Sensory processing sensitivity and its relation to parental bonding, anxiety, and depression

Sensory processing sensitivity is a recently proposed construct referring to a tendency to process a variety of information more strongly and deeply than others. Although some research has found links between sensory processing sensitivity and psychological difficulties, highly sensitive people may not necessarily be predisposed to negative affect, but may be more sensitive to poor parenting. Two hundred thirteen college students were given a measure of sensory processing sensitivity (the HSPS), the parental bonding scale (measuring parental care and over-protection), the trait anxiety scale, and the Beck depression inventory. Sensory processing sensitivity predicted both anxiety and depression above and beyond parental factors, indicating that it may be an independent risk factor. An interaction was found between sensory processing sensitivity and parental care when measuring depression. Highly sensitive people may be particularly sensitive to uncaring parents. Results indicate that sensory processing sensitivity may be a temperamental disposition that interacts meaningfully with environmental factors.     

Dimensions of Perfectionism and Anxiety Sensitivity

The current study investigated the extent to which dimensions of perfectionism are associated with components of the anxiety sensitivity construct. A sample of 177 undergraduate students completed the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, the Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory, the Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale, and the Expanded Anxiety Sensitivity Index developed by Taylor and Cox (1998). The results confirmed that automatic thoughts involving perfectionism and the interpersonal aspects of the perfectionism construct are associated with anxiety sensitivity. Examination of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index factors showed that perfectionism cognitions were associated primarily with anxiety sensitivity involving fears of cognitive dyscontrol, while socially prescribed perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation were associated primarily with fears of publicly observable anxiety reactions in a manner suggesting that the interpersonal perfectionism dimensions are linked closely with an anxious sensitivity to negative social evaluation and subsequent panic attacks. The theoretical and treatment implications of the link between perfectionism and anxiety sensitivity are discussed.     

Vigilant self‐regulation,cues of being watched and cooperativeness

The present research examined the interplay of individual differences in self‐regulatory mechanisms as outlined in regulatory focus theory (promotion‐ and prevention‐focus) and a cue of being watched in the context of cooperative behaviour. Study 1 revealed that the more individuals' habitual self‐regulatory orientation is dominated by a vigilant prevention focus, the more likely they are to act cooperatively (i.e. to donate money to natural conservation organizations) when a subtle cue of being watched renders reputational concerns salient. In contrast, when no such cue is provided individuals' habitual vigilant self‐regulatory orientation is negatively related to cooperative behaviour. Study 2 replicated the results of the initial study and examined interpersonal sensitivity (empathic concern) as a potential mediator of the observed effects. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

基因-环境交互作用理论模型及其检验方法

素质?压力模型、不同易感性模型和优势敏感性模型是当前有关基因?环境交互作用的三种代表性理论模型。素质?压力模型认为“近墨者黑”或“出淤泥而不染”, 优势反应敏感性模型认为“近朱者赤”, 而不同易感性模型则兼收并蓄, 认为某些个体近墨则黑, 近朱则赤。检验上述模型的现实有效性是当前基因?环境交互作用研究领域的热点问题之一。概观而言, 分组回归和分层回归是常用的传统检验方法, 显著性区域分析法和新参数回归模型法则是新近兴起的。未来研究需要进一步探索三种模型的领域特殊性、种族差异等问题, 检验这些模型的方法也有待改善。     

他人积极情绪对自我控制资源的替代恢复及机制

替代恢复指通过想象他人资源恢复可恢复自身的资源。研究探讨了他人积极情绪的替代恢复及人际敏感性的调节作用。本研究以331名大学生为被试,实验1和2通过消词任务消耗自控资源后,用文字材料呈现他人积极、他人中性情绪和自我积极情绪,用定价任务考察自控资源的恢复,实验2通过眼神测验测量人际敏感性。结果发现,自控资源消耗后,他人积极情绪组对商品的平均定价比他人中性情绪组低,且只在眼测得分高的个体中存在,他人积极情绪组与自我积极情绪组没有差别。研究证实了他人积极情绪对自控资源的替代恢复及人际敏感性的调节作用。     

Impulsivity and reward sensitivity within the pen model: A test of discriminant hypotheses

Impulsivity and reward sensitivity are often treated as interchangeable constructs. This conflation may be traced back to Gray’s interpretation of impulsivity as the trait level manifestation of the Behavioral Activation System (BAS), that mediates sensitivity to rewards. In this study (N = 696) we evaluated discriminant hypotheses regarding the relationships between BAS-mediated reward sensitivity, impulsivity and Eysenck’s PEN superfactors. We hypothesized that reward sensitivity would be mainly linked with Extraversion, and that impulsivity would be primarily connected with Psychoticism. Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modelling and equality constraints tests. Results mostly supported our expectations: reward sensitivity was more strongly related to Extraversion than to the other PEN superfactors, while impulsivity was more strongly related to Psychoticism and Neuroticism. Implications for BAS and impulsivity research are discussed.     

Prevention-focused self-regulation and aggressiveness

The present research examined the relationship between individual differences in self-regulatory mechanisms as outlined in regulatory focus theory (promotion- and prevention-focused self-regulation) and aggressiveness. Two studies revealed that the more individuals’ habitual self-regulatory orientation is dominated by a prevention-focus, the more likely they are to score high on measures of cynical hostility, reciprocity norm endorsement, and aggressiveness. An additional study involving the manipulation of perceived violation of a reciprocity norm showed that predominantly prevention-focused participants were particularly sensitive to the experience of a norm violation and reacted in a hostile and aggressive manner following the norm violation experience. Findings indicate that a prevention-focused style of self-regulation is associated with aggressiveness and suggest that endorsement of (negative) reciprocity norms and sensitivity to norm violations are relevant factors that help explain the differences in aggressiveness observed among individuals with a predominantly prevention-focused style of self-regulation.     

Accuracy of judging others’ traits and states: Comparing mean levels across tests

Tests of accuracy in interpersonal perception take many forms. Often, such tests use designs and scoring methods that produce overall accuracy levels that cannot be directly compared across tests. Therefore, progress in understanding accuracy levels has been hampered. The present article employed several techniques for achieving score equivalency. Mean accuracy was converted to a common metric, pi [Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1989). Effect size estimation for one-sample multiple-choice-type data: Design, analysis, and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 332–337] in a database of 109 published results representing tests that varied in terms of scoring method (proportion accuracy versus correlation), content (e.g., personality versus affect), number of response options, item preselection, cue channel (e.g., face versus voice), stimulus duration, and dynamism. Overall, accuracy was midway between guessing level and a perfect score, with accuracy being higher for tests based on preselected than unselected stimuli. When item preselection was held constant, accuracy was equivalent for judging affect and judging personality. However, comparisons must be made with caution due to methodological variations between studies and gaps in the literature.