The convincingness of an argument does not only depend on its structure (logos), the person who makes the argument (ethos), but also on the emotion that it causes in the recipient (pathos). While the overall intensity and categorical values of emotions in arguments have received considerable attention in the research community, we argue that the emotion an argument evokes in a recipient is subjective. It depends on the recipient's goals, standards, prior knowledge, and stance. Appraisal theories lend themselves as a link between the subjective cognitive assessment of events and emotions. They have been used in event-centric emotion analysis, but their suitability for assessing argument convincingness remains unexplored. In this paper, we evaluate whether appraisal theories are suitable for emotion analysis in arguments by considering subjective cognitive evaluations of the importance and impact of an argument on its receiver. Based on the annotations in the recently published ContArgA corpus, we perform zero-shot prompting experiments to evaluate the importance of gold-annotated and predicted emotions and appraisals for the assessment of the subjective convincingness labels. We find that, while categorical emotion information does improve convincingness prediction, the improvement is more pronounced with appraisals. This work presents the first systematic comparison between emotion models for convincingness prediction, demonstrating the advantage of appraisals, providing insights for theoretical and practical applications in computational argumentation.

Affective Computing has been established as a crucial field of inquiry to advance the holistic development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. Foundation models -- especially Large Language Models (LLMs) -- have been evaluated, trained, or instruction-tuned in several past works, to become better predictors or generators of emotion. Most of these studies, however, approach emotion-related tasks in a supervised manner, assessing or training the capabilities of LLMs using discrete emotion labels associated with stimuli (e.g., text, images, video, audio). Evaluation studies, in particular, have often been limited to standard and superficial emotion-related tasks, such as the recognition of evoked or expressed emotions. In this paper, we move beyond surface-level emotion tasks to investigate how LLMs reason about emotions through cognitive dimensions. Drawing from cognitive appraisal theory, we examine whether LLMs produce coherent and plausible cognitive reasoning when reasoning about emotionally charged stimuli. We introduce a large-scale benchmark on Cognitive Reasoning for Emotions - CoRE - to evaluate internal cognitive structures implicitly used by LLMs for emotional reasoning. Through a plethora of evaluation experiments and analysis, we seek to answer: (a) Are models more likely to implicitly rely on specific cognitive appraisal dimensions?, (b) What cognitive dimensions are important for characterizing specific emotions?, and, (c) Can the internal representations of different emotion categories in LLMs be interpreted through cognitive appraisal dimensions? Our results and analyses reveal diverse reasoning patterns across different LLMs. Our benchmark and code will be made publicly available.

In recent years, there has been growing interest in studying cognitive distortions and emotional appraisals from both computational and psychological perspectives. Despite considerable similarities between emotional reappraisal and cognitive reframing as emotion regulation techniques, these concepts have largely been examined in isolation. This research explores the relationship between cognitive distortions and emotional appraisal dimensions, examining their potential connections and relevance for future interdisciplinary studies. Under this pretext, we conduct an exploratory computational study, aimed at investigating the relationship between cognitive distortion and emotional appraisals. We show that the patterns of statistically significant relationships between cognitive distortions and appraisal dimensions vary across different distortion categories, giving rise to distinct appraisal profiles for individual distortion classes. Additionally, we analyze the impact of cognitive restructuring on appraisal dimensions, exemplifying the emotion regulation aspect of cognitive restructuring.

As the utilization of language models in interdisciplinary, human-centered studies grow, the expectation of model capabilities continues to evolve. Beyond excelling at conventional tasks, models are recently expected to perform well on user-centric measurements involving confidence and human (dis)agreement -- factors that reflect subjective preferences. While modeling of subjectivity plays an essential role in cognitive science and has been extensively studied, it remains under-explored within the NLP community. In light of this gap, we explore how language models can harness subjectivity by conducting comprehensive experiments and analysis across various scenarios using both fine-tuned models and prompt-based large language models (LLMs). Our quantitative and qualitative experimental results indicate that existing post-hoc calibration approaches often fail to produce satisfactory results. However, our findings reveal that personality traits and demographical information are critical for measuring subjectivity. Furthermore, our in-depth analysis offers valuable insights for future research and development in the interdisciplinary studies of NLP and cognitive science.

Our empirical investigation specifically Natural language processing (NLP) tasks involve targets the nuances of purchase behavior, guided by predicting outcomes from text, ranging from the implicit a focus on two critical dimensions as illuminated attributes of text to the subsequent behavior of by Cognitive Appraisal Theory: the author or the reader. Recent research suggests Cognitive appraisals: The multifaceted evaluative that user-level features can carry more task-related processes through which consumers engage information than the text itself (Lynn et al., 2019), with and interpret their interactions with products, but these experiments have been conducted in a limited including, but not limited to, the novelty and pleasantness scope. Other studies have explored how the linguistic of the consumer-product encounter (Yeo characteristics of text, such as its politeness and Ong, 2023).

Large language models (LLMs) have offered new opportunities for emotional support, and recent work has shown that they can produce empathic responses to people in distress. However, long-term mental well-being requires emotional self-regulation, where a one-time empathic response falls short. This work takes a first step by engaging with cognitive reappraisals, a strategy from psychology practitioners that uses language to targetedly change negative appraisals that an individual makes of the situation; such appraisals is known to sit at the root of human emotional experience. We hypothesize that psychologically grounded principles could enable such advanced psychology capabilities in LLMs, and design RESORT which consists of a series of reappraisal constitutions across multiple dimensions that can be used as LLM instructions. We conduct a first-of-its-kind expert evaluation (by clinical psychologists with M.S. or Ph.D. degrees) of an LLM's zero-shot ability to generate cognitive reappraisal responses to medium-length social media messages asking for support. This fine-grained evaluation showed that even LLMs at the 7B scale guided by RESORT are capable of generating empathic responses that can help users reappraise their situations.

The emotions we experience involve complex processes; besides physiological aspects, research in psychology has studied cognitive appraisals where people assess their situations subjectively, according to their own values (Scherer, 2005). Thus, the same situation can often result in different emotional experiences. While the detection of emotion is a well-established task, there is very limited work so far on the automatic prediction of cognitive appraisals. This work fills the gap by presenting CovidET-Appraisals, the most comprehensive dataset to-date that assesses 24 appraisal dimensions, each with a natural language rationale, across 241 Reddit posts. CovidET-Appraisals presents an ideal testbed to evaluate the ability of large language models -- excelling at a wide range of NLP tasks -- to automatically assess and explain cognitive appraisals. We found that while the best models are performant, open-sourced LLMs fall short at this task, presenting a new challenge in the future development of emotionally intelligent models. We release our dataset at https://github.com/honglizhan/CovidET-Appraisals-Public.