Affective responses to ambivalence are context-dependent: A facial EMG study on the role of inconsistency and evaluative context in shaping affective responses to ambivalence

Examining the Link Between Neutral and Ambivalent Attitudes: Their Association and their Co-Occurrence

We examined the link between neutral and ambivalent attitudes. First, we examined whether they are mutually exclusive, in that when one attitude is present, the other is not, or if they co-occur. Second, we examined whether they are negatively associated, such that as ambivalence increases, neutrality decreases. In three studies, participants indicated their positive, negative, neutral, and ambivalent attitudes toward various stimuli. In contrast to both ideas, (objective and subjective) ambivalence and neutrality co-occurred (no mutual exclusivity), and they, at best, depending on how one looked at the association, were only weakly positively or negatively associated (no strong, negative association). Univalent attitudes co-occurred with and were strongly negatively associated with neutral attitudes. These findings conflict with theories and methodologies that assume mutual exclusivity or an inverse association between neutral and ambivalent attitudes, suggesting that researchers should not assume that presence of neutrality suggests a lack of ambivalence.

Social evaluations under conflict: negative judgments of conflicting information are easier than positive judgments

In the current study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate how the brain facilitates social judgments despite evaluatively conflicting information. Participants learned consistent (positive or negative) and ambivalent (positive and negative) person information and were then asked to provide binary judgments of these targets in situations that either resolved conflict by prioritizing a subset of information or not. Self-report, decision time and brain data confirm that integrating contextual information into our evaluations of objects or people allows for nuanced (social) evaluations. The same mixed trait information elicited or failed to elicit evaluative conflict dependent on the situation. Crucially, we provide data suggesting that negative judgments are easier and may be considered the ‘default’ action when experiencing evaluative conflict: weaker activation in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during trials of evaluative conflict was related to a greater likelihood of unfavorable judgments, and greater activation was related to more favorable judgments. Since negative outcome consequences are arguably more detrimental and salient, this finding supports the idea that additional regulation and a more active selection process are necessary to override an initial negative response to evaluatively conflicting information.

Surprise: unfolding of facial expressions

Responses to surprising events are dynamic. We argue that initial responses are primarily driven by the unexpectedness of the surprising event and reflect an interrupted and surprised state in which the outcome does not make sense yet. Later responses, after sense-making, are more likely to incorporate the valence of the outcome itself. To identify initial and later responses to surprising stimuli, we conducted two repetition-change studies and coded the general valence of facial expressions using computerised facial coding and specific facial action using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Results partly supported our unfolding logic. The computerised coding showed that initial expressions to positive surprises were less positive than later expressions. Moreover, expressions to positive and negative surprises were initially similar, but after some time differentiated depending on the valence of the event. Importantly, these patterns were particularly pronounced in a subset of facially expressive participants, who also showed facial action in the FACS coding. The FACS data showed that the initial phase was characterised by limited facial action, whereas the later increase in positivity seems to be explained by smiling. Conceptual as well as methodological implications are discussed.

Perception is key? Does perceptual sensitivity and parenting behavior predict children's reactivity to others' emotions?

When interacting with other people, both children's biological predispositions and past experiences play a role in how they will process and respond to social-emotional cues. Children may partly differ in their reactions to such cues because they differ in the threshold for perceiving such cues in general. Theoretically, perceptual sensitivity (i.e., the amount of detection of slight, low-intensity stimuli from the external environment independent of visual and auditory ability) might, therefore, provide us with specific information on individual differences in susceptibility to the environment. However, the temperament trait of perceptual sensitivity is highly understudied. In an experiment, we tested whether school-aged children's (N=521, 52.5% boys, M_age=9.72years, SD=1.51) motor (facial electromyography) and affective (self-report) reactivities to dynamic facial expressions and vocalizations is predicted by their (parent-reported) perceptual sensitivity. Our results indicate that children's perceptual sensitivity predicts their motor reactivity to both happy and angry expressions and vocalizations. In addition, perceptual sensitivity interacted with positive (but not negative) parenting behavior in predicting children's motor reactivity to these emotions. Our findings suggest that perceptual sensitivity might indeed provide us with information on individual differences in reactivity to social-emotional cues, both alone and in interaction with parenting behavior. Because perceptual sensitivity focuses specifically on whether children perceive cues from their environment, and not on whether these cues cause arousal and/or whether children are able to regulate this arousal, it should be considered that perceptual sensitivity lies at the root of such individual differences.

Understanding Mixed Emotions: Paradigms and Measures

In this review, we examine the paradigms and measures available for experimentally studying mixed emotions in the laboratory. For eliciting mixed emotions, we describe a mixed emotions film library that allows for the repeated elicitation of a specific homogeneous mixed emotional state and appropriately matched pure positive, pure negative, and neutral emotional states. For assessing mixed emotions, we consider subjective and objective measures that fall into univariate, bivariate, and multivariate measurement categories. As paradigms and measures for objectively studying mixed emotions are still in their early stages, we conclude by outlining future directions that focus on the reliability, temporal dynamics, and response coherence of mixed emotions paradigms and measures. This research will build a strong foundation for future studies and significantly advance our understanding of mixed emotions.