Discrepancies in East Asians' perceived actual and ideal phenotypic facial features

The present study tested for the existence of a phenotypic actual-ideal discrepancy in East Asians’ appraisals of their own faces, in the direction of idealizing a phenotypically “Whiter” face than they perceived themselves to have. The study was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, East Asian participants residing in the U.S. (N = 104; Mage = 18.73) came into the lab to have their photograph taken. They were sent a link to complete the second phase online. Participants were required to recall either their previous day, an experience of racial discrimination, or an experience of racial acceptance. They then selected their actual and ideal face from an array of faces comprising their actual face and eight variants of their face that had been transformed to look phenotypically more “White” or more “East Asian”. A robust actual-ideal discrepancy emerged: participants both idealized a phenotypically “Whiter” face and perceived themselves as having a more phenotypically “East Asian” face than they objectively did. This discrepancy arose irrespective of whether participants were reminded of an incident of racial discrimination or acceptance

Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: II Intervention Effectiveness Across Time

Implicit preferences are malleable, but does that change last? We tested 9 interventions (8 real and 1 sham) to reduce implicit racial preferences over time. In 2 studies with a total of 6,321 participants, all 9 interventions immediately reduced implicit preferences. However, none were effective after a delay of several hours to several days. We also found that these interventions did not change explicit racial preferences and were not reliably moderated by motivations to respond without prejudice. Short-term malleability in implicit preferences does not necessarily lead to long-term change, raising new questions about the flexibility and stability of implicit preferences. (PsycINFO Database Recor

Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings

We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples that comprised 15,305 participants from 36 countries and territories. Using the conventional criterion of statistical significance (p < .05), we found that 15 (54%) of the replications provided evidence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion (p < .0001), 14 (50%) of the replications still provided such evidence, a reflection of the extremely highpowered design. Seven (25%) of the replications yielded effect sizes larger than the original ones, and 21 (75%) yielded effect sizes smaller than the original ones. The median comparable Cohen’s ds were 0.60 for the original findings and 0.15 for the replications. The effect sizes were small (< 0.20) in 16 of the replications (57%), and 9 effects (32%) were in the direction opposite the direction of the original effect. Across settings, the Q statistic indicated significant heterogeneity in 11 (39%) of the replication effects, and most of those were among the findings with the largest overall effect sizes; only 1 effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity according to this measure. Only 1 effect had a tau value greater than .20, an indication of moderate heterogeneity. Eight others had tau values near or slightly above .10, an indication of slight heterogeneity. Moderation tests indicated that very little heterogeneity was attributable to the order in which the tasks were performed or whether the tasks were administered in lab versus online. Exploratory comparisons revealed little heterogeneity between Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) cultures and less WEIRD cultures (i.e., cultures with relatively high and low WEIRDness scores, respectively). Cumulatively, variability in the observed effect sizes was attributable more to the effect being studied than to the sample or setting in which it was studied.UCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Sociales::Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas (IIP

The Psychological Appeal of Fake News Attributions

The term “fake news” is increasingly used to discredit information from reputable news organizations. We test the possibility that fake news claims are appealing because they satisfy the need to see the world as structured. Believing that the news is involved in an orchestrated disinformation campaign implies a more orderly world than believing the news is prone to random errors. Across six studies (N &gt; 2800), individuals with dispositionally high or situationally increased need for structure were more likely to attribute contested news stories to intentional deception than to journalistic incompetence. The effect persisted for stories that were ideologically consistent and inconsistent and after controlling for strength of political identification. Political orientation showed a moderating effect, such that the link between need for structure and belief in intentional deception was stronger for Republican than Democratic participants. This work helps identify when, why, and for whom fake news claims are persuasive

SISPP 2015 SPSP Karoake Party

This is the official pre-registration that SISPPers will be karaoke-ing at SPSP 2016 in San Diego, Californi

Implicit and explicit attitudes toward African Americans and Barack Obama did not substantively change during Obama’s presidency

Barack Obama is perhaps the most well-known exemplar of African Americans. However, the extent to which he has impacted attitudes toward African Americans remains unclear. Using cross-sectional data (*N *> 2,200,000), the present study examined changes in racial attitudes and attitudes toward Obama during the first seven years of Obama’s presidency. Attitudes showed no evidence of substantive change. After accounting for shifts in sample demographics, results showed an increase in implicit anti-Black attitudes and no change in explicit anti-Black attitudes. Participation date explained only 0.01% of the variance in implicit attitudes. Corresponding analyses of attitudes toward Obama (*N *> 210,000) indicated no change in implicit attitudes but increasing negativity toward Obama in explicit attitudes. Date accounted for only 0.01% of explicit attitude variance. Daily and monthly means across both samples were largely unrelated. Attitudes toward African Americans in general and Obama specifically showed little change or correspondence during Obama’s presidency