Table 1.
Tympanic membrane temperature and affect/motivational orientation articles.
| Article | Participant age | Task or report | Main findings | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boyce et al. (2002) | 4.5–8 year olds | Parental report of affect/behavior | Increased L-R TMT associated with positive emotions and socially “competent” behaviors; decreased L-R TMT associated with negative emotions and “problem” behaviors | Warmer L TMT associated with positive/approach emotions; warmer R TMT associated with negative emotions |
| Boyce et al. (1996) | 8 year olds | Parental report of affect/behavior | Increased L-R TMT associated with increased aggression, decreased ego resilience, depression, externalizing, and internalizing behavior problems, schizoid behaviors, social withdrawal, and somatization | Warmer L TMT associated with negative/withdrawal emotions |
| Gunnar and Donzella (2004) | 3–5 year olds | Parental report of affect/behavior | Increased L-R TMT associated with increased smiling and laugher, decreased L-R TMT associated with increased sadness | Warmer L TMT associated with positive/approach emotions; warmer R TMT associated with negative emotions |
| Helton (2010) | 19.97 Mean age (undergraduates) | Impulsivity assessed via performance on Go-No-Go tasks | Warmer L TMT associated with increased errors of commission and faster reaction time | Warmer L TMT associated with increased impulsivity/approach motivation; Increased R TMT associated with more “cautious” behavior |
| Helton and Carter (2011) | 20.3 Mean age (undergraduates) | TMT assessed at baseline by male or female experimenter | Lower R TMT when measured by female investigator; Similar R and L TMT when measured by male investigator | Placed in framework of “threat assessment”; interpretation not clear |
| Helton et al. (2009a) | Range of 18–33 years | Attention assessed via performance on local and global sustained attention tasks | Increased R TMT associated with sustained attention to global stimuli | Warmer R TMT associated with global attention; interpreted as cognitive fatigue-related decreased R hemisphere activity |
| Helton et al. (2009b) | 20 Mean age (undergraduates) | No affect report following possible mood induction, attention assessed via performance on the sustained attention to response task | Greater increase in R TMT compared to L TMT from pre to post-task | Warmer R TMT associated with increased attentiveness |
| Helton and Maginnity (2012) | 21 Mean age (undergraduates) | Self-report of attention/inattention | Increased R-L TMT associated with decreased inattention | Warmer R TMT associated with increased attentiveness |
| Jones et al. (2011) | 7–10 year olds | No affect report following stress induction | Low fetal-maternal “health” at birth associated with increased L-R TMT following stress | Warmer L TMT associated with negative emotions |
| Propper et al. (2010) | 19.66 Mean age (undergraduates) | Self-report of affect at baseline | No association between R-L TMT and any emotion; Ar-ITMT associated with increased anger/hostility | Greater absolute difference between L and R TMT associated with anger/hostility |
| Propper et al. (in press) | Undergraduates (age not reported) | Self-report of affect following mood induction | Baseline: increased R TMT associated with increased positive affect; post-manipulation: increased R TMT associated with increased negative affect; increased L TMT associated with positive affect | Greater absolute difference between L and R TMT associated with anger/hostility; other results not clear |
| Propper et al. (2011) | Range of 19–21 years per group (undergraduates) | Self-report of affect following sustained unilateral visual stimulation | Increased Ar-ITMT associated with increased anger/hostility, increased R-L TMT associated with increased anger | Greater absolute difference between L and R TMT associated with anger/hostility; warmer R TMT associated with negative emotions |