Some habits are more work than others:Deliberate self-regulation strategy use increases with behavioral complexity, even for established habits

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that complex behaviors are commonly supported by self-regulation strategies, even when those behaviors are supported by strong instigation habits. Background: Goal-directed and habit-mediated processes arise from separable systems that have been suggested to seldomly interact. Results: Self-regulation strategy use was lower for habitually instigated simple behaviors compared to nonhabitually instigated simple behaviors. However, participants' use of self-regulation strategies increased with the increasing complexity of behaviors, even when complex behaviors were habitually instigated. The difference in the extent of strategy use between habitually and nonhabitually instigated actions was absent when behavioral complexity was particularly high. Conclusion: These results point to a qualitative distinction—while simple behaviors may progress in a relatively automatic and unthinking manner, complex behaviors receive frequent support from self-regulation strategies, even if they are instigated habitually.</p

Some habits are more work than others:Deliberate self-regulation strategy use increases with behavioral complexity, even for established habits

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that complex behaviors are commonly supported by self-regulation strategies, even when those behaviors are supported by strong instigation habits. Background: Goal-directed and habit-mediated processes arise from separable systems that have been suggested to seldomly interact. Results: Self-regulation strategy use was lower for habitually instigated simple behaviors compared to nonhabitually instigated simple behaviors. However, participants' use of self-regulation strategies increased with the increasing complexity of behaviors, even when complex behaviors were habitually instigated. The difference in the extent of strategy use between habitually and nonhabitually instigated actions was absent when behavioral complexity was particularly high. Conclusion: These results point to a qualitative distinction—while simple behaviors may progress in a relatively automatic and unthinking manner, complex behaviors receive frequent support from self-regulation strategies, even if they are instigated habitually.</p

Longitudinal evidence that Event Related Potential measures of self-regulation do not predict everyday goal pursuit

Self-regulation has been studied across levels of analysis; however, little attention has been paid to the extent to which self-report, neural, and behavioral indices predict goal pursuit in real-life. We use a mixed-method approach (N = 201) to triangulate evidence among established measures of different aspects of self-regulation to predict both the process of goal pursuit using experience sampling, as well as longer-term goal progress at 1, 3, and 6-month follow-ups. While self-reported trait self-control predicts goal attainment months later, we observe a null relationship between longitudinal goal attainment and ERPs associated with performance-monitoring and reactivity to positive/rewarding stimuli. Despite evidence that these ERPs are reliable and trait-like, and despite theorizing that suggests otherwise, our findings suggest that these ERPs are not meaningfully associated with everyday goal attainment. These findings challenge the ecological validity of brain measures thought to assess aspects of self-regulation

Reported self-control is not meaningfully associated with inhibition-related executive function:A Bayesian analysis

Self-control is assessed using a remarkable array of measures. In a series of five data-sets (overall N = 2,641) and a mini meta-analysis, we explored the association between canonical operationalisations of self-control: The Self-Control Scale and two measures of inhibition-related executive functioning (the Stroop and Flanker paradigms). Overall, Bayesian correlational analyses suggested little-to-no relationship between self-reported self-control and performance on the Stroop and Flanker tasks. The Bayesian meta-analytical summary of all five data-sets further favoured a null relationship between both types of measurement. These results suggest that the field’s most widely used measure of self-reported self-control is uncorrelated with two of the most widely adopted executive functioning measures of self-control. Consequently, theoretical and practical conclusions drawn using one measure (e.g., the Self-Control Scale) cannot be generalised to findings using the other (e.g., the Stroop task). The lack of empirical correlation between measures of self-control do not invalidate either measure, but instead suggest that treatments of the construct of self-control need to pay greater attention to convergent validity among the many measures used to operationalize self-control

Comparison between the in-vitro cytotoxicity of three different multilayer thermoplastic clear aligner materials

Background: Clear aligner therapy (CAT) is a prominent orthodontic treatment option. CAT was formerly only used to treat mild malocclusions, but with developments in technology, it can now treat much more complex malocclusions. With the increasing popularity of CAT and technological improvements, led to the development of Invisalign’s SmartTrack technology, the first commercially available aligner material that used multi-layer plastic to facilitate tooth movement. Multiple layers provide superior mechanical properties that eluded previous single layer plastics. Aim: To study the cytotoxicity properties of different thermoplastic multilayer clear aligner materials on human primary gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). Materials and methods: Three multilayered clear aligner materials were considered in this study: SmartTrack (Align Technology, San Jose, CA, USA), Zendura FLX (Bay Materials, Fremont, CA, USA), and ComfortTrack (Great Lakes Dental Technologies, Tonawanda, NY, USA). The samples were incubated at 37oC in DMEM (0.1 mg/mL) for 21 days. The cell viability of HGFs cultured with each sample medium was then compared to a negative control assessed by MTT assay. Results: The results showed slight toxicity for each one of the samples tested. The highest cytotoxicity level seen in the HGFs was SmartTrack (65.5% ± 2.5 of cell viability), followed by Zendura FLX (72.3% ± 8.6), and the least was observed by ComfortTrack (80.8% ± 2.1). Conclusion: The Under the experimental conditions of the study, all of the materials tested displayed slight levels of cytotoxicity. SmartTrack was measured as the most cytotoxic. There were no statistical differences found between the three aligner materials (P&lt; 0.05)