The Effect of Induced Mood on Children’s Social Information Processing: Goal Clarification and Response Decision

Abstract

We investigated whether induced mood influenced the social information processing steps of goal clarification and response decision in 480 1st-3rd graders, and in more selected groups of low accepted-aggressive (n = 39), average accepted-nonaggressive (n = 103), and high accepted-nonaggressive children (n = 68). Children participated in two sessions; in the first session peer assessments were administered. In the second session children were randomly assigned to receive either a happy, angry, or neutral mood induction prior to participating in a social cognitive interview assessing goals, outcome expectancies, and self efficacy for competent, hostile, and passive responses in the context of ambiguous provocations. Results revealed that an angry mood increased focus on instrumental goals. Low accepted-aggressive children were more susceptible to the effects of mood than were high accepted- and average-nonaggressive children. In addition, children's predominant goal orientation was related to children's response decisions; children with predominantly instrumental goals evaluated nonhostile responses to provocation more negatively and had higher self efficacy for hostile responses. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

Social cognition in Intermittent Explosive Disorder and aggression

“…For the first, we report that negative emotional response to ambiguous social stimuli is the strongest correlate of aggression history followed by efficacy of response. This is consistent with a recent study reporting that negative emotions (i.e., anger) influence aggressive children to focus on outcome (Harper et al, 2010). Our study did not find a role for outcome expectancy, overall, but we did find that IED participants had higher scores for SEIP variables related to instrumental, emotional, and social outcome.…”

“…Specifically, the presence of HA typically leads to a negative emotional response, suggesting that negative emotional response may mediate the relationship between HA and aggression (Coccaro et al, 2009b, 2016). Not surprisingly, negative emotions are positively associated with both aggressive behaviors (e.g., Arsenio et al, 2000; Cornell et al, 1999; Deater-Deckard et al, 2010; Eisenberg et al, 2009) and HA (Lemerise and Maulden, 2010) and are likely to be important in influencing response and outcome evaluation (Harper et al, 2010). That said, previous studies have not taken an integrative perspective of HA and negative emotional responding by examining the simultaneous effects of these two processes on aggression.…”

Temperamental Emotionality Attributes as Antecedents of Children's Social Information Processing

“…According to functionalist accounts, anger mobilizes instrumental efforts to overcome blocked goals (Zalewski, Lengua, Wilson, Trancik, & Bazinet, 2011). Therefore, proneness to anger may signify an underlying emphasis on achieving selffocused instrumental goals over interpersonal objectives (Harper et al, 2010). As a manifestation of this instrumental goal prioritization, children who exhibit high levels of anger may limit encoding and interpretation in favor of quickly and directly confronting the peers in challenging situations.…”

“…Although studies have yet to examine temperamental positivity, anger, and fear as antecedents of multiple SIP steps over time, some evidence suggests that mood congruency may organize ways of processing interpersonal events. For example, in an experimental study, children who were induced to feel happy endorsed more constructive social goals in coping with peer transgressions (Harper et al, 2010). Likewise, research has identified concurrent links between child negative emotionality and hostile attribution biases and solutions (Luebbe, Bell, Allwood, Swenson, & Early, 2010;Orobio de Castro, Merk, Koops, Veerman, & Bosch, 2005;Suarez-Morales & Bell, 2006).…”

The Role of Social Goals in Bullies' and Victims' Social Information Processing in Response to Ambiguous and Overtly Hostile Provocation

“…Moreover, SIP biases that occur in each step of Crick and Dodge's (1994) model, including biases in goal formulation, can be energized by emotions (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000). For example, being in an angry mood makes it more likely that a child will interpret threat in any form of provocation and that they will focus on instrumental over relationship-building goals (Harper, Lemerise, & Caverly, 2010).Thus, the present study investigates which social goals are able to explain variance in bullying/victimization scores independently from attribution of intent and affective responsiveness.…”