Reappraisal als Fähigkeit - Entwicklung des Reappraisal Inventiveness Test

Welche Rolle Emotionen in unserem Leben spielen, kann nicht überschätzt werden. Um Emotionen als Teil unserer Persönlichkeit zu beschreiben, muss auch in Betracht gezogen werden, wie wir unsere Emotionen regulieren. Mit dem Ziel Emotionen zu beeinflussen, bedienen wir uns verschiedener Emotionsregulationsstrategien. Die Emotionsregulationsstrategie Reappraisal beinhaltet die (Re-)Konstruktion einer potenziell emotionsauslösenden Situation, die deren emotionale Auswirkungen verändert. Basierend auf Mischels Konzept der „construction competencies“ wurde der Reappraisal Inventiveness Test entwickelt (RIT, Weber, Loureiro de Assunção, Martin, Westmeyer, & Geisler, 2014). Der Test misst die Fähigkeit, möglichst viele verschiedene kognitive Umbewertungen für ärgerauslösende Situationen zu generieren. Bisherige Ergebnisse zur Validierung des RIT zeigen Zusammenhänge mit Offenheit für Erfahrung (NEO-FFI, Borkenau & Ostendorf, 2008) sowie Maßen für Einfallsreichtum (BIS, Jäger, Süß, & Beauducel, 1997). Ergebnisse zur diskriminanten Validität konnten in Hinblick auf Fragebogen zur habituellen Emotionsregulation (CERQ; Garnefski, Kraaij, & Spinhoven, 2001; ERQ, Abler & Kessler, 2009) mehrfach repliziert werden. Ziel der vorliegenden Arbeit ist, die psychometrische Überprüfung des RIT voranzutreiben sowie das Verfahren weiterzuentwickeln. Zu diesem Zweck wurden vier korrelative Studien durchgeführt. Aus den Befunden der Studien 1a und 1b kann auf geringe Zusammenhänge von Reappraisal Inventiveness mit ausgewählten exekutiven Funktionen, z.B. verbale Flüssigkeit, geschlossen werden. In Studie 2 wurde der RITÄrger für die Emotion Angst weiterentwickelt um zu prüfen, ob Reappraisal Inventiveness eine emotionsspezifische oder –unspezifische Fähigkeit ist. Ein eindimensionales Modell bewährte sich gegenüber einem zweidimensionalen Modell – demnach kann Reappraisal Inventiveness als eine emotionsübergreifende Fähigkeit mit emotionsspezifischen Ausprägungen verstanden werden. Im Rahmen der dritten Studie wurde der RITÄrger um ein Maß für die Motivation, Reappraisal Inventiveness zu nutzen, erweitert. Somit konnte der angenommene aber bisher fehlende Zusammenhang von Reappraisal Inventiveness und Neurotizismus als Indikator für emotionale Stabilität gezeigt werden. Zukünftige Studien sollten sich vor allem auf die praktische Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des RIT konzentrieren.Regulating ones emotion via reappraising implies the (re-)construction of an emotion eliciting situation in order to alter its emotional impact. The Reappraisal Inventiveness Test was developed based on Mischels „construction competencies“ (RIT, Weber, Loureiro de Assunção, Martin, Westmeyer, & Geisler, 2014). It measures a persons fluency and flexibility in inventing as many categorically different reappraisals for an anger-eliciting situation as possible within a limited period of time. Previous results show correlations with Openess for Experience (NEO-FFI, Borkenau & Ostendorf, 2008) and measures of divergent thinking (BIS, Jäger, Süß, & Beauducel, 1997) implying convergent validity with the RIT. Moreover, RIT performance proved to be unrelated to the self-reported habitual use of reappraisal, indicating differences between ability tests and self-report measures (CERQ; Garnefski, Kraaij, & Spinhoven, 2001; ERQ, Abler & Kessler, 2009. In order to further examine and evolve the RIT, four studies have been conducted. The results of studies 1a and 1b indicate that Reappraisal Inventiveness is remotely associated with subset executive functions, such as verbal fluency. Within the scope of the second study the RITAnger has been extended: We developed the RITAnxiety in order to verify wether Reappraisal Inventiveness can be conceptualized as an emotion specific ability. Comparing a one dimensional to a two dimensional model we concluded that Reappraisal Inventiveness can be interpreted in terms of a general as against an emotion specific ability. The main goal of study 3 was to incorporate a measure for the motivation to use Reappraisal Inventiveness in order to show the expected association with neuroticism as indicator of emotional stability. In conclusion, the benefits of using Reappraisal Inventiveness depend on various factors such as the motivation to do so. Further studies should focus on the practical use of the RIT, e.g. using it as a tool in the context of psychotherapy

No Occasion for Pleasure: The Self-Worth Contingency of a Setback and Coping With Humor

Whether or not one uses humor to cope with a setback may depend on the idiosyncratic relation of the setback to feeling of self-worth. All people pursue the higher order goal of self-validation, but people differ in what domains of life their self-worth is contingent upon and to what extent. In this article based on an incongruity theory of humor we argue that the use of humor in coping with a highly self-worth-contingent setback may be impeded by two cognitive-motivational processes: goal-driven activation and goal shielding. From the outlined theory we derived the hypothesis that the more a domain is contingent upon self-worth, the less likely a person will be to use humor to deal with a setback in that domain. We tested this hypothesis in two studies employing two forms of self-report, i.e., ratings of reaction likelihood to setbacks described at an abstract domain level (Study 1), and ranking of reaction likelihood to concrete setbacks from different domains (Study 2). The hypothesis was affirmed in different domains of self-worth contingency controlling for the influence of habitual coping with humor, coping by disengagement, and global self-esteem

Characterisation of microbial attack on archaeological bone

As part of an EU funded project to investigate the factors influencing bone preservation in the archaeological record, more than 250 bones from 41 archaeological sites in five countries spanning four climatic regions were studied for diagenetic alteration. Sites were selected to cover a range of environmental conditions and archaeological contexts. Microscopic and physical (mercury intrusion porosimetry) analyses of these bones revealed that the majority (68%) had suffered microbial attack. Furthermore, significant differences were found between animal and human bone in both the state of preservation and the type of microbial attack present. These differences in preservation might result from differences in early taphonomy of the bones. © 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved