"Ouch!" or "Aah!": People are very bad at perceiving the valence of vocalizations of high-intensity affective states

Binter, Jakub, Silvia Boschetti, Tomáš Hladký, and Hermann Prossinger. 2023. “"ouch!" or "aah!": Are Vocalizations of 'laugh', 'neutral', 'fear', 'pain' or 'pleasure' Reliably Rated?.” PsyArXiv. January 2. doi:10.31234/osf.io/rf7vw

Abstract: Our research consisted of two studies focusing on the probability of humans being able to perceive the difference between valence of human vocalizations of high (pain, pleasure and fear) and low intensity (laugh and neutral speech). The first study was conducted online and used a large sample (n=902) of respondents. The second study was conducted in a laboratory setting and involved a stress induction procedure. For both, the task was to categorize whether the human vocalization was rated positive, neutral or negative. Stimuli were audio records extracted from freely downloadable online videos and can be considered semi-naturalistic. Each rating participant (rater) was presented with five audio records (stimuli) of five females and of five males. All raters were presented with the stimuli twice (so as to statistically estimate the consistency of the ratings). Using a Bayesian statistical approach, we could test for consistencies and due-to-chance probabilities. The outcomes support the prediction that the results (ratings) are repeatable (not due to chance) but incorrectly attributed, decreasing the communication value of the expressions of fear, pain, and pleasure. Stress induction (in study two conducted on 28 participants) did have an impact on the ratings of male neutral and laugh – it caused decrease in correct attribution.

Greater self-knowledge was not associated with better psychological adjustment, but at least with nicer personality traits

Self as both target and judge: Who has an easier time knowing their own personality? Elizabeth U. Long, Erika N. Carlson, Lauren J. Human. Journal of Personality, January 1 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12806

Abstract: The past two decades have established that people generally have insight into their personalities, but less is known about how and why self-knowledge might vary between individuals. Using the Realistic Accuracy Model as a framework, we investigate whether some people make better “targets” of self-perception by behaving more consistently in everyday life, and whether these differences have benefits for psychological adjustment.

Methods: Using data from the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR, n=286), we indexed self-knowledge as the link between self-reports of personality and actual daily behaviour measured over one week. We then tested if consistency in daily behaviour as well as psychological adjustment predicted stronger self-knowledge.

Results: We found that behaving more consistently in everyday life was associated with more accurate self-reports, but that psychological adjustment was not.

Conclusion: Analogous to interpersonal perception, self-knowledge of personality might be affected by “target-side” factors, like the quality of information provided through one's behaviour. However, unlike being a good target of interpersonal perception, self-knowledge does not seem to be related to psychological adjustment.