En el presente trabajo se describen los principales procesos psicológicos a través de los cuales las emociones influyen sobre el cambio de actitudes. La primera parte de la presente revisión se ocupa de la relación entre emoción y cognición, en ella se describen cómo las emociones influyen sobre la forma en que se procesa la información persuasiva (e.g., afectando a la cantidad y dirección de pensamientos generados ante una propuesta). A continuación, se examina cómo las emociones pueden cambiar no sólo los pensamientos que vienen a la mente, sino también lo que pensamos sobre dichos pensamientos (metacognición). La investigación meta-cognitiva revisada demuestra que las emociones pueden hacer que las personas confíen o desconfíen tanto de lo que piensan como de lo que sienten. En concreto, varios paradigmas experimentales sugieren que las emociones pueden validar o invalidar a otras emociones (e.g., sentirse triste de sentir alegría) y pensamientos (e.g., sentir ira de pensar algo). Por otra parte, no sólo las emociones, sino también los pensamientos pueden validar o invalidar lo que se piensa y lo que se siente (e.g., en función de la facilidad con la que los pensamientos y emociones vienen a la mente).
Research on aggression has benefitted from using individual-difference measures to predict aggressive behavior. Research on meta-cognition has recently identified that the predictive utility of individual-difference inventories can be improved by considering the certainty with which people hold their self-views. Merging these two frameworks, the present research examines whether assessing certainty in trait aggressiveness improves its ability to predict aggressive outcomes. Across two studies, participants reported their level of trait physical aggressiveness and the certainty with which they held their responses to the scale (predictor variables). Aggressive behavioral intentions (Study 1 and 2) and actual aggressive behavior (Study 2) were used as dependent measures. As hypothesized, results indicated that certainty moderated the effects of individual-differences in aggressiveness on both aggressive outcomes. Therefore, considering the certainty with which people hold their relevant traits can be useful for understanding aggression, and also for predicting the consistency between personality and behavior.
BackgroundThe effect of indirect (versus direct) exposure to a traumatic event on the quality of life of terrorist attack victims has received considerable attention in the literature. However, more research is required to examine whether the symptoms and underlying processes caused by both types of exposure are equivalent. Our main hypothesis is that well-being plays a different role depending on indirect vs. direct trauma exposure.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, eighty direct victims of 11-M terrorist attacks (people who were traveling in trains where bombs were placed) and two-hundred indirect victims (individuals highly exposed to the 11-M terrorist attacks through communications media) voluntarily participated without compensation. To test our hypothesis regarding the mediating role of indirect exposure, we conducted a biased corrected bootstrapping procedure. To test our hypothesis regarding the moderating role of direct exposure, data were subjected to a hierarchical regression analysis.ResultsAs predicted, for indirect trauma exposure, well-being mediated the relationship between post-traumatic dysfunctional cognitions and trauma symptoms. However, for direct trauma exposure, well-being moderated the relationship between post-traumatic dysfunctional cognitions and trauma symptoms.ConclusionsThe results of our study indicate that the different role of well-being found between indirect (causal factor) and direct exposure (protective factor) should be taken into consideration in interventions designed to improve victims’ health.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.