research study about social psychology

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

The 9 Major Research Areas in Social Psychology

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Mitchell Funk / Getty Images

Social Cognition

Violence and aggression, prosocial behavior, prejudice and discrimination.

• Social Identity

Group Behavior

Social influence, interpersonal relationships.

Social psychology is a branch of psychology that studies a wide range of subjects related to social behavior. This includes studying how people interact, factors that affect social perceptions, the formation of attitudes, and how groups influence individuals.

Research in social psychology is often focused on subjects that fall within three broad areas:

• Social influence : Social influence refers to the ways in which our opinions and behavior are affected by the presence of others. This includes studies on topics such as conformity, obedience, and social pressure.
• Social perception : Social perception refers to the ways in which we form impressions of other people. This includes research on topics including first impressions, stereotyping, and prejudice.
• Social interaction : Social interaction refers to the ways in which we interact with other people. This includes research on topics such as communication, aggression, and altruism.

This article discusses some of the major areas of research in social psychology. It also explores some examples of the types of research that social psychologists might conduct within these subject areas.

Social cognition is concerned with the processing, storage, and application of social information. For example, research in this area of social psychology may focus on the development and use of social schemas. 

Schemas are our general ideas about the world, how things are, and how things work. In the case of social schemas, these ideas relate to how we expect people to behave in different situations.

These mental categories allow us to function without constantly stopping to interpret everything around us. We also develop associations between related schemas, which play an important role in the thought process and social behavior.

One area of social cognition research concerns person perception , which is how people form impressions of others. 

First impressions are the judgments we form about someone based on limited information. Studies have shown that first impressions happen within mere milliseconds and are based on several cues, such as facial expressions, body language, voice, and the beliefs held by the observer.  

Understanding how people acquire and process social information allows researchers to better explain how it can affect social interactions and individual behavior.

Attitudes and Attitude Change

Another major research area in social psychology involves the study of attitudes . Social psychologists are interested in the components of attitudes, how attitudes develop, and how attitudes change.

Attitudes are evaluations of people, objects, or issues. They can be positive (e.g., "I like chocolate") or negative (e.g., "I dislike taxes"). Various factors contribute to the development of attitudes, including upbringing and experiences, although genetics also appears to play a role in shaping them.

Researchers have identified three core components of attitude: an affective component, a behavioral component, and a cognitive component. Often referred to as the "ABCs of attitude," these elements describe how we feel, behave, and understand.

Some other characteristics of attitudes that researchers may be interested in include:

• How they are best measured : Some attitudes can be measured through self-report questionnaires, but others might be better measured using tools like facial expression or arousal levels.
• Factors that affect their strength : Attitudes can vary considerably in terms of their intensity. The strength of these attitudes directly impacts the degree to which they will guide their actions. Direct experiences and frequent exposure to the attitude can impact its strength.
• How attitudes affect behavior : Researchers are also interested in understanding how and when these attitudes influence people's actions. For example, social psychologists might explore how attitudes develop through exposure to social media sources and how those attitudes relate to real-world actions.

Attitudes are an important research topic in social psychology because they impact how people view and interact with others.

What causes violence and aggression ? While many different factors play a role, social psychologists are interested in understanding the social influences that shape violent behavior.

Research in this area looks at numerous social factors that may cause aggression, including:

• Situational variables that might contribute to aggression
• Non-physical types of aggression such as name-calling or gossiping
• How aggression is learned via modeling, such as witnessing adults or children engage in aggressive or violent behaviors
• How violence in the media affects behavior in the real world
• Strategies that can be effective in the reduction of aggression and violence
• The role social learning plays in producing aggressive behaviors and actions
• How public policy can be used to curb violent behavior

Research into the epidemic of gun violence is an example of how social psychologists are trying to understand the variables that contribute to a problem, and then utilize that knowledge to come up with actionable solutions.

Prosocial behavior is another major research area in social psychology. Prosocial behaviors are those that involve helping and cooperating.

Researchers often look at why people help others, as well as why they sometimes refuse to help or cooperate. The bystander effect is an example of a social phenomenon in the subject area of prosocial behavior.

Much of the research in the area of bystander effect was prompted by the murder of a young woman named Kitty Genovese. This case captured national attention when reports suggested that neighbors had witnessed her attack and murder but failed to call the police for help.

Later reviews of the case indicate that few (if any) of the neighbors had a clear view of the scene and were unaware of what was happening. Nevertheless, the case became mythologized in psychology textbooks and prompted a surge of interest in prosocial behaviors.

Research inspired by the Genovese case produced a great deal of information on prosocial behavior and how and why people choose—or sometimes refuse—to help others.

Prejudice, discrimination, and stereotypes exist in any social group. Social psychologists are interested in the origins, causes, and effects of these attitudes and social categorizations.

Some questions that social psychologists explore include:

• How does prejudice develop?
• Why are stereotypes maintained in the face of contrary evidence?
• How can prejudice be measured?
• What factors contribute to the formation of prejudice and discrimination?
• Are there effective ways to reduce prejudice and discrimination?

For example, researchers have found that several factors contribute to the development of prejudice, including stereotypes, social categorization, and social influences. Another factor that plays a part is the outgroup homogeneity bias, or the tendency to view people outside of our social group as being more homogenous than members of our own group.

By learning more about the psychology of prejudice and discrimination, researchers can look for solutions to help help prevent it from happening.

