Just Not Enough: Utilization of Outpatient Psychotherapy Provided by Clinical Psychologists for Patients With Psychosis and Bipolar Disorder in Switzerland.

Treatment guidelines state that evidence-based psychotherapy is effective for people with psychosis and bipolar disorder and should be offered during every phase of the treatment process. However, research has indicated a lack of outpatient psychotherapeutic services for this patient group, for example, in the United States or Germany. We extend this finding by presenting survey data from Switzerland. We surveyed 112 inpatients with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder and assessed outpatient treatment over the 5 years prior to their index hospitalization by using retrospective self-reports. The survey focused on psychotherapy provided by clinical psychologists. Results indicate that only 23.2% of participants retrospectively reported having utilized any outpatient psychotherapy within the reporting period and only 8% of participants reported having received a number of outpatient sessions that reaches recommended levels of psychotherapy. Exploratory analyses did not detect a significant association between self-reported utilization of outpatient psychotherapy sessions and most demographic, psychiatric, and psychological attributes, but patients with a bipolar disorder diagnosis (vs schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis) reported having utilized outpatient treatment more often. These findings are preliminary. When replicated they highlight the need for increased access to outpatient psychotherapy and better alignment between guideline recommendations and outpatient supply.

Implementation of a Budo group therapy for psychiatric in- and outpatients: a feasibility study.

Introduction: Physical exercise has been shown to have numerous health benefits on co-morbid somatic conditions in psychiatry and can also enhance mental health. Thus, it is not difficult to recommend physical training programs as part of an integrated and holistic treatment approach for mental health disorders. However, getting patients to participate and keeping them engaged is a major challenge. Programs based on martial arts training could be interventions improving physical and mental health with higher attachment rates. The structured discipline, holistic approach integrating physical and mental elements, and empowering activities, may explain higher participant attachment rates. Methods: Thus, the main objective of this feasibility study is to describe a newly established group therapy program incorporating interventions from martial arts training with its physical and philosophical parts including mindfulness and breath work. Results: During the 14-month study period from April 2021 to May 2022, a Budo group therapy was used by 215 individual persons with a total of 725 group therapy participations. Retention in the program was good across all settings and very good for persons who participated as outpatients. The mean age of the participants was 33.5 years with a range from 14 to 69 years of age, and about 41% of the participants were female. The therapy program was able to address patients over the whole spectrum of psychiatric diagnoses. Satisfaction and motivation were uniformly self-reported as very good. Patients self-reported improved mental and physical health after participating in a Budo session compared to pre-session. Discussion: Budo group therapy thus can be seen as a feasible, well-accepted and promising new transdiagnostic treatment approach, combining physical activation with resilience enhancement. With minimal contraindications, a broad spectrum of individuals seeking mental health support can engage in this group therapy.

Secretive and close? How sharing secrets may impact perceptions of distance.

Having secrets is incredibly common. However, secrecy has only recently started to receive more attention in research. What has largely been neglected are the consequences of secret-sharing for the relationship between sharer and receiver; a gap we aim to fill in this project. Previous research has shown that closeness can make secret-sharing more likely. Building on research from the self-disclosure and relationship literature, we experimentally investigate in three studies (N = 705) whether confiding a secret to somebody might in turn increase perceptions of closeness. In addition, we test whether the valence of the secrets moderates the hypothesized effect. While confiding negative secrets might signal a high level of trust and lead to a similar closeness as confiding positive secrets, they might also present a burden to the receiver and lead to a different pattern of closeness. To provide a holistic picture, we build on a variety of methods and investigate three perspectives: Study 1 focused on the receiver and showed that another person sharing secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) decreased the distance in the eyes of the receiver. Study 2 tested how an observer perceives the relationship between two people. Distance was judged to decrease when secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) were shared, however, this difference was not significant. Study 3 tested whether lay theories about sharing secrets predict behavior, and how sharing information may be used to change perceived distance on the receiver's side. Participants preferred to share neutral compared to secret information and positive compared to negative secrets irrespective of the distance condition. Our results contribute to the understanding of how sharing secrets affects the way individuals think about each other, how close they feel to each other, and how they interact with each other.

