This study aimed to adapt and validate the Spanish version of the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory–Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ; Corr & Cooper, 2016) and to demonstrate how RST constructs are associated with a variety of everyday behaviors. To achieve this goal, three studies have been conducted. In Study 1, a direct translation of the items from English to Spanish was pilot-tested in a sample of 139 students and a descriptive analysis of items was conducted. Moreover, a reverse translation and comparison between the two English versions were carried out by the lead author of the original questionnaire and the items were refined accordingly. In Study 2, the questionnaire’s internal structure was assessed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and the predictive validity was assessed using the Criterion Set of Act Clusters in a sample of 1,281 participants. Finally, a study of convergent validity with other measures of personality was performed in Study 3 with 190 participants. The obtained results suggested that the RST-PQ has adequate psychometric properties and the convergent validity results with other personality measures replicate findings from previous research. Having a Spanish language version of the RST-PQ is important, not only to advance RST research but also to demonstrate that this theoretical approach contributes to the prediction and explanation of different behaviors whether they are healthy or pathological ones.

As demonstrated by neuroimaging data, the human brain contains systems that control responses to threat. The revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality predicts that individual differences in the reactivity of these brain systems produce anxiety and fear-related personality traits. Here we discuss some of the challenges in testing this theory and, as an example, present a pilot study that aimed to dissociate brain activity during pursuit by threat and goal conflict. We did this by translating the Mouse Defense Test Battery for human fMRI use. In this version, dubbed the Joystick Operated Runway Task (JORT), we repeatedly exposed 24 participants to pursuit and goal conflict, with and without threat of electric shock. The runway design of JORT allowed the effect of threat distance on brain activation to be evaluated independently of context. Goal conflict plus threat of electric shock caused deactivation in a network of brain areas that included the fusiform and middle temporal gyri, as well as the default mode network core, including medial frontal regions, precuneus and posterior cingulate gyrus, and laterally the inferior parietal and angular gyri. Consistent with earlier research, we also found that imminent threat activated the midbrain and that this effect was significantly stronger during the simple pursuit condition than during goal conflict. Also consistent with earlier research, we found significantly greater hippocampal activation during goal conflict than pursuit by imminent threat. In conclusion, our results contribute knowledge to theories linking anxiety disorders to altered functioning in defensive brain systems and also highlight challenges in this research domain.

Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) has been shown to underlie a range of disorders. Technological advances have produced a decline in our development of an ability to wait in the face of uncertainty. The paper provides an update on empirical, theoretical and neural research in IU. Einstein's extended trandiagnostic model of IU is described. This model is based on control theory. The research update and IU model propose specific tools which can be implemented within transdiagnostic treatment approaches.

Several theories suggest that goal conflict leads to loss of control, but few studies have tested this proposal objectively. A transdiagnostic approach to CBT based on Perceptual Control Theory proposes that conflict between superordinate goals is at the heart of loss of control, and in turn, psychological distress. This study used the example of goal conflict around eating in a non-clinical sample as proof-of-concept to test whether it predicted loss of control. We examined whether the conflict regarding reasons to eat tasty food (e.g. ‘Eating tasty food helps me feel better’) versus reasons not to eat tasty food (e.g. ‘I want to lose weight’) correlated with weight fluctuations over 6 weeks in 33 students. At baseline, higher levels of goal conflict were associated with greater state and trait food cravings, and more problems with control over eating. As predicted, people with higher levels of goal conflict showed greater weight fluctuation. The effect diminished when controlling for trait food craving, and exercise fluctuation remained an independent predictor. We discuss the implications for future research on goal conflict, and for interventions that raise awareness of goal conflict to improve wellbeing via the enhancement of self-control.

A cognitive approach to understanding mood swings and bipolar disorders is provided, with the interpretation of changes in internal state as a central explanatory factor. The model explains how attempts at affect regulation are disturbed through the multiple and conflicting extreme personal meanings that are given to internal states. They prompt exaggerated efforts to enhance or exert control over internal states, which paradoxically provoke further internal state changes, thereby feeding into a vicious cycle that can maintain or exacerbate symptoms. Counterproductive attempts at control are classified as either ascent behaviours (increasing activation), or descent behaviours (decreasing activation). It is suggested that appraisals of extreme personal meaning are influenced by specific sets of beliefs about affect and its regulation, and about the self and relations with others, leading to an interaction that raises vulnerability to relapse. Pertinent literature is reviewed and found to be compatible with such a model. The clinical implications are discussed and compared to existing interventions.