Five studies tested two general hypotheses: Individuals differ in their use of emotion regulation strategies such as reappraisal and suppression, and these individual differences have implications for affect, well-being, and social relationships. Study 1 presents new measures of the habitual use of reappraisal and suppression. Study 2 examines convergent and discriminant validity. Study 3 shows that reappraisers experience and express greater positive emotion and lesser negative emotion, whereas suppressors experience and express lesser positive emotion, yet experience greater negative emotion. Study 4 indicates that using reappraisal is associated with better interpersonal functioning, whereas using suppression is associated with worse interpersonal functioning. Study 5 shows that using reappraisal is related positively to well-being, whereas using suppression is related negatively.

Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being.

An MRI time course of 512 echo-planar images (EPI) in resting human brain obtained every 250 ms reveals fluctuations in signal intensity in each pixel that have a physiologic origin. Regions of the sensorimotor cortex that were activated secondary to hand movement were identified using functional MRI methodology (FMRI). Time courses of low frequency (< 0.1 Hz) fluctuations in resting brain were observed to have a high degree of temporal correlation (P < 10(-3)) within these regions and also with time courses in several other regions that can be associated with motor function. It is concluded that correlation of low frequency fluctuations, which may arise from fluctuations in blood oxygenation or flow, is a manifestation of functional connectivity of the brain.

Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI.

Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

/pdf/the-weirdest-people-in-the-world-480wr4m3kb.pdf

The WEIRDest People in the World

2 Taxonomy is always a contentious issue because the world does not come to us in neat little packages (S. Personality has been conceptualized from a variety of theoretical perspectives, and at various levels of Each of these levels has made unique contributions to our understanding of individual differences in behavior and experience. However, the number of personality traits, and scales designed to measure them, escalated without an end in sight (Goldberg, 1971). Researchers, as well as practitioners in the field of personality assessment, were faced with a bewildering array of personality scales from which to choose, with little guidance and no overall rationale at hand. What made matters worse was that scales with the same name often measure concepts that are not the same, and scales with different names often measure concepts that are quite similar. Although diversity and scientific pluralism are useful, the systematic accumulation of findings and the communication among researchers became difficult amidst the Babel of concepts and scales. Many personality researchers had hoped that they might devise the structure that would transform the Babel into a community speaking a common language. However, such an integration was not to be achieved by any one researcher or by any one theoretical perspective. As Allport once put it, " each assessor has his own pet units and uses a pet battery of diagnostic devices " (1958, p. 258). What personality psychology needed was a descriptive model, or taxonomy, of its subject matter. One of the central goals of scientific taxonomies is the definition of overarching domains within which large numbers of specific instances can be understood in a simplified way. Thus, in personality psychology, a taxonomy would permit researchers to study specified domains of personality characteristics, rather than examining separately the thousands of particular attributes that make human beings individual and unique. Moreover, a generally accepted taxonomy would greatly facilitate the accumulation and communication of empirical findings by offering a standard vocabulary, or nomenclature. After decades of research, the field is approaching consensus on a general taxonomy of personality traits, the " Big Five " personality dimensions. These dimensions do not represent a particular theoretical perspective but were derived from analyses of the natural-language terms people use to describe themselves 3 and others. Rather than replacing all previous systems, the Big Five taxonomy serves an integrative function because it can represent the various and diverse systems of personality …

The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives.

http://gosling.psy.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/JRP-03-tipi.pdf

A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains

Four studies examined the construct validity of two global self-esteem measures. In Studies 1 through 3, the Single-Item Self-Esteem Scale (SISE) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE) showed strong convergent validity for men and women, for different ethnic groups, and for both college students and community members. The SISE and the RSE had nearly identical correlations with a wide range of criterion measures, including domain-specific self-evaluations, self-evaluative biases, social desirability, personality, psychological and physical health, peer ratings of group behavior, academic outcomes, and demographic variables. Study 4 showed that the SISE had only moderate convergent validity in a sample of children. Overall, the findings support the reliability and validity of the SISE and suggest it can provide a practical alternative to the RSE in adult samples. More generally, the findings contribute to the research literature by further elaborating the nomological network of global self-esteem.

Measuring Global Self-Esteem: Construct Validation of a Single-Item Measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Part 1. Designing a Personality Study. D.P. McAdams, J.L. Pals, The Role of Theory in Personality Assessment. M.B. Donnellan, R.D. Conger, Designing and Implementing Longitudinal Studies. W. Revelle, Experimental Approaches to the Study of Personality. R.F. Krueger, J.L. Tackett, Behavior Genetic Designs. T.S. Conner, L. Feldman Barrett, M.M. Tugade, H. Tennen, Idiographic Personality: The Theory and Practice of Experience Sampling. A.C. Elms, Psychobiography and Case Study Methods. P. Cramer, Mining Archival Data. R.C. Fraley, Using the Internet for Personality Research: What Can Be Done, How to Do It, and Some Concerns. R.C. Fraley, M.J. Marks, The Null Hypothesis Significance-Testing Debate and Its Implications for Personality Research. V. Benet-Martinez, Cross-Cultural Personality Research: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. S. Vazire, S.D. Gosling, A.S. Dickey, S.J. Schapiro, Measuring Personality in Nonhuman Animals. Part 2. Methods for Assessing Personality at Different Levels of Analysis. K.H. Craik, Taxonomies, Trends, and Integrations. D.L. Paulhus, S. Vazire, The Self-Report Method. L.J. Simms, D. Watson, The Construct Validation Approach to Personality Scale Construction. R.R. McCrae, A. Weiss, Observer Ratings of Personality. R.M. Furr, D.C. Funder, Behavior Observation. B.A. Woike, Content Coding of Open-Ended Responses. A.V. Song, D.K. Simonton, Personality Assessment at a Distance. O.C. Schultheiss, J.S. Pang, Measuring Implicit Motives. M.D. Robinson, Lives Lived in Milliseconds: Using Cognitive Methods in Personality Research. J.S. Beer, M.V. Lombardo, Patient and Neuroimaging Methodologies. L.M. Diamond, K. Otter-Henderson, Physiological Measures. R.P. Ebstein, R. Bachner-Melman, S. Israel, L. Nemanov, I. Gritsenko, The Human Genome Project and Personality: What We Can Learn about Our Inner and Outer Selves through Our Genes. Part 3. Analyzing and Interpreting Personality Data. J. Morizot, A.T. Ainsworth, S.P. Reise, Toward Modern Psychometrics: Application of Item Response Theory Models in Personality Research. K. Lee, M.C. Ashton, Factor Analysis in Personality Research. R.H. Hoyle, Applications of Structural Equation Modeling in Personality Research. O.P. John, C.J. Soto, The Importance of Being Valid: Reliability and the Process of Construct Validation. D.J. Ozer, Evaluating Effect Size in Personality Research. J.B. Nezlek, Multilevel Modeling in Personality Research. W. Fleeson, Studying Personality Processes: Explaining Change in Between-persons Longitudinal and Within-Person Multilevel Models. D.K. Mroczek, The Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Personality Research. J.W. Grice, Person-Centered Structural Analyses. S.G. West, L.S. Aiken, W. Wu, A.B. Taylor, Multiple Regression: Applications of the Basics and Beyond in Personality Research. W.F. Chaplin, Moderator and Mediator Models in Personality Research: A Basic Introduction. Y. Shoda, Computational Modeling of Personality as a Dynamical System. B.W. Roberts, N.R. Kuncel, W. Viechtbauer, T. Bogg, Meta-Analysis in Personality Psychology: A Primer. R.W. Robins, J.L. Tracy, J.W. Sherman, What Kinds of Methods Do Personality Psychologists Use? A Survey of Journal Editors and Editorial Board Members.

Handbook of research methods in personality psychology

Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 2nd ed.

Self-conscious emotions (e.g., shame, pride) are fundamentally important to a wide range of psychological processes, yet they have received relatively little attention compared to other, more "basic" emotions (e.g., sadness, joy). This article outlines the unique features that distinguish self-conscious from basic emotions and then explains why generally accepted models of basic emotions do not adequately capture the self-conscious emotion process. The authors present a new model of self-conscious emotions, specify a set of predictions derived from the model, and apply the model to narcissistic self-esteem regulation. Finally, the authors discuss the model's broader implications for future research on self and emotion.

/pdf/putting-the-self-into-self-conscious-emotions-a-theoretical-1fb5mp7xzm.pdf

Putting the self into self-conscious emotions: A theoretical model

Part 1. Theoretical Perspectives: Social, Cognitive, and Neural Mechanisms Underlying Self-Conscious Emotions. Tracy, Robins, The Self in Self-Conscious Emotions: A Cognitive Appraisal Approach. Tangney, Stuewig, Mashek, What's Moral about the Self-Conscious Emotions? Leary, How the Self Became Involved in Affective Experience: Three Sources of Self-Reflective Emotions. Beer, Neural Systems for Self-Conscious Emotions and Their Underlying Appraisals. Gruenewald, Dickerson, Kemeny, A Social Function for Self-Conscious Emotions: The Social Self Preservation Theory. Part 2. Developmental Contexts and Processes. Lagattuta, Thompson, The Development of Self-Conscious Emotions: Cognitive Processes and Social Influences. Hart, Matsuba, The Development of Pride and Moral Life. Lewis, Self-Conscious Emotional Development. Part 3. Cultural Influences. Goetz, Keltner, Shifting Meanings of Self-Conscious Emotions across Cultures: A Social-Functional Approach. Fessler, From Appeasement to Conformity: Evolutionary and Cultural Perspectives on Shame, Competition, and Cooperation. Edelstein, Shaver, A Cross-Cultural Examination of Lexical Studies of Self-Conscious Emotions. Wong, Tsai, Cultural Models of Shame and Guilt. Li, Fischer, Respect as a Positive Self-Conscious Emotion in European Americans and Chinese. Part 4. Specific Emotions: Function and Conceptualization. Miller,Is Embarrassment a Blessing or a Curse? Tracy, Robins, The Nature of Pride. Gilbert, The Evolution of Shame as a Marker for Relationship Security: A Biopsychosocial Approach. Elison, Harter, Humiliation Causes, Correlates, and Consequences. Ferguson, Brugman,White, Eyre, Shame and Guilt as Morally Warranted Experiences. Part 5. Special Topics and Applications. Lickel, Schmader, Spanovic, Group-Conscious Emotions: The Implications of Others' Wrongdoings for Identity and Relationships. Stuewig, Tangney, Shame and Guilt in Antisocial and Risky Behaviors. Roberts, Goldenberg, Wrestling with Nature: An Existential Perspective on the Body and Gender in Self-Conscious Emotions. Bosson, Prewitt-Freilino, Overvalued and Ashamed: Considering the Roles of Self-Esteem and Self-Conscious Emotions in Covert Narcissism. Scheff, Runaway Nationalism: Alienation, Shame, and Anger.Part 6. Assessment. Robins, Noftle, Tracy, Assessing Self-Conscious Emotions: A Review of Self-Report and Nonverbal Measures.

The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Richard W. Robins

Author Tools

Chat about Author