In it together: Shared reality with instrumental others is linked to goal success.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on Sep 07 2023 (see record 2024-05962-001). In the original article, the abstract was revised. Specifically, there were errors in the the second and third sentences of the fifth paragraph of the Shared Reality section, fifth sentence of the Present Research section, An updated Figure 1 now appears in the erratum. NIO counterpart and and the specific note in Table 3, the first parenthetical text in the Procedure and Materials section in Study 2c, the phrase its NIO counterpart in the Discussion section of Study 2c, last sentence of the second paragraph of Study 3, third sentence in the third paragraph of Study 3, first sentence in the third paragraph of the Results section, the phrase their NIO counterparts in both the Self-Reported Goal Success and GPA sections of Study 4c, NIO counterpart and the specific note in Table 9, last phrase in the second paragraph in the Discussion section of Study 4, and the in-text citation of Footnote 9 in the Contribution to Understanding the Interpersonal Influences on Goal Success.] Why are some people more successful than others? In addition to individual factors (e.g. self-control), research has recently suggested that the quality of people's interpersonal relationships is crucial for success. Successful people do not just like and feel close to instrumental objects (e.g., study material, the gym), they also like and feel close to instrumental others (IOs; people who make goal success more likely). Yet instrumental people have one crucially distinct feature that instrumental objects do not: A mind of their own. We propose that while a growing body of work suggests that the sense of closeness to IOs (others who make goal success more likely) is crucial for goal success, prior work has not examined how the sense of the quality of people's relationships with IOs, and therefore goal success, likely depends on their ability to "merge minds" with them, experiencing both the goal and the world at large (i.e., shared reality) in the same way as one's IO contributes to goal success. Specifically, the present research (N = 1,326) explored (a) whether people experience shared reality-the perception of shared attitudes and judgments about the world-with IOs and (b) whether those who do so achieve greater goal success. Participants perceiving their romantic partner as instrumental for their goals experienced more shared reality with them (Study 1); participants also reported greater shared reality with IOs relative to noninstrumental others (NIO; Study 2). Higher shared reality with IOs was linked to more goal success initially, (Studies 2-4), 3-4 weeks later (Study 2c), and higher grade point averages (Study 4). These effects held when controlling for IO liking, closeness, epistemic trust, and NIO shared reality. Self-efficacy consistently mediated the effect of IO shared reality on goal success, indicating that IO shared reality may bolster people's epistemic confidence in their abilities. Overall, findings suggest that shared reality with IOs may play an important role in goal success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Interested and Instrumental: An Examination of Instrumentality Regulation With Potential Romantic Partners.

Instrumentality-the extent to which one facilitates another person's goal progress-has been described as the Rosetta Stone of attraction, and promotes closeness in ongoing relationships. Yet prior work has not examined whether people might regulate their instrumentality in contexts in which they desire (vs. do not desire) attraction or closeness with others. Four studies, employing imagined online scenario and in-lab experimental paradigms, examined whether people strive to be more instrumental to potential romantic partners (targets) under conditions that lead them to be more (vs. less) romantically interested in those targets. Single participants were more romantically interested in romantically available versus unavailable targets, which in turn, was associated with greater willingness to be instrumental. Results for romantically involved participants were less consistent. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Honest feedback: Barriers to receptivity and discerning the truth in feedback.

Feedback is information provided to recipients about their behavior, performance, or understanding, the goal of which is to foster recipients' self-awareness, and behavioral reinforcement or change. Yet, feedback often fails to achieve this goal. For feedback to be effective, recipients must be receptive and accurately understand the meaning and veracity of the feedback (i.e., discern the truth in feedback). Honesty is critically important for both receptivity and discerning the truth in the feedback. In this article, we identify barriers to receptivity and discerning the truth in feedback and illustrate how these barriers hinder recipients' learning and improvement. Barriers can arise from the feedback itself, the feedback-giver, and the feedback-recipient, and both parties share responsibility for removing them.

Communicating Commitment: A Relationship-Protection Account of Dyadic Displays on Social Media.

