Abstract: Research on gender stereotypes about academia often focused on broad areas (natural sciences vs. humanities), but fields within these areas may differ. We measured gender stereotypes about fields from natural sciences (physics, biology), humanities (German language, philosophy), and social sciences (educational science, psychological science, law) among university students. Gender stereotypes differed significantly between fields within areas. Stereotypes about some fields from the natural and social sciences (biology = female, law = male) were even opposite to others in the same area (physics = male, educational and psychological sciences = female). Perceived gender ratios and communion stereotypes about researchers predicted field gender stereotypes. The results demonstrate strong heterogeneity in gender stereotypes within the natural and social sciences, but not the humanities.

Abstract: The glass cliff refers to the higher likelihood for women (vs. men) to hold leadership positions in struggling companies because they were appointed during a crisis. We tested whether awareness of this phenomenon influences perceptions of gender inequality, sexism, and collective action intentions for women’s rights. In four online experiments ( Ntotal = 1,333), participants (1) were informed about the link between women CEOs and negative company performance, (2) were additionally given a glass cliff explanation, or (3) only completed our measures. A meta-analysis showed that the explanation reduced sexist beliefs (very low heterogeneity) and potentially increased collective action intentions (low heterogeneity) but did not influence perceptions of gender inequality (moderate heterogeneity). These studies provide an empirical basis for sexism interventions.

Abstract: Political orientation is systematically related to individuals’ endorsement of different moral domains. Yet, current findings suggest that differences between conservatives and liberals can also be explained by a sensitivity to self-oriented or other-oriented moral transgressions. We argue that conceptualizing moral foundations as perspective-specific advances our understanding of differences in moral judgments across the political spectrum. We test a new instrument measuring perspective-specific moral foundations in a nationally representative German sample ( N = 2,042). Our findings indicate that (a) an Integrated Foundations × Perspective Model fits the data better than models only representing moral foundations or moral perspectives and (b) a self-oriented moral sensitivity is related to right-wing political orientation, while an other-oriented moral sensitivity is related to left-wing political orientation across all moral foundations.

Abstract: The present research examined the normativity of political system justification comparing France and Germany, two Western countries that substantially differ in their level of system justification. We conducted two studies, in France ( N = 177) and Germany ( N = 202), respectively, using the self-presentation paradigm. Participants were asked to answer a political system justification scale to present a good versus bad image of themselves either to a potential employer (context social utility) or a potential friend (context social desirability). Results indicated that political system justification appeared to be counter-normative in France regarding social desirability, but normative in Germany regarding social utility. We relate these results to frequent protest against the political system in France.

Abstract: Across two studies with adolescent samples, we investigated whether expressing abdication could be classified as a form of prosocial behavior. Specifically, Study 1 investigated the link between expressing abdication and the initiator’s prosociality. The results demonstrated a positive correlation between the frequency of abdication and well-established indicators of prosociality, such as social mindfulness, agreeableness, empathic concern, and social value orientation. Study 2 investigated whether expressing abdication provides positive consequences – regarding agency and positive affect – for the receivers. The results revealed that participants experienced a significantly stronger sense of agency and positive affect after receiving high-frequency abdication compared to low-frequency abdication. Our findings provide support for the idea that expressing abdication can be classified as a prosocial behavior.

Abstract: Do we regret group actions more than group inactions? Examining this, we conducted three experiments focusing on the stalemate in the US Congress over Ukraine aid in 2024. We described this stalemate as having negative consequences and whether this was decided actively or passively. Although study-specific results showed a mixed pattern, exploratory integrative data analysis across the three experiments yielded a small action effect in group-based regret: People regretted the group’s action more than the group’s inaction. We discuss how these exploratory findings replicate the action effect in regret at the group level, why we should interpret these findings with some caution, and how the findings generate new questions for future research regarding the form and function of group-based regret.

Abstract: Social interactions often involve conflicting demands, where pursuing one goal hinders another. Landkammer and Sassenberg (2016) studied the impact of co-opetition – the conflicting simultaneous demand to cooperate and compete with the same target – on cognitive flexibility. They found that compared to pure competition and cooperation, experiencing co-opetition increases cognitive flexibility (i.e., reduced rigidity in decision-making and generating more diverse ideas in a brainstorming task). Two conceptual and one direct replication (total N = 1,340) found no difference in cognitive flexibility contingent to interdependence, and Bayesian analysis showed strong evidence against an effect (BF 10 < 0.05). Our results failed to replicate the impact of co-opetition on flexibility, suggesting that conflicting demands might facilitate cognitive flexibility only in case of other types of intraindividual conflict.

Abstract: This study examined whether the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) is suitable for measuring gradual differences in attitude extremity, and whether attitude intensity contributes to this. Attitude extremity was varied gradually by using neutral, moderately positive, and extremely positive IAPS pictures as primes (Experiment 1, N = 55). Attitude intensity was manipulated by additionally varying the arousal of the primes (Experiment 1) and through emotion regulation (Experiments 2 and 3, N = 81 and N = 140, respectively). Across all experiments, an AMP version with a scalar response format was applied. The AMP reflected gradual differences in attitude extremity but not in attitude intensity.