Events have no inherent emotional content, and the meaning assigned to them determines the response entirely.
The maxim generalises reappraisal into a universal. Appraisal does substantial work and does not do all of it: bereavement, pain and serious threat produce responses that do not dissolve under reframing, and instructing people that they should is a route to secondary distress about failing to.
In practice
- A setback treated as information rather than a verdict produces a different next step, which is the real effect.
- A person told their grief is a choice of meaning has been given a second problem.
- Possible explanations
- The explanation offered is appraisal: emotional response follows interpretation, so changing the interpretation changes the response. The researched version treats appraisal as one substantial input rather than the whole.
- In its favour
- Cognitive reappraisal is well supported, and the weaker claim, that appraisal modulates response, is among the better-established findings in emotion research.
- Against it
- Research on appraisal finds limits to the strong version, since bereavement, pain and serious threat produce responses that do not dissolve under reframing, and telling people their distress is a choice adds a second burden to the first.
- Standing
- Testimonial evidence selected on success, with no comparison group. Research on appraisal finds limits to the strong version: some events produce distress across essentially all appraisals. Cognitive reappraisal supports the weaker and better-specified claim that appraisal modulates response.
- Subject
- Psychology & Behavior
- Essay
- Moralists, aphorists and the self-help tradition