SAMPLE REACTION PAPER

All of the readings this week deal with emotions and their influence on our perceptions and judgments. Even
though Ive been interested in emotional

research for awhile, this is the first time that Ive had an opportunity to read empirical studies that examine the
phenomenon. The Bodenhausen, Kramer,

& Susser article was particularly interesting because it combined emotional theories with stereotypic judgments,
another topic that I am inherently I'm

interested in. The article was also a great example of the methodological process and theory development and
testing, something you have been stressing

to our class all semester.

Based on Macraes stereotype rebound article that we read, I was thinking that stereotype suppression

might be an alternate explanation for Bodenhausens findings. Bodenhausen et al. showed that happy individuals

made more stereotypical judgments than neutral mood individuals. Experiment 2 showed that these stereotypical

judgments occurred even when the happy participants were not cognitively distracted. Perhaps the feeling of

happiness suppresses all other negative thoughts, including stereotyping. Our neutral emotion state is one in which

we are aware of both our negative and positive thoughts. A state of happiness suppresses negative thoughts,

including stereotyping and elevates our mood. When negative thoughts are brought back into our consciousness,

like being asked to make a judgment call, then these thoughts are more negative than usual. This is evidence by the

fact that Bodenhausen et al.s participants in a happy mood rated stereotyped targets more negatively than the non-

stereotyped targets. This was not seen in the neutral group because their negative thoughts had not been suppressed

via a feeling of happiness. Therefore their negative judgments did not rebound and subsequently the stereotyped

and non-stereotyped individuals were rated equally. Experiment 4 can also be explained along this line of

logic. Participants who were held accountable for their judgments were less stereotypic than those who were not

accountable in the happy condition. The fact that participants were going to be held accountable made their

processing conscious and more effortful. They may have become aware of their rebound effect and tempered their

judgments. If Macraes participants would have been told that they were going to have to explain their paragraphs

about the skinhead or explain why they chose to sit in the seat they did, Im sure their stereotypic reactions would

have been tempered as well.

 I was also intrigued by the Sinclair, Mark, & Clore article and how it related to Bodenhausen et al. Both

articles demonstrated how participants in happy moods rely on automatic processes or mental heuristics when

interpreting information or making a judgment. Sinclair et al. demonstrated how happy people are influenced the

same by strong and weak persuasive arguments. However, unhappy people engage in more effortful processing and

therefore more influenced by stronger arguments and discount weaker ones. Unlike Bodenhausen et al., Sinclair et

al. showed that when participants are aware of the cause of their mood, the effects of mood disappear and the

argument quality affects attitude. It would be interesting to take this paradigm and apply it to a stereotype judgment

situation like in Bodenhausen et al. What if Bodenhausens participants had been made aware of the fact that their

recall experience had influenced their mood? It seems likely that the effect of happiness on participants ratings

would be attenuated. There should be no differences between the neutral mood condition and the happy mood

conditions on stereotypical judgment ratings. The participants should be come aware of the external influences on

their emotion and therefore could not use their mood to cue their processing (automatic vs. conscious).

I am also a little confused about the influence of negative emotions on stereotypic judgments. Both

Sinclair et al. and Bodenhausen et al. suggests that happy people use more automatic mechanisms in processing

information. On the other hand, unhappy people engage in more motivated an conscious thinking because they are,

lets say not at an ideal goal state or their rate of movement towards a goals state is not ideal, in the terminology of

last weeks authors. Why then do unhappy people and happy individuals both make stereotypic judgments? If

unhappy people are engaging in effortful processing shouldnt they realize that they are stereotyping and be more

likely to not make stereotypic judgment, in a Devine-like interpretation? Bodenhausen appears to be saying that

happy people will make stereotypical judgments because they are using heuristic cues and also people in negative

mood will make stereotypical judgments because they are more deeply processing environmental cues. The two

statements are contradictory. Would motivational accountability also attenuated stereotypical judgments in people

with negative affect as well? This also seems like a good follow-up study.
 A reaction or response paper requires the writer to analyze a text, then develop commentary
related to it. It is a popular academic assignment because it requires thoughtful reading,
research, and writing. You can learn how to write a reaction paper by following these writing
tips.

1
Understand the purpose of a reaction paper. Reaction or response papers are
assigned so that after reading a text, you will think carefully about what you feel or think
about the text.[1] When you write a response paper, you need to evaluate the text's
strengths and weaknesses, along with if and how well the text accomplishes its
objective. A reaction paper is not just a paper where you express your opinion. [2] These
papers require a close reading of the text that goes beyond the surface meaning. You
must respond to implied ideas, and elaborate, evaluate, and analyze the author's
purpose and main points. In many cases, you can use the first-person "I" while writing
reaction papers.[3]
When you respond to the text, back up your ideas with evidence from the text along with
your own connection of ideas, texts, and overarching concepts. If you are asked to
agree or disagree, you have to provide convincing evidence about why you feel this
way.[4]
If responding to multiple texts, you must analyze how the texts relate. If responding to
one text, you probably should connect the text to overarching concepts and themes you
have discussed in the class.
The same assignment may also be given to films, lectures, field trips, labs, or even
class discussions.[5]
A reaction paper is not a summary of the text. It also does not state, "I liked this book
because it was interesting" or "I hated this because it was boring." [6]

The parts of a reaction paper are (in order) the introduction of the given topic, the body of the
topic, and the conclusion of the given topic.

What are different types of reaction papers?

Reaction papers include research papers, sample essays, argumentative or persuasive
essays, narrative, descriptive and reaction/response essays, or comparison/contrast
and cause/effect essays.