The Psychology of Everyday Life: How Small Behaviors Reflect Deep Cognitive and Emotional Processes

The Psychology of Everyday Life: How Small Behaviors Reflect Deep Cognitive and Emotional Processes

---

---

Check out our extensive video library (see channel for our latest videos)

---

 

---

Introduction

The human experience unfolds through countless small behaviors—shifts in the direction of gaze indicate shifts in attention, a reach indicates the selection of an object of interest, and brief hesitations may reveal uncertainty as to what action to perform next [1]. These seemingly mundane actions, from the way we adjust our posture during conversation to the micro-expressions that flicker across our faces, represent far more than simple motor responses or social conventions. They constitute a rich tapestry of psychological expression, revealing the complex interplay of cognitive processes, emotional states, and social dynamics that characterize human consciousness.

Most everyday behavior is not guided by stimuli as such, but by an understanding of the stimuli [2][3]. This fundamental insight from cognitive psychology challenges reductionist approaches that view behavior as mere stimulus-response patterns, instead highlighting the sophisticated information processing systems that mediate between perception and action. The contemporary understanding of everyday behavior emphasizes the role of cognitive interpretation, emotional evaluation, and social context in shaping even the most routine activities.

This analytical review examines how small behaviors serve as manifestations of deeper psychological processes, exploring the theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence that illuminate these connections. The central thesis posits that everyday behaviors, rather than being trivial or automatic responses, represent complex expressions of cognitive and emotional systems operating at multiple levels of awareness and control. Through examination of research spanning cognitive psychology, social psychology, embodied cognition, and neuroscience, this paper demonstrates how micro-behaviors reveal the sophisticated architecture of human psychological functioning.

The significance of this analysis extends beyond academic inquiry. Understanding the psychological depths of everyday behavior has implications for clinical assessment, therapeutic intervention, social interaction, and the broader comprehension of human nature. The intuition that overt behavior reveals covert cognitive operations during natural behavior has not been extensively explored. This chapter aims to argue that observations of natural behavior allow us to make inferences about general principles of cognitive processes [4].

---

Theoretical Frameworks: Understanding the Mind-Behavior Connection

Dual-Process Theory and Everyday Behavior

The foundation for understanding how small behaviors reflect deep psychological processes lies in dual-process theory, which describes qualitatively distinct processes or systems, one of which is reflective, rule-based, propositional, systematic, deliberate, controlled, conscious, or explicit, and another that is impulsive, associative, heuristic, spontaneous, automatic, unconscious, or implicit [5]. This theoretical framework provides crucial insights into how everyday behaviors emerge from the complex interplay between automatic and controlled processing systems.

The dual-process framework accounts for two types of thinking; a fast, associative, automatic or subconscious “System 1 thinking”, and a slow, propositional and reflective “System 2 thinking” [6][7]. In the context of everyday behavior, this distinction illuminates how many of our routine actions operate below the threshold of conscious awareness while simultaneously reflecting deeper cognitive and emotional processes.

The implications of dual-process theory for understanding everyday behavior are profound. Dual-process theories propose that behavior is determined by the interplay between two cognitive systems; one that is automatic and another that is controlled [8]. This interplay manifests in subtle ways throughout daily life, from the automatic adjustments we make in interpersonal distance during conversations to the unconscious emotional responses that influence our decision-making processes.

Research in this domain reveals that a cognitive vulnerability to depression is observed when negatively biased associative processing is uncorrected by reflective processing [9]. This finding demonstrates how the balance between automatic and controlled processes in everyday behavior can have significant implications for mental health and psychological well-being.

Embodied Cognition and Behavioral Expression

Embodied cognition theory offers another crucial lens for understanding how small behaviors reflect deeper psychological processes. The concept of embodied cognition attributes the birth of the mind to the control of organized movement by the brain, to translate the abstract to the concrete [10]. This perspective fundamentally reimagines the relationship between mind and body, suggesting that cognitive processes are intrinsically linked to physical experience and expression.

Recent theories have suggested that EC could also act on the processing of emotional information, as the perception and awareness of the emotion create a perceptual, somato-visceral and motor experience (“incarnation”) of the emotion. The embodiment of emotion, caused by facial expression and posture, influences causally the way emotional information is processed [11].

The embodied cognition framework reveals how seemingly simple physical behaviors—posture changes, gesture patterns, facial micro-expressions—actually represent complex cognitive and emotional processing. According to the most radical version of EC, cognition is constrained by the specific kind of body we possess, and the key notion of embodied cognition is action [12]. This constraint means that our cognitive processes are not abstract computational operations but are fundamentally shaped by and expressed through our physical being.

Human language and thought emerge from recurring patterns of embodied activity that constrain ongoing intelligent behavior. We must not assume cognition to be purely internal, symbolic, computational, and disembodied, but seek out the gross and detailed ways that language and thought are inextricably shaped by embodied action [13].

Unconscious Emotional Processing and Behavioral Manifestation

The relationship between unconscious emotional processing and everyday behavior represents another critical dimension of psychological understanding. An emotion typically involves a change in several components – physiology, cognition, motivation, behavior, and a change in consciousness. Unconscious emotions lack the key feature of consciousness. The absence of consciousness can come in the form of (1) unawareness of the stimulus eliciting the emotion or (2) unawareness of the emotion itself, producing an emotion that is not subjectively felt [14].

Research demonstrates that mechanisms driving the negative affect in depression may be fast processes existing on an unconscious level [15]. These unconscious emotional processes manifest in subtle behavioral patterns that individuals may not consciously recognize but that reveal important information about their psychological state.

Emotion regulation is a process by which human beings control emotional behaviors. From neuroscientific evidence, this mechanism is the product of conscious or unconscious processes [16]. The unconscious dimension of emotion regulation is particularly relevant to understanding everyday behavior, as many of our routine actions serve regulatory functions without our explicit awareness.

The significance of unconscious emotional processing extends to early development, where early in development the human brain not only discriminates between happy and fearful facial expressions irrespective of conscious perception, but also that, similar to adults, supraliminal and subliminal emotion processing relies on distinct neural processes [17].

---

Micro-Behaviors as Windows into Psychological Processes

The Architecture of Habitual Behavior

Habitual behaviors represent one of the most significant manifestations of how small actions reflect deeper psychological processes. Habits are commonly conceptualized as learned, automatic responses to context cues that result from frequently performing the same behavior in the same context [18]. However, contemporary research reveals that habitual behaviors are far more sophisticated than simple stimulus-response patterns.

Habitual behavior is defined as behavior that is displayed automatically on the presence of a goal, that is, a direct goal–action link that is not preceded by consciously developed intentions. Automatically executed behavior has three main characteristics in that (a) it can be executed fast, (b) its execution cannot be controlled, and (c) it is very efficient (i.e., it allows other cognitive processes to be executed simultaneously) [19].

The cognitive architecture underlying habitual behavior demonstrates remarkable complexity. Considering habits as situated conceptualizations would suggest that habitual behaviors rely on the same underlying cognitive mechanisms as, for example, impulsive behaviors. From this perspective, a behavioral response is activated when a situational cue triggers a situated conceptualization that has become well entrenched in memory. The resulting behavior could be considered an impulse, or a habitual behavior, but the common underlying mechanism would suggest that it leads in relatively effortless ways to behaviors that have previously produced rewarding outcomes [20].

This understanding challenges traditional views of habits as mindless repetitions, instead revealing them as sophisticated expressions of learning, memory, and reward processing systems. Even frequently performed or relatively automatic behaviors are still reward-driven [21], indicating that habitual behaviors reflect ongoing psychological processes rather than mere mechanical repetition.

Practice, Automaticity, and Cognitive Load

The relationship between practice, automaticity, and cognitive load provides crucial insights into how everyday behaviors reflect deeper cognitive processes. Practice has a multitude of effects on behavior, including increasing the speed of performance, rendering the practiced behavior habitual and reducing the cognitive load required to perform the task. These effects are often collectively referred to as automaticity. Here, we argue that these effects can be explained as multiple consequences of a single principle: caching of the outcome of frequently occuring computations [22].

The concept of automaticity reveals how behaviors that appear simple on the surface actually represent sophisticated cognitive achievements. Automaticity of well-practiced behaviors is typically characterized by a cluster of features: skill (faster performance), habit (behavior is expressed even if no longer appropriate) and low cognitive load (behavior can be produced with little attention or effort) [23].

This framework illuminates how everyday behaviors serve as indicators of cognitive efficiency and resource allocation. The degree of automaticity in a behavior reflects the underlying learning history, neural plasticity, and cognitive architecture that supports performance. In a more complex scenario, action selection involves two distinct computations: i) behavioral goals must be determined from stimuli and ii) actions must be selected to achieve these goals. Either of these computations could be cached, giving rise to a more diverse set of potential configurations. Habits and cognitive load associated with these different configurations may differ [24].

