Ecological validity of common behavioral decision making tasks: evidence across two samples.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and scholars routinely use behavioral decision tasks to assess real-world decision making capabilities. However, many common behavioral decision making tasks lack data on the extent to which they predict real-world risky behaviors. Across two pre-registered studies, and two timepoints, we assessed decision making abilities using common behavioral tasks and predicted participants' real-world risky decision making from task performance. METHOD: In Study 1, 918 Mechanical Turk (MTurk) workers completed three decision making tasks in addition to assessments of real-world risk behavior: preventive health behaviors, COVID-19 vaccination status, and virtual social distancing task performance. In Study 2, 221 college student participants completed the Study 1 tasks plus additional assessments of decision making and real world risk and protective behaviors. RESULTS: Across both studies, the selected behavioral decision tasks rarely predicted real world behavior and, when they did, the relationship was weak at best. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that these behavioral decision making tasks may not be good predictors of real world risky behavior at present, with some evidence that the specificity of the behavior being assessed matters (i.e. the closer the task was to the specific behavior being predicted), calling for additional ecological validity research, with a greater variety of tasks in the future.

Test-Retest Reliability of Common Behavioral Decision-Making Tasks: A Multi-Sample, Repeated Measures Study.

OBJECTIVE: Decision-making is responsible for the best and worst of human nature. The field of decision science has done much to elucidate the psychological process of decision-making, variables that affect decision-making, and outcomes of disadvantageous decision-making. However, understanding any psychological process requires creation of reliable measures. Few studies focus on the test-retest reliability of behavioral decision-making tasks despite their utility in repeated assessment batteries. METHOD: The present study examined the extent to which common behavioral decision-making tasks are reliable across time. Across two samples and two time points, participants completed multiple decision-making assessments. RESULTS: Results revealed moderate at best evidence of test-retest reliability across a 10-week interval in any of the tasks assessed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise large questions for the field of behavioral decision-making and the utility for tasks to track changes in decision-making across time in clinical populations.

Cognitive chicken or the emotional egg? How reconceptualizing decision-making by integrating cognition and emotion can improve task psychometrics and clinical utility.

Decision-making is an executive function, tapping into cognitive, emotional, and personality-based components. This complexity, and the varying operational definitions of the construct, is reflected in the rich array of behavioral decision-making tasks available for use in research and clinical settings. In many cases, these tasks are "subfield-specific," with tasks developed by cognitive psychologists focusing on cognitive aspects of decision-making and tasks developed by clinical psychologists focusing on interactions between emotional and cognitive aspects. Critically, performance across different tasks does not consistently correlate, obfuscating the ability to compare scores between measures and detect changes over time. Differing theories as to what cognitive and/or emotional aspects affect decision-making likely contribute to this lack of consistency across measures. The low criterion-related validity among decision-making tasks and lack of consistent measurement of the construct presents challenges for emotion and decision-making scholars. In this perspective, we provide several recommendations for the field: (a) assess decision-making as a specific cognitive ability versus a taxonomy of cognitive abilities; (b) a renewed focus on convergent validity across tasks; (c) further assessment of test-retest reliability versus practice effects on tasks; and (d) reimagine future decision-making research to consider the research versus clinical implications. We discuss one example of decision-making research applied to clinical settings, acquired brain injury recovery, to demonstrate how some of these concerns and recommendations can affect the ability to track changes in decision-making across time.

Maintaining distance and avoiding going out during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal examination of an integrated social cognition model.

Objective: To test an integrated social cognition model predicting two forms of social distancing behavior (maintaining distance and avoiding going out in public) during COVID-19.Design: Participants from the U.S. (Sample 1, n = 433) and Canada (Sample 2, n = 239) completed online measures, reflecting the theory of planned behavior (attitudes, norms, perceived control, intention), COVID-19-specific risk, anticipated regret, fear of catching COVID-19, and perceived capacity related to using technology to connect with others. Self-reported behavior was collected from the U.S. sample at 6-month follow-up.Results: Intention to maintain distance and avoid going out predicted behavior within the U.S. sample. For both samples, intention was predicted by attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control. Perceived severity of COVID-19, anticipated inaction regret, and fear of catching COVID-19 predicted intention to maintain distance and avoid going out across both samples. Finally, within the U.S. sample, significant indirect effects were present for perceived behavioral control predicting future maintaining distance and avoiding going out via intention to engage in these behaviors.Conclusion: The integrated social cognition model predicts social distancing intentions and long-term social distancing behaviors. Hazard-specific risk and affect were relevant determinants added to the models. Potential avenues for intervention research are described.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2021.2023746 .

