Physical-cleansing procedures can lead people to psychologically wash away their recent thoughts, reducing their impact on judgment. Lee and Schwarz (L&S) explain this and related phenomenon with an impressive unifying framework which organizes a diverse set of embodied inductions under the psychological processes of separation versus connection from one's thoughts. Across multiple procedures and paradigms, cleansing and related inductions are found to mitigate the impact of negative reactions (e.g., the guilt from transgression), but also reduce the impact of positive thoughts. In contrast, connection inductions (e.g., physically touching) magnify (rather than undermine) the influence of both positive and negative thoughts.

In making this separation-connection distinction to account for the impact of diverse operations on thought use, the authors join a number of prior frameworks that address the important distinction between having thoughts and using them (i.e., primary vs. secondary cognition; Briñol & DeMarree, Reference Briñol and DeMarree2012; Jost, Kruglanski, & Nelson, Reference Jost, Kruglanski and Nelson1998). For example, Alter and Oppenheimer (Reference Alter and Oppenheimer2009) brought together a wide array of manipulations related to the fluency/disfluency dimension, and showed how they could affect thought use. Huntsinger, Isbell, and Clore (Reference Huntsinger, Isbell and Clore2014) organized a diverse set of treatments related to the positive/negative emotion dimension and showed how they could influence the use of thoughts and thought processes. Bernstein et al. (Reference Bernstein, Hadash, Lichtash, Tanay, Shepherd and Fresco2015) integrated a variety of approaches that use mindfulness and distance inductions to reduce the impact of thoughts. Our own self-validation theory (SVT; Briñol & Petty, Reference Briñol, Petty and Zanna2009; Petty, Briñol, & Tormala, Reference Petty, Briñol and Tormala2002) is an even more general framework that brings together a broad coalition of variables capable of affecting thought reliance, including fluency (Briñol, Tormala, & Petty, Reference Briñol, Tormala, Petty, Unkelbach and Greifeneder2013b), emotion (Petty & Briñol, Reference Petty and Briñol2015), mindfulness (Luttrell, Briñol, & Petty, Reference Luttrell, Briñol, Petty, Ie, Ngnoumen and Langer2014), and most relevant to this comment, embodied inductions (Briñol, Petty, & Wagner, Reference Briñol, Petty, Wagner, Briñol and DeMarree2012).

In brief, SVT holds that having thoughts is not sufficient for them to have an impact on judgment and behavior. Rather, one must also think that those thoughts are valid to use either because the thoughts seem correct (called cognitive validation) or people feel good about or like them (affective validation; Briñol et al., Reference Briñol, Petty, Stavraki, Lamprinakos, Wagner and Díaz2018). As thought validity increases, so too does the influence of those thoughts on subsequent judgments. In our view, SVT can accommodate many of the separation-connection effects reviewed by L&S, but importantly, it also points to several potential moderators not previously considered in this domain. This comment illustrates how some of the general findings from SVT can be usefully applied to and potentially advance the separation-connection theory.

First, consider how grounded procedures can affect perceived thought validity. In the initial study on cleansing, the presumption was that because of the strong link between cleansing and removing dirt, cleansing would be especially likely to wash away negative thoughts and states (Lee & Schwarz, Reference Lee and Schwarz2011; Zhong & Liljenquist, Reference Zhong and Liljenquist2006). However, because SVT views cleansing as a general invalidating action (associated with disliking something), it can be applied to positive and negative thoughts alike. Subsequent research on cleansing confirmed this prediction (Florack, Kleber, Busch, & Stöhr, Reference Florack, Kleber, Busch and Stöhr2014). Similar to any other embodied action linked to invalidation such as head shaking (Briñol & Petty, Reference Briñol and Petty2003), postural slumping (Briñol, Petty, & Wagner, Reference Briñol, Petty and Wagner2009), frowning (Paredes, Stavraki, Briñol, & Petty, Reference Paredes, Stavraki, Briñol and Petty2013), or throwing something away (Briñol et al., Reference Briñol, Gascó, Petty and Horcajo2013a), cleansing procedures can reduce the effect of virtually any thought (or goal, or memory, and so on) if they operate by undermining thought validity.

Second, SVT holds that the meaning of an action is critical for determining its impact, not the action itself. For example, although cleansing is typically seen as removing something bad (e.g., dirt), it is possible for the same action to be viewed as adding something good (purity). If so, according to SVT, the impact would be reversed. In an illustrative study, Kim, Lee, Duhachek, Briñol, and Petty (Reference Kim, Lee, Duhachek, Briñol and Petty2018) had participants think about a recent time they did something wrong and then gave them the opportunity to wash their hands. When the action of washing was framed as removing dirt (the default meaning), the results showed that guilt over the wrong action decreased, replicating the original effect of hand washing. In contrast, when the same action was framed as adding purification to the body to help listen to one's mind, the experienced guilt increased, reversing the original effect.

Beyond the meaning of particular actions, the meaning of the self as an origin or destination to which thoughts are connected or separated is also important. Although the self tends to be associated with high validity by default, changing its meaning (from high to low validity or vice versa) can change the effect of grounded procedures on thought usage (Gascó, Briñol, Santos, Petty, & Horcajo, Reference Gascó, Briñol, Santos, Petty and Horcajo2018).

Third, consistent with SVT predictions (Briñol et al., Reference Briñol, Gascó, Petty and Horcajo2013a), L&S propose that separation and connection manipulations produce stronger effects when they involve physical actions rather than simulations. Briñol et al. (Reference Briñol, Petty, Durso and Rucker2017a) offered several reasons to explain why effects can be stronger when inductions involve actual bodily responses. For example, having the body engaged in any induction can activate a link to the self. The active-self account of prime-to-behavior effects suggests that primes can change the content of one's self-concept and linking the prime to the self-concept increases the impact of primes on judgments and behavior (Wheeler, DeMarree, & Petty, Reference Wheeler, DeMarree and Petty2007). Perhaps performing physical actions such as washing one's hands makes a stronger link to the self and thus people feel cleaner compared to merely seeing or imagining cleaning.

By focusing on the particular procedures of separation-connection, L&S have developed useful but rather specific rationales for why the particular inductions of interest (e.g., cleansing) would matter. Using SVT as a more general framework, we noted the importance of considering how moderators can contribute to specifying when separation and connecting procedures would be expected to operate by affecting perceived validity. We highlighted how the meaning of the action can matter, but SVT also points to other moderators such as the timing of the inductions (e.g., does cleansing precede or come after thought generation?). As was the case for other variables (e.g., ease, emotion, and power), we hope that SVT can contribute to understanding and advancing separation-connection effects.