自尊与人际互动：理论、研究与问题

基于自我确认理论开展的大量研究,有助于理解自尊对人际互动行为的调节作用。然而,研究者对自尊的测量工具不尽相同,筛选实验被试的标准也不尽一致,实验范式忽略了对实际人际互动情境的操纵,单纯采用人际选择反应作为测量自我确认的指标,因而难以形成具有整合性的理论模型。今后的研究有必要在编制合适的测量工具的基础上,将整体自尊与特殊自尊作为两个独立的变量置于整合性实验范式下开展研究,同时采用对人际评价信息的认知判断和对评价者的交往选择的双维指标,以全面揭示整体自尊与特殊自尊对自我确认过程的相对作用及其心理机制。     

Human social defeat and approach–avoidance: Escalating social-evaluative threat and threat of aggression increases social avoidance

Basic research on avoidance by Murray Sidman laid the foundation for advances in the classification, conceptualization and treatment of avoidance in psychological disorders. Contemporary avoidance research is explicitly translational and increasingly focused on how competing appetitive and aversive contingencies influence avoidance. In this laboratory investigation, we examined the effects of escalating social-evaluative threat and threat of social aggression on avoidance of social interactions. During social-defeat learning, 38 adults learned to associate 9 virtual peers with an increasing probability of receiving negative evaluations. Additionally, 1 virtual peer was associated with positive evaluations. Next, in an approach–avoidance task with social-evaluative threat, 1 peer associated with negative evaluations was presented alongside the peer associated with positive evaluations. Approaching peers produced a positive or a probabilistic negative evaluation, while avoiding peers prevented a negative evaluation (and forfeited a positive evaluation). In an approach–avoidance task with social aggression, virtual peers gave and took money away from participants. Escalating social-evaluative threat and aggression increased avoidance, ratings of feeling threatened and threat expectancy and decreased ratings of peer favorableness. These findings underscore the potential of coupling social defeat and approach–avoidance paradigms for translational research on the neurobehavioral mechanisms of social approach–avoidance decision-making and anxiety.     

Parent-child interactions during joint engagement with touchscreen technology: A comparison of younger versus older toddlers

With a plethora of touchscreen apps aimed at young children, parents are receiving mixed messages about the appropriateness of such technology for their toddlers. The American Academy of Pediatrics (2016) advises limited engagement with digital media for this age group and encourages parents to co-engage with children when they are using screens. However, very little is known about parent-child interaction in the context of joint engagement with digital screen media in the toddler years. This study observed 56 toddlers (M = 32.5 months old; 53 % female) and a parent (52 mothers; 4 fathers) performing a 3-minute drawing task on a touchscreen tablet (digital condition), and on an Etch-A-Sketch (non-digital condition) using a repeated measures design. Observations were analysed using global ratings of dyadic interaction, comparing warmth, cooperation and conflict between digital and non-digital conditions. A mixed MANCOVA analysis, controlling for levels of daily usage of touchscreens, revealed lower levels of parent-child cooperation and warmth in the digital condition compared to the non-digital condition. In addition, there was a main effect of age with younger dyads displaying less cooperation overall, particularly in the digital condition where interactions were also less warm. Results suggest that co-engaging with digital technology can be a challenging and potentially emotionally charged context for both parents and young children. Younger toddlers, especially, may be more likely to experience less cooperative interactions when co-engaging with digital technology with a parent. Results are discussed in relation to developmental differences between 2- and 3-year olds, and the need for more nuanced guidance for parents supporting young children’s interaction with digital media.     

Neurodualism: People Assume that the Brain Affects the Mind more than the Mind Affects the Brain

People commonly think of the mind and the brain as distinct entities that interact, a view known as dualism. At the same time, the public widely acknowledges that science attributes all mental phenomena to the workings of a material brain, a view at odds with dualism. How do people reconcile these conflicting perspectives? We propose that people distort claims about the brain from the wider culture to fit their dualist belief that minds and brains are distinct, interacting entities: Exposure to cultural discourse about the brain as the physical basis for the mind prompts people to posit that mind–brain interactions are asymmetric, such that the brain is able to affect the mind more than vice versa. We term this hybrid intuitive theory neurodualism. Five studies involving both thought experiments and naturalistic scenarios provided evidence of neurodualism among laypeople and, to some extent, even practicing psychotherapists. For example, lay participants reported that “a change in a person's brain” is accompanied by “a change in the person's mind” more often than vice versa. Similarly, when asked to imagine that “future scientists were able to alter exactly 25% of a person's brain,” participants reported larger corresponding changes in the person's mind than in the opposite direction. Participants also showed a similarly asymmetric pattern favoring the brain over the mind in naturalistic scenarios. By uncovering people's intuitive theories of the mind–brain relation, the results provide insights into societal phenomena such as the allure of neuroscience and common misperceptions of mental health treatments.     

Reflections on the role of the analytic setting in the light of COVID-19

There have been many reflections, both individual and collective within our Institutes, on the effects on our work with patients caused by COVID-19 and the requirement to move suddenly from the setting of our own consulting rooms to working with patients online (see also, the previous issue of this Journal). This paper focuses on what we have learned from these experiences that can add to our knowledge about the role of the setting in analytic work. Drawing on Bleger’s (1967) seminal paper highlighting the usual setting as a mute projection carrier for primitive wishes and affects, the paper explores how different patients have reacted to the loss of the analyst as the guardian of the setting and in particular as an embodied presence. Some key questions and challenges for both patients and analysts during the pandemic, when ‘the setting begins to weep’, are explored.     

Temporal coordination between maternal looming and infant gaze in depressed and nondepressed dyads: A bootstrapping approach

In this study, we examine the convergent validity of a measure of maternal looming derived using a motion capture system, and the temporal coordination between maternal loom and infant gaze using an event-based bootstrapping procedure. The sample comprised 26 mothers diagnosed with postpartum depression, 43 nondepressed mothers, and their 4-month-old infants. Mother-infant interactions were recorded during a standard face-to-face setting using video cameras and a motion capture system. First, results showed that maternal looming was correlated with a globally coded measure of maternal overriding. Maternal overriding is an intrusive behavior occurring when the mother re-directs the infant’s attention to parent-led activities. Thus, this result confirms that maternal looming can be considered a spatial intrusion in early interactions. Second, results showed that compared to nondepressed dyads, depressed dyads were more likely to coordinate maternal loom and infant gaze in a Loom-in-Gaze-pattern. We discuss the use of automated measurement for analyzing mother-infant interactions, and how the Loom-in-Gaze pattern can be interpreted as a disturbance in infant self-regulation.     

Using the teaching interaction procedure to train interventionists to implement the Cool versus Not CoolTM procedure

The teaching interaction procedure is a behavior analytic procedure that has been used to target the development of social skills. The teaching interaction procedure consists of labeling the target skill, providing a meaningful rationale, describing the steps of the target skill, modeling the skill, role‐play, and providing feedback throughout the interaction. Although the teaching interaction procedure has been used to teach a variety of social skills for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), it has only been used to train staff in two studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of the teaching interaction procedure to teach three interventionists to implement the Cool versus Not Cool? procedure to target the development of social skills for children diagnosed with ASD. The results of a multiple baseline design demonstrated that the teaching interaction procedure was effective for all three interventionists. Results of the child participants' skill acquisition are also provided.     

Selfish power and unselfish status in Chinese work situations

The present research explored the selfishness of power and status as well as the mechanism in Chinese work situations. By using experimental and survey methods, two studies were designed to investigate the relationships among power, status, and self‐interested behaviour (SIB) as well as the mediating effect of perspective‐taking (PT). Results of the two studies consistently indicated that power increases whereas status reduces SIB. These opposing behavioural effects are partially attributed to the fact that power reduces whereas status increases PT. In addition, our results showed an interaction between power and status on SIB in Study 1 (interaction as a mental function), and a positive correlation between perceived power and status in Study 2 (correlation as a mental perception). Through the discussion from the perspective of the self/other‐orientation trait, as well as the stable effects of power and status on SIB in the two studies, we conclude that power is selfish and status is unselfish in Chinese work situations.     

Driver conflict response during supervised automation: Do hands on wheel matter?

Securing appropriate driver responses to conflicts is essential in automation that is not perfect (because the driver is needed as a fall-back for system limitations and failures). However, this is recognized as a major challenge in the human factors literature. Moreover, in-depth knowledge is lacking regarding mechanisms affecting the driver response process. The first aim of this study was to investigate how driver conflict response while using highly reliable (but not perfect) supervised automation differ for drivers that (a) crash or avoid a conflict object and (b) report high trust or low trust in automation to avoid the conflict object. The second aim was to understand the influence on the driver conflict response of two specific factors: a hands-on-wheel requirement (with vs. without), and the conflict object type (garbage bag vs. stationary vehicle). Seventy-six participants drove with highly reliable but supervised automation for 30 min on a test track. Thereafter they needed to avoid a static object that was revealed by a lead-vehicle cut-out. The driver conflict response was assessed through the response process: timepoints for driver surprise reaction, hands-on-wheel, driver steering, and driver braking. Crashers generally responded later in all actions of the response process compared to non-crashers. In fact, some crashers collided with the conflict object without even putting their hands on the wheel. Driver conflict response was independent of the hands-on-wheel requirement. High-trust drivers generally responded later than the low-trust drivers or not at all, and only high trust drivers crashed. The larger stationary vehicle triggered an earlier surprise reaction compared to the garbage bag, while hands-on-wheel and steering response were similar for the two conflict object types. To conclude, crashing is associated with a delay in all actions of the response process. In addition, driver conflict response does not change with a hands-on-wheel requirement but changes with trust-level and conflict object type. Simply holding the hands on the wheel is not sufficient to prevent collisions or elicit earlier responses. High trust in automation is associated with late response and crashing, whereas low trust is associated with appropriate driver response. A larger conflict object trigger earlier surprise reactions.     

Urgent and non-urgent takeovers during conditional automated driving on public roads: The impact of different training programmes

Supplying training to drivers that teaches them about automated driving and requests to intervene may help them to build and maintain a mental representation of how automation works and thereby improve takeover performance. We aimed to investigate the effect of different types of training programmes about the functioning of automated driving on drivers’ takeover performance during real driving. Fifty-two participants were split into three groups for training sessions: paper (short notice), video (3-minute tutorial) and practice (short drive). After the training, participants experienced automated driving and both urgent and non-urgent requests to intervene in a Wizard-of-Oz vehicle on public roads. Participants’ takeover time, visual behaviour, mental workload, and flow levels during the requests to intervene were assessed. Our results indicated that in urgent circumstances, participants’ takeover response times were faster in the practice training condition compared to the other training conditions. Nevertheless, the practice training session did not present any other positive effect on drivers’ visual behaviour. This could indicate that prior training, particularly when reinforcing drivers' motor skills, improved their takeover response time at the latest motor stages rather than in the early sensory states. In addition, the analysis of in-vehicle videos revealed that participants’ attention was captured in the first place by the in-vehicle human-machine interface during the urgent request to intervene. This highlights the importance for designers to display information on the HMI in an appropriate way to optimise drivers’ situation awareness in critical situations.