On the emotions that accompany autobiographical memories: Dysphoria disrupts the fading affect bias

Participants in two studies recalled autobiographical events and reported both the affect experienced at event occurrence and the affect associated with event recollection. The intensity of affect associated with a recalled event generally decreased, but the affective fading was greater for negative events than for positive events. The magnitude of this fading affect bias also varied with participants' dysphoria levels: Dysphorics showed a smaller fading affect bias than non-dysphorics. Additional analyses suggested that the fading affect bias is not a product of: (1) distorted retrospective memory for the affect originally accompanying events; (2) differences in the initial affect intensity of positive and negative events; or (3) differences in the ages of positive and negative events. Other variables that might be related to the fading affect bias are discussed.     

A regulatory focus model of self-evaluation

Regulatory focus theory [Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press.] argues that concerns with growth and nurturance (i.e., a promotion focus) and concerns with safety and security (i.e., a prevention focus) produce different motives and perception. The current studies test whether regulatory focus also affects individuals’ strivings for self-evaluation. Specifically, we argue that a promotion or a prevention focus directs the self-evaluation process to self-esteem or self-certainty, respectively. Two studies supported this prediction by demonstrating that regulatory focus affects the strength of self-evaluation goals and individuals’ reactions to goal failure. In Study 1, we found that a promotion focus led to a stronger self-esteem goal (as measured by greater accessibility of esteem-related words), whereas a prevention focus led to a stronger self-certainty goal (as measured by greater accessibility of certainty-related words). In Study 2, a promotion failure led to lower self-esteem than a prevention failure, but a prevention failure led to lower self-certainty than a promotion failure. This research suggests an unrecognized role of nurturance and safety concerns in understanding the self-evaluation process.     

Less negative=more positive? Social discrimination as avoidance or approach

A motivational approach to ingroup favoritism based on regulatory focus theory (RFT; Higgins, 1997) is introduced. RFT suggests that individual self-regulation is either more concerned with approaching positive events (promotion focus) or with avoiding negative events (prevention focus). It is suggested that if an individual self-categorizes as a group member, resource allocations to one’s group will be based on these mechanisms of self-regulation. Thus, a promotion focus should engender ingroup favoritism during the distribution of positive resources but not during the distribution of negative resources, whereas a prevention focus should engender ingroup favoritism for negative but not for positive resources. The results of two studies support this prediction based on momentary and chronic regulatory focus. The self-regulation approach to ingroup favoritism provides an explanation for social discrimination in the distribution of positive and negative resources.     

Adult attachment and memory of emotional reactions to negative and positive events

Relations between adult attachment and memory for earlier emotional reactions to negative and positive events were examined. Hypotheses were that avoidance would be associated with underestimating earlier negative affect, whereas anxiety would be associated with overestimating earlier negative affect. Also, both avoidance and anxiety were expected to relate to underestimating earlier positive affect intensity. Participants (119 college students) completed daily report forms three times a day for 4 days on which they described and rated their immediate emotional reactions to events within each time period. Approximately 10 days later, they were asked to estimate their immediate emotional reaction to one negative event and one positive event. Events were coded as interpersonal or non-interpersonal. Contrary to hypotheses, for those lower on avoidance, anxiety related to lower levels of recalled negative affect (i.e., greater underestimation) for negative interpersonal events. As expected, with positive events, anxiety and avoidance related to lower levels of recalled positive emotions. Results suggest that memory processes could be one explanation of how working models operate and are sustained over time.     

Age-related positivity effects and autobiographical memory detail: Evidence from a past/future source memory task

This study investigated whether the age-related positivity effect strengthens specific event details in autobiographical memory. Participants retrieved past events or imagined future events in response to neutral or emotional cue words. Older adults rated each kind of event more positively than younger adults, demonstrating an age-related positivity effect. We next administered a source memory test. Participants were given the same cue words and tried to retrieve the previously generated event and its source (past or future). Accuracy on this source test should depend on the recollection of specific details about the earlier generated events, providing a more objective measure of those details than subjective ratings. We found that source accuracy was greater for positive than negative future events in both age groups, suggesting that positive future events were more detailed. In contrast, valence did not affect source accuracy for past events in either age group, suggesting that positive and negative past events were equally detailed. Although ageing can bias people to focus on positive aspects of experience, this bias does not appear to strengthen the availability of details for positive relative to negative past events.     

Speed/accuracy decisions in task performance: Built-in trade-off or separate strategic concerns?

In four studies we show that participants’ regulatory focus influences speed/accuracy decisions in different tasks. According to regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997), promotion focus concerns with accomplishments and aspirations produce strategic eagerness whereas prevention focus concerns with safety and responsibilities produce strategic vigilance. Studies 1–3 show faster performance and less accuracy in simple drawing tasks for participants with a chronic or situationally induced promotion focus compared to participants with a prevention focus. These studies also show that as participants move closer to the goal of completing the task, speed increases and accuracy decreases for participants with a promotion focus, whereas speed decreases and accuracy increases for participants with a prevention focus. Study 4 basically replicates these results for situationally induced regulatory focus with a more complex proofreading task. The study found that a promotion focus led to faster proofreading compared to a prevention focus, whereas a prevention focus led to higher accuracy in finding more difficult errors than a promotion focus. Through speed and searching for easy errors, promotion focus participants maximized their proofreading performance. In all four studies, the speed effects were independent of the accuracy effects and vice versa. These results show that speed/accuracy (or quantity/quality) decisions are influenced by the strategic inclinations of participants varying in regulatory focus rather than by a built-in trade-off.     

Age-related positivity effects and autobiographical memory detail: evidence from a past/future source memory task

This study investigated whether the age-related positivity effect strengthens specific event details in autobiographical memory. Participants retrieved past events or imagined future events in response to neutral or emotional cue words. Older adults rated each kind of event more positively than younger adults, demonstrating an age-related positivity effect. We next administered a source memory test. Participants were given the same cue words and tried to retrieve the previously generated event and its source (past or future). Accuracy on this source test should depend on the recollection of specific details about the earlier generated events, providing a more objective measure of those details than subjective ratings. We found that source accuracy was greater for positive than negative future events in both age groups, suggesting that positive future events were more detailed. In contrast, valence did not affect source accuracy for past events in either age group, suggesting that positive and negative past events were equally detailed. Although ageing can bias people to focus on positive aspects of experience, this bias does not appear to strengthen the availability of details for positive relative to negative past events.     

Regulatory focus and temporal distance

Four studies identify and examine a temporal component to regulatory focus. Results support the assertion that promotion focus tends to predominate for temporally distant goals, whereas proximal goals are characterized by more balanced consideration of both promotion- and prevention-focused concerns. In Study 1, students rated the importance of promotion and prevention goals at two points in time: 2 weeks before and a few minutes before an examination. Promotion goal importance increased with temporal distance, whereas prevention goal importance remained constant over time. Study 2 replicated this pattern holding the actual time-span constant (3.5 weeks) and varying only the psychological sense of proximity/distance. In Study 3, subjects rated the regulatory focus of goals at varying points in time, both future and past. The temporal effect was replicated for both time periods. Study 4 provided evidence for the reverse effect, that of regulatory focus on the perceived temporal distance of future goals. Taken together, these findings suggest an integration across research domains that links regulatory focus to temporal perspective for both prospective and retrospective judgments.     

Stereotype threat and performance: how self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci

The authors hypothesized that activated self-stereotypes can influence the strategies of task solution by inducing regulatory foci. More specifically, positive self-stereotypes should induce a promotion focus state of eagerness, whereas negative stereotypes should induce a prevention focus state of vigilance. Study 1 showed that a negative ascribed stereotype with regard to task performance leads to better recall for avoidance-related statements whereas a positive stereotype leads to better recall for approach-related statements. In Studies 2 and 3, both an experimental manipulation of group performance expectation and the preexisting stereotype of better verbal skills in women than in men led to faster and less accurate performance in the positive as compared with the negative stereotype group. Studies 4 and 5 showed that positive in-group stereotypes led to more creative performance whereas negative stereotypes led to better analytical performance. These results point to a possible mechanism for stereotype-threat effects.     

Regulatory Focus and the Probability Estimates of Conjunctive and Disjunctive Events

Prior research has shown that people overestimate the likelihood of conjunctive events and underestimate the likelihood of disjunctive events. We evaluated whether people's regulatory focus success was related to the magnitude of these judgmental biases. Regulatory focus theory posits that people are guided by two distinct motivational systems—promotion focus and prevention focus. When people are promotion focused they attempt to bring their actual selves into alignment with their ideal selves (standards reflecting wishes and aspirations). When people are prevention focused they attempt to bring their actual selves into alignment with their ought selves (standards reflecting duties and obligations). As predicted, promotion success (i.e., congruence between actual and ideal selves) was positively related to the accuracy of disjunctive probability estimates, whereas prevention success (i.e., congruence between actual and ought selves) was not. Also as predicted, greater prevention success led to more accurate conjunctive probability estimates, whereas greater promotion success did not.     

Finding the good in the bad: age and event experience relate to the focus on positive aspects of a negative event

All lives contain negative events, but how we think about these events differs across individuals; negative events often include positive details that can be remembered alongside the negative, and the ability to maintain both representations may be beneficial. In a survey examining emotional responses to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, the current study investigated how this ability shifts as a function of age and individual differences in initial experience of the event. Specifically, this study examined how emotional importance (i.e. self-reported emotional arousal and personal significance), involvement (i.e. self and friend/family involvement in the 2013 Boston Marathon and self-involvement in prior marathons), and self-reported surprise upon hearing about the event related to the tendency to report focusing on the negative and positive aspects of the bombings. Structural equation models revealed that while greater emotional importance and surprise were associated with a greater focus on negative elements, involvement and age were associated with increased consideration of positive aspects. Further, emotional importance was more strongly related to an increased focus on negative aspects for young adults and an increased focus on positive aspects for older adults, highlighting a tendency for older adults to enhance positive features of an otherwise highly negative event.     

Emotions and decision making: Regulatory focus moderates the influence of anticipated emotions on action evaluations

We investigate the moderating effects of self-regulatory foci (Higgins, 1996a) on the impact of anticipated emotions in decision making. We hypothesise that regulatory focus moderates the relationships between anticipated emotions of success and failure of performing an act and evaluations of the act. A promotion focus should highlight the role of dissatisfaction-satisfaction emotions in predicting evaluations, whereas a prevention focus should emphasise the impact of relaxation-agitation emotions. Hypotheses were investigated in two studies. In the first, chronic self-regulatory orientations were assessed; in the second, self-regulatory concerns were manipulated. Results support the moderating effects of regulatory foci on the impact of negative anticipated emotions: Anticipated agitation induces more favourable action evaluations under a prevention focus; and anticipated dejection leads to more favourable action evaluations under a promotion focus. No interaction was detected involving positive emotions, suggesting that an asymmetry may exist in motivational regulation of emotional information.     

Regulatory focus and attitudes to migrants

In two studies we examined the role of two regulatory foci (i.e., prevention and promotion) in predicting Australian's attitudes to different types of migrants. According to regulatory focus theory, promotion-focused self-regulation is concerned with nurturance and accomplishment needs and involves the pursuit of wishes and aspirations. As such, it results in sensitivity to positive outcomes and to relative pleasure from gains. On the other hand, prevention-focused self-regulation is concerned with security needs and is directed at meeting duties and obligations. As such, it results in sensitivity to negative outcome and relative pain from losses. In Study 1, as predicted, the extent of promotion focus (i.e., a concern with accomplishment and the pursuit of ideals) predicted more positive attitudes to culturally similar and economically beneficial migrants, whereas the extent of prevention focus (i.e., concern with security and meeting obligations) predicted more negative attitudes to migrants who are culturally dissimilar. In Study 2 we replicated and extended these findings, showing that the extent of promotion focus and a lack of concern with threats predicted positive attitudes to both culturally similar and economically beneficial migrants, which, in the case of the latter group, was mediated by a focus on the benefits these migrants provide. In the case of culturally dissimilar migrants, the extent of promotion focus and a concern with gains predicted more positive attitudes. However, for economically less beneficial migrants, neither the extent of promotion nor prevention focus was a predictor. Only lower concerns with threat predicted more positive attitudes to this migrant group. The results are discussed with respect to other determinants of attitudes to migrants and the implications for migration and asylum-seeker policy.     

Regulatory concerns and appraisal efficiency: the general impact of promotion and prevention

It was hypothesized that people's appraisals both of themselves and of other objects in the world are more efficient when the emotional dimension underlying their appraisals fits their regulatory concerns. Regulatory focus theory distinguishes 2 such fundamental concerns: promotion concerns with accomplishment that relate to cheerfulness- and dejection-related emotions, and prevention concerns with security that relate to quiescence- and agitation-related emotions. Five studies found that individuals with stronger promotion concerns were faster in appraising how cheerful or dejected the object made them feel, whereas individuals with stronger prevention concerns were faster in appraising how quiescent or agitated the object made them feel. These greater appraisal efficiencies were found for both chronic and situationally induced promotion and prevention concerns and were independent of both the valence and the extremity of the appraisals.     

An exploration of the relationship among valence,fading affect,rehearsal frequency,and memory vividness for past personal events

The affect associated with negative (or unpleasant) memories typically tends to fade faster than the affect associated with positive (or pleasant) memories, a phenomenon called the fading affect bias (FAB). We conducted a study to explore the mechanisms related to the FAB. A retrospective recall procedure was used to obtain three self-report measures (memory vividness, rehearsal frequency, affective fading) for both positive events and negative events. Affect for positive events faded less than affect for negative events, and positive events were recalled more vividly than negative events. The perceived vividness of an event (memory vividness) and the extent to which an event has been rehearsed (rehearsal frequency) were explored as possible mediators of the relation between event valence and affect fading. Additional models conceived of affect fading and rehearsal frequency as contributors to a memory’s vividness. Results suggested that memory vividness was a plausible mediator of the relation between an event’s valence and affect fading. Rehearsal frequency was also a plausible mediator of this relation, but only via its effects on memory vividness. Additional modelling results suggested that affect fading and rehearsal frequency were both plausible mediators of the relation between an event’s valence and the event’s rated memory vividness.     

The fading affect bias: Effects of social disclosure to an interactive versus non-responsive listener

The intensity of negative emotions associated with event memories fades to a greater extent over time than positive emotions (fading affect bias or FAB). In this study, we examine how the presence and behaviour of a listener during social disclosure influences the FAB and the linguistic characteristics of event narratives. Participants recalled pleasant and unpleasant events and rated each event for its emotional intensity. Recalled events were then allocated to one of three experimental conditions: no disclosure, private verbal disclosure without a listener or social disclosure to another participant whose behaviour was experimentally manipulated. Participants again rated the emotional intensity of the events immediately after these manipulations and after a one-week delay. Verbal disclosure alone was not sufficient to enhance the FAB. However, social disclosure increased positive emotional intensity, regardless of the behaviour of the listener. Whilst talking to an interactive listener led unpleasant event memories to decrease in emotional intensity, talking to a non-responsive listener increased their negative emotional intensity. Further, listener behaviour influenced the extent of emotional expression in written event narratives. This study provides original evidence that listener behaviour during social disclosure is an important factor in the effects of social disclosure in the FAB.     

