Why are some obsessions more upsetting than others?

Little is known about why certain obsessional thoughts are more upsetting than others for people with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). Obsessional thought content often seems arbitrary to sufferers. The current study examined three possible reasons why particular thoughts would be especially upsetting for individuals, based on suggestions put forth by cognitive theories of obsessional thoughts. Twenty-eight individuals with a principal diagnosis of OCD completed questionnaires and interviews at two different periods of time on (1) their most upsetting current obsession and (2) their least upsetting current obsession. Results suggested that more upsetting obsessions were evaluated as more meaningful or significant than less upsetting obsessions, and more upsetting obsessions contradicted valued aspects of the self to a greater degree. All examples of current obsessions, both most and least upsetting, arose in the context of life concerns or issues. Results support cognitive theories in that the strength and nature of appraisal appears to be linked with the distress associated with a thought, and more upsetting thoughts are those that have implications for a person's sense of self.     

Why are some people with neurological illness more resilient than others?

The current qualitative study was designed to evaluate the coping strategies of people living with a chronic progressive neurological illness and their carers. The neurological illnesses were Huntington's disease, motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease. Participants included 15 people who showed high levels of adjustment and 15 who showed low levels of adjustment. Participants were selected from an earlier study, to ensure that they satisfied the inclusion criteria for the current study. Interviews were completed to determine the strategies used to cope with the demands of the illness. Participants who demonstrated good adjustment were more likely to draw on social support to provide them with the resources to deal with the illness. In contrast, those who evidenced poor adjustment were more likely to draw on external supports to complete tasks for them. The implications of these findings for people with chronic neurological illnesses and their families are discussed.     

Why are some people more knowledgeable than others? A longitudinal study of knowledge acquisition

The purpose of this study was to investigate correlates of knowledge acquisition within a real-world domain-basketball. The study employed a longitudinal design and involved two sessions, with approximately 2.5 months between sessions. Session 1 occurred near the beginning of the men's college basketball season, and Session 2 occurred after the season. There was an indirect effect of interest in basketball on new basketball knowledge, via exposure to domain-relevant information. In addition, prior basketball knowledge had a strong effect on new basketball knowledge distinct from an influence through basketball exposure. This finding suggests that prior knowledge may provide a framework into which new knowledge can be integrated. By contrast, there was no effect of fluid intelligence on new basketball knowledge. Although somewhat surprising given evidence that this aspect of intelligence may play a role in the acquisition of certain types of knowledge, this finding accords with the view that knowledge is a major determinant of various aspects of cognitive functioning, including learning.     

Why are some moral beliefs perceived to be more objective than others?

Recent research has investigated whether people think of their moral beliefs as objectively true facts about the world, or as subjective preferences. The present research examines variability in the perceived objectivity of different moral beliefs, with respect both to the content of moral beliefs themselves (what they are about), and to the social representation of those moral beliefs (whether other individuals are thought to hold them). It also examines the possible consequences of perceiving a moral belief as objective. With respect to the content of moral beliefs, we find that beliefs about the moral properties of negatively valenced acts are seen as reliably more objective than beliefs about the moral properties of positively valenced acts. With respect to the social representation of moral beliefs, we find that the degree of perceived consensus regarding a moral belief positively influences its perceived objectivity. The present experiments also demonstrate that holding a moral belief to be objective is associated with a more ‘closed’ response in the face of disagreement about it, and with more morally pejorative attributions towards a disagreeing other person.     

Interevent differences in event memory: Why are some events more recallable than others?

Interitem differences in the free recall of action events were studied in five experiments. The action events were presented in three different formats: minitasks performed by the subjects in response to verbal instructions from the experimenter (SPTs), minitasks performed by the experimenter (EPTs), and task instructions (TIs). Not only were reliable interevent differences in recall probability demonstrated within each format, but these differences tended to correlate across formats, especially between the SPTs and EPTs; thus, a highly recallable SPT also tended to be a highly recallable EPT. Attempts to explain interitem recall differences in terms of differences in familiarity, vividness, and the availability of environmental cues were largely unsuccessful. An experimental analysis of the action events into action and object components showed the recall probabilities of our events to be mainly dependent on the recall probabilities of their action components, with only a minor dependence on the recall probabilities of their object components.     

Why do men have higher expectancy than women?

The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that sex differences in expected academic achievement could be explained by corresponding differences in perceived intellectual ability, and to explore the relationship between perceived ability and the sex role related traits of instrumentality and expressiveness. Results showed sex differences both in expectancy and perceived ability. When perceived ability was controlled, sex no longer related to expectancy. A small correlation was found between expectancy and a measure of instrumentality. The latter variable correlated substantially with perceived ability. A measure of expressiveness was unrelated both to expectancy and perceived ability. Path analysis gave results consistent with the hypotheses that men have higher perceived ability than women because men think of themselves as more instrumental than women do, and that instrumentality determines expectancy indirectly through its relationship to perceived ability.     

Human feelings: why are some more aware than others?

A recent article reports that human perception of heartbeat timing is mediated by right (non-dominant) anterior insular cortex, and that the activity and the size of this region is directly correlated with individuals' subjective awareness of inner body feelings and emotionality. These results support the somatic-marker hypothesis of consciousness (a modern successor to the James-Lange theory of emotion) and the neuroanatomical concept that human awareness is based on a phylogenetically distinct interoceptive pathway.     

Is the past prologue for some more than others? The hobo syndrome and job complexity

The current study examines the relationship between an individual's history of changing jobs and future turnover (the so-called “hobo syndrome”). Relying on self-consistency theory, it was hypothesized that the relationship between job mobility history and turnover is moderated by job complexity. Using a sample of 393 employees from two healthcare organizations, multiple methods were used to assess the variables of interest. Job mobility history was assessed with a biodata questionnaire collected before employees were hired. Job complexity was measured objectively by a job complexity index calculated from O*NET data. Turnover was assessed with actual turnover data collected over an 18-month post-hire period. Consistent with our hypothesis, results using event history analyses revealed that previous job changes were positively related to turnover likelihood. Additionally, job complexity moderated the relationship between previous job changes and turnover likelihood, such that previous job changes were more positively related to turnover in complex jobs. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.     

Why do you fear the bogeyman? An embodied predictive coding model of perceptual inference

Why are we scared by nonperceptual entities such as the bogeyman, and why does the bogeyman only visit us during the night? Why does hearing a window squeaking in the night suggest to us the unlikely idea of a thief or a killer? And why is this more likely to happen after watching a horror movie? To answer these and similar questions, we need to put mind and body together again and consider the embodied nature of perceptual and cognitive inference. Predictive coding provides a general framework for perceptual inference; I propose to extend it by including interoceptive and bodily information. The resulting embodied predictive coding inference permits one to compare alternative hypotheses (e.g., is the sound I hear generated by a thief or the wind?) using the same inferential scheme as in predictive coding, but using both sensory and interoceptive information as evidence, rather than just considering sensory events. If you hear a window squeaking in the night after watching a horror movie, you may consider plausible a very unlikely hypothesis (e.g., a thief, or even the bogeyman) because it explains both what you sense (e.g., the window squeaking in the night) and how you feel (e.g., your high heart rate). The good news is that the inference that I propose is fully rational and gives minds and bodies equal dignity. The bad news is that it also gives an embodiment to the bogeyman, and a reason to fear it.     

Why are some people more susceptible to ingroup threat than others? The importance of a relative extrinsic to intrinsic value orientation

Whereas an individual differences perspective recently pointed to the importance of a relative extrinsic to intrinsic value orientation in the prediction of outgroup attitudes, the intergroup relations perspective stresses the importance of threat. This study investigates the interplay of both perspectives. A scenario study among high-school students showed that only people who attach greater relative importance to extrinsic values react with a negative attitude towards an outgroup that is portrayed as threatening. A longitudinal study among university students then showed that people with a relatively greater extrinsic value orientation are not only more likely to react to threat but also to perceive threat. Specifically, cross-lagged analyses showed that a relatively greater extrinsic value orientation predicted over-time increases in threat perceptions.     

Are students in some college majors more self-determined in their studies than others?

Self-determination theory proposes that the extent to which students’ motivation is self-determined is critical to learning outcomes. Based on occasional research evidence and our perceptions, we hypothesize that college students in certain majors have profiles that are higher in self-determined motivation than students in other majors. Specifically, our primary hypothesis is that students in the social sciences and humanities tend to be more self-determined, whereas students in business-related majors tend to be less self-determined. The results from two studies using large samples and advanced analytical methods support the primary hypotheses. Comparison results were also obtained for other majors (e.g., engineering and natural sciences), and supplemental analyses supported the critical role of self-determined motivation in learning outcomes among students in all majors. Study 2 also found support for two mechanisms for such differences, i.e., the majors’ learning climates and students’ individual differences in autonomous functioning. The current evidence suggests the importance of promoting more humanistic learning environments in certain academic disciplines.     

Normative theories of argumentation: are some norms better than others?

Norms—that is, specifications of what we ought to do—play a critical role in the study of informal argumentation, as they do in studies of judgment, decision-making and reasoning more generally. Specifically, they guide a recurring theme: are people rational? Though rules and standards have been central to the study of reasoning, and behavior more generally, there has been little discussion within psychology about why (or indeed if) they should be considered normative despite the considerable philosophical literature that bears on this topic. In the current paper, we ask what makes something a norm, with consideration both of norms in general and a specific example: norms for informal argumentation. We conclude that it is both possible and desirable to invoke norms for rational argument, and that a Bayesian approach provides solid normative principles with which to do so.     

Why are women more religious than men? Testing the explanatory power of personality theory among undergraduate students in Wales

This study tests the explanatory power of personality-based psychologically grounded theories to account for the well-established finding within the psychology of religion that within Christian and post-Christian contexts women are more religious than men. A sample of 1682 undergraduate students in Wales completed the short form of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised together with the adult form of the Francis Scale of Attitude towards Christianity and measures of frequency of church attendance, and frequency of personal prayer. These data confirm that women record higher levels of religiosity and lower levels of psychoticism, and demonstrate that psychoticism is the strongest predictor of individual differences in religiosity. Multiple-regression analyses show that, when individual differences in personality are taken into account, biological sex adds no further impact on religiosity. This finding suggests that higher levels of religiosity among women may be interpreted as a function of basic psychological differences in levels of psychoticism rather than as a sociological function of being female.     

Predictors of time to remission from depression in primary care patients: do some people benefit more from positive life change than others?

The authors examined the role of personality, social support, and coping strategies and their interaction with positive life change (PLC) in influencing time to remission from depression in 86 depressed primary care patients (69% women, mean age = 36.6 years), who were followed for 3.5 years. Diagnostic information was obtained by the Present State Examination (J. K. Wing, J. Cooper, & N. Sartorius, 1974), and life change by the Life Events and Difficulties Schedule (G. W. Brown & T. O. Harris, 1978). The association of PLC and other predictors with the time to remission was studied by means of Cox regression. PLC reduced time to remission in women, but not in men. Other predictors that expedited remission were low severity of premorbid difficulties, high self-esteem, and a tension-reducing coping style. Neuroticism modified the effect of PLC in that the remission forward bringing effect of PLC was stronger for highly neurotic people. The results suggests that women and psychologically vulnerable persons benefit most from PLC.     

Reconstruction of things past: Why do some memories feel so close and others so far away?

The vast majority of work in construal level theory focuses prospectively on the future. Through a series of studies controlling for knowledge about an event, we look retrospectively at the past and demonstrate that construal mindsets can materially influence how a past event is reconstructed in memory. Specifically, an event recalled in a more concrete mindset feels subjectively closer than when recalled in an abstract mindset (Studies 1-3). We present evidence suggesting this is because a concrete mindset actually makes people feel as though they know more, even if they were initially exposed to the same set of information—perceived information accessibility mediates the effect of construal level on temporal distance (Study 2). The effect of construal level on memory reconstruction extends to judgments of blame, where judgments of greater temporal distance drive a greater propensity to blame parties for negative events and temporal distance mediates these judgments (Study 3). Together, these studies are the first to demonstrate that the mindset employed when recalling an event shapes its remembrance.     

What's love got to do with it? Why some marriages succeed and others fail

This essay summarizes a 13‐year longitudinal study carried out in the United States that challenges conventional wisdom about courtship and the early marital roots of connubial distress and divorce. The study traced relationships from courtship, to the early years of marriage, to parenthood (for most), and to divorce (for some). The essay describes the germination of the study, how it was implemented, and what it reveals about why some marriages succeed and others fail. Couples' courtship and early marital experiences foreshadow: (a) whether they stay married or divorce, (b) whether they sustain satisfying unions if their marriage lasts, and (c) how quickly marriages that end in divorce break apart. Mutually satisfying marriages are differentiable from those that fail in that they both promise marital consanguinity and deliver on the promise.     

Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: why do women like women more than men like men?

Four experiments confirmed that women's automatic in-group bias is remarkably stronger than men's and investigated explanations for this sex difference, derived from potential sources of implicit attitudes (L. A. Rudman, 2004). In Experiment 1, only women (not men) showed cognitive balance among in-group bias, identity, and self-esteem (A. G. Greenwald et al., 2002), revealing that men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic own group preference. Experiments 2 and 3 found pro-female bias to the extent that participants automatically favored their mothers over their fathers or associated male gender with violence, suggesting that maternal bonding and male intimidation influence gender attitudes. Experiment 4 showed that for sexually experienced men, the more positive their attitude was toward sex, the more they implicitly favored women. In concert, the findings help to explain sex differences in automatic in-group bias and underscore the uniqueness of gender for intergroup relations theorists.