Emotions and Perception

Class 25

Final Exam Date and Time

Date: Tuesday, May 14

Time: 11:45-2:45

Course Evaluations [SIRS] Please complete!

3

Emotions Diary Exercise

1. Some were surprised, some not surprised

a. Degree certain emotions predominatedb. Degree emotions varied

2. Unexpected big influences

a. Sleep b. Weather c. Hunger

3. Buffering value of fun.

4. Do emotions --> health, or does health --> emotions?

4

Diary Exercise Results

For All Students, Health was not related to stress (should have been!) but was related to an emotion. Which one?

____ Happy ____ Sad ___ Anxious ___ AngryX

r Anx : Health = -.24, p < .05

Emotions and Health differed for men and women

HealthAnxious -.47 +Angry -.54 *Work Stress -.36

HealthAnxious -.23Angry -.02Work Stress -.05

MEN WOMEN

5

  10 Years Ago

5 Years Ago

1YearAgo

3 Months

Ago

Last Month

Last Week

Yester-day

Today To-morrow

Next Week

Next Month

3 Months From Now

1 Year From Now

5 Years From Now

10 Years From Now

 

PERSONAL TIMELINE

1 23

     Not At All

 Very Little

 Somewhat

 A Lot

 A Great Degree

 

1 Optimistic 1 2 3 4 5

2 Pessimistic 1 2 3 4 5

3 Happy 1 2 3 4 5

4 Angry 1 2 3 4 5

5 Scared 1 2 3 4 5

6 Sad 1 2 3 4 5

7 Bored 1 2 3 4 5

8 Worried 1 2 3 4 5

What is your TYPICAL feeling state?

6

Judgment of Typical Feeling State At Start of Term and Diary Study Results

Happy.D Angry.D Anxious.D Sad.D Stress.Total.D

Happy .58** -.28* -.10 -.22+ -.31*

Angry -.33* .31* .38** -.33* .34*

Scared -.22+ .07 .28* .25+ .20

Sad -.31* .24 .25* .40** .38**

Optimistic .30* -.12 .03 -.18 -.17

Pessimistic -.41** .20 .19 .31* .19

Sta

rt o

f T

erm

Rat

ing

s

Average Diary Ratings

7

Timeline Future-Oriented Bias, Diary Results, and Gender

  10 Years Ago

5 Years Ago

1YearAgo

3 Months

Ago

Last Month

Last Week

Yester-day

Today To-morrow

Next Week

Next Month

3 Months From Now

1 Year From Now

5 Years From Now

10 Years From Now

 

PERSONAL TIMELINE

Future BiasHappy .39Sad -.59 *Rel. Stress -.63

Future BiasHappy -.03Angry .30*Work Stress .32+

MEN WOMEN

8

Psychosocial Resources

Social Support

Self Worth, Self Esteem

Self-Efficacy

Emotional Disclosure

9

Resources and Coping Reduced depression and anxiety Reduced cardiovascular response to stress Reduced levels of norepinephrine, epinephrine, cortisol Better immune functioning Fewer colds, fewer heart attacks, quicker recovery

post-MI, reduced cancer, easier childbirth, etc.

10

Emotional Support andMortality After Heart Attack(Berkman et al., 1992)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Emotional SupportAbsent

Emotional SupportPresent

Mo

rtal

ity

Rat

e

11

How Do Emotional Resources “Work”?Affects the way stressors are experienced

Instrumental and informational benefits

Psycho-social benefits Belonging Enhanced self worth Existential gains: meaningfulness, control, ordered world

Affects the way that stressors are perceived?

12

Psychosocial Resources Affect Willingness to Face Stressors

Health risks (Reed & Aspinwall, 1998)

Negative feedback (Trope & Neter, 1994)

Arguments that challenge beliefs (Cohen, et al., 2000)

13

Stressors Affect Stressor Perception

New Look, Cue Distortion (Easterbrook, 1959).

“Loomingness” e.g., of spiders (Riskind et al., 1995).

Visual “boundary reduction” (Mathews & Mackintosh, 2004)

Anxiety and pain (Rhudy & Meager, 2000)

Time duration and abstinence (Klein et al., 2003)

14

Social Context and Cue Perception

Psycho-socialResources

Stressful Events

Primary Appraisal

Self Relevance

Secondary Appraisal Appraisal of Adaptive

Capacities

Stress

Stressor Perception

15

Research Program

Resources moderate:

Social Perception – others’ distress

Somatic Perception – own physical pain

Visual Perception – steepness, distance

16

Social Support and Perceiving Others' Distress

Purpose: Test whether support moderates the perception of another’s physical distress.

Baby cries as disturbing cue (Bachorowski & Owren, 2002)

Baby cries evoke strong emotions People gauge own emotions to interpret baby criesCries are ambiguous, permit emotion-based interpretation

17

Method

N = 140 females

Cover story: Mental imagery and social perception

Social context: Guided imagery task

Rate baby cries

18

Social Context Induction Positive Support: Imagine most satisfying source of

emotional support

Neutral Contact: Imagine someone you neither like nor dislike, but see regularly

Negative Contact: Imagine person who betrayed your trust or otherwise failed you

19

Cry Samples Male infants undergoing surgical circumcision.

Detailed explanation regarding procedure.

12 cries, about 5 s each, mixed order4 low intensity4 moderate intensity4 high intensity

20

21

Cry Ratings by Social Context

3.5

3.7

3.9

4.1

4.3

4.5

Positive Neutral Negative

Cry

Ratin

gs

Mood: F (1, 138) = 10.85, p < .01

Social context: F (2, 138) = 3.36 p < .04

22

The Effects of Social Context and Emotional Disclosure on Cry Perception

Negative social contexts deplete resources, lead to amplified perception of others’ distress.

Emotional disclosure bolsters resources.

Disclosure should therefore counteract the amplifying effects of negative social contexts.

23

Method N = 121 females

Cover story: Mental imagery and social perception

Social context: Mentally image positive, neutral, or negative contact

Disclosure taskDisclose: Thoughts and feelings regarding imaged personSuppress: Describe imaged person factually

Rate baby cries

24

Social Context and Emotional Disclosure on Baby Cry Ratings

(Harber, Einav, & Lang, 2008)

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

4.4

4.6

Positive Neutral Negative

Social Context

Cry

Rat

ings

SuppressDisclose

25

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

4.4

4.6

Positive Neutral Negative

Social Context

Cry

Ratin

gs

SuppressDisclose

Support X Disclosure: p < .01 Positive Suppress vs. Negative Suppress: p < .07

Negative Express vs. Negative Suppress: p < .01

Social Context and Emotional Disclosure on Baby Cry Ratings

(Harber, Einav, & Lang, 2008)

26

Social Support and the Perception of Physical Pain

27

Pain Injury

Cartesian Pain Model

1-to-1 relationship between injury and pain.

Top-down Pain Moderation

Melzack and Wall’s (1965) Gate Control TheoryAttention (inward/outward) affects pain (Pennebaker, 1983)

Emotions (anxiety, fear) affect pain (Rhudy & Meagher, 2000)

28

Research Design

ParticipantsN = 38 femalesMean age = 21 years.Women only because they are:

More susceptible to pain (Gawande, 1998) More open emotionally (Brody & Hall, 2000)

29

30

31

32

33

Effect of Social Context on Pain Rating

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

Positive Neutral Negative

Pain

Rat

ings

F (2, 35) = 4.29 p < .03

34

Summary of Baby Cry and Pain Studies

Social Support buffers pain perceptionIn others (baby cries)In oneself (heat probe)

This is not a mood effect

This is not a distraction effect

35

Social Support and Psychophysical Judgment

Does support extend to visual perception?

Do we literally see things differently under high vs. low social support?

Does support affect accuracy of perception?

Baby cry, pain studies do not address accuracy.

Do effects replicate with in-vivo support?

36

Social Support and Slant Perception(Schnall, Harber, Stefanucci, & Proffitt, 2008)

37

Geographical Slant Perception and Social Support

Conscious slant perception (e.g., of hills) is exaggerated (5% is seen as 20%, etc.), as per Proffitt et al., 1995.

