Positive and negative affect are often thought to influence the quality of group decision-making by prompting different cognitive processing styles: a less effortful heuristic style in the case of positive affect, and a more detail-oriented systematic style in the case of negative affect, with the latter yielding better group decisions than the former. By contrast, we argue that rather than prompting a specific cognitive processing style, positive affect encourages the maintenance of whatever style is currently in use, while negative affect encourages a change in style. Consequently, both positive and negative affect can result in either better or worse group decisions, depending on which cognitive processing style was at play just prior to the affect’s arousal. To test this idea, we conducted three experiments, and found that when heuristic processing was initially primed, subsequently inducing a sad mood resulted in better decisions by both individuals and groups than did subsequently inducing a happy mood. The reverse occurred when systematic processing was initially primed. In groups, these effects were mediated by the relative focus, during group discussion, on critical decision-relevant information. Implications of these findings and future directions for research are discussed.

人们通常认为，正面和负面影响会通过提示不同的认知处理方式来影响小组决策的质量：正面影响时会减少费力的启发式风格，负面影响时会更注重细节的系统风格，后者比前者产生更好的群体决策。相比之下，我们认为积极的情绪不是促进特定的认知加工风格，而是鼓励维持当前正在使用的任何样式，而消极的情绪则鼓励改变样式。因此，正面和负面的影响都可能导致更好或更坏的小组决策，这取决于在影响被唤起之前所发挥的认知处理方式。为了验证这个想法，我们进行了三个实验，并且发现，当启发式处理最初启动时，随后引发悲伤情绪会导致个人和团队的决策要比随后引发愉悦情绪更好。相反，最初启动系统处理时会发生这种情况。在小组中，这些影响是由小组讨论期间对关键决策相关信息的相对关注所介导的。讨论了这些发现的含义和未来的研究方向。