Your Daily digest for PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

[Article Digests for Psychology & Social Work]

PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

 

(https://www.psypost.org/habit-of-suppressing-positive-emotions-might-lead-to-lower-well-being/) Habit of suppressing positive emotions might lead to lower well-being
Nov 2nd 2024, 10:00

A series of studies in the United States and on the island of Taiwan found that people suppress their positive emotions less often than they suppress their negative emotions. However, suppression of positive—but not negative—emotions was consistently associated with lower well-being. The research was published in (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42761-023-00221-1) Affective Science.
Many people habitually suppress outward displays of their emotions. Various world cultures discourage showing certain emotions in public, considering such displays inappropriate. Men, in particular, are often expected to refrain from showing emotions, with many cultures assigning various negative qualities to men who frequently display emotions, especially negative ones.
Researchers have traditionally viewed the suppression of emotional displays as taxing for mental health and associated with lower well-being. One line of reasoning suggests that suppressing emotions can elicit unpleasant feelings of inauthenticity, which stand in opposition to the desire to be authentic and to freely express one’s true self. Suppressing emotions also requires considerable cognitive effort, leading many researchers to view suppression as an indicator of poor emotional functioning.
Study author Chen-Wei Yu and his colleagues note that the relationship between emotional suppression and well-being may be more nuanced; it might be specifically the suppression of positive emotions that diminishes well-being, not the suppression of negative emotions. They conducted a series of three studies to investigate whether tendencies to suppress negative and positive emotions are distinct personal characteristics and how these tendencies are associated with various aspects of well-being.
In the first study, the authors examined three Taiwanese datasets containing data from 479 young adult participants, including responses to the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (an assessment of emotion regulation strategies) and various well-being measures.
In the second study, the authors analyzed two datasets from culturally different contexts. One dataset came from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS), while the other came from the Pittsburgh Cold study, which examines the effects of exposure to the common cold virus in a sample of healthy U.S. adults. These datasets also included responses to the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire and a range of well-being measures.
Study 3 included 250 U.S. participants recruited via Prolific and 205 participants from Taiwan. They completed the same emotion regulation assessment as in the previous studies, although the researchers made minor modifications to resolve wording issues in the original form, along with an assessment of well-being.
The results of the first study showed that individuals tend to suppress their negative emotions more frequently than they suppress positive emotions. Suppression of positive and negative emotions was associated, but only moderately, indicating that individuals often apply different levels of suppression to positive and negative emotions. Suppression of positive emotions, but not negative emotions, was somewhat associated with lower well-being.
The second study confirmed these findings, showing only a moderate association between the suppression of positive and negative emotions in individuals. Once again, suppression of positive emotions was associated with lower well-being, while suppression of negative emotions was not.
Finally, the third study showed that both in Taiwan and in the United States, individuals tend to suppress negative emotions more frequently than positive emotions. The remaining findings were consistent with those of the previous studies.
“The present investigation established the separability of differential adaptiveness of habitual expressive suppression of positive and of negative emotions. Across three studies and two culturally distinct regions (i.e., Taiwan, US), we found that (a) people’s suppression of positive (vs. negative) emotions was engaged less and was less integral to their general suppression tendencies, (b) the two forms of suppression were only moderately correlated, and (c) only suppression of positive, but not of negative, emotions predicted lower wellbeing,” the study authors concluded.
The study sheds light on the links between suppressing emotions and well-being. However, it should be noted that the study was solely based on self-reports, leaving room for reporting bias to affect the results. Additionally, the design of the studies does not allow any cause-and-effect conclusions to be derived from the findings.
The paper, “(http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42761-023-00221-1) Habitual Expressive Suppression of Positive, but not Negative, Emotions Consistently Predicts Lower Well-being across Two Culturally Distinct Regions,” was authored by Chen-Wei Yu, Claudia Haase, and Jen-Ho Chang.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-study-explores-testosterones-role-in-mens-romantic-misjudgments/) New study explores testosterone’s role in men’s romantic misjudgments
Nov 2nd 2024, 08:00

