Positive Feedback as a Lever to Boost Students' STEM Outcomes.

Although many college students intend to major in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), dropout from these fields is high, especially among members of historically underrepresented groups, such as women and racial-ethnic minorities. We propose a minimal, yet potentially powerful intervention to broaden participation in STEM: giving positive feedback to students in STEM. Studies 1 and 2 found that giving positive feedback is less normative in math (vs. English) courses, and instructors' feedback-giving practices and students' experiences mirror these norms. However, students who received positive (vs. only objective) feedback on introductory-level college calculus exams showed greater belonging and self-efficacy in math, which predicted better STEM outcomes (i.e., increased interest in STEM and higher final math course grades, respectively, Study 3). These findings were especially strong for racial-ethnic minority students. Giving positive (vs. only objective) feedback is thus a potentially transformative tool that boosts student outcomes, especially for underrepresented groups.

Pursuing safety in social connection regulates the risk-regulation, social-safety, and behavioral-immune systems.

A new goal-systems model is proposed to help explain when individuals will protect themselves against the risks inherent to social connection. This model assumes that people satisfy the goal to feel included in safe social connections-connections where they are valued and protected rather than at risk of being harmed-by devaluing rejecting friends, trusting in expectancy-consistent relationships, and avoiding infectious strangers. In the hypothesized goal system, frustrating the fundamental goal to feel safe in social connection sensitizes regulatory systems that afford safety from the risk of being interpersonally rejected (i.e., the risk-regulation system), existentially uncertain (i.e., the social-safety system), or physically infected (i.e., the behavioral-immune system). Conversely, fulfilling the fundamental goal to feel safe in social connection desensitizes these self-protective systems. A 3-week experimental daily diary study (N = 555) tested the model hypotheses. We intervened to fulfill the goal to feel safe in social connection by repeatedly conditioning experimental participants to associate their romantic partners with highly positive, approachable words and images. We then tracked how vigilantly experimental versus control participants protected themselves when they encountered social rejection, unexpected behavior, or contagious illness in everyday life. Multilevel analyses revealed that the intervention lessoned self-protective defenses against each of these risks for participants who ordinarily felt most vulnerable to them. The findings provide the first evidence that the fundamental goal to feel safe in social connection can co-opt the risk-regulation, social-safety, and behavioral-immune systems as independent means for its pursuit. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Happiness-To enjoy now or later? Consequences of delaying happiness and living in the moment beliefs.

How do people think about happiness? Is it something best enjoyed as an investment over time, or is it something fleeting that should be savored? When people view happiness as an investment, they may endorse delaying happiness (DH)-the belief that working hard and sacrificing opportunities for happiness now will contribute to greater future happiness. When people view happiness as fleeting, they may endorse living in the moment (LM)-the belief that one should seize proximal opportunities to experience happiness now, rather than later. Using a mix of cross-sectional, meta-analytic (Studies 1, 2a, 2b, 2c), experimental (Study 3), and daily diary methods (Study 4), people who endorsed DH or LM beliefs anticipated more positive affect upon goal attainment and experienced greater well-being, but only DH was related to more negative affect when pursuing nonfocal goals and less delay discounting of future rewards. Implications for self-regulation and emotion are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

I'm Still Spending: Financial Contingency of Self-Worth Predicts Financial Motivational Conflict and Compulsive Buying.

People with financially contingent self-worth (FCSW) base their self-esteem on money and feel pressured to achieve financial success. However, the present research suggests such individuals may be vulnerable to compulsive buying and experiencing distress and impairment in their lives from engaging in this maladaptive behavior (Study 1a-1b). Study 2 identified a key mechanism: People with FCSW experience more motivational conflict between wanting to spend (vs. not spend) their money, which predicts greater compulsive buying intentions and anticipated distress from making excessive purchases. A 5-week diary study revealed that FCSW-on average and at a weekly level-predicted greater perceived financial motivational conflict and more compulsive buying, distress, and impairment in life (Study 3). People with FCSW experience more financial motivational conflict, independent of beliefs about spending implying wealth or feeling pressured to spend to display one's wealth to others (Study 4). Implications and future directions are discussed.

Facing the Facets: No Association Between Dispositional Mindfulness Facets and Positive Momentary Stress Responses During Active Stressors.

Mindfulness has been associated with enhanced coping with stress. However, it remains unclear how dispositional mindfulness impacts the nature and valence of experiences during active stressors. Across 1,001 total participants, we used cardiovascular responses from the biopsychosocial model of challenge/threat to assess the degree to which individuals cared about a stressor in the moment and had a positive versus negative psychological experience. Although we found a small association between mindfulness-particularly the acting with awareness facet-and responses consistent with caring more about the stressor (i.e., greater task engagement), we found no evidence that mindfulness was associated with exhibiting a more positive psychological response (i.e., greater challenge) during the stressor. Despite no differences in the valence of momentary experiences as a function of mindfulness, individuals higher in mindfulness self-reported more positive experiences afterward. These findings suggest that dispositional mindfulness may benefit responses to active stressors only after they have passed.

Is satisficing really satisfying? Satisficers exhibit greater threat than maximizers during choice overload.

When selecting from too many options (i.e., choice overload), maximizers (people who search exhaustively to make decisions that are optimal) report more negative post-decisional evaluations of their choices than do satisficers (people who search minimally to make decisions that are sufficient). Although ample evidence exists for differences in responses after-the-fact, little is known about possible divergences in maximizers' and satisficers' experiences during choice overload. Thus, using the biopsychosocial model of challenge/threat, we examined 128 participants' cardiovascular responses as they actively made a selection from many options. Specifically, we focused on cardiovascular responses assessing the degree to which individuals (a) viewed their decisions as valuable/important and (b) viewed themselves as capable (vs. incapable) of making a good choice. Although we found no differences in terms of the value individuals placed on their decisions (i.e., cardiovascular responses of task engagement), satisficers-compared to maximizers-exhibited cardiovascular responses consistent with feeling less capable of making their choice (i.e., greater relative threat). The current work provides a novel investigation of the nature of differences in maximizers'/satisficers' momentary choice overload experiences, suggesting insight into why they engage in such distinct search behaviors.

Can't Buy Me Love (or Friendship): Social Consequences of Financially Contingent Self-Worth.

Although people may think that money improves one's relationships, research suggests otherwise. Focusing on money is associated with spending less time maintaining relationships and less desire to rely on others for help. But why does focusing on money relate to worse social outcomes? We propose that when people base their self-esteem on financial success-that is, have financially contingent self-worth-they are likely to feel pressured to pursue success in this domain, which may come at the expense of spending time with close others. Consistent with this idea, results of four cross-sectional studies (N = 2,439) and a daily diary study (N = 246) revealed that basing one's self-worth on financial success is associated with greater feelings of loneliness and social disconnection, and this may be related to experiencing less autonomy and spending less time with family and friends.

Positive Feedback From Male Authority Figures Boosts Women's Math Outcomes.

People often search for cues in the environment to determine whether or not they will be judged or treated negatively based on their social identities. Accordingly, feedback from gatekeepers-members of majority groups who hold authority and power in a field-may be an especially important cue for those at risk of experiencing social identity threat, such as women in math settings. Across a series of studies, women who received positive ("Good job!") versus objective (score only) feedback from a male (vs. female) authority figure in math reported greater confidence; belonging; self-efficacy; more favorable Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) attitudes/identification/interest; and greater implicit identification with math. Men were affected only by the type of math feedback they received, not by the source of feedback. A meta-analysis across studies confirmed results. Together, these findings suggest that positive feedback from gatekeepers is an important situational cue that can improve the outcomes of negatively stereotyped groups.

It's All About the Money (For Some): Consequences of Financially Contingent Self-Worth.

Financial success is an important goal, yet striving for it is often associated with negative outcomes. One reason for this paradox is that financial pressures may be tied to basing self-worth on financial success. Studies 1a to 1c developed a measure of Financial Contingency of Self-Worth (Financial CSW), and found that it predicted more financial social comparisons, financial hassles, stress, anxiety, and less autonomy. In response to a financial (vs. academic) threat, higher Financial CSW participants experienced less autonomy, perceived financial problems more negatively, and disengaged from their financial problems (Study 2). When given an opportunity to self-affirm, however, Financial CSW participants did not show diminished autonomy in response to a financial (vs. academic) threat (Study 3). Finally, participants with higher Financial CSW were less likely to make extravagant spending decisions following a financial (vs. health) threat (Study 4). Together, these studies demonstrate the many consequences of staking self-worth on financial success.