IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emotional response in a disjunction condition


  • Wang, Zuo-Jun
  • Li, Shu
  • Jiang, Cheng-Ming


This study investigated the emotional response in a disjunction condition. Participants were presented with a hypothetical three-condition scenario in which they imagined that they had submitted their application for admission to two universities. In the two conditions of certainty, the participants imagined that they were either accepted by University A or rejected by University A. In the uncertain condition, the participants imagined that they did not know whether they had been accepted or rejected by University A. These three conditions formed a disjunction condition. The results suggested that the participants felt less happy under the uncertain condition than under the two conditions of certainty, regardless of whether the information presentation was non-transparent (Experiment 1A) or transparent (Experiment 1B) and regardless of whether the options in the two conditions of certainty were similar (Experiment 2A) or substantially discrepant (Experiment 2B and Experiment 3). Experiment 3 further demonstrated that, consistent with the hedonic hypothesis, preferential choices (which constitutes a disjunction effect) are based on emotional responses in the disjunction condition. The underlying processes of the emotional response in the disjunction condition and its relation to the literature on risk and uncertainty aversion are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Zuo-Jun & Li, Shu & Jiang, Cheng-Ming, 2012. "Emotional response in a disjunction condition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 71-78.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:33:y:2012:i:1:p:71-78
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2011.08.009

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Uri Gneezy & John A. List & George Wu, 2006. "The Uncertainty Effect: When a Risky Prospect is Valued Less than its Worst Possible Outcome," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1283-1309.
    2. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    3. Pham, Michel Tuan, 1998. " Representativeness, Relevance, and the Use of Feelings in Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 144-159, September.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Clarke, Christopher E. & Hart, Philip S. & Schuldt, Jonathon P. & Evensen, Darrick T.N. & Boudet, Hilary S. & Jacquet, Jeffrey B. & Stedman, Richard C., 2015. "Public opinion on energy development: The interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 131-140.

    More about this item


    Emotions; Uncertainty; Sure-Thing Principle; Disjunction effect; Dampening effect;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:33:y:2012:i:1:p:71-78. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.