A recent study published in (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1425389) Frontiers in Psychology offers new insights into how testosterone might affect men’s interpretations of women’s social signals. Researchers found that testosterone heightened men’s sensitivity to specific friendly cues, particularly among men who viewed themselves as more attractive, though it did not broadly increase the tendency to overestimate women’s romantic interest.
Men’s tendency to sometimes over-interpret friendly cues from women as romantic interest, known as the “sexual misperception bias,” has long intrigued psychologists. Some suggest this bias may be a result of evolutionary pressures, given that misinterpreting interest might have had greater reproductive consequences than occasional misjudgments. In terms of reproductive success, a missed opportunity to connect with a mate could have more impact than a rare mistaken advance.
Testosterone is a hormone commonly associated with mating and social behaviors, and researchers believe it may influence men’s perception of social cues. Although previous studies have examined testosterone’s effects on behavior and attraction, little was known about whether it directly shapes men’s interpretations of social interactions with women. This study aimed to fill that gap by exploring testosterone’s effect on men’s perception of romantic interest in social scenarios.
“I have long been interested in bridging ultimate and proximate levels of explanation, that is evolutionary explanations of the why questions (what is X for?) and explanations of the how question (what are the mechanisms responsible for X?),” said study author (https://x.com/tangl3dbank) Stefan M. M. Goetz, who is affiliated with Michigan State University’s Charles Stewart Mott Department of Public Health.
“The sexual overperception hypothesis has become a key example in evolutionary psychology. It suggests that due to the adaptive advantage of minimizing missed mating opportunities, men tend to overestimate sexual interest,” Goetz explained. “While researchers have studied many ‘how’ questions on sex differences in behavior, few have investigated whether testosterone, a hormone mediating male-typical traits, links to this bias—and none has shown causal evidence.”
The researchers studied a group of 190 heterosexual men aged 18 to 40. These participants, recruited through media, databases, and universities, were randomly assigned in a double-blind setup to receive either 11 milligrams of testosterone or a placebo. This meant neither the participants nor the researchers knew who had received the actual hormone.
After the administration, participants interacted briefly with a female research assistant, who was instructed to behave in a friendly but non-flirtatious manner. Two additional observers, unaware of the study’s purpose, later rated video recordings of the interactions to ensure the assistant’s behavior appeared consistently friendly.
Following the interaction, participants completed questionnaires to assess their perceptions of the assistant’s interest and their own levels of attractiveness. This setup allowed the researchers to investigate how participants’ self-perceived attractiveness influenced their interpretation of the interaction, especially among those who received testosterone.
The researchers found that testosterone did not broadly increase men’s tendency to overinterpret friendliness as romantic interest. However, testosterone appeared to increase sensitivity to specific friendly behaviors, but only in men who rated themselves as moderately or highly attractive. Men with lower self-perceived attractiveness did not show a stronger response to friendly cues after receiving testosterone, suggesting the hormone’s effect may depend on a person’s self-image.
Interestingly, testosterone also appeared to increase men’s tendency to “project” their own romantic interest onto the female assistant, particularly among those who saw themselves as more attractive. For example, men who rated themselves highly attractive and received testosterone were more likely to interpret friendly cues as romantic interest if they were also interested in a connection with her.
Goetz highlighted five key takeaways from the research: “First, and this is true of the sexual misperception literature in general, guys, when you first meet a woman, she is probably not interested in having sex with you,” he explained. “In fact, for both men and women, the base rate of interest is quite low; men’s just happens to be slightly higher, which leads to the well-documented overperception bias among men. Second, people tend to infer other people’s mental states by projecting our own.”
“Third, overperception is particularly acute if a man thinks that he is attractive. However, this doesn’t mean that a woman won’t ever be interested in him. For one, attractive men (self-perceptions are correlated) do receive greater sexual interest from others, and these men may learn to incorporate this into their perceptions despite the resultant overperception. Past research has suggested that, especially for attractive men, prolonged courtship can generate reciprocal attraction. However, this should not be taken as encouragement to pursue someone who has shown no interest—persistent unwanted advances constitute harassment and should be avoided.”
