How Emotions Distort Decision Making: Arousal and Bias
This paper examines how emotions shape and often distort the decision-making process, drawing on research by Andrade and Ariely (2009) and Ariely and Loewenstein (2006). It argues that strong emotions — particularly sexual arousal, fear, and sadness — narrow perception and generate a "tunnel vision" effect that limits a person's ability to consider all relevant factors. The paper also addresses the false consensus effect, whereby decision makers incorrectly assume others share their emotional state, and the tendency toward affiliative bias. Ultimately, the paper advocates for greater self-awareness and emotional distance, especially when facing major life decisions such as marriage, major purchases, or other high-stakes choices.
- Introduction: Emotions and Tunnel Vision in Decision Making: Emotions narrow perception and distort situational judgment
- Sexual Arousal and Myopic Decision Making: Arousal overrides ethical reasoning in major decisions
- Fear, Sadness, and the False Consensus Effect: Negative emotions create false consensus and biased outcomes
- References: APA citations for two key behavioral studies
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper anchors every claim in peer-reviewed sources, consistently citing Andrade & Ariely (2009) and Ariely & Loewenstein (2006) to support its argument rather than relying on assertion alone.
- It uses a consistent central metaphor — "tunnel vision" and "myopic focus" — that threads through each section and gives the argument structural coherence.
- The paper broadens its scope effectively by extending the arousal argument to other emotional states (fear, sadness), showing the principle applies across emotion types rather than being limited to a single case.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates source synthesis: rather than summarizing each article separately, it weaves findings from both sources together paragraph by paragraph to build a unified argument. This is a hallmark of college-level analytical writing and shows the student can use multiple sources to support a single line of reasoning.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a conceptual claim about emotional narrowing and supports it immediately with citations. The second paragraph deepens the argument by applying it to specific high-stakes decisions and introducing the self-control dimension. The third paragraph pivots to emotions beyond sexual arousal — fear and sadness — and introduces the false consensus concept as a parallel mechanism. The paper closes with a brief references section in APA format.
Introduction: Emotions and Tunnel Vision in Decision Making
Emotions tend to sharpen and clarify decision making in the context of the immediate subject or activity of interest, creating a myopic view of the world that is difficult to easily disengage from. This "tunnel vision" effect — particularly pronounced during states of sexual arousal, passion, or even simple sexual interest — can easily negate other sensory inputs and perceptual cues from the external environment (Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006). The corresponding effect is an immediate reduction in the ability to make decisions based on assessments of all factors relevant to the situation.
Emotions also complicate judgment and often lead people to make erroneous assumptions regarding the motives, believability, and perceptions of others (Andrade & Ariely, 2009). Strongly positive or negative emotions are often associative and are assumed to be shared by those around the person making the decision — creating what researchers describe as an affiliative effect (Andrade & Ariely, 2009). The stronger the emotion, the greater the level of perceptual bias and the lower the ability to accurately assess a given situation.
Sexual Arousal and Myopic Decision Making
There is ample evidence from both articles that when someone is making a major decision — such as whom to marry, what car to buy, or which home to purchase — more time for reflection is needed across a range of emotional states to ensure consistency and accuracy of perception (Andrade & Ariely, 2009). If any of these significant decisions are associated with a specific state of sexual arousal, the entire perceptual framework changes completely, becomes far more myopic, and the object of desire or lust becomes the focal point of all thinking (Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006).
Studies show that male respondents who believed they were strong enough, ethically and morally, to resist certain behaviors found that resistance too difficult when ideal conditions existed and their state of arousal was heightened (Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006). The authors imply that the most significant decisions need to be grounded in a strong foundation of freedom from this myopic focus on the satisfaction of desire, and instead rooted in conscious awareness. As research on self-control consistently shows, willpower alone is rarely sufficient to prevent unethical or immoral behavior in states of heightened sexual arousal (Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006).
Andrade and Ariely (2009) further contend that when major decisions must be made, individuals would be best served by reducing the influence of these emotional states in order to minimize myopic focus. For those facing major life decisions, developing greater self-awareness and moving beyond the constraints of perceptual bias driven by sexual stimuli is strongly advised (Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006).
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.