Nonverbal Communication and Social Psychological Processes

Nonverbal behavior represents perhaps the most directly observable manifestation of how small behaviors reflect deeper psychological processes. The field of nonverbal communication (NVC) has a long history involving many cue modalities, including face, voice, body, touch, and interpersonal space; different levels of analysis, including normative, group, and individual differences; and many substantive themes that cross from psychology into other disciplines [25][26].

The significance of nonverbal communication in revealing psychological processes extends beyond conscious intention. Compared with more explicit racial slurs and statements, biased facial expressions and body language may resist conscious identification and thus produce a hidden social influence [27][28]. This research demonstrates how subtle nonverbal behaviors can transmit complex social and emotional information without conscious awareness.

Identifying the component cues and behaviors is only the first step in appreciating the complexity of the nonverbal system of communication. Because nonverbal communication operates in a holistic fashion, it is important to move beyond elemental components to overall patterns. We cannot possibly consider the countless permutations of subtle changes in the various components, and there is no formula for the weighted combinations of elements that determine particular meanings. Nevertheless, we can find some common themes across the various components that shape the meaning of integrated patterns of nonverbal communication [29].

Research reveals that exposure to prowhite (versus problack) nonverbal bias increased viewers’ bias even though patterns of nonverbal behavior could not be consciously reported [30][31]. This finding illustrates how micro-behaviors in social contexts serve as vehicles for complex psychological and social processes that operate below conscious awareness.

---

Emotion Regulation and Behavioral Expression

The Dual-Process Model of Emotion Regulation

Emotion regulation represents a critical domain where small behaviors reveal sophisticated psychological processes. To organise emerging findings, we present a dual-process framework that integrates explicit and implicit forms of emotion regulation, and argue that both forms of regulation are necessary for well-being [32][33].

According to contemporary dual-process models of emotion regulation, these strategies have further been categorized as deliberate/explicit (also called effortful, conscious or controlled) and automatic/implicit (also called incidental or unconscious) [34]. This distinction is crucial for understanding how everyday behaviors serve regulatory functions.

The process model of emotion regulation reveals the complexity underlying seemingly simple behavioral responses. Emotion regulation encompasses physiological, cognitive, and behavioral processes that are internal and external to the individual and that enable the individual to have control over the types of emotions experienced as well as when and to what degree they are experienced [35].

According to the process model of emotion regulation proposed by Gross, emotions can be regulated at five different stages: situation selection, situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive change (often, reappraisal), and response modulation [36]. Each of these stages can manifest through subtle behavioral adjustments that reflect deeper emotional processing.

Unconscious Emotion Regulation Mechanisms

The unconscious dimension of emotion regulation is particularly relevant to understanding everyday behavior. People often encounter difficulty when making conscious attempts to regulate their emotions. We propose that nonconscious self-regulatory processes may be of help in these difficult circumstances because nonconscious processes are not subject to the same set of limitations as are conscious processes [37].

Research demonstrates that participants who had a reappraisal emotion control goal primed and operating nonconsciously achieved the same decrease in physiological reactivity as those explicitly instructed to reappraise [38][39]. This finding reveals how behavioral patterns that appear spontaneous may actually reflect sophisticated unconscious regulatory processes.

According to Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis, emotions are generated by conveying the current state of the body to the brain through interoceptive and proprioceptive afferent input. The resulting brain activation patterns represent unconscious emotions and correlate with subjective feelings [40][41]. This framework illuminates how physical behaviors and emotional states are intrinsically interconnected.

Motor Behavior and Emotional Processing

The relationship between motor behavior and emotional processing provides compelling evidence for how small behaviors reflect deeper psychological processes. This proposition implies a corollary that the deliberate control of motor behavior could regulate feelings. We tested this possibility, hypothesizing that engaging in movements associated with a certain emotion would enhance that emotion and/or the corresponding valence [42].

Surprisingly, although progressive muscle relaxation is widely used for tension reduction and dance has been used for centuries to intensify joy in social settings, evidence for the impact of emotional bodily posture and movements on affective state is scarce. A handful of studies have shown that isometric arm flexion (associated with approach, e.g., bringing food towards one’s mouth) and arm extension (associated with rejection) affect evaluative cognitive processing [43].

This research demonstrates how micro-behaviors in motor expression serve as both manifestations and regulators of emotional states, revealing the bidirectional relationship between physical action and psychological experience.

