Psychometric Properties and Correlates of Precarious Manhood Beliefs in 62 Nations

Precarious manhood beliefs portray manhood, relative to womanhood, as a social status that is hard to earn, easy to lose, and proven via public action. Here, we present cross-cultural data on a brief measure of precarious manhood beliefs (the Precarious Manhood Beliefs scale [PMB]) that covaries meaningfully with other cross-culturally validated gender ideologies and with country-level indices of gender equality and human development. Using data from university samples in 62 countries across 13 world regions (N = 33,417), we demonstrate: (1) the psychometric isomorphism of the PMB (i.e., its comparability in meaning and statistical properties across the individual and country levels); (2) the PMB’s distinctness from, and associations with, ambivalent sexism and ambivalence toward men; and (3) associations of the PMB with nation-level gender equality and human development. Findings are discussed in terms of their statistical and theoretical implications for understanding widely-held beliefs about the precariousness of the male gender role

Recall bias for emotions and pain: Consistency, stability, and predictors

Background When asked to report on their experiences in the past week, patients often recall them as more intense than initially reported. However, until now the cross-domain consistency and temporal stability of recall bias have not been investigated. This study addresses this gap by exploring recall bias for pain, negative affect (NA), and positive affect (PA) in chronic pain patients. Methods Secondary analyses included two ecological momentary assessment studies. Chronic pain patients (Study 1, n=116; Study 2, n=68) rated the intensity of momentary pain, PA, and NA several times a day for two weekly periods, either 3 months apart (Study 1) or administered consecutively (Study 2). Recall ratings were collected at the end of each week. Recall bias was defined as the discrepancy between the 7-day recall and the mean real-time ratings. Findings On average, the 7-day recall was higher than the mean momentary ratings for all measures. The recall bias was moderately stable over time. The correlations between recall bias for pain, PA, and NA were mostly not significant. Variability, peak experience, and state at the moment of recall predicted recall bias for pain and NA. Recall bias for PA and NA was related to trait anxiety and depression in Study 1. Discussion Individual differences in recall bias were not consistent across domains suggesting that it is not a general phenomenon. However, the predictors of recall bias were similar for emotions and symptoms. The current study opens important avenues for future research regarding mechanisms underlying recall bias

A novel measure of self-reported interoception: The Three-dimensional Interoceptive Sensations Questionnaire

Interoception refers to the ability to perceive internal bodily sensations such as breathing, heartbeats, and the movement of the viscera. This multidimensional construct can be measured using both performance-based methods (e.g., heartbeat counting task) and self-report. Surprisingly, research so far has failed to show strong associations between different measures of interoception. This could be caused by the choice of self-report measures, which often use different operationalizations of interoception and frequently include both non-neutral sensations (e.g., responses to affective states or somatic symptoms) and neutral bodily sensations in different organ systems. To overcome those limitations, we propose a novel measure of interoception, the Three-dimensional Interoceptive Sensations Questionnaire (ThIS-Q), which focuses on the perception of neutral sensations in three domains: respiratory, cardiac, and upper gastrointestinal. In Study 1, a pool of 28 items was presented to a sample of 357 undergraduate students. Exploratory factor analysis with oblique factor rotation performed on this dataset suggested a 3-factor solution with the following interpretation of factors: cardiorespiratory activation, cardiorespiratory deactivation, and gastroesophageal. Items with a primary factor loading >.40 were retained for confirmatory factor analysis which was performed in Study 2 in a sample of 374 adults recruited through Prolific Academic. The analyses supported the 3-factor solution of the 21-item ThIS-Q. All subscale and composite scores had acceptable to good internal consistency reliability. We have also examined construct validity, showing that ThIS-Q scores were positively related to other general measures of interoception, including the Body Awareness Questionnaire. Divergent validity was supported with nonsignificant associations with measures of negative affectivity, anxiety, worry, and symptom-related fear. Taken together, our findings suggest that the ThIS-Q is a valid and reliable measure of interoceptive sensibility. It consists of three scales assessing self-reported perception of neutral sensations from the cardiac, respiratory, and gastroesophageal system. This questionnaire could advance our understanding of interoceptive processes by allowing for the measurement of interoception within as well as between different bodily domains

Is recall bias similar for emotions and pain? Evidence from studies among patients with chronic pain.

