Is shame a proximal trigger for drinking? A daily process study with a community sample.

Between-subjects studies show that people with higher levels of shame tend to experience more negative drinking-related consequences than people with lower levels of shame. However, within-subjects studies of the association between daily fluctuations in shame and subsequent drinking have yielded mixed findings. This study aimed to resolve these inconsistencies by examining the association between daily fluctuations in shame, between-subjects differences in shame, and subsequent evening alcohol consumption in a sample of 70 community-dwelling drinkers. In addition, we examined whether the previous night's drinking predicted shame the next day based on the theory that shame may operate in a cyclical fashion in some people to maintain problematic drinking patterns. Multilevel model analyses showed a cross-level interaction in which individuals' average levels of ashamed mood moderated the effect of daily fluctuations in shame on solitary drinking. In contrast, previous day's drinking was only weakly related to shame the next day. This study contributes to existing literature by refining models of negative mood-related drinking and further elucidating the patterns by which shame serves as a trigger for drinking, particularly among high shame individuals. The authors interpret results in terms of self-control theory and demonstrate the importance of disaggregating between- and within-subjects variance when examining longitudinal data. (PsycINFO Database Record

Hormonal underpinnings of status conflict: Testosterone and cortisol are related to decisions and satisfaction in the hawk-dove game.

A contribution to a special issue on Hormones and Human Competition.Testosterone is theorized to influence status-seeking behaviors such as social dominance and competitive behavior, but supporting evidence is mixed. The present study tested the roles of testosterone and cortisol in the hawk-dove game, a dyadic economic decision-making paradigm in which earnings depend on one's own and the other player's choices. If one person selects the hawk strategy and the other person selects the dove strategy, the player who selected hawk attains a greater financial pay-off (status differentiation). The worst financial outcome occurs when both players choose the hawk strategy (status confrontation). Ninety-eight undergraduate students (42 men) provided saliva samples and played ten rounds of the hawk-dove game with another same-sex participant. In support of the hypothesis that testosterone is related to status concern, individuals higher in basal testosterone made more hawk decisions - decisions that harmed the other player. Acute decreases in cortisol were also associated with more hawk decisions. There was some empirical support for the dual-hormone hypothesis as well: basal testosterone was positively related to satisfaction in the game among low basal-cortisol individuals but not among high basal-cortisol individuals. There were no significant sex differences in these hormonal effects. The present findings align with theories of hormones and status-seeking behavior at the individual level, but they also open up new avenues for research on hormone profiles at the collective level. Our results suggest that the presence of two or more high-testosterone members increases the likelihood of status confrontations over a limited resource that can undermine collective outcomes.