A primary line of research in the PRESCI Lab focuses on the cognitive components of nostalgia and how it can serve several psychological and interpersonal relationship benefits.
Dr. Evans' earlier work investigating nostalgia's cognitive components came through researching the mechanistic role mental transportation serves in nostalgic processes. He and his collaborators found that when people recall nostalgic memories, they are mentally transported to the memory (i.e., mentally place themselves in the setting of the memory), and, in turn, experience the social, self-oriented, and existential benefits of nostalgia (Evans et al., 2021). Building on this work, Dr. Evans and the PRESCI Lab is currently investigating the use of virtual reality as a resource to further enhance the extent to which people mentally transport to and experience the benefits of nostalgia. Along similar lines, the PRESCI Lab is also investigating the linguistic and narrative underpinnings of nostalgic recollections, such as the language used among bilinguals, the parts of speech most frequently used, and the narrative structure of nostalgic recollections. Another ongoing line of research in the PRESCI Lab involves the psychological and interpersonal experiences in romantic relationships. For example, we are investigating romantic nostalgia (i.e., nostalgia regarding one’s current romantic partner or relationship) as a special type of personal nostalgia and its role as a resource for positive relationship functioning (Evans et al., 2022). We found that when experiencing romantic nostalgia, people feel closer and more committed to their partners as well as more satisfied with their relationships. We are currently expanding on these findings to understand how romantic nostalgia might repair and maintain romantic relationships.
Metaphor Use
As another primary line of research in the PRESCI Lab, we are also investigating the cognitive processes underlying metaphor use, how people differ in their tendency to use metaphors, and the psychological and interpersonal benefits of metaphor use. People often use metaphors to help understand their own experiences and the experiences of others. People use metaphors by comparing concrete examples or experiences to abstract constructs in order to make sense of them (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 1999). As psychological and social information is largely abstract in nature (e.g., emotions), metaphor use is a helpful tool for people to understand these concepts and, ultimately, understand themselves and others.
Like our nostalgia research, we are also investigating the role mental imagery plays in the use of metaphors. As metaphor use involves describing abstract phenomena using concrete examples, we believe that people may rely on mental imagery to formulate these concrete descriptions. Additionally, similar to our nostalgia research, we are also investigating the role metaphor use plays in interpersonal processes. Since emotions are largely abstract in nature, people may rely on metaphors to both understand themselves and others. Indeed, this is what we find. For example, in a recent series of studies, we found that on days that people experienced empathy and took the perspective of others, they used more metaphors (Fetterman, Evans, & Covarrubias, 2021). We are building on this work to understand how metaphor use may benefit romantic relationships.
Intellectual Humility and Science Denialism
One growing area of research in the PRESCI Lab is our work on both intellectual humility and science denialism. Regarding our work on intellectual humility, we are interested in the interpersonal dynamics involved in engaging (or failing to engage) in intellectually humble behaviors when one's own opinions regarding a factually based argument contradict another's. Along similar lines, we are currently investigating the antecedents and consequences of denying scientific findings. For example, we recently investigated science denialism of personality research, such that when personality research conflicts with people’s own individual differences, they tend to deny the science (Evans & Fetterman, 2021). We are building on this work to understand how this incongruence between research and one's lived experiences applies to other areas of science, beyond personality and social psychological research.