{"title":"Robustness Tests Replicate Corneille et al.’s (2020) Fake News by Repetition Effect","authors":"J. Béna, O. Corneille, A. Mierop, C. Unkelbach","doi":"10.5334/irsp.683","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.683","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70669817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Young Greeks’ Social Representation of Protest: Dialogical Structure and Ideological Function","authors":"Alexandros Vlazakis, A. Baka, Lia Figgou","doi":"10.5334/irsp.648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.648","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"22 12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70669645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Benedek Kurdi, I. Hussey, Christoph Stahl, Sean Hughes, C. Unkelbach, M. Ferguson, O. Corneille
–
{"title":"Unaware Attitude Formation in the Surveillance Task? Revisiting the Findings of Moran et al. (2021)","authors":"Benedek Kurdi, I. Hussey, Christoph Stahl, Sean Hughes, C. Unkelbach, M. Ferguson, O. Corneille","doi":"10.5334/irsp.546","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.546","url":null,"abstract":"–","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70668920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We attempted a pre-registered replication and extension of Studies 1, 2, and 3 from Pronin and Ross (2006) regarding the effects of social and temporal distance on trait attributions with an online American Amazon MTurk sample (N = 911). We concluded mixed findings. We found support for the original findings: participants attributed more dispositional traits to others compared to themselves, although with weaker effects (original: f = 0.35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]; replication: f = 0.10, 95% CI [0.03, 0.16]). Also, similar to the original, we found that participants tended to attribute a favorable ratio of positive traits when mak ing self-assessments (original: f = 0.77, 95% CI [0.29, 1.25]; replication: f = 0.88, 95% CI [0.50, 1.26]). However, unlike the original, we failed to find support for the core hypothesis that participants would ascribe more dispositional traits to their temporally distant self compared to their present self (original: f = 0.54, 95% CI [0.27, 0.77]; replication: f = 0.02, 95% CI [0.00, 0.06]). Furthermore, in contrast to the original, we found that the positive traits ratio increases with temporal distance (original: f = 0.16, 95% CI [0.00, 0.36]; replication: f = 0.33, 95% CI [0.22, 0.42] in the opposite direction). Contrary to our hypothesis, in an extension, we found that people were more likely to ascribe a greater ratio of positive traits to their friends than to themselves ( 𝜉 = 0.3, 95% CI [0.21, 0.38]). All materials, data, and code are provided here: https://osf.io/gs2rx/ .
{"title":"Are Past and Future Selves Perceived Differently from Present Self? Replication and Extension of Pronin and Ross (2006) Temporal Differences in Trait Self-Ascription","authors":"N. Adelina, G. Feldman","doi":"10.5334/irsp.571","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.571","url":null,"abstract":"We attempted a pre-registered replication and extension of Studies 1, 2, and 3 from Pronin and Ross (2006) regarding the effects of social and temporal distance on trait attributions with an online American Amazon MTurk sample (N = 911). We concluded mixed findings. We found support for the original findings: participants attributed more dispositional traits to others compared to themselves, although with weaker effects (original: f = 0.35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]; replication: f = 0.10, 95% CI [0.03, 0.16]). Also, similar to the original, we found that participants tended to attribute a favorable ratio of positive traits when mak ing self-assessments (original: f = 0.77, 95% CI [0.29, 1.25]; replication: f = 0.88, 95% CI [0.50, 1.26]). However, unlike the original, we failed to find support for the core hypothesis that participants would ascribe more dispositional traits to their temporally distant self compared to their present self (original: f = 0.54, 95% CI [0.27, 0.77]; replication: f = 0.02, 95% CI [0.00, 0.06]). Furthermore, in contrast to the original, we found that the positive traits ratio increases with temporal distance (original: f = 0.16, 95% CI [0.00, 0.36]; replication: f = 0.33, 95% CI [0.22, 0.42] in the opposite direction). Contrary to our hypothesis, in an extension, we found that people were more likely to ascribe a greater ratio of positive traits to their friends than to themselves ( 𝜉 = 0.3, 95% CI [0.21, 0.38]). All materials, data, and code are provided here: https://osf.io/gs2rx/ .","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44049832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vincenzo Iacoviello, G. Valsecchi, Jacques Berent, Islam Borinca, J. Falomir-Pichastor
Traditional masculinity norms are still prevalent in our societies. As a result, men who deviate from these norms face adverse reactions (i.e., backlash), mainly from other men. The present research investigated whether the perceived threat to gender status quo accounts for this phenomenon. In two studies using a sample of heterosexual men (N total = 338), we measured male participants’ endorsement of traditional masculinity beliefs and their political orientation. As a means of examining the role of threat to the gender status quo, we then manipulated whether traditional masculinity norms remained stable (stability) or changed across time (men’s feminization). Finally, we assessed participants’ evaluation of men who deviate from traditional masculinity norms (i.e., a backlash against a non-traditional man). This target was either compared to a traditional man (Study 1) or a traditional woman (Study 2). The general hypothesis was that men who are strongly motivated to maintain the gender status quo (i.e., those who endorse traditional masculinity beliefs to a higher extent or support right-wing political ideologies) should show greater backlash, particularly when the gender status quo is threatened (i.e., in the men’s feminization condition). The results of a small-scale meta-analysis supported our hypothesis. We discuss the impact of these findings on the gender literature.
{"title":"The Impact of Masculinity Beliefs and Political Ideologies on Men’s Backlash Against Non-Traditional Men: The Moderating Role of Perceived Men’s Feminization","authors":"Vincenzo Iacoviello, G. Valsecchi, Jacques Berent, Islam Borinca, J. Falomir-Pichastor","doi":"10.5334/irsp.588","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.588","url":null,"abstract":"Traditional masculinity norms are still prevalent in our societies. As a result, men who deviate from these norms face adverse reactions (i.e., backlash), mainly from other men. The present research investigated whether the perceived threat to gender status quo accounts for this phenomenon. In two studies using a sample of heterosexual men (N total = 338), we measured male participants’ endorsement of traditional masculinity beliefs and their political orientation. As a means of examining the role of threat to the gender status quo, we then manipulated whether traditional masculinity norms remained stable (stability) or changed across time (men’s feminization). Finally, we assessed participants’ evaluation of men who deviate from traditional masculinity norms (i.e., a backlash against a non-traditional man). This target was either compared to a traditional man (Study 1) or a traditional woman (Study 2). The general hypothesis was that men who are strongly motivated to maintain the gender status quo (i.e., those who endorse traditional masculinity beliefs to a higher extent or support right-wing political ideologies) should show greater backlash, particularly when the gender status quo is threatened (i.e., in the men’s feminization condition). The results of a small-scale meta-analysis supported our hypothesis. We discuss the impact of these findings on the gender literature.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46889447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People are eager to update their beliefs, such as a perceived risk, if they receive information that is better than expected but are reluctant to do so when the evidence is unfavourable. When estimating the likelihood of future outcomes, this phenomenon of asymmetrical belief update helps generate and maintain personal optimism bias. In this study, we investigated whether asymmetrical belief update also extends to estimating the future of other individuals. Specifically, we prompted respondents to assess the perceived likelihood of three social targets experiencing future positive and negative events: an in-group, a mild out-group and an extreme out-group. We then provided the respondents with feedback about the base rates of those events in the general population and prompted them to re-assess their initial estimates for all social targets. Respondents expected more positive than negative outcomes for the in-group and the mild out-group, but more negative outcomes for the extreme out-group. We also found an asymmetrical update of beliefs contingent on the valence of the future event and the social target. For negative outcomes, respondents updated more following good news than bad news, particularly for the mild out-group. For positive outcomes, respondents equally updated their beliefs following good news and bad news for the in-group and the mild out-group. However, they updated their beliefs significantly more following bad news than good news for the extreme out-group member. Our data thus reveal the strong and robust influence of social stereotypes on future expectancies for others.
{"title":"Asymmetrical update of beliefs about future outcomes is driven by outcome valence and social group membership","authors":"Mihai Dricu, S. Bührer, D. Moser, T. Aue","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/27htj","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/27htj","url":null,"abstract":"People are eager to update their beliefs, such as a perceived risk, if they receive information that is better than expected but are reluctant to do so when the evidence is unfavourable. When estimating the likelihood of future outcomes, this phenomenon of asymmetrical belief update helps generate and maintain personal optimism bias. In this study, we investigated whether asymmetrical belief update also extends to estimating the future of other individuals. Specifically, we prompted respondents to assess the perceived likelihood of three social targets experiencing future positive and negative events: an in-group, a mild out-group and an extreme out-group. We then provided the respondents with feedback about the base rates of those events in the general population and prompted them to re-assess their initial estimates for all social targets. Respondents expected more positive than negative outcomes for the in-group and the mild out-group, but more negative outcomes for the extreme out-group. We also found an asymmetrical update of beliefs contingent on the valence of the future event and the social target. For negative outcomes, respondents updated more following good news than bad news, particularly for the mild out-group. For positive outcomes, respondents equally updated their beliefs following good news and bad news for the in-group and the mild out-group. However, they updated their beliefs significantly more following bad news than good news for the extreme out-group member. Our data thus reveal the strong and robust influence of social stereotypes on future expectancies for others.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43985177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Conspiracy theories arise for virtually any public event (e.g., pandemics, assassinations, disasters). In light of positively correlated endorsements of such beliefs, many have pointed to a more general mindset behind this. Others have argued against this notion of a consistent mindset. Applying Latent Profile Analyses, we examine the evidence for either uniform or differentiated response patterns to various items in five studies (reanalyzed datasets, total N = 7877). Overall, the results speak strongly to uniform reactions that could be summarized as a general mindset, but also revealed important qualifications. First, small parts of the samples show more differentiated patterns in relation to extraterrestrial cover-up narratives (Studies 2 to 4) or contradictory theories (Study 5). Second, indicators dealing with the general suppression of relevant information in the public were among the items with the highest approval ratings across all classes. One discussed implication is that existing scales are useful tools to measure conspiracy mindsets. Another implication is that the average endorsement of any conspiracy theory is a function of both the respondents’ conspiracy mindset and the item’s psychometric difficulty, strongly suggesting interpreting item endorsement only in relative terms, but refraining from interpreting a high agreement as an absolute number.
{"title":"A Uniform Conspiracy Mindset or Differentiated Reactions to Specific Conspiracy Beliefs? Evidence From Latent Profile Analyses","authors":"M. Frenken, R. Imhoff","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/zcjur","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/zcjur","url":null,"abstract":"Conspiracy theories arise for virtually any public event (e.g., pandemics, assassinations, disasters). In light of positively correlated endorsements of such beliefs, many have pointed to a more general mindset behind this. Others have argued against this notion of a consistent mindset. Applying Latent Profile Analyses, we examine the evidence for either uniform or differentiated response patterns to various items in five studies (reanalyzed datasets, total N = 7877). Overall, the results speak strongly to uniform reactions that could be summarized as a general mindset, but also revealed important qualifications. First, small parts of the samples show more differentiated patterns in relation to extraterrestrial cover-up narratives (Studies 2 to 4) or contradictory theories (Study 5). Second, indicators dealing with the general suppression of relevant information in the public were among the items with the highest approval ratings across all classes. One discussed implication is that existing scales are useful tools to measure conspiracy mindsets. Another implication is that the average endorsement of any conspiracy theory is a function of both the respondents’ conspiracy mindset and the item’s psychometric difficulty, strongly suggesting interpreting item endorsement only in relative terms, but refraining from interpreting a high agreement as an absolute number.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46530785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Past research suggests that certain content features of conspiracy theories may foster their credibility. In two experimental studies (N = 293), we examined whether conspiracy theories that explicitly offer a broad explanation for the respective phenomena and/or identify potential threat posed by conspirators are granted more credibility than conspiracy theories lacking such information. Furthermore, we tested whether people with a pronounced predisposition to believe in conspiracies are particularly susceptible to such information. To this end, participants judged the credibility of four conspiracy theories which varied in the provision of explanatory and threat-related information. Interestingly, the specific type of information provided was not decisive. Instead, credibility judgments were only driven by people’s predisposition to believe in conspiracies. Findings suggest that there is no mechanistic, almost automatic effect of merely adding specific information and highlight the relevance of people’s conspiratorial mindset for the evaluation of conspiracy theories.
{"title":"Believe It or Not – No Support for an Effect of Providing Explanatory or Threat-Related Information on Conspiracy Theories’ Credibility","authors":"Marcel Meuer, Aileen Oeberst, R. Imhoff","doi":"10.5334/irsp.587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.587","url":null,"abstract":"Past research suggests that certain content features of conspiracy theories may foster their credibility. In two experimental studies (N = 293), we examined whether conspiracy theories that explicitly offer a broad explanation for the respective phenomena and/or identify potential threat posed by conspirators are granted more credibility than conspiracy theories lacking such information. Furthermore, we tested whether people with a pronounced predisposition to believe in conspiracies are particularly susceptible to such information. To this end, participants judged the credibility of four conspiracy theories which varied in the provision of explanatory and threat-related information. Interestingly, the specific type of information provided was not decisive. Instead, credibility judgments were only driven by people’s predisposition to believe in conspiracies. Findings suggest that there is no mechanistic, almost automatic effect of merely adding specific information and highlight the relevance of people’s conspiratorial mindset for the evaluation of conspiracy theories.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49336641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jasper Van Assche, Arne Roets, T. Haesevoets, Masi Noor
In light of the recent steps Belgium has made towards reconciling with its colonial history in Congo (e.g., the King’s letter of regret, and the removal of some colonial statues), we examined how Belgians differ in their attitudes towards an official apology, towards (symbolic) reparations (e.g., renaming streets), and towards raising more awareness about the colonial past (e.g., more detailed information in educational books) as a function of their ideological worldviews. We hypothesized that authoritarianism and group dominance would negatively predict these outcome variables, while particularly universal-diverse orientation and egalitarianism would predict them positively. We further hypothesized that these relations would be mediated by relevant intergroup emotions (i.e., group-based guilt, shame, and anger, and especially outgroup empathy). Path model analyses on a sample of 258 Flemish-speaking students provided support for our predictions: (1) universal-diverse orientation was the strongest predictor of all intergroup emotions, (2) empathy—and to a lesser extent group-based anger—were the strongest direct predictors of attitudes towards apologizing, reparation, and awareness, and (3) empathy was the most important mediator explaining the associations of universal-diverse and egalitarian orientations with the outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings for the current debate regarding reconciliation between groups with a history of colonialism.
