Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,661

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Appraisal Theories of Emotion: State of the Art and Future Development

Open access
Moors, Agnes, Ellsworth, Phoebe C., Scherer, Klaus R., Frijda, Nico H.·2013·Emotion Review

Abstract

Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future developmentAlthough a scholarly topic over the centuries, emotion was first scientifically approached by Darwin (1872), who advocated a functional approach.Soon after, James (1890) started a debate about the elicitation and differentiation of the emotions and even about the very definition of the term emotion, that still continues.There have been periods of dominance for certain theories, like Tomkins' (1962) revival of Darwin's ideas in the form of discrete or basic emotion theory, a revival of peripheral theories by Schachter (1964), and various revivals of Wundt's (1896) dimensional theory.In the 1960's, Arnold (1960) and Lazarus (1966) pioneered a new theoretical approach called appraisal theory, which is in essence a systematization of ancient ideas about emotion, reflecting the ideas of Aristotle, Hume (1739-40), Spinoza (1677), and Sartre (1939).In the 1980's this approach took on new vigor, with a number of theorists proposing variants of appraisal theory, developing concrete predictions, and testing them empirically.Since then, "appraisal" has become a household word in emotion research, but the term is used in widely different forms and different theoretical and atheoretical contexts.This special issue attempts to delineate the fundamental architecture of a family of theories that can be rightly called appraisal theories in a strict sense.In this issue we discuss the design features of these theories, their current development, and the empirical support for them, as well as unresolved issues, new developments, and critical objections.Four major contributions outline the scope of the current debate and a group of commentators provide a critical echo.In this special issue we will focus on the theories of Arnold (1960), Lazarus (1991), Scherer (1984, 2009), Smith and Ellsworth (1985, Ellsworth, 1991), Frijda (1986, 2007), Roseman (1984), andClore andOrtony (2000).The basic premise of appraisal theories is that emotions are adaptive responses, which reflect appraisals of features of the environment that are significant for the organism's well-being.Many other emotion theories also see emotions

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1754073912468165

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 1,661

Metadata

Authors
Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R., & Frijda, N. H.
Venue
Emotion Review
Published
2013-03-20
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
119-124
ISSN
  • 1754-0739 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-0747
OpenAlex
W2109474021
Cited by
1,661
References
11
FWCI
73.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Appraisal Theories of Emotion: State of the Art and Future Development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1754073912468165
The paper
Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R., & Frijda, N. H. (2013). Appraisal Theories of Emotion: State of the Art and Future Development. Emotion Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912468165

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.