Why do they do it? Differences in high-intensity exercise-affect between those with higher and lower intensity preference and tolerance

Evidence suggests high-intensity exercise results in a more negative affective response when compared to moderate- or low-intensity exercise. However, a large number of individuals continue participating in high-intensity exercise, in spite of these supposed declines in affective state.PurposeDetermine whether trait differences influence variability in exercise-affect for those with higher versus lower exercise intensity preference and/or tolerance, and determine the mediating relationship between traits, exercise behavior, and affective states.MethodsUndergraduates (N = 245, 20.3 ± 1.7 yrs, BMI = 23.7 ± 3.8, 60.8% female, 82% regular exercisers) completed the Preference for and Tolerance of the Intensity of Exercise Questionnaire. They then completed a 15-min high-intensity body-weight circuit (HIC), a walk, and a reading condition, where valence (via Feeling Scale), perceived physiological activation (via Felt Arousal Scale), and ratings of perceived exertion were taken prior to, every 3-min during, and 20-min post (P20) condition, while activity enjoyment was assessed immediately post.ResultsMultivariate ANOVAs revealed significant differences (p_s < 0.05) in valence between those with high versus low intensity preferences during HIC at minutes 3 (d = 0.615), 6 (d = 0.772), 9 (d = 0.659), 12 (d = 0.625), 15 (d = 0.632), and at P20 (d = 0.554), and for enjoyment following HIC (d = 0.545), but not for walking or reading conditions.ConclusionsThese findings suggest the intensity-preference trait influences how an individual feels during high-intensity exercise, but has less influence on affect during moderate/lower intensity activities. These differences may be predictive of whether an individual will continue high-intensity exercise programming.     

When Intertemporal Rewards Are Hedonic,Larger Units of Wait Time Boost Patience

In intertemporal choices between smaller‐sooner (SS) and larger‐later (LL) rewards, five studies reveal that patience for the LL option is influenced by an interactive effect of the measurement units used to express wait time (large vs. small) and the type of the reward (hedonic vs. utilitarian). Specifically, larger time units boost patience, but more so when rewards are hedonic rather than utilitarian. In line with the numerosity heuristic, the effect of time units on patience is mediated by larger time units shrinking wait time perception. This effect arises because hedonic (vs. utilitarian) rewards promote a reliance on heuristics rather than systematic calculations. Therefore, a more calculative mindset diminishes the effect of units even for hedonic rewards and eliminates the hedonic‐utilitarian asymmetry. These results contribute to research on numerosity, intertemporal choice, and hedonic‐utilitarian differences, and offer a simple tool for practitioners to influence patience.     

The Consumption Consequences of Couples Pooling Finances

When couples decide to share their lives, they must also decide how to pool their finances. In this article, we ask: Does the type of bank account from which one spends (joint vs. separate) affect the type of products one chooses to buy (utilitarian vs. hedonic)? Real‐world evidence from analyzing bank transaction records (study 5), as well as data collected from experiments in the field (studies 1 and 2) and lab (studies 3 and 4), converge to support the hypothesis that couple members who spend from a joint bank account are more likely to choose utilitarian (vs. hedonic) products, than those who spend from a separate bank account. We find that these different spending patterns are driven by an increased need to justify spending to one's partner that is experienced when money is pooled together. If a hedonic product becomes easier to justify (study 4), the effect of account type on spending patterns disappears. These findings have important theoretical and practical implications for better understanding financial decision‐making within romantic couples.     

Affect and automatic mood maintenance

The hedonic contingency model (HCM; Wegener & Petty, 1994) states that individuals have learned to seek out positive activities while in a happy mood in order to maintain or elevate that mood. We argue that this tendency may become overlearned and, thus, automated. More specifically, the experience of a happy mood was predicted to automatically activate the mood-maintenance tendency proposed by the HCM. Participants induced into happy, sad, or neutral moods ranked their preferences for future activities that were nonconsciously associated with either a positive or negative valence. Supporting the notion of automatic mood maintenance, happy participants appeared to evaluate the affective qualities of the future activities and base their preferences on this evaluation without realizing that they were doing so. Theoretical implications of this finding are discussed.     

The experience of new sensorimotor contingencies by sensory augmentation

Embedded in the paradigm of embodied cognition, the theory of sensorimotor contingencies (SMCs) proposes that motor actions and associated sensory stimulations are tied together by lawful relations termed SMCs. We aimed to investigate whether SMCs can be learned by means of sensory augmentation. Therefore we focused on related perceptual changes. Subjects trained for 7 weeks with the feelSpace belt mapping information of the magnetic north to vibrotactile stimulation around the waist. They experienced substantial changes in their space perception. The belt facilitated navigation and stimulated the usage of new navigation strategies. The belt’s vibrating signal changed to a kind of spatial information over time while the belt’s appeal and perceived usability increased. The belt also induced certain emotional states. Overall, the results show that learning new SMCs with this relatively small and usable device leads to profound perceptual and emotional changes, which are fully compatible with embodied theories of cognition.     

Employee commitment and well-being: A critical review, theoretical framework and research agenda

Although a great deal is known about the implications of employee commitment for organizations, less attention has been paid to its ramifications for employees themselves. Previous research has been unsystematic and the findings have sometimes been inconsistent. The most consistent findings pertain to the positive links between affective commitment and employee well-being. Relations between continuance commitment and well-being are more variable, but generally negative. Little is known about relations involving normative commitment. There is considerable inconsistency in findings pertaining to the moderating effects of commitment on stressor-strain relations. We provide a theoretical framework based on an integration of the three-component model of commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997) and Deci and Ryan's (1985) self-determination theory of motivation to help explain both the consistencies and inconsistencies, and to guide future research. We also argue for a broadening of the concept of employee well-being to include indices of eudaimonic as well as hedonic well-being.     

A mechanism model of the effect of hedonic product consumption on well‐being

In response to recent calls for research into activities that may increase happiness, this study uses longitudinal data to investigate changes in within-subject, instead of between-subject, well-being. In the context of hedonic product consumption, this study reveals a mechanism by which consumption influences well-being through the mediating effect of satisfaction with associated life domains. Four years of data from a large national panel survey show that consuming hedonic products has indirect effects on well-being, by improving consumers' satisfaction within relevant life domains. High hedonic consumption improves satisfaction with relevant life domains, primarily through more frequent consumption of low-cost hedonic products rather than less frequent consumption of high-cost hedonic products.