“Fourth, testosterone likely plays a role in generating overperception, particularly among men who think of themselves as being attractive, and increases the tendency to project one’s own interest,” Goetz continued.
“Finally, I want readers to understand that testosterone does not cause ‘masculine’ behavior in a straightforward, ineluctable manner. Gendered behaviors are the result of a complex mix of social and biological factors. Cultural stereotypes of testosterone as the sole cause of masculine behavior have not been borne out by the data. For one, in our study we did not observe a main effect of testosterone, meaning that other factors (individual differences and contextual factors), in conjunction with testosterone, influenced these behaviors. Additionally, while these effects were detectable across a large sample of men, knowing an individual’s testosterone level will not be very informative with respect to his behavior.”
While this study sheds light on the influence of testosterone on social perception, there are some limitations to consider. For one, the use of a single female confederate during a brief interaction may limit the generalizability of the findings, as her specific style of friendliness could have affected the results. In future research, incorporating a variety of female participants with differing interaction styles and involving more naturalistic settings could give a clearer picture of how testosterone affects perceptions in varied contexts.
“The interaction was very brief, lasting only three minutes,” Goetz said. “While people do rapidly form impressions of others, sussing out mental states over the course of a single interaction likely requires more time. I would like to see these results replicated and extended to situations that more closely resemble human courtship; that is, repeated encounters.”
Additionally, the study only provided a single dose of testosterone, limiting conclusions about the long-term effects of testosterone on social perception. Investigating longer-term hormone administration or comparing these results to those of natural hormonal changes could provide deeper insights into how testosterone influences these biases over time.
“We only tested the causal effect of acute changes in testosterone and only after a single dose,” Goetz explained. “(Basal testosterone was positively correlated with overperception, but in our design, it cannot be causally linked to perception—e.g., it could be the case that men who regularly overperceive sexual interest experience heightened testosterone as a result.) Many androgen-linked traits, including psychological traits, are to some degree shaped by organizational effects of androgens, which are largely permanent and emerge during developmental sensitive periods. Additionally, acute changes may become more apparent after repeated exposures.”
“The effect of current hormone levels often depends on these prior organizational effects. Intriguingly, facial masculinity may reflect levels of prenatal testosterone exposure; and facial masculinity has been linked to men’s self-perceived attractiveness. If facial masculinity is a useful proxy for organizational effects, including it in the statistical model could help to address whether the association with self-perceived attractiveness and perception stems from inflated self-appraisals and/or past experiences, or from organizational influences of testosterone which then amplify the influence of acute testosterone changes.”
“In a similar manner, some research indicates that sensitivity to acute changes in testosterone depends on basal levels,” Goetz added. “Reported in the supplemental material, we found that the effect of acutely raising testosterone on projection of long-term sexual interest was smaller among men with higher basal testosterone, suggesting that those with lower baseline levels were more sensitive to equivalent increases in testosterone. Thus, sensitivity to acute changes may be an important factor in moderating testosterone’s effects.”
These findings enhance our understanding of hormone-driven social behavior and pave the way for further research into the nuanced ways testosterone may shape human interactions, potentially validating evolutionary explanations.
“Ultimately, I believe greater attention to proximate mechanisms can help establish the validity of evolutionary explanations,” Goetz said. “If putatively adaptive sex differences such as men’s sexual overperception can be shown to be causally mediated by sex hormones, this strengthens evolutionary accounts while challenging purely sociocultural explanations. The same is true if the reverse is found.”
“I think this research illustrates the value of integrating different levels of analysis in psychology. Understanding both why a behavior exists (evolutionary explanations) and how it works (biological mechanisms) gives us a more complete picture. Plus, this kind of work helps demystify the role of hormones like testosterone in human behavior—showing they’re part of a complex system rather than simple triggers of stereotypical male behavior. Recent methodological advancements in behavioral endocrinology are finally enabling researchers to address testosterone’s causal role in human behavior.”
The study, “(https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1425389/full) Under the influence: exogenous testosterone influences men’s cross-sex perceptions of sexual interest,” was authored by Stefan M. M. Goetz, Todd Lucas, and Justin M. Carr.

