Irritability has gained recognition as a clinically significant trait in youth and adults that when persistent and severe, predicts poor outcomes throughout life. However, its definition, measurement, and relationship to similar constructs remain poorly understood. In a community sample of adults (N=458; 19-74 years; M=40.5), we sought to identify a unitary irritability factor from independently constructed self-reported measures of irritability distinct from the related constructs of aggression, depression, and anxiety, and whether it was associated with face emotion identification deficits and hostile interpretation biases previously established in clinical pediatric samples. The three measures of irritability generated a common factor characterized by a rapid, angry response to provocation. This irritability factor had unique associations with tendencies to judge ambiguous stimuli as reflecting hostility, but not with face emotion identification performance. These findings clarify the nature of irritability and its associations with neurocognitive phenomenon.

The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of two types of status on judges' sentencing decisions. One type emphasized the defendant's history of conformity (conformity status); the other emphasized his power (power status). Also examined were the crime's outcome for the group (activity significance), and its severity (degree of deviance). Subjects were 81 university students assuming the role of sentencing judge and presented with case descriptions of defendants. Higher levels of assigned punishment were significantly related to higher levels of degree of deviance and activity significance, and to lower levels of conformity status. Power status had no significant influence on punishment decisions. It is concluded that predicting differential treatment of defendants requires an understanding of several variables, and that the importance of status as a factor depends on the particular type of status involved.

This study investigated the relation between an individual's tendency to tolerate and/or report discomfort and the amount of life change experienced by that individual. The role of attention in this relation was also examined and manipulated through instruction. Eighty college freshman were selected and divided into three groups (high, medium, low) as a function of scores obtained on the College Schedule of Recent Experience (CSRE). Participants were asked to experience two known discomforting stimuli, the cold pressor and loud broad-band noise. Dependent measures included participant's tolerance time, report of discomfort, and amount of attention paid to each of the stimuli. Results indicated that "high"-life change groups tolerated the two discomforting stimuli significantly less than either the "low"- or the "medium"-life change groups. Neither discomfort ratings nor attention was significantly different across groups. Findings are discussed in relation to epidemiological studies of the life change and illness relation.