You believe what?!: Relational closeness and belief relevance predict conspiracy belief tolerance.

Hardly a day passes without seeing the negative consequences of conspiracy beliefs manifest in headline news. While a great deal of research has examined the causes and consequences of believing conspiracy theories, relatively little research has examined the reaction to one's belief in conspiracy theories from one's social network. We asked participants to indicate how they would react if a family member, friend, or co-worker believed a series of conspiracy theories (e.g., Would they be willing to tolerate those beliefs? Would they be willing to confront those beliefs?). Also, we examined the role of Actively Openminded Thinking (AOT; Svedholm-Hakkinen & Lindeman, 2018) to examine the extent to which it predicted the belief in conspiracy theories and the acceptance of those beliefs in others. Study 1 and Study 2 were nearly identical, except the former consisted of an internet sample and the latter consisted of college students. Together, the data from these studies revealed that conspiracy beliefs that had direct consequences for the participant were less likely to be tolerated and more likely to be confronted. The closer the relationship of the believer to the participant, the more likely the participant was to tolerate and confront the belief. Finally, AOT scores were associated with a decreased tendency to believe in conspiracies and an increased tendency to confront those beliefs in others. These data inform our understanding of social and individual factors that lead to confrontation of conspiracy beliefs and increase our understanding of the AOT construct.

To boldly go where no relationship has gone before: Commentary on interpersonal relationships in the digital age.

Individuals have a need to maintain positive social interactions, and with the advent of new-media technologies, there are a myriad ways individuals can satisfy this need by engaging socially in mediated (non-face-to-face) communication, hence the need for a special issue on "Relationships in the Digital Age." The articles in this special issue reflect the need to answer theoretical questions brought forth by the increased tendency for individuals to create and maintain interpersonal relationships through mediated forms of communication. The commentary highlights the need for increased research on mediated interpersonal relationships by psychologists and discusses how the articles in the issue can be used to answer theoretical questions about mediated interpersonal communication. The article ends with speculation on how media may create social spaces that may be advantageous for some individuals.

To boldly go where no relationship has gone before: commentary on interpersonal relationships in the digital age.

Individuals have a need to maintain positive social interactions and with the advent of new media technologies, there are a myriad ways individuals can satisfy this need by engaging socially in mediated (non-face-to-face) communication, hence the need for a special issue on Relationships in the Digital Age. The articles in this special issue reflect the need to answer theoretical questions brought forth by the increased tendency for individuals to create and maintain interpersonal relationships through mediated forms of communication. The commentary highlights the need for increased research on mediated interpersonal relationships by psychologists and discusses how the articles in the issue can be used to answer theoretical questions about mediated interpersonal communication. The article ends with speculation on how media may create social spaces that may be advantageous for some individuals.

Are narcissists more attracted to people in relationships than to people not in relationships?

Does grandiose narcissism predict greater attraction for others in relationships? We examined this question by replicating previous work implicating grandiose narcissists as mate poachers (Studies 1 and 2). We then used an experimental paradigm (Studies 3 and 4) to assess the extent to which grandiose narcissists indicate a greater interest in someone who is already in a relationship compared to someone who is single. Results suggest that although grandiose narcissism related to reports of more frequent mate poaching attempts, grandiose narcissists did not appear to be more interested in taking someone away from an existing relationship. Instead, participants took their own relationship status into consideration (rather than the relationship status of a target) when evaluating their interest in a target for a short-term fling or a long-term relationship. Thus, although grandiose narcissists report more frequent mate poaching attempts, they do not appear to be more interested in people in relationships compared to those who are single.

It's All in How You Think About It: Construal Level and the Iowa Gambling Task.

