS We have delved more deeply into the processes underlying AET that was proposed by Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) some 14 years ago. The original Affective Events Model focuses on attitudes that are more stable, such as The Role of Cognition and Attitude in Driving Behavior 219 job satisfaction and job commitment. It therefore acknowledges the imm-ediacy of affect-driven behavior but focuses on judgment-driven behaviors that occur as a result of attitudes formed over time through the repeated occurrence of either negative or positive work events. The inclusion of recent theory on attitudes illustrates the interplay of cognition and emotion in a more immediate sense and therefore accounts for relatively spontaneous as well as more considered judgment-driven behavior. Contribution AET says that affective events in the workplace give rise to either affect-or judgment-driven behavior. Our proposed redrawing of the Affective Events Framework does not change the model fundamentally, but it helps us to be explicit about the relationship between the environment (work environment features), work events, and resulting work behaviors. It facilitates a deeper understanding of when emotion or cognition has a greater influence of workplace behaviors and how work environment features (context) inform behaviors through the cognitive aspect of attitude. It enables us to accounts for behaviors that result from attitudes constructed in the moment as well as underlying more stable attitudes. While emotion can singularly drive behavior and while in certain cir-cumstance, for example, fight or flight situations, this can be adaptive, in many instances it can be maladaptive. We argue that affective reactions mostly do not lead to affect-driven behavior, that is, behavior that is driven directly and only by affect.
eBook - ePubManaging Emotions in Organizations
Positive Employee Experiences Following Acquisitions
- Riikka Harikkala-Laihinen(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
2015 ).What makes the event affective is that it stimulates a reaction based on a job-related agent, object, or occurrence. This reaction includes appraisal and an emotional reaction, and can reflect either a transitory or ongoing work-related goal (Basch and Fisher 1998 ). The affective events can be categorized as being in the task-related or interpersonal spheres. Task-related events influence the execution of job assignments, whereas interpersonal events concern colleagues (Casper et al. 2019 ). In addition to the triggering event itself, the work environment may influence the resulting emotional reaction. For example, should the atmosphere at work be stressful, a superior’s critique is likely to cause anger, which leads to job dissatisfaction and possibly even an open argument or leaving the company (Mignonac and Herrbach 2004 ). Nevertheless, individuals differ in their personal disposition towards emotions, often highlighting either positive or negative experiences, thus also influencing which emotions are likely to emerge at work (Fisher 2002 ).3.3 Emotions Following Acquisitions
Focusing on the human side of acquisitions reveals them to be a process of adaptation (Cartwright and Cooper 1995 ). This process is often named acculturation ; the making of a unified culture from previously separate beliefs, assumptions and values (Larsson and Lubatkin 2001 ). Acculturation includes the coming together, clashing and adaptation necessary to achieve a harmonious coexistence (Nahavandi and Malekzadeh 1988 ; Rottig et al. 2013 ). The resultant conflict and adaptation often lead to change resistance, at worst giving rise to the merger syndrome —a fear-the-worst response increasing stress and anxiety (Marks and Mirvis 1997 ; Kusstatscher and Cooper 2005 ; Sinkovics et al. 2011
eBook - PDFThe Interpersonal Dynamics of Emotion
Toward an Integrative Theory of Emotions as Social Information
- Gerben A. van Kleef(Author)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
210 Part III Conclusions, implications, and new directions Affective Events Theory and the dual threshold model of anger A prominent framework in the organizational literature is Affective Events Theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), which was developed to explain how affectively laden work events influence job satisfaction and performance. AET holds that features of the work environment can give rise to affective reactions (i.e., moods and emotions), which in turn shape job satisfaction and performance. The theory played an important role in stimulating research on affective phenomena in the workplace by according a mediating role to affective states in explaining how organiza- tion members respond to their work environment. This focus on affective reactions represents a commonality with EASI theory. The main differ- ence between the theories resides in their level of analysis. AET aims to explain the emergence and intrapersonal consequences of affective states, whereas EASI describes the interpersonal consequences of emotional expressions. Besides this critical distinction, there are differences in the scope of the theories. AET is concerned specifically with the role of affective states in shaping job-related attitudes and behaviors, whereas EASI seeks to explain the interpersonal effects of emotions across domains of life. Another perspective from the organization sciences that merits discus- sion here is the dual threshold model of anger (Geddes & Callister, 2007). This model posits that emotion recognition and organizational display rules jointly create two thresholds that determine outcomes of anger epi- sodes in the workplace. The expression threshold is crossed when individuals express rather than suppress their anger at work, so that the anger can be perceived by others. The impropriety threshold is crossed when expressed anger violates organizational emotion display norms.
