/pdf/feeling-and-thinking-preferences-need-no-inferences-q4mw2hj8rx.pdf

Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences

Part I. Experimental Studies: 2. Experiment in psychology 3. Experiments on perceiving III Experiments on imaging 4-8. Experiments on remembering: (a) The method of description (b) The method of repeated reproduction (c) The method of picture writing (d) The method of serial reproduction (e) The method of serial reproduction picture material 9. Perceiving, recognizing, remembering 10. A theory of remembering 11. Images and their functions 12. Meaning Part II. Remembering as a Study in Social Psychology: 13. Social psychology 14. Social psychology and the matter of recall 15. Social psychology and the manner of recall 16. Conventionalism 17. The notion of a collective unconscious 18. The basis of social recall 19. A summary and some conclusions.

Remembering. A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology, Cambridge (University Press) 1964.

Attachment--and loss.

Many people are exposed to loss or potentially traumatic events at some point in their lives, and yet they continue to have positive emotional experiences and show only minor and transient disruptions in their ability to function. Unfortunately, because much of psychology’s knowledge about how adults cope with loss or trauma has come from individuals who sought treatment or exhibited great distress, loss and trauma theorists have often viewed this type of resilience as either rare or pathological. The author challenges these assumptions by reviewing evidence that resilience represents a distinct trajectory from the process of recovery, that resilience in the face of loss or potential trauma is more common than is often believed, and that there are multiple and sometimes unexpected pathways to resilience. M ost people are exposed to at least one violent or life-threatening situation during the course of their lives (Ozer, Best, Lipsey, & Weiss, 2003). As people progress through the life cycle, they are also increasingly confronted with the deaths of close friends and relatives. Not everyone copes with these potentially disturbing events in the same way. Some people experience acute distress from which they are unable to recover. Others suffer less intensely and for a much shorter period of time. Some people seem to recover quickly but then begin to experience unexpected health problems or difficulties concentrating or enjoying life the way they used to. However, large numbers of people manage to endure the temporary upheaval of loss or potentially traumatic events remarkably well, with no apparent disruption in their ability to function at work or in close relationships, and seem to move on to new challenges with apparent ease. This article is devoted to the latter group and to the question of resilience in the face of loss or potentially traumatic events. The importance of protective psychological factors in the prevention of illness is now well established (Taylor, Kemeny, Reed, Bower, & Gruenewald, 2000). Moreover, developmental psychologists have shown that resilience is common among children growing up in disadvantaged conditions (e.g., Masten, 2001). Unfortunately, because most of the psychological knowledge base regarding the ways adults cope with loss or potential trauma has been derived from individuals who have experienced significant psychological problems or sought treatment, theorists working in this area have often underestimated and misunderstood resilience, viewing it either as a pathological state or as something seen only in rare and exceptionally healthy individuals. In this article, I challenge this view by reviewing evidence that resilience in the face of loss or potential trauma represents a distinct trajectory from that of recovery, that resilience is more common than often believed, and that there are multiple and sometimes unexpected pathways to resilience.

/pdf/loss-trauma-and-human-resilience-have-we-underestimated-the-2kd7sl9mfq.pdf

Loss, Trauma, and Human Resilience Have We Underestimated the Human Capacity to Thrive After Extremely Aversive Events?

Well-being : the foundations of hedonic psychology

Factors affecting delay were studied in patients seeking treatment for the first time for a particular symptom at clinics in a major, innercity hospital. On the basis of the patients' retrospective report, the total time from first noticing a symptom to the seeking of treatment was divided into three sequential stages: 1) appraisal delay--the time the patient takes to appraise a symptom as a sign of illness; 2) illness delay--the time taken from deciding one is ill until deciding to seek professional medical care; and 3) utilization delay--the time from the decision to seek care until the patient goes to the clinic and uses its services. The variables used to predict the length of delay for each of the three stages and for total delay included reports on concrete, sensory perceptions and abstract, conceptual beliefs about one's symptoms, behavioral factors such as strategies for self-appraisal and techniques for coping with illness, emotional reactions, negative imagery elicited by the illness threat, situational barriers, and socio-demographic factors. Patients experiencing a very painful symptom and patients who did not read about their symptom had a short appraisal delay. Patients with old symptoms and those who imagined possible, severe consequences of their illness had long illness delays. Utilization delay was shortest for persons who were not concerned about the cost of treatment, who had a painful symptom, and who were certain that their symptom could be cured. Patients who had short total delays were persons who did not have a competing personal problem and who had a painful symptom. All of these predictors were significantly correlated with the measure of delay at or beyond the p = .01 level. It was concluded that different factors mediate delay in each of the three stages and that studies which use only a single measure of total delay are likely to be of limited value in understanding delay.