People often make their romantic relationships visible to others through dyadic displays (DDs). Yet, their reasons for doing so are not well-understood. We proposed and tested a relationship-protection account of DD use, focusing on a social media environment. We predicted that relationship-protection motivation would predict DDs and that DDs would serve a relationship-protective function. In Study 1, a correlational study of romantically involved Facebook users, relationship-protection motivation positively predicted DD use on Facebook even when controlling for feelings of interconnectedness. Relationship-protection motivation also mediated effects of relationship satisfaction and commitment on DD use. In Study 2, participants perceived a target whose Facebook profile we experimentally manipulated to include DDs (vs. not) as more likely to be in a high-quality relationship and less receptive to romantic advances from others, with implications for participants' interest in affiliating with the target. Our findings support a relationship-protection account of DD use on social media.

Comparison of Prescribing Practices with Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant Protocols.

BACKGROUND: The goal of anticoagulation management programs is to prevent thrombosis while minimizing the risks of hemorrhage. Direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) selectively inhibit coagulation proteins to inhibit thrombosis. Previous studies suggest patient monitoring and education provided through anticoagulation services enhance adherence and decrease adverse outcomes in patients receiving DOAC therapy. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to describe DOAC prescribing adherence to anticoagulation service protocols and to observe whether enrollment in an anticoagulation service resulted in greater prescribing adherence to DOAC protocols. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study evaluated all initial prescriptions of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban at Marshfield Clinic from 19 October 2010 to 21 August 2014. Three algorithms analyzed patient and prescription data extracted from the organization's electronic health record and classified prescriptions as per protocol or not per protocol. The algorithms classified not per protocol prescriptions as off-label indication, renal impairment [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 ml/min], hepatic impairment (rivaroxaban and apixaban), advanced age >74 years (dabigatran), dose too low, or dose too high. The analysis assessed whether enrollment in the Marshfield Clinic Anticoagulation Service DOAC monitoring process was associated with increased adherence to protocols. RESULTS: In aggregate, 72% of apixaban prescriptions, 52% of dabigatran prescriptions, and 70% of rivaroxaban prescriptions were per protocol. Off-label indications and dosage too low were the most common not per protocol reasons for apixaban and rivaroxaban prescriptions. Age ≥75 years and off-label indication were the most common not per protocol reasons for dabigatran prescriptions. Enrollment in the anticoagulation service process was not associated with increased adherence to protocols. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of DOAC prescriptions did not adhere to protocol expectations. While enrollment in DOAC management through the Marshfield Clinic Anticoagulation Service was not associated with increased adherence to protocols, opportunities exist to optimize DOAC prescribing. Defining ideal DOAC management requires additional research.

Assessment of dabigatran utilization and prescribing patterns for atrial fibrillation in a physician group practice setting.

For years, warfarin and aspirin have been standard therapies for prophylaxis of stroke in atrial fibrillation. In late 2010, dabigatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor, became available for use in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. We sought to evaluate utilization and prescribing patterns of dabigatran in a physician group practice setting. We retrospectively collected prescription data from October 2010 to December 2011 including indication of use, dose, renal function, drug interactions, history of warfarin therapy, and risk assessment scores (CHADS2 and HAS-BLED). Off-label use (history of valve disease or no diagnosis of atrial fibrillation) occurred in 20% (n = 34) of 174 patients. Renal function assessed by Cockcroft-Gault equation identified 1 case of contraindicated use and the need for initial renal dose adjustment in approximately 1/2 of the patients with reduced renal function (15-30 ml/min). Review of anticoagulant use revealed 68% of patients (n = 119) previously received warfarin and ultimately 20% of all patients on dabigatran resumed warfarin therapy. A significant increase in the use of permeability glycoprotein inhibitors and proton pump inhibitors after initiating dabigatran was observed. Nearly 10% of patients had a CHADS2 score of 0. For patients receiving novel oral anticoagulants, prospective inclusion in anticoagulation services and guidance from specific "place in therapy" statements have potential to play a large role in maximizing safety while aiding in continued research.