Heads of Worry, Hearts of Joy: Daily Diary Investigations of Self-Location and Well-Being.

When people are asked to locate the self, they frequently choose the head and heart regions of the body. These bodily regions, in turn, are linked to an extensive set of metaphors, including those that conceptualize the heart as the locus of authenticity, love, and passion. Based on such considerations as well as frameworks within the self and well-being literatures, four samples of participants in three studies (total N = 527) were asked whether, on particular days, they perceived themselves to be located in their head regions of their bodies or their heart regions. When the self was perceived to be in the heart to a greater extent, participants reported higher levels of affective and eudaimonic well-being, as mediated by processes related to reward perception (Study 1), savoring (Study 2), and social activity (Study 3). In terms of daily experiences, the heart-located self is a happier self.

Colorfulness influences perceptions of valence and arousal.

Research on color-emotion associations provides evidence that hue, chroma, and lightness relate to various emotional experiences. Most of this research has assessed these relationships via isolated color swatches while confounding color dimensions. We broadened the medium in which color-emotion associations were made by manipulating color in photographs varying in valence and/or arousal, and we solely focused on the chroma dimension. In Experiment 1, participants perceived neutral and positive-valence photographs to be happier and more arousing when displayed chromatically, relative to achromatically. In Experiment 2, participants increased the chroma content of photographs to make them appear maximally happy, and they decreased the chroma content of photographs to make them appear maximally sad. In Experiment 3, participants altered the chroma content of photographs to their preferred levels, with positive-valence photographs containing the most chroma, followed by neutral, then negative-valence photographs. In Experiment 4, participants increased the chroma content of photographs to make them appear maximally positive or arousing, and they decreased chroma to make photographs appear maximally negative or calming. This pattern was similar regardless of the initial valence/arousal content of the images. These results indicate that chroma may convey emotion-relevant information independent of hue or lightness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Remembering our first date brings back those fuzzy feelings: The role of romantic nostalgia in relationship functioning.

People often reflect nostalgicallyon the momentous occasions of their relationships. Experiencing romantic nostalgia-nostalgia for shared experiences with one's current romantic partner-likely confers relationship-specific benefits. Indeed, prior research indirectly hints at this assumed outcome by looking at relationship narratives. More recent work provides direct evidence that romantic nostalgia is both positively correlated with and causally enhances relationship-specific benefits. We describe such research and discuss avenues for future investigations that address mechanisms and potential downsides of romantic nostalgia while exploring translational possibilities.

Development and Validation of the Single-Item Mindfulness Scale (SIMS).

Mindfulness is a focused attention to and acceptance of present experiences. Although several reliable and valid multi-item measures of trait mindfulness exist, researchers may sometimes want a short and quick measure of mindfulness. In this project, we developed and validated the Single-Item Mindfulness Scale (SIMS) to assess trait mindfulness. We conducted eight studies involving 3,125 adult and adolescent participants. The studies consisted of cross-sectional, short longitudinal, and daily diary designs. We first developed the wording of the SIMS in Studies 1 and 2 and then examined the validity and reliability in Studies 3-8. The SIMS was found to be reliable and valid. It correlated with several multi-item measures of mindfulness at effect sizes in the medium to large range. It also correlated in expected ways with variables known to be related to existing multi-item measures of mindfulness such as self-compassion, anxiety, negative affect, positive affect, depression, neuroticism, empathy, prosocial behavior, and self-consciousness. Furthermore, it correlated positively with daily reports of mindfulness in a two-week diary study. Although existing multi-item trait mindfulness scales should be used, when possible, the SIMS is recommended in situations when time, question quantity, or researcher focus is constrained.

Religiosity and the Naturalness Bias in Drug and Vaccine Choices.

Research reveals a bias for natural versus synthetic drugs. We sought to determine if this bias is associated with religiosity. Three cross-sectional studies (N = 1399 U.S. participants) were conducted to examine the impact of religiosity on the naturalness bias in the drug and vaccine domains. We assessed measures of religiosity, preferences for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines in hypothetical scenarios, and a health-related behavior (COVID-19 vaccination status). The results revealed that participants high versus low in religiosity had stronger preferences for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines. Furthermore, participants high versus low in religiosity were less likely to have taken the COVID-19 vaccine, and the natural drug bias was a mediator of this effect. Overall, participants higher in religiosity had a stronger preference for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines, and this preference had implications for health behavior.

What shall we call God? An exploration of metaphors coded from descriptions of God from a large U.S. undergraduate sample.

People use numerous metaphors to describe God. God is seen as a bearded man, light, and love. Based on metaphor theories, the metaphors people use to refer to God reflect how people think about God and could, in turn, reflect their worldview. However, little work has explored the common metaphors for God. This was the purpose of the current investigation. Four trained raters coded open-ended responses from predominantly Christian U.S. undergraduates (N = 2,923) describing God for the presence or absence of numerous metaphoric categories. We then assessed the frequency of each of the metaphor categories. We identified 16 metaphor categories that were present in more than 1% of the responses. The top categories were "GOD IS POWER," "GOD IS HUMAN," and "GOD IS MALE." These findings were similar across religious affiliations. We attempted to support our coding analysis using top-down and bottom-up automated language analysis. Results from these analyses provided added confidence to our conclusions. We discuss the implications of our findings and the potential for future studies investigating important psychological and behavioral outcomes of using different metaphors for God.

Leveraging individual differences to understand grounded procedures.

We applaud the goals and execution of the target article, but note that individual differences do not receive much attention. This is a shortcoming because individual differences can play a vital role in theory testing. In our commentary, we describe programs of research of this type and also apply similar thinking to the mechanisms proposed in the target article.

Mental transportation mediates nostalgia's psychological benefits.

Nostalgizing confers social, existential, and self-oriented psychological benefits or functions. But how does the experience of nostalgia conduce to these functions? We propose that it does so, in part, through mental transportation, which involves mentally leaving one's current space and transporting oneself into a past event. We addressed the role of mental transportation in one daily diary study and two experiments (N = 514). By assessing daily experiences of nostalgia in Study 1, we found that, on days in which participants felt more nostalgic, they were more likely to experience mental transportation. Following a narrative induction of nostalgia, we assessed mental transportation (Studies 2 and 3) and the three putative nostalgia functions: social, existential, self-oriented (Study 3). Nostalgic (vs. control) participants reported greater mental transportation (Studies 2 and 3), which in turn was associated with stronger functions (Study 3). The findings portray mental transportation as a key mechanism underlying the psychological benefits of nostalgia.

Positive and negative emotions predict weight loss intentions and behaviors beyond theory of planned behavior constructs.

PURPOSE: The current study examined the predictive utility of emotional valence (i.e., positive and negative emotions) on weight loss intentions and behaviors, beyond theory of planned behavior constructs (i.e., attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control), among a community sample of people who were overweight (BMI > 25 kg/m2). METHODS: Participants were recruited for a longitudinal study via an online panel. They completed a baseline survey (N = 732) and a follow-up survey 6 months later (N = 526), both administered online. The surveys included measures of attitude, subjective norms, perceived control, positive and negative emotions regarding one's current weight, intentions to engage in weight loss behaviors (time 1), and having engaged in weight loss behaviors in the past 6 months (time 2). RESULTS: Emotion explained additional variance in weight loss intentions (range ΔR2 = 0.03-0.10, all ps < 0.01) and behaviors (range ΔR2 = 0.01-0.02, all ps < 0.05) beyond theory of planned behavior constructs. Negative emotions mainly predicted the intake of unhealthy food and seeking social support, whereas positive emotions predicted physical activity (intention and behavior). These results suggested that the differential relations might be based on whether the strategy is approach or avoidance oriented. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings, comprehensive models of weight loss behaviors should consider emotion, and the valence of such emotion, regarding current weight. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, multiple time series without intervention.

Hello darkness my old friend: preferences for darkness vary by neuroticism and co-occur with negative affect.

Metaphors frequently link negative affect with darkness and associations of this type have been established in several experimental paradigms. Given the ubiquity and strength of these associations, people who prefer dark to light may be more prone to negative emotional experiences and symptoms. A five study investigation (total N = 605) couches these ideas in a new theoretical framework and then examines them. Across studies, 1 in 4 people preferred the perceptual concept of dark over the perceptual concept of light. These dark-preferring people scored higher in neuroticism (Studies 1 and 2) and experienced greater depressive feelings in daily life (Study 3). Moreover, dark preferences shared a robust relationship with depressive symptoms (Study 4) as well as generalised anxiety symptoms (Study 5). The results provide novel insights into negative affectivity and extend conceptual metaphor theory in a way that is capable of making individual difference predictions.

