Post Interesting Psychology Articles

[Enters Laughing]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...-fad-won-t-die

in the MBTI, thinking and feeling are opposite poles of a continuum. In reality, they’re independent: we have three decades of evidence that if you like ideas and data, you can also like people and emotions. (In fact, more often than not, they go hand in hand: research shows that people with stronger thinking and reasoning skills are also better at recognizing, understanding, and managing emotions.) When I scored as a thinker one time and a feeler one time, it’s because I like both thinking and feeling. I should have separate scores for the two.

................................

https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.996

Abstract
In 3 studies (respective Ns = 289, 394, and 1,678), males and females were assessed on Big Five traits, masculine instrumentality (M), feminine expressiveness (F), gender diagnosticity (GD), and RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional) vocational interest scales. Factor analyses of RIASEC scores consistently showed evidence for D. J. Prediger's (1982) People–Things and Ideas–Data dimensions, and participants' factor scores on these dimensions were computed. In all studies Big Five Openness was related to Ideas–Data but not to People–Things. Gender was strongly related to People–Things but not to Ideas–Data. Within each sex, GD correlated strongly with People–Things but not with Ideas–Data. M, F, and Big Five measures other than Openness tended not to correlate strongly with RIASEC scales or dimensions. The results suggest that gender and gender-related individual differences within the sexes are strongly linked to the People–Things dimension of vocational interests. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Lippa, R., 1998. Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people–things dimension. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(4), p.996.

[Enters Laughing]

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035325
Brooks, A.W., 2014. Get excited: reappraising pre-performance anxiety as excitement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), p.1144.
Get excited: reappraising pre-performance anxiety as excitement (direct pdf file link)

Individuals often feel anxious in anticipation of tasks such as speaking in public or meeting with a boss. I find that an overwhelming majority of people believe trying to calm down is the best way to cope with pre-performance anxiety. However, across several studies involving karaoke singing, public speaking, and math performance, I investigate an alternative strategy: reappraising anxiety as excitement. Compared with those who attempt to calm down, individuals who reappraise their anxious arousal as excitement feel more excited and perform better. Individuals can reappraise anxiety as excitement using minimal strategies such as self-talk (e.g., saying “I am excited” out loud) or simple messages (e.g., “get excited”), which lead them to feel more excited, adopt an opportunity mind-set (as opposed to a threat mind-set), and improve their subsequent performance. These findings suggest the importance of arousal congruency during the emotional reappraisal process.