Two studies are presented that challenge the evidentiary basis for the existence of evolved sex differences in jealousy. In opposition to the evolutionary view, Study I demonstrated that a sex difference in jealousy resulting from sexual versus emotional infidelity is observed only when judgments are recorded using a forced-choice response format. On all other measures, no sex differences were found; both men and women reported greater jealousy in response to sexual infidelity. A second study revealed that the sex difference on the forced-choice measure disappeared under conditions of cognitive constraint. These findings suggest that the sex difference used to support the evolutionary view of jealousy (e.g., D. M. Buss, R. Larsen, D. Westen, & J. Semmelroth, 1992; D. M. Buss et al., 1999) likely represents a measurement artifact resulting from a format-induced effortful decision strategy and not an automatic, sex-specific response shaped by evolution.

The authors argue that specific emotions can alter the persuasive impact of messages as a function of the emotional framing of persuasive appeals. Because specific emotions inflate expectancies for events possessing matching emotional overtones (D. DeSteno, R. E. Petty, D. T. Wegener, & D. D. Rucker, 2000), the authors predicted that attempts at persuasion would be more successful when messages were framed with emotional overtones matching the emotional state of the receiver and that these changes would be mediated by emotion-induced biases involving expectancies attached to arguments contained in the messages. Two studies manipulating discrete negative emotional states and message frames (i.e., sadness and anger) confirmed these predictions. The functioning of this emotion-matching bias in parallel with emotion-induced processing differences and the limitations of a valence-based approach to the study of attitude change are also considered.

This analysis provides important information that can help to identify potentially problematic gamblers during the early stages of gambling-related problems. Public health workers can use these results to develop early interventions that target high-risk Internet gamblers for prevention efforts. However, one study limitation is that the results distinguish only a small proportion of the total sample; therefore, additional research will be necessary to identify markers that can classify larger segments of high-risk gamblers.

This study is the first to compare the accuracy of self-reported with actual monetary outcomes of online fixed odds sports betting, live action sports betting, and online casino gambling at the individual level of analysis. Subscribers to bwin.party digital entertainment's online gambling service volunteered to respond to the Brief Bio-Social Gambling Screen and questions about their estimated gambling results on specific games for the last 3 or 12 months. We compared the estimated results of each subscriber with his or her actual betting results data. On average, between 34% and 40% of the participants expressed a favorable distortion of their gambling outcomes (i.e., they underestimated losses or overestimated gains) depending on the time period and game. The size of the discrepancy between actual and self-reported results was consistently associated with the self-reported presence of gambling-related problems. However, the specific direction of the reported discrepancy (i.e., favorable vs. unfavorable bias) was not associated with gambling-related problems.