The Burden of Power: Construing Power as Responsibility (Rather Than as Opportunity) Alters Threat-Challenge Responses.

Power usually lowers stress responses. In stressful situations, having high (vs. low) power heightens challenge and lowers threat. Yet, even power-holders may experience threat when becoming aware of the responsibility that accompanies their power. Power-holders can construe (i.e., understand) a high-power position primarily as opportunity to "make things happen" or as responsibility to "take care of things." Power-holders construing power as responsibility (rather than opportunity) may be more likely to experience demands-such as taking care of important decisions under their control-as outweighing their resources, resulting in less challenge and more threat. Four experiments with subjective and cardiovascular threat-challenge indicators support this. Going beyond prior work on structural aspects (e.g., power instability) that induce stress, we show that merely the way how power-holders construe their power can evoke stress. Specifically, we find that power construed as responsibility (vs. opportunity) is more likely to imply a "burden" for the power-holder.

The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists.

Scientists are dedicating more attention to replication efforts. While the scientific utility of replications is unquestionable, the impact of failed replication efforts and the discussions surrounding them deserve more attention. Specifically, the debates about failed replications on social media have led to worry, in some scientists, regarding reputation. In order to gain data-informed insights into these issues, we collected data from 281 published scientists. We assessed whether scientists overestimate the negative reputational effects of a failed replication in a scenario-based study. Second, we assessed the reputational consequences of admitting wrongness (versus not) as an original scientist of an effect that has failed to replicate. Our data suggests that scientists overestimate the negative reputational impact of a hypothetical failed replication effort. We also show that admitting wrongness about a non-replicated finding is less harmful to one's reputation than not admitting. Finally, we discovered a hint of evidence that feelings about the replication movement can be affected by whether replication efforts are aimed one's own work versus the work of another. Given these findings, we then present potential ways forward in these discussions.

The scope and consequences of metaphoric thinking: Using individual differences in metaphor usage to understand how metaphor functions.

People often think, feel, and behave metaphorically according to conceptual metaphor theory. There are normative sources of support for this theory, but individual differences have received scant attention. This is surprising because people are likely to differ in the frequency with which they use metaphors and, therefore, the frequency with which they experience the costs and benefits of metaphoric thinking. To investigate these ideas, a 5-study program of research (total N = 532) was conducted. Study 1 developed and validated a Metaphor Usage Measure (MUM), finding that people were fairly consistent in their tendencies toward literal thought and language on the one hand versus metaphoric thought and language on the other. These differences were, in turn, consequential. Although metaphor usage predicted susceptibility to metaphor transfer effects (Studies 2 and 3), it was also linked to higher levels of emotional understanding (Studies 4 and 5). The findings provide support for several key premises of conceptual metaphor theory in the context of a new measure that can be used to track the consequences of metaphoric thinking. (PsycINFO Database Record

Power Versus Affiliation in Political Ideology: Robust Linguistic Evidence for Distinct Motivation-Related Signatures.

Posited motivational differences between liberals and conservatives have historically been controversial. This motivational interface has recently been bridged, but the vast majority of studies have used self-reports of values or motivation. Instead, the present four studies investigated whether two classic social motive themes--power and affiliation--vary by political ideology in objective linguistic analysis terms. Study 1 found that posts to liberal chat rooms scored higher in standardized affiliation than power, whereas the reverse was true of posts to conservative chat rooms. Study 2 replicated this pattern in the context of materials posted to liberal versus conservative political news websites. Studies 3 and 4, finally, replicated a similar interactive (ideology by motive type) pattern in State of the State and State of the Union addresses. Differences in political ideology, these results suggest, are marked by, and likely reflective of, mind-sets favoring affiliation (liberal) or power (conservative).

Sex-Linked Mating Strategies Diverge with a Manipulation of Genital Salience.

Trivers (1972) proposed that evolutionary factors should favor divergent mating strategies for males versus females. Such differences may be less pronounced among human beings than other animals and social norms and sex roles are also pertinent influences. The present experiment (N = 133 college undergraduates, 74 female) sought to bypass some of these other influences. Participants were randomly assigned to a condition designed to increase attention to the genital region (a downward pointing arrow) or not (an upward pointing arrow). They then reported on their interest in short-term (e.g., a one-night stand) and long-term (e.g., a potential marital partner) mating opportunities. A theory-consistent three-way interaction occurred such that the genital salience manipulation primed a shorter-term reproductive strategy among men and a longer-term reproductive strategy among women. The results provide unique support for evolution-linked ideas about sex differences in the form of a role for bodily attention.

The embodiment of success and failure as forward versus backward movements.

People often speak of success (e.g., "advance") and failure (e.g., "setback") as if they were forward versus backward movements through space. Two experiments sought to examine whether grounded associations of this type influence motor behavior. In Experiment 1, participants categorized success versus failure words by moving a joystick forward or backward. Failure categorizations were faster when moving backward, whereas success categorizations were faster when moving forward. Experiment 2 removed the requirement to categorize stimuli and used a word rehearsal task instead. Even without Experiment 1's response procedures, a similar cross-over interaction was obtained (e.g., failure memorizations sped backward movements relative to forward ones). The findings are novel yet consistent with theories of embodied cognition and self-regulation.

The myth of the angry atheist.

Atheists are often portrayed in the media and elsewhere as angry individuals. Although atheists disagree with the pillar of many religions, namely the existence of a God, it may not necessarily be the case that they are angry individuals. The prevalence and accuracy of angry-atheist perceptions were examined in 7 studies with 1,677 participants from multiple institutions and locations in the United States. Studies 1-3 revealed that people believe atheists are angrier than believers, people in general, and other minority groups, both explicitly and implicitly. Studies 4-7 then examined the accuracy of these beliefs. Belief in God, state anger, and trait anger were assessed in multiple ways and contexts. None of these studies supported the idea that atheists are particularly angry individuals. Rather, these results support the idea that people believe atheists are angry individuals, but they do not appear to be angrier than other individuals in reality.

Implicit Self-Importance in an Interpersonal Pronoun Categorization Task.

Object relations theories emphasize the manner in which the salience/importance of implicit representations of self and other guide interpersonal functioning. Two studies and a pilot test (total N = 304) sought to model such representations. In dyadic contexts, the self is a "you" and the other is a "me", as verified in a pilot test. Study 1 then used a simple categorization task and found evidence for implicit self-importance: The pronoun "you" was categorized more quickly and accurately when presented in a larger font size, whereas the pronoun "me" was categorized more quickly and accurately when presented in a smaller font size. Study 2 showed that this pattern possesses value in understanding individual differences in interpersonal functioning. As predicted, arrogant people scored higher in implicit self-importance in the paradigm. Findings are discussed from the perspective of dyadic interpersonal dynamics.

What Can Metaphors Tell Us about Personality?

Theorists propose that metaphors are not mere figures of speech, but can actively shape one's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Social psychologists have supported this claim over the past 10 years. Personality psychologists, though, have only recently begun investigating how metaphors can inform our understanding of what makes us different from each other. This review focuses on projects demonstrating links between metaphor and personality. As an example, people have been asked whether they locate the self in the head or the heart. Head people are (more) rational and cold, whereas heart people are emotional and warm. In addition, an individual differences approach can reveal what it is that metaphoric thinking does to and for people. Overall, individual difference approaches to common metaphors are shown to be informative not only in understanding how people differ from each other but also in extending the metaphor literature.

Threat ≠ prevention, challenge ≠ promotion: the impact of threat, challenge and regulatory focus on attention to negative stimuli.

The purpose of the current experiment was to distinguish between the impact of strategic and affective forms of gain- and loss-related motivational states on the attention to negative stimuli. On the basis of the counter-regulation principle and regulatory focus theory, we predicted that individuals would attend more to negative than to neutral stimuli in a prevention focus and when experiencing challenge, but not in a promotion focus and under threat. In one experiment (N = 88) promotion, prevention, threat, or challenge states were activated through a memory task, and a subsequent dot probe task was administered. As predicted, those in the prevention focus and challenge conditions had an attentional bias towards negative words, but those in promotion and threat conditions did not. These findings provide support for the idea that strategic mindsets (e.g., regulatory focus) and hot emotional states (e.g., threat vs. challenge) differently affect the processing of affective stimuli.