ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, VOLUME 69, ISSUE 3

increase of only $50, or no increase at all, you would Bell’s (1985) disappointment theory postulates that feel elated. Disappointment is a psychological reaction probability and magnitude of outcome affect the intento an outcome that does not match up to expectations. sity of disappointment after undesirable outcomes and “Elation” refers to the euphoria associated with an outthat of elation after desirable outcomes. The influence come that exceeds expectations. The greater the disparof probability and magnitude of outcome on the intenity between outcome and expectations, the greater one’s sity of disappointment and elation was examined in disappointment or elation. five studies. Study 1 (within-subjects design) showed The role of these emotions in decision making was an effect of probability on both disappointment and elation. Study 2 (between-subjects design) showed only first explored by Bell (1985) and Loomes and Sugden an effect of probability on disappointment. Study 3 also (1986). Their work diverges from the classical conserelied on a between-subjects design, used a different quential view of decision making. The central proposiset of pay-offs, and replicated the findings of Study 2. tion of their disappointment theories is that individuals In Study 4 both probability and magnitude of outcome form expectations about uncertain prospects. The exwere systematically varied. Results showed a large efpectations may vary from person to person. For examfect of probability on disappointment, but only a small ple, a mathematician may expect the probabilistic avereffect on elation. Magnitude had a large effect on elaage, an optimist may expect more, a pessimist less. If tion, but only a small effect on disappointment. Study the actual consequence turns out to be worse (or better) 5 (using a real lottery) replicated the findings of Studies 2 and 3. Overall, these results suggest that experithan what was expected, they will experience a sensaenced disappointment is primarily determined by the tion of disappointment (or elation). This sensation genprobability of the (undesirable) outcome, while elation erates a decrement (or an increment) of utility which is primarily determined by the magnitude of the (desirmodifies the basic utility derived from the consequences able) outcome. Possible explanations for this asymme(Loomes and Sugden, 1987). Basically, the decision try are proposed, and implications for disappointment maker’s disappointment is assumed to be in direct protheory are briefly outlined. q 1997 Academic Press portion to the difference between what (s)he expected and what (s)he got. More formally, disappointment 5 dp(x 2 y) in a lottery where x is at least as preferred Imagine that the head of your department tells you as y, p is the probability of winning, and d is a constant that she is very pleased with your work and offers you reflecting the degree to which a unit of disappointment a salary increase of $250 a month; how would you feel? affects the decision maker (see Bell, 1985, p. 5). SimiIf you were expecting an increase of $450, you would larly, if x (the desirable outcome) occurs, the experifeel disappointed; however, if you were expecting an enced elation is assumed to be proportional to the differ-