Regarding the impact of life events on individual’s affective reactions and behavior options, there is a big dispute among existing studies. It is generally believed that more negative events were worse. But studies have inconsistent conclusions: more negative events were better when events have different affective intensities (Seta, Haire, & Seta, 2008).Thus, the affective intensity of negative life events may be a crucial variable. In addition, no satisfactory explanations were given by averaging and summation model, peak-end rule and mental accounting models. The main purpose of this study is to explore the impact of different intensity negative life events on individual’s affective reactions and behavior options, then find its internal processing mechanism and establish a satisfactory theory explanation. 144 college students participated in three experiments. The study applied research paradigm from Seta, Haire, & Seta (2008), the experimental materials for Chinese college students' negative life events. Participants were told that the experimenter was interested in their reactions to different events. After that, they were given packets that contained the experimental manipulations. Participants indicated how negative they felt after thinking about the events that happened to them on a 101-point scale where “0” indicated “low negative” and “100” indicated “super extremely negative.” And, they also were asked to choose between the two options (the highly negative event versus the highly negative plus mildly positive one) by placing a circle around the letter (either A or B) that appeared in front of each option. Order of options and event presentations were counterbalanced. The results showed that individual would use different processing mode to the negative life events of different attribution, which was shown in the difference of affective reactions and behavior options. Experiment 1 found that participants had a more intense negative affective reaction when they were exposed to a highly negative life experience rather than exposed to two negative events: a highly negative and a mildly negative life event. This supports averaging effect. There were no significant order effects. The lack of order effects in this experiment demonstrates that averaging effects can be obtained over and above sequence effects, such as those predicted by the peak-end rule. Experiment 2 showed that summation effects were obtained when the different intensity negative life events were same types, however, averaging effects were obtained when the different intensity negative life events were different types. Experiment 3 found that the peak-end rule was obtained when the negative life events have obvious temporal sequence. The results showed that the individuals’ processing of negative life events was not invariable, but had different processing mode and strategy, which depended on the attribution of life events. The study supports the multiple-processing hypothesis of life events, in which individuals’ processing may be averaging or summation according to the attribution of negative life events.