Processing memories of anger-eliciting events: the effect of asking 'why' from a distance

Preliminary experimental evidence suggests that ruminating about anger-eliciting events exacerbates anger and associated affect. However, no research has investigated the effect of rumination on processing memories of these events. This study examined the impact of manipulating cognitive processing when recalling anger-eliciting events. Participants (N=60) outlined an anger-related experience and were randomly allocated to recall the event according to an experimental instruction that manipulated recall perspective and emotional focus (distanced-why, distanced-what, immersed-why or immersed-what). Participants completed measures of negative affect and implicit and explicit anger, and returned the following day to complete measures that indexed frequency of intrusive memories of the event and memory-related distress. Contrary to prediction, participants allocated to the distanced-why condition did not report reduced anger. However, participants instructed to think about 'why' they experienced the emotions they did during the event (compared with 'what' emotions they experienced) reported more intrusions 24h later, regardless of vantage perspective. These results accord with theoretical models that emphasise the negative impact of a ruminative 'why' focus on the processing of past events.     

When stepping outside the self is not enough: A self-distanced perspective reduces the experience of basic but not of self-conscious emotions

Despite recent increased interest in self-conscious emotions, few studies have investigated their regulation. The current research examines the effectiveness of self-perspective in regulating negative self-conscious (guilt, shame) versus basic (anger, sadness) emotions. We predict that adopting a distanced perspective on the self would attenuate the experience of anger and sadness, as previous research has shown (e.g., Kross et al., 2005). However, because the experience of self-conscious emotions involves self-evaluation as well as the evaluation of the self from the perspective of others, a self-distanced perspective may enable these emotions and fail to attenuate the experience of shame and guilt. As predicted, a self-distanced perspective attenuated feelings of sadness and anger, but not of shame and guilt. These findings suggest the appraisal of the experienced emotion (i.e., whether it involves self-evaluations and/or the perspective of others) may influence the effectiveness of emotion-regulation strategies.     

Facilitating adaptive emotional analysis: distinguishing distanced-analysis of depressive experiences from immersed-analysis and distraction

Two studies examined the psychological processes that facilitate adaptive emotional analysis. In Study 1, participants recalled a depression experience and then analyzed their feelings from either a self-immersed (immersed-analysis) or self-distanced (distanced-analysis) perspective. Participants in the distanced-analysis group focused less on recounting their experience and more on reconstruing it, which in turn led to lower levels of depressed affect. Furthermore, comparisons to a distraction group indicated that distanced-analysis was as effective as distraction in reducing depressed affect relative to the immersed-analysis group. Study 2 replicated these findings and showed that both 1 day and 7 days after the experimental manipulations, participants in the distanced-analysis group remained buffered against depressed affect and reported experiencing fewer recurring thoughts about their depression experience over time compared to both the immersed-analysis and distraction groups.     

"Asking why" from a distance: Its cognitive and emotional consequences for people with major depressive disorder

Although analyzing negative experiences leads to physical and mental health benefits among healthy populations, when people with depression engage in this process on their own they often ruminate and feel worse. Here we examine whether it is possible for adults with depression to analyze their feelings adaptively if they adopt a self-distanced perspective. We examined this issue by randomly assigning depressed and nondepressed adults to analyze their feelings surrounding a depressing life experience from either a self-distanced or a self-immersed perspective and then examined the implications of these manipulations for depressotypic thought accessibility, negative affect, implicit and explicit avoidance, and thought content. Four key results emerged. First, all participants were capable of self-distancing while analyzing their feelings. Second, participants who analyzed their feelings from a self-distanced perspective showed lower levels of depressotypic thought accessibility and negative affect compared to their self-immersed counterparts. Third, analyzing negative feelings from a self-distanced perspective led to an adaptive shift in the way people construed their experience-they recounted the emotionally arousing details of their experience less and reconstrued them in ways that promoted insight and closure. It did not promote avoidance. Finally, self-distancing did not influence negative affect or depressotypic thought accessibility among nondepressed participants. These findings suggest that whether depressed adults' attempts to analyze negative feelings lead to adaptive or maladaptive consequences may depend critically on whether they do so from a self-immersed or a self-distanced perspective. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

自我聚焦对社交焦虑的影响：抽离与正念的调节作用

本文旨在探讨抽离和正念在自我聚焦对社交焦虑影响关系中的作用。两个研究分别采用相关法和实验法,探究自我聚焦内容（冗思、正念）和反思方式（浸入、抽离）对社交焦虑的交互影响。结果：问卷数据显示,抽离在自我聚焦注意影响社交焦虑的关系中起着调节作用,无论低抽离倾向还是高抽离倾向,自我聚焦注意都能预测社交焦虑,高抽离倾向减弱个体的社交焦虑感;实验结果表明,聚焦内容与反思方式两者交互作用于社交焦虑,浸入-聚焦冗思内容引发最强的社交焦虑,抽离-聚焦正念内容引发最弱的社交焦虑。结论：抽离和聚焦正念内容都最能有效缓解自我聚焦对社交焦虑的不良影响。     

Procedural justice effects on self-esteem under certainty versus uncertainty emotions

Building upon the idea that procedural justice effects are more pronounced when uncertainty is high, we proposed that recall of an uncertainty-eliciting emotion (fear) will render people more responsive to variations in procedural justice than will recall of a certainty-eliciting emotion (disgust). Results from Study 1, (n = 79 undergraduate students) confirmed that a fair procedure (voice condition) enhanced self-esteem relative to an unfair procedure (no voice condition) to a greater extent when people recalled fear than when they recalled disgust. Results from Study 2 (n = 147 undergraduate students) also showed that a fair, relative to an unfair, procedure enhanced self-esteem more strongly when recalling the emotion of fear rather than disgust, but only when these emotions were recalled from a self-immersed than a self-distanced perspective. These findings confirm that discrete emotions that orient people to interpret situations in uncertain versus certain ways are important antecedents of procedural justice effects.     

Remembering personal change for better or worse: Retrieval context matters

We investigated how focusing on the details (experience focus) versus self-narrative significance (coherence focus) of valenced transitions informs appraisals and emotions at recall. Participants (N = 302) selected a negative or positive transition and rated their emotion. Two weeks later, they described their event using an experience or coherence focus, then rated emotion, event impact, self-relevance, and memory characteristics. A coherence (vs. experience) focus produced lower negative affect and greater psychological impact, particularly for negative transitions. The negative-coherence group showed the largest decrease in negation emotion over time. A coherence (vs. experience) focus resulted in less perceptual detail, reactivity, and re-experiencing. Positive (vs. negative) events were deemed more central to identity and connected to other events. Mental focus informed psychological impact and negative affect, while event valence influenced self-relevance. These findings remained when event type (interpersonal) was matched across groups. Motives for framing autobiographical memories and implications for adaptive self-reflection are discussed.     

The effect of self-distancing on adaptive versus maladaptive self-reflection in children

Although children and adolescents vary in their chronic tendencies to adaptively versus maladaptively reflect over negative feelings, the psychological mechanisms underlying these different types of self-reflection among youngsters are unknown. We addressed this issue in the present research by examining the role that self-distancing plays in distinguishing adaptive versus maladaptive self-reflection among an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse sample of fifth-grade public schoolchildren. Children were randomly assigned to analyze their feelings surrounding a recent anger-related interpersonal experience from either a self-immersed or self-distanced perspective. They then rated their negative affect and described in writing the stream of thoughts they experienced when they analyzed their feelings. Children's stream-of-thought essays were content analyzed for the presence of recounting statements, reconstruing statements, and blame attributions. Path analyses indicated that children who analyzed their feelings from a self-distanced perspective focused significantly less on recounting the "hot," emotionally arousing features of their memory (i.e., what happened to me?) and relatively more on reconstruing their experience. This shift in thought content--less recounting and more reconstruing--led children in the self-distanced group to blame the other person involved in their recalled experience significantly less, which in turn led them to display significantly lower levels of emotional reactivity. These findings help delineate the psychological mechanisms that distinguish adaptive versus maladaptive forms of self-reflection over anger experiences in children. Their basic findings and clinical implications are discussed.     

Regulatory focus and affective recall

In two studies, we tested the impact of regulatory focus on recalled affect for past academic outcomes. Because promotion focus concerns achieving gains, it should be related to greater recalled positive affect. In contrast, prevention focus concerns avoiding losses, and should be related to greater recalled negative affect. In Study 1, promotion focus led to greater recalled positive affect for positive events, while prevention focus led to greater recalled negative affect regardless of event valence. In Study 2, promotion focus increased recalled positive affect for both positive and negative events, whereas prevention focus increased recalled negative affect for both positive and negative events. These studies demonstrate that current motivation can alter memory for past affective experiences; the regulatory focus ascribed to a previous event changes the extent to which people remember their emotional experience. Implications are discussed.     

Seeking security or growth: a regulatory focus perspective on motivations in romantic relationships

Using a multimethod approach, we examined how regulatory focus shapes people's perceptual, behavioral, and emotional responses in different situations in romantic relationships. We first examined how chronic regulatory focus affects romantic partners' support perceptions and problem-solving behaviors while they were engaged in a conflict resolution discussion (Study 1). Next, we experimentally manipulated regulatory focus and tested its effects on partner perceptions when individuals recalled a prior conflict resolution discussion (Study 2). We then examined how chronic regulatory focus influences individuals' emotional responses to hypothetical relationship events (Study 3) and identified specific partner behaviors to which people should respond with regulatory goal-congruent emotions (Study 4). Strongly prevention-focused people perceived their partners as more distancing and less supportive during conflict (Studies 1 and 2), approached conflict resolution by discussing the details related to the conflict (Study 1), and experienced a negative relationship outcome with more agitation (Study 3). Strongly promotion-focused people perceived their partners as more supportive and less distancing (Studies 1 and 2), displayed more creative conflict resolution behavior (Study 1), and experienced a negative relationship outcome with more sadness and a favorable outcome with more positive emotions (Study 3). In Study 4, recalling irresponsible and responsible partner behaviors was associated with experiencing more prevention-focused emotions, whereas recalling affectionate and neglectful partner behaviors was associated with more promotion-focused emotions. The findings show that regulatory focus and approach-avoidance motivations influence certain interpersonal processes in similar ways, but regulatory focus theory also generates novel predictions on which approach-avoidance models are silent.     

Neuroticism and well-being? Let's work on the positive rather than negative aspects

The present studies show that certain cognitive strategies (e.g. savoring, practicing gratitude) enable individuals high in neuroticism to maintain or recover their positive emotions. In Study 1, participants (regardless of neuroticism differences) felt positive about a pleasant event if they savored it; however, dampening the event caused individuals high but not low in neuroticism to feel less positive. Study 2 showed that being grateful for things in their lives helped participants maintain their affect balance after a positive mood induction, or regain their affect balance after a negative mood induction. This research is thus the first step toward illuminating how people (including individuals high in neuroticism) could improve their momentary affect via the alternative route of maintaining or increasing positive emotions, rather than the traditional solution of reducing negative emotions.     

When "light" and "dark" thoughts become light and dark responses: affect biases brightness judgments

Metaphors link positive affect to brightness and negative affect to darkness. Research has shown that such mappings are "alive" at encoding in that word-meaning evaluations are faster when font color matches prevailing metaphors (positive = bright; negative = dark). These results, however, involved reaction times, and there are reasons to think that evaluations would be unlikely to influence perceptual judgments, the current focus. Studies 1-3 establish that perceptual judgments were biased in a brighter direction following positive (vs. negative) evaluations, and Study 4 shows that such biases are automatic. The results significantly extend the metaphor representation perspective. Not only do evaluations activate metaphors, but such metaphoric mappings are sufficient to lead individuals to violate input from visual perception when judging an object's brightness.     

社会交往情境中权力和反馈对情绪的影响

以往关于权力是否影响情绪的研究存在结果争议,这意味着可能存在其它因素的作用。本研究基于权力控制理论和社会距离理论,探究了社交情境中权力和反馈对情绪的影响。研究1采用经验取样法收集了140名被试五天内的1706段社交经历,研究2采用实验法考察了148名被试的社交经历。结果表明,权力和反馈对情绪存在交互影响:(1)当个体处于低权力情境时,反馈影响情绪,反馈越积极,情绪也越积极;(2)当个体获得积极反馈时,权力不影响情绪;当个体获得消极反馈时,权力影响情绪,权力越高,情绪相对更积极。本研究有助于厘清以往研究关于权力与情绪关系的争议。     

Subjective impact, meaning making, and current and recalled emotions for self-defining memories

Two studies examined the impact of self-defining events on individuals (i.e., subjective impact), meaning making with regard to these events, and how subjective impact may account for the pattern of current and recalled emotions for these self-defining memories (Singer & Moffitt, 1991-1992). In Study 1, participants recalled self-defining memories, indicating how much impact the recalled events have had on them and described meaning making for these events. Subjective impact was shown to be a good marker for meaning making. Participants in Study 2 each recalled five self-defining memories, reporting their current emotions about the events, the emotions they recalled feeling at the time, and the impact the events have had on them. As expected, for negative memories, people reported less negative emotion (e.g., sadness) and more positive emotion (e.g., pride) compared to how they recalled feeling at the time. For positive memories, people reported equally intense positive emotion (e.g., love) and less negative emotion (e.g., fear) compared to how they recalled feeling at the time. These patterns of current and recalled emotions were accounted for by impact ratings.     

Hearts Strangely Warmed (and Cooled): Emotional Experience in Religious and Atheistic Individuals

In light of neurophysiological evidence suggesting a link between hemispheric dominance and religious preference, three studies tested whether atheists and religious individuals process emotions differently. Suggestive of right-hemispheric dominance, individuals who identified with religion reported more intense positive emotions associated with a recalled love experience (Study 1), greater sadness in immediate response to reading a tragic news story (Study 2), and more vivid recall of the subjective details of either their most recent birthday or an existential crisis (Study 3). They also reported greater alexithymia compared to atheists. Overall, agnostic/no religion individuals averaged in between these two groups. The results suggest that, relative to atheists, religious individuals have more accessible yet undifferentiated emotions, which may perhaps serve as raw materials for religious experience.     

No pain,no change: Reductions in prior negative affect following physical pain

In general, organisms are motivated to avoid stimuli that induce pain. However, some individuals intentionally inflict pain on themselves (e.g., nonsuicidal self-injury) and report doing so for the perceived emotional benefits following the experience of pain. Two controlled laboratory studies sought to expand upon the relatively limited literature on the effects of pain on emotion. In Study 1, participants provided momentary affect ratings immediately before and after experiencing physical pain. Results demonstrated that both positive affect and negative affect (NA) decreased following the experience of pain. In the Study 2, we examined the effect that individual differences in emotional reactivity had on affective reactions to pain. Individuals high in emotional reactivity experienced larger decreases in NA following the experience of pain than individuals who were low in emotional reactivity. Our findings may potentially explain why some individuals intentionally seek out the experience of pain.     

Emotional,motivational and attitudinal consequences of autonomous prosocial behaviour

When do prosocial actors experience positive versus negative psychological outcomes from helping others? In four studies and an internal meta-analysis, we tested the hypothesis that autonomy shapes the psychological consequences of helping others. In Study 1, prosocial behaviour was associated with a robust pattern of negative well-being outcomes (i.e., depression, anxiety, stress) for individuals low but not high in autonomy. In Studies 2–4, relative to reflecting on a neutral interpersonal experience, reflecting on an autonomous helping experience increased sadness and happiness, strengthened intentions to help in the future and raised support for social welfare. By contrast, reflecting on a controlled helping experience increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions, but did not affect attitudes or behavioural intentions. Collectively, the findings indicate that autonomy (or lack thereof) shapes the emotional, motivational and attitudinal consequences of helping behaviour.     

Sex,sex roles,and response styles for negative affect: Selectivity in a free recall task

Study 1 examined how responses to negative affect may be influenced by sex differences in response styles [S. Nolen-Hoeksema (1987), “Sex Differences in Unipolar Depression: Evidence and Theory,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 101, pp. 259–282] and situational norms. Male and female experimental subjects were led to experience negative affect by reading and rating sad stories, and were then given either nonnormative or normative feedback. Nonnormative subjects were informed that their story ratings were more negative than other participants' ratings. Normative subjects were informed that their ratings were similar to others' ratings. For nonnormative subjects, men recalled less negative material than women, suggesting that response styles are most apparent when negative affect is considered inappropriate. As both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of response styles, Study 2 examined the hypothesis that both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of recall in a manner similar to sex in Study 1. Male and female subjects high and low in masculinity and femininity were assigned to negative-nonnormative and neutral affect conditions. In addition to a marginally significant sex effect consistent with Study 1, results revealed that high-masculinity individuals tended to recall more positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. In contrast, low-masculinity individuals recalled less positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. The implications of this research for the impact of negative affect on recall are addressed.     

It ain’t over ‘til it’s over: The effect of task completion on the savoring of success

The present research investigated a common yet to date unexamined assumption that individuals are unlikely to savor success when they have not yet fully completed a task. In Study 1 (N = 83), we assessed savoring responses of soccer players who were either winning or were tied at the end of the first half (in progress) and at the end of the match (completed). In Study 2 (N = 121 undergraduates), performance feedback (successful vs. average) and task completion (in progress vs. completed) were manipulated and savoring was assessed. In both studies, successful individuals reported savoring their positive experience less when the task was in progress as compared to completed. Results of a third study (N = 152 undergraduates) showed that lower savoring of success was due to individuals’ focus on and worries about future performance as well as the perception that positive emotions have limited utility. We discuss these findings in terms of the consequences for performance and well-being.     

What Constitutes a Good Life? Cultural Differences in the Role of Positive and Negative Affect in Subjective Well‐Being

ABSTRACT East Asians and Asian Americans report lower levels of subjective well-being than Europeans and European Americans. Three studies found support for the hypothesis that such differences may be due to the psychological meanings Eastern and Western cultures attach to positive and negative affect. Study 1 demonstrated that the desire to repeat a recent vacation was significantly predicted by recalled positive affect—but not recalled negative affect—for European Americans, whereas Asian Americans considered both positive and negative affect. Study 2 replicated this effect in judging satisfaction with a personal friendship. Study 3 linked changes in European Americans' life satisfaction to everyday positive events caused by the self (vs. others) and changes in Japanese life satisfaction to everyday negative events caused by others (vs. the self). Positive affect appears particularly meaningful for European Americans and negative affect for Asian Americans and Japanese when judging a satisfying vacation, friendship, or life.