Background When asked to report on their pain in the past week, patients often recall it as more intense than they experienced it. This recall bias also appears for other domains assessed in clinical settings: positive (PA) and negative affect (NA). However, until now the cross-domain consistency and temporal stability of recall bias have not been investigated. This study addresses this gap by exploring recall bias for pain, NA, and PA in patients with chronic pain. Methods This study reports secondary analyses of two ecological momentary assessment studies. Chronic pain patients (Study 1, n=116; Study 2, n=68) rated the intensity of momentary pain, PA, and NA several times a day for two weekly periods, either 3 months apart (S1) or administered consecutively (S2). Recall ratings were collected at the end of each week. Recall bias was defined as the discrepancy between the 7-day recall and the mean real-time ratings. The cross-domain consistency and temporal stability were tested with correlations. Mixed ANOVAs explored the magnitude of recall bias in relation to personality traits (anxiety, depression, neuroticism). Results On average, the 7-day recall was higher than the average momentary ratings for pain, PA, and NA. The recall bias was moderately stable over time, with test-retest reliabilities over 3 months of .53 (pain), .53 (PA) and .31 (NA). The correlations between recall bias for pain, PA, and NA were mostly not significant. Individual differences in recall bias for PA and NA were related to personality traits (S1), such that higher levels of anxiety/depression/neuroticism were related to greater overreporting of NA and less overreporting of PA. However, this was not replicated in S2. Patients who were more anxious and depressed reported higher momentary and recalled pain, but recall bias for pain was not related to personality traits. Conclusions This study provides evidence of recall bias for both pain and affect ratings in chronic pain patients. Individual differences in recall bias were not consistent across domains suggesting that recall bias is not a general phenomenon. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that patients who retrospectively overreport pain will also overreport other experiences. The current study opens important avenues for future research regarding mechanisms underlying recall bias

Memory processes in retrospective symptom (over)reporting

Self-reported somatic symptoms play a primary role in the health care system, guiding the behavior and decisions of both patients and medical specialists. These decisions are often based on retrospective evaluations of past symptom episodes. However, both momentary and memory-based symptom ratings are vulnerable to various biasing factors leading to inaccurate (often overestimated) symptom recall. The aim of the current doctoral project was to investigate somatic memories and the role of memory processes in retrospective symptom reporting. According to the “dual-process” perspective, symptom reporting results from the interplay between sensory-perceptual and affective-motivational components of a somatic experience. Consequently, differential processing of those components could be one of the factors affecting memory processes. Based on those assumptions, we hypothesized that biased symptom reporting emerges in response to a relative imbalance of the two components, especially when strong negative affective information overshadows a sensory component, potentially resulting in less detailed memory of sensory details. Because a relative dominance of affective over sensory processing of bodily signals could be expected among individuals with an overreactive evaluative system, the advanced hypotheses were tested among the individuals who report frequent, often medically unexplained, somatic experiences (habitual symptom reporting; HSR) and score high on negative affectivity (NA). The first study (Chapter 2) adopted a psychometric approach to test the latent structure of symptom reporting. In line with earlier findings, symptom reporting was best explained by a bifactor model comprising one general and several symptom specific factors, which could be interpreted as reflecting the affective and sensory components of symptom experiences, respectively. To examine the factors affecting retrospective symptom reporting, the next four studies adopted an experimental approach with standardized procedures to induce aversive bodily symptoms (pain, dyspnea) in controlled laboratory conditions. Assessment of both self-reported and psychophysiological responses to somatic stimuli took place concurrently during symptom inductions. Retrospective ratings were collected up to two (Studies 2-4) and four (Study 5) weeks after the somatic experiences. In the first two experimental studies (Chapters 3 and 4), concurrent and retrospective responses to the symptoms were compared within- and between-subjects in a study with students and a study with patients with medically unexplained dyspnea (MUD) and healthy controls. This demonstrated that (a) memory biases start to operate immediately after the somatic event, (b) intensity ratings of both concurrent and retrospective ratings are more elevated in HSR/MUD, and (c) the latter effect is mediated by the affective state associated with a somatic experience (i.e., state NA and anxiety). In the following experimental studies (Chapters 5 and 6), symptom inductions were combined with the processing focus (PF) manipulation at encoding and at retrieval to investigate whether directing PF to either sensory-perceptual or affective-motivational aspects of somatic experience can influence retrospective symptom reporting. The manipulation of PF at encoding led to differences in affective responses as well as to the memory bias, such that the affective PF resulted in both increased affective responses to symptom inductions and increased retrospective ratings of dyspnea (but not of pain). On the other hand, the manipulation at retrieval did not influence the way symptoms or affective responses were recalled. Finally, the topic of somatic memories was also approached from an autobiographical memory perspective (Chapter 7) showing reduced memory specificity of health-related autobiographical memories in patients with MUD compared to healthy controls. Taken together, these studies clearly emphasize the importance of affective processing in retrospective symptom reporting. Specifically, biased symptom recall was related to an increased focus on the affective aspects of a distressing somatic experience. Consequently, this could explain not only biased symptom reporting in general, but also the greater vulnerability to retrospective symptom overreporting among individuals with an overreactive evaluative response system (higher level of NA). A detailed discussion of these findings, together with limitations of the reported studies and recommendations for future research are presented in the last chapter.status: publishe