{"title":"“Sorry for Congo, Let’s Make Amends”: Belgians’ Ideological Worldviews Predict Attitudes Towards Apology and Reparation for its Colonial Past","authors":"Jasper Van Assche, Arne Roets, T. Haesevoets, Masi Noor","doi":"10.5334/irsp.486","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.486","url":null,"abstract":"In light of the recent steps Belgium has made towards reconciling with its colonial history in Congo (e.g., the King’s letter of regret, and the removal of some colonial statues), we examined how Belgians differ in their attitudes towards an official apology, towards (symbolic) reparations (e.g., renaming streets), and towards raising more awareness about the colonial past (e.g., more detailed information in educational books) as a function of their ideological worldviews. We hypothesized that authoritarianism and group dominance would negatively predict these outcome variables, while particularly universal-diverse orientation and egalitarianism would predict them positively. We further hypothesized that these relations would be mediated by relevant intergroup emotions (i.e., group-based guilt, shame, and anger, and especially outgroup empathy). Path model analyses on a sample of 258 Flemish-speaking students provided support for our predictions: (1) universal-diverse orientation was the strongest predictor of all intergroup emotions, (2) empathy—and to a lesser extent group-based anger—were the strongest direct predictors of attitudes towards apologizing, reparation, and awareness, and (3) empathy was the most important mediator explaining the associations of universal-diverse and egalitarian orientations with the outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings for the current debate regarding reconciliation between groups with a history of colonialism.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48945243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The last decade saw rapid growth of the body of work devoted to relations between social thermoregulation and various other domains, with a particular focus on the connection between prosociality and physical warmth. This paper reports on a first systematic cross-linguistic study of the exponents of conceptual metaphor AFFECTION IS WARMTH (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Grady, 1997), which provides the motivation for the large share of research in this area. Assumed to be universal, it enables researchers, mostly speakers of major European languages, to treat words like warm and cold as self-evident and easily translatable between languages – both in their concrete uses (to feel warm/cold) and as applied to interpersonal relationships (a cold/warm person, warm feelings, etc.). Based on a sample of 94 languages from all around the world and using methodology borrowed from typological linguistics and mixed-effects regression modelling, we show that the relevant expressions show a remarkably skewed distribution and seem to be absent or extremely marginal in the majority of language families and linguistic macro-areas. The study demonstrates once again the dramatic influence of the Anglocentric, Standard Average European, and WEIRD perspectives on many of the central concepts and conclusions in linguistics, psychology, and cognitive research and discusses how changing this perspective can impact research in social psychology in general and in social thermoregulation in particular.
{"title":"Talking About Temperature and Social Thermoregulation in the Languages of the World","authors":"Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm, D. Nikolaev","doi":"10.5334/irsp.410","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.410","url":null,"abstract":"The last decade saw rapid growth of the body of work devoted to relations between social thermoregulation and various other domains, with a particular focus on the connection between prosociality and physical warmth. This paper reports on a first systematic cross-linguistic study of the exponents of conceptual metaphor AFFECTION IS WARMTH (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Grady, 1997), which provides the motivation for the large share of research in this area. Assumed to be universal, it enables researchers, mostly speakers of major European languages, to treat words like warm and cold as self-evident and easily translatable between languages – both in their concrete uses (to feel warm/cold) and as applied to interpersonal relationships (a cold/warm person, warm feelings, etc.). Based on a sample of 94 languages from all around the world and using methodology borrowed from typological linguistics and mixed-effects regression modelling, we show that the relevant expressions show a remarkably skewed distribution and seem to be absent or extremely marginal in the majority of language families and linguistic macro-areas. The study demonstrates once again the dramatic influence of the Anglocentric, Standard Average European, and WEIRD perspectives on many of the central concepts and conclusions in linguistics, psychology, and cognitive research and discusses how changing this perspective can impact research in social psychology in general and in social thermoregulation in particular.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2021-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45198916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"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：