Peer Support and Exercise Adherence in Adolescents: The Chain-Mediated Effects of Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulation

In the context of exercise psychology, the mediating relationship between peer support, self-efficacy and self-regulation, and adolescents' exercise adherence was to be explored.

METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed among 2200 teenagers from twelve middle schools in Shanghai. The "process" program in SPSS and the bootstrap method were applied to construct and analyze the direct and indirect effects of peer support on adolescents' exercise adherence.

RESULTS

Peer support directly affected adolescents' exercise adherence (β = 0.135, p < 0.001, effect size of 59%) and self-efficacy (β = 0.493, p < 0.001, effect size accounted for 42%), and self-regulation (β = -0.184, p < 0.001, effect size of 11%) influenced exercise adherence indirectly. In addition, self-efficacy and self-regulation could impose a chain-mediated effect on peer support and exercise adherence (effect size of 6%).

CONCLUSION

Peer support could promote adolescents' exercise adherence. Self-efficacy and self-regulation are mediating factors of peer support on exercise adherence in teenagers, self-regulation as well as self-efficacy-imposed chain-mediating effects on peer support and adolescents' exercise adherence.

The effects of reward and frustration in patients with bipolar disorder: Evidence from a computerized task with non-contingent feedback

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) is characterized by mood changes that implies alterations in reward sensitivity and frustration tolerance. This study examined the effects of monetary reward and frustration on attentional performance and on affective experience across mood states in BD.

METHODS

An Affective Posner Task in which the nature of contingencies are divided in the three successive blocks (baseline condition, monetary reward and non-contingent feedback) was applied to BD individuals in their different episodes: mania (n = 30), depression (n = 30), and euthymia (n =  30) as well as to a group of healthy controls (n = 30).

RESULTS

Monetary reward improved performance (in terms of faster response times) in the euthymic group and the control group, whereas it impaired performance in the manic group and has not significant effect in the depressed group. In addition, an increased interference of frustration on response accuracy was exhibited in the three groups of BD patients (including euthymia) compared with healthy controls.

LIMITATIONS

Participants' affective experience was self-informed by a Likert scale, so the reliability of this measure can be undermined in symptomatic patients in terms of stability and objectivity. Although it was statistically controlled, at the time of testing, all BD patients were medicated.

CONCLUSIONS

A dissociated effect of reward and frustration was found between symptomatic and euthymic states in BD: whereas the benefit from monetary reward is affected only during symptomatic episodes (i.e., a state), the notably increased interference of frustration is exhibited also during euthymia (i.e., a trait).

"You're wrong!": The impact of accuracy feedback on the bat-and-ball problem

The popular bat-and-ball problem is a relatively simple math riddle on which people are easily biased by intuitive or heuristic thinking. In two studies we tested the impact of a simple but somewhat neglected manipulation - the impact of minimal accuracy feedback - on bat-and-ball performance. Participants solved a total of 15 standard and 15 control versions of the bat-and-ball problem in three consecutive blocks. Half of the participants received accuracy feedback in the intermediate block. Results of both studies indicated that the feedback had, on average, no significant effect on bat-and-ball accuracy over and above mere repeated presentation. We did observe a consistent improvement for a small number of individual participants. Explorative analyses indicated that this improved group showed a more pronounced conflict detection effect (i.e., latency increase) at the pretest and took more deliberation time after receiving the negative feedback compared to the unimproved group.

Priming analogical reasoning with false memories

Like true memories, false memories are capable of priming answers to insight-based problems. Recent research has attempted to extend this paradigm to more advanced problem-solving tasks, including those involving verbal analogical reasoning. However, these experiments are constrained inasmuch as problem solutions could be generated via spreading activation mechanisms (much like false memories themselves) rather than using complex reasoning processes. In three experiments we examined false memory priming of complex analogical reasoning tasks in the absence of simple semantic associations. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated the robustness of false memory priming in analogical reasoning when backward associative strength among the problem terms was eliminated. In Experiments 2a and 2b, we extended these findings by demonstrating priming on newly created homonym analogies that can only be solved by inhibiting semantic associations within the analogy. Overall, the findings of the present experiments provide evidence that the efficacy of false memory priming extends to complex analogical reasoning problems.

Mental Contrasting and the Self-Regulation of Responding to Negative Feedback

Mentally contrasting a desired future with impeding reality promotes goal pursuit when expectations of success are high and curbs goal pursuit when expectations of success are low. Four studies tested whether mental contrasting affects responses to goal-relevant negative feedback. Mental contrasting promoted the processing of negative feedback (Studies 1 and 2), which in turn helped participants to form plans beneficial for goal pursuit (Study 2). Mental contrasting also protected the self-view of competence against negative feedback (Study 3) and facilitated beneficial attributions for negative feedback (Study 4). All effects occurred in line with expectations of success. These results suggest that mental contrasting regulates effective responses to negative feedback by bringing goal pursuit in line with expectations of success.