Perspectives on Psychological Science最新文献

{"title":"Why It May Be Useful to Integrate the Stereotype Content Model and the Interpersonal Perspective","authors":"Jenny M. Cundiff, Timothy W. Smith, Adrian C. Williams","doi":"10.1177/17456916251372120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251372120","url":null,"abstract":"This article synthesizes how we think about groups and how we behave during interpersonal situations by integrating the influential stereotype content model from social psychology and the interpersonal perspective in personality and clinical psychology. The empirically derived structural model of the interpersonal circumplex closely resembles the stereotype content model in its general form and specific dimensions. Integration allows researchers to hypothesize and test precise mechanisms linking stereotypes and interpersonal interactions using the common metaconcepts of agency and communion to link cognitions (stereotypes) and behavior. The interpersonal perspective has also been studied extensively, and repeated patterns of interaction have been linked to mental and physical health. Thus, this integration also has the potential to inform our mechanistic understanding of associations between stereotypes and outcomes and thus inform interventions intended to reduce stereotyping and its harmful effects. Integration with the stereotype content model also extends the interpersonal perspective by highlighting the importance of stereotypes as a repetitive influence on interpersonal interactions, similar to interpersonal conceptualizations of personality. This integration of the stereotype content model and the interpersonal tradition helps create a holistic view of the influence of stereotypes during interpersonal situations and explain why benefits or risks may follow.","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.6,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145188505","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":"What Happens When Payments End? Fostering Long-Term Behavior Change With Financial Incentives.","authors":"Sophia Winkler-Schor, Markus Brauer","doi":"10.1177/17456916241247152","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17456916241247152","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Financial incentives are widely used to get people to adopt desirable behaviors. Many small landholders in developing countries, for example, receive multiyear payments to engage in conservation behaviors, and the hope is that they will continue to engage in these behaviors after the program ends. Although effective in the short term, financial incentives rarely lead to long-term behavior change because program participants tend to revert to their initial behaviors soon after the payments stop. In this article, we propose that four psychological constructs can be leveraged to increase the long-term effectiveness of financial-incentive programs: motivation, habit formation, social norms, and recursive processes. We review successful and unsuccessful behavior-change initiatives involving financial incentives in several domains: public health, education, sustainability, and conservation. We make concrete recommendations on how to implement the four above-mentioned constructs in field settings. Finally, we identify unresolved issues that future research might want to address to advance knowledge, promote theory development, and understand the psychological mechanisms that can be used to improve the effectiveness of incentive programs in the real world.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"925-940"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141070871","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":"Happiness Maximization Is a WEIRD Way of Living.","authors":"Kuba Krys, Olga Kostoula, Wijnand A P van Tilburg, Oriana Mosca, J Hannah Lee, Fridanna Maricchiolo, Aleksandra Kosiarczyk, Agata Kocimska-Bortnowska, Claudio Torres, Hidefumi Hitokoto, Kongmeng Liew, Michael H Bond, Vivian Miu-Chi Lun, Vivian L Vignoles, John M Zelenski, Brian W Haas, Joonha Park, Christin-Melanie Vauclair, Anna Kwiatkowska, Marta Roczniewska, Nina Witoszek, İdil Işık, Natasza Kosakowska-Berezecka, Alejandra Domínguez-Espinosa, June Chun Yeung, Maciej Górski, Mladen Adamovic, Isabelle Albert, Vassilis Pavlopoulos, Márta Fülöp, David Sirlopu, Ayu Okvitawanli, Diana Boer, Julien Teyssier, Arina Malyonova, Alin Gavreliuc, Ursula Serdarevich, Charity S Akotia, Lily Appoh, D M Arévalo Mira, Arno Baltin, Patrick Denoux, Carla Sofia Esteves, Vladimer Gamsakhurdia, Ragna B Garðarsdóttir, David O Igbokwe, Eric R Igou, Natalia Kascakova, Lucie Klůzová Kračmárová, Nicole Kronberger, Pablo Eduardo Barrientos, Tamara Mohorić, Elke Murdock, Nur Fariza Mustaffa, Martin Nader, Azar Nadi, Yvette van Osch, Zoran Pavlović, Iva Poláčková Šolcová, Muhammad Rizwan, Vladyslav Romashov, Espen Røysamb, Ruta Sargautyte, Beate Schwarz, Lenka Selecká, Heyla A Selim, Maria Stogianni, Chien-Ru Sun, Agnieszka Wojtczuk-Turek, Cai Xing, Yukiko Uchida","doi":"10.1177/17456916231208367","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17456916231208367","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Psychological science tends to treat subjective well-being and happiness synonymously. We start from the assumption that subjective well-being is more than being happy to ask the fundamental question: What is the <i>ideal</i> level of happiness? From a cross-cultural perspective, we propose that the idealization of attaining maximum levels of happiness may be especially characteristic of Western, educated, industrial, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) societies but less so for others. Searching for an explanation for why \"happiness maximization\" might have emerged in these societies, we turn to studies linking cultures to their eco-environmental habitat. We discuss the premise that WEIRD cultures emerged in an exceptionally benign ecological habitat (i.e., faced relatively light existential pressures compared with other regions). We review the influence of the Gulf Stream on the Northwestern European climate as a source of these comparatively benign geographical conditions. We propose that the ecological conditions in which WEIRD societies emerged afforded them a basis to endorse happiness as a value and to idealize attaining its maximum level. To provide a nomological network for happiness maximization, we also studied some of its potential side effects, namely alcohol and drug consumption and abuse and the prevalence of mania. To evaluate our hypothesis, we reanalyze data from two large-scale studies on ideal levels of personal life satisfaction-the most common operationalization of happiness in psychology-involving respondents from 61 countries. We conclude that societies whose members seek to maximize happiness tend to be characterized as WEIRD, and generalizing this across societies can prove problematic if adopted at the ideological and policy level.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"874-902"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12408936/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139730220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"\"When\" Versus \"Whether\" Gender/Sex Differences: Insights From Psychological Research on Negotiation, Risk-Taking, and Leadership.","authors":"Hannah R Bowles, Jens Mazei, Heidi H Liu","doi":"10.1177/17456916241231584","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17456916241231584","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We present a conceptual framework of situational moderators of gender/sex effects in negotiation, risk-taking, and leadership-three masculine-stereotypic domains associated with gender/sex gaps in pay and authority. We propose that greater situational ambiguity and higher relevance and salience of gender/sex increase the likelihood of gender/sex-linked behaviors in these domains. We argue that greater ambiguity increases the extent to which actors and audiences must search inwardly (e.g., mental schema, past experience) or outwardly (e.g., social norms) for cues on how to behave or evaluate a situation and thereby widens the door for gender/sex-linked influences. Correspondingly, we propose that gender/sex effects on behavior and evaluations in these domains will be more likely when gender/sex is more relevant and salient to the setting or task. We propose further that these two situational moderators may work jointly or interactively to influence the likelihood of gender/sex effects in negotiation, risk-taking, and leadership. We conclude by discussing applications of our conceptual framework to psychological science and its translation to practice, including directions for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"855-873"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140158718","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":"Taboos and Self-Censorship Among U.S. Psychology Professors.","authors":"Cory J Clark, Matias Fjeldmark, Louise Lu, Roy F Baumeister, Stephen Ceci, Komi Frey, Geoffrey Miller, Wilfred Reilly, Dianne Tice, William von Hippel, Wendy M Williams, Bo M Winegard, Philip E Tetlock","doi":"10.1177/17456916241252085","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17456916241252085","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We identify points of conflict and consensus regarding (a) controversial empirical claims and (b) normative preferences for how controversial scholarship-and scholars-should be treated. In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews (<i>n</i> = 41) to generate a quantitative survey (<i>N</i> = 470) of U.S. psychology professors' beliefs and values. Professors strongly disagreed on the truth status of 10 candidate taboo conclusions: For each conclusion, some professors reported 100% certainty in its veracity and others 100% certainty in its falsehood. Professors more confident in the truth of the taboo conclusions reported more self-censorship, a pattern that could bias perceived scientific consensus regarding the inaccuracy of controversial conclusions. Almost all professors worried about social sanctions if they were to express their own empirical beliefs. Tenured professors reported as much self-censorship and as much fear of consequences as untenured professors, including fear of getting fired. Most professors opposed suppressing scholarship and punishing peers on the basis of moral concerns about research conclusions and reported contempt for peers who petition to retract papers on moral grounds. Younger, more left-leaning, and female faculty were generally more opposed to controversial scholarship. These results do not resolve empirical or normative disagreements among psychology professors, but they may provide an empirical context for their discussion.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"941-957"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12408927/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140945233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Cognitive Architecture of Infant Attachment.","authors":"Yuyan Luo, Kristy vanMarle, Ashley M Groh","doi":"10.1177/17456916241262693","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17456916241262693","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Meta-analytic evidence indicates that the quality of the attachment relationship that infants establish with their primary caregiver has enduring significance for socioemotional and cognitive outcomes. However, the mechanisms by which early attachment experiences contribute to subsequent development remain underspecified. According to attachment theory, early attachment experiences become embodied in the form of cognitive-affective representations, referred to as internal working models (IWMs), that guide future behavior. Little is known, however, about the cognitive architecture of IWMs in infancy. In this article, we discuss significant advances made in the field of infant cognitive development and propose that leveraging insights from this research has the potential to fundamentally shape our understanding of the cognitive architecture of attachment representations in infancy. We also propose that the integration of attachment research into cognitive research can shed light on the role of early experiences, individual differences, and stability and change in infant cognition, as well as open new routes of investigation in cognitive studies, which will further our understanding of human knowledge. We provide recommendations for future research throughout the article and conclude by using our collaborative research as an example.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"958-999"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11861394/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142056235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gender Bias in Creativity: A Process Model for Understanding the Gender Gap in Creative Achievement.","authors":"Christa L Taylor","doi":"10.1177/17456916251360739","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251360739","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The gender gap in creative achievement, wherein women are underrepresented as high-achieving creators across domains, has far-reaching consequences for individuals and society. Current explanations of what leads to gender discrepancies in creative achievement, despite minimal differences between men and women in creative potential and ability, are incomplete. One vital factor in this process may be gender bias in the attributions of creativity given that both men and women have been found to attribute greater creativity to men. However, the antecedents and consequences of gender bias in attributions of creativity, as well as the processes by which bias impacts gender differences in creative achievement, remain unclear. This article seeks to fill this gap by presenting a model describing how the social environment shapes gender bias in attributions of creativity, how bias influences gender differences in internal and external factors related to creativity, and how these factors interact to impact gender differences in creative behavior and achievement. The proposed model promotes a dynamic, multilevel understanding of the gender gap in creative achievement and provides a strong theoretical foundation for developing interventions to promote greater creative equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"17456916251360739"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144848237","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":"Letter to the Editor.","authors":"Andrew Gelman","doi":"10.1177/17456916251362851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251362851","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"17456916251362851"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144848238","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":"Can Generative AI Chatbots Emulate Human Connection? A Relationship Science Perspective","authors":"Molly G. Smith, Thomas N. Bradbury, Benjamin R. Karney","doi":"10.1177/17456916251351306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251351306","url":null,"abstract":"The development of generative artificial intelligence capable of sustaining complex conversations has created a burgeoning market for companion chatbots promising social and emotional connection. The appeal of these products raises questions about whether chatbots can fulfill the functions of close relationships. Proponents argue that relationships with chatbots can be as meaningful as relationships between humans, whereas critics argue they are a dangerous distraction from genuine connections. This analysis applies theoretical tools from more than 50 years of research on close relationships to evaluate the extent to which human–chatbot interactions meet the definition of and fulfill the functions of close relationships. Interactions between humans and chatbots do possess some characteristic features of close relationships: Humans and chatbots can influence each other and engage in frequent and diverse conversations over time. Chatbots can be responsive in ways humans perceive as supportive, generating feelings of connection and opportunities for growth. Yet because chatbots make only superficial requests of their users, relationships with them cannot provide the benefits of negotiating with and sacrificing for a partner and may reinforce undesirable behaviors. Research that attends to the characteristics of users, chatbots, and their interactions will be crucial for identifying for whom these relationships will be beneficial or harmful.","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144755808","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":"Let's Get Together: Toward an Integration of Personality Psychology and Distinct Emotions Research.","authors":"Eric J Mercadante,Aaron C Weidman,Jessica L Tracy","doi":"10.1177/17456916251349819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251349819","url":null,"abstract":"Emotions play a prominent role in personality psychology, yet personality researchers most frequently study them as broad dimensions (e.g., negative affect) rather than distinct emotions (e.g., fear). We argue that a greater incorporation of distinct emotions into personality research would enrich our understanding of personality. We highlight four ways in which personality research can be expanded by considering distinct emotions as inputs driving personality processes, mediators and moderators of relationships between personality factors and life outcomes, and outputs of personality processes. We then discuss how a personality-based methodological approach might enhance distinct emotions research and highlight an area in which the integration of distinct emotions has already benefited personality science. We conclude by reviewing methodological tools that personality researchers can use to measure distinct emotions empirically.","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":"25 1","pages":"17456916251349819"},"PeriodicalIF":12.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144684202","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}