Guilt appeals in the field of persuasion are quite common. However, the effectiveness of these messages is sometimes ambivalent. It is widely acknowledged that guilt leads people to engage into prosocial behaviors, but the effects of guilt can also be counter-productive (e.g., reactance-like effects). We argue that the explanations for these contradictions remain unsatisfactory and suggest that taking into account the implications of underlying cognitive—especially attentional—mechanisms would provide a better understanding of these paradoxical outcomes. This article provides a brief review of the literature on the link between guilt and pro-social behaviors and its classical interpretations. We propose a reinterpretation of this link by taking into account specific attentional processes triggered by the emotion of guilt. Attentional biases are, in our opinion, better predictors of the effectiveness of a message than the amount of emotion induced by the same message. This consideration should guide future research in the field of guilt appeals and pro-social behaviors. Implications, in terms of a broader comprehension of the emotion–behavior association in decision making processes, are discussed.

The COVID-19 crisis represents a global health concern, including mental health. Regarding the necessity to assess anxiety related to COVID-19, a scale was developed (Ahorsu et al., 2020). The goal of the present study was to validate of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) in French (official language in 29 countries), and investigate its relationship with indicators of affective disturbances. The study was performed on 316 participants. The FCV-19S underwent a double back translation procedure. Its psychometric properties were evaluated.The French FCV-19S demonstrated a stable unidimensional structure with robust psychometric properties (strong internal consistency, good convergent and divergent validity, and good test-retest validity). With its robust psychometric properties in assessing the unidimensional construct of the fear of COVID-19, this scale will help to provide a better understanding of the relationship between emotions and psychological or psychiatric disorders during the pandemics in French-speaking countries.

Patients with anorexia nervosa often report a conscious alteration of body image representation, with both body overestimation and body dissatisfaction. Cognitive and behavioural therapy is effective for treating many psychiatric disorders but often fails to treat anorexia nervosa and body image distortions. Although patients are aware of their weight loss, they continue to feel overweight - as if there were a conflict between a previous (maybe already false) body representation and the new one. These distortions are linked to negative emotions focused on the body but which can extend to the self (e.g. disgust and sadness). The present case report is the first in which the Appraisal Tendency Framework has been applied to decrease body image distortions in a patient with anorexia nervosa. The Appraisal Tendency Framework is usually used to understand how emotions influence decision making. Here, we report on a 24-year-old woman who suffered from anorexia nervosa and body image distortions, and was treated as an inpatient with conventional cognitive and behavioural therapy for an eating disorder. Body image distortions were assessed before and after the patient completed an adaptation of the Iowa Gambling Task, coupled with the induction of a heuristic processing emotion. We hypothesized that allowing the patient to focus on the emotional cues in the modified Iowa Gambling Task would improve her decisions about her true body shape. All body image measures were improved after the protocol. Consequently, we suggest that the Appraisal Tendency Framework might be a valuable means of investigating body image issues in eating disorders and anorexia nervosa. Further studies are required to expand and detail these findings.

Développé en 2015, l’Emotion Imbued Choice (EIC ; Lerner et al., 2015) explique la manière dont les émotions influencent la prise de décision. Selon ce modèle, les émotions incidentes (non reliées à la décision) associées à un haut degré de certitude déclencheraient un traitement plutôt heuristique de l’information tandis que les émotions associées à un haut degré d’incertitude déclencheraient un traitement plutôt délibératif (Tiedens & Linton, 2001), expliquant des différences de performances dans les tâches de prise de décision.L’influence des émotions incidentes a été étudiée dans la prise de décision unique et dans la prise séquentielle de décisions (i.e., séries de décisions). Si l’EIC, fournit un cadre explicatif clair concernant la prise de décision unique, ses prédictions sont moins explicites quant à la prise séquentielle de décisions. Cette dernière présente la particularité que chaque décision est suivie d’un feedback (gain ou perte) ayant une valeur émotionnelle (positive vs. négative). Cette source d’influence émotionnelle intégrée (reliée à la décision) peut modifier les décisions suivantes. Des auteurs ont observé que le déclenchement d’un traitement de l’information plutôt heuristique conduit les participants à prendre des décisions plus avantageuses que le déclenchement d’un traitement de l’information plutôt délibératif (Bagneux et al. 2013 ; voir aussi Bollon & Bagneux, 2013). Toutefois, l’implication du traitement de la valeur émotionnelle des feedbacks dans l’obtention de ce pattern de résultats n’a, à ce jour, pas reçu de confirmation directe.Notre objectif était d’identifier la manière dont les émotions incidentes, en fonction de leur degré de certitude, modulent la prise séquentielle de décisions. Au travers d’une série de sept expériences, nous avons montré comment ces émotions incidentes interagissent avec l’influence émotionnelle intégrée des feedbacks. Ainsi, seul le déclenchement d’un traitement plutôt heuristique conduit les participants à moduler leurs décisions en fonction du type (positifs vs. négatifs) de feedbacks reçus. Ces résultats concernent les tâches de prise séquentielle de décisions ambigües et risquées. La modulation du pattern de prise de décision a été mise en évidence, de manière classique, lors de l’induction d’émotions incidentes négatives et, de manière plus originale, lors de l’induction d’émotions incidentes positives. En second lieu, l’analyse des résultats et de la littérature a mis en évidence la fiabilité médiocre de la mesure du degré de certitude. Une série de six autres études, s’inscrivant dans la méthodologie générale de construction d’échelles, a été réalisée afin d’en recherche les origines. Nous avons montré que cette faible fiabilité était la double conséquence d’une définition incomplète et d’une opérationnalisation imparfaite de la dimension de certitude. À un niveau théorique, nous proposons que l’ensemble de nos résultats supportent la nécessité d’étendre le modèle EIC à la prise séquentielle de décisions. Sur le plan méthodologique, nos résultats justifient l’intérêt de développer un nouvel outil de mesure du degré de certitude.

Background. In primary care, general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs) play pivotal roles in guiding patients’ drug choices. Nonprescription drugs (NPDs), which are dispensed with or without a prescription, represent significant health care costs. NPDs are most often used for symptomatic relief and may be subject to shared decision making. We designed shared DECIsion in hEalth (DECIdE), a patient decision aid for NPDs in primary care, via a 3-step user-centered approach. Design. In the first step, a nominal group composed of potential future users (patients, GPs, and CPs) reached a consensus on the prototype’s specifications. In the second step, GPs, CPs, and their patients tested the prototype in user tests during simulated consultations based on real-life scenarios, and clinical psychologists conducted individual interviews to improve the prototype. In the third step, international experts used the eDELPHI consensus method to validate DECIdE as a shared decision aid. Results. Sixteen participants in the nominal group reached a consensus on 18 specifications. The user tests involved 16 patients and 4 health care professionals across 2 cycles. The prototypes were improved according to an analysis of 20 individual interviews. Fifteen French-speaking experts, searchers, physicians, and pharmacists from 4 countries reached a consensus on 11 of the 13 propositions inspired by the IPDAS criteria and the French HAS criteria in 2 rounds to validate the final prototype of DECIdE. Conclusion . Interprofessional collaboration at each step of development is the main strength of this user-centered design. DECIdE is currently being evaluated for its effects on decisional conflict in GPs’ practices and community pharmacies in a randomized controlled trial. Implications. DECIdE could encourage more rational use of NPDs, particularly in self-medication. Highlights: DECIdE is the first patient decision aid in French for usual drugs in primary care, based on the latest scientific data in line with an evidence-based medicine approach for general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs). DECIdE’s user-centered design includes interprofessional collaboration at each step between searchers, GPs, CPs, and social and clinical psychologists. The original 3 steps of the user-centered design of DECIdE combined user testing with qualitative analysis and 2 successive consensus methods to create and validate the patient decision aid using the nominal group and eDELPHI methods. The free availability of DECIdE on a dedicated Web site will enable GPs and CPs to make widespread use of shared decisions about nonprescription drugs daily.