6.1.3. Measures Key Appraisals. We used similar items to those employed in Experiment 1 to measure the internalization of the devaluation, albeit adapted to the context of the academic setting. The six items used to measure internalization were the following: The feedback reduced my selfesteem as a student, The feedback negatively affected the idea that I have about myself as a student, The feedback makes me doubt about myself as a psychology student, The feedback reinforces my confidence in my abilities as a student (reverse coded), The feedback reinforces my self-confidence as a psychology student (reverse coded), and The feedback reinforces the psychology student aspect of my identity (reverse coded) ( = 0.76).

6.2.3. Key appraisals The results on internalization showed a marginally significant main effect of agency, a nonsignificant main effect of hostility, and a nonsignificant interaction (see Table 2 for the statistics). The mean of internalization was higher in the no-agency condition (M = 2.89, SD = 1.20) than in the agency condition (M = 2.62, SD = 1.19), although this difference was only marginally significant (see Table 2). The results on unfairness yielded a significant main effect of hostility, a nonsignificant main effect of agency, and a nonsignificant interaction. As expected, the participants appraised the hostile evaluation (M = 3.44, SD = 1.28) as significantly more unfair than the non-hostile evaluation (M = 2.11, SD = 1.37).

To measure the unfairness appraisal, we used the same items as in Experiment 1 ( = 0.84). To conceal the real objective of the experiment, we added to the list some positive items, which were not used in the analyses: unbiased, respectful, educative, and honest. Discrete Emotions. We used the same method to measure discrete emotions as in Experiment 1, asking the participants to indicate on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 6 (extremely) the extent to which they felt humiliation, shame, and anger. To conceal the real objective of the experiment, we added satisfaction, pride, joy, guilt, and humility.

6.2.4. Emotions The results on humiliation yielded the hypothesized significant main effect of agency, the expected significant main effect of hostility, and a nonsignificant interaction. As expected, the participants in the noagency condition felt significantly more humiliation (M = 2.78, SD = 2.01) than those in the agency condition (M = 2.26, SD = 2.03); the participants in the hostile condition felt significantly more humiliation (M = 2.84, SD = 2.06) than those in the non-hostile condition (M = 2.20, SD = 1.96). There were no significant effects on shame. Regarding anger, only the main effect of hostility was significant, with higher levels of anger in the hostile (M = 1.92, SD = 1.84) than in the non-hostile condition (M = 1.44, SD = 1.61).