We present a three-dimensional taxonomy of achievement emotions that considers valence, arousal, and object focus as core features of these emotions. By distinguishing between positive and negative emotions (valence), activating and deactivating emotions (arousal), and activity emotions, prospective outcome emotions, and retrospective outcome emotions (object focus), the taxonomy has a 2 × 2 × 3 structure representing 12 groups of achievement emotions. In four studies across different countries (N = 330, 235, 323, and 269 participants in Canada, the United States, Germany, and the U.K., respectively), we investigated the empirical robustness of the taxonomy in educational (Studies 1-3) and work settings (Study 4). An expanded version of the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire was used to assess 12 key emotions representing the taxonomy. Consistently across the four studies, findings from multilevel facet analysis and structural equation modeling documented the importance of the three dimensions for explaining achievement emotions. In addition, based on hypotheses about relations with external variables, the findings show clear links of the emotions with important antecedents and outcomes. The Big Five personality traits, appraisals of control and value, and context perceptions were predictors of the emotions. The 12 emotions, in turn, were related to participants' use of strategies, cognitive performance, and self-reported health problems. Taken together, the findings provide robust evidence for the unique positions of different achievement emotions in the proposed taxonomy, as well as unique patterns of relations with external variables. Directions for future research and implications for policy and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Some epistemic emotions, such as surprise and curiosity, have attracted increasing scientific attention, whereas others, such as confusion, have yet to receive the attention they deserve. In addition, little is known about the relations between these emotions, their joint antecedents and outcomes, and how they differ from other emotions prompted during learning and knowledge generation (e.g., achievement emotions). In 3 studies (Ns = 102, 373, 125) using a trivia task with immediate feedback, we examined within-person interrelations, antecedents, and effects of 3 epistemic emotions (surprise, curiosity, and confusion). Studies 2 and 3 additionally included 2 achievement emotions (pride and shame). Using multilevel modeling to disentangle within- and between-person variance, we found that achievement emotions were associated with accuracy (i.e., correctness of the answer), whereas epistemic emotions were related to high-confidence errors (i.e., incorrect answers a person was confident in) generating cognitive incongruity. Furthermore, as compared with achievement emotions, epistemic emotions were more strongly and positively related to subsequent knowledge exploration. Specifically, surprise and curiosity were positive predictors of exploration. Confusion had positive predictive effects on exploration which were significant in Studies 1 and 3 but not in Study 2, suggesting that the effects of confusion are less stable and need to be investigated further. Apart from the findings for confusion, the results were fully robust across all 3 studies. They shed light on the distinct origins and outcomes of epistemic emotions. Directions for future research and practical implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Research has started to acknowledge the importance of emotions for complex learning and cognitive performance. However, research on epistemic emotions has only recently become more prominent. Research in educational psychology in particular has mostly focused on examining achievement emotions instead of epistemic emotions. Furthermore, only few studies have addressed functional mechanisms underlying multiple different epistemic emotions simultaneously, and only one study has systematically compared the origins and effects of epistemic emotions with other emotions relevant to knowledge generation (i.e., achievement emotions; Vogl et al., 2019). The present article aimed to replicate the findings from Vogl et al. (2019) exploring within-person interrelations, origins, and outcomes of the epistemic emotions surprise, curiosity, and confusion, and the achievement emotions pride and shame, as well as to analyze their robustness and generalizability across two different study settings (online; Study 1, n = 169 vs. lab; Study 2, n = 79). In addition, the previous findings by Vogl et al. (2019, Study 3) and the present two new studies were meta-analytically integrated to consolidate evidence on origins and outcomes of epistemic emotions. The results of the two new studies largely replicated the findings by Vogl et al. (2019). Combined with the meta-analytic results, the findings confirm distinct patterns of antecedents for epistemic vs. achievement emotions: Pride and shame were more strongly associated with the correctness of a person’s answer (i.e., accuracy), whereas surprise, curiosity, and confusion were more strongly related to incorrect responses a person was confident in (i.e., high-confidence errors) producing cognitive incongruity. Furthermore, in contrast to achievement emotions, epistemic emotions had positive effects on the exploration of knowledge. Implications for research and practice are discussed.