The emerging field of emotion regulation studies how individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and express them. This review takes an evolutionary perspective and characterizes emotion in terms of response tendencies. Emotion regulation is denned and distinguished from coping, mood regulation, defense, and affect regulation. In the increasingly specialized discipline of psychology, the field of emotion regulation cuts across traditional boundaries and provides common ground. According to a process model of emotion regulation, emotion may be regulated at five points in the emotion generative process: (a) selection of the situation, (b) modification of the situation, (c) deployment of attention, (d) change of cognitions, and (e) modulation of responses. The field of emotion regulation promises new insights into age-old questions about how people manage their emotions.

http://www.elaborer.org/cours/A13/lectures/Gross1998.pdf

The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review.

Objectives: Lao Juan (LJ, 劳倦) is a syndrome described in Chinese medicine (CM) that manifests with : Lao Juan (LJ, 劳倦) is a syndrome described in Chinese medicine (CM) that manifests with fatigue, fever, spontaneous sweating, indigestion, work-induced pain, weakness of the limbs, and shortness of breath. fatigue, fever, spontaneous sweating, indigestion, work-induced pain, weakness of the limbs, and shortness of breath. The present study was conducted to examine the reliability and validity of a Lao Juan Questionnaire (LJQ). The present study was conducted to examine the reliability and validity of a Lao Juan Questionnaire (LJQ). Methods: A total of 151 outpatients and 73 normal subjects were asked to complete the LJQ. Seventy-three normal subjects A total of 151 outpatients and 73 normal subjects were asked to complete the LJQ. Seventy-three normal subjects were additionally asked to complete the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS). Twelve clinicians determined whether the were additionally asked to complete the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS). Twelve clinicians determined whether the 151 outpatients exhibited LJ or not. The internal consistency and construct validity for the LJQ were estimated using 151 outpatients exhibited LJ or not. The internal consistency and construct validity for the LJQ were estimated using data from the outpatient subjects. The CFS data were used to examine the concurrent validity of the LJQ. Total LJQ data from the outpatient subjects. The CFS data were used to examine the concurrent validity of the LJQ. Total LJQ scores and the clinicians' diagnoses of the outpatients were used to perform receiver operating characteristics (ROC) scores and the clinicians' diagnoses of the outpatients were used to perform receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses and to defi ne an optimum cut-off score for the LJQ. curve analyses and to defi ne an optimum cut-off score for the LJQ. Results: The 19-item LJQ had satisfactory internal : The 19-item LJQ had satisfactory internal consistency (α=0.828) and concurrent validity, with signifi cant correlations between the LJQ and the CFS subscales. consistency (α=0.828) and concurrent validity, with signifi cant correlations between the LJQ and the CFS subscales. In the test of construct validity using principal component analysis, a total of six factors were extracted, and the overall In the test of construct validity using principal component analysis, a total of six factors were extracted, and the overall variance explained by all factors was 59.5%. In ROC curve analyses, the sensitivity, specifi city, and area under the variance explained by all factors was 59.5%. In ROC curve analyses, the sensitivity, specifi city, and area under the curve were 76.0%, 59.2%, and 0.709, respectively. The optimum cut-off score was defi ned as six points. curve were 76.0%, 59.2%, and 0.709, respectively. The optimum cut-off score was defi ned as six points. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the LJQ is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating LJ. Our results suggest that the LJQ is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating LJ. KEYWORDS Chinese medicine, chronic fatigue syndrome, Chinese medicine-pattern Chinese medicine, chronic fatigue syndrome, Chinese medicine-pattern

Development and Validation of A

Publisher Summary This chapter presents an integrated understanding of various impression formation processes. The chapter introduces a model of impression formation that integrates social cognition research on stereotyping with traditional research on person perception. According to this model, people form impressions of others through a variety of processes that lie on a continuum reflecting the extent to that the perceiver utilizes a target's particular attributes. The continuum implies that the distinctions among these processes are matters of degree, rather than discrete shifts. The chapter examines the evidence for the five main premises of the model, it is helpful to discuss some related models that raise issues for additional consideration. The chapter discusses the research that supports each of the five basic premises, competing models, and hypotheses for further research. The chapter concludes that one of the model's fundamental purposes is to integrate diverse perspectives on impression formation, as indicated by the opening quotation. It is also designed to generate predictions about basic impression formation processes and to help generate interventions that can reduce the impact of stereotypes on impression formation.

A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation

The statistical analysis of mediation effects has become an indispensable tool for helping scientists investigate processes thought to be causal. Yet, in spite of many recent advances in the estimation and testing of mediation effects, little attention has been given to methods for communicating effect size and the practical importance of those effect sizes. Our goals in this article are to (a) outline some general desiderata for effect size measures, (b) describe current methods of expressing effect size and practical importance for mediation, (c) use the desiderata to evaluate these methods, and (d) develop new methods to communicate effect size in the context of mediation analysis. The first new effect size index we describe is a residual-based index that quantifies the amount of variance explained in both the mediator and the outcome. The second new effect size index quantifies the indirect effect as the proportion of the maximum possible indirect effect that could have been obtained, given the scales of the variables involved. We supplement our discussion by offering easy-to-use R tools for the numerical and visual communication of effect size for mediation effects.

/pdf/effect-size-measures-for-mediation-models-quantitative-373kkaf6c8.pdf

Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects.

The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis, 2nd ed.

We analyze the accuracy of deception judgments, synthesizing research results from 206 documents and 24,483 judges. In relevant studies, people attempt to discriminate lies from truths in real time with no special aids or training. In these circumstances, people achieve an average of 54% correct lie-truth judgments, correctly classifying 47% of lies as deceptive and 61% of truths as nondeceptive. Relative to cross-judge differences in accuracy, mean lie-truth discrimination abilities are nontrivial, with a mean accuracy d of roughly .40. This produces an effect that is at roughly the 60th percentile in size, relative to others that have been meta-analyzed by social psychologists. Alternative indexes of lie-truth discrimination accuracy correlate highly with percentage correct, and rates of lie detection vary little from study to study. Our meta-analyses reveal that people are more accurate in judging audible than visible lies, that people appear deceptive when motivated to be believed, and that individuals regard their interaction partners as honest. We propose that people judge others' deceptions more harshly than their own and that this double standard in evaluating deceit can explain much of the accumulated literature.

Accuracy of Deception Judgments

This article compiles results from a century of social psychological research, more than 25,000 studies of 8 million people. A large number of social psychological conclusions are listed alongside meta-analytic information about the magnitude and variability of the corresponding effects. References to 322 meta-analyses of social psychological phenomena are presented, as well as statistical effect-size summaries. Analyses reveal that social psychological effects typically yield a value of r equal to .21 and that, in the typical research literature, effects vary from study to study in ways that produce a standard deviation in r of .15. Uses, limitations, and implications of this large-scale compilation are noted. In 1898 Norman Triplett published an early experiment in social psychology, about an effect of the presence of others on task performance. In the 100 years since Triplett’s investigation, many social psychological effects have been documented. The current article summarizes the best established of these findings, with data from more than 25,000 research studies and 8 million people. Our goal is to quantify the magnitude and variability of social psychological effects. We begin by considering previous summaries of social psychology, note some unresolved issues, and review developments that permit a century of scholarly work to be quantitatively described. For present purposes, we follow Manstead and Hewstone (1995) in regarding social psychology as the study of “the reciprocal influence of the individual and his or her social context” (p. 588).

/pdf/one-hundred-years-of-social-psychology-quantitatively-26n4flsx3b.pdf

One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described

A meta-analysis was conducted on research investigating the effects of alcohol consumption and expectancy within the balanced-placebo design. Preliminary results indicated that both alcohol and expectancy have significant, although heterogeneous effects on behavior. Subsequent analyses were conducted to determine the factors responsible for the heterogeneity of effects. At the highest level of analysis, alcohol expectancy had strong effects on relatively deviant social behaviors and minimal effects on nonsocial behaviors. Alcohol consumption showed the opposite pattern of effects. The principal effects associated with alcohol expectancy involved increased alcohol consumption and increased sexual arousal in response to erotic stimuli. On the other hand, alcohol consumption led to significant impairment of information processing and motor performance, induced a specific set of physical sensations, resulted in general improvements of mood, and tended to increase aggression. Finally, across all studies it was observed that alcohol consumption and expectancy interacted no more frequently than would be expected by chance. These results have implications for both the theories and methods of contemporary alcohol research.

Social and behavioral consequences of alcohol consumption and expectancy: a meta-analysis.

Decades of research has shown that people are poor at detecting lies Two explanations for this finding have been proposed First, it has been suggested that lie detection is inaccurate because people rely on invalid cues when judging deception Second, it has been suggested that lack of valid cues to deception limits accuracy A series of 4 meta-analyses tested these hypotheses with the framework of Brunswik's (1952) lens model Meta-Analysis 1 investigated perceived cues to deception by correlating 66 behavioral cues in 153 samples with deception judgments People strongly associate deception with impressions of incompetence (r = 59) and ambivalence (r = 49) Contrary to self-reports, eye contact is only weakly correlated with deception judgments (r = -15) Cues to perceived deception were then compared with cues to actual deception The results show a substantial covariation between the 2 sets of cues (r = 59 in Meta-Analysis 2, r = 72 in Meta-Analysis 3) Finally, in Meta-Analysis 4, a lens model analysis revealed a very strong matching between behaviorally based predictions of deception and behaviorally based predictions of perceived deception In conclusion, contrary to previous assumptions, people rarely rely on the wrong cues Instead, limitations in lie detection accuracy are mainly attributable to weaknesses in behavioral cues to deception The results suggest that intuitive notions about deception are more accurate than explicit knowledge and that lie detection is more readily improved by increasing behavioral differences between liars and truth tellers than by informing lie-catchers of valid cues to deception

Why Do Lie-Catchers Fail? A Lens Model Meta-Analysis of Human Lie Judgments.

The authors report a meta-analysis of individual differences in detecting deception, confining attention to occasions when people judge strangers' veracity in real-time with no special aids. The authors have developed a statistical technique to correct nominal individual differences for differences introduced by random measurement error. Although researchers have suggested that people differ in the ability to detect lies, psychometric analyses of 247 samples reveal that these ability differences are minute. In terms of the percentage of lies detected, measurement-corrected standard deviations in judge ability are less than 1%. In accuracy, judges range no more widely than would be expected by chance, and the best judges are no more accurate than a stochastic mechanism would produce. When judging deception, people differ less in ability than in the inclination to regard others' statements as truthful. People also differ from one another as lie- and truth-tellers. They vary in the detectability of their lies. Moreover, some people are more credible than others whether lying or truth-telling. Results reveal that the outcome of a deception judgment depends more on the liar's credibility than any other individual difference.

/pdf/individual-differences-in-judging-deception-accuracy-and-4o0ozmuodz.pdf

Charles F. Bond

Papers

Accuracy of Deception Judgments

One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described

Social and behavioral consequences of alcohol consumption and expectancy: a meta-analysis.

Why Do Lie-Catchers Fail? A Lens Model Meta-Analysis of Human Lie Judgments.

Individual differences in judging deception: accuracy and bias.