Influence of positive affect on the subjective utility of gains and losses: it is just not worth the risk
Abstract
A modification of the procedure originally used by Davidson, Suppes, and Siegel (1956) to measure subjective utility was used to study the influence of positive affect on individuals' perceived value (utility) functions. Results indicated, as expected, that persons in whom positive affect had been induced showed a more negative subjective utility for losses than did controls. This indicates that losses seem worse to people who are feeling happy than to those in a control condition. The subjective utility functions of the two groups did not differ as much, however, when people were considering potential gain. Thus, at least in the situation tested in this study, potential gains did not seem to be more appealing (nor less so) for affect subjects than they did for controls. These findings are discussed in relation to theoretical issues in decision making and work suggesting that positive affect can promote increased sensitivity to losses in situations of potential meaningful loss.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
People in favorable moods are motivated to sustain that state, whereas those in negative affective states seek to return to equilibrium.
“Research shows that people in favorable moods are motivated to sustain that state, whereas those in negative affective states seek to return to equilibrium (Isen and Geva, 1987; Isen et al., 1988).”
From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Isen et al., 1988
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267 · Cited by 5,955 · see citing works
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540 · see citing works
Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/000282803322655392 · Cited by 5,377 · see citing works
Feeling and Believing: The Influence of Emotion on Trust.
Dunn, J. R., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.736 · Cited by 1,301 · see citing works
Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration
Campbell, W. K., & Sedikides, C. (1999) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.3.1.23 · Cited by 873 · see citing works
Restoring the self: Positive affect helps improve self-regulation following ego depletion
Tice, D. M., Baumeister, R. F., Shmueli, D., & Muraven, M. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.007 · Cited by 836 · see citing works
Isen, A. M. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1102_01 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
Self-citationTo your heart's content: a model of affective diversity in top management teams
Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2000) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667020 · Cited by 599 · see citing works
Assessment of positive welfare: a review
Yeates, J. W., & Main, D. C. J. (2008) · The Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.05.009 · Cited by 504 · see citing works
Chemers, M. M., Watson, C. B., & May, S. T. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167200265001 · Cited by 431 · see citing works
Estrada, C. A., Isen, A. M., & Young, M. J. (1994) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/bf02856470 · Cited by 389 · see citing works
Self-citationBaumeister, R. F. (1997) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.2.145 · Cited by 268 · see citing works
Group Representations and Intergroup Bias: Positive Affect, Similarity, and Group Size
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Isen, A. M., & Lowrance, R. (1995) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167295218009 · Cited by 209 · see citing works
Self-citationPersonality, emotion and individual differences in response to online fraud
Norris, G., & Brookes, A. (2021) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.109847 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion
Haag, C. (2026) · Frontiers in Social Psychology · doi:10.3389/frsps.2026.1669672 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Isen, A. M., Nygren, T. E., & Ashby, F. G.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
- ORCID
- Ashby, F. Gregory
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1988
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 710-717
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2157803167
- Cited by
- 611
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 2.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Keywords
- positive affect, subjective utility, gain and loss, loss aversion, utility functions, risk-taking, affective states, decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Affect, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Risk-Taking
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