(https://www.psypost.org/can-kindness-make-you-more-beautiful-new-psychology-research-says-yes/) Can kindness make you more beautiful? New psychology research says yes
Nov 2nd 2024, 06:00

A recent study published in the (https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12800) British Journal of Social Psychology suggests that people seen as kind and helpful are also perceived as more physically attractive. This effect, seen across various scenarios and types of relationships, highlights how kind actions may shape perceptions of physical beauty.
Physical appearance is often the first aspect noticed when meeting someone new, and studies have long shown that personality traits can influence attractiveness judgments. While positive characteristics such as friendliness or humor can make people seem more attractive, specific traits may carry more weight than others.
In their new research, Natalia Kononov and Danit Ein-Gar focused on prosocial behavior—acts of kindness, cooperation, and helpfulness—and sought to understand whether this quality has a unique effect on perceptions of physical beauty. Their hypothesis was that people might feel motivated to associate with prosocial individuals, viewing them as more attractive because of an unconscious desire to form connections with people who display kindness.
“Often, we use beauty metaphorically to describe admirable inner qualities, saying someone is ‘beautiful on the inside.’ I was curious to see if this perception has a basis in reality—whether kindness and generosity, qualities associated with inner beauty, actually influence how we perceive someone’s physical attractiveness. Our findings suggest this association isn’t just metaphorical; beautiful acts do, indeed, lead us to see people as more beautiful,” said study author (https://www.linkedin.com/in/natalia-kononov-9566b1282/) Natalia Kononov, a Fulbright Postdoctoral Fellow at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
The research involved ten studies with over 4,000 participants. The team designed a variety of scenarios to assess whether prosocial behavior influenced how physically attractive people appeared to others. Participants in different studies either observed real-life prosocial acts, read descriptions of kind actions, or imagined scenarios involving helpful behavior.
To ensure the findings were comprehensive, the researchers accounted for several factors: they compared perceptions of attractiveness when participants saw people acting kindly versus in a neutral context; they explored how consistent prosocial behavior might affect attractiveness differently than one-time acts; and they examined whether the influence of kindness on perceived beauty was stronger than that of other positive traits like humor or intelligence.
Participants were shown images of people alongside descriptions of either prosocial or neutral behaviors, and then rated their physical attractiveness on a standardized scale. In some studies, participants only read about the target without seeing any images, allowing researchers to determine whether the effects of prosocial behavior extended beyond visual impressions.
The researchers discovered a consistent link between prosocial actions and higher ratings of physical attractiveness. People who were described as engaging in kind or helpful behaviors were rated as more beautiful than those who were not described this way. This finding held true for both male and female observers evaluating targets of either gender, suggesting a broad appeal of prosociality in enhancing physical attractiveness.
“An interesting aspect of our findings is that the effect of prosociality on attractiveness was consistent across genders,” Kononov told PsyPost. “Kindness and generosity made both men and women appear more attractive, regardless of who was being evaluated or who was doing the evaluating. This gender-universal appeal highlights just how broadly kindness can shape perceptions of beauty.”
The effect appeared strongest when kindness was part of the person’s usual behavior, rather than a one-off act, indicating that people tend to find sustained kindness more attractive than sporadic good deeds. Interestingly, prosociality’s influence on attractiveness ratings was stronger than that of other positive traits, like humor or intelligence. This suggests that kindness and helpfulness play a unique role in shaping physical perceptions beyond a general “halo effect,” where positive traits broadly enhance other evaluations.
“We thought prosociality would play a significant role, but we didn’t expect it to surpass traits like intelligence and humor,” Kononov said. “It’s interesting because, while people often view humor and intelligence as highly appealing traits, kindness may actually have a stronger impact on how attractive someone appears. This finding suggests that kindness might be more central to our perception of beauty than we usually assume.”
Moreover, the study found that the motivation to form relationships also influenced this effect. In contexts where a relationship was possible, people viewed prosocial individuals as more attractive; however, when forming a relationship was not feasible, the effect of kindness on perceived beauty diminished. This highlights that the tendency to find kind people more attractive is partly based on a desire for connection, rather than simply admiring prosocial behavior from a distance.
Lastly, prosocial behavior even softened participants’ judgments of physical imperfections. When a person was described as prosocial, participants were less likely to focus on minor flaws, such as scars or other physical irregularities, compared to non-prosocial individuals. This suggests that kindness can enhance attractiveness not only by boosting positive impressions but also by reducing attention to imperfections.
“The main takeaway is that physical beauty is shaped by more than just physical traits like symmetry and other external features, which people often invest a lot of effort into,” Kononov told PsyPost. “Acts of kindness and generosity can also enhance how attractive someone appears to others—and this effect extends beyond romantic relationships. Positive behavior adds a unique layer of attractiveness that transcends outward appearance.”
Despite the study’s thorough approach, some limitations exist. The sample was primarily from United States-based participants, which may limit how the findings apply to other cultural contexts. Since kindness and helpfulness can take different forms across cultures, it’s worth investigating whether the link between prosocial behavior and beauty perception varies in different parts of the world.
Another limitation is that the study focused largely on participants’ initial perceptions rather than on how these impressions may evolve over time. Future research might explore whether the positive impact of prosociality on attractiveness endures over long-term relationships, or if other traits, like reliability or loyalty, might eventually play a more significant role in attractiveness judgments.
“One limitation to consider is that our study focuses on perceptions, though it’s interesting to consider the potential effects these perceptions may have on behavior,” Kononov said. “Additionally, our findings capture a general trend that could vary across different social and cultural contexts, so further research would be valuable to understand how these dynamics might shift in diverse settings.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12800) Prosocial behaviour enhances evaluation of physical beauty,” was published on September 16, 2024.

