Mind over matter: reappraising arousal improves cardiovascular and cognitive responses to stress

Researchers have theorized that changing the way we think about our bodily responses can improve our physiological and cognitive reactions to stressful events. However, the underlying processes through which mental states improve downstream outcomes are not well understood. To this end, we examined whether reappraising stress-induced arousal could improve cardiovascular outcomes and decrease attentional bias for emotionally negative information. Participants were randomly assigned to either a reappraisal condition in which they were instructed to think about their physiological arousal during a stressful task as functional and adaptive, or to 1 of 2 control conditions: attention reorientation and no instructions. Relative to controls, participants instructed to reappraise their arousal exhibited more adaptive cardiovascular stress responses-increased cardiac efficiency and lower vascular resistance-and decreased attentional bias. Thus, reappraising arousal shows physiological and cognitive benefits. Implications for health and potential clinical applications are discussed.     

Ape metaphysics: object individuation without language

Developmental research suggests that whereas very young infants individuate objects purely on spatiotemporal grounds, from (at latest) around 1 year of age children are capable of individuating objects according to the kind they belong to and the properties they instantiate. As the latter ability has been found to correlate with language, some have speculated whether it might be essentially language dependent and therefore uniquely human. Existing studies with non-human primates seem to speak against this hypothesis, but fail to present conclusive evidence due to methodological shortcomings. In the present experiments we set out to test non-linguistic object individuation in three great ape species with a refined manual search methodology. Experiment 1 tested for spatiotemporal object individuation: Subjects saw 1 or 2 objects simultaneously being placed inside a box in which they could reach, and then in both conditions only found 1 object. After retrieval of the 1 object, subjects reached again significantly more often when they had seen 2 than when they had seen 1 object. Experiment 2 tested for object individuation according to property/kind information only: Subjects saw 1 object being placed inside the box, and then either found that object (expected) or an object of a different kind (unexpected). Analogously to Experiment 1, after retrieval of the 1 object, subjects reached again significantly more often in the unexpected than in the expected condition. These results thus confirm previous findings suggesting that individuating objects according to their property/kind is neither uniquely human nor essentially language dependent. It remains to be seen, however, whether this kind of object individuation requires sortal concepts as human linguistic thinkers use them, or whether some simpler form of tracking properties is sufficient.     

How attributional ambiguity shapes physiological and emotional responses to social rejection and acceptance

The authors examined White and Black participants' emotional, physiological, and behavioral responses to same-race or different-race evaluators, following rejecting social feedback or accepting social feedback. As expected, in ingroup interactions, the authors observed deleterious responses to social rejection and benign responses to social acceptance. Deleterious responses included cardiovascular (CV) reactivity consistent with threat states and poorer performance, whereas benign responses included CV reactivity consistent with challenge states and better performance. In intergroup interactions, however, a more complex pattern of responses emerged. Social rejection from different-race evaluators engendered more anger and activational responses, regardless of participants' race. In contrast, social acceptance produced an asymmetrical race pattern--White participants responded more positively than did Black participants. The latter appeared vigilant and exhibited threat responses. Discussion centers on implications for attributional ambiguity theory and potential pathways from discrimination to health outcomes.     

Big tales and cool heads: academic exaggeration is related to cardiac vagal reactivity

Students who exaggerate their current grade point averages (GPAs) report positive emotional and motivational orientations toward academics (Gramzow & Willard, 2006; Willard & Gramzow, 2007). It is conceivable, however, that these self-reports mask underlying anxieties. The current study examined cardiovascular reactivity during an academic interview in order to determine whether exaggerators respond with a pattern suggestive of anxiety or, alternatively, equanimity. Sixty-two undergraduates were interviewed about their academic performance. Participants evidenced increased sympathetic activation (indexed with preejection period) during the interview, suggesting active task engagement. Academic exaggeration predicted parasympathetic coactivation (increased respiratory sinus arrhythmia). Observer ratings indicated that academic exaggeration was coordinated with a composed demeanor during the interview. Together, these patterns suggest that academic exaggeration is associated with emotional equanimity, rather than anxiety. The capacity for adaptive emotion regulation--to keep a cool head when focusing on academic performance--offers one explanation for why exaggerators also tend to improve academically. These findings have implications for the broader literature on self-evaluation, emotion, and cardiovascular reactivity.     

Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others

The extent to which stigmatized interaction partners engender perceivers' threat reactions (i.e., stigma-threat hypothesis) was examined. Experiments 1 and 2 included the manipulation of stigma using facial birthmarks. Experiment 3 included manipulations of race and socioeconomic status. Threat responses were measured physiologically, behaviorally, and subjectively. Perceivers interacting with stigmatized partners exhibited cardiovascular reactivity consistent with threat and poorer performance compared with participants interacting with nonstigmatized partners, who exhibited challenge reactivity. In Experiment 3, intergroup contact moderated physiological reactivity such that participants who reported more contact with Black persons exhibited less physiological threat when interacting with them. These results support the stigma-threat hypothesis and suggest the utility of a biopsychosocial approach to the study of stigma and related constructs.     

Multifamily interventions in the context of inherited genetic conditions: A scoping review

This scoping review sought to examine the existing literature on multifamily interventions with families dealing with inherited genetic conditions. It also seeks to identify gaps in the evidence to help guide future research and intervention development. Four databases (PubMed, Web of Sciences, Scopus and PsycInfo) were systematically searched and analysed, resulting in five publications for inclusion. The main findings evidence two main themes: characteristics of multifamily interventions, and evaluation of the intervention and impact on participants. These findings suggest that multifamily interventions can provide families with extended support beyond the care usually offered by genetic healthcare services and contribute to enhancing positive change in key aspects of adaptation and coping with an inherited genetic conditions. Multifamily discussion groups are a methodology that is particularly suitable when working with families in this context. Collaboration between genetic healthcare services and accredited systemic family therapists is required to sustain the implementation of multifamily discussion groups and their feasibility. Research on the effectiveness, feasibility and economic viability of multifamily interventions is also needed.     

Backlash for high self-promotion at hiring depends on candidates' gender and age

Previous research has shown that evaluators react negatively to intense, high levels of self-promotion during the interview, in particular when displayed by female candidates, presumably because these behaviors violate the female gender stereotype of being modest and putting others first. We expand this focus on a single social category and examine the joint effects of gender and age on reactions to high self-promotion/low modesty, as both gender and age stereotypes contain normative expectations regarding assertiveness and humility. Results of our experimental study point out two groups at risk of backlash, older women and younger men. While both older female and younger male candidates engaging in high self-promotion were seen as competent, they were regarded as less interpersonally warm, received lower interview performance ratings, and were less likely to be hired. These results provide evidence for the importance of applying an intersectional lens on the effects of self-promotion at hiring. Their implications for theory and practice as well as recommendations for future research are discussed.