Recent research has identified a number of factors that can influence performance on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) when it is used in clinical or research settings. The current studies examine the effects of construal level theory (CLT) on the IGT. Study 1 suggests that when primed with a high construal mindset (i.e., thinking abstractly vs. concretely), individuals learned to avoid Deck A more than those primed with a low construal mindset. Study 2 suggests that when construal level is manipulated through psychological distance (i.e., selecting for a close vs. distant friend), individuals in a high construal mindset instead showed a preference for Deck A compared to individuals in a low construal mindset or a control group. Taken together, these studies suggest that IGT performance is impacted by the manner in which one construes the task. Implications for decision making research and use of the IGT as a clinical and research instrument are discussed.

The prevalence and prevention of crosstalk: a multi-institutional study.

It is a common problem in psychology subject pools for past study participants to inform future participants of key experimental details (also known as crosstalk). Previous research (Edlund, Sagarin, Skowronski, Johnson, & Kutter, 2009) demonstrated that a combined classroom and laboratory treatment could significantly reduce crosstalk. The present investigation tested a laboratory-only treatment for the prevention of crosstalk at five universities, along with institutional-level moderators of crosstalk. Results indicated the presence of crosstalk at all universities and that the laboratory-based treatment was effective in reducing crosstalk. Importantly, crosstalk rates were higher (but successfully neutralized) in research pools with higher research credit requirements. Therefore, this research provides valuable guidance regarding crosstalk prevalence and its minimization by researchers.

Missed Programs (You Can't TiVo This One): Why Psychologists Should Study Media.

Media psychology involves the scientific examination of the cognitive processes and behavior involved in the selection, use, interpretation, and effects of communication across a variety of media (e.g., via the Internet, television, telephone, film). Media are central to people's lives, with projections indicating that an average person spent over 3,515 hours using media in 2012. New technologies are increasing the importance of media. Data from two content analyses demonstrate the underrepresentation of media psychology in mainstream psychological literature and in undergraduate and graduate psychology course offerings. We argue for the importance of a psychological approach to the study of media because of its presence in people's lives and because psychologists use it in their research and their choices may affect the external validity of their findings. We provide a useful framework from which psychologists can approach the study of media, and we conclude with recommendations for further areas of scientific inquiry relevant to psychological science.

Seeing the forest through the trees: improving decision making on the Iowa gambling task by shifting focus from short- to long-term outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The present study sought to examine two methods by which to improve decision making on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT): inducing a negative mood and providing additional learning trials. METHOD: In the first study, 194 undergraduate students [74 male; M age = 19.44 (SD = 3.69)] were randomly assigned to view a series of pictures to induce a positive, negative, or neutral mood immediately prior to the IGT. In the second study, 276 undergraduate students [111 male; M age = 19.18 (SD = 2.58)] completed a delay discounting task and back-to-back administrations of the IGT. RESULTS: Participants in an induced negative mood selected more from Deck C during the final trials than those in an induced positive mood. Providing additional learning trials resulted in better decision making: participants shifted their focus from the frequency of immediate gains/losses (i.e., a preference for Decks B and D) to long-term outcomes (i.e., a preference for Deck D). In addition, disadvantageous decision making on the additional learning trials was associated with larger delay discounting (i.e., a preference for more immediate but smaller rewards). CONCLUSIONS: The present results indicate that decision making is affected by negative mood state, and that decision making can be improved by increasing the number of learning trials. In addition, the current results provide evidence of a relationship between performance on the IGT and on a separate measure of decision making, the delay discounting task. Moreover, the present results indicate that improved decision making on the IGT can be attributed to shifting focus toward long-term outcomes, as evidenced by increased selections from advantageous decks as well as correlations between the IGT and delay discounting task. Implications for the assessment of decision making using the IGT are discussed.

Effect of playing violent video games cooperatively or competitively on subsequent cooperative behavior.

Research on video games has yielded consistent findings that violent video games increase aggression and decrease prosocial behavior. However, these studies typically examined single-player games. Of interest is the effect of cooperative play in a violent video game on subsequent cooperative or competitive behavior. Participants played Halo II (a first-person shooter game) cooperatively or competitively and then completed a modified prisoner's dilemma task to assess competitive and cooperative behavior. Compared with the competitive play conditions, players in the cooperative condition engaged in more tit-for-tat behaviors-a pattern of behavior that typically precedes cooperative behavior. The social context of game play influenced subsequent behavior more than the content of the game that was played.