Updating Beliefs under Perceived Threat.

Humans are better at integrating desirable information into their beliefs than undesirable information. This asymmetry poses an evolutionary puzzle, as it can lead to an underestimation of risk and thus failure to take precautionary action. Here, we suggest a mechanism that can speak to this conundrum. In particular, we show that the bias vanishes in response to perceived threat in the environment. We report that an improvement in participants' tendency to incorporate bad news into their beliefs is associated with physiological arousal in response to threat indexed by galvanic skin response and self-reported anxiety. This pattern of results was observed in a controlled laboratory setting (Experiment I), where perceived threat was manipulated, and in firefighters on duty (Experiment II), where it naturally varied. Such flexibility in how individuals integrate information may enhance the likelihood of responding to warnings with caution in environments rife with threat, while maintaining a positivity bias otherwise, a strategy that can increase well-being.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The human tendency to be overly optimistic has mystified scholars and lay people for decades: How could biased beliefs have been selected over unbiased beliefs? Scholars have suggested that although the optimism bias can lead to negative outcomes, including financial collapse and war, it can also facilitate health and productivity. Here, we demonstrate that a mechanism generating the optimism bias, namely asymmetric information integration, evaporates under threat. Such flexibility could result in enhanced caution in dangerous environments while supporting an optimism bias otherwise, potentially increasing well-being.

Efficacy of mindfulness to regulate induced emotions in the laboratory: A systematic review and meta-analysis of self-report and biobehavioral measures.

A substantial part of the research on the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions on mood regulation is conducted in the laboratory. Nevertheless, a systematic review of the results is lacking. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of mindfulness as an emotion regulation (ER) strategy when using mood induction procedures. A systematic search of databases was conducted and a total of 43 studies were included in the meta-analysis. We found a small significant overall effect size of mindfulness [g= -0.15 (95% CI [-0.30, -0.01], p = 0.04)], which became non-significant after removing outliers (g=-0.15, p = 0.06). We also found high levels of heterogeneity which was not explained by the moderating variables analyzed. Thus, there is limited meta-analytic evidence of the efficacy of mindfulness strategies in down-regulating or preventing heightened or chronic effects of induced mood states in well-controlled laboratory settings. We propose that this could be partially due to some limitations in laboratory methodologies and suggest some guidelines to overcome them in future primary research.