on affect and cognitive processing to include both valence and arousal. This
may closely parallel extensions or revisions based on the examination of spe-
cific emotions, as emotions are more readily classified in terms of both va-
lence and arousal in contrast to more general mood states.
Second, the theories reviewed are largely derived from research using typi-
cal social psychology paradigms. For instance, most of the researchers devel-
oped their theories based on experiments conducted on group processes and
stereotypes in laboratory settings (e.g., Bless, 2000; Fiedler, 2000; Forgas,
2000a). In contrast to many academic tasks, these laboratory tasks are often
rather short in duration (lasting for the experimental session) and do not cap-
ture the complex interaction of the situation (including other people and
other activities) in which the task takes place. In applying these theories to
educational settings and academic tasks, care must be taken to carefully con-
sider how changes in the duration of the situation, the context, and the im-
portance of the activity to the participant may alter the way in which affect
relates to cognitive processing. As is clear from our review, recent attempts to
apply these theories to academic contexts is difficult, even when there are
similarities in terms of the context and duration of the task. Therefore, we
urge researchers to carefully manipulate these various components so that we
can better understand when and how the theories reviewed can be applied to
educational settings.
Third, in our own work (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002b, 2003), we have
assessed effort regulation and cognitive regulation in addition to perform-
ance or learning. The findings for these outcomes are consistent, suggesting
that positive affect enhances engagement in terms of effort and higher order
strategy use. This idea is also supported by Pekrun et al.’s (2002) research
linking positive academic emotions such as enjoyment and hope to greater ef-
fort, deeper cognitive engagement, more self-regulated learning in academic
settings. The relation between affect and engagement as well as cognitive
processing suggests that there may be a complex interplay among affect, cog-
nition, and motivation that needs to be further investigated. Indeed, we are
working on developing an asymmetrical bidirectional model linking achieve-
ment motivation to affect (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002a). However, given
the lack of research on affect and cognitive processing in academic contexts,
it is rather difficulty to speculate on the interaction of all three variables on
students’ learning (see Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003, for a recent attempt to
consider all three outcomes). It is well beyond the scope of the current chap-
ter to attempt to integrate our asymmetrical bidirectional model linking
achievement goals to affect with the current review of affect and cognitive
processing. As we more carefully refine these models of affect and cognitive
processing and affect and motivation, it will be easier to integrate the three
components.
- AFFECT AND COGNITIVE PROCESSING 83