Search

Indecisiveness, the subjective inability to make satisfying decisions, is an individual difference trait that may impede effective actions. Mechanisms underlying indecisiveness are largely unknown. In four studies, we tested the prediction that indicators of evaluation difficulty were associated with indecisiveness in simple evaluations. Across studies, indecisiveness was measured via self-report while evaluation difficulties were derived behaviorally from three indicators: difficulty distinguishing between similar evaluation objects (i.e., standard deviation of evaluation ratings), evaluation duration (reaction times), and implicit evaluations (evaluative priming effect) using familiar everyday objects. Study 1 (N = 151) was based on attractiveness evaluations of portraits. Studies 2a (N = 201) and 2b (N = 211) used chocolate as evaluation objects and manipulated to what extent the evaluations were equivalent to a decision. In Study 3 (N = 80) evaluations were measured implicitly through evaluative priming using food pictures. Contrary to our predictions, indecisiveness showed no reliable association to any indicator of evaluation difficulty, regardless of type of evaluation object, equivalence of evaluation and decision, and whether evaluation difficulty was based on explicit or implicit evaluations. All null findings were supported by Bayes factors. These counterintuitive results are a first step toward investigating evaluation processes as potential mechanisms underlying indecisiveness, showing that for both explicit and implicit measurements, indecisiveness is not characterized by difficulties when evaluating familiar everyday objects.

Indecisiveness, the subjective inability to make satisfying decisions, is an individual difference trait that may impede effective actions. Mechanisms underlying indecisiveness are largely unknown. In four studies, we tested the prediction that indicators of evaluation difficulty were associated with indecisiveness in simple evaluations. Across studies, indecisiveness was measured via self-report while evaluation difficulties were derived behaviorally from three indicators: difficulty distinguishing between similar evaluation objects (i.e., standard deviation of evaluation ratings), evaluation duration (reaction times), and implicit evaluations (evaluative priming effect) using familiar everyday objects. Study 1 (N = 151) was based on attractiveness evaluations of portraits. Studies 2a (N = 201) and 2b (N = 211) used chocolate as evaluation objects and manipulated to what extent the evaluations were equivalent to a decision. In Study 3 (N = 80) evaluations were measured implicitly through evaluative priming using food pictures. Contrary to our predictions, indecisiveness showed no reliable association to any indicator of evaluation difficulty, regardless of type of evaluation object, equivalence of evaluation and decision, and whether evaluation difficulty was based on explicit or implicit evaluations. All null findings were supported by Bayes factors. These counterintuitive results are a first step toward investigating evaluation processes as potential mechanisms underlying indecisiveness, showing that for both explicit and implicit measurements, indecisiveness is not characterized by difficulties when evaluating familiar everyday objects.

The study determines how burden and patterns of somatic symptom reporting developed over almost four decades in the general German population. Additionally, we studied how socio-demographic factors affected the degree of somatic symptoms. Population-based samples representative for West Germany between 18 and 60 years of age were analyzed comparing three cross-sectional samples of 1975 (N = 1601), 1994 (N = 1416), and 2013 (N = 1290) by conducting a three-way analysis of variance (sex, age, survey). The prevalence rates for somatic symptoms in men and women were lower in the more recent surveys; this affected women most strongly. Exhaustion and musculoskeletal complaints remained leading symptoms (affecting 25%, resp. 11% of the men and 30%, resp. 19% of the women). There was a slight increase in women's prevalence of exhaustion from 1994 (15%) to 2013 (19%). As determined by stepwise multiple regression, somatic symptoms were consistently associated with female sex and higher age. In the 2013 survey, education became an additional negative predictor of somatic symptom load, while the impact of age and sex on somatic symptoms reporting decreased. Somatic symptoms remain a major burden in the general population. Findings are interpreted with regard to improved living and health care conditions, different cohort experiences, and more public health information.

The study determines how burden and patterns of somatic symptom reporting developed over almost four decades in the general German population. Additionally, we studied how socio-demographic factors affected the degree of somatic symptoms. Population-based samples representative for West Germany between 18 and 60 years of age were analyzed comparing three cross-sectional samples of 1975 (N = 1601), 1994 (N = 1416), and 2013 (N = 1290) by conducting a three-way analysis of variance (sex, age, survey). The prevalence rates for somatic symptoms in men and women were lower in the more recent surveys; this affected women most strongly. Exhaustion and musculoskeletal complaints remained leading symptoms (affecting 25%, resp. 11% of the men and 30%, resp. 19% of the women). There was a slight increase in women's prevalence of exhaustion from 1994 (15%) to 2013 (19%). As determined by stepwise multiple regression, somatic symptoms were consistently associated with female sex and higher age. In the 2013 survey, education became an additional negative predictor of somatic symptom load, while the impact of age and sex on somatic symptoms reporting decreased. Somatic symptoms remain a major burden in the general population. Findings are interpreted with regard to improved living and health care conditions, different cohort experiences, and more public health information.

The density hypothesis states that positive information is more similar than negative information, resulting in higher density of positive information in mental representations. The present research applies the density hypothesis to recognition memory to explain apparent valence asymmetries in recognition memory, namely, a recognition advantage for negative information. Previous research explained this negativity advantage on the basis of valence-induced affect. We predicted that positive information's higher density impairs recognition performance. Two old-new word recognition experiments tested whether differential density between positive and negative stimuli creates a negativity advantage in recognition memory, over and above valence-induced affect. In Experiment 1, participants better discriminated negative word stimuli (i.e., less false alarms) and showed a response bias towards positive words. Regression analyses showed the asymmetry to be function of density and not of valence. Experiment 2 varied stimulus density orthogonal to valence. Again, discriminability and response bias were a function of density and not of valence. We conclude that the higher density of positive information causes an apparent valence asymmetry in recognition memory.

The density hypothesis states that positive information is more similar than negative information, resulting in higher density of positive information in mental representations. The present research applies the density hypothesis to recognition memory to explain apparent valence asymmetries in recognition memory, namely, a recognition advantage for negative information. Previous research explained this negativity advantage on the basis of valence-induced affect. We predicted that positive information's higher density impairs recognition performance. Two old-new word recognition experiments tested whether differential density between positive and negative stimuli creates a negativity advantage in recognition memory, over and above valence-induced affect. In Experiment 1, participants better discriminated negative word stimuli (i.e., less false alarms) and showed a response bias towards positive words. Regression analyses showed the asymmetry to be function of density and not of valence. Experiment 2 varied stimulus density orthogonal to valence. Again, discriminability and response bias were a function of density and not of valence. We conclude that the higher density of positive information causes an apparent valence asymmetry in recognition memory.