Can I borrow a feeling? Spillover of negative arousal from inconsistent information during attitude formation diminishes perceptions of well-being

On the Attitudinal Consequences of Being Mindful

A series of studies examined whether mindfulness is associated with the experience of attitudinal ambivalence. Studies 1A and 1B found that mindful individuals expressed greater comfort holding ambivalent views and reported feeling ambivalent less often. More mindful individuals also responded more positively to feelings of uncertainty (as assessed in Study 1B). Study 2 replicated these effects and demonstrated that mindful individuals had lower objective and subjective ambivalence across a range of attitude objects but did not differ in attitude valence, extremity, positivity/negativity, strength, or the need to evaluate. Study 3 showed that the link between greater ambivalence and negative affect was buffered by mindfulness, such that there was no link between the amount of ambivalence and negative affect among more mindful individuals. The results are discussed with respect to the benefits of mindfulness in relation to ambivalence and affect.

From Power to Inaction

Research has shown that people who feel powerful are more likely to act than those who feel powerless, whereas people who feel ambivalent are less likely to act than those whose reactions are univalent (entirely positive or entirely negative). But what happens when powerful people also are ambivalent? On the basis of the self-validation theory of judgment, we hypothesized that power and ambivalence would interact to predict individuals’ action. Because power can validate individuals’ reactions, we reasoned that feeling powerful strengthens whatever reactions people have during a decision. It can strengthen univalent reactions and increase action orientation, as shown in past research. Among people who hold an ambivalent judgment, however, those who feel powerful would be less action oriented than those who feel powerless. Two experiments provide evidence for this hypothesized interactive effect of power and ambivalence on individuals’ action tendencies during both positive decisions (promoting an employee; Experiment 1) and negative decisions (firing an employee; Experiment 2). In summary, when individuals’ reactions are ambivalent, power increases the likelihood of inaction.

Over-the-Counter Relief From Pains and Pleasures Alike: Acetaminophen Blunts Evaluation Sensitivity to Both Negative and Positive Stimuli

Acetaminophen, an effective and popular over-the-counter pain reliever (e.g., the active ingredient in Tylenol), has recently been shown to blunt individuals' reactivity to a range of negative stimuli in addition to physical pain. Because accumulating research has shown that individuals' reactivity to both negative and positive stimuli can be influenced by a single factor (an idea known as differential susceptibility), we conducted two experiments testing whether acetaminophen blunted individuals' evaluations of and emotional reactions to both negative and positive images from the International Affective Picture System. Participants who took acetaminophen evaluated unpleasant stimuli less negatively and pleasant stimuli less positively, compared with participants who took a placebo. Participants in the acetaminophen condition also rated both negative and positive stimuli as less emotionally arousing than did participants in the placebo condition (Studies 1 and 2), whereas nonevaluative ratings (extent of color saturation in each image; Study 2) were not affected by drug condition. These findings suggest that acetaminophen has a general blunting effect on individuals' evaluative and emotional processing, irrespective of negative or positive valence.

On Feeling Torn About One's Sexuality: The Effects of Explicit-Implicit Sexual Orientation Ambivalence

Three studies offer novel evidence addressing the consequences of explicit–implicit sexual orientation (SO) ambivalence. In Study 1, self-identified straight females completed explicit and implicit measures of SO. The results revealed that participants with greater SO ambivalence took longer responding to explicit questions about their sexual preferences, an effect moderated by the direction of ambivalence. Study 2 replicated this effect using a different paradigm. Study 3 included self-identified straight and gay female and male participants; participants completed explicit and implicit measures of SO, plus measures of self-esteem and affect regarding their SO. Among straight participants, the response time results replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2. Among gay participants, trends suggested that SO ambivalence influenced time spent deliberating on explicit questions relevant to sexuality, but in a different way. Furthermore, the amount and direction of SO ambivalence was related to self-esteem.

The effects of positive patient testimonials on PTSD treatment choice

Despite the existence of effective treatment options for PTSD, these treatments are failing to reach those that stand to benefit from PTSD treatment. Understanding the processes underlying an individual's treatment seeking behavior holds the potential for reducing treatment-seeking barriers. The current study investigates the effects that positive treatment testimonials have on decisions regarding PTSD treatment. An undergraduate (N = 439) and a trauma-exposed community (N = 203) sample were provided with videotaped treatment rationales for prolonged exposure (PE) and sertraline treatments of PTSD. Half of each sample also viewed testimonials, detailing a fictional patient's treatment experience. All participants then chose among treatment options and rated the credibility of - and personal reactions toward - those options. Among treatment naïve undergraduates, testimonials increased the proportion choosing PE alone; and among treatment naïve members of the trauma-exposed community sample, testimonials increased the proportion choosing a combined PE plus sertraline treatment. These effects were not observed for those with prior history of either psychotherapeutic or pharmacological treatment. Major barriers exist that prevent individuals with PTSD from seeking treatment. For a critical unreached treatment sample, those who are treatment naïve, positive patient testimonials offer a mechanism in which to make effective treatments more appealing and accessible.