Le Rorschach Système Intégré en Neuropsychologie : articulation du cognitif et de l'affectif

Since the 1920s, the Rorschach test has been widely used for the study of neurological populations. However, advances in the field of neuropsychology in the 1960s made it cease to be considered appropriate in this context. More recently, with the development of Exner’s Comprehensive System and its cognitivist problem-solving paradigm, a number of authors have reconsidered the test in light of contemporary neuropsychology, not only as a cognitive neuropsychological tool, but also as a useful instrument for the study of relationships between cognitive functioning and affect, and as an instrument capable of transcending theoretical and paradigmatic shifts and trends in neuropsychology and personality psychology.     

Gender Differences in Positive and Negative Feelings Between Adolescents and Their Fathers and Mothers

Given the connections between feelings and well-being within the family, we addressed gender differences and similarities of feelings within the family. We explored adolescents’, mothers’, and fathers’ positive and negative affect within a community sample of 224 families from the southeast of the United States. Adolescents ranged in age from 12 to 19 years. Findings suggest more gender differences in positive and negative affect for parental gender (i.e., mothers versus fathers) than for adolescent gender (i.e., boys versus girls). There were more consistent associations within the family for positive affect as opposed to negative affect. We discussed the results in the context of gender differences within the family within the family systems theoretical perspective.     

When the method makes a difference: Antagonistic effects on “automatic evaluations” as a function of task characteristics of the measure

Researchers often employ implicit measures as dependent variables to investigate processes of attitude formation and change. In such studies, experimentally induced differences are typically interpreted as reflecting change in automatic evaluations. We argue that experimentally induced effects on implicit measures may not always reflect genuine changes in evaluative responses, but can be driven by the mechanisms underlying the measurement procedure. In line with this assumption, the present research shows that these mechanisms can produce opposite effects of the same experimental manipulation for otherwise equivalent implicit measures. These results indicate that merely observing experimental effects on implicit measures does not allow direct inferences regarding changes in automatic evaluations. Instead, psychological interpretations of such effects hinge upon the mechanics of how a given measurement procedure responds to variations in the context. Implications for research using implicit measures are discussed.     

Can bad weather improve your memory? An unobtrusive field study of natural mood effects on real-life memory

Can good or bad mood induced by the weather influence people’s ability to correctly remember everyday scenes? In this unobtrusive field study, we predicted and found that weather-induced negative mood improved memory accuracy. Randomly selected shoppers on bright, sunny days (good mood) or on cloudy, rainy days (bad mood) saw 10 unusual objects in the check-out area of a suburban shop, and their recall and recognition memory for these objects was later tested. Shoppers in a negative mood showed better memory and higher discrimination ability. The cognitive mechanisms responsible for everyday mood effects on memory performance are discussed, and the implications of these findings for current affect/cognition theories and applied areas are considered.     

Mindfulness, Big Five personality, and affect: A meta-analysis

Mindfulness is purposefully and nonjudgmentally paying attention to the present moment. The primary purpose of this study is to provide a more precise empirical estimate of the relationship between mindfulness and the Big Five personality traits as well as trait affect. Current research results present inconsistent or highly variable estimates of these relationships. Meta-analysis was used to synthesize findings from 32 samples in 29 studies. Results indicate that, although all of the traits display appreciable relationships with mindfulness, the strongest relationships are found with neuroticism, negative affect, and conscientiousness. Conscientiousness, in particular, is often ignored by mindfulness researchers; results here indicate it deserves stronger consideration. Although the results provide a clearer picture of how mindfulness relates to these traits, they also highlight the need to ensure an appropriate conceptualization and measurement of mindfulness.     

Understanding the relationship between mood and creativity: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis of 62 experimental and 10 non-experimental studies was conducted to evaluate the positive-mood-enhances-creativity generalization. While the results demonstrate that positive mood enhances creativity, the strength of that effect is contingent upon the comparative or referent mood state (i.e., neutral or negative mood) as well as the type of creative task. Further, the pattern of effect sizes supports a curvilinear relationship between affective intensity and creative performance. In general, a contextual perspective of mood–creativity relations is supported.     

Contingent reliance on the affect heuristic as a function of regulatory focus

Results from four studies show that the reliance on affect as a heuristic of judgment and decision making is more pronounced under a promotion focus than under a prevention focus. Two different manifestations of this phenomenon were observed. Studies 1–3 show that different types of affective inputs are weighted more heavily under promotion than under prevention in person-impression formation, product evaluations, and social recommendations. Study 4 additionally shows that valuations performed under promotion are more scope-insensitive—a characteristic of affect-based valuations—than valuations performed under prevention. The greater reliance on affect as a heuristic under promotion seems to arise because promotion-focused individuals tend to find affective inputs more diagnostic, not because promotion increases the reliance on peripheral information per se.     

P-technique factor analyses of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List (MAACL)

The Multiple Affect Adjective Check List (MAACL) has been found to have five first-order factors representing Anxiety, Depression, Hostility, Positive Affect, and Sensation Seeking and two second-order factors representing Positive Affect and Sensation Seeking (PASS) and Dysphoria. The present study examines whether these first- and second-order conceptions of affect (based on R-technique factor analysis) can also account for patterns of intraindividual variability in affect (based on P-technique factor analysis) in eight elderly women. Although the hypothesized five-factor model of affect was not testable in all of the present P-technique datasets, the results were consistent with this interindividual model of affect. Moreover, evidence of second-order (PASS and Dysphoria) and third-order (generalized distress) factors was found in one data set. Sufficient convergence in findings between the present P-technique research and prior R-technique research suggests that the MAACL is robust in describing both inter- and intraindividual components of affect in elderly women.This paper is based on the doctoral research of the first author and was partially supported by the National Institute of Aging Grant T32 AC 00048-12 to The Pennsylvania State University and a Grant-in-Aid of Research from Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. The authors wish to thank John R. Nesselroade for his helpful comments on an early draft of this paper.     

Discriminant validity of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List - revised

Four groups of patients (depressives, schizophrenics, substance dependents and abusers), a miscellaneous group of other patients, and a group of matched normals from a general population sample were compared on the scales of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List - Revised (MAACL-R). All scales showed highly significant differentiation among the groups. An index consisting of Depression minus Positive Affect scales was particularly effective in discriminating between depressive and other groups. A discriminant function analysis showed that the depressive could be distinguished from other patient groups and normals with an accuracy of 72% correct. The normals could be distinguished from all of the patient groups with a 60% accuracy, and 87% if the substance abuser group is ignored. The discriminant validity among the nondepressive patient groups was not nearly as good.     

Broad or narrow affect scores for the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List? Comment on Hunsley's “dimensionality of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List-Revised”

Hunsley's paper constitutes the second independent replication of four of the five factors in the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List-Revised (MAACL-R), even though he used the trait instead of the state form used to construct the scales and a more stringent factor loading criterion than Zuckerman and Lubin. Hunsley also did a two-factor analysis (positive and negative affects) of the MAACL items and concluded on the basis of the scree test that this was a more optimal solution than the five-factor one. This conclusion is questioned on the basis that the scales were devised to improve discriminant validity of the subscales, which they have done, particularly if standard scores are used. Since four of the five factors are replicable in state and trait versions of the MAACL-R and clinical studies show discriminant validity for the subscales, there is no reason to ignore the components of the two broader affect factors. Such factors can be assessed through use of the two standard summary scores for the MAACL: Dysphoria (A + D + H) and Positive Affect plus Sensation Seeking (PA + SS).