Research Project | Extremes in Psychology: Exploring the Spectrum of Subjective and Objective Perspectives

Project lead:

Ass.-Prof. Dr. Dominik Mihalits, MSc., BA.pth – Sigmund Freud Private University
dominik.mihalits@sfu.ac.at

Team members:

• Prof. Dr. Jaan Valsiner – Aalborg University
• Natalie Rodax, PhD – Sigmund Freud Private University
• Priscilla Fabrizi, BSc – Sigmund Freud Private University
• Dyveke Fogh Drejer, BSc – Aalborg University
• Prof. Tatsuya Sato – Ritsumeikan University
• Assoc.-Prof. Teppei Tsuchimoto – Ritsumeikan University
• Asst.-Prof. Abel Nogueira López – University of Burgos

The project employs a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods to capture the multifaceted nature of “extremes.” Qualitative methods include in-depth interviews and content analyses, which will provide rich, exploratory insight into personal narratives and cultural representations of extreme situations. These qualitative approaches allow participants to describe subjective extreme experiences in their own words and enable analysis of how extremes are portrayed or discussed in online communities and media.

Building on the qualitative insights, a range of quantitative methods will be used to objectively measure and test aspects of extreme experiences. Psychometric tools (e.g. standardized questionnaires or rating scales) will help quantify individuals’ perceptions of what is extreme. Controlled computer-based experiments may be designed – for example, presenting participants with standardized images or scenarios (some drawn from databases of extreme life events) to gauge their reactions and thresholds for labelling something as extreme. This mixed-methods approach ensures that the project captures both the subjective nuances and the objective measures of extreme experiences.

• Defining and Identifying Extremes: How can an “extreme” event or behaviour be identified objectively, and how does this compare with subjective perception? We hypothesize that there will be a measurable gap between objective indicators of an extreme (for example, statistical rarity or intensity of an event) and people’s subjective labelling of something as extreme. Cultural background and personal experience are expected to strongly influence whether an individual perceives a given situation as “extreme,” meaning that what is objectively extraordinary may not always be subjectively seen as such (and vice versa).
• Cultural and Psychological Factors: In what ways do cultural context and individual psychological traits influence the experience and interpretation of extremes? This question explores the role of factors such as cultural norms, values, and personal characteristics (e.g. personality traits like sensation-seeking or tolerance for risk) in shaping one’s concept of extreme. Hypothesis: The perception and tolerance of extremes will vary across cultures and individuals – for instance, societies that regularly face natural disasters might have a higher threshold for labelling events as extreme, while certain personality profiles might seek out or downplay extreme experiences. We expect to find that cultural narratives (stories, media, collective memory) about extreme events significantly shape what members of that culture consider extreme, and that individual differences (like high sensation-seeking) correlate with a greater pursuit or acceptance of extreme experiences.
• Positive Extremes and Performance: Are positively viewed “extreme” experiences (such as extraordinary achievements) linked to performance psychology variables? This question arises from the initial observation that many positively connoted extremes involve exceptional performance. Hypothesis: We propose that positive extreme experiences – for example, breaking a world record or achieving a personal best – are associated with specific psychological factors such as high motivation, resilience, or flow states. Individuals who achieve or chase extreme feats may share certain mental strategies or traits (studied in performance and sports psychology), and understanding this link could reveal how pushing to extremes can contribute to personal growth or well-being. The project will examine if framing an experience as an “extreme accomplishment” influences one’s psychological state or performance outcomes.
• Boundary to Clinical Relevance: Where is the boundary between extreme-but-normal behaviour and clinically abnormal behaviour? Here we investigate at what point an extreme deviation in emotion or behaviour might signal a psychological disorder. Hypothesis: Many extreme behaviours or experiences lie on a continuum with normal behaviour, and only when certain thresholds are crossed (in intensity, frequency, or impact on functioning) do they become pathological. For instance, an extremely high level of fear in a genuinely dangerous situation is normal, but extreme fear responses in safe situations may indicate a phobia. We expect our research to identify key criteria or markers that distinguish a healthy extreme (e.g., an intense but transient emotional experience, or an extraordinary achievement that remains adaptive) from one that is a sign of clinical concern (e.g., extreme behaviours that are pervasive, maladaptive, or detached from reality). This will help refine how clinicians and researchers define the line between normative extremes and clinically significant deviance.

This project is innovative in that it tackles a largely unexplored concept in psychology – the nature of “extremes” – from both a cultural and a psychological perspective. While specific extreme behaviours (like extreme sports) or extreme pathologies have been studied in isolation, there is currently no comprehensive framework for understanding extremes as a general phenomenon across positive, negative, subjective, and objective dimensions. By addressing this gap, the research will contribute new theoretical and empirical insights into how humans define the limits of experience.

Scientific relevance: The findings are expected to advance psychological theory by illuminating how people categorize the intensity of experiences. The project’s interdisciplinary approach bridges subfields of psychology: it connects cultural psychology (how shared media and narratives shape our concept of extreme) with cognitive and physiological psychology (how our brains and bodies respond to extreme stimuli), as well as with social and personality psychology (how individual and group differences affect the perception of extremes). Additionally, by examining parallels with abnormal psychology, the research can sharpen the conceptual boundaries of what is considered extreme but normal versus pathological. This could inform future diagnostic thinking or prevention strategies by identifying markers that precede clinical conditions (for example, recognizing when extreme stress or risk-taking might tip into a disorder).

Practical relevance: Understanding extremes has tangible benefits in several domains. In performance and sports psychology, insights from this project could help coaches and practitioners leverage the positive aspects of extreme achievement – for instance, by understanding the mindset that drives individuals to exceptional performance, these strategies could be taught to others striving for excellence. The research might highlight how embracing certain “extreme” challenges (in a controlled way) can foster personal growth, resilience, and peak performance. Conversely, in clinical and counselling settings, knowing where the line lies between extreme experiences and pathology will aid professionals in guiding individuals who indulge in extreme behaviours or undergo extreme events. It can improve assessment – for example, distinguishing a one-off extreme coping response from the onset of a clinical condition – and intervention, by suggesting when to encourage normalization of an experience versus when to offer clinical support.

10/2024 – 09/2030