eBook - PDF- Wilfred J. Zerbe, Charmine E. J. Härtel, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Wilfred J. Zerbe, Charmine E. J. Härtel, Neal M. Ashkanasy(Authors)
- 2008(Publication Date)
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited(Publisher)
Our analysis of the role played by moods and emotions in strategic decision outcomes in organizations is based on Affective Events Theory (AET) ( Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ) as well as social cognitive research on affective influences on cognition and behavior ( Bower, 1981 ; Forgas, 2002 ; Schwarz, 1990). AET holds that organizational events trigger affective responses in organizational members, with consequences for workplace attitudes, cognition, and behavior. Although Weiss and Cropanzano developed their theory with specific reference to micro-level attitudes and behaviors within the organization, we apply this basic model of affective influence in organizations to strategic management. Specifically, we argue that workplace events elicit affective responses (moods and emotions) that in turn influence both the content and process of strategic decision-making. Thus, we offer an extension and application of Weiss and Cropanzano’s (1996) AET to strategic management, and in particular, strategic decision-making. In the remainder of the article, we highlight the importance of understanding the impact of affect on strategic decision processes and set CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND NEAL M. ASHKANASY 2 out the justification for each component of our conceptual model starting with the antecedents of affect in organizational settings before discussing the nature of affect and the implications of affect for organizational cognition. Following this, we review the cognitive processes involved in strategic decision-making in organizations. Finally, and drawing upon recent advances in affect and cognition research, we explore the impact that individual’s affective responses to organizational events have on organiza-tional cognition and strategic management. We conclude with a brief discussion of the implications of the model for theory, research, and practice.
eBook - PDFWhat Have We Learned?
Ten Years on
- Charmine E. J. Härtel, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Wilfred J. Zerbe, Neal M. Ashkanasy(Authors)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited(Publisher)
In Weiss and Job Attitudes Judgement-Driven Behaviours Affect-Driven Behaviours Affective reactions Work Environment Features Work Events Disposition Fig. 1 . Affective Events Theory ( Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ). Table 1. Adaptation of AET Variables for a Third-Party Complaint Context. AET – Workplace Events AET – Service Failures Work environment features Contexts Work event Service failure Moods and emotions at work Consumer emotional responses Affective-driven behavior Emotion-driven complaint behavior Job attitudes Attitude toward the organization Judgment-driven behavior Judgment-driven complaint behavior Affective disposition Individual characteristics AET as Framework for Understanding Third-Party Consumer Complaints 171 Cropanzano’s conceptualization of AET, affect includes both moods and emotions. As we are concerned with studying complaint behavior, the appropriate affective focus is on emotions, since the affect in this context is linked with an object, i.e., complaint behavior, which is the definition of emotion ( Lazarus, 1991 ). Consequently, in our extension of AET for the marketplace, we relabel this variable as emotional response and show its component parts following Stephens and Gwinner’s (1998) cognitive-emotive process model of consumer complaint behavior. There are three components to emotional response: a physical response, primary appraisal, and secondary appraisal. Physical responses can involve changes in body temperature and heart rate, pupil dilation, and sweating ( Frijda, 1993 ). Primary appraisal is the awareness of the physical responses such that one is aware of feeling positive or negative ( Frijda, 1993 ). The specific emotion such as anger or joy is identified as part of the secondary appraisal process ( Frijda, 1993 ). Unresolved consumer problems generate negative emotions which are evoked when something of value, whether a goal, an expectation, or ideal, is threatened or thwarted ( Paterson & Ha¨ rtel, 2002 ).
- Chester A. Schriesheim, Linda L. Neider(Authors)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Information Age Publishing(Publisher)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IS A SERIES OF AFFECTIVE EVENTS OVER TIME Affective Events Theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) provides a useful framework for examining employee emotional responses in the workplace. This theory proposes that affective events in the workplace evoke positive or negative emotions in employees, which then influence their attitudes and af- fect-driven behaviors. Affective events in the workplace arise due to factors in the work environment, and have included manager behaviors and emotional expressions (see Basch & Fisher, 1998; Cropanzano, Dasborough, & Weiss, in press; Dasborough, 2006). It seems evident that a major organizational change would involve a number of possible affective events for employees. Series of Affective Events Emotional Responses Attitude Toward Change Announcement of Change Implementation of Change Hope > Joy, Pride Sadness Fear > Anger, Regret Commitment Ambivalence Resistance Apathy Cynical Figure 1.1 An affective events model of organizational change. Feeling Positive, Negative, Ambivalent, or Apathetic 5 The initial affective event, the announcement of a major change initia- tive, is perhaps the most impactful. An announcement of organizational change event such as an adjustment of organizational strategy, structure, culture, etc., can evoke a myriad of feelings, involving both positive and negative emotional responses. The announcement of major organizational change can be “a time of great organizational upheaval” (Corwin, Wein- stein, & Sweeney, 1991, p. 47), characterized by frustration (Greenwood, Hinings, & Brown, 1994), anxiety, and stress; yet, it can also be a time of great excitement (Liu & Perrewe, 2005). These high arousal emotions fol- lowing the announcement set the stage for how the employee will respond to the organizational change in the longer term. Organizational change is not just a single affective event with a singular emotional response.
