What's to Fear from Immigrants? Creating an Assimilationist Threat Scale

We argue that cultural threat, stressed in recent studies of anti-immigrant sentiment, is properly measured in the U.S. case as "assimilationist threat": a resentful perception that immigrants are failing to adopt the cultural norms and lifestyle of their new homeland. We explore the meaning and form of assimilationist threat in the minds of Americans through an analysis of four focus groups, two in Los Angeles, CA, and two in Columbus, OH. Using information from the focus groups, we develop and test a set of survey questions covering three dimensions of immigrants' commitment to their new country: language, productivity, and citizenship. We produce a summary scale of assimilationist threat that can be used by other researchers seeking to understand the causes and consequences of anti-immigrant sentiment.     

长时记忆中目标信息的即时性通达

采用移动窗口技术和探测词再认技术,探讨文本阅读过程中长时记忆中目标信息的即时性通达。实验1探讨当原目标尚未实现,新目标处于活跃状态,进入长时记忆的未实现的原目标是否对当前阅读产生影响。实验2探讨当原目标已经实现,新目标处于活跃状态,进入长时记忆的已实现的原目标是否对当前阅读产生影响。本实验结果初步证明,在含有目标信息的文本阅读中,未实现的原目标信息和已实现的目标信息都处于活跃状态,一旦出现与原目标焦点有关的信息,就会被通达与当前的信息进行整合,只是已实现的目标信息比未实现的目标信息通达的程度低。     

Attention,mindwandering, and mood

We tested the hypothesis that mindwandering and external distraction are both manifestations of a common state of reduced attention focus, and examined how both relate to reported level of happiness. We conducted real-time sampling of people’s experience of mindwandering, irrelevant distraction (e.g. by music, phone, etc.), and happiness levels, in two studies with 524 people undertaking common daily-life activities. All irrelevant external distractions were positively correlated with mindwandering. Indeed mindwandering duration could be predicted from the reported duration of external distraction, when controlling for a range of background variables. An exploratory factor analysis of mindwandering and distraction reports suggested a single underlying construct. In addition, duration of irrelevant distraction by both mobile phones and mindwandering was significantly associated with reduced reported levels of happiness. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that that a state of reduced attention focus underlies both mindwandering and distractibility and clarify the link with happiness.     

Changing behaviors: Using norms to promote physical activity for type 2 diabetes patients

IntroductionGiven that diabetes is a major public heath issue around the world, it is vital that we find effective means to change behaviors, especially levels of physical activity among type 2 diabetes patients.ObjectiveThis study aims to provide proof of the effectiveness of programs promoting physical activity, based on cognitive dissonance and normative focus theories which are designed to produce behavioral changes in persons with type 2 diabetes.MethodNinety-six type 2 diabetes patients were assigned to one of three programs: a traditional information program, a norm-based program, and a dissonance-based program. The participants filled out a short French version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) one week before and one week after the program.ResultsThe results showed that the participants in the norm-based program made progress compared to those in the traditional information program. No significant difference was observed between the traditional information program and dissonance-based program.ConclusionsThese findings are consistent with both the focus normative theory and previous studies showing that recalling the norm increases compliance. The procedure to be used in diabetes prevention programs should focus on the normative dimensions of the desired behaviors in order to improve patients’ quality of life.     

Sadness and ruminative thinking independently depress people's moods

Depression and rumination often co‐occur in clinical populations, but it is not clear which causes which, or if both are manifestations of an underlying pathology. Does rumination simply exacerbate whatever affect a person is experiencing, or is it a negative experience in and of itself? In two experiments we answer this question by independently manipulating emotion and rumination. Participants were allocated to sad or neutral (in Experiment 1), or sad, neutral or happy (Experiment 2) mood conditions, via a combination of emotionally evocative music and autobiographical recall. Afterwards, in both studies, participants either ruminated by thinking about self‐relevant statements or, in a control group, thought about self‐irrelevant statements. Taken together, our data show that, independent of participants' mood, ruminators reported more negative affect relative to controls. The findings are consistent with theories suggesting that self‐focus is itself unpleasant, and illustrate that depressive rumination comprises both affective and ruminative components, which could be targeted independently in clinical samples.     

The Influence of Attentional Focus on Balance Control over Seven Days of Training

This study examined the training effect of attentional focus (external focus, internal focus, or no focus instructions) on a dynamic balance task. Participants completed baseline balance testing, seven consecutive days of dynamic balance board training, and retention testing 24 hours after the last session. The novel finding of this study was the presence of a training effect on balance control when adopting an external focus relative to an internal focus or no focus instructions. Further, we report the unique observation that more patterned behavior was adopted regardless of the focus instructions. These findings provide insight into how instructions can be altered to enhance human balance control and complement the constrained-action hypothesis.     

The Effect of Group Polarization on Opposition to Donald Trump

Using focus groups, we examined support and opposition for Donald Trump prior to the 2016 presidential election. When ingroup members participate in discussion, this conversation alone typically strengthens and intensifies members’ initial attitudes. We used a pre‐ to post‐focus‐group questionnaire to assess attitudes toward Trump, his campaign, and policies. We argue that group polarization influenced people’s opinions about Trump such that attitudes became more extreme after discussion with like‐minded individuals. We report changes for Trump nonsupporters for which group polarization occurred on attitudes toward illegal immigration, political correctness, the military, women, and veterans after the group discussion. For each, level of support for Trump’s views decreased. To further explore potential psychological mechanisms associated with group polarization, we employed network science methods to examine the structure of the language associated with these issues and identify potential drivers of attitude change. Results provide some support for a common mechanism for group polarization, which may be driven by language dynamics specific to individual attitudes.     

The effects of instructional cues on performance and mechanics during a gross motor movement

Externally focused instructions specific to performance have shown to improve body mechanics (Gokeler et al., 2015; Welling, Benjaminse, Gokeler, & Otten, 2016). However, the effect of using an external focus instruction may have been more profound if the content of the instruction had been relevant to mechanics. Therefore, the present study examined the effects of externally focused instructions specific to performance and externally focused instructions specific to body mechanics on mechanics and performance. Twenty-four adults (n = 12 males; n = 12 females) performed a series of drop jumps following external focus cues that were specific to performance and landing mechanics. Participants completed a drop jump followed by a maximal effort vertical jump. The initial contact, maximal angle, and range of motion at the knee in the sagittal and frontal plane motion were measured for mechanics and the height of the second vertical jump was measured for performance. The results suggest external focus instructions specific to performance are beneficial for performance, but not for improving landing mechanics. This suggests that external focus instructions must be specific to the contents of the instruction.     

Practice variability promotes an external focus of attention and enhances motor skill learning

Variability in practice has been shown to enhance motor skill learning. Benefits of practice variability have been attributed to motor schema formation (variable versus constant practice), or more effortful information processing (random versus blocked practice). We hypothesized that, among other mechanisms, greater practice variability might promote an external focus of attention on the intended movement effect, while less variability would be more conducive to a less effective internal focus on body movements. In Experiment 1, the learning of a throwing task was enhanced by variable versus constant practice, and variable group participants reported focusing more on the distance to the target (external focus), while constant group participants focused more on their posture (internal focus). In Experiment 2, golf putting was learned more effectively with a random compared with a blocked practice schedule. Furthermore, random group learners reported using a more effective distal external focus (i.e., distance to the target) to a greater extent, whereas blocked group participants used a less effective proximal focus (i.e., putter) more often. While attentional focus was assessed through questionnaires in the first two experiments, learners in Experiment 3 were asked to report their current attentional focus at any time during practice. Again, the learning of a throwing task was more effective after random relative to blocked practice. Also, random practice learners reported using more external focus cues, while in blocked practice participants used more internal focus cues. The findings suggest that the attentional foci induced by different practice schedules might be at least partially responsible for the learning differences.     

How regulatory focus impacts the process-by-outcome interaction for perceived fairness and emotions

Judgments of fairness take into account at least two pieces of information—the outcome received and the process by which the outcome was assigned. Generally speaking, low levels of fairness are apt to be reported when the outcome is unfavorable and the allocation process is deemed inappropriate. In this study, we investigate how regulatory focus theory can further our understanding of the process by outcome interaction. Specifically, when individuals are working to add to their earnings (a promotion focus) the typical effect is observed. However, when individuals are focused on maintaining something that is their own (a prevention focus) the most negative emotion occurs when individuals are allocated an unfavorable outcome through a process that contains procedural safeguards.