Determinants of Three Stages of Delay in Seeking Care at a Medical Clinic

The models used in the study of communication and health behavior have changed from those describing how to impose health actions on relatively passive respondents to models describing how respondents regulate their own health practices. We have traced the change from the fear-drive model, which described how fear induced change, to the parallel response model, which described how subjects processed information and generated coping responses to solve the problem posed by both the objective health threat and by their subjective fear. The data supporting this change showed that increasing fear led to more favorable attitudes but that fear alone was insufficient to create action: Specific action instructions had to be added to both high and low fear and both combinations produced the same level of health action. Neither the data nor the parallel model specified what subjects learned about the threat that made exposure to a high or low fear message necessary for behavior change. The parallel response model has been elaborated into a more complete systems model and new studies show how health threats are represented. They have found attributes such as IDENTITY (label and symptoms), CAUSES, TIME LINES or duration, and CONSEQUENCES, that set goals and criteria to generate and evaluate problem solving (coping) behavior. Suggestions are made for applying this more complete model to public health practice.

The Impact of Communications on the Self-Regulation of Health Beliefs, Decisions, and Behavior:

How accurately can people remember how they felt in the past? Although some investigators hold that emotional memories are resistant to change, we review evidence that current emotions, appraisals, and coping efforts, as well as personality traits, are all associated with bias in recalling past emotions. Bias occurs as memories of emotional states are updated in light of subsequent experience and goals. Biased memories in turn influence future plans and emotions, and may contribute to the formation of enduring personality traits. People's memories for emotions provide highly condensed and accessible summaries of the relevance of past experiences to current goals.

Sources of Bias in Memory for Emotions

“And the question which I have for you (Professor Anita Hill) is how reliable is your testimony in October of 1991 on events that occurred 8, 10 years ago, when you are adding new factors, explaining them by saying you have repressed a lot?,” asked Senator Specter. (Republicans and Democrats alternate in questioning, 1991). It is October 11, 1991, and the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is considering the controversial nomination to the Supreme Court of Judge Clarence Thomas. Toward the end of the nomination process, there is a surprise witness. An attorney, Anita Hill, who used to work for Thomas, claims he sexually harassed her a decade earlier. Hill, now a University of Oklahoma law professor, reluctantly agrees to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and much of the nation watches spellbound as she testifies on television. “My working relationship became even more strained when Judge Thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. … His conversations were very vivid. He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes. … One of the oddest episodes I remember was an occasion in which Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office.

Emotional events and emotions in autobiographical memories

Two experiments are presented in which lateralization of monaural, auditory input affected the evaluation of verbal passages. In Experiment 1, subjects listened to taped passages that consisted of three levels (positive, neutral, and negative) of tone of voice crossed with three similar levels of content or meaning, making a total of nine different tone/content combinations. Subjects rated these passages as positive, neutral, or negative, and although they were not instructed about which cues (tone or content) to use, 29 of 36 subjects who listened on the left ear primarily used the tone-of-voice cues to rate the passages, whereas 21 of 36 subjects who listened on the right ear used the content cues (p less than .01). In Experiment 2, subjects were asked to make objective ratings of both tone of voice and content. Subjects who listened on the right ear were more accurate in rating both cues. The lateral differences in evaluating the auditory stimuli are discussed in the framework of the left hemisphere's specialization for analytic processing of objective information and the right hemisphere's specialization for the holistic processing of subjective or emotional information. However, each hemisphere's specialization for tone and content cues can be greatly affected by the demands of the experimental task. Language: en

Martin A. Safer

Papers

Determinants of Three Stages of Delay in Seeking Care at a Medical Clinic

The Impact of Communications on the Self-Regulation of Health Beliefs, Decisions, and Behavior:

Sources of Bias in Memory for Emotions

Emotional events and emotions in autobiographical memories

Ear differences in evaluating emotional tones of voice and verbal content.