Life Chaos is Associated with Reduced HIV Testing, Engagement in Care, and ART Adherence Among Cisgender Men and Transgender Women upon Entry into Jail.

Life chaos, the perceived inability to plan for and anticipate the future, may be a barrier to the HIV care continuum for people living with HIV who experience incarceration. Between December 2012 and June 2015, we interviewed 356 adult cisgender men and transgender women living with HIV in Los Angeles County Jail. We assessed life chaos using the Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (CHAOS) and conducted regression analyses to estimate the association between life chaos and care continuum. Forty-eight percent were diagnosed with HIV while incarcerated, 14% were engaged in care 12 months prior to incarceration, mean antiretroviral adherence was 65%, and 68% were virologically suppressed. Adjusting for sociodemographics, HIV-related stigma, and social support, higher life chaos was associated with greater likelihood of diagnosis while incarcerated, lower likelihood of engagement in care, and lower adherence. There was no statistically significant association between life chaos and virologic suppression. Identifying life chaos in criminal-justice involved populations and intervening on it may improve continuum outcomes

Affective Flexibility: Evaluative Processing Goals Shape Amygdala Activity

Although early research implicated the amygdala in automatic processing of negative information, more recent research suggests that it plays a more general role in processing the motivational relevance of various stimuli, suggesting that the relation between valence and amygdala activation may depend on contextual goals. This study provides experimental evidence that the relation between valence and amygdala activity is dynamically modulated by evaluative goals. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, participants evaluated the positive, negative, or overall (positive plus negative) aspects of famous people. When participants were providing overall evaluations, both positive and negative names were associated with amygdala activation. When they were evaluating positivity, positive names were associated with amygdala activity, and when they were evaluating negativity, negative names were associated with amygdala activity. Evidence for a negativity bias was found; modulation was more pronounced for positive than for negative information. These data suggest that the amygdala flexibly processes motivationally relevant evaluative information in accordance with current processing goals, but processes negative information less flexibly than positive information

The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non- Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions

Over the past decade, intuitionist models of morality have challenged the view that moral reasoning is the sole or even primary means by which moral judgments are made. Rather, intuitionist models posit that certain situations automatically elicit moral intuitions, which guide moral judgments. We present three experiments showing that evaluations are also susceptible to the influence of moral versus non-moral construal. We had participants make moral evaluations (rating whether actions were morally good or bad) or non-moral evaluations (rating whether actions were pragmatically or hedonically good or bad) of a wide variety of actions. As predicted, moral evaluations were faster, more extreme, and more strongly associated with universal prescriptions—the belief that absolutely nobody or everybody should engage in an action—than non-moral (pragmatic or hedonic) evaluations of the same actions. Further, we show that people are capable of flexibly shifting from moral to non-moral evaluations on a trial-by-trial basis. Taken together, these experiments provide evidence that moral versus non-moral construal has an important influence on evaluation and suggests that effects of construal are highly flexible. We discuss the implications of these experiments for models of moral judgment and decision- making

The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non- Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions

Over the past decade, intuitionist models of morality have challenged the view that moral reasoning is the sole or even primary means by which moral judgments are made. Rather, intuitionist models posit that certain situations automatically elicit moral intuitions, which guide moral judgments. We present three experiments showing that evaluations are also susceptible to the influence of moral versus non-moral construal. We had participants make moral evaluations (rating whether actions were morally good or bad) or non-moral evaluations (rating whether actions were pragmatically or hedonically good or bad) of a wide variety of actions. As predicted, moral evaluations were faster, more extreme, and more strongly associated with universal prescriptions—the belief that absolutely nobody or everybody should engage in an action—than non-moral (pragmatic or hedonic) evaluations of the same actions. Further, we show that people are capable of flexibly shifting from moral to non-moral evaluations on a trial-by-trial basis. Taken together, these experiments provide evidence that moral versus non-moral construal has an important influence on evaluation and suggests that effects of construal are highly flexible. We discuss the implications of these experiments for models of moral judgment and decision- making