Findings

Rough times

Kevin Lewis

October 07, 2018

Focusing on the future from afar: Self-distancing from future stressors facilitates adaptive coping
Rachel White et al.
Emotion, forthcoming

Abstract:
Prior research indicates that visual self-distancing enhances adaptive self-reflection about negative past events (Kross & Ayduk, 2011). However, whether this process is similarly useful when people reflect on anxiety-provoking future negative experiences, and if so, whether a similar set of mechanisms underlie its benefits in this context, is unknown. Here we addressed these questions using a combination of experimental and individual difference methods with adults and adolescents (total N = 2,344). In Studies 1 and 2, spontaneous self-distancing predicted less anxious emotional reactivity among adults and adolescents. This effect was mediated by differences in how vividly participants imagined a future anxiety-provoking event. Study 3 provided causal evidence in an adult sample: Adopting a self-distanced (vs. self-immersed) perspective when reflecting on a future stressor led to lower levels of anxiety as well as lower imagery vividness. Consistent with Studies 1 and 2, reductions in imagery vividness mediated the emotion regulatory benefits of self-distancing. A meta-analysis of all three studies further confirmed these findings across samples. Thus, the current studies extend previous research on the benefits of self-distancing to future stressors. In addition, they highlight a novel mechanism for this relation: imagery vividness.


Routines and Meaning in Life
Samantha Heintzelman & Laura King
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming

Abstract:
Previous research links the experience of meaning in life (MIL) with environmental structure and the coherence of external stimuli. The current studies directly test the association between one source of structure in everyday life - routines - and MIL. First, Study 1 (N = 317) found a positive relationship between trait preference for routine and MIL. Study 2 expanded upon this cross-sectional finding with experience sampling data (N = 85; 2,590 episodes) showing that the degree to which current, naturally occurring, behavior followed a typical routine positively related to participants' momentary feelings of MIL. These findings have implications for conceptualizations of MIL, suggesting a previously unnoted, mundane, and ubiquitous source of MIL. The potential roles of boredom and novelty and individual and situational differences for these effects are discussed.


Do Victories and Losses Matter? Effects of Football on Life Satisfaction
Radek Janhuba
Journal of Economic Psychology, forthcoming

Abstract:
This study examines the effects of emotional shocks on subjective well-be-ing and the role social context plays in how shocks are experienced. Using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), this paper uses an ordered logit model to estimate the effects of a local college football team's wins and losses on the life satisfaction of local citizens. The analysis suggests that unexpected wins have positive effects on life satisfaction. The results are driven entirely by games played at the home stadium, indicating that the impacts of emotional shocks are larger if the experience is shared with other fans. Moreover, the effects increase with the size of the stadium relative to the local population, suggesting that social context is likely to be the underlying factor. Surprisingly, no effects are found for cases of unexpected losses.


Do positive illusions of control foster happiness?
Martina Kaufmann et al.
Emotion, forthcoming

Abstract:
Positive emotions have been shown to benefit from optimistic perceptions, even if these perceptions are illusory (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The current research investigated the effects of increases and decreases in illusory control on positive and negative emotions. In two studies we experimentally induced changes in illusory perceptions of control (increase vs. decrease of illusory control) and assessed the extent to which these changes, in turn, influenced participants' emotions. Extending prior research, the results of both studies revealed that whereas illusions of personal control over environmental outcomes mitigated the experience of negative emotions, they did not foster positive emotions. Perceiving a loss of illusory control, however, significantly reduced the experience of positive emotions, but had no effect on negative emotions. Implications for emotion theory and intervention programs are discussed.


Do the ends dictate the means in emotion regulation?
Yael Millgram et al.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, forthcoming

Abstract:
Although selecting emotion regulation strategies constitutes means to achieve emotion goals (i.e., desired emotional states), strategy selection and goals have been studied independently. We propose that the strategies people select are often dictated by what they want to feel. We tested the possibility that emotion regulation involves choosing strategies that match emotion goals. We expected people who are motivated to decrease emotional intensity to select strategies that are tailored for decreasing emotions (e.g., distraction), whereas those who are motivated to increase emotional intensity to select strategies that are tailored for increasing emotions (e.g., rumination). We expected this pattern to be evident both in the lab and in everyday life. We first verified that some strategies (i.e., distraction) are more effective in decreasing, and other strategies (i.e., rumination) more effective in increasing emotions (Study 1). Next, we tested whether emotion goals (decrease vs. increase emotion) direct the selection of strategies inside (Studies 2-3) and outside (Study 4) the laboratory. As predicted, participants were more likely to select strategies that decrease emotions (e.g., distraction, suppression) when motivated to decrease, and strategies that increase emotions (e.g., rumination) when motivated to increase negative (Studies 2-4) and positive (Study 3) emotions. Finally, in Study 5, we demonstrated that emotional dysfunction is linked to less flexibility in matching strategies to goals. Compared to healthy participants, depressed participants selected rumination less for increasing emotions and selected distraction less for decreasing emotions. Our findings show that what people want to feel can determine how they regulate emotions.


Are Two Bads Better Than One? A Model of Sensory Limitations
Lars Lefgren, Olga Stoddard & John Stovall
NBER Working Paper, September 2018

Abstract:
We present a theoretical framework which explains the optimizing behavior of individuals who are exposed to many latent stimuli but prone to experience only the most salient one. We show that individuals with such preferences may find it optimal to engage in seemingly dysfunctional behavior such as self-harm. Our model also explains the behavior of individuals experiencing depression or trapped by multiple competing problems. We present experimental evidence suggesting such preferences explain the behavior of more than two thirds of subjects exposed to single and multiple painful stimuli.


Insight

from the

Archives

A weekly newsletter with free essays from past issues of National Affairs and The Public Interest that shed light on the week's pressing issues.

advertisement

Sign-in to your National Affairs subscriber account.


Already a subscriber? Activate your account.


subscribe

Unlimited access to intelligent essays on the nation’s affairs.

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to National Affairs.