Self and Social Identity

Our perceptions of social identities and ourselves are another important research area in social psychology. Some of the questions that researchers explore include:

• How do people come to know and understand themselves?
• How do these self-perceptions affect our social interactions?
• How does belonging to different social groups shape individual identity?
• How do intersecting group members influence self-perception and self-identity?

Social psychologists are interested in learning more about how this inner life influences our outer lives and social world. Self-awareness, self-esteem, self-concept , and self-expression are only a few factors that influence our social experience.

For example, social comparison is a process that can impact how people view themselves. Upward social comparison involves comparing the self to others who are perceived as higher in status and ability, while downward social comparison focuses on making comparisons to those who are lower in status or ability.

Upward comparisons can leave people feeling like they don't measure up, damaging self-esteem. Downward comparisons, on the other hand, can help enhance self-esteem.

By learning more about how social identities and self-perceptions interact, social psychologists are better able to understand how social factors can influence how individuals feel about themselves and their identities.

Group behavior is defined as the actions, feelings, or thoughts of a collective of people. Such groups involve two or more people who share something in common such as identity, purpose, and belief.

The behavior of groups is one of the largest research areas in social psychology. Most people realize that groups tend to behave differently than individuals. These group behaviors are sometimes beneficial but can also be detrimental.

Social psychologists often look at topics such as:

• Group dynamics
• Group decision making
• Cooperation
• Group influence

Norms are an example of an aspect of group behavior that can guide how group members think, behave, or act. Norms are standards that emerge and guide how another member judge one another.

Social psychologists are also interested in the role of social influence on behavior and decision-making. Topics such as the psychology of persuasion , peer pressure, conformity , and obedience are only a few of those studied in this area of social psychology.

One example of research in this area of social psychology was Milgram's obedience studies conducted during the 1960s. The experiments found that when ordered by an authority figure, participants were willing to deliver what they believed were dangerous and painful electrical shocks to another person. While the shocks were staged, the research suggested that many people were willing to go to great lengths to obey authority.

Research has helped reveal the power of social influence and has uncovered ways to help people resist influence.

Social relationships play a major role in shaping behavior, attitudes, feelings, and thoughts. Social psychologists study how these interpersonal relationships affect people by looking at attachment , liking , love , and attraction.

Some research questions that social psychologists might explore include:

• How important are interpersonal relationships to individual well-being?
• What factors play a role in attraction?
• How do interpersonal relationships influence helping behaviors in groups?
• How do close relationships affect individuals?

Close relationships are relationships in which we feel a strong sense of connection and intimacy with another person. Studies on close relationships have shown that they are associated with many benefits, such as increased happiness and satisfaction with life.

A Word From Verywell

Social psychology is a rich subject that explores how social perception, social interaction, and social influence affect both groups and individuals. Researchers in this field are interested in various topics, including attitudes, attraction, close relationships, and helping behavior. By learning more about these subjects, social psychologists can add to our understanding of social behavior and its effect on individual well-being.

Venta A, Hatkevich C, Mellick W, Vanwoerden S, Sharp C. Social cognition mediates the relation between attachment schemas and posttraumatic stress disorder . Psychol Trauma. 2017;9(1):88-95. doi:10.1037/tra0000165

Stolier RM, Hehman E, Keller MD, Walker M, Freeman JB. The conceptual structure of face impressions . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A . 2018;115(37):9210-9215. doi:10.1073/pnas.1807222115

Markovitch N, Netzer L, Tamir M. Will you touch a dirty diaper? Attitudes towards disgust and behaviour [published correction appears in Cogn Emot . 2016;30(3):i].  Cogn Emot . 2016;30(3):592–602. doi:10.1080/02699931.2015.1020049

Olson JM, Vernon PA, Harris JA, Jang KL. The heritability of attitudes: A study of twins . J Pers Soc Psychol . 2001;80(6):845-60. PMID: 11414369.

Van Ryzin MJ, Dishion TJ. From antisocial behavior to violence: a model for the amplifying role of coercive joining in adolescent friendships .  J Child Psychol Psychiatry . 2013;54(6):661–669. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12017

Kassin SM. The killing of Kitty Genovese: What else does this case tell us?   Perspect Psychol Sci . 2017;12(3):374–381. doi:10.1177/1745691616679465

Rhodes M, Mandalaywala TM. The development and developmental consequences of social essentialism .  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci . 2017;8(4):10.1002/wcs.1437. doi:10.1002/wcs.1437

Hjerm M, Eger M, Danell R.  Peer attitudes and the development of prejudice in adolescence .  Socius Sociolog Res Dynamic World . 2018;4:1-11. doi:10.1177/2378023118763187

American Psychological Association.  Outgroup homogeneity bias .

Drury J, Carter H, Cocking C, Ntontis E, Tekin Guven S, Amlôt R. Facilitating collective psychosocial resilience in the public in emergencies: Twelve recommendations based on the social identity approach [published correction appears in Front Public Health . 2019 Jun 27;7:181].  Front Public Health . 2019;7:141. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2019.00141

Rahman T. Extreme Overvalued Beliefs: How Violent Extremist Beliefs Become "Normalized" .  Behav Sci (Basel) . 2018;8(1):10. doi:10.3390/bs8010010

Russell NJC.  Milgram's obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution .  Br J Soc Psychol . 2011;50:140-162. doi:10.1348/014466610X492205

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Current Research in Social Psychology

Editors: michael lovaglia, university of iowa; shane soboroff, st. ambrose university.

Current Research in Social Psychology  ( CRISP ) is a peer reviewed, electronic journal publishing theoretically driven, empirical research in major areas of social psychology. Publication is sponsored by the  Center for the Study of Group Processes  at the  University of Iowa,  which provides free access to its contents. Authors retain copyright for their work. CRISP is permanently archived at the Library of the University of Iowa and at the Library of Congress. Beginning in April, 2000,  Sociological Abstracts  publishes the abstracts of CRISP articles.

Citation Format:  Lastname ,  Firstname . 1996. "Title of Article."  Current Research in Social Psychology  2:15-22 https://crisp.org.uiowa.edu

RECENT ISSUES

Finding Positives in the Pandemic: The Role of Relationship Status, Self-Esteem, Mental Health, and Personality.

Examining Public Attitudes And Ideological Divides Through Media Engagement: An Empirical Analysis of Moral Foundations Theory Amidst the Covid-19 Pandemic.

When Race is Not Enough: Lessons Learned Using Racially Tagged Names.

Formation of a Positive Social Identity: How Significant are Attitudes, Subjective Norms, and Perceived Similarity Concerning Group Identification?

Passive Social Network Usage and Hedonic Well-Being Among Vietnamese University Students: A Moderated Mediation Model Involving Self-Esteem and Sense of Self.

Cognitive Dissonance and Depression: A Qualitative Exploration of a Close Relationship.

Gender Differences in Support for Collective Punishment: The Moderating Role of Malleability Mindset.

Hard Feelings? Predicting Attitudes Toward Former Romantic Partners.

Perceived Control in Multiple Option Scenarios: Choice, Control, and the Make-a-Difference Metric.

Drivers of Prosocial Behavior: Exploring the Role of Mindset and Perceived Cost.

Malleability of Laïcité: People with High Social Dominance Orientation Use Laïcité to Legitimize Public Prayer by Catholics but not by Muslims.

Differences and Predictive Abilities of Competitiveness Between Motivation Levels, Contexts, and Sex.

Parental Rejection and Peer Acceptance: The Mediating Role of Cognitive Bias.

A Novel Approach for Measuring Self-Affirmation.

Ingroup Bias in the Context of Meat Consumption: Direct and Indirect Attitudes Toward Meat-Eaters and Vegetarians.

Perceptions of Case Complexity and Pre-Trial Publicity Through the Lens of Information Processing.

"Muslims' Desire for Intergroup Revenge in the Aftermath of the Christchurch Attack: The Predictive Role of Ingroup Identification, Perceived Intergroup Threat, and the Norm of Reciprocity. "

"Personal Networks and Social Support in Disaster Contexts."

"Aggressive and Avoidant Action Tendencies Towards Out-Groups: The Distinct Roles of In-Group Attachment vs. Glorification and Cognitive vs. Affective Ambivalence."

"We (Might) Want You: Expectations of Veterans' General Competence and Leadership."

"Situation Attribution Mediates Intention to Overlook Negative Signals Among Romantic Partners."

"Software Program, Bot, or Artificial Intelligence? Affective Sentiments across General Technology Labels"

"Privilege is Invisible to Those Who Have It": Some Evidence that Men Underestimate the Magnitude of Gender Differences in Income.

"Perceived Control and Intergroup Discrimination."  

"Leadership, Gender, and Vocal Dynamics in Small Groups."

Taking Responsibility for an Offense: Being Forgiven Encourages More Personal Responsibility, More Empathy for the Victim, and Less Victim Blame.

Potential Factors Influencing Attitudes Toward Veterans Who Commit Crimes: An Experimental Investigation of PTSD in the Legal System.

"Is that Discrimination? I'd Better Report it!" Self-presentation Concerns Moderate the Prototype Effect.

Relation Between Attitudinal Trust and Behavioral Trust: An Exploratory Study

Comparing Groups' Affective Sentiments to Group Perceptions.

Perceived Autonomous Help and Recipients' Well-Being: Is Autonomous Help Good for Everyone.

S tudying Gay and Straight Males' Implicit Gender Attitudes to Understand Previously Found Gender Differences in Implicit In-Group Bias.

Nepotistic Preferences in a Computerized Trolley Problem.

Telecommuting, Primary Caregiving, and Gender as Status .

You're Either With Us or Against Us: In-Group Favoritism and Threat .

 Impact of the Anticipation of Membership Change on Transactive Memory and Group Performance.

Mindfulness Increases Analytical Thought and Decreases Just World Beliefs .

Status, Performance Expectations, and Affective Impressions: An Experimental Replication.

The Effects of African-American Stereotype Fluency on Prejudicial Evaluation of Targets .

Status Characteristics and Self-Categoriation: A Bridge Across theoretical Traditions.

Why do Extraverts Feel More Positive Affect and Life Satisfaction? The Indirect Effects of Social Contribution and Sense of Power.

In-group Attachment and Glorification, Perceptions of Cognition-Based Ambivalence as Contributing to the Group, and Positive Affect.

Mentoring to Improve a Child's Self-Concept: Longitudinal Effects of Social Intervention on Identity and Negative Outcomes.

Affect, Emotion, and Cross-Cultural Differences in Moral Attributions.

The Effects of Counterfactual Thinking on College Students' Intentions to Quit Smoking Cigarettes .

Self-Enhancement, Self-Protection and Ingroup Bias.

The Moderating Effect of Socio-emotional Factors on the Relationship Between Status and Influence in Status Characteristics Theory.

What We Know About People Shapes the Inferences We Make About Their Personalities.

The Pros and Cons of Ingroup Ambivalence: The Moderating Roles of Attitudinal Basis and Individual Differences in Ingroup Attachment and Glorification.

Effects of Social Anxiety and Group Membership of Potential Affiliates on Social Reconnection After Ostracism.

"Yes, I Decide You Will Recieve Your Choice": Effects of Authoritative Agreement on Perceptions of Control.

Being Generous to Look Good: Perceived Stigma Increases Prosocial Behavior in Smokers.

Acting White? Black Young Adults Devalue Same-Race Targets for Demonstrating Positive-but-Stereotypically White Traits

Looking Up for Answers: Upward Gaze Increases Receptivity to Advice

Which Judgement Do Women Expect from a Female Observer When They Claim to be a Victim of Sexism?

Neighborhood Deterioration and Perceptions of Race

The Use of Covert and Overt Jealousy Tactics in Romantic Relationships: The Moderating Role of Relationship Satisfaction

The Impact of Status Differences on Gatekeeping: A Theoretical Bridge and Bases for Investigation

Reducing Prejudice with (Elaborated) Imagined and Physical Intergroup Contact Interverventions

Are Depressed Individuals More Susceptible to Cognitive Dissonance?

Gender Differences in the Need to Belong: Different Cognitive Representations of the Same Social Groups

Fight The Power: Comparing and Evaluating Two Measures of French and Raven's (1959) Bases of Social Power

Mother Knows Best So Mother Fails Most: Benevolent Stereotypes and the Punishment of Parenting Mistakes

Blame Attributions about Disloyalty

Attitudes Towards Muslims are More Favorable on a Survery than on an Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure

Attributions to Low Group Effort can Make You Feel Better: The Distinct Roles of In-group Identification, Legitimacy of Intergroup Status, and Controllability Perceptions

The Role of Collective and Personal Self-Esteem in a Military Context

On Bended Knee: Embodiment and Religious Judgments

Identity Salience and Identity Importance in Identity Theory

Sexist Humor and Beliefs that Justify Societal Sexism

Future-Oriented People Show Stronger Moral Concerns

Further Examining the Buffering Effect of Self-Esteem and Mastery on Emotions

Group-Based Resiliency: Contrasting the Negative Effects of Threat to the In-Group

You Validate Me, You Like Me, You're Fun, You Expand Me: "I'm Yours!"

Pleading Innocents: Laboratory Evidence of Plea Bargaining's Innocence Problem

The Moral Identity and Group Affiliation

Threat, Prejudice, and Stereotyping in the Context of Japanese, North Korean, and South Korean Intergroup Relations

Exams may be Dangerous to Grandpa's Health: How Inclusive Fitness Influences Students' Fraudulent Excuses

To View Archived CRISP Issues Click here

To View the Notice for Contributors Click here . Includes formatting and citation guidelines.

To View the Editorial Board Click here

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Wiley Open Access Collection

Shared understanding and social connection: Integrating approaches from social psychology, social network analysis, and neuroscience

Elisa c. baek.

1 Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles California, USA

Carolyn Parkinson

2 Brain Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles California, USA

Meaningfully connecting with others is critical to the well‐being of individuals. What phenomena contribute to and stem from social connection? In this paper, we integrate emerging work that uses neuroimaging and social network analysis with theories that explore the links between shared reality and social connection. We highlight recent work suggesting that the extent to which people have aligned mental processing and shared subjective construals to those around them—as shown by neural similarity—is associated with both objective and subjective social connection. On the other hand, idiosyncrasies are linked to difficulties with social connection. We conclude by suggesting how the links between shared understanding and social connection can be productively used as a framework to study psychosocial phenomena of interest.

1. INTRODUCTION

Humans are inherently social, with a fundamental need to belong and forge meaningful connections with others (Baumeister & Leary,  1995 ). Indeed, social connection is critical to individuals' well‐being, and deficits in social connection can have devastating consequences, including increased risk for mortality that persists even after controlling for comorbidities (Cacioppo & Cacioppo,  2014 ; Hawkley & Cacioppo,  2010 ; Hawkley et al.,  2003 ; Moieni & Eisenberger,  2020 ).

A rich body of research highlights that experiencing generalized shared reality with others plays an important role in achieving social connection (Baumeister et al.,  2018 ; Echterhoff & Higgins,  2018 ; Higgins et al.,  2021 ; Reis et al.,  2000 , 2017 ; Rossignac‐Milon & Higgins,  2018 ). For instance, feeling understood by others is associated with positive evaluations of social interactions with strangers (Cross et al.,  2000 ), greater fulfillment in close relationships (Oishi et al.,  2010 ), and increased life satisfaction (Lun et al.,  2008 ; Reis et al.,  2000 ). Furthermore, the pursuit of generalized shared reality with others—which refers to the perceived experience of having similar inner states (e.g., beliefs, feelings, and attitudes) about the world in general to those of others (Echterhoff et al.,  2009 ; Higgins et al.,  2021 )—is closely linked to the pursuit of social connection, as the pursuit of generalized shared reality is driven not only by people's motivations to understand the world around them (“epistemic motives”; Higgins et al.,  2021 ) but also by their motivations to relate to one another interpersonally (“relational motives”; Higgins et al.,  2021 ). Indeed, people seek to achieve generalized shared reality not only with close others, but also strangers, and the extent to which people achieve generalized shared reality is associated with success in attaining social connection (Rossignac‐Milon et al.,  2021 ).

In the current paper, we integrate findings from a growing body of literature that uses theories, tools, and methods from social network analysis and neuroscience with existing theories that link generalized shared reality with social connection. In doing so, we highlight that neuroimaging work corroborates established links between generalized shared reality and social connection, while also providing additional insights on what aspects of mental processing of what kinds of stimuli may be particularly important. We posit that experiencing shared understanding across various contexts (e.g., of multiple events or situations) may contribute to and stem from generalized shared reality (i.e., a more general, subjective sense of experiencing common inner states with others about the world broadly). We further highlight potential mechanisms that may underlie this bidirectional relationship. We also review evidence that suggests that our motivations to connect with one another through cultivating generalized shared reality constitute one factor that drives information sharing, a ubiquitous and consequential behavior.

2. NEURAL SIMILARITY AS A MEASURE OF SHARED UNDERSTANDING

We begin by providing an overview of how neuroimaging can be used to measure similarities in mental processing related to subjective construals across various contexts, thereby capturing shared understanding while individuals view and interpret stimuli. Specifically, measuring brain responses in naturalistic paradigms (e.g., where participants view audiovisual stimuli, such as videos, that unfold over time) can unobtrusively provide insight into participants' mental processes that ebb and flow over time in response to stimuli that mimic the multisensory and dynamic nature, as well as the contextual richness, of everyday experiences. One can then correlate these brain responses across participants to obtain intersubject correlations (ISCs), which measure the degree to which participants show similarities in brain responses and thus, can indirectly capture intersubject similarities in mental processes associated with particular brain regions (e.g., attention allocation, interpretations, emotional responding) while processing stimuli (Nastase et al.,  2019 ). Indeed, coordinated neural responses across individuals (i.e., large ISCs of brain responses) have been linked to shared understanding of events (Lahnakoski et al.,  2014 ; Nguyen et al.,  2019 ; Yeshurun et al.,  2017 ); participants who had similar interpretations of an animated narrative, as indicated by linguistic similarities during free recall, also had greater neural similarity in brain regions implicated in high‐level cognition (Nguyen et al.,  2019 ), and similarities in experimentally‐manipulated psychological perspectives during an audio narrative were also associated with similarities in neural responses in brain regions that support attentional allocation and subjective interpretation of events (Lahnakoski et al.,  2014 ; Yeshurun et al.,  2017 ). Combined, these findings support the notion that neural similarity can capture the extent to which people experience shared understanding with one another across various contexts.

Calculating similarities in neural responses as participants view naturalistic stimuli can garner insight into psychological processes that may not be easily captured with self‐report measures alone. For instance, whereas self‐report measures typically capture participants' responses at specific moments, ISCs capture similarities in how responses evolve over time across individuals, without requiring individuals to pause for introspection (Nastase et al.,  2019 ). Additionally, ISCs can unobtrusively capture similarities in many different types of mental processing in parallel (e.g., emotional and socio‐cognitive processes) as they unfold without the need for participants to pause and self‐reflect on each aspect of mental processing that experimenters have predetermined to be of interest in order to report on it. Furthermore, not relying solely on self‐report can be advantageous because people are often unwilling and/or unable to accurately reflect on their cognitive processes (Nisbett et al.,  1977 ) and because the act of self‐reflection can produce inaccuracies in reporting (Wilson et al.,  1993 ; Wilson & Schooler,  1991 ). As we discuss below, researchers can leverage these advantages of neuroimaging to identify hypotheses about psychological processes that can be more directly tested with complementary self‐report and behavioral measures. In these ways, neuroimaging can be used synergistically with traditional behavioral and experimental methods in social psychology to study links between shared reality and social connection. In the following sections, we highlight neuroimaging research that corroborates these established links, showing that shared understanding of various stimuli—as captured by similar neural responses across individuals—is associated with both objective and subjective social connection. We also suggest that neuroimaging can add insight to the types of mental processing (e.g., what aspects of their world people pay attention to, how and when they deploy social cognitive processes like mentalizing) that may be particularly important in linking shared reality and social connection, which can then be more directly tested in follow‐up behavioral experiments.

2.1. Shared understanding is important to objective and subjective social connection

2.1.1. evidence from investigations of social connection in dyadic contexts.

Across diverse interpersonal contexts, experiencing shared understanding with others about various facets of the world has been associated with social connection (Andersen & Przybylinski,  2018 ; Bar‐Shachar & Bar‐Kalifa,  2021 ; Higgins et al.,  2021 ; Rossignac‐Milon et al.,  2021 ). Having many incidences of shared understanding can lead to a sense of generalized shared reality, or a broader perception that one shares their inner states with another person about the world in general (Echterhoff & Higgins,  2018 ; Higgins et al.,  2021 ). Indeed, the homophily principle is pervasive in social networks, such that “birds of a feather flock together”—people tend to be surrounded by and be friends with individuals who are similar to themselves in demographic attributes such as age, religion, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status (McPherson et al.,  2002 ), as well as stable characteristics such as personality traits (Youyou et al.,  2017 ) and personal values (Byrne,  1961 ; Dehghani et al.,  2016 ; Lönnqvist & Itkonen,  2016 ; Youyou et al.,  2017 ). Decades of research in social psychology has also highlighted the similarity‐attraction relationship: people are attracted to others who share similar attitudes (Byrne,  1961 , 1997 ; Hyon et al.,  2020 ; Montoya & Horton,  2013 ). Relatedly, similarities in how individuals construe the world are associated with social connection; in both strangers and romantic couples, dyads who experience a greater sense of generalized shared reality also experience greater interpersonal connection (Rossignac‐Milon et al.,  2021 ; see Figure  1 ).

Social connection is linked to aligned mental processing and the perception of generalized shared reality in dyads. (a) Inter‐subject similarity of neural responses to naturalistic stimuli (e.g., film clips), which can capture alignment in mental processing, is associated with social distance; friends show more similar neural responses to one another compared to people further apart in the social network. Source : Redrawn from Hyon et al. ( 2020 ). (b) Across three studies, self‐reported perceptions of generalized shared reality with a partner were associated with felt closeness with the partner. Source : Redrawn from Rossignac‐Milon et al. ( 2021 )

Neural evidence converges with and adds additional insight to the findings summarized above. As discussed previously, obtaining similarities in neural responses across individuals can be valuable in capturing alignment of mental processes between individuals. Brain‐to‐brain synchrony has been studied in various ways, including by exposing individuals to the same time‐locked stimuli (e.g., video clips; Hyon et al.,  2020 ; Parkinson et al.,  2018 ) and by examining unconstrained dyadic interactions (e.g., during live conversation; Kinreich et al.,  2017 ). Recent work using these methods suggests that similarities in neural responding across individuals are related to social connection. For example, friends have similar neural responses to one another while viewing naturalistic videos (e.g., excerpts from film and television shows ranging in tone and topic), including in brain regions that govern attentional allocation, narrative interpretation, and affective responding (Hyon et al.,  2020 ; Parkinson et al.,  2018 ; see Figure  1 ). These neural findings not only support the notion that having similar construals of aspects of the external world is associated with social connection, but also provide insight into the types of similarities in mental processing that may be particularly related to social connection; for instance, given that similarity in brain regions implicated attentional allocation is associated with friendship, being similar in what you attend in the world around you may be particularly important in friendships. In another study, brain‐to‐brain synchrony during naturalistic, dyadic social interactions (i.e., conversations) was correlated with behavioral markers of social connection (e.g., shared gaze and coupling of positive affect; Kinreich et al.,  2017 ); thus, biological coupling between individuals may be one indicator of shared subjective responding that is associated with social connection. Furthermore, people—often without conscious effort—imitate one another's behaviors, and this behavioral synchronization may both promote and reflect generalized shared reality, which is linked to social connection (Echterhoff & Higgins,  2018 ; Higgins et al.,  2021 ). For instance, both non‐verbal and verbal mimicry are linked to social connection, such that individuals non‐consciously mimic the behaviors of interaction partners when trying to affiliate (Lakin & Chartrand,  2003 ) and verbal mimicry is associated with cohesiveness in teams (Gonzales et al.,  2010 ), stability in romantic relationships (Ireland et al.,  2011 ), and quality of social interactions (Niederhoffer & Pennebaker,  2002 ).

2.1.2. Evidence from investigations of individual differences in overall social connection

Beyond particular dyadic interactions and relationships considered in isolation, the overall degree to which someone achieves shared understanding with others across various contexts may also relate to how successful they are in cultivating and maintaining social connection, and whether or not they occupy positions in their social networks that are conducive to social connection. For instance, “social chameleons”–people who are especially attuned to social cues and adapt their behaviors to meet others' expectations in social contexts (i.e., individuals high in self‐monitoring; Snyder,  1974 )–are more likely to occupy social‐network positions where they act as brokers between otherwise unconnected people (Fang et al.,  2015 ; Kleinbaum et al.,  2015 ; Oh & Kilduff,  2008 ). Such individuals tend to be more successful in professions that require interacting with others (Baek & Falk,  2018 ; Kilduff & Day,  1994 ; Wang et al.,  2015 ), perhaps because they are adept at achieving generalized shared reality, and/or perceptions thereof, with many others (even if they are pretending and do not actually see the world similarly to others).

Recent neuroimaging work also suggests that convergent processing with one's peers is associated with both objective and subjective measures of one's overall level of social connection, whereas idiosyncrasy is associated with overall social disconnection (Baek et al.,  2022 ; Baek, Hyon et al.,  2021 ). For instance, in one study, individuals with high levels of objective social connection (e.g., who many indicated as a friend and were therefore well‐connected in their social networks) showed neural responses more similar to normative neural responses in their communities compared to individuals with low levels of objective social connection (i.e., who were less well‐connected) while viewing naturalistic audiovisual stimuli (e.g., clips from television shows and movies) (Baek et al.,  2022 ; see Figure  2 ). Additionally, these findings followed an Anna Karenina principle, which is based on the famous line from the novel Anna Karenina : “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way” (Tolstoy,  1878 ). Accordingly, well‐connected individuals had very similar neural responses to one another, whereas each less well‐connected individual was dissimilar in their own way (Baek et al.,  2022 ; see Figure  2 ), suggesting that well‐connected individuals process the world similarly to one another, whereas each less well‐connected individual processes the world in their own idiosyncratic way. Notably, while self‐reported ratings of the content followed similar patterns, such that well‐connected individuals were also more similar to their peers in what they found to be enjoyable and interesting, controlling for these ratings did not change the neural results (Baek et al.,  2022 ). Accordingly, these findings highlight advantages of neuroimaging, suggesting that neural data can capture aspects of mental processing beyond what can be obtained using a few targeted self‐report measures. For instance, brain areas where well‐connected individuals showed, on average, greater similarity with community members included regions that have been previously implicated in social cognitive processes such as understanding others' mental states (i.e., mentalizing; Baek et al.,  2022 ). In these ways, neural data can provide insight into the types of similarities in mental processing that may be particularly strongly linked to social connection (e.g., similarities in when, and to what extent, people deploy social processing, such as mentalizing) that can then be tested in follow‐up studies more directly with, for instance, behavioral measures (e.g., to explicitly test if alignment in social processing is associated with social connection). Combined, these findings show that convergent processing of the world with one's peers is associated with objective social connection, or an individual's number of social ties, and highlight how neuroimaging can complement and extend insights from self‐report measures.

Overall degree of social connection in a community is associated with neural similarity to other community members. (a) Well‐connected individuals (e.g., whom many others indicated as a friend) in the social network of a residential community showed neural responses that were, on average, more similar to other community members compared to less well‐connected individuals. Source : Redrawn from Baek et al. ( 2022 ). (b) The findings followed an Anna Karenina principle, such that well‐connected individuals were exceptionally similar to one another, whereas less well‐connected individuals were dissimilar to each other, reflecting that each less well‐connected individual was dissimilar in their own way. Source : Redrawn from Baek et al. ( 2022 )

Thus, shared understanding of various stimuli is linked to objective social connection. However, it is also important to consider subjective social connection, given that one may have many friends, but feel very isolated, and vice versa; moreover, one's subjective feelings of social isolation can be even more consequential than objective social isolation (e.g., for negative health outcomes; Holwerda et al.,  2014 ; Lee & Ko,  2018 ). Recent work highlights that similar patterns to those described above were found when investigating subjective social connection, or the distressing feeling that often accompanies subjective perceptions of social disconnection (i.e., loneliness) (Baek, Hyon et al.,  2021 ). While non‐lonely individuals were highly similar to one another in their neural responses while viewing clips from television shows and film, highly‐lonely individuals were dissimilar not only to their non‐lonely peers but also to each other, highlighting that subjective social disconnection is associated with idiosyncratic processing, or a lack of shared understanding of external stimuli, which may also be associated with a lack of generalized shared reality more broadly (Baek, Hyon et al.,  2021 ). Notably, these findings persisted after controlling for friendships between the participants, as well as overall levels of objective social connection (in this case, number of friends), suggesting that being surrounded by people who see the world differently from oneself (i.e., lack of generalized shared reality) may be a risk factor for loneliness, even if one regularly socializes with them.

Brain regions where similarities in neural responding have been associated with people's overall levels of objective and subjective social connection include regions in the default mode network, where neural similarity has been associated with shared understanding across various contexts (e.g., shared perspectives and goals; Lahnakoski et al.,  2014 ; similar interpretations of ambiguous narratives; Nguyen et al.,  2019 ; similar beliefs about characters; Yeshurun et al.,  2017 ) and friendship (Parkinson et al.,  2018 ). These findings corroborate recent theories suggesting that the default mode network plays a dynamic, sense‐making role in integrating individuals' internal schemas and memories with external information to form models of situations as they unfold, and that this integrating role of the network plays a critical role in establishing generalized shared reality (Yeshurun et al.,  2021 ). Indeed, across multiple studies, synchronized neural responses between caregivers and children in regions of the default mode network were observed during active interaction (Kinreich et al.,  2017 ; Piazza et al.,  2020 ), supporting the notion that these regions in the brain support the creation of generalized shared reality across individuals. Combined, these results highlight that the degree to which individuals experience shared understanding across various contexts—and thus, generalized shared reality—with others in their social circles is critical to achieving social connection.

3. MECHANISMS THAT LINK SHARED UNDERSTANDING AND SOCIAL CONNECTION

Thus, behavioral and neural evidence suggest that experiencing generalized shared reality with others—via shared understanding across various contexts—is associated with social connection, which is in turn linked with well‐being. What are the potential mechanisms by which individuals achieve generalized shared reality with others? One possibility is that through the processes of social influence, norms, behaviors, and attitudes spread throughout social networks (Cialdini & Goldstein,  2004 ; Cialdini & Trost,  1998 ) and lead to the construction of shared meaning (Baumeister et al.,  2018 ). Social influence pervades human society and has consequently been of great interest in the field of psychology, as evidenced by decades of research and theorizing on the topic (Cialdini & Trost,  1998 ; Turner,  1991 ). Findings from classic social psychology experiments suggest that individuals achieve shared understanding with others across various contexts because they are strongly driven by motivations both to socially affiliate and belong (“normative conformity”) and to form accurate perceptions of the world around them and therefore seek information from others to inform their own perceptions in ambiguous situations (“informational conformity”) (Asch,  1956 ; Deutsch & Gerard,  1955 ; Sherif,  1935 , 1936 ). For instance, the famous Asch ( 1951 ) experiments, which found that a majority of individuals conformed in their judgments about the length of lines to match that of an erroneous majority, provide examples of normative conformity, highlighting that individuals are so strongly driven by motivations to socially affiliate (Baumeister & Leary,  1995 ) that they will often portray an ostensible generalized shared reality with others even at the cost of accuracy (Chen et al.,  1996 ). Furthermore, corroborating theories of informational conformity, classic experiments by Sherif ( 1935 , 1936 ) showed that groups converge over time to form common norms about ambiguous stimuli, providing insight into how social influence that leads to shared norms can occur rather seamlessly, particularly in unclear situations.

