...
首页> 外文期刊>Affective science. >Blinded by and Stuck in Negative Emotions: Is Psychological Inflexibility Across Different Domains Related?
【24h】

Blinded by and Stuck in Negative Emotions: Is Psychological Inflexibility Across Different Domains Related?

机译:被负面情绪蒙蔽和困住:不同领域的心理僵化是否相关?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Psychological inflexibility is theorized to underlie difficulties adjusting mental processes in response to changing circumstances. People show inflexibility across a range of domains, including attention, cognition, and affect. But it remains unclear whether common mechanisms underlie inflexibility in different domains. We investigated this possibility in a pre-registered replication and extension examining associations among attentional, cognitive, and affective inflexibility measures. Participants (N =196) completed lab tasks assessing (a) emotion-induced blindness, the tendency for task-irrelevant emotional stimuli to impair attention allocation to non-emotional stimuli; (b) emotional inertia, the tendency for feelings to persist across time and contexts; and global self-report measures of (c) repetitive negative thinking, the tendency to repeatedly engage in negative self-focused thoughts (i.e., rumination, worry). Based on prior research linking repetitive negative thinking with negative affect inertia, on one hand, and emotion-induced blindness, on the other, we predicted positive correlations among all three measures of inflexibility. However, none of the three measures were related and Bayes factors indicated strong evidence for independence. Supplementary analyses ruled out alternative explanations for our findings, e.g., analytic decisions. Although our findings question the overlap between attentional, cognitive, and affective inflexibility measures, this study has methodological limitations. For instance, our measures varied across more than their inflexibility domain and our sample, relative to previous studies, included a high proportion of Asian participants who may show different patterns of ruminative thinking to non-Asian participants. Future research should address these limitations to confirm that common mechanisms do not underlie attentional, cognitive, and affective inflexibility.
机译:心理理论预言,缺乏灵活性基础调整心理过程的困难为了应对不断变化的环境。显示不灵活性在一系列领域,包括注意、认知和影响。目前尚不清楚是否共同的机制在不同的领域基础缺乏灵活性。在预注册调查这种可能性复制和扩展研究协会在注意力、认知和情感顽固的措施。评估(a) emotion-induced实验室完成任务失明,task-irrelevant的倾向情绪刺激影响注意分配客观的刺激;倾向于感情持续跨越时间和背景;(c)重复的负面想法,倾向多次参与消极的自我的想法(例如,沉思,担心)。先前的研究将重复的负面与负面影响惯性思维,在一个手,emotion-induced失明,在其他,我们预测之间的正相关性所有三个措施的不灵活性。所有的三个相关措施和贝叶斯因素表明强有力的证据独立。替代解释我们的发现,例如,分析决策。问题注意力之间的重叠,认知和情感不灵活性措施,这种研究方法的局限性。不同的多个实例,我们的措施他们的顽固域和样本,相对于以前的研究,包括高亚洲参与者可能显示的比例不同的沉思的思维模式非亚洲参与者。解决这些局限性确认常见机制不构成注意力,认知和情感缺乏灵活性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号