Getting a grip on your feelings: Effects of action orientation and external demands on intuitive affect regulation

The authors propose that volitional action is supported by intuitive affect regulation, defined as flexible, efficient, and nonrepressive control of own affective states. Intuitive affect regulation should be most apparent among action-oriented individuals under demanding conditions. Consistent with this, a demanding context led action-oriented individuals to down-regulate negative affect in self-reports (Study 1), in an affective Simon task (Study 2), and in a face discrimination task (Study 3). In line with the idea that intuitive affect regulation is guided by top-down self-regulation processes, intuitive affect regulation in a face discrimination task was mediated by increases in self-accessibility (Study 3). No parallel effects emerged among action-oriented participants in a nondemanding context or among state-oriented participants

Weighty matters : importance literally feels heavy

Previous work showed that concrete experiences of weight influence people’s judgments of how important certain issues are. In line with an embodied simulation account but contrary to a metaphor-enriched perspective, this work shows that perceived importance of an object influences perceptions of weight. Two studies manipulated information about a book’s importance, after which, participants estimated its weight. Importance information caused participants to perceive the book to be heavier. This was not merely a semantic association, because weight perceptions were affected only when participants physically held the book. Furthermore, importance information influenced weight perceptions but not perceptions of monetary value. These findings extend previous research by showing that the activation direction from weight to importance can be reversed, thus suggesting that the connection between importance and weight goes beyond metaphorical mappings. Implications for the debate on interpretation of findings on the interplay between bodily states and abstract information are discussed

Spoiling the Pleasure of Success: Emotional Reactions to the Experience of Self-Control Conflict in the Eating Domain

People often experience self-control conflicts (i.e., feel tempted to indulge while motivated to resist). But, how do people feel after making such conflicted self-control choices? Whereas previous research has focused almost exclusively on the influence of choice outcomes (healthy vs. unhealthy) on emotional reactions (e.g., pride vs. guilt), we propose that the experience of conflict during decision making could have a unique influence, possibly fueling negative emotions (i.e., regret) regardless of people's choice outcomes. To test this, we studied immediate consequences of people's experience of conflict during self-control decision making (healthy vs. unhealthy food choice) on self-conscious emotions (i.e., guilt, regret, or pride), choice satisfaction and future behavior. Across 5 studies (vignette, field, and experience sampling), we found a link between self-control conflict and negativity: the more difficulty (proxy of conflict, Studies 1 and 2) or conflict (Studies 3 and 5) participants experienced during self-control decision making, the more negative they felt about their choice afterward. This was the case for unhealthy as well as healthy choices. Specifically, self-control conflict strength was associated with increased levels of guilt and regret (but not pride), with lower satisfaction and with lowered odds of making a similar choice in the future (Studies 1 to 3). Studies 4 and 5 suggested that conflict strength can boost pride after healthy choices, but only if participants first appraised their choice as acts of self-control. Our findings, therefore, highlight the costs as well as the potential benefits of experiencing conflict during self-control decision making

Adaptation in conflict: are conflict-triggered control adjustments protected in the presence of motivational distractors?

<p>Solving a conflict between two response options in an interference task has been found to increase control in a subsequent conflict situation. The present research examined whether such <i>conflict adaptation</i> persists in the presence of distractors that have motivational relevance and are therefore competing for attentional resources (i.e. they signal opportunities for monetary gains or losses contingent on overall task performance). In an adjusted flanker task, motivational (versus neutral versus no) distractors were presented together with the current trial while the previous trial never included any distractor. Accumulated evidence across three studies showed that motivational distractors reduced the conflict adaptation effect. This was found irrespective of the location at which the distractor occurred (Study 1), and independent of its valence (i.e. reward or loss, Study 2). Study 3 and a merged data analysis ruled out low-level alternative explanations. In line with a dual competition account (Pessoa, L. (2009). How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? <i>Trends in Cognitive Sciences</i>, <i>13</i>(4), 160–166. doi:<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.006" target="_blank">10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.006</a>), our results show that conflict adaptation is not fully protected in the presence of motivational distractors. We discuss whether this should be interpreted as a limitation, or as reflecting the flexibility of the control system in dealing with motivationally relevant information.</p

On the waxing and waning of working memory: Action orientation moderates the impact of demandig relationships primes on working memory capacity

The present research examined how actionversus state-oriented individuals (Kuhl & Beckmann, 1994) utilize their working memory capacity under varying situational demands. Participants visualized either a demanding or an accepting person, after which their working memory capacity was assessed. Among action-oriented participants, visualizing a demanding person led to greater operation spans (Study 1) and superior memory for intention-related information (Study 2) than visualizing an accepting person. State-oriented participants displayed the opposite pattern, such that visualizing an accepting person led to greater operation spans (Study 1) and superior memory for intentions (Study 2) than visualizing a demanding person. These findings indicate that action versus state orientation moderates the impact of situational demands on working memory capacity. © 2006 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc