Multilevel Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling of Daily Diary Coping Data: Modeling Trait and State Variation

This study used multilevel modeling of daily diary data to model within-person (state) and between-person (trait) components of coping variables. This application included the introduction of multilevel factor analysis (MFA) and a comparison of the predictive ability of these trait/state factors. Daily diary data were collected on a large (n = 366) multiethnic sample over the course of 5 days. Intraclass correlation coefficient for the derived factors suggested approximately equal amounts of variability in coping usage at the state and trait levels. MFAs showed that Problem-Focused Coping and Social Support emerged as stable factors at both the within-person and between-person levels. Other factors (Minimization, Emotional Rumination, Avoidance, Distraction) were specific to the within-person or between-person levels but not both. Multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) showed that the prediction of daily positive and negative affect differed as a function of outcome and level of coping factor. The Discussion section focuses primarily on a conceptual and methodological understanding of modeling state and trait coping using daily diary data with MFA and MSEM to examine covariation among coping variables and predicting outcomes of interest.     

Social exclusion modulates pre-reflective interpersonal body representation

Perception of affordance is enhanced not only when that object is located in one’s own peripersonal space, as compared to when it is located within extrapersonal space, but also when the object is located in another person’s peripersonal space [as measured by a spatial alignment effect (SAE)]. It has been suggested that this reflects the existence of an interpersonal body representation (IBR) that allows us to represent the perceptual states and action possibilities of others. Here, we address the question of whether IBR can be modulated by higher level/reflective social cognition, such as judgments about one’s own social status. Participants responded with either the right or the left hand as soon as a go signal appeared. The go signal screen contained a task-irrelevant stimulus consisting of a 3D scene in which a mug with a left- or right-facing handle was positioned on a table. The mug was positioned either inside or outside the reaching space of the participants. In a third of the trials, the mug was positioned within the reaching space of an avatar seated at the table. Prior to this task we induced an experience of social ostracism in half of the participants by means of a standardized social exclusion condition. The results were that the SAE that normally occurs when the mug is in the avatar’s reaching space is extinguished by the induced social exclusion. This indicates that judgments about one’s own social status modulate the effect of IBR.     

Cognitive and neural determinants of response strategy in the dual-solution plus-maze task

Response strategy in the dual-solution plus maze is regarded as a form of stimulus-response learning. In this study, by using an outcome devaluation procedure, we show that it can be based on both action-outcome and stimulus-response habit learning, depending on the amount of training that the animals receive. Furthermore, we show that deactivation of the dorso-medial and the dorso-lateral striatum with Botulinum neurotoxin A, mimicked or abolished, respectively, the effects of practice on the sensitivity of the response strategy to outcome devaluation. These findings have relevant implications for the understanding of the learning mechanisms underlying different overt behaviors in this widely used maze task.     

Does how I look at what you're doing depend on what I'm doing?

Previous studies showed that people proactively gaze at the target of another's action by taking advantage of their own motor representation of that action. But just how selectively is one's own motor representation implicated in another's action processing? If people observe another's action while performing a compatible or an incompatible action themselves, will this impact on their gaze behaviour? We recorded proactive eye movements while participants observed an actor grasping small or large objects. The participants' right hand either freely rested on the table or held with a suitable grip a large or a small object, respectively. Proactivity of gaze behaviour significantly decreased when participants observed the actor reaching her target with a grip that was incompatible with respect to that used by them to hold the object in their own hand. This indicates that effective observation of action may depend on what one is actually doing, being actions observed best when the suitable motor representations may be readily recruited.     

Out of your hand's reach, out of my eyes' reach

When witnessing another's action, people recruit the same motor resources that enable them to efficiently perform that action, thus gazing at its target well before the agent's hand. But just to what extent does this recruitment help people in grabbing another's action target? If the latter seems to be out of the agent's reach, will this impact on people's gaze behaviour? We recorded proactive eye movements while participants witnessed someone else trying to reach for and grasp objects located either within or outside his reach. Proactivity of gaze was impaired when the targets were just out of the agent's reach. This effect is likely to be due to an interpersonal bodily space representation that allows one to map another's reaching space, thus prompting proactive eye movements towards the target just in case the agent is in the position to act upon it.     

Evidence on the Hierarchical,Multidimensional Nature of Behavioural Job Crafting

While to date job crafting has been conceptualised as consisting of behaviours aiming at seeking more resources, decreasing hindering demands, and seeking more challenges, recent research suggests that individuals may restore the fit between their demands and preferences also by optimising their demands. Accordingly, optimising demands has been introduced in the resource-based perspective to job crafting as an additional strategy that aims at making the work processes more efficient, simplifying procedures and eliminating obstacles. In this paper, we explore and provide evidence for the validity of a four-factor, hierarchical structure of behavioural job crafting constituted by increasing resources, seeking challenges, decreasing demands, and optimising demands. Moreover, our results provide initial evidence suggesting that overall job crafting may be more strongly characterised by effortful actions to expand the work characteristics rather than to reduce them.