Booster effects and mechanisms of web-based personalised normative feedback alcohol intervention for college students: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effects of booster and no booster versions of web-based alcohol Personalised Normative Feedback (PNF) and whether descriptive norms mediated and/or participant motivation moderated the effectiveness of the intervention in real world conditions (i.e. no financial incentives). METHODS: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial with 1-, 3-, and 6-month assessments. Brazilian college students reporting alcohol use in the last 12 months (N=931) were recruited from May/2020 to December/2022 and allocated to 1) No booster/single PNF(S-PNF); 2) Booster/multiple PNF(M-PNF); or 3) Assessment-only control. We applied Helmert coding [1: Any intervention (S-PNF or M-PNF) vs. Control; and 2: S-PNF vs. M-PNF]. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: typical number of drinks/week and maximum number of drinks/week; secondary outcomes: drinking frequency and number of consequences. Three-months assessment was the primary interval. Descriptive norms were tested as mediator. Interest, importance, and readiness to change were examined as moderators. RESULTS: Compared to control, any intervention did not influence primary outcomes at 3-months or 6-months, but did at 1-month, when reduced typical drinking (IRR:0.77, 95%CI:0.66;0.90) and maximum number of drinks (IRR:0.69, 95%CI:0.58;0.82). There was an intervention effect on the consequences at 3-months. No differences were observed between S-PNF and M-PNF. No mediation effects were found at 3-months. At 6-months, there was an indirect effect on typical drinking through norms at 3-months (b=-0.82, 95%CI:-2.03;-0.12) and effects on maximum drinks through norms at 1-month (b=-0.54, 95%CI:-1.65;-0.02). No support for moderation was found. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention reduced alcohol drinking at 1 month only and was not effective thereafter. Mechanisms of effect remain unclear.

Neural Sensitivity to Peer Feedback and Depressive Symptoms: Moderation by Executive Function.

Theories of adolescent development suggest that elevated neural sensitivity to social evaluation confers tradeoffs for adolescents' wellbeing, promoting adaptation to changing social contexts but increasing risk for emotional distress and depression. This study investigated whether the association between neural processing of peer feedback and depressive symptoms depends on teacher-reported executive function (EF) ability in adolescent girls. Girls showed activation to negative and positive peer feedback in regions implicated in social-emotional processing that interacted with EF to predict depressive symptoms. Specifically, activation predicted more depression in youth with poorer EF but less depression in youth with better EF, suggesting that the impact of increased social sensitivity may depend on youths' ability to regulate this sensitivity in adaptive ways.

The tail of the caudate is sensitive to both gain and loss feedback during information integration categorization.

Although most category learning studies use feedback for training, little attention has been paid to how individuals utilize feedback implemented as gains or losses during categorization. We compared skilled categorization under three different conditions: Gain (earn points for correct answers), Gain and Loss (earn points for correct answers and lose points for wrong answers) and Correct or Wrong (accuracy feedback only). We also manipulated difficulty and point value, with near boundary stimuli having the highest number of points to win or lose, and stimuli far from the boundary having the lowest point value. We found that the tail of the caudate was sensitive to feedback condition, with highest activity when both Gain and Loss feedback were present and least activity when only Gain or accuracy feedback was present. We also found that activity across the caudate was affected by distance from the decision bound, with greatest activity for the near boundary high value stimuli, and lowest for far low value stimuli. Overall these results indicate that the tail of the caudate is sensitive not only to positive rewards but also to loss and punishment, consistent with recent animal research finding tail of the caudate activity in aversive learning.

Effect of positive social comparative feedback on the resting state connectivity of dopaminergic neural pathways: A preliminary investigation.

Positive social comparative feedback is hypothesized to generate a dopamine response in the brain, similar to reward, by enhancing expectancies to support motor skill learning. However, no studies have utilized neuroimaging to examine this hypothesized dopaminergic mechanism. Therefore, the aim of this preliminary study was to investigate the effect of positive social comparative feedback on dopaminergic neural pathways measured by resting state connectivity. Thirty individuals practiced an implicit, motor sequence learning task and were assigned to groups that differed in feedback type. One group received feedback about their actual response time to complete the task (RT ONLY), while the other group received feedback about their response time with positive social comparison (RT + POS). Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired at the beginning and end of repetitive motor practice with feedback to measure practice-dependent changes in resting state brain connectivity. While both groups showed improvements in task performance and increases in performance expectancies, ventral tegmental area and the left nucleus accumbens (mesolimbic dopamine pathway) resting state connectivity increased in the RT + POS group but not in the RT ONLY group. Instead, the RT ONLY group showed increased connectivity between ventral tegmental area and primary motor cortex. Positive social comparative feedback during practice of a motor sequence task may induce a dopaminergic response in the brain along the mesolimbic pathway. However, given that absence of effects on expectancies and motor learning, more robust and individualized approaches may be needed to provide beneficial psychological and behavioral effects.

Give it a second try? The influence of feedback and performance in the decision of reattempting.

Feedback evaluation can affect behavioural continuation or discontinuation, and is essential for cognitive and motor skill learning. One critical factor that influences feedback evaluation is participants' internal estimation of self-performance. Previous research has shown that two event-related potential components, the Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN) and the P3, are related to feedback evaluation. In the present study, we used a time estimation task and EEG recordings to test the influence of feedback and performance on participants' decisions, and the sensitivity of the FRN and P3 components to those factors. In the experiment, participants were asked to reproduce the total duration of an intermittently presented visual stimulus. Feedback was given after every response, and participants had then to decide whether to retry the same trial and try to earn reward points, or to move on to the next trial. Results showed that both performance and feedback influenced participants' decision on whether to retry the ongoing trial. In line with previous studies, the FRN showed larger amplitude in response to negative than to positive feedback. Moreover, our results were also in agreement with previous works showing the relationship between the amplitude of the FRN and the size of feedback-related prediction error (PE), and provide further insight in how PE size influences participants' decisions on whether or not to retry a task. Specifically, we found that the larger the FRN, the more likely participants were to base their decision on their performance - choosing to retry the current trial after good performance or to move on to the next trial after poor performance, regardless of the feedback received. Conversely, the smaller the FRN, the more likely participants were to base their decision on the feedback received.

Reward positivity affects temporal interval production in a continuous timing task.

The neural circuits of reward processing and interval timing (including the perception and production of temporal intervals) are functionally intertwined, suggesting that it might be possible for momentary reward processing to influence subsequent timing behavior. Previous animal and human studies have mainly focused on the effect of reward on interval perception, whereas its impact on interval production is less clear. In this study, we examined whether feedback, as an example of performance-contingent reward, biases interval production. We recorded EEG from 20 participants while they engaged in a continuous drumming task with different realistic tempos (1728 trials per participant). Participants received color-coded feedback after each beat about whether they were correct (on time) or incorrect (early or late). Regression-based EEG analysis was used to unmix the rapid occurrence of a feedback response called the reward positivity (RewP), which is traditionally observed in more slow-paced tasks. Using linear mixed modeling, we found that RewP amplitude predicted timing behavior for the upcoming beat. This performance-biasing effect of the RewP was interpreted as reflecting the impact of fluctuations in reward-related anterior cingulate cortex activity on timing, and the necessity of continuous paradigms to make such observations was highlighted.

Prediction-error-dependent processing of immediate and delayed positive feedback.

Learning often involves trial-and-error, i.e. repeating behaviours that lead to desired outcomes, and adjusting behaviour when outcomes do not meet our expectations and thus lead to prediction errors (PEs). PEs have been shown to be reflected in the reward positivity (RewP), an event-related potential (ERP) component between 200 and 350 ms after performance feedback which is linked to striatal processing and assessed via electroencephalography (EEG). Here we show that this is also true for delayed feedback processing, for which a critical role of the hippocampus has been suggested. We found a general reduction of the RewP for delayed feedback, but the PE was similarly reflected in the RewP and the later P300 for immediate and delayed positive feedback, while no effect was found for negative feedback. Our results suggest that, despite processing differences between immediate and delayed feedback, positive PEs drive feedback processing and learning irrespective of delay.

Emotional cues reduce Pavlovian interference in feedback-based go and nogo learning.

It is easier to execute a response in the promise of a reward and withhold a response in the promise of a punishment than vice versa, due to a conflict between cue-related Pavlovian and outcome-related instrumental action tendencies in the reverse conditions. This robust learning asymmetry in go and nogo learning is referred to as the Pavlovian bias. Interestingly, it is similar to motivational tendencies reported for affective facial expressions, i.e., facilitation of approach to a smile and withdrawal from a frown. The present study investigated whether and how learning from emotional faces instead of abstract stimuli modulates the Pavlovian bias in reinforcement learning. To this end, 137 healthy adult participants performed an orthogonalized Go/Nogo task that fully decoupled action (go/nogo) and outcome valence (win points/avoid losing points). Three groups of participants were tested with either emotional facial cues whose affective valence was either congruent (CON) or incongruent (INC) to the required instrumental response, or with neutral facial cues (NEU). Relative to NEU, the Pavlovian bias was reduced in both CON and INC, though still present under all learning conditions. Importantly, only for CON, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias effect was adaptive by improving learning performance in one of the conflict conditions. In contrast, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias in INC was completely driven by decreased learning performance in non-conflict conditions. These results suggest a potential role of arousal/salience in Pavlovian-instrumental regulation and cue-action congruency in the adaptability of goal-directed behavior. Implications for clinical application are discussed.

Social influence in adolescence: Behavioral and neural responses to peer and expert opinion.

Social influence plays a crucial role during the teen years, with adolescents supposedly exhibiting heightened sensitivity to their peers. In this study, we examine how social influence from different sources, particularly those with varying normative and informational significance, affect adolescents' opinion change. Furthermore, we investigated the underlying neural dynamics to determine whether these two behaviorally similar influences share their neural mechanisms. Twenty-three participants (14-17 years old) gave their opinions about facial stimuli and received feedback from either a peer group or an expert group, while brain responses were recorded using concurrent magnetoencephalography. In a second rating session, we found that participants' opinions changed in line with conflicting feedback, but only when the feedback was lower than their initial evaluation. On the neural level, conflict with peers evoked stronger neural responses than conflict with experts in the 230-400 ms time window and the right frontotemporal magnetometer channels. Nevertheless, there was no greater conformity toward peers. Moreover, conflict compared to no conflict decreased neural oscillations in the beta frequency range (20-26 Hz) at the right frontal and parietal channels. Taken together, our findings do not support the general assumption that adolescent behavior is excessively vulnerable to peer norms, although we found heightened neural sensitivity to peer feedback.

Willingness valued more than ability in partner choice: Insights into behavioral and ERP data.

In human cooperation, people prefer to choose partners with high willingness and ability-while both are valued by partners, individuals often prioritize willingness. Two event-related potential (ERP) experiments were conducted to discern the neural processes underpinning this preference. In the first experiment, participants made a choice between two potential partners and received feedback on the selected partner's willingness to cooperate. This was followed by feedback on the partner's task performance (ability) or a gambling outcome. In contrast, the second experiment first provided feedback on ability, then presented feedback on willingness or a gambling outcome. This study revealed that a potential partner's willingness trait significantly influences individuals' emotional evaluations and monetary allocations than the ability trait. Electrophysiological data indicated that low-willingness feedback elicited a diminished feedback-related negative (FRN) and an amplified P3 compared to high-willingness feedback. In contrast, no such difference was discernible between high- and low-ability feedback. Moreover, the P3 difference from high versus low willingness was considerably more pronounced than that from gambling outcomes, whereas the difference wave between high and low ability paralleled gambling outcomes. These findings bolster the novel finding that partner willingness may provide more substantial social rewards than ability. Furthermore, this study provides the first ERP evidence of willingness and ability trait perceptions in partner choice decisions.

Effort expenditure modulates feedback evaluations involving self-other agreement: evidence from brain potentials and neural oscillations.

The influence of effort expenditure on the subjective value in feedback involving material reward has been the focus of previous research. However, little is known about the impact of effort expenditure on subjective value evaluations when feedback involves reward that is produced in the context of social interaction (e.g. self-other agreement). Moreover, how effort expenditure influences confidence (second-order subjective value) in feedback evaluations remains unclear. Using electroencephalography, this study aimed to address these questions. Event-related potentials showed that, after exerting high effort, participants exhibited increased reward positivity difference in response to self-other (dis)agreement feedback. After exerting low effort, participants reported high confidence, and the self-other disagreement feedback evoked a larger P3a. Time-frequency analysis showed that the high-effort task evoked increased frontal midline theta power. In the low (vs. high)-effort task, the frontal midline delta power for self-other disagreement feedback was enhanced. These findings suggest that, at the early feedback evaluation stage, after exerting high effort, individuals exhibit an increased sensitivity of subjective value evaluation in response to self-other agreement feedback. At the later feedback evaluation stage, after completing the low-effort task, the self-other disagreement feedback violates the individuals'high confidence and leads to a metacognitive mismatch.

How does error correction occur during lexical learning?

We examined two theories of the mechanisms that enable error correction via corrective feedback. One theory focuses on enhancing the encoding of corrective feedback (corrective feedback-encoding facilitation account). The other is the recursive reminding theory, which considers memory integration between an initial event with error generation and a subsequent event involving correct answer feedback. The Japanese idiom pronunciation task was used in two experiments, in which it was manipulated whether the generated errors were visually presented, as well as corrective feedback. In an immediate retest after a five-minute retention interval, participants recalled their errors in the initial test and their correct answers. In addition, error trials fell into three ordinal confidence categories (low, medium, and high). First, a typical hypercorrection was replicated in which higher-confidence errors are more likely to be corrected. However, this was not observed when errors from the initial test were not recalled in the final test, which does not align with the corrective feedback-encoding facilitation account. The second issue was whether additional experience with the generated errors would enhance the error correction. Given the recursive reminding theory, the additional experience of errors should reinforce the mutual dependence between an error and the correct answer provided by feedback, improving cued recall performance later. This prediction is supported. The present findings suggest that the recursive reminding theory can explain the benefits of generating errors when learning through corrective feedback and can also be expanded to understand the hypercorrection effect.

Whether and how to regulate: Emotion regulation in negative-feedback situations.

Emotion-regulation goals are often studied in isolation, despite them typically occurring in the presence of alternative goals. Negative feedback situations offer an intriguing context to study the interplay of emotion-regulation goals (wanting to feel better) and performance goals (wanting to perform better). Across five preregistered online studies (N = 1,087), we investigated emotion-regulation choice (i.e., whether and how to regulate) in feedback situations. Challenging the assumption that the goal to perform better is the focal goal in negative-feedback situations, we show that negative feedback increases the salience of the goal to feel better via negative affect in Studies 1-2. Moving beyond the question of whether people regulate their emotions when they receive negative feedback, we examined how they regulate their emotions in Studies 3-5. Focusing on the relative importance of the goals to feel and to perform better, we found that the goal to perform better but not the goal to feel better influences negative-feedback recipients' emotion-regulation strategy choice. A salient goal to perform better was associated with a preference for reappraisal over distraction. These results have critical implications for the emotion-regulation literature and models of feedback processing from an emotion-regulation perspective. They demonstrate that affect-oriented processes such as emotion regulation operate when people receive negative feedback. They also highlight the importance of studying alternative goals given their relevance for how people regulate their emotions. From a practical standpoint, the findings may help us to better understand why people sometimes fail to perform better following negative feedback. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Exploration of the influence of the quantification method and reference scheme on feedback-related negativity and standardized measurement error of feedback-related negativity amplitudes in a trust game.

Various approaches have been taken over the years to quantify event-related potential (ERP) responses and these approaches may vary in their utility connecting empirical research and scientific claims. In this work we compared different quantification methods as well as the influence of three reference methods (linked mastoids, average reference, and current source density) on the resulting ERP amplitude. We use the experimental effects and effect sizes (Cohen's d) to evaluate the different methodological variants and we calculate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). In addition, the bootstrapped standard error of the means (SME, Luck et al., 2021), which was recently suggested as a quality criterion for ERP research, is used for this purpose. Our example for an ERP is the feedback-related negativity (FRN) to feedback about trustee behavior in a trust game with participants in the trustor position. We found that the quantification methods concerning the FRN influenced the absolute value of condition effects in the experimental paradigm. Yet, the patterns of effects were detected by all chosen methods, except for the 'individual difference wave'-based peak window approach. In addition, our findings stress the importance of checking the reference electrodes concerning effects of the experimental conditions. Furthermore, interactions of topographical distribution and reference choice should be considered. Finally, we were able to show that the SME is lower for more datapoints that are given in the quantification period of the FRN, and higher for more negative FRN amplitudes. These biases may lead to divergence of SME and effect size detection. Therefore, if the SME was used to compare different processing choices one should consider controlling for these important aspects of the data and possibly include other quality criteria like effect sizes.

The impact of social hierarchies on neural response to feedback evaluations after advice giving.

Advisors generally evaluate advisee-relevant feedback after advice giving. The response to these feedback-(1) whether the advice is accepted and (2) whether the advice is optimal-usually involves prestige. Prior literature has found that prestige is the basis by which individuals attain a superior status in the social hierarchy. However, whether advisors are motivated to attain a superior status when engaging in advice giving remains uncharacterized. Using event-related potentials, this study investigates how advisors evaluate feedback after giving advice to superior (vs. inferior) status advisees. A social hierarchy was first established based on two advisees (one was ranked as superior status and another as inferior status) as well as participants' performance in a dot-estimation task in which all participants were ranked as medium status. Participants then engaged in a game in which they were assigned roles as advisors to a superior or inferior status advisee. Afterward, the participants received feedback in two phases. In Phase 1, participants were told whether the advisees accepted the advice provided. In Phase 2, the participants were informed whether the advice they provided was correct. In these two phases, when the advisee was of superior status, participants exhibited stronger feedback-related negativity and P300 difference in response to (1) whether their advice was accepted, and (2) whether their advice was correct. Moreover, the P300 was notably larger when the participants' correct advice led to a gain for a superior-status advisee. In the context of advice giving, advisors are particularly motivated to attain a superior status when the feedback involving social hierarchies, which is reflected in higher sensitivity to feedback associated with superior status advisees at earlier and later stages during feedback evaluations in brains.

Beneficial effects of communicating intentions when delivering moral criticism: Cognitive and neural responses.

People often do not accept criticism on their morality, especially when delivered by outgroup members. In two preregistered studies, we investigated whether people become more receptive to such negative feedback when feedback senders communicate their intention to help. Participants received negative feedback from ostensible others on their selfish (rather than altruistic) decisions in a donation task. We manipulated the identity of a feedback sender (ingroup vs. outgroup) and the intention that they provided for giving feedback. A sender either did not communicate any intentions, indicated the intention to help the feedback receiver improve, or communicated the intention to show moral superiority. We measured participants' self-reported responses to the feedback (Study 1, N = 44) and additionally recorded an EEG in Study 2 (N = 34). Results showed that when no intentions were communicated, participants assumed worse intentions from outgroup senders than ingroup senders (Study 1). However, group membership had no significant effect once feedback senders made their intentions explicit. Moreover, across studies, when feedback senders communicated their intention to help, participants perceived feedback as less unfair compared with when senders tried to convey their moral superiority. Complementing these results, exploratory event-related potential results of Study 2 suggested that communicating the intention to help reduced participants' attentional vigilance toward negative feedback messages on their morality (i.e., decreased P200 amplitudes). These results demonstrate the beneficial effects of communicating the intention to help when one tries to encourage others' moral growth through criticism.

Processing abnormalities in monetary outcome evaluations among male individuals with opioid use disorder: evidence from feedback-related negativity.

Background: Numerous studies have highlighted the pivotal role of alterations in the monetary reward system in the development and maintenance of substance use disorder (SUD). Although these alterations have been well documented in various forms of SUD, the electrophysiological mechanisms specific to opioid use disorder (OUD) remain underexplored. Understanding these mechanisms is critical for developing targeted interventions and advancing theories of addiction specific to opioid use.Objectives: To explore abnormalities in monetary reward outcome processing in males with OUD. We hypothesized that control individuals would show higher feedback-related negativity (FRN) to losses, unlike those in the OUD group, where FRN to losses and gains would not differ significantly.Methods: Fifty-seven participants (29 male individuals with OUD [heroin] and 28 male controls) were evaluated. A combination of the monetary incentive delay task (MIDT) and event-related potential (ERP) technology was used to investigate electrophysiological differences in monetary reward feedback processing between the OUD and healthy control groups.Results: We observed a significant interaction between group (control vs. OUD) and monetary outcome (loss vs. gain), indicated by p < .05 and η2p = 0.116. Specifically, control participants showed stronger negative FRN to losses than gains (p < .05), unlike the OUD group (p > .05).Conclusion: This study's FRN data indicate that males with OUD show altered processing of monetary rewards, marked by reduced sensitivity to loss. These findings offer electrophysiological insights into why males with OUD may pursue drugs despite potential economic downsides.

How and when social evaluative feedback is processed in the brain: A systematic review on ERP studies.

Social evaluative feedback informs the receiver of the other's views, which may contain judgments of personality-related traits and/or the level of likability. Such kinds of social evaluative feedback are of particular importance to humans. Event-related potentials (ERPs) can directly measure where in the processing stream feedback valence, expectancy, or contextual relevance modulate information processing. This review provides an overview and systematization of studies and early, mid-latency, and late ERP effects. Early effects were inconsistently reported for all factors. Feedback valence effects are more consistently reported for specific mid-latency ERPs (Reward Positivity, RewP, and Early Posterior Negativity, EPN) and late positivities (P3 and Late Positive Potential, LPP). Unexpected feedback consistently increased the Feedback Related Negativity (FRN) and, less consistently, decreased P3 amplitudes. Contextual relevance of the sender (e.g., human vs computer sender) or self-relatedness increased mid-latency to late ERPs. Interactions between valence and other factors were less often found, arising during mid-latency stages, where most consistent interactions showed larger EPN and P3 amplitude differences for valent feedback in a more relevant context. The ERP findings highlight that social evaluative feedback is consistently differentiated during mid-latency processing stages. The review discusses the relevance of findings, possible shortcomings of different experimental designs, and open questions. Furthermore, we suggest concrete venues for future research.

Ghrelin decreases sensitivity to negative feedback and increases prediction-error related caudate activity in humans, a randomized controlled trial.

The stomach-derived hormone ghrelin plays not only a role in feeding, starvation, and survival, but it has been suggested to also be involved in the stress response, in neuropsychiatric conditions, and in alcohol and drug use disorders. Mechanisms related to reward processing might mediate ghrelin's broader effects on complex behaviors, as indicated by animal studies and mostly correlative human studies. Here, using a within-subject double-blind placebo-controlled design with intravenous ghrelin infusion in healthy volunteers (n = 30), we tested whether ghrelin alters sensitivity to reward and punishment in a reward learning task. Parameters were derived from a computational model of participants' task behavior. The reversal learning task with monetary rewards was performed during functional brain imaging to investigate ghrelin effects on brain signals related to reward prediction errors. Compared to placebo, ghrelin decreased punishment sensitivity (t = -2.448, p = 0.021), while reward sensitivity was unaltered (t = 0.8, p = 0.43). We furthermore found increased prediction-error related activity in the dorsal striatum during ghrelin administration (region of interest analysis: t-values ≥ 4.21, p-values ≤ 0.044). Our results support a role for ghrelin in reward processing that extends beyond food-related rewards. Reduced sensitivity to negative outcomes and increased processing of prediction errors may be beneficial for food foraging when hungry but could also relate to increased risk taking and impulsivity in the broader context of addictive behaviors.

From cross-lagged effects to feedback effects: Further insights into the estimation and interpretation of bidirectional relations.

Bidirectional relations have long been of interest in psychology and other social behavioral sciences. In recent years, the widespread use of intensive longitudinal data has provided new opportunities to examine dynamic bidirectional relations between variables. However, most previous studies have focused on the effect of one variable on the other (i.e., cross-lagged effects) rather than the overall effect representing the dynamic interplay between two variables (i.e., feedback effects), which we believe may be due to a lack of relevant methodological guidance. To quantify bidirectional relations as a whole, this study attempted to provide guidance for the estimation and interpretation of feedback effects based on dynamic structural equation models. First, we illustrated the estimation procedure for the average and person-specific feedback effects. Then, to facilitate the interpretation of feedback effects, we established an empirical benchmark by quantitatively synthesizing the results of relevant empirical studies. Finally, we used a set of empirical data to demonstrate how feedback effects can help (a) test theories based on bidirectional relations and (b) reveal correlates of individual differences in bidirectional relations. We also discussed the broad application prospects of feedback effects from a dynamic systems perspective. This study provides guidance for applied researchers interested in further examining feedback effects in bidirectional relations, and the shift from focusing on cross-lagged effects only to a comprehensive consideration of feedback effects may provide new insights into the study of bidirectional relations.