---

Cognitive Flexibility and Behavioral Adaptation

The Neural Basis of Flexible Behavior

Cognitive flexibility represents a crucial aspect of how everyday behaviors reflect sophisticated psychological processes. Our ability to overcome habitual responses in favor of goal-driven novel responses depends on frontoparietal cognitive control networks (CCNs). Recent and ongoing work is revealing the brain network and information processes that allow CCNs to generate cognitive flexibility [44].

Working memory processes necessary for flexible maintenance and manipulation of goal-relevant representations were recently found to depend on short-term network plasticity (in contrast to persistent activity) within CCN regions. Compositional (i.e. abstract and reusable) rule representations maintained within CCNs have been found to reroute network activity flows from stimulus to response, enabling flexible behavior. Together, these findings suggest cognitive flexibility is enhanced by CCN-coordinated network mechanisms, utilizing compositional reuse of neural representations and network flows to flexibly accomplish task goals [45][46].

This neural architecture underlying cognitive flexibility manifests in everyday behaviors through subtle adjustments in response patterns, decision-making processes, and adaptive responses to changing contexts. The ability to override habitual responses and generate novel behaviors reflects the sophisticated interplay between multiple cognitive control systems.

Creative Thinking and Behavioral Innovation

The relationship between creative thinking and everyday behavior reveals another dimension of how small actions reflect deeper psychological processes. Creative thinking often requires overcoming habitual responses and forming remote associations, which may be supported or hindered by cognitive control. This study investigated how two components of inhibitory control—conflict detection and conflict inhibition—contribute to remote associative thinking under different types of experience constraints [47].

The capacity for creative expression in everyday behavior demonstrates the sophisticated cognitive mechanisms underlying seemingly routine actions. Creative cognition—the processes underlying the generation of a creative idea—is a critical aspect of creative problem-solving for both teams and individuals. Cognitive processes associated with creative problem-solving have received much more attention at the individual level than at the team level [48].

---

Social Context and Behavioral Expression

Interpersonal Dynamics and Micro-Behaviors

The social context of everyday behavior reveals how individual psychological processes interact with interpersonal dynamics. The first dimension is involvement or immediacy. In general, increased involvement is indicated by a closer distance, touch, gaze, greater facial expressiveness, a more direct-facing orientation, forward lean, gesturing, and vocal expressiveness [49].

Nonverbal communication is an important part of human communication, including head nodding, eye gaze, proximity and body orientation [50][51]. These subtle social behaviors reflect complex psychological processes including attention allocation, emotional states, social attitudes, and interpersonal intentions.

Research demonstrates that results showed more liking for and more trust in the virtual human whose nodding behaviour was driven by realistic behaviour rules. This supports the psychological models of nodding and advances our ability to build realistic virtual humans [52]. This finding illustrates how specific micro-behaviors carry significant psychological and social information.

Social Influence and Behavioral Transmission

The transmission of psychological states through behavioral channels represents a crucial aspect of how small behaviors reflect deeper processes. This study shows that teachers’ nonverbal behaviors may be one source of children’s academic stereotypes, including negative stereotypes about groups to which they belong. Moreover, these findings highlight the importance of subtle social cues in guiding children’s beliefs about social groups [53].

Adults are unlikely to provide children with explicit instruction about prejudice and stereotyping; however, adults who strive to be egalitarian may still demonstrate biases toward individuals from various social groups through their nonverbal behaviors. Schools provide a context where children have the opportunity to observe interactions between teachers and peers from various social groups, and teachers often differ in their treatment of children from different social groups [54].

This research reveals how everyday behaviors serve as vehicles for complex social psychological processes, transmitting attitudes, beliefs, and emotional states through subtle behavioral channels.

---

Clinical and Applied Implications

Behavioral Assessment and Psychological Understanding

The recognition that small behaviors reflect deeper psychological processes has significant implications for clinical assessment and intervention. The aim of CBT in smoking cessation is to identify and change the cognitive processes that maintain tobacco use, followed by teaching the necessary skills or strategies to stop smoking and maintain the cessation of abstinence [55].

A person’s emotions and behaviors are not directly linked to a specific life event, but more to how the events are evaluated and processed cognitively [56][57]. This understanding emphasizes the importance of examining the cognitive and emotional processes underlying behavioral patterns rather than focusing solely on surface-level actions.

The therapeutic implications extend to understanding how an important assumption behind this scientific stance is that beliefs can only be changed if there is concrete evidence to support the integration of new ways of looking at the self, the world, and the future. Behavioral techniques used in CBT are also greatly informed by the assumption that psychological difficulties are often maintained by dysfunctional patterns of behavior, including avoidance. As such, an important component of CBT is the use of exercises aimed at changing clients’ expectancies about their ability to function in particular situations [58].

