Legitimate vs. illegitimate restrictions - a motivational and physiological approach investigating reactance processes.
Legitimate vs. illegitimate restrictions - a motivational and physiological approach investigating reactance processes.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00632
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Jonas E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sittenthaler S;Steindl C;Jonas E
对我们自由的威胁是我们日常社会交往的一部分。它们伴随着一种令人厌恶的动机唤醒状态，称为反抗，这导致人们努力重建他们受到威胁的自由。如果威胁似乎是非法的，情况尤其如此。然而，反抗理论表明，当人们受到合法的自由威胁时，也应该引起反抗。在这篇文章中，我们首先要表明，非法和合法的自由威胁都会引起反感。其次，我们的目标是通过探索经历合法与非法限制的潜在过程来扩展过去关于反抗的工作。在当前的研究中（N= 57），参与者以非法（意外且不适当）或合法（意外但适当）的方式受到限制，或者根本没有受到限制。我们评估了参与者的反抗经历，他们恢复自由的行为意图，他们的接近动机状态，以及他们的生理唤醒（心率）。结果表明，当以非法或合法的方式受到限制时，参与者表现出相同的反抗和愤怒。然而，当观察人们的生理反应时，非法和合法限制之间的重要差异变得明显。不合法的限制导致立即唤醒，而合法的限制导致延迟唤醒。这表明不合理的限制会导致厌恶性唤起的突然增加。然而，合法的限制似乎与一个更认知的过程有关，在这个过程中，人们首先需要构建自己的思想，并在进入生理上唤起的反抗感觉之前对情况进行反思。此外，中介分析表明，行为意图恢复一个人的自由导致积极和消极的接近动机。总之，我们提出了一个组合的双过程和交织过程模型，解释人们的反应，合法与非法的限制。
Threats to our freedom are part of our daily social interactions. They are accompanied by an aversive state of motivational arousal, called reactance, which leads people to strive to reestablish their threatened freedom. This is especially the case if the threat seems to be illegitimate in nature. However, reactance theory suggests that reactance should also be aroused when people are exposed to legitimate freedom threats. In this article we first aim to show that both illegitimate and legitimate freedom threats evoke reactance. Second, we aim to extend past work on reactance by exploring the underlying process of experiencing a legitimate vs. an illegitimate restriction. In the current study (N= 57) participants were restricted in an illegitimate (unexpected and inappropriate) or legitimate (unexpected but appropriate) way, or were not restricted at all. We assessed participants’ experience of reactance, their behavioral intentions to restore their freedom, their approach motivational states, as well as their physiological arousal (heart rate). Results indicated that when restricted in an illegitimate or a legitimate way, participants indicated the same amount of reactance as well as anger. However, when looking at people’s physiological reactions, important differences between illegitimate and legitimate restrictions become apparent. Illegitimate restrictions led to an immediate arousal, whereas legitimate restrictions led to a time delayed arousal. This suggests that illegitimate restrictions lead to a sudden increase in aversive arousal. Legitimate restrictions, however, seem to be associated with a more cognitive process in which people first need to structure their thoughts and reflect upon the situation before getting into the feeling of reactance in a physiologically arousing sense. Moreover a mediation analysis could show that behavioral intentions to regain one’s freedom result in positive and negative approach motivation. In sum we propose a combined dual-process and intertwined-process model explaining people’s reactions to legitimate vs. illegitimate restrictions.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
CROYLE, RT;COOPER, J
通讯作者：
COOPER, J
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Harmon-Jones, E;Sigelman, JD;Harmon-Jones, C
通讯作者：
Harmon-Jones, C
影响因子：
3
作者：
Butler EA;Lee TL;Gross JJ
通讯作者：
Gross JJ
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
CLEE, MA;WICKLUND, RA
通讯作者：
WICKLUND, RA
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
EISENBERG, N;FABES, RA;SHELL, R
通讯作者：
SHELL, R