Can one’s temper be cooled? A role for Agreeableness in moderating Neuroticism’s influence on anger and aggression

The study followed from the idea that Neuroticism captures hot or facilitative vulnerabilities related to anger and aggression, whereas Agreeableness captures cool or inhibitory processes in relation to these same outcomes. As such, it was predicted that Neuroticism and Agreeableness should interact to predict anger and aggression according to hot/cool models of self-regulation. This hypothesis was systematically examined among three independent samples of participants (total N = 176). As predicted, Neuroticism and Agreeableness interacted to predict anger and aggression among all samples, and did so in a manner consistent with the hypothesis that Neuroticism–anger relations would be lower at high levels of Agreeableness. The results therefore highlight the distinct roles of Neuroticism and Agreeableness in predicting anger and aggression, while placing these traits in a common interactive self-regulatory framework.     

Commentary on the Current Status of Assessment in Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy

This commentary focuses on the current status of assessment in rational-emotive and cognitive-behavior therapy, in the context of making comments about three assessment articles published in the same journal issue. The commentary describes important characteristics of rational-emotive and cognitive-behavior assessment measures, suggests several avenues of psychometric research on behavioral tests of distress tolerance as clinical measures, reviews psychometric and other important properties of existing irrational belief measures, and endorses assessment related to newly proposed anger disorder diagnoses.

The relationship of momentary anger and impulsivity to bulimic behavior

Past research has suggested that negative affect may be a causal factor for eating disordered behaviors. More specifically, research has shown that anger appears to be one aspect of negative affect that is particularly relevant in bulimic patients. Previous studies have also shown that the relationship between negative affect and eating disordered behaviors may partially depend upon personality variables such as impulsivity. The present study examined whether the relationship between anger and eating disordered behaviors is moderated by impulsivity. Subjects completed an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) protocol for an average of 2 weeks. Findings revealed that overall antecedent anger level and the variability of antecedent anger predicted binge-eating episodes and that these relationships were moderated by participants' level of impulsivity. These findings suggest that personality variables impact the way that anger and eating behaviors relate. They also suggest that the variability of antecedent anger may be a fruitful avenue for future research for those interested in causal variables associated with bulimia nervosa.     

动态面孔表情优势效应的心理机制及神经基础

动态面孔表情优势效应是指较静态面孔表情而言, 个体在识别动态的面孔表情时表现出较好的识别能力。动态面孔表情优势效应的心理机制主要涉及增强的构形加工、补偿角色和面孔模仿能力。此外, 该优势效应的神经网络则由核心的神经网络和扩展的神经网络组成, 前者主要负责早期的知觉编码和刺激的运动加工, 而后者与个体的面孔模仿能力、刺激的动态表征等有关。今后的研究应集中在完善延伸的神经网络、拓展其心理机制; 开展动态面孔表情优势效应的发展性研究; 考察面孔表情的刚性运动特征; 注重在虚拟现实环境下研究动态面孔表情的优势效应。     

The spiral of distrust: (Non‐)cooperation in a repeated trust game is predicted by anger and individual differences in negative reciprocity orientation

This study investigated state anger and individual differences in negative reciprocity orientation as predictors of individuals' willingness to cooperate with strangers. In order to observe real behaviour, we used a trust game that was played over six periods. In the trust game, a first player (sender) determines how much of a certain endowment she/he wants to share with a second player (trustee), who then can give something back. We varied whether participants received feedback [feedback (yes, no)] about the trustee's behavioural decision (amount sent back). Supporting our hypotheses, the results suggest that feedback compared with no feedback about the trustee's behaviour increased anger. Specifically, information about low back transfers triggered anger and non‐cooperation in return. Importantly, participants with a strong negative reciprocity orientation reported higher levels of anger and were less willing to cooperate with the trustee compared with those with low negative reciprocity orientation. Moreover, even when anger was low, individuals with a strong negative reciprocity orientation were less willing to cooperate compared with those with a low negative reciprocity orientation. Thus, negative reciprocity orientation seems to arouse a spiral of distrust. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Attention and interpretation processes and trait anger experience,expression, and control

This study explored attention and interpretation biases in processing facial expressions as correlates of theoretically distinct self-reported anger experience, expression, and control. Non-selected undergraduate students (N?=?101) completed cognitive tasks measuring attention bias, interpretation bias, and Spielberger’s State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI-2). Attention bias toward angry faces was associated with higher trait anger and anger expression and with lower anger control-in and anger control-out. The propensity to quickly interpret ambiguous faces as angry was associated with greater anger expression and its subcomponent of anger expression-out and with lower anger control-out. Interactions between attention and interpretation biases did not contribute to the prediction of any anger component suggesting that attention and interpretation biases may function as distinct mechanisms. Theoretical and possible clinical implications are discussed.     

