Researchers interested in affect have often questioned the existence of neutral affective states. In this paper, we review and challenge three beliefs that researchers might hold about neutral affect. These beliefs are: (1) it is not possible to feel neutral because people are always feeling something, (2) neutrality is not an affective state because affect must be positively or negatively valenced, and (3) neutral affect is unimportant because it does not influence cognition or behavior. We review the reasons these beliefs might exist and provide empirical evidence that questions them. Specifically, we argue that neutral affect is a felt experience that provides important valence-relevant information, which influences cognition and behavior. By dispelling these beliefs about neutral affect, we hope to shine a light on the assumptions that researchers hold about the nature of affect and to provide novel theoretical and methodological perspectives that help advance our understanding of the affective landscape.

No abstract

Role modeling has received much attention in education research, uncovering the mechanisms by which imitation occurs (e.g., the aspects of role models that make them more or less effective) and identifying the outcomes associated upon imitating the model. Nonetheless, certain socialcognitive processes involved in role modeling tend to be overlooked. This oversight is puzzling given that these processes, such as retention and reproduction of modeled behavior, are of great importance to role modeling processes-the consideration and inclusion of such processes can provide crucial insight. This paper provides an overview of the role model research in education to date, detailing researchers' focus and emphasis on identifying aspects of role model effectiveness. We then analyze how including the component processes of social learning or observational theory can add value and application to advance role modeling research. Finally, we provide recommendations to close the gap between current research trends and what has been previously theorized on modeling to help inform ongoing future investigations.

the disease caused by the new strain of coronavirus has spread exponentially across the country. While the spread of this disease can be significantly slowed if people practice "social distancing," it is difficult to break old habits and acquire new behaviors at the needed speed. The purpose of this study is to challenge how health risk messages are currently communicated (specifically by considering how the Center of Disease Control (CDC) communicates its recommendations for social distancing) and suggest an alternative way. We tested and applied the use of a robust behavioral intervention known as "if−then" plans (plans that spell out in advance how one wants to achieve a goal they have previously set) to encourage the acquisition of a new behavior (e.g., social distancing) during this time of crisis. Using a longitudinal mixed design (within-/between-subjects study) daily diary study, we hypothesized and observed (via multilevel modeling) that those randomized into the experimental group (those who created and practiced if−then plans) demonstrated increased social distancing over time, whereas engagement in social distancing did not change in the control condition (those who observed the CDC guidelines). These results were sustained in a 3-week follow-up examination for those who were strongly committed to the goal to social distance. Such evidence suggests that risk communication messaging that includes if−then plans is an effective way of acquiring new behaviors. Public Significance StatementThis study proposes optimizing the current way of communicating COVID-19 health messages to promote the adoption of new behaviors (e.g., social distancing). In a 3-week study, we demonstrate the effectiveness of supplementing traditional health messages with if−then plans (self-generated plans which specify in advance how one wants to achieve a previously set goal) to promote social distancing.

No abstract