Abele-Brehm, A. E., Gollwitzer, M., Steinberg, U., and Schönbrodt, F. D. (2019). Attitudes toward open science and public data sharing: A survey among members of the German Psychological Society. Social Psychology, 50(4), 252–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aly, M., Colunga, E., Crockett, M. J., Goldrick, M., Gomez, P., Kung, F. Y. H., McKee, P. C., Pérez, M., Stilwell, S. M., and Diekman, A. B. (2022). Changing the culture of peer review for a more inclusive and equitable psychological science. Preprint available at https://psyarxiv.com/435xz.Google Scholar

American Psychological Association (1994) Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

American Psychological Association (2001) Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

American Psychological Association (2010) Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

American Psychological Association (2017) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Available from the author at www.apa.org/ethics/code.Google Scholar

Azar, M., Riehm, K. E., McKay, D., and Thombs, B. D. (2015). Transparency of outcome reporting and trial registration of randomized controlled trials published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0142894.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Azpeitia, J., Lombard, E. J., Pope, T., and Cheryan, S. (2022). Reference Audit: A Technique for Diversifying Your References. Seattle, WA: University of Washington (citation audit template available at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HHM6i1WDaAVzSJxgZG8UtNWP3aRcFprsdVpLZJEWxOQ/edit#gid=759055580).Google Scholar

Bakker, M., Veldkamp, C. L., van Assen, M. A., Crompvoets, E. A., Ong, H. H., Nosek, B. A., Soderberg, C. K., Mellor, D., & Wicherts, J. M. (2020). Ensuring the quality and specificity of preregistrations. PLoS biology, 18(12), e3000937.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bauer, P. J. (2022). Psychological science stepping up a level. Psychological Science, 33(2), 179–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baumrind, D. (1964). Some thoughts on ethics of research: After reading Milgram’s “behavioral study of obedience.” American Psychologist, 19(6), 421–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bem, D. (2003). Writing the empirical journal article. In Darley, J. M., Zanna, M. P., and Roediger III, H. L. (eds.) The Compleat Academic: A Practical Guide for the Beginning Social Scientist, 2nd ed. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Bem, D. (2011). Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 407–425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Benjamin, D. J., Berger, J. O., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B. A., Wagenmakers, E. J., Berk, R., … and Johnson, V. E. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), 6–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Biros, M. (2018). Capacity, vulnerability, and informed consent for research. Journal of Law and Medical Ethics, 46, 72–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Boynton, M. H., Portnoy, D. B., and Johnson, B. T. (2013). Exploring the ethics and psychological impact of deception in psychological research. IRB, 35(2), 7–13.Google ScholarPubMed

Chambers, C. D., and Tzavella, L. (2022). The past, present and future of registered reports. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(1), 29–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Christensen, L. (1988). Deception in psychological research: When is its use justified? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14(4), 664–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christian, T. M. L., Lafferty-Hess, S., Jacoby, W. G., and Carsey, T. (2018). Operationalizing the replication standard. International Journal of Digital Curation, 13(1), 114–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christie, D. J. (2011). The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology. John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Claesen, A., Gomes, S., Tuerlinckx, F., and Vanpaemel, W. (2021). Comparing dream to reality: An assessment of adherence of the first generation of preregistered studies. Royal Society Open Science, 8(10), 211037.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Coffelt, T. A. (2017). Confidentiality and anonymity of participants. In Allen, M. (ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, SAGE publications.Google Scholar

Constine, J. (2014). The morality of A/B testing. TechCrunch+. At https://techcrunch.com/2014/06/29/ethics-in-a-data-driven-world.Google Scholar

Craig, R., Cox, A., Tourish, D., and Thorpe, A. (2020). Using retracted journal articles in psychology to understand research misconduct in the social sciences: What is to be done? Research Policy, 49(4), 103930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crandall, C. S. (2001). Scientific progress: A need for trust, a need for skepticism. Dialogue, 16(2), 20–21.Google Scholar

Crandall, C. S. (2019). Science as dissent: The practical value of basic and applied science. Journal of Social Issues, 75(2), 630–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Criado-Perez, C. (2021). Measuring and predicting the use of evidence-based management. Ph.D. dissertation, UNSW Sydney.Google Scholar

Crosas, M., Gautier, J., Karcher, S., Kirilova, D., Otalora, G., and Schwartz, A. (2018). Data policies of highly-ranked social science journals. At https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/9h7ay.Google Scholar

Curtis, B. L. (2014). Social networking and online recruiting for HIV research: Ethical challenges. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 9, 58–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Devezer, B., Navarro, D. J., Vandekerckhove, J., and Ozge Buzbas, E. (2020). The case for formal methodology in scientific reform. Royal Society Open Science, 8(3), 200805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ebersole, C. R., Atherton, O. E., Belanger, A. L., Skulborstad, H. M., Allen, J. M., Banks, J. B., … and Nosek, B. A. (2016). Many labs 3: Evaluating participant pool quality across the academic semester via replication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Engber, D. (2017) Daryl Bem proved ESP is real: Which means science is broken. Slate, June 7, 2017.Google Scholar

Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLOS ONE, 4(5), e5738.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fox, N., Honeycutt, N., and Jussim, L. (2022). Better understanding the population size and stigmatization of psychologists using questionable research practices. Meta-psychology, 6, MP.2020.2601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilmore, R., and Nilsonne, G. (2017). IRBs and data sharing. At https://gilmore-lab.github.io/sips-2017-07-30/#5.Google Scholar

Giner-Sorolla, R. (2012). Science or art? How aesthetic standards grease the way through the publication bottleneck but undermine science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 562–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Giner-Sorolla, R. (2016). Approaching a fair deal for significance and other concerns. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giofrè, D., Boedker, I., Cumming, G., Rivella, C., and Tressoldi, P. (March 7, 2022). The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors’ reporting of statistics and use of open research practices: Five years later. MetaArXiv. At https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/8ya3m.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gonzales, J. E., and Cunningham, C. A. (2015). The promise of preregistration in psychological research. Psychological Science Agenda, 29(8), 2014–2017.Google Scholar

Gopalakrishna, G., ter Riet, G., Vink, G., Stoop, I., Wicherts, J. M., and Bouter, L. M. (2022). Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in the Netherlands. PLOS ONE, 17(2), e0263023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Green, D. H. (1948). Ethics governing the service of prisoners as subjects in medical experiments. Journal of the American Medical Association, 136, 457–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gunsalus, C. K., Marcus, A. R., and Oransky, I. (2018). Institutional research misconduct reports need more credibility. JAMA, 319(13), 1315–1316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gupta, U. C. (2013). Informed consent in clinical research: Revisiting few concepts and areas. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 4(1), 26–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hailes, H. P., Ceccolini, C. J., Gutowski, E., and Liang, B. (2021). Ethical guidelines for social justice in psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 52(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hardwicke, T. E., Bohn, M., MacDonald, K., Hembacher, E., Nuijten, M. B., Peloquin, B. N., … and Frank, M. C. (2021). Analytic reproducibility in articles receiving open data badges at the journal Psychological Science: An observational study. Royal Society Open Science, 8(1), 201494, DOI:10.1098/rsos.201494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hardwicke, T. E., and Ioannidis, J. P. (2018). Populating the data ark: An attempt to retrieve, preserve, and liberate data from the most highly-cited psychology and psychiatry articles. PLOS one, 13(8), e0201856, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201856.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hardwicke, T. E., Mathur, M. B., MacDonald, K., Nilsonne, G., Banks, G. C., Kidwell, M. C., … Frank, M. C. (2018). Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: Evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal cognition. Royal Society Open Science, 5(8), 180448, DOI: 10.1098/rsos.180448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hardwicke, T. E., Thibault, R. T., Kosie, J. E., Wallach, J. D., Kidwell, M. C., and Ioannidis, J. P. (2022). Estimating the prevalence of transparency and reproducibility-related research practices in psychology (2014–2017). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(1), 239–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., and Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heirene, R., LaPlante, D., Louderback, E. R., Keen, B., Bakker, M., Serafimovska, A., and Gainsbury, S. M. (2021, July 16). Preregistration specificity & adherence: A review of preregistered gambling studies & cross-disciplinary comparison. At https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nj4es.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Houtkoop, B. L., Chambers, C., Macleod, M., Bishop, D. V., Nichols, T. E., and Wagenmakers, E. J. (2018). Data sharing in psychology: A survey on barriers and preconditions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(1), 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivy, A. C. (1949). Nazi war crimes of a medical nature. Journal of the American Medical Association, 139, 131–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacoby, W. (March 26, 2015). The AJPS replication policy: Innovations and revisions. American Journal of Political Science Editor Blog. At https://ajps.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ajps-replic-and-verif-policy-2-27-18.pdf.Google Scholar

Jin, X., Chandramouli, C., Allocco, B., Gong, E., Lam, C. S. P., and Yan, L. L. (2020). Women’s participation in cardiovascular clinical trials from 2010–2017. Circulation, 141, 540–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jonas, K. J., and Cesario, J. (2016). How can preregistration contribute to research in our field? Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 1(1–3), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jordan, C. H., and Zanna, M. P. (1999). How to read a journal article in social psychology. In Baumeister, R. F. (ed.) The Self in Social Psychology. Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kidwell, M. C., Lazarević, L. B., Baranski, E., Hardwicke, T. E., Piechowski, S., Falkenberg, L. S., … and Nosek, B. A. (2016). Badges to acknowledge open practices: A simple, low-cost, effective method for increasing transparency. PLoS Biology, 14(5), e1002456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kisselburgh, L., and Beever, J. (2022). The ethics of privacy in research and design: Principles, practices, and potential. In Knijnenburg, B. P., Page, X., Wisniewski, P., Lipford, H. R., Proferes, N., and Romano, J. (eds.) Modern Socio-technical Perspectives on Privacy. Springer.Google Scholar

Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., AdamsJr, R. Alper, B., S., … and Sowden, W. (2018). Many labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klein, S. B. (2014). What can recent replication failures tell us about the theoretical commitments of psychology? Theory & Psychology, 24, 326–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Korn, J. H. (1997). Illusions of Reality: A History of Deception in Social Psychology. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Lawson, K. M., Murphy, B., Azpeitia, J., Lombard, E. Pope, T., and Hall, J. A. (2022). Citing behaviors in psychology: A roadblock to cumulative and inclusive science (preprint). Available at https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/6kvqg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leach, M. M., and Harbin, J. J. (1997). Psychological ethics codes: A comparison of twenty‐four countries. International Journal of Psychology, 32(3), 181–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

LeBel, E. P., Borsboom, D., Giner-Sorolla, R., Hasselman, F., Peters, K. R., Ratliff, K. A., and Smith, C. T. (2013). PsychDisclosure. org: Grassroots support for reforming reporting standards in psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(4), 424–432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

LeBel, E. P., and Peters, K. R. (2012). Fearing the future of empirical psychology: Bem’s (2011) evidence of psi as a case study of deficiencies in modal research practice. Review of General Psychology, 15(4), 371–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ledgerwood, A. (2018). The preregistration revolution needs to distinguish between predictions and analyses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), E10516–E10517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Le Texier, T. (2019). Debunking the Stanford prison experiment. American Psychologist, 74, 823–839.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Longino, H. E. (2020). Science as social knowledge. In Longino, H. E., Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maassen, E., Van Assen, M. A., Nuijten, M. B., Olsson-Collentine, A., and Wicherts, J. M. (2020). Reproducibility of individual effect sizes in meta-analyses in psychology. PLOS one, 15(5), e0233107, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

McDaniel, T., and Starmer, C. (1998). Experimental economics and deception: A comment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majeed, A., and Lee, S. (2020). Anonymization techniques for privacy preserving data publishing: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Access, 9, 8512–8545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martone, M. E., Garcia-Castro, A., and VandenBos, G. R. (2018). Data sharing in psychology. American Psychologist, 73(2), 111–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mayo, D. G. (2018). Statistical Inference as Severe Testing. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Merton, R. K. (1942). The normative structure of science. In Merton, R. K. (ed.) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Meyer, M. N. (2018). Practical tips for ethical data sharing. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1, 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Michelzon, T. (2021). Dan Ariely was suspended from research at MIT after conducting unauthorized experiment with human subjects. HaMakom. At www.ha-makom.co.il/post-tomer-dan-ariely-mit-suspention.Google Scholar

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mitscherlich, A., and Mielke, F. (1949). Doctors of Infamy: The Story of the Nazi Medical Crimes. Henry Schuman.Google Scholar

Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., and Fiedler, K. (2014). Research practices that can prevent an inflation of false-positive rates. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(2), 107–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Narayanan, A., and Shmatikov, V. (2008, May). Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets. In 2008 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (sp 2008). IEEE.Google Scholar

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Department of Health, Education and Welfare (September 30, 1978). The Belmont Report. United States Government Printing Office. DHEW pub. no. (OS) 78-0012. At http://videocast.nih.gov/pdf/ohrp_belmont_report.pdf.Google Scholar

National Research Council. (2014). Proposed Revisions to the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects in the Behavioral and Social Sciences. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Ndebele, P. (2013). The Declaration of Helsinki, 50 years later. Jama, 310(20), 2145–2146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., … and Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture: The TOP guidelines for journals. Science, 348(6242), 1422–1425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nosek, B. A., and Lakens, D. (2014). Registered reports: A method to increase the credibility of published results. Social Psychology, 45(3), 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nuijten, M. B., Borghuis, J., Veldkamp, C. L. S., Dominguez-Alvarez, L., van Assen, M. A. L. M., and Wicherts, J. M. (2017). Journal data sharing policies and statistical reporting inconsistencies in psychology. Collabra: Psychology, 3(1), doi.org/10.1525/collabra.102.Google Scholar

Code, The Nuremberg. (1947). In A. Mitscherlich and F. Mielke, Doctors of Infamy: The Story of the Nazi Medical Crimes. New York: Schuman (1949), xxiii–xxv.Google Scholar

Obels, P., Lakens, D., Coles, N. A., Gottfried, J., and Green, S. A. (2020). Analysis of open data and computational reproducibility in registered reports in psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(2), 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ojanuga, D. (1993). The medical ethics of the “father of gynecology,” Dr J Marion Sims. Journal of Medical Ethics, 19(1), 28–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Oransky, I., and Marcus, N. (2016). How researchers lock up their study data with sharing fees. STAT. At www.statnews.com/2016/09/30/data-sharing-fees.Google Scholar

Pace, L. A., and Livingston, M. M. (2005). Protecting human subjects in internet research. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 10, 35–40.Google Scholar

Painter, A., and Sterba, S. (eds.) (2011). Handbook of Ethics in Quantitative Methodology. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pascual-Leone, A., Singh, T., and Scoboria, A. (2010). Using deception ethically: Practical research guidelines for researchers and reviewers. Canadian Psychology, 51(4), 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Painter, A., and Sterba, S. (eds.) (2011). Handbook of Ethics in Quantitative Methodology. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rea, S. C., Kleeman, H., Zhu, Q., Gilbert, B., and Yue, C. (2020). Crowdsourcing as a tool for research: Methodological, fair, and political considerations. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 40(3–4), 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reverby, S. M. (ed.). (2012). Tuskegee’s Truths: Rethinking the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. UNC Press Books.Google Scholar

Riehm, K. E., Azar, M., and Thombs, B. D. (2015). Transparency of outcome reporting and trial registration of randomized controlled trials in top psychosomatic and behavioral health journals: A 5-year follow-up. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 79(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rochios, C., and Richmond, J. L. (2022). Are we all on the same page? Subfield differences in open science practices in psychology. Infant and Child Development, 33(1), e2361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosnow, R. L., and Rosenthal, R. (2011). Ethical principles in data analysis: An overview. In Painter, A. and Sterba, S. (eds.) Handbook of Ethics in Quantitative Methodology. Routledge.Google Scholar

Rubin, Mark. (2020). Does preregistration improve the credibility of research findings? Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 16(4), 376–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sakaluk, J., Williams, A., and Biernat, M. (2014). Analytic review as a solution to the misreporting of statistical results in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 652–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scheel, A. M. (2022). Why most psychological research findings are not even wrong. Infant and Child Development, 31(1), e2295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scheel, A. M., Schijen, M. R., and Lakens, D. (2021). An excess of positive results: Comparing the standard psychology literature with registered reports. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(2), 25152459211007467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Settles, I. H., Jones, M. K., Buchanan, N. T., and Dotson, K. (2021). Epistemic exclusion: Scholar(ly) devaluation that marginalizes faculty of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 14(4), 493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shweder, R., and Nesbitt, R. (2017). Don’t let your misunderstanding of the rules hinder your research. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com.Google Scholar

Shuster, E. (1997). Fifty years later: The significance of the Nuremberg Code. New England Journal of Medicine, 337(20), 1436–1440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., and Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

SPSP TOP II Task Force (2022). Resources: TOP II guidelines, FAQ/guidance. Retrieved from https://spsp.org/professional-development/publishing-resources/top-ii-guidelines-faq-guidance#1.Google Scholar

Stern, P. C. (2011). Contributions of psychology to limiting climate change. American Psychologist, 66(4), 303–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sternberg, R. S., and Sternberg, K. (2010). The Psychologist’s Companion: A Guide to Scientific Writing for Students and Researchers, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Strauss, D. H., White, S. A., and Bierer, B. E. (2021). Justice, diversity, and research ethics review. Science, 371(6535), 1209–1211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Stricker, J., and Günther, A. (2019). Scientific misconduct in psychology: A systematic review of prevalence estimates and new empirical data. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 227(1), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sweeney, L. (2000). Simple demographics often identify people uniquely. Health, 671(2000), 1–34.Google Scholar

Tedersoo, L., Küngas, R., Oras, E. et al. Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines. Sci Data 8(192) (2021), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00981-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Towse, J. N., Ellis, D. A., and Towse, A. S. (2021). Opening Pandora’s box: Peeking inside psychology’s data sharing practices, and seven recommendations for change. Behavior Research Methods, 53(4), 1455–1468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Tsang, W., Alter, D. A., Wijeysundera, H. C., Zhang, T., and Ko, D. T. (2012). The impact of cardiovascular disease prevalence on women’s enrollment in landmark randomized cardiovascular trials: A systematic review. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27, 93–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

van’t Veer, A. E., and Giner-Sorolla, R. (2016). Preregistration in social psychology: A discussion and suggested template. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vanpaemel, W., Vermorgen, M., Deriemaecker, L., and Storms, G. (2015). Are we wasting a good crisis? The availability of psychological research data after the storm. Collabra, 1(1), DOI:10.1525/collabra.13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vazire, S., and Holcombe, A. O. (2022). Where are the self-correcting mechanisms in science? Review of General Psychology, 26(2), 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wagenmakers, E. J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., and van der Maas, H. L. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: The case of psi. Comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 426–432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Walton, G. M., and Wilson, T. D. (2018). Wise interventions: Psychological remedies for social and personal problems. Psychological Review, 125(5), 617–655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Weindling, P. (2001). The origins of informed consent: The International Scientific Commission on Medical War Crimes, and the Nuremberg Code. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 75, 37–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wendler, D., and Miller, F. G. (2004). Deception in the pursuit of science. Archives of Internal Medicine, 164(6), 597–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wicherts, J. M., Borsboom, D., Kats, J., and Molenaar, D. (2006). The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. American Psychologist, 61(7), 726–728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Zimbardo, P. G., Banks, W. C., Haney, C., and Jaffe, D. (April 8, 1973). The mind is a formidable jailer. New York Times magazine, 38 ff.Google Scholar

Zhou, H., and Fishbach, A. (2016). The pitfall of experimenting on the web: How unattended selective attrition leads to surprising (yet false) research conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 493–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Ego depletion and self-control failure: An energy model of the self’s executive function. Self and Identity, 1(2), 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., and Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., and Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 351–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bhatia, S., and Walasek, L. (2016). Event construal and temporal distance in natural language. Cognition, 152, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Becker, D. V., and Srinivasan, N. (2014). The vividness of the happy face. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3), 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bertsch, S., Pesta, B. J., Wiscott, R., and McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The generation effect: A meta-analytic review. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 201–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Blázquez, D., Botella, J., and Suero, M. (2017). The debate on the ego-depletion effect: Evidence from meta-analysis with the p-uniform method. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 197, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bullard, S. E., Fein, D., Gleeson, M. K., Tischer, N., Mapou, R. L., and Kaplan, E. (2004). The Biber cognitive estimation test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19(6), 835–846.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T.-H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Nave, G., Nosek, B. A., Pfeiffer, T., Altmejd, A., Buttrick, N., Chan, T., Chen, Y., Forsell, E., Gampa, A., Heikensten, E., Hummer, L., Imai, T., … Wu, H. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 637–644, with supplementary material at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Campbell, D. T., and Kenny, D. A. (1999). A Primer on Regression Artifacts. Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., and Darby, B. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(2), 206–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coles, N. A., Larsen, J. T., and Lench, H. C. (2019). A meta-analysis of the facial feedback literature: Effects of facial feedback on emotional experience are small and variable. Psychological Bulletin, 145(6), 610–651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Coles, N. A., March, D. S., Marmolejo-Ramos, F., Larsen, J., Arinze, N. C., Ndukaihe, I., Willis, M., Francesco, F., Reggev, N., Mokady, A., Forscher, P. S., Hunter, J., Gwenaël, K., Yuvruk, E., Kapucu, A., Nagy, T., Hajdu, N., Tejada, J., Freitag, R., … Marozzi, M. (2022). A multi-lab test of the facial feedback hypothesis by the Many Smiles Collaboration. PsyArXiv, https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/cvpuw.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Combs, B., and Slovic, P. (1979). Newspaper coverage of causes of death. Journalism Quarterly, 56(4), 837–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Costello, F., and Watts, P. (2019). The rationality of illusory correlation. Psychological Review, 126(3), 437–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Crawford, H. J., Brown, A. M., and Moon, C. E. (1993). Sustained attentional and disattentional abilities: Differences between low and highly hypnotizable persons. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102(4), 534–543.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dang, J. (2018). An updated meta-analysis of the ego depletion effect. Psychological Research, 82(4), 645–651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dang, J., Barker, P., Baumert, A., Bentvelzen, M., Berkman, E., Buchholz, N., Buczny, J., Chen, Z., De Cristofaro, V., de Vries, L., Dewitte, S., Giacomantonio, M., Gong, R., Homan, M., Imhoff, R., Ismail, I., Jia, L., Kubiak, T., Lange, F., … Zinkernagel, A. (2021). A multilab replication of the ego depletion effect. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(1), 14–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Duhem, P. (1954). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory (trans. P. Wiener). Atheneum (original work published 1914).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Earp, B. D., and Trafimow, D. (2015). Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 621, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Feld, G. B., and Born, J. (2015). Exploiting sleep to modify bad attitudes. Science, 348(6238), 971–972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance, vol. 2. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K. (1991). The tricky nature of skewed frequency tables: An information loss account of distinctiveness-based illusory correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(1), 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K., Jung, J., Wänke, M., Alexopoulos, T., and de Molière, L. (2015). Toward a deeper understanding of the ecological origins of distance construal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 57, 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K., and Krueger, J. I. (2012). More than an artifact: Regression as a theoretical construct. In Krueger, J. I. (ed.) Social Judgment and Decision Making. Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Fiedler, K., Kutzner, F., and Krueger, J. I. (2012). The long way from α-error control to validity proper: Problems with a short-sighted false-positive debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 661–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K., McCaughey, L., and Prager, J. (2021). Quo vadis, methodology? The key role of manipulation checks for validity control and quality of science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 816–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K., and Prager, J. (2018). The regression trap and other pitfalls of replication science: Illustrated by the report of the Open Science Collaboration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiedler, K., Unkelbach, C., and Freytag, P. (2009). On splitting and merging categories: A regression account of subadditivity. Memory & Cognition, 37(4), 383–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fiedler, K., and Walther, E. (2004). Stereotyping as Inductive Hypothesis Testing. Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Friese, M., Loschelder, D. D., Gieseler, K., Frankenbach, J., and Inzlicht, M. (2019). Is ego depletion real? An analysis of arguments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23(2), 107–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Genschow, O., Westfal, M., Crusius, J., Bartosch, L., Feikes, K. I., Pallasch, N., and Wozniak, M. (2021). Does social psychology persist over half a century? A direct replication of Cialdini et al.’s (1975) classic door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(2), e1–e7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., Alberts, H., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., … Zwienenberg, M. (2016). A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 546–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hauser, D. J., Ellsworth, P. C., and Gonzalez, R. (2018). Are manipulation checks necessary? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 998, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hilton, D. J., and Slugoski, B. R. (1986). Knowledge-based causal attribution: The abnormal conditions focus model. Psychological Review, 93, 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hofmann, W., De Houwer, J., Perugini, M., Baeyens, F., and Crombez, G. (2010). Evaluative conditioning in humans: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 390–421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kassin, S. M. (2008). False confessions: Causes, consequences, and implications for reform. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(4), 249–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krüger, T., Fiedler, K., Koch, A. S., and Alves, H. (2014). Response category width as a psychophysical manifestation of construal level and distance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(4), 501–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kruger, J., and Evans, M. (2004). If you don’t want to be late, enumerate: Unpacking reduces the planning fallacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 586–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhl, J., and Kazén, M. (1999). Volitional facilitation of difficult intentions: Joint activation of intention memory and positive affect removes Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(3), 382–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kvarven, A., Strømland, E., and Johannesson, M. (2020). Comparing meta-analyses and preregistered multiple-laboratory replication projects. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(4), 423–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lawrence, D. H., and Festinger, L. (1962). Deterrents and Reinforcement: The Psychology of Insufficient Reward. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Liberman, N., and Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Loftus, E. F. (1993). The reality of repressed memories. American Psychologist, 48(5), 518–537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

McShane, B. B., Tackett, J. L., Böckenholt, U., and Gelman, A. (2019). Large-scale replication projects in contemporary psychological research. American Statistician, 73(sup. 1), 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maglio, S. J., and Trope, Y. (2011). Scale and construal: How larger measurement units shrink length estimates and expand mental horizons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(1), 165–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mongeau, P. A. (1993). The brainstorming myth. Paper presented to the Western States Communication Association, Albuquerque, NM.Google Scholar

Moore, D. A., and Healy, P. J. (2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review, 115(2), 502–517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Morewedge, C. K., Gilbert, D. T., Keysar, B., Berkovits, M. J., and Wilson, T. D. (2007). Mispredicting the hedonic benefits of segregated gains. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 700–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., and Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 774–789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Oberauer, K., and Lewandowsky, S. (2019). Addressing the theory crisis in psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(5), 1596–1618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Collaboration, Open Science (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pfungst, O. (1911). Clever Hans (The Horse of Mr. Von Osten): A Contribution to Experimental Animal and Human Psychology. Holt, Rinehart andWinston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Polivy, J., and Doyle, C. (1980). Laboratory induction of mood states through the reading of self-referent mood statements: Affective changes or demand characteristics? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 89(2), 286–290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Proctor, R. W., and Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Quine, W. V. O. (1952). The Dogmas of Empiricism (reprinted from “A logical point of view”). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Rottenstreich, Y., and Tversky, A. (1997). Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory. Psychological Review, 104(2), 406–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sagristano, M. D., Trope, Y., and Liberman, N. (2002). Time-dependent gambling: Odds now, money later. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(3), 364–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sánchez, A. M., Coleman, C. W., and Ledgerwood, A. (2021). Does temporal distance influence abstraction? A large pre-registered experiment. Social Cognition, 39(3), 352–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Schaller, M. (2014). When and how disgust is and is not implicated in the behavioral immune system. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 8(4), 251–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., and Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Slamecka, N. J., and Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592–604.Google Scholar

Soderberg, C. K., Callahan, S. P., Kochersberger, A. O., Amit, E., and Ledgerwood, A. (2015). The effects of psychological distance on abstraction: Two meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 525–548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Soto, C. J. (2019). How replicable are links between personality traits and consequential life outcomes? The life outcomes of personality replication project. Psychological Science, 30(5), 711–727.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Stanley, D. J., and Spence, J. R. (2014). Expectations for replications: Are yours realistic? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 305–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Storbeck, J., and Clore, G. L. (2008). The affective regulation of cognitive priming. Emotion, 8(2), 208–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Strack, F., Martin, L. L., and Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 768–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Thorne, K. S. (2019). LIGO and gravitational waves, III: Nobel lecture, December 8, 2017. Annalen der Physik, 531(1), DOI:10.1002/andp.201800350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Trafimow, D. (2022). Generalizing across auxiliary, statistical, and inferential assumptions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(1), 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Trope, Y., and Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Tversky, A., and Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Unkelbach, C. (2006). The learned interpretation of cognitive fluency. Psychological Science, 17(4), 339–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Vallacher, R. R., and Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 660–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vohs, K. D., Schmeichel, B. J., Lohmann, S., Gronau, Q. F., Finley, A. J., Ainsworth, S. E., Alquist, J. L., Baker, M. D., Brizi, A., Bunyi, A., Butschek, G. J., Campbell, C., Capaldi, J., Cau, C., Chambers, H., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Christensen, W. J., Clay, S. L., Curtis, J., … Albarracín, D. (2021). A multisite preregistered paradigmatic test of the ego-depletion effect. Psychological Science, 32(10), 1566–1581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wagenmakers, E.-J., Beek, T., Dijkhoff, L., Gronau, Q. F., Acosta, A., Adams, R. B., Albohn, D. N., Allard, E. S., Benning, S. D., Blouin-Hudon, E.-M., Bulnes, L. C., Caldwell, T. L., Calin-Jageman, R. J., Capaldi, C. A., Carfagno, N. S., Chasten, K. T., Cleeremans, A., Connell, L., DeCicco, J. M., … Zwaan, R. A. (2016). Registered replication report: Strack, Martin, & Stepper (1988). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 917–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Williamson, D. A., and Blanchard, E. B. (1979). Heart rate and blood pressure biofeedback. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 4(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Allen, L., O’Connell, A., and Kiermer, V. (2019). How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship. Learned Publishing, 32(1), 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., and Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chetty, R., Jackson, M. O., Kuchler, T., Stroebel, J., Hendren, N., Fluegge, R. B., Gong, S., Gonzalez, F., Grondin, A., Jacob, M., Johnston, D., Koenen, M., Laguna-Muggenburg, E., Mudekereza, F., Rutter, T., Thor, N., Townsend, W., Zhang, R., Bailey, M., … Wernerfelt, N. (2022). Social capital I: Measurement and associations with economic mobility. Nature, 608(7921), 108–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Christopher, S., Watts, V., McCormick, A. K. H. G., and Young, S. (2008). Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership. American Journal of Public Health, 98(8), 1398–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cikara, M., Martinez, J. E., and Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2022). Moving beyond social categories by incorporating context in social psychological theory. Nature Reviews Psychology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, S. E., Clifasefi, S. L., Stanton, J., Straits, K. J. E., Espinosa, P. R., Andrasik, M. P., Miller, K. A., Orfaly, V. E., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., Nicasio, A. V., Hawes, S. M., Nelson, L. A., Duran, B. M., and Wallerstein, N. (2018). Community-based participatory research (CBPR): Towards equitable involvement of community in psychology research. American Psychologist, 73(7), 884–898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cooke, S. J., Young, N., Donaldson, M. R., Nyboer, E. A., Roche, D. G., Madliger, C. L., Lennox, R. J., Chapman, J. M., Faulkes, Z., and Bennett, J. R. (2021). Ten strategies for avoiding and overcoming authorship conflicts in academic publishing. FACETS, 6, 1753–1770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dupree, C. H., and Kraus, M. W. (2022). Psychological science is not race neutral. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(1), 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eaton, A. A., Grzanka, P. R., Schlehofer, M. M., and Silka, L. (2021). Public psychology: Introduction to the special issue. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1209–1216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Eggert, L. (2011). Best practices for allocating appropriate credit and responsibility to authors of multi-authored articles. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Forscher, P. S., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Coles, N. A., Silan, M. A., Dutra, N., Basnight-Brown, D. M., and IJzerman, H. (in press). The benefits, barriers, and risks of big team science. Perspectives on Psychological Science.Google Scholar

Greenwald, A. G., and Schuh, E. S. (1994). An ethnic bias in scientific citations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(6), 623–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gruber, J., Mendle, J., Lindquist, K. A., Schmader, T., Clark, L. A., Bliss-Moreau, E., Akinola, M., Atlas, L., Barch, D. M., Barrett, L. F., Borelli, J. L., Brannon, T. N., Bunge, S. A., Campos, B., Cantlon, J., Carter, R., Carter-Sowell, A. R., Chen, S., Craske, M. G., … Williams, L. A. (2021). The future of women in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(3), 483–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Grzanka, P. R., and Cole, E. R. (2021). An argument for bad psychology: Disciplinary disruption, public engagement, and social transformation. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1334–1345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hall, K., Vogel, A., Huang, G., Serrano, K., Rice, E., Tsakraklides, S., and Fiore, S. (2018). The science of team science: A review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science. American Psychologist, 73, 532–548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., and Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

IJzerman, H., Lewis, N. A., Jr., Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N., DeBruine, L., Ritchie, S. J., Vazire, S., Forscher, P. S., Morey, R. D., Ivory, J. D., and Anvari, F. (2020). Use caution when applying behavioural science to policy. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(11), 1092–1094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Jachimowicz, J. M. (2022). Embracing field studies as a tool for learning. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(5), 249–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Flake, J. K., Liuzza, M. T., Antfolk, J., Arinze, N. C., Ndukaihe, I. L. G., Bloxsom, N. G., Lewis, S. C., Foroni, F., Willis, M. L., Cubillas, C. P., Vadillo, M. A., Turiegano, E., Gilead, M., Simchon, A., Saribay, S. A., Owsley, N. C., Jang, C., … Coles, N. A. (2021). To which world regions does the valence–dominance model of social perception apply? Nature Human Behaviour, 5(1), 159–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Klein, G. (2007). Performing a project premortem. Harvard Business Review, 85, 18–19.Google Scholar

Klein, R. A., Cook, C. L., Ebersole, C. R., Vitiello, C., Nosek, B. A., Hilgard, J., Ahn, P. H., Brady, A. J., Chartier, C. R., Christopherson, C. D., Clay, S., Collisson, B., Crawford, J. T., Cromar, R., Gardiner, G., Gosnell, C. L., Grahe, J., Hall, C., Howard, I., … Ratliff, K. A. (2022). Many labs 4: Failure to replicate mortality salience effect with and without original author involvement. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 35271, https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.35271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams, R. B., Alper, S., Aveyard, M., Axt, J. R., Babalola, M. T., Bahník, Š. , Batra, R., Berkics, M., Bernstein, M. J., Berry, D. R., Bialobrzeska, O., Binan, E. D., Bocian, K., Brandt, M. J., Busching, R., … Nosek, B. A. (2018). Many labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kurdi, B., Seitchik, A. E., Axt, J. R., Carroll, T. J., Karapetyan, A., Kaushik, N., Tomezsko, D., Greenwald, A. G., and Banaji, M. R. (2019). Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 74(5), 569–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Larrick, R. P., Mannes, A. E., and Soll, J. B. (2012). The social psychology of the wisdom of crowds. In Joachim I. Krueger (ed.) Social Judgment and Decision Making. Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Ledgerwood, A., Hudson, S. T. J., Lewis, N. A., Jr., Maddox, K. B., Pickett, C. L., Remedios, J. D., Cheryan, S., Diekman, A. B., Dutra, N. B., Goh, J. X., Goodwin, S. A., Munakata, Y., Navarro, D. J., Onyeador, I. N., Srivastava, S., and Wilkins, C. L. (2022). The pandemic as a portal: Reimagining psychological science as truly open and inclusive. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17456916211036654, https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211036654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ledgerwood, A., Pickett, C., Navarro, D., Remedios, J. D., and Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2022). The unbearable limitations of solo science: Team science as a path for more rigorous and relevant research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, e81, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X21000844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2021a). Can we achieve “equality” when we have different understandings of its meaning? How contexts and identities shape the pursuit of egalitarian goals. Psychological Inquiry, 32(3), 155–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2021b). What counts as good science? How the battle for methodological legitimacy affects public psychology. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1323–1333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2022). What universities say versus do about diversity, equity and inclusion. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(5), 610–610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lin, Z., and Li, N. (2022). Global diversity of authors, editors, and journal ownership across subdisciplines of psychology: Current state and policy implications. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17456916221091832, https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221091831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., and Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McShane, B. B., Tackett, J. L., Böckenholt, U., and Gelman, A. (2019). Large-scale replication projects in contemporary psychological research. American Statistician, 73(sup1), 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, M. N., Heck, P. R., Holtzman, G. S., Anderson, S. M., Cai, W., Watts, D. J., and Chabris, C. F. (2019). Objecting to experiments that compare two unobjectionable policies or treatments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(22), 10723–10728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Milkman, K. L., Gromet, D., Ho, H., Kay, J. S., Lee, T. W., Pandiloski, P., Park, Y., Rai, A., Bazerman, M., Beshears, J., Bonacorsi, L., Camerer, C., Chang, E., Chapman, G., Cialdini, R., Dai, H., Eskreis-Winkler, L., Fishbach, A., Gross, J. J., … Duckworth, A. L. (2021). Megastudies improve the impact of applied behavioural science. Nature, 600(7889), 478–483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mitchell, J., Boettcher-Sheard, N., Duque, C., and Lashewicz, B. (2018). Who do we think we are? Disrupting notions of quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 28(4), 673–680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Moshontz, H., Campbell, L., Ebersole, C. R., IJzerman, H., Urry, H. L., Forscher, P. S., Grahe, J. E., McCarthy, R. J., Musser, E. D., Antfolk, J., Castille, C. M., Evans, T. R., Fiedler, S., Flake, J. K., Forero, D. A., Janssen, S. M. J., Keene, J. R., Protzko, J., Aczel, B., … Chartier, C. R. (2018). The Psychological Science Accelerator: Advancing psychology through a distributed collaborative network. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 501–515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 404–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Oyserman, D. (2015). Culture as situated cognition. In Robert A. Scott and Marlis C. Buchmann (gen. eds) and Stephen M. Kosslyn (consulting ed.) Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resource. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0067.Google Scholar

Page, S. E. (2019). The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Paluck, E. L., and Cialdini, R. B. (2013). Field research methods. In Reis, H. T. and Judd, C. M. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pearson, A. R., White, K. E., Nogueira, L., Lewis, N. A., Jr., Green, D. J., Schuldt, J. P., and Edmondson, D. (in press). Climate change and health equity: A research agenda for psychological science. American Psychologist.Google Scholar

Posselt, J. R. (2016). Inside Graduate Admissions: Merit, Diversity, and Faculty Gatekeeping. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reece, A., Cooney, G., Bull, P., Chung, C., Dawson, B., Fitzpatrick, C., Glazer, T., Knox, D., Liebscher, A., and Marin, S. (2022). Advancing an interdisciplinary science of conversation: Insights from a large multimodal corpus of human speech (arXiv:2203.00674). arXiv, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.00674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Roberts, S. O., Bareket-Shavit, C., Dollins, F. A., Goldie, P. D., and Mortenson, E. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1295–1309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 515–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Settles, I. H., Jones, M. K., Buchanan, N. T., and Dotson, K. (2021). Epistemic exclusion: Scholar(ly) devaluation that marginalizes faculty of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 14(4), 493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Starck, J. G., Sinclair, S., and Shelton, J. N. (2021). How university diversity rationales inform student preferences and outcomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(16), e2013833118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2013833118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Syed, M. (2021). It’s 2 × 2 designs all the way down: Social psychology’s over-reliance on experiments restricts diversity in the field (conference presentation), https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/u89e2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Bavel, J. J., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., Drury, J., Dube, O., Ellemers, N., Finkel, E. J., Fowler, J. H., Gelfand, M., Han, S., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., … Willer, R. (2020). Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 460–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yudkin, D. A., Stolier, R. M., and Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2021). Changing perceptions around nontraditional career trajectories in psychological science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(6), 417–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zuberi, T., and Bonilla-Silva, E. (eds.). (2008). White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar

Adams, R. B., Jr., Rule, N. O., Franklin, R. G. Jr., Wang, E., Stevenson, M. T., Yoshikawa, S., Nomura, M., Sato, W., Kveraga, K., and Ambady, N. (2009). Cross-cultural reading the mind in the eyes: An fMRI investigation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(1), 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alter, A. L., and Kwan, V. S. Y. (2009). Cultural sharing in a global village: Evidence for extracultural cognition in European Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 742–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Althoff, T., Sosič, R., Hicks, J. King, L., Delp, A. C., S., and Leskovec, J. (2017). Large-scale physical activity data reveal worldwide activity inequality. Nature, 547, 336–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., and Akert, R. M. (2010). Social psychology, 7th ed. Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Ashman, O., Shiomura, K., and Levy, B. R. (2006). Influence of culture and age on control beliefs: The missing link of interdependence. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 62(2), 143–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ateca-Amestoy, V., Aguilar, A. C., and Moro-Egido, A. (2014). Social interactions and life satisfaction: Evidence from Latin America. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 527–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bagozzi, R. P., Wong, N., and Yi, Y. (1999). The role of culture and gender in the relationship between positive and negative affect. Cognition and Emotion, 13(6), 641–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Benet-Martínez, V., Leu, J., Lee, F., and Morris, M. W. (2002). Negotiating biculturalism: Cultural frame switching in biculturals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 33, 492–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biswas-Diener, R., and Diener, E. (2001). Making the best of a bad situation: Satisfaction in the slums of Calcutta. Social Indicators Research, 55, 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, M. B., and Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “We”? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brislin, R. W. (1986).The wording and translation of research instruments. In Lonner, W. J. and Berry, J. W. (eds) Field Methods in Cross-cultural Research, vol. 8, Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Brislin, R. W., Lonner, W. J., and Thorndike, R. M. (1973). Cross-cultural Research Methods. Wiley.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantor, N., Mischel, W., and Schwartz, J. (1982). A prototype analysis of psychological situations. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 45–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Charlesworth, T. E. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2022). Word embeddings reveal social group attitudes and stereotypes in large language corpora. In Dehghani, M. & Boyd, R. (eds.), Handbook of language analysis in psychology (pp. 494–510). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Chentsova-Dutton, Y. E., and Dzokoto, V. (2014). Listen to your heart: The cultural shaping of interoceptive awareness and accuracy. Emotion, 14, 666–678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cheryan, S., and Monin, B. (2005). Where are you really from? Asian Americans and identity denial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 717–730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chiu, C., Gelfand, M. J., Yamagishi, T., Shteynberg, G., and Wan, C. (2010). Intersubjective culture: The role of intersubjective perceptions in cross-cultural research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 482–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Choi, J., Catapano, R., and Choi, I. (2017). Taking stock of happiness and meaning in everyday life: An experience sampling approach. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(6), 641–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Choi, I., Dalal, R., Kim-Prieto, C., and Park, H. (2003). Culture and judgment of causal relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 46–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cohen, D. (1996). Law, social policy, and violence: The impact of regional cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 961–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, D. (2003). The American national conversation about (everything but) shame. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 70 (4), 1075–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, D., and Nisbett, R. E. (1997). Field experiments examining the culture of honor: The role of institutions in perpetuating norms about violence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1188–1199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B. F., and Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: An experimental ethnography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945–960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Costa, P. T., and McCrae, R. R. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64(1), 21–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cross, S., Uskul, A. K., Gercek-Swing, B., Sunbay, Z., Ataca, B., and Karakitapoglu, Z. (2014). Cultural prototypes and dimensions of honor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 232–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Diener, E., and Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 653–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., and Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Eagly, A. H., and Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54(6), 408–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ebert, T., Götz, F. M., Gladstone, J. J., Müller, S. R., and Matz, S. C. (2021). Spending reflects not only who we are but also who we are around: The joint effects of individual and geographic personality on consumption. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(2), 378–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fehr, E., and Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Festinger, L., and Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fischer, R. (2004). Standardization to account for cross-cultural response bias: A classification of score adjustment procedures and review of research in JCCP. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 35(3), 263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, R. (2006). Congruence and functions of personal and cultural values: Do my values reflect my culture’s values? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(1), 1419–1431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Funder, D. C. (2019). The Personality Puzzle, 8th ed. W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Gawronski, B. (2004). Theory-based bias correction in dispositional inference: The fundamental attribution error is dead, long live the correspondence bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 15,183–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C. et al. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332, 1100–1104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gladstone, J. J., Matz, S. C., and Lemaire, A. (2019). Can psychological traits be inferred from spending? Evidence from transaction data. Psychological Science, 30, 1087–1096.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Golder, S. A., and Macy, M. W. (2011). Diurnal and seasonal mood vary with work, sleep, and daylength across diverse cultures. Science, 333, 1878–1881.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Greenfield, P. M. (2013). The changing psychology of culture from 1800 through 2000. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1722–1731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Greenfield, P. M., Maynard, A. E., and Childs, C. P. (2003). Historical change, cultural learning, and cognitive representation in Zinacantec Maya children. Cognitive Development, 18, 455–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Günsoy, C., Joo, M., Cross, S. E., Uskul, A. K., Gul, P., Wasti, S. A., Salter, P., Haugen, A., Erdas, D., and Yegin, A. (2020). The influence of honor threats on goal delay and goal derailment: A comparison of Turkey, southern U.S., and northern U.S. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 88, 103974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gurven, M., von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H., and Lero Vie, M. (2013). How universal is the Big Five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among forager–farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 354–370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hahn, D. W., Lee, K., and Ashton, M. C. (1999). A factor analysis of the most frequently used Korean personality trait adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 13, 261–282.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamamura, T. (2012). Are cultures becoming individualistic? A cross-temporal comparison of individualism–collectivism in the United States and Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hampton, R. S., and Varnum, M. E. W. (2018). Do cultures vary in self-enhancement? ERP, behavioral, and self-report evidence. Social Neuroscience, 13(5), 566–578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Han, S.-P., and Shavitt, S. (1994). Persuasion and culture: Advertising appeals in individualistic and collectivistic societies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30(4), 326–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harkness, J. A, Pennell, B-E. , and Schoua-Glusberg, A. (2004). Survey questionnaire translation and assessment. In Presser, S., Rothgeb, J., Couper, M., Lessler, J., Martin, E., Martin, J., and Singer, E. (eds) Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

He, J., and van de Vijver, F. (2012). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural research. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(2), https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, S. J., Kitayama, S., Lehman, D. R., Takata, T., Ide, E., Leung, C., and Matsumoto, H. (2001). Divergent consequences of success and failure in Japan and North America: An investigation of self-improving motivations and malleable selves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 599–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heine, S. J., and Lehman, D. R. (1997). Culture, dissonance, and self-affirmation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Peng, K., and Greenholtz, J. (2002). What’s wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales? The reference-group effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 903–918.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Herrmann, B., Thoni, C., and Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial punishment across societies. Science, 319(5868), 1362–1367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hong, Y.-Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C.-Y., and Benet-Martínez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55, 709–720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hoshino-Browne, E., Zanna, A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Kitayama, S., and Lackenbauer, S. (2005). On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: The case of Easterners and Westerners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 294–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Jackson, J. C., Watts, J., Henry, T. R., List, J.-M., Forkel, R., Muncha, P. J., Greenhill, S. J., Gray, R. D., and Lindquist, K. A. (2019). Emotion semantics show both cultural variation and universal structure. Science, 366, 1517–1522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Flake, J. K., Liuzza, M. T. … Coles, N. A. (2021). To which world regions does the valence–dominance model of social perception apply? Nature Human Behavior, 5, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kashima, E. S., and Kashima, Y. (1998). Culture and language: The case of cultural dimensions and personal pronoun use. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 29(3), 461–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kashima, Y., and Triandis, H. C. (1986). The self-serving bias in attributions as a coping strategy: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 17(1), 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Napier, J. L., Callan, M. J., and Laurin, K. (2008). God and the government: Testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 18–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Keller, H., Borke, J., Chaudhary, N., Lamm, B., and Kleis, A. (2010). Continuity in parenting strategies: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 41(3), 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keller, H., Kärtner, J., Borke, J., Yovsi, R., and Kleis, A. (2005). Parenting styles and the development of the categorical self: A longitudinal study on mirror self-recognition in Cameroonian Nso and German families. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(6), 496–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar