Research in psychology and cognitive science has consistently demonstrated the importance of emotion in a wide range of everyday judgments, including moral judgment. Most current accounts of moral judgment hold that emotion plays an important role, but the nature and extent of this role are still debated. We outline three increasingly strong claims about the role of emotion in moral judgment and assess the evidence for each. According to the first and least controversial claim, emotions follow from moral judgments, such that witnessing immorality can lead to negative emotions and witnessing moral virtue can lead to positive ones. According to the second claim, emotions amplify moral judgments, for instance, by making immoral acts seem even more immoral. Finally, on the last claim, emotions can actually moralize nonmoral behaviors—that is, they give nonmoral acts a moral status. Although this claim seems to be the most intriguing one theoretically, empirical support for it is still very limited. In this review, we discuss research findings that are in line with each of these views, we highlight recurring themes across these three categories of evidence, and we identify some open questions and areas for future research. WIREs Cogn Sci 2013, 4:169–178. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1216 This article is categorized under: Psychology > Emotion and Motivation

This paper investigates the effect of brand name repetition on brand attitude in the context of a fictional text. Furthermore, it tests the moderating impact of brand familiarity, narrative transportation, and individual differences in need for cognition (NFC). Participants in an experiment read the full text of a real short-story, which featured the target brand. Brand name repetition and brand familiarity were systematically manipulated. The results show that brand name repetition affects attitude towards an unfamiliar brand and readers' narrative transportation and NFC moderate this effect: Attitude towards the brand improves with repetition only when both transportation and NFC are relatively high. No effects were found for the familiar brand

Three studies explore the manner in which one's mood may affect the use and impact of accessible information on judgments. Specifically, the authors demonstrated that positive and negative moods differentially influence the direction of accessibility effects (assimilation, contrast) by determining whether abstract traits or concrete actor-trait links are primed. Study 1 investigated the impact of positive versus negative mood on the judgmental impact of trait-implying behaviors and found that positive moods lead to assimilation and negative moods to contrast. In Study 2, this effect was replicated in a subliminal priming paradigm. In Study 3, it was demonstrated that the type of information activated by trait-implying behaviors is indeed mood dependent, such that abstract trait information is activated in a positive mood, whereas specific actor-trait links are activated in a negative mood.

Five studies show that mood affects context-dependence, such that negative mood promotes attention to a salient target, whereas positive mood enhances attention to both target and context. Judgments of temperature (Study 1), weight (Study 2), and size (Studies 3 and 4) were more strongly affected by the context in a positive than in a negative mood. Moreover, these effects extend to the social domain: When perceiving a target person's emotions, happy people were more influenced by the context than were sad people (Study 5). Thus, positive mood enhanced, and negative mood reduced, the magnitude of perceptual context effects. The results suggest that this pattern is not easily explained in terms of effort or depth of processing differences.

How reading in a foreign vs. native language moderates the impact of repetition-induced brand placement prominence on placement responses