Do We Become More Lonely With Age? A Coordinated Data Analysis of Nine Longitudinal Studies.

Loneliness is a pervasive experience with adverse impacts on health and well-being. Despite its significance, notable gaps impede a full understanding of how loneliness changes across the adult life span and what factors influence these changes. To address this, we conducted a coordinated data analysis of nine longitudinal studies encompassing 128,118 participants ages 13 to 103 from over 20 countries. Using harmonized variables and models, we examined loneliness trajectories and predictors. Analyses revealed that loneliness follows a U-shaped curve, decreasing from young adulthood to midlife and increasing in older adulthood. These patterns were consistent across studies. Several baseline factors (i.e., sex, marital status, physical function, education) were linked to loneliness levels, but few moderated the loneliness trajectories. These findings highlight the dynamic nature of loneliness and underscore the need for targeted interventions to reduce social disparities throughout adulthood.

When and Why People Conceal Infectious Disease.

People sick with infectious illnesses face negative social outcomes, like exclusion, and may take steps to conceal their illnesses from others. In 10 studies of past, current, and projected illness, we examined the prevalence and predictors of infection concealment in adult samples of U.S. university students, health-care employees, and online crowdsourced workers (total N = 4,110). About 75% reported concealing illness in interpersonal interactions, possibly placing others in harm's way. Concealment motives were largely social (e.g., wanting to attend events like parties) and achievement oriented (e.g., completing work objectives). Disease characteristics, including potential harm and illness immediacy, also influenced concealment decisions. People imagining harmful (vs. mild) infections concealed illness less frequently, whereas participants who were actually sick concealed frequently regardless of illness harm, suggesting state-specific biases underlying concealment decisions. Disease concealment appears to be a widely prevalent behavior by which concealers trade off risks to others in favor of their own goals, creating potentially important public-health consequences.

The Motion-Silencing Illusion Depends on Object-Centered Representation.

Motion silencing is a striking and unexplained visual illusion wherein changes that are otherwise salient become difficult to perceive when the changing elements also move. We develop a new method for quantifying illusion strength (Experiments 1a and 1b), and we demonstrate a privileged role for rotational motion on illusion strength compared with highly controlled stimuli that lack rotation (Experiments 2a to 3b). These contrasts make it difficult to explain the illusion in terms of lower-level detection limits. Instead, we explain the illusion as a failure to attribute changes to locations. Rotation exacerbates the illusion because its perception relies upon structured object representations. This aggravates the difficulty of attributing changes by demanding that locations are referenced relative to both an object-internal frame and an external frame. Two final experiments (4a and 4b) add support to this account by employing a synchronously rotating external frame of reference that diminishes otherwise strong motion silencing. All participants were Johns Hopkins University undergraduates.

The Formation of Negative Attitudes Toward Novel Groups.

People perceive out-groups, minorities, and novel groups more negatively than in-groups, majorities, and familiar groups. Previous research has argued that such intergroup biases may be caused by the order in which people typically encounter social groups. Groups that are relatively novel to perceivers (e.g., out-groups, minorities) are primarily associated with distinct attributes that differentiate them from familiar groups. Because distinct attributes are typically negative, attitudes toward novel groups are negatively biased. Five experiments (N = 2,615 adults) confirmed the generalizability of the novel groups' disadvantage to different aspects of attitude formation (i.e., evaluations, memory, stereotyping), to cases with more than two groups, and to cases in which groups were majority/minority or in-groups/out-groups. Our findings revealed a remarkably robust influence of learning order in the formation of group attitudes, and they imply that people often perceive novel groups more negatively than they actually are.

Once and Again: Repeated Viewing Affects Judgments of Spontaneity and Preparation.

Reality is fleeting, and any moment can only be experienced once. Rewatching a video, however, allows people to repeatedly observe the exact same moment. We propose that people may fail to fully distinguish between merely observing behavior again (through replay) from that behavior being performed again in the exact same way. Using an assortment of stimuli that included auditions, commercials, and potential trial evidence, we demonstrated through nine experiments (N = 10,412 adults in the United States) that rewatching makes a recorded behavior appear more rehearsed and less spontaneous, as if the actors were simply precisely repeating their actions. These findings contribute to an emerging literature showing that incidental video features, like perspective or slow motion, can meaningfully change evaluations. Replay may inadvertently shape judgments in both mundane and consequential contexts. To understand how a video will influence its viewer, one will need to consider not only its content, but also how often it is viewed.

Cutting Through the Noise: Auditory Scenes and Their Effects on Visual Object Processing.

Despite the intuitive feeling that our visual experience is coherent and comprehensive, the world is full of ambiguous and indeterminate information. Here we explore how the visual system might take advantage of ambient sounds to resolve this ambiguity. Young adults (ns = 20-30) were tasked with identifying an object slowly fading in through visual noise while a task-irrelevant sound played. We found that participants demanded more visual information when the auditory object was incongruent with the visual object compared to when it was not. Auditory scenes, which are only probabilistically related to specific objects, produced similar facilitation even for unheard objects (e.g., a bench). Notably, these effects traverse categorical and specific auditory and visual-processing domains as participants performed across-category and within-category visual tasks, underscoring cross-modal integration across multiple levels of perceptual processing. To summarize, our study reveals the importance of audiovisual interactions to support meaningful perceptual experiences in naturalistic settings.

The Basic Units of Working Memory Manipulation Are Boolean Maps, Not Objects.

Determining the manipulation unit of working memory is one of the fundamental questions in understanding how working memory functions. The prevalent object-based theory in cognitive research predicts that memory manipulation is performed on the level of objects. Here we show instead that the basic units of working memory manipulation are Boolean maps, a data structure describing what can be perceived in an instant. We developed four new manipulation tasks (with data from 80 adults) and showed that manipulation times only increased when the number of Boolean maps manipulated increased. Increasing the number of orientations manipulated did not induce longer manipulation times, consistent with a key prediction of the Boolean map theory. Our results show that Boolean maps are the manipulation unit of working memory.

Sensitivity to the Instrumental Value of Choice Increases Across Development.

Across development, people tend to demonstrate a preference for contexts in which they have the opportunity to make choices. However, it is not clear how children, adolescents, and adults learn to calibrate this preference based on the costs and benefits of agentic choice. Here, in both a primary, in-person, reinforcement-learning experiment (N = 92; age range = 10-25 years) and a preregistered online replication study (N = 150; age range = 8-25 years), we found that participants overvalued agentic choice but also calibrated their agency decisions to the reward structure of the environment, increasingly selecting agentic choice when choice had greater instrumental value. Regression analyses and computational modeling of participant choices revealed that participants' bias toward agentic choice-reflecting its intrinsic value-remained consistent across age, whereas sensitivity to the instrumental value of agentic choice increased from childhood to early adulthood.

Promoting Erroneous Divergent Opinions Increases the Wisdom of Crowds.

The aggregation of many lay judgments generates surprisingly accurate estimates. This phenomenon, called the "wisdom of crowds," has been demonstrated in domains such as medical decision-making and financial forecasting. Previous research identified two factors driving this effect: the accuracy of individual assessments and the diversity of opinions. Most available strategies to enhance the wisdom of crowds have focused on improving individual accuracy while neglecting the potential of increasing opinion diversity. Here, we study a complementary approach to reduce collective error by promoting erroneous divergent opinions. This strategy proposes to anchor half of the crowd to a small value and the other half to a large value before eliciting and averaging all estimates. Consistent with our mathematical modeling, four experiments (N = 1,362 adults) demonstrated that this method is effective for estimation and forecasting tasks. Beyond the practical implications, these findings offer new theoretical insights into the epistemic value of collective decision-making.

White by Another Name? Can Anti-Christian Bias Claims Serve as a Racial Dog Whistle?

Four preregistered experiments (N = 4,307) explored whether anti-Christian bias claims can discreetly signal White allyship among Christian American adults. In Experiments 1 and 2, reading about anti-Christian bias led White, but not Black, Christians to perceive more anti-White bias. Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrate the connection between Christian and White can be leveraged by politicians in the form of a racial dog whistle. In Experiment 3, White Christians perceived a politician concerned about anti-Christian bias as caring more about anti-White bias and more willing to fight for White people (relative to a control). This politician was also perceived as less offensive than a politician concerned about anti-White bias. In Experiment 4, Black Christians perceived a politician concerned about anti-Christian bias as less offensive than one concerned about anti-White bias yet still unlikely to fight for Black people. Results suggest "anti-Christian bias" can provide a relatively palatable way to signal allegiance to White people.

Synchrony Influences Estimates of Cooperation in a Public-Goods Game.

Benefiting from a cooperative interaction requires people to estimate how cooperatively other members of a group will act so that they can calibrate their own behavior accordingly. We investigated whether the synchrony of a group's actions influences observers' estimates of cooperation. Participants (recruited through Prolific) watched animations of actors deciding how much to donate in a public-goods game and using a mouse to drag donations to a public pot. Participants then estimated how much was in the pot in total (as an index of how cooperative they thought the group members were). Experiment 1 (N = 136 adults) manipulated the synchrony between players' decision-making time, and Experiment 2 (N = 136 adults) manipulated the synchrony between players' decision-implementing movements. For both experiments, estimates of how much was in the pot were higher for synchronous than asynchronous groups, demonstrating that the temporal dynamics of an interaction contain signals of a group's level of cooperativity.

The Interactive Effect of Incentive Salience and Prosocial Motivation on Prosocial Behavior.

Charities often use incentives to increase prosocial action. However, charities sometimes downplay these incentives in their messaging (pilot study), possibly to avoid demotivating donors. We challenge this strategy, examining whether increasing the salience of incentives for prosocial action can in fact motivate charitable behavior. Three controlled experiments (N = 2,203 adults) and a field study with an alumni-donation campaign (N = 22,468 adults) found that more (vs. less) salient incentives are more effective at increasing prosocial behavior when prosocial motivation is low (vs. high). This is because more (vs. less) salient incentives increase relative consideration of self-interest (vs. other-regarding) benefits, which is a stronger driver of behavior at low (vs. high) levels of prosocial motivation. By identifying that prosocial motivation moderates the effect of incentive salience on charitable behavior, and by detailing the underlying mechanism, we advance theory and practice on incentive salience, motivation, and charitable giving.

Do They Look the Same Unless They Are Angry? Investigating the Other-Race Effect in the Presence of Angry Expressions.

Ethnic out-group members are disproportionately more often the victim of misidentifications. The so-called other-race effect (ORE), the tendency to better remember faces of individuals belonging to one's own ethnic in-group than faces belonging to an ethnic out-group, has been identified as one causal ingredient in such tragic incidents. Investigating an important aspect for the ORE-that is, emotional expression-the seminal study by Ackerman and colleagues (2006) found that White participants remembered neutral White faces better than neutral Black faces, but crucially, Black angry faces were better remembered than White angry faces (i.e., a reversed ORE). In the current study, we sought to replicate this study and directly tackle the potential causes for different results with later work. Three hundred ninety-six adult White U.S. citizens completed our study in which we manipulated the kind of employed stimuli (as in the original study vs. more standardized ones) whether participants knew of the recognition task already at the encoding phase. Additionally, participants were asked about the unusualness of the presented faces. We were able to replicate results from the Ackerman et al. (2006) study with the original stimuli but not with more standardized stimuli.

Misplaced Divides? Discussing Political Disagreement With Strangers Can Be Unexpectedly Positive.

Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments (N = 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people's interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People's expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be-especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.

Gender-Ambiguous Voices and Social Disfluency.

Recently, gender-ambiguous (nonbinary) voices have been added to voice assistants to combat gender stereotypes and foster inclusion. However, if people react negatively to such voices, these laudable efforts may be counterproductive. In five preregistered studies (N = 3,684 adult participants) we found that people do react negatively, rating products described by narrators with gender-ambiguous voices less favorably than when they are described by clearly male or female narrators. The voices create a feeling of unease, or social disfluency, that affects evaluations of the products being described. These effects are best explained by low familiarity with voices that sound ambiguous. Thus, initial negative reactions can be overcome with more exposure.

Biases in Improvement Decisions: People Focus on the Relative Reduction in Bad Outcomes.

People often decide whether to invest scarce resources-such as time, money, or energy-to improve their chances of a positive outcome. For example, a doctor might decide whether to utilize scarce medicine to improve a patient's chances of recovery, or a student might decide whether to study a few additional hours to increase their chances of passing an exam. We conducted 11 studies (N = 5,342 adults) and found evidence that people behave as if they focus on the relative reduction in bad outcomes caused by such improvements. As a consequence, the same improvements (e.g., 10-percentage-point improvements) are valued very differently depending on whether one's initial chances of success are high or low. This focus on the relative reduction of bad outcomes drives risk preferences that violate normative standards (Studies 1a-1g and 2a), is amplified when decisions become more consequential (Study 2b), and leads even experienced professionals to make suboptimal decisions (Study 3).

Disagreement Gets Mistaken for Bad Listening.

It is important for people to feel listened to in professional and personal communications, and yet they can feel unheard even when others have listened well. We propose that this feeling may arise because speakers conflate agreement with listening quality. In 11 studies (N = 3,396 adults), we held constant or manipulated a listener's objective listening behaviors, manipulating only after the conversation whether the listener agreed with the speaker. Across various topics, mediums (e.g., video, chat), and cues of objective listening quality, speakers consistently perceived disagreeing listeners as worse listeners. This effect persisted after controlling for other positive impressions of the listener (e.g., likability). This effect seemed to emerge because speakers believe their views are correct, leading them to infer that a disagreeing listener must not have been listening very well. Indeed, it may be prohibitively difficult for someone to simultaneously convey that they disagree and that they were listening.

On the Efficacy of Accuracy Prompts Across Partisan Lines: An Adversarial Collaboration.

The spread of misinformation is a pressing societal challenge. Prior work shows that shifting attention to accuracy increases the quality of people's news-sharing decisions. However, researchers disagree on whether accuracy-prompt interventions work for U.S. Republicans/conservatives and whether partisanship moderates the effect. In this preregistered adversarial collaboration, we tested this question using a multiverse meta-analysis (k = 21; N = 27,828). In all 70 models, accuracy prompts improved sharing discernment among Republicans/conservatives. We observed significant partisan moderation for single-headline "evaluation" treatments (a critical test for one research team) such that the effect was stronger among Democrats than Republicans. However, this moderation was not consistently robust across different operationalizations of ideology/partisanship, exclusion criteria, or treatment type. Overall, we observed significant partisan moderation in 50% of specifications (all of which were considered critical for the other team). We discuss the conditions under which moderation is observed and offer interpretations.

Risky-Choice Framing Effects Result Partly From Mismatched Option Descriptions in Gains and Losses.

Textbook psychology holds that people usually prefer a certain option over a risky one when options are framed as gains but prefer the opposite when options are framed as losses. However, this pattern can be amplified, eliminated, or reversed depending on whether option descriptions include only positive information (e.g., "200 people will be saved"), only negative information (e.g., "400 people will not be saved"), or both. Previous studies suggest that framing effects arise only when option descriptions are mismatched across frames. Using online and student samples (Ns = 906 and 521), we investigated 81 framing-effect variants created from matched and mismatched pairs of 18 option descriptions (nine in each frame). Description valence or gist explained substantial variation in risk preferences (prospect theory does not predict such variation), but a considerable framing effect remained in our balanced design. Risky-choice framing effects appear to be partly-but not completely-the result of mismatched comparisons.

Improving Memory Search Through Model-Based Cue Selection.

We often use cues from our environment when we get stuck searching our memories, but prior research has failed to show benefits of cuing with other, randomly selected list items during memory search. What accounts for this discrepancy? We proposed that cues' content critically determines their effectiveness and sought to select the right cues by building a computational model of how cues affect memory search. Participants (N = 195 young adults from the United States) recalled significantly more items when receiving our model's best (vs. worst) cue. Our model provides an account of why some cues better aid recall: Effective cues activate contexts most similar to the remaining items' contexts, facilitating recall in an unsearched area of memory. We discuss our contributions in relation to prominent theories about the effect of external cues.