Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Affective Events Theory/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Affective Events Theory

Affective Events Theory (AET) is the macro framework that reoriented organizational research toward emotions and the events that cause them. Proposed by Howard Weiss and Russell Cropanzano in 1996, it argues that features of the work environment give rise to discrete events — daily hassles and uplifts — that trigger affective reactions, and that these momentary emotions, not just stable attitudes, drive how people behave at work. The theory's central insight is to distinguish affect-driven behaviors, which flow directly from emotional states, from judgment-driven behaviors, which flow from evaluative attitudes like job satisfaction. It also positions dispositions, such as trait affectivity, as shaping how strongly people react to events. Weiss and Beal's 2005 reflection clarified the theory's structure and its methodological demands, especially the need for within-person, over-time data. AET supplied the conceptual rationale for the experience-sampling and diary revolution in organizational behavior.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Affective Events Theory (How Workplace Events Generate Emotions That Shape Attitudes and Behavior)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / organizational-behavior
  • Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 1-74. · ISBN 9781559389389
  • Weiss, H. M., & Beal, D. J. (2005). Reflections on affective events theory. In N. M. Ashkanasy, W. J. Zerbe, & C. E. J. Härtel (Eds.), Research on Emotion in Organizations, Vol. 1: The Effect of Affect in Organizational Settings (pp. 1-21). Emerald. · DOI 10.1016/S1746-9791(05)01101-6
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Used in the same domainEmotional Labor Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainPsychological Contract Measurementmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyUtrecht Work Engagement Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto