Sweet-cheeks vs. pea-brain: embodiment,valence, and task all influence the emotional salience of language

Previous research has found that more embodied insults (e.g. numbskull) are identified faster and more accurately than less embodied insults (e.g. idiot). The linguistic processing of embodied compliments has not been well explored. In the present study, participants completed two tasks where they identified insults and compliments, respectively. Half of the stimuli were more embodied than the other half. We examined the late positive potential (LPP) component of event-related potentials in early (400–500?ms), middle (500–600?ms), and late (600–700?ms) time windows. Increased embodiment resulted in improved response accuracy to compliments in both tasks, whereas it only improved accuracy for insults in the compliment detection task. More embodied stimuli elicited a larger LPP than less embodied stimuli in the early time window. Insults generated a larger LPP in the late time window in the insult task; compliments generated a larger LPP in the early window in the compliment task. These results indicate that electrophysiological correlates of emotional language perception are sensitive to both top-down and bottom-up processes.     

Splitting a Difference of Opinion: The Shift to Negotiation

Negotiation is not only used to settle differences of interest but also to settle differences of opinion. Discussants who are unable to resolve their difference about the objective worth of a policy or action proposal may be willing to abandon their attempts to convince the other and search instead for a compromise that would, for each of them, though only a second choice yet be preferable to a lasting conflict. Our questions are: First, when is it sensible to enter into negotiations and when would this be unwarranted or even fallacious? Second, what is the nature of a compromise? What does it mean to settle instead of resolve a difference of opinion, and what might be the dialectical consequences of mistaking a compromise for a substantial resolution? Our main aim is to contribute to the theory of argumentation within the context of negotiation and compromise formation and to show how arguing disputants can shift to negotiation in a dialectically virtuous way.     

The role of warning behaviors in threat assessment: an exploration and suggested typology

The concept of warning behaviors offers an additional perspective in threat assessment. Warning behaviors are acts which constitute evidence of increasing or accelerating risk. They are acute, dynamic, and particularly toxic changes in patterns of behavior which may aid in structuring a professional's judgment that an individual of concern now poses a threat - whether the actual target has been identified or not. They require an operational response. A typology of eight warning behaviors for assessing the threat of intended violence is proposed: pathway, fixation, identification, novel aggression, energy burst, leakage, directly communicated threat, and last resort warning behaviors. Previous research on risk factors associated with such warning behaviors is reviewed, and examples of each warning behavior from various intended violence cases are presented, including public figure assassination, adolescent and adult mass murder, corporate celebrity stalking, and both domestic and foreign acts of terrorism. Practical applications and future research into warning behaviors are suggested.     

When any Worx looks typical to you: Global relative to local processing increases prototypicality and liking

Two studies examine novelty categorization theory's (Förster, Marguc & Gillebaart, 2010) assumption that global compared to local processing styles enhance typicality judgments of atypical objects and thereby enhance liking. We used an artificial category of figures for an alleged computer game including a prototype and three exemplars that varied with respect to similarity with it. Results show that when primed with a global processing style, participants find atypical objects more typical, like them better and process them faster than participants under a local processing style. Mediation analyses show that typicality mediates the effects of processing styles on liking, and that ease of categorization mediates the effect of processing styles on prototypicality. Mood, measured via self report did not influence effects. The studies reflect the fact that judged typicality and its effects are context dependent.     

Attachment dynamics in a virtual world

The study investigated the transfer of attachment working models onto autonomous agents in a virtual social environment (VSE). Participants from a community sample (N = 422; mean age = 29 years; mean relationship duration = 4.8 years) encountered three attachment‐related key scenes in a VSE: a separation with a subsequent reunion, a conflict, and an illness. In these scenarios, participants gave instructions to the main character (the “protagonist”), who had a romantic relationship with one of the other agents (the “virtual spouse”). Recorded were numerous behaviors as well as emotions participants ascribed to the protagonist. Generally, participants' attachment styles correlated as predicted with their behavior toward the virtual spouse, with βs up to.42. Thus, the study demonstrates that internal working models are transferred to the virtual relationship. This approach opens new ways to investigate attachment‐related behavior by using VSEs that allow experimental variations of the virtual partner's reactions and other situational variables.     

Why and when peer prediction is superior to self-prediction: the weight given to future aspiration versus past achievement

Peer predictions of future behavior and achievement are often more accurate than those furnished by the self. Although both self- and peer predictions correlate equally with future outcomes, peers tend to avoid the degree of overoptimism so often seen in self-predictions. In 3 studies, the authors tested whether this differential accuracy arises because people give more weight to past behavior when predicting others, but emphasize agentic information, in particular data about their aspiration level, when predicting the self. Studies 1 and 3 showed that the exact same participants rated past behavior more diagnostic of future performance when predicting another person but viewed aspiration-level data as more valuable when someone else was trying to predict them. In Studies 2 and 3 (predicting an upcoming exam score and performance in a lab task, respectively), participants gave greater weight in self-predictions to aspiration-level data than did a yoked peer, who instead gave greater weight to evidence of past achievement. This differential weighting explained why peer predictions tended to be less optimistic and, thus, more accurate. Discussion centers on strategies for predicting future behavior and why people may remain ignorant of their own incompetence despite feedback.