Regulatory Focus and the Interpersonal Dynamics of Romantic Partners’ Personal Goal Discussions

Guided by regulatory focus theory, we examined how romantic partners’ chronic concerns with promotion (advancement) and prevention (security) shape the interpersonal dynamics of couples’ conversations about different types of personal goals. Members of 95 couples (N = 190) first completed chronic regulatory focus measures and then engaged in videotaped discussions of two types of goals that were differentially relevant to promotion and prevention concerns. Participants also completed measures of goal‐ and partner‐relevant perceptions. Independent observers rated the discussions for support‐related behaviors. Highly promotion‐focused people approached their partners more, perceived greater partner responsiveness, and received more support when discussing goals that were promotion‐relevant and that they perceived as less attainable. When partners’ responsiveness to promotion‐relevant goals was low, highly promotion‐focused people reported greater self‐efficacy regarding these goals. Highly prevention‐focused people perceived more responsiveness when partners were less distancing during discussions of their prevention‐relevant goals, and greater responsiveness perceptions reassured them that these goals are less disruptive to the relationship. These findings suggest that chronic concerns with promotion and prevention orient people to their relationship environment in ways that are consistent with these distinct motivational needs, especially when discussing goals that increase the salience of these needs.     

Workplace duties or opportunities? Challenge stressors,regulatory focus,and creativity

Previous research has produced contradictory findings about the impact of challenge stressors on individual and team creativity. Based on the challenge–hindrance stressors framework (LePine, Podsakoff, & LePine, 2005) and on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997), we argue that the effect of challenge stressors on creativity is moderated by regulatory focus. We hypothesize that while promotion focus strengthens a positive relationship between challenge stressors and creativity, prevention focus reinforces a negative relationship. Experimental data showed that high demands led to better results in a creative insight task for individuals with a strong trait promotion focus, and that high demands combined with an induced promotion focus led to better results across both creative generation and insight tasks. These results were replicated in a field R&D sample. Furthermore, we found that team promotion focus moderated the effect of challenge stressors on team creativity. The results offer both theoretical insights and suggest practical implications.     

心理时间旅行的方向与事件情绪效价对任务自信的影响

时间是认识和定义自我的框架之一。本研究采用两个实验,探讨心理时间旅行对任务自信的影响。实验1采用自由回忆或想象过去、未来事件的操纵,结果发现：事件情绪效价影响任务自信,时间方向以事件情绪效价为中介间接影响任务自信,想象的未来事件比回忆的过去事件更积极,进而引发更高任务自信。实验2采用平衡回忆或想象事件的情绪效价的操纵,使效价与时间方向的作用相分离,结果发现：时间方向不影响任务自信,想象事件的情绪效价对任务自信的作用受到时间方向的调节。回忆过去事件时,效价不影响任务自信;而想象未来事件时,事件效价越积极,任务自信越高。对于时间旅行中的积极事件,时间旅行的方向不影响任务自信;而对于消极事件,想象未来所引发的任务自信低于回忆过去。结论：时间旅行的方向与想象事件的情绪效价共同作用于任务自信。     

Promoting us or preventing them: regulatory focus and manifestations of intergroup bias

Four studies examined whether situational and individual differences in individuals' regulatory focus influence how intergroup bias is expressed emotionally and behaviorally. Consistent with past findings on promotion focus, these studies found evidence that participants' promotion focus, whether measured or manipulated, was related to how extensively they demonstrated bias toward their ingroup in terms of cheerfulness- and dejection-related emotions and approach-related behaviors. Consistent with past findings on prevention focus, these studies also revealed that participants' prevention focus was related to how extensively they showed bias against an outgroup in terms of quiescence- and agitation-related emotions and avoidance-related behaviors. The implications for the self-regulatory functions of intergroup bias are discussed.