Public concerns about violent video games are moral concerns—How moral threat can make pacifists susceptible to scientific and political claims against violent video games

Public discussions about the harmfulness of violent media are often held in the aftermath of violent felony. At the same time, we know little about whether and how experiencing real‐life violence impacts the way laypersons perceive and evaluate debates about virtual violence. In Study 1, we provided data indicating that both real‐life violence and violent video games are perceived as morally threatening by people who regard nonviolence to be an important moral value (i.e., pacifists). In Study 2, we hypothesized and found that when pacifists perceive threat from the presence of real‐life violence, they are especially susceptible to scientific and political claims indicating that violent video games are harmful. Our findings are in line with the value protection model and research on the psychological consequences of threat. Implications of the present findings are discussed with regard to a better understanding of the violent video games debate in the general public.     

When planning is not enough: Fighting unhealthy snacking habits by mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII)

In two experiments a self‐regulatory strategy combining mental contrasting with the formation of implementation intentions (MCII) was tested for its effectiveness in diminishing unhealthy snacking habits. Study 1 (N = 51) showed that participants in the MCII condition consumed fewer unhealthy snacks than participants in a control condition who thought about and listed healthy options for snacks. In Study 2 (N = 59) MCII was more effective than mental contrasting or formulating implementation intentions alone and mental contrasting was found to increase perceived clarity about critical cues for unhealthy snacking. Together, these findings suggest that MCII is an effective strategy for fighting habits and that one of the underlying processes making MCII superior to implementation intentions alone may be that mental contrasting produces clarity about the critical cues for the unwanted habitual behavior. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Regulating self-defensiveness: If–then plans prevent claiming and creating performance handicaps

Claiming or creating obstacles before performing important tasks (i.e., self-handicapping) is a costly strategy to protect the self from implications of poor outcomes. We predicted that forming an if–then plan (implementation intention) helps individuals overcome their performance-related worries and thus prevents self-handicapping behavior. In two experiments, all participants formed the goal to perform well on an upcoming task and learned the strategies to ignore worries and tell themselves “I can do it”, either in an if–then format (implementation intention) or not (control). The task was either described as an intelligence test (highly threatening) or as a perception style test (less threatening). Participants could then claim a self-handicap (report stress, Experiment 1) or behaviorally self-handicap (inadequately prepare, Experiment 2). As predicted, implementation intentions reduced claimed and behavioral self-handicapping to levels observed in the low-threat control conditions. Experiment 2 demonstrated these effects among chronic self-handicappers. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Implementation intentions and shielding goal striving from unwanted thoughts and feelings

Forming an implementation intention or "if-then plan" promotes the attainment of different types of goals (Gollwitzer, 1999; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). So far, research on implementation intentions has focused on the initiation of goal striving, whereas the issue of shielding of ongoing goal striving has been largely neglected. In two field experiments concerned with dieting (Study 1) and athletic goals (Study 2), goal shielding was supported by implementation intentions geared at controlling potentially interfering inner states (i.e., cravings for junk food in Study 1, and disruptive thoughts, feelings, and physiological states in Study 2). In both experiments, forming if-then plans enhanced the rate of goal attainment. Thus, implementation intention formation can be used to promote the realization of desired outcomes not only by facilitating getting started with goal striving but also by preventing goal striving from straying off course.     

The Fallacy of the Private-Public Self-Focus Distinction

ABSTRACT Taking the distinction between Aristotelian and Galilean modes of thought (Lewin, 1931) as a background, the bifurcation of the self-focus concept into “private” and “public” types of self-focus is discussed critically A theoretical connection between the private-public distinction and other central concepts within the self-awareness literature is found to be lacking Further, it is found that (a) the relation between the theoretical definitions of “private” and “public” and their respective empirical definitions is not explicated, that (b) the public half of the dichotomy does not involve a focus of attention toward or away from the self, and perhaps most important, that (c) the conceptual work surrounding the private-public distinction illustrates how an Aristotelian approach to theorizing prevents the raising of pertinent questions     

Effects of objective and subjective account components on forgiving

The authors explored the effects of the components of a harm-doer's account of her transgression on the victims' emotional reactions to the transgression and to the character traits that she attributes to the harm-doer. Participants were 480 people whom the authors asked to imagine an incident in which they were harmed by the careless behavior of a friend. Subsequently, the authors offered participants an account of the harm-doer. In a 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 between-subjects design, the authors manipulated 5 account components: Admitting Fault, Admitting Damage, Expressing Remorse, Asking for Pardon, and Offering Compensation. The authors measured the participants' perceptions of these components. Results indicated that (a) the subjective perception of account components occurs schematically so that components are implicitly perceived without being objectively present, (b) objective components affect victims' reactions via subjective perceptions of these components, (c) personality factors (Irreconcilability, Interpersonal Trust, and Trait Anger) affect victims' reactions directly. Finally, certain configurations of account components are more effective than others. Specifically, asking for pardon had an effect on forgiving only when it was combined with an acknowledgment of the damage and a compensation offer. This result suggests that in this situation, the victim perceives a harm-doer's asking for pardon without the other components as an insincere apology.     

Response styles in the assessment of anger expression

This study demonstrates how mixture distribution item response models can be used to detect different response styles in the clinical assessment of anger expression. Analyses of 3 subscales of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory in a clinical sample of 4,497 patients revealed that there are different response styles that manifest themselves in 2- and 3-class solutions. These solutions are robust across subsamples. Response styles reflect both psychologically meaningful biases (i.e., social desirability) and nonmeaningful response category preferences. Person parameters that correct for class membership (and thus, for response styles) are computed and compared with raw scores. The implications of these results for research on clinical assessment are discussed.     

Implementation intentions and efficient action initiation.

Implementation intentions ("If I encounter Situation X, then I'll perform Behavior Y!") are postulated to instigate automatic action initiation. In 4 studies, the hypothesis was tested that implementation intentions lead to immediate action initiation once the specified situation is encountered, even under conditions of high cognitive load. First, individuals whose action control is known to be hampered by disruptive cognitive business, such as opiate addicts under withdrawal (Study 1) and schizophrenic patients (Study 2), benefited from forming implementation intentions. Second, the beneficial effect of implementation intentions was also found in 2 experiments with university students (Studies 3 and 4) in which cognitive load was experimentally induced by using dual task paradigms. Results of the 4 studies suggest that forming implementation intentions instigates immediate action initiation that is also efficient.     

Implementation intentions and disengagement from a failing course of action

We explored the consequences of forming implementation intentions that call for action (adjustment of chosen course of action) versus reflection (assessment of the appropriateness of chosen course of action) in situations that activate people's tendency to remain committed to failing courses of action. In Study 1, when negative experiences preceded failure, action and reflection implementation intention participants showed higher rates of disengagement than mere goal intention and no intention participants. However, when positive experiences preceded failure, only action implementation intention participants maintained this high disengagement rate. In Study 2, we observed that time pressure moderated the facilitating effects of action and reflection implementation intentions on disengagement when negative experiences preceded failure. Whereas the effect of action implementation intentions benefited from time pressure, the effect of reflection implementation intentions did not. The present studies construe disengagement as a self-regulation process and highlight the benefits of implementation intentions as a self-regulation tool. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Asking “why” helps action control by goals but not plans

The present research investigated whether asking “why” concerning the pursuit of one goal can affect the subsequent pursuit of a previously chosen goal. Asking “why” should activate cognitive procedures involving deliberation over the pros and cons of a goal (why-mindset). This mode of thinking should spill over to subsequently pursued goals, with different consequences for goal striving guided by goal intentions and for goal striving guided by implementation intentions (if-then plans). As goal intentions guide behavior by effortful top-down action control processes motivated by the expected value of the desired outcomes, being in a why-mindset should induce defensive postdecisional deliberation and thereby promote goal pursuit. In contrast, implementation intentions guide behavior by automatic bottom-up action control processes triggered by the specified situational cues; in this case, being in a why-mindset should eliminate the effects implementation intentions have on goal pursuit. Performance on a handgrip self-control task (Study 1) as well as on a dual-task (simultaneous go/no-go task and tracking tasks; Study 2) supported these predictions: why-mindsets reinforced goal intention effects and impaired implementation intention effects on handgrip and dual-task performance. Implications for effective goal striving are discussed.