Writing about justice and injustice: Complex effects on affect, performance, threat, and biological responses to acute social stress among african American women and men.

OBJECTIVE: Brief, culturally-tailored, and scalable stress coping interventions are needed to address a broad range of stress-related health disparities, including among African Americans. In this study, we develop two brief justice writing interventions and demonstrate a methodological approach for evaluating how prompting African Americans to think about justice and injustice can alter responses to acute social stress. METHODS: African American women and men were randomized to a neutral writing condition or one of two justice-based writing interventions, which prompted them to recall past experiences of personal justice - with (adjunctive injustice) or without (personal justice-only) recalling and writing about injustice. Participants then completed a modified Trier Social Stress Test, during which they received feedback on poor performance. We measured cognitive performance, affect, and perceived threat in response to task feedback. We also measured blood pressure and salivary cortisol stress responses. RESULTS: Men experienced more positive emotion, performed better on the stressor task, and were less threatened by poor performance feedback in the personal justice-only condition. Men also had lower systolic blood pressure reactivity in the justice writing conditions compared to control. Women experienced less positive emotion, performed worse on the stressor task, and were more threatened by feedback in the personal justice-only condition. Women also had lower cortisol recovery after the stressor task in the adjunctive injustice condition. CONCLUSION: Thinking about justice and injustice may alter performance, affect, threat, and biological responses to acute social stress. Still, gender differences highlight that justice thinking is likely to produce heterogeneous and complex stress coping responses among African Americans.

The Road Not Taken: What Developmental Psychology Might Learn From Darwin's Insights Concerning Sexual Selection.

Developmental Psychology is the branch of psychology that studies, not only human behavior, but how and why human behavior changes over time. This essay seeks to review to what extent Developmental Psychology has failed to perceive human behavior through the lens of evolutionary theory in general, and in particular sexual selection as first described by Darwin and later elaborated on by many, including Robert Trivers and Geoffrey Miller; the essay asserts that this failure has resulted in many wrong turns and missed opportunities. In some cases, major developmental theorists (e.g., Freud, Erikson) were bedeviled by sex-based differences which they saw but could not explain and which compromised the parsimony of their stage theories. In the case of stage theories of moral development, some major theorists (e.g., Piaget, Kohlberg) were able to offer simpler explanations of moral development only by limiting their studies to male subjects. And, while Developmental Psychology textbooks thoroughly describe sex differences in the timing of morphological changes in puberty, writers seldom discuss why the timing is different in the two sexes, universally, and functionally. On the other hand, several domains of developmental focus, including play, mate choice, parenting, and spatial cognition, have seen successful research efforts that utilized sexually selected predispositions as foundational assumptions. The essay concludes with a discussion of how a more evolutionary and functional view of human behavior might move the field of Developmental Psychology to an even more robust and accurate understanding of how humans change over the course of a lifetime.

Testosterone rapidly increases neural reactivity to threat in healthy men: a novel two-step pharmacological challenge paradigm.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that testosterone (T) plays a key role in shaping competitive and aggressive behavior in humans, possibly by modulating threat-related neural circuitry. However, this research has been limited by the use of T augmentation that fails to account for baseline differences and has been conducted exclusively in women. Thus, the extent to which normal physiologic concentrations of T affect threat-related brain function in men remains unknown. METHODS: In the current study, we use a novel two-step pharmacologic challenge protocol to overcome these limitations and to evaluate causal modulation of threat- and aggression-related neural circuits by T in healthy young men (n = 16). First, we controlled for baseline differences in T through administration of a gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist. Once a common baseline was established across participants, we then administered T to within the normal physiologic range. During this second step of the protocol we acquired functional neuroimaging data to examine the impact of T augmentation on neural circuitry supporting threat and aggression. RESULTS: Gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonism successfully reduced circulating concentrations of T and brought subjects to a common baseline. Administration of T rapidly increased circulating T concentrations and was associated with heightened reactivity of the amygdala, hypothalamus, and periaqueductal grey to angry facial expressions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide novel causal evidence that T rapidly potentiates the response of neural circuits mediating threat processing and aggressive behavior in men.

Social status moderates the relationship between facial structure and aggression.

A growing body of evidence has linked individual differences in facial structure-in particular, the facial width-to-height ratio (FWHR)-to social behaviors, including aggression, cheating, and nonreciprocation of trust. In the research reported here, we extended this work by demonstrating that the association between FWHR and aggression is moderated by subjective and objective measures of social status. In Study 1 (N = 237 college students), FWHR was positively correlated with aggressive behavior, but only among men reporting relatively low social status. In Study 2 (N = 891 professional hockey players), FWHR was positively correlated with penalty minutes, but only among players who earned relatively low salaries. Collectively, these studies provide compelling evidence for the role of social status in moderating the relationship between facial structure and aggression, indicating that FWHR is a robust predictor of aggressive behavior, but only in the context of relatively low social status.

Changes in testosterone mediate the effect of winning on subsequent aggressive behaviour.

Testosterone concentrations rise rapidly in the context of competitive interactions and remain elevated in winners relative to losers. Theoretical models suggest that this divergent neuroendocrine response serves to mediate future dominance behaviours. Although research in animal models provides compelling support for this model, evidence for its applicability to human social behaviour is limited. In the current study, men and women were randomly assigned to experience a series of victories or defeats, after which aggressive behaviour was assessed using a well-validated behavioural measure. Winning produced elevated testosterone concentrations relative to losing in men, but not women. More importantly, testosterone reactivity to competition mediated the effect of winning on subsequent aggressive behaviour in men, but not women. We discuss limitations of the current study (e.g., the status manipulation may have affected other variables not measured in the study including competitiveness and physical activity expended), as well as discuss a potential neural mechanism underlying the effect of testosterone reactivity on aggressive behaviour.

Applying evolutionary thinking to the study of emotion.

This paper argues for invoking evolutionary, functional thinking in analyzing emotions. It suggests that the fitness needs of normal individuals be kept in mind when trying to understand emotional behavior. This point of view is elaborated in sections addressing these topics: defining emotion; applying comparative analysis to the study of emotions; focusing on the elicitors and resulting motivated behaviors mediated by the various affects; recognizing that not all emotions have prominent, distinct facial expressions; acknowledging all of the basic emotions and not just some exemplars; crediting the more sensible Cannon-Bard theory over James-Lange; recognizing the more ancient, fundamental role of the limbic system in emotion compared with that of the neocortex; and analyzing socio-emotional interactions as they occur naturally, not just individual emotional behavior studied under artificial conditions. Describing the various facets and neuroendocrine mechanisms of each basic emotion can provide a framework for understanding the normal and pathological development of each emotion. Such an inventory, or ethogram, would provide a comprehensive list of all of the observable behavioral tendencies of our species.