Embodied Approaches to Intervention

The embodied cognition perspective offers new approaches to psychological intervention that recognize the mind-body connection in everyday behavior. The three modules of the suggested embodied approach to CBT [59][60] represent innovative applications of embodied cognition principles to therapeutic practice.

Research supports the integration of embodied approaches in therapy, demonstrating that the congruence between the body expression of the recipient’s emotion and the emotional tone of the sender’s language can facilitate the understanding of communication [61]. This finding suggests that attention to micro-behaviors and bodily expression can enhance therapeutic effectiveness.

---

Future Directions and Research Implications

Methodological Innovations

The study of how small behaviors reflect deeper psychological processes requires sophisticated methodological approaches that can capture subtle behavioral patterns and their psychological correlates. ISC measures the consistency of time series across the same voxels in different participants, revealing common neural activation regions. Compared with traditional general linear model (GLM) analyses, ISC has distinct advantages: it is data-driven and relatively model-free, allowing researchers to study brain function without predefined temporal models, and it is more sensitive to subtle task-induced activation patterns. A higher ISC implies a more “synchronized” or “coherent” response between individuals [62].

The development of new technologies and analytical approaches promises to enhance our understanding of the relationship between micro-behaviors and psychological processes. Resonating with the multidimensional nature of the construct, the measurement of cognitive load encompasses the assessment of subjective perceptions, performance and physiological responses. Whereas performance measures and self-report measures for cognitive load assessment are widely used in industrial settings, important steps have to be made yet to arrive at a reliable and valid implementation of physiological measures [63][64].

Integration of Multiple Theoretical Perspectives

Future research should continue to integrate insights from multiple theoretical perspectives to develop more comprehensive understanding of how everyday behaviors reflect psychological processes. The convergence of dual-process theory, embodied cognition, emotion regulation research, and social psychology offers promising avenues for theoretical development.

We propose that in order for an embodied cognition perspective to be refined and advanced as a lifelong theory of cognition, it is important to consider what can be learned from research with children. We propose that in order for an embodied cognition perspective to be refined and advanced as a lifelong theory of cognition, it is important to consider what can be learned from research with children [65][66].

The developmental perspective on everyday behavior and psychological processes represents a particularly important area for future investigation, as understanding how these relationships emerge and change across the lifespan can inform both theoretical models and practical applications.

---

Discussion

The evidence reviewed in this analysis demonstrates that everyday behaviors, far from being trivial or superficial actions, represent complex manifestations of sophisticated cognitive and emotional processes. The convergence of research from multiple domains—cognitive psychology, social psychology, neuroscience, and embodied cognition—reveals that small behaviors serve as windows into the deeper architecture of human psychological functioning.

The theoretical frameworks examined—dual-process theory, embodied cognition, and emotion regulation models—provide complementary perspectives on how psychological processes manifest through behavioral expression. Dual-process theory illuminates the interplay between automatic and controlled processes in everyday behavior, revealing how actions that appear spontaneous actually reflect complex cognitive computations. Embodied cognition theory demonstrates the intrinsic connection between physical expression and mental states, challenging traditional mind-body distinctions. Emotion regulation research shows how behaviors serve regulatory functions, often operating below conscious awareness to maintain psychological equilibrium.

The empirical evidence supports several key conclusions about the relationship between small behaviors and deeper psychological processes:

1. Automaticity and Complexity: Habitual and automatic behaviors, rather than being simple or mindless, reflect sophisticated learning, memory, and reward processing systems. The apparent simplicity of routine actions masks underlying cognitive complexity.

2. Unconscious Processing: Many everyday behaviors reflect unconscious emotional and cognitive processes, serving as external manifestations of internal states that individuals may not consciously recognize or report.

3. Social Transmission: Micro-behaviors serve as vehicles for transmitting complex psychological and social information between individuals, often operating below the threshold of conscious awareness.

4. Regulatory Functions: Small behaviors frequently serve emotion regulation and cognitive control functions, representing adaptive responses to psychological and environmental demands.

5. Individual Differences: The relationship between behaviors and underlying processes varies across individuals, reflecting differences in personality, learning history, cultural background, and psychological state.

The implications of these findings extend across multiple domains. In clinical psychology, recognition of the psychological depth of everyday behaviors suggests new approaches to assessment and intervention that attend to subtle behavioral patterns as indicators of underlying psychological processes. In social psychology, understanding how micro-behaviors transmit complex psychological information has implications for intergroup relations, social influence, and communication effectiveness.

The embodied cognition perspective offers particularly promising directions for future research and application. The recognition that cognitive and emotional processes are intrinsically linked to physical expression suggests that interventions targeting behavioral change may have profound effects on psychological states, and vice versa.

However, several limitations and challenges must be acknowledged. The complexity of the relationships between behaviors and psychological processes makes it difficult to draw simple causal inferences. The same behavior may reflect different psychological processes in different individuals or contexts, and different behaviors may serve similar psychological functions. Future research must continue to develop more sophisticated theoretical models and methodological approaches to capture these complexities.

Additionally, the cultural and contextual specificity of many behavioral expressions requires careful consideration of social and cultural factors in research and application. What constitutes meaningful behavioral expression varies significantly across cultural contexts, and universal principles must be distinguished from culture-specific patterns.

---

Conclusion   

This analytical review has demonstrated that everyday behaviors, far from being trivial surface phenomena, represent sophisticated expressions of the complex cognitive and emotional processes that characterize human psychological functioning. The evidence from multiple research domains converges on the conclusion that small behaviors serve as windows into deeper psychological processes, revealing the intricate architecture of human consciousness and social interaction.

The theoretical frameworks of dual-process theory, embodied cognition, and emotion regulation provide complementary perspectives on how psychological processes manifest through behavioral expression. The empirical evidence reveals that habitual behaviors reflect complex learning and memory systems, that unconscious processes significantly influence everyday actions, that micro-behaviors serve important social and emotional regulatory functions, and that individual differences in these relationships have important implications for psychological well-being.

The implications of this understanding extend across multiple domains of psychological science and practice. Recognition of the psychological depth of everyday behaviors suggests new approaches to clinical assessment and intervention, enhanced understanding of social psychological processes, and innovative applications of embodied cognition principles in therapeutic and educational contexts.

Future research should continue to develop more sophisticated theoretical models and methodological approaches to capture the complexity of behavior-psychology relationships, integrate insights from multiple theoretical perspectives, and explore the developmental and cultural dimensions of these processes. The methodological innovations emerging from neuroscience and computational approaches offer promising tools for advancing this understanding.

Ultimately, this analysis reveals that the psychology of everyday life is characterized by profound depth and complexity beneath seemingly simple surface behaviors. The recognition that small behaviors reflect deep cognitive and emotional processes has the potential to transform our understanding of human nature, enhance our approaches to psychological assessment and intervention, and inform the development of more nuanced and effective psychological theories and practices.

As we continue to explore the intricate relationships between mind, body, and behavior, the study of everyday psychology promises to yield increasingly sophisticated insights into the fundamental nature of human experience. The appreciation that every gesture, every micro-expression, every subtle behavioral adjustment represents a manifestation of the complex psychological processes that constitute consciousness itself opens new avenues for understanding and supporting human flourishing in all its remarkable complexity.

 

---

Key References:  

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645.

Beck, A. T. (2011). Cognitive behavior therapy: Basics and beyond (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Berkman, E. T., Hutcherson, C. A., Livingston, J. L., Kahn, L. E., & Inzlicht, M. (2017). Self-control as value-based choice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 422-428.

Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2016). Liking, wanting, and the incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. American Psychologist, 71(8), 670-679.

Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power posing: Brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363-1368.

Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel—now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59-70.

Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Harcourt Brace.

Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 62-68.

Gallese, V. (2008). Mirror neurons and the social nature of language: The neural exploitation hypothesis. Social Neuroscience, 3(3-4), 317-333.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299.

Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1-26.

Hall, J. A., Carter, S., Cody, M. J., & Albright, L. (2010). Individual differences in the accuracy of nonverbal communication. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(6), 692-698.

Hasson, U., Nir, Y., Levy, I., Fuhrmann, G., & Malach, R. (2004). Intersubject synchronization of cortical activity during natural vision. Science, 303(5664), 1634-1640.

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago Press.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Koole, S. L., & Rothermund, K. (2011). “I feel better but I don’t know why”: The psychology of implicit emotion regulation. Cognition & Emotion, 25(3), 389-399.

Martin, A. (2007). The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 25-45.

Niedenthal, P. M. (2007). Embodying emotion. Science, 316(5827), 1002-1005.

Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.

Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 220-247.

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37-76.

Winkielman, P., & Berridge, K. C. (2004). Unconscious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(3), 120-123.

Wood, W., & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 289-314.