The present article reviews a growing body of research on receptiveness to opposing views-the willingness to access, consider, and evaluate contradictory opinions in a relatively impartial manner. First, we describe the construct of receptiveness and consider how it can be measured and studied at the individual level. Next, we extend our theorizing to the interpersonal level, arguing that receptiveness in the course of any given interaction is mutually constituted by the dispositional tendencies and observable behaviors of the parties involved. We advance the argument that receptiveness should be conceptualized and studied as an interpersonal construct that emerges dynamically over the course of an interaction and is powerfully influenced by counterpart behavior. This interpersonal conceptualization of receptiveness has important implications for intervention design and raises a suite of novel research questions.
Self-reflection is suggested to attenuate feelings, yet researchers disagree on whether adopting a distant or near perspective, or processing the experience abstractly or concretely, is more effective. Given the relationship between psychological distance and level of abstraction, we suggest the "construal-matching hypothesis": Psychological distance and abstraction differently influence emotion intensity, depending on whether the emotion's appraisal involves low-level or high-level construal. Two meta-analyses tested the effects of psychological distance (k = 230) and level-of-abstraction (k = 98) manipulations on emotional experience. A distant perspective attenuated emotional experience (g = 0.52) but with weaker effects for high-level (g = 0.29; for example, self-conscious emotions) than low-level emotions (g= 0.64; for example, basic emotions). Level of abstraction only attenuated the experience of low-level emotions (g = 0.2) and showed a reverse (nonsignificant) effect for high-level emotions (g = -0.13). These results highlight differences between distancing and level-of-abstraction manipulations and the importance of considering the type of emotion experienced in emotion regulation.
Empirical evidence about the development of social relationships across adulthood into late life continues to accumulate, but theoretical development has lagged behind. The Differential Investment of Resources (DIRe) model integrates these empirical advances. The model defines the investment of time and energy into social ties varying in terms of emotional closeness and kinship as the core mechanism explaining the formation and maintenance of social networks. Individual characteristics, acting as capacities, motivations, and skills, determine the amount, direction, and efficacy of the investment. The context (e.g., the living situation) affects the social opportunity structure, the amount of time and energy available, and individual characteristics. Finally, the model describes two feedback loops: (a) social capital affecting the individual's living situation and (b) different types of ties impacting individual characteristics via social exchanges, social influences, and social evaluations. The proposed model will provide a theoretical basis for future research and hypothesis testing.
Relationship partners affect one another's health outcomes through their health behaviors, yet how this occurs is not well understood. To fill this gap, we present the Dyadic Health Influence Model (DHIM). The DHIM identifies three routes through which a person (the agent) can impact the health beliefs and behavior of their partner (the target). An agent may (a) model health behaviors and shape the shared environment, (b) enact behaviors that promote their relationship, and/or (c) employ strategies to intentionally influence the target's health behavior. A central premise of the DHIM is that agents act based on their beliefs about their partner's health and their relationship. In turn, their actions have consequences not only for targets' health behavior but also for their relationship. We review theoretical and empirical research that provides initial support for the routes and offer testable predictions at the intersection of health behavior change research and relationship science.
Contemporary research on human sociality is heavily influenced by the social identity approach, positioning social categorization as the primary mechanism governing social life. Building on the distinction between agency and identity in the individual self ("I" vs. "Me"), we emphasize the analogous importance of distinguishing collective agency from collective identity ("We" vs. "Us"). While collective identity is anchored in the unique characteristics of group members, collective agency involves the adoption of a shared subjectivity that is directed toward some object of our attention, desire, emotion, belief, or action. These distinct components of the collective self are differentiated in terms of their mental representations, neurocognitive underpinnings, conditions of emergence, mechanisms of social convergence, and functional consequences. Overall, we show that collective agency provides a useful complement to the social categorization approach, with unique implications for multiple domains of human social life, including collective action, responsibility, dignity, violence, dominance, ritual, and morality.