<![CDATA[This study examines the realization of the Appraisal System and the construction of affective stance in an expert-layperson podcast interaction, focusing on an episode of The Mel Robbins Podcast featuring a Yale emotional intelligence expert. Adopting a descriptive qualitative design grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics and supported by descriptive quantification of the coded evaluative categories, the analysis integrates the Appraisal framework with the Stance Triangle model to examine how evaluative meaning and affective positioning are enacted across 292 coded evaluative clauses drawn from a 64-minute, approximately 10,932-word transcript. Findings indicate that Judgement (39.4%) was the most frequent Attitude category, surpassing Affect (32.5%) and Appreciation (28.1%), a pattern attributed to the episode's narrative structure built around personal disclosure requiring evaluation of human conduct. Within Affect, Insecurity dominated; within Judgement, Capacity prevailed over Propriety; and within Appreciation, positive Valuation was directed overwhelmingly at emotion-regulation techniques rather than people, suggesting Appreciation functions as an implicit marker of knowledge acceptance in pedagogical talk. Stance analysis identified two recurring patterns: alignment through lexical echo and disalignment followed by collaborative repair, the latter occurring more frequently and demonstrating that the stance-taking process operates iteratively as a mechanism for correcting misjudgement in real time. These results indicate that Judgement functions as an interpretive scaffold through which Affect becomes meaningful to lay audiences in expert-mediated emotion talk. The study contributes provisional theoretical refinements to the integrated appraisal-stance approach and offers practical implications for popular psychology media, emotional education, and interview-based science communication design.]]>
