The Sharp Spikes of Poverty:Financial Scarcity Is Related to Higher Levels of Distress Intensity in Daily Life

Although income is an important predictor of life satisfaction, the precise forces that drive this relationship remain unclear. We propose that financial resources afford individuals a path to reducing the distressing impact of everyday hassles, thereby increasing one's life satisfaction. More specifically, we hypothesize that financial scarcity is associated with greater distress intensity in everyday life. Furthermore, we propose that lower perceived control helps explain why financial scarcity predicts higher distress intensity and lower life satisfaction. We provide evidence for these hypotheses in a 30-day daily diary study (522 participants, 13,733 observations). A second study (N = 376) further suggests that, although everyone relies on social support to ease stress, financial scarcity shrinks the sense one can use economic resources to reduce the adverse impact of daily hassles. Although money may not necessarily buy happiness, it reduces the intensity of stressors experienced in daily life-and thereby increases life satisfaction

Income More Reliably Predicts Frequent Than Intense Happiness

There is widespread consensus that income and subjective well-being are linked, but when and why they are connected is subject to ongoing debate. We draw on prior research that distinguishes between the frequency and intensity of happiness to suggest that higher income is more consistently linked to how frequently individuals experience happiness than how intensely happy each episode is. This occurs in part because lower-income individuals spend more time engaged in passive leisure activities, reducing the frequency but not the intensity of positive affect. Notably, we demonstrate that only happiness frequency underlies the relationship between income and life satisfaction. Data from an experience sampling study (N = 394 participants, 34,958 daily responses), a preregistered cross-sectional study (N = 1,553), and a day reconstruction study (N = 13,437) provide empirical evidence for these ideas. Together, this research provides conceptual and empirical clarity into how income is related to happiness.</p

Between home and work: Commuting as an opportunity for role transitions

Across the globe, every workday people commute an average of 38 minutes each way, yet surprisingly little research has examined the implications of this daily routine for work-related outcomes. Integrating theories of boundary work, self-control, and work-family conflict, we propose that the commute to work serves as a liminal role transition between home and work roles, prompting employees to engage in boundary management strategies. Across three field studies (n = 1,736), including a four-week-long intervention study, we find that lengthy morning commutes are more aversive for employees with lower trait self-control and greater work-family conflict, leading to decreased job satisfaction and increased turnover. In addition, we find that employees who engage in a specific boundary management strategy we term role-clarifying prospection (i.e., thinking about the upcoming work role) are less likely to be negatively affected by lengthy commutes to work. Results further show that employees with higher levels of trait self-control are more likely to engage in role-clarifying prospection, and employees who experience higher levels of work-family conflict are more likely to benefit from role-clarifying prospection. Although the commute to work is typically seen as an undesirable part of the workday, our theory and results point to the benefits of using it as an opportunity to transition into one’s work role

Commuting with a Plan: How Goal-Directed Prospection Can Offset the Strain of Commuting

To get to work, employees need to commute. Across the globe, the average commute is 38 minutes each way per day. It is well known that longer commutes have negative effects on employees’ well-being and job-related outcomes. Yet, commuting may not similarly affect all employees, since some of them may naturally engage in behaviors to offset the negative effects of longer commutes. Drawing on psychological research on self-control, we theorize how engaging in future-oriented thinking about the tasks to complete during the workday (i.e., goal-directed prospection) while commuting to work influences work outcomes. Across two field studies and one field experiment, we find that individuals higher in trait self-control are less likely to report negative effects of longer commutes. While commuting, individuals with higher trait self-control engage in goal-directed prospection, partially offsetting the strain of commuting. In a field experiment, individuals asked to engage in goal-directed prospecting during commuting reported higher levels of job satisfaction and lower levels of emotional exhaustion. Although commuting is typically seen as the least desirable part of an employee’s day, our theory and results point to the benefits of viewing it as a useful time period to engage in goal-directed prospection

sj-docx-1-psp-10.1177_01461672231211843 – Supplemental material for Extraverts Reap Greater Social Rewards From Passion Because They Express Passion More Frequently and More Diversely

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-psp-10.1177_01461672231211843 for Extraverts Reap Greater Social Rewards From Passion Because They Express Passion More Frequently and More Diversely by Kai Krautter, Anabel Büchner and Jon M. Jachimowicz in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</p

The impact of incidental environmental factors on vote choice: Wind speed is related to more prevention-focused voting

How might irrelevant events infiltrate voting decisions? The current research introduces a new mechanism - regulatory focus—by which incidental environmental factors can affect vote choice. Regulatory focus theory proposes that there are two fundamental psychological orientations in how people navigate their worlds: A prevention focus tunes cognition towards security, safety, protection, and risk aversion, whereas a promotion focus orients attention toward achieving growth and positive outcomes. We present a model for how wind speed on Election Day affects voting by shifting the regulatory focus of voters. We propose that increased wind speed shifts voters toward selecting prevention-focused options (e.g., restricting immigration, rejecting Brexit, rejecting Scottish Independence) over promotion-focused options (e.g., promoting immigration, favoring Brexit, favoring Scottish Independence). We further argue that wind speed only affects voting when an election clearly offers a choice between prevention and promotion-focused options. Using a mixed-method approach—archival analyses of the “Brexit” vote, the Scotland independence referendum, and 10 years of Swiss referendums, as well as one field study and one experiment - we find that individuals exposed to higher wind speeds become more prevention-focused and more likely to support prevention-focused electoral options. The findings highlight the political importance of incidental environmental factors. Practically, they speak to the benefit of absentee voting and expanding voting periods beyond traditional election days