Everybody Will Win,and All Must Be Hired: Comparing Additivity Neglect with the Nonselective Superiority Bias

Two streams of research looking at referent‐dependent judgments from slightly different angles are subadditivity research and research on the nonselective superiority bias. Both biases violate basic formal constraints: the probabilities of a set of exclusive events cannot add up to more than 100%, and a set of attractive candidates cannot all be rated as superior to the group mean. We examine in three experiments how these two biases are related, by asking the same participants to perform both kinds of tasks on the same material. Both biases appear to be widespread, even for sets where all alternatives are presented together, but they differ in the way they are affected by response format and experimental setup. Thus, presenting participants with an unbiased set of ratings will reduce but not normalize their probability estimates of the same alternatives; while presenting them with an unbiased (additive) set of probabilities will make most alternatives appear inferior to the group mean, inverting the superiority bias. Self‐reports reveal that additivity neglect and the nonselective superiority bias can be based on two main response‐strategies: (i) considering each alternative independently or (ii) comparing alternatives, while neglecting their complementarity. In both cases, assessments will be the outcome of a compromise between the perceived “absolute” merits of each alternative, its standing relative to referents, and properties of the response scale. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Emotion-specific and emotion-non-specific components of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): implications for a taxonomy of related psychopathology

Many cognitive theories of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), including our own SPAARS model, propose that one basis of the disorder is the cognitive system's persistent failure to resolve discrepancies between trauma-related information and the content of pre-existing mental representations, such as schemas. This leads to the characteristic PTSD symptom pattern of re-experiencing and avoidance of trauma-related material. Furthermore, the nature of this unresolved discrepancy revolves around appraisals of threat and the corresponding emotion profile in PTSD is therefore predominantly intense fear and anxiety. This paper argues that this general framework can be extended to discrepancies around other appraisal dimensions such as loss, and consequently to other emotions such as sadness. A localized taxonomy is therefore proposed comprising emotional disorders that resemble PTSD in their basic patterns of re-experiencing and avoidance symptoms--what we call their 'emotion-non-specific component'--but that differ from PTSD in terms of the core emotions involved--what we call their 'emotion-specific component'. The clinical and nosological implications of this argument are discussed.     

Clinical trials: active control vs placebo — What is ethical?

The quest for effective medicines is very old. In modern times two important tools have been developed to evaluate efficacy of drugs: superiority and non-inferiority types of clinical trials. The former tests the null hypothesis of μ (the difference between a tested drug and comparator) ≤ 0 against μ > 0; the latter tests the null hypothesis of μ ≤ - Δ against, μ > - Δ, where Δ is the clinical difference from the comparator. In a superiority trial, a new drug is tested against a placebo; in a non-inferiority trial, a new drug is tested against active treatment. In this paper, arguments are presented to show that a superiority trial against a placebo is scientifically sound but ethically unacceptable, whereas a non-inferiority trial against active treatment is ethically sound but scientifically not reliable. Switching from a superiority type of trial with placebo to a non-inferiority trial with an active-control — following the latest revision of Declaration of Helsinki — is in practice switching from the violation of the uncertainty principle to uncertainty of results. Given human and financial resources, it appears an academic question as to which is more unethical: to violate patients’ rights or to produce results without scientific value. All presented considerations lead to the conclusion that the use of a superiority trial of design with an active control instead of placebo will satisfy scientific needs, expectation of patients, and the ancient quest for effective medicines. In the era of Good (Clinical, Laboratory, Manufacture) Practice, the attention of those performing clinical trials is focused on the procedure, not always on its essence. However even the excellent performance of a trial which is not worth doing is fruitless. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an international conference, “Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 12–13 April, 2003.