The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Balancing cognition and emotion: Innovation implementation as a function of cognitive appraisal and emotional reactions toward innovation
Abstract
Focusing on the role of emotions in understanding employee behavior, the present study identifies employees' emotional reactions toward innovation as a mediating process that explains the effects of institutional environment on collective innovation use in work units. We further employed the appraisal theory of emotion and affective events theory (AET) to conceptualize the relationships between cognitions and emotions involving innovation. This expanded conceptual model was tested using multi‐source data from 1150 employees and managers of 81 branches of a Korean insurance company that were implementing a new practice called Life‐Long Learning. Two contextual factors (management involvement and training for innovation) significantly predicted employees' collective cognitive appraisal of the innovation (perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use). Collective cognitive appraisal in turn predicted employees' positive and negative emotions toward the innovation, which completely mediated the effects of contextual factors and cognitive appraisal on implementation effectiveness (consistent and committed use of the innovation in the branch). This study highlights the critical role of emotions in the context of innovation implementation, and shows the need for greater attention to emotional processes in examining organizational innovations. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990) · Imagination, Cognition and Personality · doi:10.2190/dugg-p24e-52wk-6cdg · Cited by 10,484
Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model1
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250921 · Cited by 8,767
Venkatesh, V. (2000) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 · Cited by 6,664
MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542 · Cited by 5,688
Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM).
Forgas, J. P. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39 · Cited by 3,470
The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior
Barsade, S. G. (2002) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094912 · Cited by 3,361
POSNER, J., RUSSELL, J. A., & PETERSON, B. S. (2005) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579405050340 · Cited by 2,602
Organizational Behavior: Affect in the Workplace
Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135156 · Cited by 1,797
Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams
Kelly, J. R., & Barsade, S. G. (2001) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2974 · Cited by 1,011
Cited by
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314527128 · Cited by 3,103
Metadata
- Authors
- Choi, J. N., Sung, S. Y., Lee, K., & Cho, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-12-22
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 107-124
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W1956939146
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 10.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Balancing cognition and emotion: Innovation implementation as a function of cognitive appraisal and emotional reactions toward innovation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/job.684
- The paper
- Choi, J. N., Sung, S. Y., Lee, K., & Cho, D. (2011). Balancing cognition and emotion: Innovation implementation as a function of cognitive appraisal and emotional reactions toward innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.684
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.