Facial expressions aid social transactions and serve as socialization tools, with smiles signaling approval and reward, and angry faces signaling disapproval and punishment. The present study examined whether the subjective experience of positive vs. negative facial expressions differs between children and adults. Specifically, we examined age-related differences in biases toward happy and angry facial expressions. Young children (5–7 years) and young adults (18–29 years) rated the intensity of happy and angry expressions as well as levels of experienced arousal. Results showed that young children—but not young adults—rated happy facial expressions as both more intense and arousing than angry faces. This finding, which we replicated in two independent samples, was not due to differences in the ability to identify facial expressions, and suggests that children are more tuned to information in positive expressions. Together these studies provide evidence that children see unambiguous adult emotional expressions through rose-colored glasses, and suggest that what is emotionally relevant can shift with development.

Behavior analysts and psychologists advocate for the use of therapies and strategies based on credible, scientific evidence. Researchers and clinicians regularly advocate for Evidence-based Practices (EBPs) over questionable "alternatives" because caregivers seldom choose interventions based on scientific evidence alone. This study applied methods and concepts from Consumer Behavior Analysis to conduct a reinforcer-based evaluation of the consequences that influence treatment choices. Hypothetical Treatment Purchase Tasks (HTPTs) were designed to evaluate how utilitarian (UR; i.e., the efficacy of treatment) and informational sources of reinforcement (IR; i.e., community support for treatment) jointly influence treatment-related choices. A total of 104 caregivers were recruited using the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) framework to complete two HTPTs. Results indicated that caregivers overall favored treatments with greater IR over those with greater UR, suggesting that indirect contingencies for treatment choices exerted greater overall influence than the direct contingencies of treatment choices (i.e., efficacy). This finding extends the literature on treatment choice by providing a reinforcer-based perspective on why 'fad', questionable, and pseudoscientific practices can achieve and maintain high levels of adoption by caregivers. This work concludes with a discussion of Consumer Behavior Analysis and how reinforcer-based interpretations of choice can be used to improve efforts to support and advocate for evidence-based child behavior treatments.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract