A paper recently published by Turner-Zwinkels et al. (2025) contains a peculiar set of findings: using cross-sectional analyses of international survey data, one study found that the more partisans agree with their co-partisans on matters of policy and ideology, the less they like the party they all support, whereas in another study these variables were uncorrelated. These negative and null relationships are counter-intuitive and conflict with prior findings showing that greater perceived ideological similarity tends to increase liking. Turner-Zwinkels et al. suggest these results could be a product of optimal distinctiveness theory. However, I suggest that this result is a statistical artefact caused by collider bias. I explain how collider bias could create this result even if the true relationship between liking and ideological similarity is positive. I demonstrate the plausibility of this explanation using simulations and a re-analysis of Turner-Zwinkels et al.’s data.

The present study examined the interaction of grammatical gender and gender stereotypes in Modern Greek. Native Greek adults were primed with Greek occupational nouns of common gender (i.e., nouns that are used for both male and female characters) with a masculine ending and a stereotypically male or female bias (e.g., iδravlikós ‘plumber’ and esθitikós ‘beautician’), followed by a masculine or feminine pronoun target (aftós ‘he’ or aftí ‘she’), forming stereotypically congruent (iδravlikós – aftós, ‘plumber – he’, esθitikós – aftí, ‘beautician - she’) and incongruent (iδravlikós – aftí, ‘plumber – she’, esθitikós – aftós, ‘beautician - he’) prime-target pairs. The participants’ task was to decide the gender of the pronoun, and their response times were measured. An effect of congruency was found for masculine pronouns, with slower response times when the masculine pronoun had been primed with a stereotypically female role noun. No such effect of congruency was found for feminine pronouns. This suggests that not only gender stereotypicality but also the morphological form of the noun influenced processing in Greek role nouns. Specifically, apparent morphosyntactic cues, albeit being uninformative about referential gender, seemingly generated a male bias and mitigated the impact of gender stereotypes associated with female-biased role nouns in prime-target pairs involving a feminine pronoun, reflecting an interaction between grammatical form and stereotype.

Correction to: Dyduch-Hazar, K., & Gollwitzer, M. (2024). Feeling Bad About Feeling Good? How Avengers and Observers Evaluate the Hedonic Pleasure of Taking Revenge. Social Psychological Bulletin, 19, Article e12477. https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.12477

While Open Science has arguably initiated positive changes at some stages of the research process (e.g., increasing transparency through preregistration), problematic behaviors during data collection are still almost impossible to detect and pose a great risk to the validity and integrity of psychological research—especially, when researchers use data collected by others (e.g., students). Exploring students’ and supervisors’ perspectives, the present registered report enlightens this “black box” of student data collection, focusing on questionable research practices and research misconduct (QRP/M). The majority of students did not report having engaged in any problematic behaviors during data collection, but some QRP/M—ranging from somewhat questionable to highly fraudulent—seem quite common (e.g., telling participants the hypothesis beforehand, participating in one’s own survey). We provide an overview of students’ reported and supervisors’ suspected data collection QRP/M, explore potential drivers for these behaviors based on the fraud triangle model (including pressures, opportunities, and rationalizations), and report how students and supervisors perceive the eligibility of student data for further uses (e.g., scientific publications). Moreover, we explore the role of the student-supervisor relationship (e.g., communication and expectations) and Open Science practices in student projects. In summary, our findings suggest the potential scientific value of data from student projects. Fostering transparent communication regarding expectations, experiences, and intentions between supervisors and students might further contribute to strengthening this prospect.

