The Role of Selfagency on Episodic Mental Time

The Role of Self-agency on Episodic Mental Time Travel Meymune N. Topcu & William Hirst The New School INTRODUCTION q A strong relation between remembering the past and imagining the STUDY 1 - RESULTS STUDY 2 - RESULTS SPECIFICITY future has been consistently demonstrated (e. g. Williams et al. , 1996; SPECIFICITY & TIME 4 Specifciity Score studied much except a study that shows a causal effect of self efficacy on the specificity of remembered and imagined episodic events (Brown, Past 3 Future Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 q A tendency to see the personal future in a more positive light than the der Linden, 2006; Newby-Clark & Ross, 2003). Whether self agency could account for the difference between past and future valence has not been explored . 44* q Past specificity correlates with future specificity (r=. 72, p=. 000) q Past responses are more specific than future responses (p=. 001) AGENCY attributed to the self in the future Agency Score Correlations for Specificity and Agency 5 Valence Past Valence Future . 02 . 21* -. 23** . 14 Circumstance Future . 08 -. 20* Other-person Past . 15 . 02 Other-person Future . 03 . 28** Self Past . 18* . 03 3 Self Future -. 03 . 14 2 Note: * p <. 05, ** p <. 01 9 STUDY 1 VALENCE & AGENCY Agency scores by time 6 Agency scores by time 8 4 Past Agency Scale Future Circumstance Past 3 Agency Score 7 Participants: 30 (10 Male) participants recruited via Mechanical Turk. Materials: q Provided 15 past and 15 future episodic events 2 6 Past 5 Other-person Self q Participants attribute more agency to themselves in the future compared to the past (p=. 000) and they attribute marginally more agency to other- q Only for self agency - Time 1 > Time 3 (p=. 002) & Time 2 > Time 3 (p=. 004) q Provided 15 past and 15 future episodic events in response to cue words past (r= -. 28, p=. 001); Other-person agency past correlates with number of years into the past (r=. 41, p=. 001) DATA PREPARATION q All responses coded in terms of specificity (1 -4 for Study 1; 1 -3 for Study 2) and then averaged separately for past and future q Valence and agency scores averaged for past and future q Number of years since/until the event calculated and averaged for past and future RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2015 www. Poster. Presentations. com q The difference score for self agency (β=. 26) predicts (R 2=. 07) the difference score for valence (p=. 003) q Past and future thinking are related in terms of specificity Correlations for Specificity and Agency Self-Agency past as moderator for past and future specificity Medium (Mean) High (+1 SD) Future Specificity 4 3. 5 3 2. 5 Specificity Past Specificity Future Agency Scale . 18* . 24** Circumstance Past -. 19* -. 09 Circumstance Future -. 30** -. 29** Other-person Past -. 22* -. 27** Other-person Future -. 22* -. 26** Self Past . 32** . 26** Self Future . 27** . 35** Note: * p <. 05, ** p <. 01 Low Medium Past Specificity q Regression models are tested with specificity past and future as DVs q No significant correlation between specificity and agency q Self-agency past moderates the relation between past and future specificity (R 2=. 08, p=. 03) q When people attribute more agency to themselves the relation between past and future specificity gets stronger q Temporal construal theory is supported; responses get less specific as one moves in time q People attribute more agency to themselves in the future and they view the future as more positive than the past q On of the reasons why people have a rosy vision of the future is that they think they will have more control over events in the future High “I control and determine the events in my life” “I don’t have influence over the outcomes of events in my personal life (reverse)” q Difference scores are calculated by subtracting future scores from past GENERAL DISCUSSION 2 q Completed an agency scale with 4 questions (1 -7) the past (M= 0. 78, SD= 0. 86), p=. 000 scores for self agency and valence q Self-agency past negatively correlates with number of years into the Low (-1 SD) q Time of the event the past compared to the future (p=. 000) SPECIFICITY & AGENCY q Assessed responses in terms of: q Valence (-3 -3) q Participants attribute more agency to themselves in the future compared q Participants view the future (M= 4. 92, SD= 0. 73) as more positive than SPECIFICITY & AGENCY q No time-period q 3 Agency questions (1 -7) Self to the past (p=. 000) and they attribute more agency to other-people in agency (r=. 38, p=. 037) people in the past compared to the future (p=. 070) Materials: Other-person (r=. 43, p=. 000), and self agency (r=. 51, p=. 000) q Past and future correlates for circumstance (r=. 64, p=. 000) and self Participants: 132 (48 Male) participants recruited via Mechanical Turk Circumstance q Past and future correlates for circumstance (r=. 23, p=. 007), other- 1 q 3 Time periods: Time 1 (1 Year), Time 2 (1 -5 Years), Time 3 (5 -50 STUDY 2 1 Future 4 Circumstance be caused by you? ” (1 -9) . 64* (. 60*) specificity and future specificity as partially mediated by agency q Time 1 > Time 2 (p=. 04) & Time 1 > Time 3 (p=. 07) METHOD “At the time of this event how much do you think that the event was/might Specificity Future q Unstandardized regression coefficients for the relation between past of years into the future (r= -. 38, p=. 000) AGENCY q 3 Agency questions for each response: Self, Other-person, Circumstance Specificity Past (r= -. 49, p=. 000); future specificity negatively correlates with number 7 Years) . 09* q Participants’ memories (M= 6. 01, SD= 7. 65) are more distant in time q Past specificity negatively correlates with number of years into the past 2 personal past has been found in previous studies (D’Argembeau & Van specificity (M= 2. 56, SD= 0. 48), p=. 398 than their future imaginations (M= 0. 49, SD= 1. 11), p=. 000 2. 5 et al. , 2011) Self Agency Future q Past specificity (M= 2. 53, SD= 0. 54) is not different than future 3. 5 q The role of perceived self-agency in mental time travel has not been SPECIFICITY & AGENCY q Past specificity correlates with future specificity (r=. 72, p=. 000) Specificity scores by time-period Schacter, Addis & Buckner, 2007). STUDY 2 - RESULTS and all the agency scores as predictors q The model that fits Specificity Past best (R 2=. 14, p=. 000) is the one with Agency Scale (β=. 16, p=. 057) and Self agency past (β=. 32, p=. 000) as predictors q In Study 1, as people attributed more agency to themselves in the past the relation between past & future thinking got stronger q In Study 2, self agency future partially mediated the relation between past and future specificity ACKNOWLEDGMENTS q The model that fits specificity future best (R 2=. 18, p=. 000) is the one with Agency Scale (β=. 20, p=. 016), Other-person agency future, (β=. 18, p=. 042) Self agency future (β=. 24, p=. 007) as predictors q We would like to thank Gabriella Santoro, Betul Tutar, Nesibe Musti, Nurul Farhan Alwani, and Pinar Karatas for their valuable assistance