Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42531352›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Negative interpretation bias and emotional responses to positive contexts.

Emily Gawlik, Karin Coifman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Emily GawlikDepartment of Psychological Science, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1805-5556
Karin CoifmanDepartment of Psychological Science, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2372-0081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Negative interpretation bias, the tendency to interpret ambiguous situations as negative or threatening, is associated with reports of intense and more frequent negative affect. However, there is a relative paucity of work seeking to determine whether this cognitive bias might account for individual differences in affective responses to positive content. Given the wealth of benefits associated with positive emotional experiences, such as greater psychological wellbeing and better physical health, this investigation tested the influence of negative interpretation bias on emotion responses to evocative positive film clips as positive emotion-eliciting contexts. Negative interpretation bias was indexed using a novel word matching task. In each investigation, careful consideration of dispositional or trait-level influence on interpretation bias (i.e., dispositional negativity) was considered. Investigations conducted across three samples of college students at a large, Midwestern public university reveal complexity to this question: in one study, a small significant indirect effect of negative interpretation bias on the association between dispositional negativity and self-reported affect following positive emotionally-evocative films was found, while in the two subsequent studies, no significant mediation was found. Certain contextual factors, such as the explicit or discrete nature of the clip presentation as well as more stable tendencies toward positive emotional responsivity and the capacity to self-report emotional experiences, appear to be important. Finally, the novel task was found to be reliable and demonstrated convergent validity with established indicators. Future work should continue to clarify the conditions under which negative interpretation bias may influence responses to positive emotional contexts, given the importance of positive emotionality for lifelong physical and mental health.

Indexed as

EmotionsAdolescentAdultBiasFemaleHumansMaleStudentsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42531352
PMCPMC13423173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.