Trait self-control and beliefs about the utility of emotions for initiatory and inhibitory self-control

How do people with high trait self-control achieve their success? This research aimed to investigate beliefs about emotion utility as a potential mechanism. Specifically, because beliefs about the utility of emotions predict emotion regulation and successful performance, we investigate the hypothesis that trait self-control influences beliefs about the utility of emotions for self-control. Two preregistered studies examined whether beliefs about the utility of emotions in everyday self-control situations varied depending on the person (trait self-control) and the situation (initiatory or inhibitory self-control). Our key finding was that people considered positive emotions more useful for self-control than negative emotions. This effect was also moderated by situational and individual factors, such that positive emotions were considered especially useful by participants with high trait self-control and in situations requiring initiatory self-control (with the opposite effect for negative emotions). This research suggests a potential role for instrumental emotion regulation in self-control success.     

Beliefs About Emotion: Links to Emotion Regulation,Well-Being,and Psychological Distress

People differ in their implicit beliefs about emotions. Some believe emotions are fixed (entity theorists), whereas others believe that everyone can learn to change their emotions (incremental theorists). We extend the prior literature by demonstrating (a) entity beliefs are associated with lower well-being and increased psychological distress, (b) people's beliefs about their own emotions explain greater unique variance than their beliefs about emotions in general, and (3) implicit beliefs are linked with well-being/distress via cognitive reappraisal. These results suggest people's implicit beliefs—particularly about their own emotions—may predispose them toward emotion regulation strategies that have important consequences for psychological health.     

Emotion Beliefs,Emotion Regulation,and Emotional Experiences in Daily Life

One potential factor that could influence how individuals with at least moderate symptoms of depression cope with upsetting events in their daily lives is the beliefs that these individuals hold about whether emotions are malleable or fixed. The current study adopted an experience sampling approach to examine how the beliefs about emotion’s malleability related to daily positive and negative affect and daily emotion regulation efforts among individuals with at least moderate symptoms of depression (N = 84). Results demonstrated that individuals having at least moderate symptoms of depression who held more malleable beliefs about emotions reported decreased negative affect both overall during the day and specifically in response to daily upsetting events. Additionally, these individuals who held more malleable beliefs about their emotions also reported more daily use of cognitive reappraisal to regulate their emotions in response to upsetting daily events. Results from the current study extend previous work examining the relationship between emotion malleability beliefs, emotional experiences, and emotion regulation to examine these relationships in people who are moderately depressed as they navigate the emotional landscape of their daily lives.     

Successful emotion regulation requires both conviction and skill: beliefs about the controllability of emotions,reappraisal, and regulation success

To succeed in self-regulation, people need to believe that it is possible to change behaviour and they also need to use effective means to enable such a change. We propose that this also applies to emotion regulation. In two studies, we found that people were most successful in emotion regulation, the more they believed emotions can be controlled and the more they used an effective emotion regulation strategy – namely, cognitive reappraisal. Cognitive reappraisal moderated the link between beliefs about the controllability of emotion and success in emotion regulation, when reappraisal was measured as a trait (Study 1) or manipulated (Study 2). Such moderation was found when examining the regulation of disgust elicited by emotion-inducing films (Study 1), and the regulation of anger elicited by real political events (Study 2). We discuss the implications of our findings for research and practice in emotion regulation.     

Beliefs about emotional residue: the idea that emotions leave a trace in the physical environment

Drawing upon the literatures on beliefs about magical contagion and property transmission, we examined people's belief in a novel mechanism of human-to-human contagion, emotional residue. This is the lay belief that people's emotions leave traces in the physical environment, which can later influence others or be sensed by others. Studies 1-4 demonstrated that Indians are more likely than Americans to endorse a lay theory of emotions as substances that move in and out of the body, and to claim that they can sense emotional residue. However, when the belief in emotional residue is measured implicitly, both Indians and American believe to a similar extent that emotional residue influences the moods and behaviors of those who come into contact with it (Studies 5-7). Both Indians and Americans also believe that closer relationships and a larger number of people yield more detectable residue (Study 8). Finally, Study 9 demonstrated that beliefs about emotional residue can influence people's behaviors. Together, these finding suggest that emotional residue is likely to be an intuitive concept, one that people in different cultures acquire even without explicit instruction.     

The relationship between beliefs about emotions and quality of life in irritable bowel syndrome

Suppression of undesirable emotions, as well as beliefs about the unacceptability of experiencing and expressing emotions, have both been shown to be related to poorer health-related outcomes in several clinical groups. Potential models through which these variables relate have yet to be tested in those with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and are therefore examined in the current article. Online questionnaires were administered to people with IBS (n = 84) to test a mediation model in which beliefs about the unacceptability of emotions are associated with greater emotional suppression, which in turn relates to increased affective distress and consequently poorer quality of life. An alternate model to test the direction of effect along with two further models using support-seeking as mediators of the same predictor and outcome were also tested. Emotional suppression and affective distress (in that particular order) mediate the relationship between beliefs about emotions and quality of life IBS. The models using support-seeking as mediators of the relationship between beliefs about emotions and the two outcomes were not supported. These findings suggest a role for emotional processing in medically unexplained symptoms and imply the need to address such beliefs about emotions in psychological therapies.     

Power and perceived influence: I caused your behavior,but I'm not responsible for it

There are numerous examples of powerful people denying responsibility for others' (mis)conduct in which they played—and acknowledge playing—a causal role. The current article seeks to explain this conundrum by examining the difference between, and powerful people's beliefs about, causality and responsibility. Research has shown power to have numerous psychological consequences. Some of these consequences, such as overconfidence, are likely to increase an individual's belief that he or she caused another person's behavior. However, others, such as decreased perspective‐taking, are likely to decrease an individual's belief that he or she was responsible for another person's behavior. In combination, these psychological consequences of power may lead powerful people to believe that they instigated another's behavior while simultaneously believing that the other person could have chosen to do otherwise. The dissociation between these two attributions may help to explain why people in positions of power often deny responsibility for others' behavior—unethical or otherwise—that they undeniably caused.     

Perceived consensus influences intergroup behavior and stereotype accessibility

Past research has demonstrated the powerful influence other people have on the thoughts and behaviors of individuals. However, the study of intergroup attitudes has focused primarily on the influence of direct exposure to out-group members as determinants of stereotypes and prejudice. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that learning that others share one's intergroup beliefs influences intergroup attitudes and behavior as well as stereotype representation. Experiment 1 demonstrated that learning that one's beliefs are shared or not shared with others influences attitudes, behavior, and the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship. Experiment 2 demonstrated a potential mechanism for such effects by showing that learning about whether others share one's stereotypes influences the accessibility of those stereotypes and related stereotypes.     

Relationships Among Self,Others, and Persecutors in Individuals With Persecutory Delusions: A Repertory Grid Analysis

The purpose of the current study was to examine the way individuals with persecutory delusions construe the self, others, and their main persecutor with reference to the constructs of malevolence and omnipotence, and examine the extent to which these interpersonal beliefs link to distress, self-esteem, and delusion conviction. Repertory grid methodology was used to explore interpersonal beliefs about malevolence and omnipotence in a sample (N = 30) of individuals with current persecutory delusions (mean age 36.4 years; 62% male and 53% White). Participants also completed measures of emotional distress (depression and anxiety) and self-esteem. The findings suggested that persecutors were construed as more omnipotent and malevolent than both the self and others; others in turn were construed as more omnipotent and malevolent than the self. Beliefs about self as powerful were associated with lower anxiety, depression, and higher self-esteem, and beliefs about persecutors’ omnipotence predicted delusion conviction. As with voices, the concepts of power/omnipotence and malevolence/benevolence appear to be important constructs when seeking to understand the relationship between individuals and their perceived persecutors. These findings support working therapeutically with negative schematic beliefs about self, others, and persecutors, which is consistent with a person-based cognitive therapy model of distressing psychosis.     

Tailoring emotions in romantic relationships: A person-centered approach

Adapting the concept of emotional labor to romantic relationships, we examined how people tailor their emotions based on beliefs about partner expectations. Participants (N = 521) completed measures of faking one’s felt emotions (surface acting) and attempting to change felt emotions (deep acting) in response to four contexts. Using latent profile analysis, we identified five profiles (non-actors, deep-actors, moderates, actors, and extreme regulators), and evaluated how profile membership corresponded to relationship quality, self-esteem, and general emotional regulation tendencies. Relationship quality was higher among deep actors and non-actors compared with actors and extreme regulators. Although people may benefit from deep acting, the co-occurrence of surface acting appears to maximize the costs and minimize the benefits of deep acting in romantic relationships.     

Health Beliefs and Attitudes Toward People Living With HIV/AIDS

The present study was concerned with the relationship between health beliefs and attitudes toward people living with HIV/AIDS. Measures of attitudes toward people with HIV/AIDS, beliefs about the transmission of HIV, and health locus of control beliefs were completed by 128 undergraduate students. In general, subjects who believed that HIV was transmitted through normal social contact wanted to avoid contact with people with HIV/AIDS, and showed other negative attitudes, such as lack of sympathy and blame. They also believed that their health was influenced by powerful others and chance. The findings are discussed in terms of fear of contracting HIV and the tendency to blame the victim.     

Personal efficacy, external locus of control, and perceived contingency of parental reinforcement among depressed, paranoid, and normal subjects

Bandura (1982) suggested that judgments of personal efficacy and outcome expectancies (i.e., locus of control) jointly affect behavior. We hypothesized that different combinations of these two sets of beliefs would characterize the thought structures of normal subjects and of psychiatric patients suffering from distinctly different disorders. Normal subjects, depressed subjects, and paranoid subjects completed scales with which we measured beliefs in personal efficacy and beliefs that outcomes are controlled either by chance or by powerful others, as well as a scale with which we assessed perceived contingency of parental reinforcement. The major findings were as follows: Normals judged themselves to be more efficacious than did psychiatric subjects; whereas depressives expected outcomes to be controlled by chance, paranoids expected outcomes to be under the control of powerful others; among the normals, outcome expectancies were strongly associated with personal efficacy, but among the psychiatric patients, these beliefs were unrelated; depressives and paranoids equally reported more noncontingent parental reinforcement than did normals; and perceived contingency of parental reinforcement was predictive of outcome expectancies but not of personal efficacy. The data suggest that low personal efficacy may be a distinguishing characteristic of all psychiatric patients, whereas outcome expectancies may determine the specific nature of the psychiatric disorder.     

Felt emotions,and verbally communicated emotions: the case of pride

Potential discrepancies between felt and verbally communicated emotions elicited by two Pride events (‘selected for a job among a large group’ and ‘being congratulated for one's own new partner’) were studied by means of a structured questionnaire. Italian male (n = 88) and female (n = 107) university students attributed felt and communicated emotions to the event protagonist P, choosing from a list of 14 emotions; the communication occurred with P‘s partner or friend, or with an acquaintance. Statistical analyses of subjects’ attributions confirmed the hypothesis that felt emotions are regulated in verbal communication to others: pride, triumph, self-satisfaction and excitement were de-emphasized in communication; joy, satisfaction, happiness and surprise were intensified; other emotions were communicated as felt. Event type, and to a lesser extent sex of subject, significantly influenced the direction and extent of regulation. The results are interpreted as showing that the verbal communication of emotion is influenced by emotion-related social norms and beliefs.     

The Unmaking of Prejudice: How Christian Beliefs Relate to Attitudes Toward Homosexuals

We propose that the internalization of orthodox Christian beliefs serves as a basis for a personal moral standard that discourages prejudice against others as well as for self-critical emotions that follow upon behaving in a discriminatory manner. Two correlational studies tested hypotheses derived from our theory. Study 1 demonstrated that to the extent people endorse orthodox Christian beliefs, they report an internal motivation to respond without prejudice toward homosexuals. Study 2 demonstrated that, when controlling for the effects of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), endorsement of orthodox Christian beliefs was related to positive attitudes toward homosexuals as individuals or as a group, but not toward homosexuality as a behavior or lifestyle.     

Theory of Mind Impairments in Social Anxiety Disorder

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is a common psychiatric disorder characterized by a persistent, excessive fear and avoidance of social and performance situations. Research on cognitive biases indicates individuals with SAD may lack an accurate view of how they are perceived by others, especially in social situations when they allocate important attentional resources to monitoring their own actions as well as external threat. In the present study, we explored whether socially anxious individuals also have impairments in theory of mind (ToM), or the ability to comprehend others’ mental states, including emotions, beliefs, and intentions. Forty socially anxious and 40 non-socially-anxious comparison participants completed two ToM tasks: the Reading the Mind in the Eyes and the Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition. Participants with SAD performed worse on ToM tasks than did non-socially-anxious participants. Relative to comparison participants, those with SAD were more likely to attribute more intense emotions and greater meaning to what others were thinking and feeling. These group differences were not due to interpretation bias. The ToM impairments in people with SAD are in the opposite direction of those in people with autism spectrum conditions whose inferences about the mental states of other people are absent or very limited. This association between SAD and ToM may have important implications for our understanding of both the maintenance and treatment of social anxiety disorder.     

Explaining Normative Versus Nonnormative Action: The Role of Implicit Theories

The current research investigates what motivates people to engage in normative versus nonnormative action. Prior research has shown that different emotions lead to different types of action. We argue that these differing emotions are determined by a more basic characteristic, namely, implicit theories about whether groups and the world in general can change. We hypothesized that incremental theories (beliefs that groups/the world can change) would predict normative action, and entity theories (beliefs that groups/the world cannot change) as well as group identification would predict nonnormative action. We conducted a pilot in the context of protests against a government plan to relocate Bedouin villages in Israel and a main study during the Israeli social protests of the middle class. Results revealed three distinct pathways to collective action. First, incremental theories about the world predicted hope, which predicted normative action. Second, incremental theories about groups and group identification predicted anger, which also predicted normative collective action. Lastly, entity theories about groups predicted nonnormative collective action through hatred, but only for participants who were highly identified with the group. In sum, people who believed in the possibility of change supported normative action, whereas those who believed change was not possible supported nonnormative action.     

Understanding Beliefs

Beliefs are central to political psychology, but in many ways remain undertheorized. A good starting place for further thought is the typology of Smith, Bruner, and White that separates reality testing from the social and psychological functions of beliefs. The concept of beliefs has several connotations, some of which involve faith and emotions. It is often difficult to grasp others' beliefs, especially when they are foreign to us or morally repugnant. It is even more difficult to determine whether beliefs are powerful in the sense of determining behavior and autonomous in the sense of not being directly derivable from other factors. The Smith, Bruner, and White typology is useful here, helps us understand the operation of biases, and points to the multiple roles that beliefs play in people's lives, including managing trade-offs and generating what looks to others like hypocrisy.     

Reappraising faces: effects on accountability appraisals,self-reported valence,and pupil diameter

Many of our emotions arise in social contexts, as we interact with and learn about others. What is not yet clear, however, is how such emotions unfold when we either react to others or attempt to regulate our emotions. To address this issue, 30 healthy volunteers reacted to or reappraised positive or negative information that was paired with neutral faces. While they were doing this task, we assessed pupillary responses. We also asked participants to provide ratings of accountability and experienced emotion. Findings indicated that appraised accountability increased in response to emotional information, and changes in accountability were associated with commensurate changes in valence reports and increased pupil diameter. During reappraisal, accountability and emotion decreased, but pupil diameter increased. The findings highlight the importance of accountability appraisals during the generation and regulation of emotional reactions to others, while also documenting pupillary increases during emotional reactivity and regulation.     

Yes I can: Expected success promotes actual success in emotion regulation

People who expect to be successful in regulating their emotions tend to experience less frequent negative emotions and are less likely to suffer from depression. It is not clear, however, whether beliefs about the likelihood of success in emotion regulation can shape actual emotion regulation success. To test this possibility, we manipulated participants' beliefs about the likelihood of success in emotion regulation and assessed their subsequent ability to regulate their emotions during a negative emotion induction. We found that participants who were led to expect emotion regulation to be more successful were subsequently more successful in regulating their emotional responses, compared to participants in the control condition. Our findings demonstrate that expected success can contribute to actual success in emotion regulation.