We examined (a) the relation between content knowledge and comprehension (both reading and listening comprehension) using correlational data and (b) the impact of content knowledge instruction on content knowledge and comprehension using causal data. Moderation by assessment, person, instruction, and study quality characteristics was systematically examined. For causal data, listening comprehension was excluded from moderation analysis due to insufficient studies. Correlational data from 108 studies, 441 correlation coefficients, and N = 68,301 participants showed that content knowledge was moderately related to comprehension with an identical magnitude for listening comprehension and reading comprehension (r = .41). The relation with reading comprehension was stronger when content knowledge was assessed using norm-referenced tasks (r = .50) than when it was assessed using researcher-developed tasks (r = .39). Causal data from 55 studies, 304 treatment effect sizes, and N = 18,540 participants showed that content knowledge instruction improved content knowledge (g = 1.36) and reading comprehension (g = 0.44), but not listening comprehension (g = 0.13). Effects on reading comprehension differed: research-developed tasks (g = 0.51) compared to norm-referenced comprehension assessments (g = 0.21); knowledge activation (g = 0.66) compared to knowledge building (g = 0.19); and studies with an N of 1 design (g = 0.67) compared to those that did not (g = 0.18). The findings highlight the importance of content knowledge in comprehension while highlighting the need to consider variation in the relation and impact by assessment, instruction, and study quality features. Future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Content knowledge and comprehension: A meta-analytic review of correlational and causal associations.","authors":"Young-Suk Grace Kim, Yucheng Cao","doi":"10.1037/bul0000502","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000502","url":null,"abstract":"We examined (a) the relation between content knowledge and comprehension (both reading and listening comprehension) using correlational data and (b) the impact of content knowledge instruction on content knowledge and comprehension using causal data. Moderation by assessment, person, instruction, and study quality characteristics was systematically examined. For causal data, listening comprehension was excluded from moderation analysis due to insufficient studies. Correlational data from 108 studies, 441 correlation coefficients, and N = 68,301 participants showed that content knowledge was moderately related to comprehension with an identical magnitude for listening comprehension and reading comprehension (r = .41). The relation with reading comprehension was stronger when content knowledge was assessed using norm-referenced tasks (r = .50) than when it was assessed using researcher-developed tasks (r = .39). Causal data from 55 studies, 304 treatment effect sizes, and N = 18,540 participants showed that content knowledge instruction improved content knowledge (g = 1.36) and reading comprehension (g = 0.44), but not listening comprehension (g = 0.13). Effects on reading comprehension differed: research-developed tasks (g = 0.51) compared to norm-referenced comprehension assessments (g = 0.21); knowledge activation (g = 0.66) compared to knowledge building (g = 0.19); and studies with an N of 1 design (g = 0.67) compared to those that did not (g = 0.18). The findings highlight the importance of content knowledge in comprehension while highlighting the need to consider variation in the relation and impact by assessment, instruction, and study quality features. Future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"35 1","pages":"1219-1244"},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joshua W. Maxwell, Robert D. Torrence, Eric Ruthruff
Facial expressions of emotion are critical to survival and social interaction. Their importance is underscored by evolutionary adaptations that enable their automatic production and recognition. As a result, emotional faces may receive attentional prioritization, even when completely irrelevant to the task at hand. Although attentional bias is theoretically plausible, empirical findings have been inconsistent: Some studies have reported bias toward emotional faces, whereas many others have not. To clarify this discrepancy, we conducted a meta-analysis of attentional bias for task-irrelevant emotional expressions, including studies using the additional singleton and spatial cuing paradigms (which includes dot probe paradigms). We found an overall effect between zero and small (Hedges's g = 0.08), based on 160 cases. The only significant moderator was the data set from which the emotional face stimuli were drawn, with the Gur data set (Gur et al., 2002) producing the strongest bias. In a second meta-analysis, we examined studies where the emotional expression was task relevant because both the expression and the target were singletons. Here, the overall attentional bias was small to medium (g = 0.41), based on 25 cases. We conclude that facial expressions of emotion do not bias attention when they are task irrelevant. In the discussion, we highlight some empirical and theoretical challenges to emotion automaticity and offer explanations for why the effect was between zero and small. One potential explanation is studies often utilize static photographs of actors portraying facial expressions of emotion, which are low in salience and ecological validity because they lack context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
情绪的面部表情对生存和社会互动至关重要。它们的重要性被进化适应所强调，使它们能够自动产生和识别。因此，情绪激动的面孔可能会获得注意力优先级，即使与手头的任务完全无关。虽然注意偏向在理论上是合理的，但实证结果却不一致：一些研究报告了对情绪激动的面孔的偏向，而其他许多研究则没有。为了澄清这一差异，我们对任务无关情绪表达的注意偏倚进行了荟萃分析，包括使用额外的单线索范式和空间线索范式（包括点探针范式）的研究。基于160个案例，我们发现总体效应介于零和小之间（赫奇斯的g = 0.08）。唯一显著的调节因子是提取情绪面部刺激的数据集，Gur数据集（Gur et al., 2002）产生了最强的偏差。在第二个荟萃分析中，我们检查了情绪表达与任务相关的研究，因为表达和目标都是单身。在这里，基于25例的总体注意偏倚是小到中等（g = 0.41）。我们得出结论，当面部表情与任务无关时，它们不会影响注意力。在讨论中，我们强调了情绪自动性的一些经验和理论挑战，并解释了为什么影响介于零和小之间。一种可能的解释是，研究经常使用演员描绘面部表情的静态照片，由于缺乏背景，这些照片的显着性和生态有效性较低。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。
{"title":"Attention bias for facial expressions of emotion: A meta-analytic review.","authors":"Joshua W. Maxwell, Robert D. Torrence, Eric Ruthruff","doi":"10.1037/bul0000496","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000496","url":null,"abstract":"Facial expressions of emotion are critical to survival and social interaction. Their importance is underscored by evolutionary adaptations that enable their automatic production and recognition. As a result, emotional faces may receive attentional prioritization, even when completely irrelevant to the task at hand. Although attentional bias is theoretically plausible, empirical findings have been inconsistent: Some studies have reported bias toward emotional faces, whereas many others have not. To clarify this discrepancy, we conducted a meta-analysis of attentional bias for task-irrelevant emotional expressions, including studies using the additional singleton and spatial cuing paradigms (which includes dot probe paradigms). We found an overall effect between zero and small (Hedges's g = 0.08), based on 160 cases. The only significant moderator was the data set from which the emotional face stimuli were drawn, with the Gur data set (Gur et al., 2002) producing the strongest bias. In a second meta-analysis, we examined studies where the emotional expression was task relevant because both the expression and the target were singletons. Here, the overall attentional bias was small to medium (g = 0.41), based on 25 cases. We conclude that facial expressions of emotion do not bias attention when they are task irrelevant. In the discussion, we highlight some empirical and theoretical challenges to emotion automaticity and offer explanations for why the effect was between zero and small. One potential explanation is studies often utilize static photographs of actors portraying facial expressions of emotion, which are low in salience and ecological validity because they lack context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"32 1","pages":"1197-1218"},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Thorben Jansen, Lucas W. Liebenow, Ute Mertens, Fabian T. C. Schmidt, Julian F. Lohmann, Johanna Fleckenstein, Jennifer Meyer
Psychological science requires reliable measures. Within systematic literature reviews, reliability hinges on high interrater agreement during data extraction. Yet, the extraction process has been time-consuming. Efforts to accelerate the process using technology have shown limited success until generative artificial intelligence (genAI), particularly large language models (LLMs), accurately extracted variables from medical studies. Nonetheless, for psychological researchers, it remains unclear how to utilize genAI for data extraction, given the range of tested variables, the medical context, and the variability in accuracy. We systematically assessed extraction accuracy and error patterns across domains in psychology by comparing genAI-extracted and human-extracted data from 22 systematic review databases published in the Psychological Bulletin. Eight LLMs extracted 312,329 data points from 2,179 studies on 186 variables. LLM extractions achieved unacceptable accuracy on all metrics for 20% of variables. For 46% of variables, accuracy was acceptable for some metrics and unacceptable for others. LLMs reached acceptable but not high accuracy on all metrics in 15%, high but not excellent in 8%, and excellent accuracy in 12% of variables. Accuracy varied most between variables, less between systematic reviews, and least between LLMs. Moderator analyses using a hierarchical logistic regression, hierarchical linear model, and meta-analysis revealed that accuracy was higher for variables describing studies' context and moderator variables compared to variables for effect size calculation. Also, accuracy was higher in systematic reviews with more detailed variable descriptions and positively correlated with model sizes. We discuss directions for investigating ways to use genAI to accelerate data extractions while ensuring meaningful human control. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
心理科学需要可靠的测量方法。在系统的文献综述中，可靠性取决于数据提取过程中研究者的高度一致性。然而，提取过程一直很耗时。在生成式人工智能（genAI），特别是大型语言模型（llm）能够准确地从医学研究中提取变量之前，利用技术加速这一进程的努力取得了有限的成功。尽管如此，对于心理学研究人员来说，考虑到测试变量的范围、医学背景和准确性的可变性，如何利用基因人工智能进行数据提取仍不清楚。通过比较《心理学公报》上发表的22个系统综述数据库中基因人工提取和人工提取的数据，我们系统地评估了心理学各领域的提取准确性和错误模式。8个LLMs从2179项研究中提取了312329个数据点，涉及186个变量。对于20%的变量，LLM提取在所有指标上取得了不可接受的准确性。对于46%的变量，准确性对于某些指标是可以接受的，而对于其他指标则是不可接受的。llm在所有指标上达到可接受但不高的准确率为15%，在8%的变量上达到高但不优秀的准确率，在12%的变量上达到优秀的准确率。准确性在变量之间变化最大，在系统评价之间变化较小，在法学硕士之间变化最小。使用层次逻辑回归、层次线性模型和元分析的调节分析显示，描述研究背景的变量和调节变量的准确性高于效应大小计算的变量。此外，在具有更详细的变量描述的系统评价中，准确性更高，并且与模型大小呈正相关。我们讨论了研究如何使用基因人工智能来加速数据提取，同时确保有意义的人类控制的方向。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。
{"title":"Data extraction by generative artificial intelligence: Assessing determinants of accuracy using human-extracted data from systematic review databases.","authors":"Thorben Jansen, Lucas W. Liebenow, Ute Mertens, Fabian T. C. Schmidt, Julian F. Lohmann, Johanna Fleckenstein, Jennifer Meyer","doi":"10.1037/bul0000501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000501","url":null,"abstract":"Psychological science requires reliable measures. Within systematic literature reviews, reliability hinges on high interrater agreement during data extraction. Yet, the extraction process has been time-consuming. Efforts to accelerate the process using technology have shown limited success until generative artificial intelligence (genAI), particularly large language models (LLMs), accurately extracted variables from medical studies. Nonetheless, for psychological researchers, it remains unclear how to utilize genAI for data extraction, given the range of tested variables, the medical context, and the variability in accuracy. We systematically assessed extraction accuracy and error patterns across domains in psychology by comparing genAI-extracted and human-extracted data from 22 systematic review databases published in the Psychological Bulletin. Eight LLMs extracted 312,329 data points from 2,179 studies on 186 variables. LLM extractions achieved unacceptable accuracy on all metrics for 20% of variables. For 46% of variables, accuracy was acceptable for some metrics and unacceptable for others. LLMs reached acceptable but not high accuracy on all metrics in 15%, high but not excellent in 8%, and excellent accuracy in 12% of variables. Accuracy varied most between variables, less between systematic reviews, and least between LLMs. Moderator analyses using a hierarchical logistic regression, hierarchical linear model, and meta-analysis revealed that accuracy was higher for variables describing studies' context and moderator variables compared to variables for effect size calculation. Also, accuracy was higher in systematic reviews with more detailed variable descriptions and positively correlated with model sizes. We discuss directions for investigating ways to use genAI to accelerate data extractions while ensuring meaningful human control. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"9 1","pages":"1280-1306"},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tyler B. Sabey, Braydon C. Shanklin, Jason A. Colquitt, Michael D. Baer
Keltner et al. (2003) presented an integrative theory of the social implications of possessing power. Their theory-the approach-inhibition theory of power-quickly became the dominant lens for empirical investigations of how power influences a person's cognition, affect, and behavior. Despite the many benefits of Keltner et al.'s theory, the past 20 years of research have surfaced several potential issues with the theory, including empirical dissensus, mediational ambiguity, and questions about cognitive versus affective primacy. The purpose of this study is to resolve these issues by conducting the first meta-analytic synthesis of the literature on the outcomes of power. Specifically, we tested Keltner et al.'s propositions that power is positively related to the approach-oriented outcomes of attention to rewards, automatic cognition, positive affect, and disinhibited behavior and negatively related to the inhibition-oriented outcomes of attention to threats, controlled cognition, negative affect, and inhibited behavior. Our meta-analysis included a final set of 1,712 effect sizes from 813 independent samples of 432 manuscripts with 269,534 participants. Our analysis demonstrates that the theory is well-supported; approach associations are larger than inhibition associations; power influences behavior indirectly through attention, cognition, and affect; and those indirect effects are largely conveyed through affect. Based on these findings, we suggest several future directions that scholars can take as the literature on power continues to evolve. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
Keltner et al.（2003）提出了一个关于拥有权力的社会影响的综合理论。他们的理论——权力的接近抑制理论——迅速成为实证研究权力如何影响一个人的认知、情感和行为的主流视角。尽管Keltner等人的理论有很多好处，但过去20年的研究已经暴露了该理论的几个潜在问题，包括经验分歧、中介模糊以及关于认知与情感首要的问题。本研究的目的是通过对有关权力结果的文献进行首次元分析综合来解决这些问题。具体而言，我们检验了Keltner等人的命题，即权力与注意奖励、自动认知、积极影响和去抑制行为的方法导向结果呈正相关，与注意威胁、控制认知、消极影响和抑制行为的抑制导向结果负相关。我们的荟萃分析包括来自813个独立样本的1712个效应量，这些样本来自432份手稿，共有269534名参与者。我们的分析表明，该理论得到了很好的支持；接近关联大于抑制关联；权力通过注意、认知和情感间接影响行为；而这些间接影响主要是通过情感来传达的。基于这些发现，我们提出了未来学者可以采取的几个方向，因为关于权力的文献在不断发展。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。
{"title":"The approach-inhibition theory of power: A meta-analytic test and synthesis.","authors":"Tyler B. Sabey, Braydon C. Shanklin, Jason A. Colquitt, Michael D. Baer","doi":"10.1037/bul0000500","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000500","url":null,"abstract":"Keltner et al. (2003) presented an integrative theory of the social implications of possessing power. Their theory-the approach-inhibition theory of power-quickly became the dominant lens for empirical investigations of how power influences a person's cognition, affect, and behavior. Despite the many benefits of Keltner et al.'s theory, the past 20 years of research have surfaced several potential issues with the theory, including empirical dissensus, mediational ambiguity, and questions about cognitive versus affective primacy. The purpose of this study is to resolve these issues by conducting the first meta-analytic synthesis of the literature on the outcomes of power. Specifically, we tested Keltner et al.'s propositions that power is positively related to the approach-oriented outcomes of attention to rewards, automatic cognition, positive affect, and disinhibited behavior and negatively related to the inhibition-oriented outcomes of attention to threats, controlled cognition, negative affect, and inhibited behavior. Our meta-analysis included a final set of 1,712 effect sizes from 813 independent samples of 432 manuscripts with 269,534 participants. Our analysis demonstrates that the theory is well-supported; approach associations are larger than inhibition associations; power influences behavior indirectly through attention, cognition, and affect; and those indirect effects are largely conveyed through affect. Based on these findings, we suggest several future directions that scholars can take as the literature on power continues to evolve. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"56 1","pages":"1245-1279"},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Reports an error in "Mapping domains of life success: Insights from meta-analytic criterion profile analysis" by Michael P. Wilmot, Brenton M. Wiernik and Deniz S. Ones (Psychological Bulletin, 2025[Jun], Vol 151[6], 767-818; see record 2026-36149-001). In the article, the "Supportive environments" and "Unsupportive environments" subheadings for "Regulating environments" were inadvertently switched. The corrected figure is present in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2026-36149-001). Experiencing success in life has been a principal human endeavor for millennia. Despite broad interest in the subject, no consensual taxonomy exists for domains of life success. In response, we conceptualize and define life success as a multidimensional construct domain, and we then validate a provisional rational taxonomy of 14 life success categories. We subsequently use this taxonomy to quantitatively review and synthesize meta-analyses reporting relations of the Big Five personality traits to variables associated with life success. Altogether, we identify 111 meta-analyses reporting relations to 206 variables, representing N > 2.25 million participants from k > 3,300 studies. First, we examine the extent to which Big Five traits predict life success variables. Next, we distinguish the extent to which prediction is due to personality's elevation (profile level effects) or its configuration (profile pattern effects) using meta-analytic criterion profile analysis (Wiernik et al., 2021). Finding that configurations are vital, we then use clustering algorithms to synthesize similarities among personality configurations across variables and uncover 10 clusters that are hierarchically nested in three metaclusters: contentment (gratification, balance, deference), agentic engagement (accomplishment, high performance, citizenship, ingenuity, leadership), and self-transcendence (support, inclusion). We suggest that these 10 life success clusters represent archetypal life success goals and their associated personality profiles reflect archetypal means for realizing these diverse ends. In summary, we provide a theoretically integrative map of domains of life success. We conclude by discussing implications and future research directions, as well as contributions and limitations of our findings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
Michael P. Wilmot, Brenton M. Wiernik和Deniz S. Ones撰写的《绘制人生成功的领域：来自元分析标准概况分析的见解》（《心理学通报》，2025[Jun], Vol 151[6], 767-818；见记录2026-36149-001）。在文章中，“调节环境”的“支持性环境”和“非支持性环境”的副标题被无意地调换了。更正后的数字在勘误表中。（原文摘要见记录2026-36149-001）几千年来，体验生活中的成功一直是人类的主要追求。尽管人们对这一主题有着广泛的兴趣，但对于人生成功的各个领域却没有共识的分类。作为回应，我们将人生成功概念化并定义为一个多维结构域，然后我们验证了14个人生成功类别的临时理性分类。随后，我们使用这一分类定量回顾和综合元分析，报告五大人格特质与生活成功相关变量的关系。总的来说，我们确定了111个元分析，报告了与206个变量的关系，代表了来自k > 3,300项研究的N > 225万参与者。首先，我们检查了五大特征预测生活成功变量的程度。接下来，我们使用元分析标准概况分析（Wiernik et al., 2021）区分预测是由于人格提升（概况水平效应）还是其配置（概况模式效应）造成的程度。发现配置是至关重要的，然后我们使用聚类算法来综合变量之间人格配置的相似性，并发现10个集群，这些集群分层嵌套在三个元集群中：满足（满足，平衡，尊重），代理参与（成就，高性能，公民身份，独创性，领导力）和自我超越（支持，包容）。我们认为，这10个人生成功集群代表了原型人生成功目标，而它们相关的人格特征反映了实现这些不同目标的原型手段。总而言之，我们提供了一幅生活成功领域的理论整合图。最后讨论了本研究的启示和未来的研究方向，以及本研究的贡献和局限性。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。
