Real-World Implementation of Infant Behavioral Sleep Interventions: Results of a Parental Survey

Objective To describe parental practices implementing behavioral sleep intervention (BSI) outside a clinical setting. Study design Parents (n = 652), recruited through a Facebook group designed as a peer support group for parents using BSI, completed an online survey about their experience using BSI with their infant or toddler. Results On average, parents implemented BSI when their infant was 5.6 (±2.77) months. Parents most often used modified (49.5%) or unmodified extinction (34.9%), with fewer using a parental presence approach (15.6%). Regardless of BSI type, more parents endorsed “a great deal of stress” during the first night (42.2%) than 1 week later (5.2%). The duration of infant crying was typically greatest the first night (reported by 45%; M = 43 minutes) and was significantly reduced after 1 week (M = 8.54 minutes). Successful implementation of BSI on the first attempt was reported by 83%, with a median and mode of 7 days until completion (79% by 2 weeks). Regardless of BSI type, after intervention parents reported their infant had less difficulty falling asleep, fewer night awakenings, and were more likely to sleep in their room and/or in their own crib/bed. Conclusions The majority of parents report successfully implementing BSI, with significantly reduced infant crying by the end of 1 week and success within 2 weeks. Few differences were found between behavioral approaches

When feeling good feels "wrong": Avoiding hedonic consumption when it reflects immoral character

Singapore Ministry of EducationOther conferences where this work was presented: Society for Consumer Psychology Boutique: Motivation and Emotions, New York: 2017 and Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Diego, 2016</p

Amplifying Voice in Organizations

We extend the field’s understanding of voice recognition by examining peer responses to voice. We investigate how employees can help peers get a status boost from voicing, while also raising their own status, by introducing the concept of amplification—public endorsement of another person’s contribution, with attribution to that person. In two experiments and one field study, we find that amplification enhances status both for voicers and for those who amplify voice. Being amplified was equally beneficial for voicers who framed their ideas promotively (improvement-focused) and prohibitively (problem-focused; Study 1), and for men and women (Study 2). Furthermore, amplified ideas were rated as higher quality than nonamplified ideas. Amplification also helped amplifiers: participants reading experimentally manipulated meeting transcripts rated amplifiers as higher status than those who self-promoted, stayed quiet, or contributed additional ideas (Studies 1 and 2). Finally, in an intervention in a nonprofit organization, select employees trained to use amplification attained higher status in their work groups (Study 3). In all, these results increase our understanding of how social actors can capitalize on instances of voice to give a status boost to voicers who might otherwise be overlooked, and help organizations realize the potential of employees’ diverse perspectives