Construal level mindsets modulate gender categorizations in preschool children.

Social categorization is a crucial information processing strategy that adults deliberately adjust depending on goals and situational requirements. This study investigated whether flexibility in categorization is similarly present among preschool children. More specifically, we tested whether spontaneous gender categorizations are more pronounced for children with a situationally induced abstract compared to concrete construal level mindset. Sixty-one children first participated in a construal mindset induction task before completing a visual variant of the "who said what" memory task. Systematic memory confusions indicated that all children engaged in gender-based social categorization but that this tendency was accentuated in the abstract compared to concrete mindset condition. These results suggest an ability of children to modulate social categorizations. Implications for the development of intergroup biases are discussed.

This feels like the right choice: how decision aids may facilitate affect-based valuation.

When individuals cannot make up their mind, they sometimes use a random decision-making aid such as a coin to make a decision. This aid may also elicit affective reactions: A person flipping a coin may (dis)like the outcome, and thus decide according to this feeling. We refer to this process as catalysing decisions and to the aid as catalyst. We investigate whether using a catalyst may not only elicit affect but also result in more affect-based decision making. We used different online studies that examine affect-driven decisions by investigating scope insensitivity (indirect behavioural measure) and self-reported weight given to feelings versus reasons in hypothetical donation decisions. Study 1a showed that a catalyst (a lottery wheel) lead to more scope insensitive (i.e. affect-driven) donations. Study 1b included several changes and did not replicate these results. Study 2 (preregistered) examined scope insensitivity but did not replicate previous results; Study 3 (preregistered) looked at the weight given to feelings versus reason. Although catalyst (compared to control) participants descriptively reported relying more on feelings, this difference did not reach significance. In contrast to lay beliefs, results do not indicate support for the hypothesis that using a catalyst results in more affect-based hypothetical donation decisions.

Deciding advantageously after flipping a coin.

Folk wisdom, advice columns, and pop culture suggest that when undecided, individuals may flip a coin - not to simply follow the suggestion, but to inspect their reaction to the outcome and then use the reaction to decide. While being intuitively appealing, it remains an open question whether this strategy results in advantageous decisions. Here we used an adapted version of the Iowa Gambling Task to test whether flipping a coin before making a decision may result in advantageous choices. Participants from the general public (N = 542) participated in the adapted Iowa Gambling Task. Results suggest that, under certain conditions, using a coin flip results in a higher likelihood to choose the objectively better option after 40 trials and a steeper learning curve throughout the game. Furthermore, after 40 trials, coin- compared to control-participants described themselves as more certain and the task as easier. This study is the first to show that flipping a coin may prove beneficial, objectively by leading to better decisions, and subjectively by resulting in reduced difficulty and higher certainty.

This outcome feels right! subjective evaluations of coin flip outcomes reflect previously stated preferences.

When facing a difficult decision, individuals may rely on a coin flip to help them come to a conclusion. In some cases, however, individuals might not adhere to the coin's outcome, but instead report liking or disliking the coin flip's outcome, and may use this affective reaction to form their decision. In this manuscript we investigate the affective reaction towards the outcome of a coin flip and determine whether this affective reaction provides valid feedback in regards to individuals' underlying preferences (Hypothesis 1). We further test whether flipping a coin results in a higher alignment between previous preferences and subsequent decisions (Hypothesis 2). We conducted three studies in the lab and with online samples. Throughout all studies we found support for the notion that the affective reactions regarding the coin flip's outcome validly reflect previously indicated preferences or attractiveness ratings. Contrary to wide-spread expectations, however, we did not find reliable support for the notion that flipping a coin, compared to a control group, leads to decisions that are more in line with the previously stated preferences.

Negative Is True Here and Now, But Not So Much There and Then.

How do people judge the veracity of a message? The negativity bias in judgments of truth describes the phenomenon that the same message is more likely judged as true when framed negatively compared to positively. This manuscript investigates the negativity bias in conditions of psychological proximity and the possibility that the bias decreases when distance increases. This notion is informed by construal level theory, which holds that negative information is more salient and weighed more strongly in conditions of psychological proximity compared to distance. Against this background, we hypothesize that a negativity bias likely occurs in conditions of proximity. With increasing psychological distance, however, positively compared to negatively framed information is more likely to be judged true, therefore attenuating or even reversing the bias. Two studies provide preliminary yet weak support for this hypothesis. A final registered study put the preliminary conclusions to a critical test and yielded consistent results: We find a significant interaction between frame and distance, indicating a descriptive trend for a negativity bias in conditions of proximity, yet a positivity bias in conditions of distance. This interaction illustrates that psychological distance may impact the negativity bias in truth judgments.

Secretive and close? How sharing secrets may impact perceptions of distance.

Having secrets is incredibly common. However, secrecy has only recently started to receive more attention in research. What has largely been neglected so far are the consequences of secret-sharing for the relationship between sharer and receiver. In this project, we aim to fill this gap. Previous research has shown that closeness can make secret-sharing more likely. Building on research from the self-disclosure and relationship literature, we experimentally investigate whether secret-sharing might in turn increase perceptions of closeness. In addition, we test the valence of the secrets shared as potential driver of the hypothesized effect, as negative secrets might signal a high level of trust, but might also present a burden to the receiver. To provide a holistic picture, we build on a variety of methods to investigate three perspectives: Study 1 focuses on the receiver and tests whether another person sharing secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) decreases distance in the eyes of the receiver. Study 2 investigates lay theories and tests how an observer perceives the relationship between two people who share secrets (vs. nonconfidential information). Study 3 tests whether these lay theories about sharing secrets are predictive of behavior, and how a sharer might choose secrets of negative or positive valence to decrease perceived distance on the receiver's side. Our results will contribute to the understanding of how sharing secrets affects the way individuals think about each other, how close they feel to each other, and how they interact with each other.

Manipulating the odds: The effects of Machiavellianism and construal level on cheating behavior.

Values, beliefs, and traits differ across individuals, and these concepts might impact whether individuals choose to engage in (dis)honest behavior. This project focuses on interindividual differences in Machiavellianism, which is defined as a tendency toward cynicism and manipulativeness, and the belief that the ends justify the means. We hypothesized that trait Machiavellianism would predict dishonest behavior. Furthermore, we speculated that some situations are more conducive than others for Machiavellianism to translate into behavior. In particular, Construal Level Theory holds that individuals construe social situations on a concrete level, or an abstract level, and that an abstract construal level triggers values and value-related traits to be more influential on behavior. Against this background, we hypothesized that differences in Machiavellianism produce differences in dishonest monetary behavior when situations are construed abstractly. Four studies tested these considerations by asking participants to toss a coin and self-report the toss' outcome. Inconsistent with our theorizing, we did not find that higher Machiavellianism is consistently associated with a higher self-reported probability of receiving an individual bonus. We also did not find consistent support that higher Machiavellianism is associated with cheating under abstract compared to concrete construal.

Catalyzing decisions: How a coin flip strengthens affective reactions.

When individuals are undecided between options, they may flip a coin or use other aids that produce random outcomes to support decision-making. Such aids lead to clear suggestions, which, interestingly, individuals do not necessarily follow. Instead when looking at the outcome, individuals sometimes appear to like or dislike the suggestion, and then decide according to this feeling. In this manuscript we argue that such a decision aid can function as a catalyst. As it points to one option over the other, individuals focus on obtaining this option and engage in a more vivid representation of the same. By imagining obtaining the option, feelings related to the option become stronger, which then drive feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the outcome of the decision aid. We provide support for this phenomenon throughout two studies. Study 1 indicates that using a catalyst leads to stronger feelings. Study 2 replicates this finding using a different catalyst, and rules out alternative explanations. Here, participants report that after having used a catalyst, they experienced a stronger feeling of suddenly knowing what they want compared to the control group that did not use a catalyst. Implications of these results for research and practice are discussed.