{"title":"Correction to \"Mapping domains of life success: Insights from meta-analytic criterion profile analysis\" by Wilmot et al. (2025).","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/bul0000504","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000504","url":null,"abstract":"Reports an error in \"Mapping domains of life success: Insights from meta-analytic criterion profile analysis\" by Michael P. Wilmot, Brenton M. Wiernik and Deniz S. Ones (Psychological Bulletin, 2025[Jun], Vol 151[6], 767-818; see record 2026-36149-001). In the article, the \"Supportive environments\" and \"Unsupportive environments\" subheadings for \"Regulating environments\" were inadvertently switched. The corrected figure is present in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2026-36149-001). Experiencing success in life has been a principal human endeavor for millennia. Despite broad interest in the subject, no consensual taxonomy exists for domains of life success. In response, we conceptualize and define life success as a multidimensional construct domain, and we then validate a provisional rational taxonomy of 14 life success categories. We subsequently use this taxonomy to quantitatively review and synthesize meta-analyses reporting relations of the Big Five personality traits to variables associated with life success. Altogether, we identify 111 meta-analyses reporting relations to 206 variables, representing N > 2.25 million participants from k > 3,300 studies. First, we examine the extent to which Big Five traits predict life success variables. Next, we distinguish the extent to which prediction is due to personality's elevation (profile level effects) or its configuration (profile pattern effects) using meta-analytic criterion profile analysis (Wiernik et al., 2021). Finding that configurations are vital, we then use clustering algorithms to synthesize similarities among personality configurations across variables and uncover 10 clusters that are hierarchically nested in three metaclusters: contentment (gratification, balance, deference), agentic engagement (accomplishment, high performance, citizenship, ingenuity, leadership), and self-transcendence (support, inclusion). We suggest that these 10 life success clusters represent archetypal life success goals and their associated personality profiles reflect archetypal means for realizing these diverse ends. In summary, we provide a theoretically integrative map of domains of life success. We conclude by discussing implications and future research directions, as well as contributions and limitations of our findings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145752700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Content Knowledge and Comprehension: A Meta-Analytic Review of Correlational and Causal Associations","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/bul0000502.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000502.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145718338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Attention Bias for Facial Expressions of Emotion: A Meta-Analytic Review","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/bul0000496.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000496.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145717841","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for The Approach-Inhibition Theory of Power: A Meta-Analytic Test and Synthesis","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/bul0000500.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000500.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145717828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Feeds, Feelings, and Focus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Examining the Cognitive and Mental Health Correlates of Short-Form Video Use","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/bul0000498.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000498.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"119 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145498612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sanne B. Geeraerts, Jenna Spitzer, Susanne Schulz, Deborah M. Capaldi, David C. R. Kerr, Susan Branje
{"title":"Intergenerational stability in parenting across two generations: A multilevel meta-analytic review.","authors":"Sanne B. Geeraerts, Jenna Spitzer, Susanne Schulz, Deborah M. Capaldi, David C. R. Kerr, Susan Branje","doi":"10.1037/bul0000494","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000494","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"144 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.4,"publicationDate":"2025-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145498615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：