Pride and moral disengagement: associations among comparison-based pride, moral disengagement, and unethical decision-making

Pride has rarely been explored in the context of moral disengagement and unethical decision-making. Although some research has examined the associations between "authentic" and "hubristic" pride and unethical behaviour, little attention has been paid to potential mechanisms. Across two correlational studies (N = 379), we explore the associations between two facets of pride rooted on comparisons - social comparison-based pride, and self-based pride, moral disengagement, and unethical decision-making. Results show that social comparison-based pride consistently (positively) relates to moral disengagement, and that moral disengagement accounts for the association between social comparison-based pride and unethical decision-making. In sum, our findings contribute in novel ways to the understanding of how pride based in different comparison frames may lead to antisocial decision-making.

The influence of pride emotion on executive function: Evidence from ERP

BACKGROUND

The current study examined the influence of positive "basic" emotions on executive function; there is limited evidence about the influence of positive "self-conscious"emotions, such as pride, on executive functions processes.

METHODS

Pride is a status-related self-conscious emotion and the present research explored the influence of pride on the subcomponents of executive function, using three experiments that adopted the digit size-parity switching, N-back, and dual choice oddball paradigms.

RESULTS

The behavioral results suggested that cognitive load and behavior inhibition effects in the pride emotion were significantly higher than the neutral emotion. The ERP results showed that the pride emotion elicited smaller P3 difference wave for the switching task and dual choice oddball task. In the N-back task, the pride emotion elicited larger N1 amplitude and smaller P2 difference wave compared to the neutral emotion. A comparison among results from the three experiments indicated that pride emotion restrains all subcomponents of executive function, though with different manifestations of the impact.

CONCLUSION

Experiencing positive emotions is typically viewed as desirable and adaptive in educational settings; however, pride as a unique positive emotion may damage people's cognitive performance, indicating that we need to be cautious when performing cognitive operations in a pride mood.

Comparison of a co-produced mental health service to traditional services: A co-produced mixed-methods cross-sectional study

This study investigates the differences between a co-produced experimental mental health centre and traditional day centres. For this purpose, we used a collaborative and mixed-method approach in two complementary studies: (i) a quantitative cross-sectional study designed to compare users' hospitalization rates and their use of psychiatric medications and (ii) a qualitative study designed to explore and document the experienced differences between co-produced and traditional services. In the quantitative cross-sectional study, surveys were administered to 37 users of one co-produced mental health service and to 40 users of traditional mental health services. A negative binomial regression analysis was performed to examine the relationships between predictors and users' hospitalization rates. After adjusting for the potential confounders, users of the co-produced centre reported a 63.2% reduced rate of hospitalizations compared with users of traditional mental health services (P = 0.002). Furthermore, 39% of users of the co-produced centre reported a reduction or even withdrawal from psychiatric medications against 22% of the comparison group (P = 0.036). In the qualitative study, six main differences emerged from a thematic analysis of a large user-led focus group. In the participants' experiences, the co-produced service focused on (i) parity and respectful relationships, (ii) people's strengths, (iii) freedom, (iv) psychological continuity, (v) social inclusion, and (vi) recovery orientation. Our research provides empirical evidence concerning the 'preventive aspect' of co-produced mental health services. Additionally, new insights into how different stakeholders, particularly users of co-produced mental health services, experience the differences between co-produced and traditional mental health services are provided.