Empirical studies have been conducted on emotional hypersensitivity and perceived over-offendedness.
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
Available evidence provides partial support for empirical studies on emotional hypersensitivity, but no relevant sources were found covering perceived over-offendedness.
Introduction: Although there are several psychological theories on bipolar disorders (BD), the empirical evidence on these theories through experimental studies is still limited. The current study systematically reviews experimental methods used in studies on the main theories of BD: Reward Hypersensitivity Theory (RST) or Behavioral Activation System (BAS), Integrative Cognitive Model (ICM), Positive Emotion Persistence (PEP), Manic Defense theory (MD), and Mental Imagery (MI). The primary aim is to provide an overview of the used methods and to identify limitations and suggest areas of improvement. Methods: A systematic search of six databases until October 2023 was conducted. Study selection involved two independent reviewers extracting data on experimental study design and methodology. Results: A total of 84 experimental studies were reviewed. BAS and RST were the most frequently studied theories. The majority of these experimental studies focus on mechanisms of reward sensitivity. Other important elements of the reviewed theories, such as goal setting and—attainment, situation selection (avoidance or approach), activation, affective/emotional reactivity, and regulatory strategies, are understudied. Self-report and neuropsychological tasks are most often used, while mood induction and physiological measures are rarely used. Conclusion: There is a need for more consensus on the operationalization of psychological theories of mania. Standardization of test batteries could i
( 1997 ) theory: first, the current definition of hypersensitivity pertains only to emotional, rather than physical or environmental, stimulation. On the one hand, we have not yet been able to empirically verify ourselves whether emotional hypersensitivity and sensory hypersensitivity respond to the same underlying mechanisms. On the other hand, we also think that a hypersensitive person’s senses are not more developed than a nonhypersensitive person; it is, rather, their brain that perceives and processes more in-depth information, especially of an emotional nature. This may lead to a hyperactivity of the nervous system that can activate the person experiencing it. In the end, we think that hypersensitivity might depend on the amplification of emotional processing associated with sensory perception rather than on a more developed sensory perception.
Second, sensory processing sensitivity is typically measured with self-report scales, whereas emotional (hyper)sensitivity associated with EI is measured through objective, performance-based tasks. Self-report hypersensitivity questionnaires typically ask people to position themselves on items describing typical hypersensitive indicators, such as “I am very sensitive to pain”. This way of measuring/estimating hypersensitivity is based very much on self-knowledge and the recognition of how one usually behaves. The framework of hypersensitivity as it is presented in this contribution, and in the empirical work we have been performing so far on hypersensitivity and EI (e.g., Gillioz et al. 2023a , 2023b ; Nicolet-dit-Félix et al. 2023 ), relies more directly on how individuals react to emotions and emotional stimuli. For example, we present emotional facial expressions and test whether hypersensitive individuals pay more attention to them as compared to neutral facial expressions, or we employ very subtle and complex blends of expressions that only hypersensitive people can recognize. This way of measuring hypersensitivity
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.