(https://www.psypost.org/are-conservatives-or-progressives-more-biased-new-study-finds-it-depends-on-whos-in-power/) Are conservatives or progressives more biased? New study finds it depends on who’s in power
Nov 1st 2024, 16:00

A new study sheds light on how political power influences ideological prejudice in the United States, revealing that people’s ideological bias against opposing beliefs intensifies when their own party is not in power. The research analyzed data spanning nearly five decades, showing that conservatives are more prejudiced against progressives when Democrats hold power, and progressives exhibit stronger biases against conservatives when Republicans are in charge. Published in the (https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-17783-001?doi=1) Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, the study offers new insights into how ideological prejudices shift based on political circumstances.
The researchers behind the study — Johanna Woitzel from Ruhr University Bochum and Alex Koch from the University of Chicago — aimed to address an ongoing debate: is ideological prejudice inherently stronger among conservatives or progressives? This question has been contested for years, with some studies suggesting conservatives or progressive are generally more prejudiced, while others argue that ideological bias is a universal response to opposing viewpoints. Woitzel and Koch proposed a new angle: that political power dynamics might shape how strongly people hold prejudices against opposing ideologies.
To test this hypothesis, they used data from two main sources: the American National Election Studies (ANES) and the Agency–Beliefs–Communion (ABC) model studies. ANES provided an extensive longitudinal dataset, covering political attitudes from 1972 to 2021, while the ABC studies offered recent data from 2016 to 2021, focusing on people’s perceptions of various social groups based on ideological alignment.
The researchers pooled and reanalyzed 27 studies — 21 from ANES and six from the ABC model — each of which included information on people’s ideological self-identification, prejudicial feelings toward different groups, and the political environment at the time of data collection. ANES, with its nationally representative samples, measured ideological dissimilarity by asking participants to rate their attitudes toward various groups on a spectrum of “warmth” and “coldness,” which essentially indicated likability or dislikability. The ABC studies, on the other hand, captured ideological prejudice by asking participants to rate groups based on trustworthiness, likability, and morality.
In analyzing these data sources, the researchers identified the party in power during each period and created a political power index to account for which party controlled the presidency, vice presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives. This political power index varied from -0.5 (indicating complete Republican control) to +0.5 (indicating complete Democratic control). By integrating this index with the participants’ ideological scores and prejudice measures, the researchers could assess if and how shifts in political power influenced ideological prejudice.
The researchers found that changes in governmental power were closely tied to fluctuating patterns of ideological prejudice: conservatives displayed increased prejudice toward progressive groups during Democratic administrations, while progressives showed stronger bias against conservative groups during Republican-led administrations.
To complement these findings, the researchers conducted two new experiments. In the first experiment, 1,004 participants were recruited to rate a series of groups under conditions that varied both the measures of ideology (narrow vs. broad) and the form of prejudice assessed (feelings vs. thoughts). This design was intended to evaluate whether the measurement approach could influence the strength or direction of ideological prejudice. Participants rated their own ideological alignment on a scale from conservative to progressive and then completed assessments of prejudice toward groups with contrasting ideologies.
The results of this experiment indicated that measurement style (narrow political ideology vs. broader measures including lifestyle and religion) did not significantly alter the findings, reinforcing the robustness of the ideological prejudice effect.
The second experiment tested the impact of sample representativeness by comparing results from a nationally representative sample of 1,000 U.S. residents with a more accessible sample of 1,044 online workers recruited through Prolific Academic. Both groups rated their prejudicial feelings toward various groups identified in a pilot study as common ideological groups in U.S. society, including Democrats, Republicans, LGBTQ+ people, and religious groups. The results showed consistent levels of ideological prejudice in both samples, suggesting that the study’s findings were not influenced by sample characteristics.
To test for causality, the researchers conducted a third experiment that included an imagined political power scenario, asking 994 participants to envision either Democrats or Republicans holding complete control of the U.S. government. Participants then rated their prejudice toward both conservative and liberal groups. This manipulation allowed researchers to simulate a “perceived power threat” and observe its effect on participants’ levels of ideological prejudice.
The results showed that when participants imagined that their opposing political party held power, their ideological prejudice toward opposing groups increased. This experimental evidence reinforced the study’s main hypothesis that ideological prejudice intensifies in response to opposition or perceived powerlessness within the political structure.
The results “led us to conclude that ideological prejudice is robustly heterogeneous,” the researchers stated. “Thus, the scientific debate about (a)symmetric ideological prejudice might benefit from focusing on when and why ideological prejudice is stronger in conservatives, progressives, or neither, instead of arguing that one of the three is the case throughout time and across situations.”
However, this study has some limitations. The researchers acknowledged that while they found strong evidence for the influence of political power on ideological prejudice, other factors could contribute to this effect. Events such as economic downturns, social movements, and global crises like pandemics may also heighten or reduce ideological biases. Additionally, the study primarily focused on ideological dynamics within the United States, which means these findings may not apply to other countries or cultures with different political systems and values.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001643) Political Rule (vs. Opposition) Predicts Whether Ideological Prejudice Is Stronger in U.S. Conservatives or Progressives,” was authored by Johanna Woitzel and Alex Koch.