Slant distortion is lessened under lower physical load-- Light back pack vs. heavy back pack-- Physically refreshed vs. fatigued-- Good physical condition vs. poor condition-- Younger vs. older

Is slant distortion reduced under lower psychological load?

38

How People "Normally" See Hills

0 10 20 30 40 50 600

10203040506070

80An

gle

Judg

edVerbal

Haptic

Angle of Hill

39

• How steep is a hill when you are• - alone• - with a friend?

Heavy backpack Very steep hill

Design and Predictions

40

Methods and Measures

Participants: Passersby at UVA campus walkAlone (n = 14)Same-sex friend pairs (n = 17; both friends participate)

MeasuresVerbal: “How many degrees is the slant of this hill?”)Visual Judgment: hand protractorHaptic: palm board

41

Social Support and Slant

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Verbal Visual Haptic

Alone

With Friend

Verbal: p < .05; control for mood: p < .02

Visual: p < .14; control for mood: p < .10Note: Line represents actual slant

42

Effects of Friendship Duration, and Mood, on Slant Perception

Friendship Duration

(in months)

Verbal r = -.49, p < .05

Visual r = -.50, p < .05

Haptic r = -.14, p = ns

Mood

(negative)

Verbal r = -.01, p = ns

Visual r = -.13, p = ns

Haptic r = .01, p = ns

43

Slant Study 2: Imaged Support and Slant Perception

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Verbal Visual Haptic

Measure

Deg

rees Positive

Neutral

Negative

Note: Line represents actual slant

44

Correlations Between Relationship Quality and Slant Perception

Verbal Visual Haptic

Close -.37* -.36* .10

Warm -.33* -.28 .22

Happy -.39* -.20 .12

Note: Effects hold when controlling for mood

* = p < .05

45

Resources and Distance PerceptionHarber, Yeung, & Iacovelli, 2011

Proffitt shows that physical resources affect distance perception as well as slant (more tired or weighed down, distances seem farther)

Will psycho-social resources also moderate distance perception?

Will self-worth serve as resource?

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

02468

101214161820

BoostedSelf Worth

NeutralSelf Worth

DepletedSelf Worth

Dev

iati

on

fro

m A

ccu

racy

Wundt

Control

Distance Accuracy as a Function of Object (Threat v. Non-threat) and Self Worth

Note: Accuracy deviation reflects exaggerated proximity

53

N = XXX, XX% female, age = XX.XX

PHOTO LOOKING DOWN STAIRWELL

Self Esteem, External Support, and Height JudgmentsHarber, Yeung, & Iacovelli, under review (Study 2)

54

Resources will moderate height judgments.

Trait self esteem will operate as a resource.

High internal resources can supplement low external resources.

Study 2 Predictions

55

Low External Resources

56

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Hands on Rail Hands Taped

Heig

ht in

Fee

t

High Esteem

Low Esteem

Self Esteem, External Support, and Height Perception

Actual Height

57

Self Esteem, External Support, and Height Perception

Actual Height

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Hands on Rail Hands Taped

Heig

ht in

Fee

t

High Esteem

Low Esteem

58

Implications Resources affect perception

Of others’ distress (baby cries)Of own physical painOf hill slantOf distance to stressor (i.e., Wundt the tarantula)

Resources may enhance coping and social relations by moderating the way stressors are perceived.

The world we see (and hear, feel) may be shaped by how we feel about our own feelings of competence and connection.

59

Research TeamBaby Cry Studies

Graduate Collaborator

Michal Cohen

Research Assistants

Vivette Alston Seray ItexElsie Aurich Patrice MasonAleth Belmonte Jessica MeickeMary Ann Bishay Nirvana Pistoljevic Kami Eckleberry Tal RaichlinTina Hernandez Rhonda Werr

Pain StudyGraduate Collaborators

Jennifer Reid Douglas Yeung Karen Wenberg

Tarantula Study Tony Iacovelli Doug Yeung Reid Spencer