To be successful in social life, perceivers need to form impressions of other people's trustworthiness. Current models of this process emphasize the role of specific descriptive content–individual verbal and visual features determining trust impressions. In contrast, we describe three lines of our research showing that trust impressions also depend on consistency–a sense of fit–between features. The first line demonstrates that consistency of brief verbal characterizations increases trust judgments. The second line shows that trust judgments and behaviors are boosted by incidental consistency between the foreground and background of visual scenes. The third line observes that consistency between facial features enhances impressions of trustworthiness. In all these studies, consistency (measured via subjective ratings, reaction times, and physiological measures) positively and uniquely predicted trust judgments. Overall, our results, and related findings, show that trust impressions are not a simple sum of the contributing parts, but reflect a “gestalt.” We theoretically locate these findings in frameworks emphasizing the role of fluency, predictive coding, and coherence in social cognition.

Introduction to a Festschrift in Honour of Bogdan Wojciszke Authors Katarzyna Myślińska-Szarek Faculty of Psychology in Sopot, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Sopot, Poland Konrad Bocian Faculty of Psychology in Sopot, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Sopot, Poland Michał Parzuchowski Faculty of Psychology in Sopot, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Sopot, Poland PDF HTML XML Article info Impact Citations How to Cite License Published at 6. September 2022 https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.9643 Issue: Vol. 17 (2022) Section: A Festschrift in Honour of Bogdan Wojciszke Share: Z Myślińska-Szarek, K., Bocian, K., & Parzuchowski, M. (2022). Introduction to a Festschrift in Honour of Bogdan Wojciszke. Social Psychological Bulletin, 17, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.9643 More Citation Formats ACM ACS APA ABNT Chicago Harvard IEEE MLA Turabian Vancouver Download Citation Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 International License. PlumX Dimensions Views: Total Abstract PDF HTML XML 309 153 112 19 25 Downloads: Download data is not yet available.

Managerial positions involve influencing others, hence the importance of studying the standards guiding managers' attitudes, decisions, and behavior. Drawing on structural theories and psychological findings on the effects of subjective social status, we predict that holding a managerial position is related to individual value structure via self-perceived social rank of those in managerial positions. We argue that holding a managerial position is associated positively with prioritizing values reflecting personal focus (self-enhancement and openness to change value types) and, as a consequence, negatively with prioritizing values reflecting social focus (self-transcendence and conservation value types). Using data from the European Social Survey 2012 (N = 48,105) from 29 countries, we found a mediating effect of subjective social status between holding a managerial position and personal versus social focus not moderated by the country context. We discuss the implications of these findings for psychological theories of social hierarchy and managerial practice.

The socioeconomic status (SES) of individuals is related to their political trust. The higher their status, the more they trust the political system. This well-known relation is generally explained in terms of socialisation. The higher the SES, the more people are exposed to democratic values or interact with trustworthy institutions. This increases political interest, which increases political trust. In this study, we propose a complementary explanation: lower SES enhances the perception that the social fabric is breaking down (anomie), and this reduces political trust. We test this hypothesis by using structural equation modeling (SEM) on a representative survey (n = 1203) conducted in the Wallonia region of Belgium. That region appeared suited to explore our hypothesis because of its long-term economic difficulties. The results reveal that those of low SES have less political trust because they perceive more anomie in society. These results are consistent even when the alternative explanation is taken into account (the socialisation hypothesis). Moreover, the results also showed that a higher level of anomie reduced interpersonal trust which reduced political trust (serial mediation). These results highlight the key role of anomie when considering the relation of SES with political trust.

Could there be upsides to rudely challenging people’s positions? If no one calls out the speaker of a challenging or offensive statement, it might be because the audience is afraid to challenge the speaker, thereby suggesting the speaker holds a dominant position. In two experiments (N = 635), participants read vignettes in which a speaker uttered a statement that was challenging (it directly clashed with the audience’s prior views) or unchallenging (it agreed with the audience’s prior views). We also manipulated whether the audience accepted or rejected the statement after it was uttered. In Experiment 1 the statements were about mundane topics, while in Experiment 2 the statements were offensive. In both experiments, speakers uttering challenging statements that the audience nonetheless accepted were deemed more dominant and more likely to be the boss of the audience members. This shows that people use audience reactions to challenging statements to infer dominance, and suggests that people might use the utterance of challenging statements to demonstrate their dominance.