eBook - PDFEmotions at Work
Theory, Research and Applications for Management
- Roy L. Payne, Cary Cooper, Roy L. Payne, Cary Cooper(Authors)
- 2003(Publication Date)
- Wiley-Interscience(Publisher)
This evaluative judgment is the consequence of affective experiences at work and beliefs about our jobs. Affect and beliefs jointly influence the evaluation that is job satisfaction. Second, AET places great emphasis on the causal role of events in influencing affect, performance, and attitudes. As we have seen, most theories of satisfaction focus on the way people judge the features of the work environment (the pay, the career opportunities, etc.). In contrast, AET suggests that things happen to people AFFECT AT WORK: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 159 at work, these events often have emotional consequences, and these emotional states influence both attitudes and behaviors. Third, the influence of affective states is immediate (i.e. affect influences per- formance when the person is in the affective state). Since affective states can and do vary over time, the relationship between affect and performance must be studied as it unfolds over time. Finally, AET makes the distinction between affect-driven and judgment-driven behaviors. Some behaviors are the immediate consequences of current affective states. These behaviors are not influenced by our overall evaluations of our jobs. Other behaviors are mediated by these judgments. AET discusses which types of work behaviors are likely to be affect driven and which types are likely to be judgment driven. As we said, AET is too recently presented to evaluate in its entirety. Research has demonstrated that satisfaction is a function of both beliefs and affective experiences (Weiss, Nicholas, & Daus, 1999), but, beyond that, the usefulness of the theory remains to be evaluated. DISCUSSION We now have finished documenting the historical trends in the study of work affect and would, of course, be remiss if we did not provide some general discus- sion of themes and conclusions. Many of the central themes apparent in the history have been made during the historical presentation itself.
eBook - ePub- Ashlea C. Troth, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Ronald H. Humphrey, Ashlea C. Troth, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Ronald H. Humphrey(Authors)
- 2023(Publication Date)
- Emerald Publishing Limited(Publisher)
(2018) used AET as an underlying framework to postulate that goal-related interruptions as work events elicit certain types of affective reactions. Hunter et al. (2019) also used AET to argue that interruptions that impede work trigger negative affect while interruptions that assist goals elicit positive affect. Additionally, Zohar et al. (2003) claimed that work events that hinder goals produce negative emotional reactions, whereas work events that enhance goals produce positive emotional reactions. More specifically, work events or situations that are compatible with goal achievement and goal progression elicit positive affective reactions (i.e., work-enhancing events), whereas events or situations that are incompatible with goal achievement and goal progression elicit negative affective reactions (i.e., work-hindering events). In this chapter, we argue that the effect of interruption type on individual outcomes is in part explained by individuals' use of emotional regulation in response to the emotion generated by the work interruptions. Emotion Regulation at Work Emotion is naturally embedded in daily working life (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Employees go through various positive emotions such as love, calmness, enthusiasm, and happiness as well as negative emotions such as shame, frustration, anger, fear, and sadness (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). These numerous emotions shape the thoughts and actions of employees at work (Fredrickson, 1998). Researchers from various disciplines and backgrounds have attempted to define emotion. Some refer to emotion as a state of feeling (Frijda, 2000), while others view emotion as a cognitive process (Lazarus, 1991) or a chain of reactions to various stimuli which are behavioral, physiological, and cognitive factors (Gross, 1998). Based on these studies, Gross (1998) defined emotions as personal reactions or feelings triggered by internal or external stimuli
eBook - PDF- Mary Uhl-Bien, John R. Schermerhorn, Jr., Richard N. Osborn(Authors)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
96 CHAPTER 4 ■ Emotions, Attitudes, and Job Satisfaction 7. Affective Events Theory shows how one’s emotional reactions to work events, envi- ronment, and personal predispositions can influence ____________. (a) job satisfaction and performance (b) emotional labor (c) emotional intelligence (d) emotional contagion 8. The tendency of people at work to display feelings consistent with the moods of their co-workers and bosses is known as ____________. (a) emotional dissonance (b) emotional labor (c) mood contagion (d) mood stability 9. When an airline flight attendant displays organizationally desired emotions when interacting with passengers, this is an example of ____________. (a) emotional labor (b) emotional contagion (c) job commitment (d) negative affect 10. A person who always volunteers for extra work or helps someone else with their work is said to be high in ____________. (a) emotional labor (b) affect (c) emotional intelligence (d) organizational commitment 11. The main difference between job involvement and ____________ is that the former shows a positive attitude toward the job and the latter shows a positive attitude toward the organization. (a) organizational commitment (b) employee engagement (c) job satisfaction (d) cognitive dissonance 12. Job satisfaction is known to be a good predictor of ____________. (a) deep acting (b) emotional intelligence (c) cognitive dissonance (d) absenteeism 13. The best conclusion about job satisfaction in today’s workforce is probably that ____________. (a) it isn’t an important issue (b) the only real concern is pay (c) most people are not satisfied with their jobs most of the time (d) trends show declining job satisfaction 97 Steps to Further Learning 4 14. Which statement about the job satisfaction–job performance relationship is most consistent with research? (a) A happy worker will be productive. (b) A productive worker will be happy. (c) A well-rewarded productive worker will be happy.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