(https://www.psypost.org/individualizing-personality-assessments-through-humanistic-trait-based-interventions/) Individualizing personality assessments through humanistic trait-based interventions
Nov 1st 2024, 14:00

New research published in (https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000366) The Humanistic Psychologist introduces the Five-Factor Personality Assessment System (FFPAS), a novel method for individualizing psychological assessments.
The five-factor model (FFM) of personality (or the Big Five) has been a dominant framework in psychological research. While widely used, traditional applications of the FFM, such as the NEO Personality Inventory, often fail to account for the unique, (https://www.psypost.org/new-research-proposes-individualizing-psychological-assessment-using-the-five-factor-model-of-personality/) individualized experiences that contribute to psychological distress. This gap has become increasingly apparent in humanistic psychology, which emphasizes a person-centered, holistic approach to understanding psychological challenges.
The FFPAS seeks to connect individual trait measures with life situations that contribute to psychological distress by highlighting trait-situation mismatches.
“A guiding question behind my research has been to understand the relationship between Big Five personality traits and the world as we encounter it in perception,” explained (https://www.garrihovha.ca) Dr. Garri Hovhannisyan ((https://x.com/GarriHovha) @garrihovha), a clinician in private practice at the Centre for Interpersonal Relationships and the Centre for Psychology and Emotional Health, in Toronto, Canada
“The semistructured interview I propose in my article – based on my dissertation research – provides a way of methodically explicating how individuals’ personality traits are implicated in the problematic patterns they experience. This, in turn, affords novel clinical applications of the Big Five model in diagnosing and ultimately treating individuals who are caught up in negative patterns – something of value to clinicians and mental health researchers alike.”
The FFPAS is built around a semistructured interview format, designed to be implemented alongside established personality assessments like the NEO. Hovhannisyan’s approach uses coding criteria to analyze client narratives, focusing on how personality traits manifest in everyday situations. In a pilot study, the system was tested with a sample recruited through university mailing lists and psychology groups. Four participants completed an extensive personality assessment using the International Personality Item Pool NEO (IPIP-NEO) questionnaire, followed by two hour-long interviews.
During the interviews, participants identified repetitive patterns of distress in their lives, providing detailed examples. Their narratives were transcribed and analyzed using the FFPAS coding system, which tagged references to the five personality domains (i.e., Openness,  Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism) and their corresponding facets (e.g., Self-discipline, Impulsiveness). This allowed the researcher to identify patterns of trait-situation mismatches.
“Personality traits are not static but interact dynamically with life situations,” Hovhannisyan explained. “For example, Extraverts have a particularly pronounced need for interacting with others, which influences their behavior and predisposes them to seeking connection – such as by attending parties or social gatherings. Conversely, Introverts are less likely to behave in such ways, because their need for interaction is less pronounced.”
“The FFPAS demonstrates that personal struggles often result from mismatches between our traits and the demands of our environments (e.g., when Extraverts have no opportunities to interact, or when Introverts have no opportunities to be alone). This awareness could lead to greater self-understanding and help guide personalized interventions for improved mental health outcomes.”
“None of the problematic patterns we experience are just within us but arise from our relationship to the world. This perspective is helpful, particularly in conducting psychological assessments. It can relieve clients from feelings of guilt and shame by allowing them to see that, without the world’s presence, their experience of negative patterns would not be possible, and that despite their suffering, there is certainly a place in the world for them and their distinct styles of being in the world, as per their Big Five traits.”
One limitation is that the FFPAS has yet to undergo extensive psychometric validation.
“The current findings are based on preliminary research, so more empirical data would solidify the system’s reliability and applicability,” Hovhannisyan said.
“Questions that remain include establishing a stronger empirical foundation for the FFPAS’ coding system, understanding the full range of its clinical applications, and examining how it can be best implemented in various therapeutic settings. Additionally, exploring trait-situation mismatches in more diverse populations would enhance its generalizability.”
He added, “I would like to emphasize the potential of the FFPAS to make a significant contribution to clinical practice. By providing a systematic way to link Big Five personality traits with lived experiences of distress, it can bridge existing theoretical insights from personality research with practical, therapeutic applications in psychology.”
The research, “(https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000366) The Five-Factor Personality Assessment System”, was authored by Garri Hovhannisyan​.

(https://www.psypost.org/orthognathic-surgery-might-have-a-surprising-impact-on-how-we-perceive-the-world/) Orthognathic surgery might have a surprising impact on how we perceive the world
Nov 1st 2024, 12:00

A recent study published in (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1426820) Frontiers in Psychology has found that individuals who undergo jaw surgery for jaw deformities may experience improvements in self-perception and a heightened sensitivity to emotional aspects of objects around them. The study suggests that these changes in facial appearance might not only enhance physical attractiveness but also influence cognitive functions. These results highlight the surprising mental and emotional impacts of facial surgery, which go beyond physical health and aesthetics.
Orthognathic surgery, a procedure often used to correct facial deformities associated with jaw structure, has long been recognized for its positive impact on quality of life. By addressing functional and appearance-related issues, this type of surgery improves patients’ ability to chew and speak while also helping alleviate psychological distress linked to self-image. Many patients report a boost in confidence and general quality of life following surgery, but researchers have mostly focused on how these procedures affect physical health and broad emotional states.
The question of whether these surgeries specifically change cognitive functions—such as how patients perceive themselves or respond emotionally to the outside world—has largely gone unexplored. This study aimed to close this gap, investigating how changes in facial appearance might influence self-evaluation and reactions to emotional cues in the surrounding environment.
“While the goal of orthognathic surgery for jaw deformities is to improve facial appearance, it is also intended to eliminate psychological distress. However, this has rarely been verified,” explained study author (https://researchmap.jp/mhonma?lang=en) Motoyasu Honma, a junior associate professor at the Showa University School of Medicine in Tokyo. “Our interest was in how improvements in facial appearance benefit the psychological aspects of patients, and behind this interest was the hypothesis that the effects of orthognathic surgery extend beyond appearance to include individual self-evaluation and mental health.”
The research team gathered two groups of participants: 22 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery and a control group of 30 healthy, age- and sex-matched individuals. The patients in the surgery group, ranging in age from 18 to 39, underwent specific types of jaw surgeries, such as the bilateral sagittal split osteotomy, with or without the Le Fort I osteotomy, between September 2020 and June 2021. All patients completed several stages of assessment at various intervals: three months before surgery, one month before surgery, and one month post-surgery.
For their evaluations, patients rated how they felt about their own face and body, assessing both emotional response and preference using a visual scale. In addition, patients reviewed 30 different images, some designed to evoke positive, negative, or neutral emotions, and rated how much they liked or disliked each image. Patients’ anxiety levels were also measured using the State–Trait Anxiety Inventory, a tool designed to measure anxiety both as a stable personality trait and as a temporary response to specific situations. This allowed the researchers to assess how patients’ emotional reactions, self-assessments, and anxiety levels shifted over time.
The researchers found that patients viewed their facial appearance more favorably after the surgery, while their opinions of their body image stayed relatively constant. This change in facial self-evaluation confirms that patients felt better about their appearance specifically because of the facial improvements from surgery rather than an overall shift in self-image.
In addition to the changes in self-perception, patients also showed heightened sensitivity to emotional images after their surgery. When patients viewed images with positive or negative emotional content, they reacted more intensely than they did before the surgery, while their responses to neutral images remained unaffected. This suggests that the surgery did not simply heighten emotional sensitivity across the board; instead, it specifically impacted the way patients responded to content with emotional significance.
“What I found surprising was that the results showed that the negative images were perceived more negatively, while the positive images were perceived more positively, rather than all the images being evaluated positively,” Honma told PsyPost. “I interpreted this as probably being due to the fact that the participants’ sensitivity to emotional images had increased.”
Another interesting finding was the correlation between improved self-ratings and emotional sensitivity. Patients who rated their facial appearance more positively after surgery were also the ones who showed the strongest emotional responses to the positive and negative images. This connection implies that as patients’ views of their own appearance improved, they became more emotionally receptive to the world around them. However, this heightened sensitivity was not linked to a reduction in anxiety, suggesting that the improved emotional responsiveness was a unique benefit of the surgery itself rather than a byproduct of reduced stress.
“This study has presented the benefits of facial improvement for patients in terms of changes in cognitive function,” Honma said. “These benefits may be a new aspect effect of plastic surgery, and may benefit the entire beauty industry. For the general public, similar benefits may also be occurring in everyday makeup behavior.”
While this study provides valuable insight into the cognitive and emotional effects of facial surgery, it is important to consider its limitations. One limitation is the relatively small sample size. Increasing the sample size in future studies would help confirm and expand upon these findings. Additionally, while the study examined the impact of surgery on self-perception and emotional sensitivity, it did not explore how surgery might affect other aspects of mental health, such as social anxiety or sleep quality. Further research in these areas could help clarify the potential of orthognathic surgery to reduce broader psychological symptoms.
“Although this study focused on changes in anxiety, it is also possible that PTSD and sleep disorders are also involved, and it is hoped that these will also be investigated,” Honma said. “In addition, with regard to cognitive science indicators, it is thought that it is important to investigate the possibility of changes in taste and respiratory function due to improvement in the jaw joint. We hope to achieve the treatment goal eliminating psychological disorders in patients with jaw deformities through a multifaceted investigation.”
“The current experimental data showed that facial surgery also has psychological benefits, but this is not intended to be an easy recommendation for facial surgery,” the researcher added.

The study, “(https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1426820/full) Changes in facial appearance alter one’s sensitivity not only to the self but also to the outside world,” was authored by Motoyasu Honma, Sayaka Yoshiba, Saya Miyamoto, Nanae Himi, Shugo Haga, Sumire Ogura, Koutaro Maki, Yuri Masaoka, Masahiko Izumizaki, and Tatsuo Shirota.

Forwarded by:
Michael Reeder LCPC
Baltimore, MD

This information is taken from free public RSS feeds published by each organization for the purpose of public distribution. Readers are linked back to the article content on each organization's website. This email is an unaffiliated unofficial redistribution of this freely provided content from the publishers. 

 

(#) unsubscribe from this feed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clinicians-exchange.org/pipermail/article-digests-clinicians-exchange.org/attachments/20241102/006a1ece/attachment.htm>