Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableNegative Emotion and Nonacceptance of Emotion in Daily Life(AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC, 2022-08)Nonacceptance of emotion is consistently linked with increased levels of psychopathology and diminished well-being. Research has found that negative emotion and nonacceptance of emotion are positively associated cross-sectionally but has yet to directly investigate temporal associations between these constructs. Given that negative emotions are frequently the target of negative thoughts and other emotions, and that acceptance of emotion is associated with prospective decreases in negative emotion, we hypothesized that the temporal relation between negative emotion and nonacceptance of emotion is bidirectional. The present study examined the association between these variables during people's daily lives using an experience sampling methodology. Multilevel modeling was used for all analyses, including hierarchical generalized linear modeling and log-normal hurdle modeling. A total of 187 women from the United States and Australia reported negative emotion and nonacceptance of emotion 14 times a day for 5 days. Negative emotion and nonacceptance of emotion were positively associated contemporaneously. Across time, nonacceptance of emotion was prospectively and positively associated with the intensity of negative emotion independent of immediately prior negative emotion, and negative emotion intensity was prospectively and positively associated with nonacceptance of emotion independent of immediately prior nonacceptance. Results support a bidirectional model of negative emotion and nonacceptance of emotion wherein each variable predicts increases in the other across time. Our findings elucidate how individuals fall into maladaptive emotional patterns that are difficult to break and could possibly pave the way to the development and maintenance of psychopathology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
-
ItemHow Does It Feel to Be Treated Like an Object? Direct and Indirect Effects of Exposure to Sexual Objectification on Women's Emotions in Daily Life(American Psychological Association, 2019-06-01)Exposure to sexual objectification is an everyday experience for many women, yet little is known about its emotional consequences. Fredrickson and Roberts' (1997) objectification theory proposed a within-person process, wherein exposure to sexual objectification causes women to adopt a third-person perspective on their bodies, labeled self-objectification, which has harmful downstream consequences for their emotional well-being. However, previous studies have only tested this model at the between-person level, making them unreliable sources of inference about the proposed intraindividual psychological consequences of objectification. Here, we report the results of Bayesian multilevel structural equation models that simultaneously tested Fredrickson and Roberts' (1997) predictions both within and between persons, using data from 3 ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies of women's (N = 268) experiences of sexual objectification in daily life. Our findings support the predicted within-person indirect effect of exposure to sexual objectification on increases in negative and self-conscious emotions via self-objectification. However, lagged analyses suggest that the within-person indirect emotional consequences of exposure to sexual objectification may be relatively fleeting. Our findings advance research on sexual objectification by providing the first comprehensive test of the within-person process proposed by Fredrickson and Roberts' (1997) objectification theory.
-
ItemSexual objectification in women's daily lives: A smartphone ecological momentary assessment study(WILEY, 2017-06)Sexual objectification, particularly of young women, is highly prevalent in modern industrialized societies. Although there is plenty of experimental and cross-sectional research on objectification, prospective studies investigating the prevalence and psychological impact of objectifying events in daily life are scarce. We used ecological momentary assessment to track the occurrence of objectifying events over 1 week in the daily lives of young women (N = 81). Participants reported being targeted by a sexually objectifying event - most often the objectifying gaze - approximately once every 2 days and reported witnessing sexual objectification of others approximately 1.35 times per day. Further, multilevel linear regression analyses showed that being targeted by sexual objectification was associated with a substantial increase in state self-objectification. Overall, individual differences had little impact in moderating these effects.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableBlaming, praising, and protecting our humanity: The implications of everyday dehumanization for judgments of moral status(WILEY, 2011-09)Being human implies a particular moral status: having moral value, agency, and responsibility. However, people are not seen as equally human. Across two studies, we examine the consequences that subtle variations in the perceived humanness of actors or groups have for their perceived moral status. Drawing on Haslam's two-dimensional model of humanness and focusing on three ways people may be considered to have moral status - moral patiency (value), agency, or responsibility - we demonstrate that subtly denying humanness to others has implications for whether they are blamed, praised, or considered worthy of moral concern and rehabilitation. Moreover, we show that distinct human characteristics are linked to specific judgments of moral status. This work demonstrates that everyday judgments of moral status are influenced by perceptions of humanness.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableOur Flaws Are More Human Than Yours: Ingroup Bias in Humanizing Negative Characteristics(SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC, 2012-03)Four studies investigated whether people tend to see ingroup flaws as part of human nature (HN) to a greater degree than outgroup flaws. In Study 1, people preferentially ascribed high HN flaws to their ingroup relative to two outgroups. Study 2 demonstrated that flaws were rated higher on HN when attributed to the ingroup than when attributed to an outgroup, and no such difference occurred for positive traits. Study 3 replicated this humanizing ingroup flaws (HIF) effect and showed that it was (a) independent of desirability and (b) specific to the HN sense of humanness. Study 4 replicated the results of Study 3 and demonstrated that the HIF effect is amplified under ingroup identity threat. Together, these findings show that people humanize ingroup flaws and preferentially ascribe high HN flaws to the ingroup. These ingroup humanizing biases may serve a group-protective function by mitigating ingroup flaws as "only human."