Recall bias for pain and emotions: Consistency, stability, and predictors

Background When asked to report on their experiences in the past week, patients often recall them as more intense than initially reported. However, until now the cross-domain consistency and temporal stability of recall bias have not been investigated. This study addresses this gap by exploring recall bias for pain, negative affect (NA), and positive affect (PA) in chronic pain patients. Methods Secondary analyses included two ecological momentary assessment studies. Chronic pain patients (Study 1, n=116; Study 2, n=68) rated the intensity of momentary pain, PA, and NA several times a day for two weekly periods. Recall ratings were collected at the end of each week. Recall bias was defined as the discrepancy between the 7-day recall and the mean real-time ratings. Results On average, the 7-day recall was higher than the mean momentary ratings for pain, PA, and NA. The recall bias was moderately stable over time, with test-retest reliabilities over 3 months of .53 (pain), .53 (PA) and .31 (NA). The correlations between recall bias for pain, PA, and NA were mostly not significant. Variability, peak experience, and state at the moment of recall predicted recall bias for pain and NA. Recall bias for PA and NA, but not for pain, was related to trait anxiety and depression in Study 1. Conclusions This study provides evidence for recall bias for both pain and affect ratings in chronic pain patients. Individual differences in recall bias were not consistent across domains suggesting that recall bias is not a general phenomenon. Thus, it cannot be assumed that patients who retrospectively overreport pain will also overreport other experiences. The current study opens important avenues for future research regarding mechanisms underlying recall bias

Biases in retrospective self-report of emotions and pain: Evidence from studies using Experience Sampling Method.

Introduction: Retrospective self-report ratings are prone to recall bias. Studies using Experience Sampling Method (ESM) showed that when asked to report on their experiences in the past week, individuals often recall them as more intense than initially reported. This presentation will focus on the characteristics and predictors of recall bias and discuss a recent study exploring recall bias for pain, negative affect (NA), and positive affect (PA) in chronic pain patients. Methods: In two ESM studies, patients rated the intensity of momentary pain, PA, and NA several times a day for two weekly periods. Recall ratings were collected at the end of each week. Results: 7-day recall was higher than the mean momentary ratings for all measures. Recall bias was moderately stable over time, but the cross-domain consistency was low. Recall bias was predicted by variability, peak experience, and state at the moment of recall (for pain and NA) and by trait anxiety (for PA and NA). Conclusions: Individual differences in recall bias were not consistent across domains suggesting that it is not a general phenomenon. However, the predictors of recall bias were similar for emotions and symptoms. This opens important avenues for future research regarding mechanisms underlying recall bias

The new measures of interoceptive accuracy: A systematic review and assessment

Conscious interoception, the perception of internal bodily states, is thought to contribute to fundamental human abilities (e.g., decision-making and emotional regulation). One of its most studied dimensions is interoceptive accuracy: the objective capacity to detect internal bodily signals. In the past few years, several labs across the world have started developing new tasks aimed at overcoming limitations inherent in classical measures of interoceptive accuracy. In this systematic review, we identified these tasks (since 2015) for the cardiac, respiratory, and gastrointestinal domains. For each identified task, we discuss their strengths and weaknesses, and make constructive suggestions for further improvement. In the general discussion, we discuss the (potentially elusive) possibility of reaching high validity in the measurement of interoceptive accuracy. We also point out that interoceptive accuracy may not be the most critical dimension for informing current theories, and we encourage researchers to investigate other dimensions of conscious interoception

The effects of time frames on self-report

<div><p>Background</p><p>The degree to which episodic and semantic memory processes contribute to retrospective self-reports have been shown to depend on the length of reporting period. Robinson and Clore (2002) argued that when the amount of accessible detail decreases due to longer reporting periods, an episodic retrieval strategy is abandoned in favor of a semantic retrieval strategy. The current study further examines this shift between retrieval strategies by conceptually replicating the model of Robinson and Clore (2002) for both emotions and symptoms and by attempting to estimate the exact moment of the theorized shift.</p><p>Method</p><p>A sample of 469 adults reported the extent to which they experienced 8 states (<i>excited</i>, <i>happy</i>, <i>calm</i>, <i>sad</i>, <i>anxious</i>, <i>angry</i>, <i>pain</i>, <i>stress</i>) over 12 time frames (<i>right now</i> to <i>in general</i>). A series of curvilinear and piecewise linear multilevel growth models were used to examine the pattern of response times and response levels (i.e., rated intensity on a 1–5 scale) across the different time frames.</p><p>Results</p><p>Replicating previous results, both response times and response levels increased with longer time frames. In contrast to prior work, no consistent evidence was found for a change in response patterns that would suggest a shift in retrieval strategies (i.e., a flattening or decrease of the slope for longer time frames). The relationship between the time frames and response times/levels was similar for emotions and symptoms.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Although the current study showed a pronounced effect of time frame on response times and response levels, it did not replicate prior work that suggested a shift from episodic to semantic memory as time frame duration increased. This indicates that even for longer time frames individuals might attempt to retrieve episodic information to provide a response. We suggest that studies relying on self-report should use the same well-defined time frames across all self-reported measures.</p></div