Neuroimaging evidence supports these accounts of social influence. For instance, individuals feel distressed when they find out that they are misaligned with others; brain regions associated with conflict detection are activated when people learn that their own attitudes and opinions are different from their peers' (Klucharev et al.,  2009 ), while changing one's own opinions to conform to peers' opinions is associated with increased activity in the brain's subjective valuation regions (Welborn et al.,  2015 ). These findings provide insight into the biological mechanisms underlying normative conformity, suggesting that the experience of shared understanding is rewarding, whereas lacking shared understanding may trigger a neural “alarm” signal, potentially motivating efforts to conform and reestablish a sense of a shared worldview with others. Accordingly, these processes may support relational motives that promote generalized shared reality across individuals (Higgins et al.,  2021 ). Neural evidence also suggests that social influence can promote genuine and private acceptance of social norms; in one study, social influence modulated brain regions that encode subjective valuation, such that stimuli (i.e., faces) elicited greater valuation‐related brain activity after participants learned that their peers had allegedly rated those stimuli as more attractive than they had, and less valuation‐related brain activity after participants learned that their peers had allegedly rated those stimuli as less attractive than they had (Zaki et al.,  2011 ); these findings provide neurobiological evidence supporting informational conformity and epistemic motives that lead to generalized shared reality, suggesting that individuals genuinely update their own perceptions about the world in light of information from others. Taken together, conformity may be one route by which societies come to have a unified generalized shared reality, arriving at an agreement in beliefs, attitudes, and norms, driven by motivations to belong and to form accurate representations of the world.

As briefly discussed above, people tend to be surrounded by others who share many characteristics as themselves (McPherson et al.,  2002 ). Does similarity drive social connection or does social connection lead to similarity? In other words, are people attracted to people similar to themselves, or do people become more similar to their social ties over time? Evidence suggests a bidirectional effect. For instance, people tend to gravitate toward others who share similar attitudes and traits as themselves, viewing them more favorably than dissimilar others (Byrne,  1961 , 1997 ; Montoya & Horton,  2013 ), supporting the notion that similarity drives social connection, such that people are more likely to feel socially connected with others who are already similar to themselves. A separate body of research provides empirical evidence that supports the reverse causal direction. Social influence processes (such as those described in the preceding paragraph on conformity) unfold amongst people in one another's immediate social contexts, causing ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving to spread through social networks such that over time, people become similar to those who are close to them in social ties (e.g., friends, friends‐of‐friends) in a diversity of ways (Cacioppo et al.,  2009 ; Christakis & Fowler,  2007 ; Rosenquist et al.,  2011 ). Future studies can provide further insight into not only the extent to which homophily versus social influence contribute to links between shared understanding and social connection, but also the types of similarities among close social ties that may result from preexisting similarities versus social influence. Furthermore, it could be fruitful to consider the role of culture in these relationships; for instance, individuals with shared cultural backgrounds interpret signals to others' emotional states more similarly, facilitating increased sensitivity and accuracy in recognizing one another's emotional expressions (Elfenbein & Ambady,  2002 ). Future work could explore whether people with shared cultural backgrounds would have a greater likelihood of social connection due to alignment in their interpretations of cues to others' apparent emotional states. Future work investigating the relationship between shared reality and non‐affiliative forms of social connection could also be fruitful. For instance, it remains largely unknown whether competitive interactions (where there are both winning and losing parties, such as sports games) lead to shared reality (because individuals were in the same situation) or not (because outcomes differed across individuals and individuals' goals were misaligned with one another).

4. APPLICATIONS TO STUDY SOCIAL PHENOMENA

As we have discussed thus far, a large body of literature supports the notion that shared understanding across various contexts is linked to social connection. Emerging research suggests that one ubiquitous human behavior, information sharing, is rooted in both a desire to establish shared understanding with others and can serve to reinforce generalized shared reality more broadly. In this section, we synthesize behavioral and neural studies that corroborate recent theories suggesting that information sharing plays a critical role in the pursuit and creation of generalized shared reality in society (Baumeister et al.,  2018 ), one that helps promote and reflects social connection between individuals (see Figure  3 ).

Information sharing, generalized shared reality, and social connection. (a) The associations between generalized shared reality and social connection can be used as a theoretical framework to understand the mechanisms that underlie information sharing. (b) The association between information sharing and generalized shared reality is bidirectional; people share information that reflects shared norms and values of a social group, and this sharing behavior in turn contributes to the further creation and reinforcing of shared realities. (c) The association between information sharing and social connection is bidirectional. Desires to socially connect drive information sharing, and information sharing leads to social interactions, which can result in social bonding

Information sharing is an inherently social behavior. The act of sharing information with others supports fundamental human motivations to connect and belong (Baumeister & Leary,  1995 ; Berger,  2014 ), and people self‐report anticipation for positive social interactions as a key motivation for sharing information (Angelis et al.,  2012 ; Ma et al.,  2011 ). Recent neuroimaging work corroborates these findings, highlighting that brain regions involved in mentalizing play an important role in information sharing. For instance, such brain regions (e.g., medial prefrontal cortex, precuneus, temporoparietal junction, superior temporal sulcus; Dufour et al.,  2013 ; Frith & Frith,  2003 ) are activated when people make decisions about sharing information, compared to other types of decisions, and the extent to which information (e.g., news articles) activates these regions is associated with the likelihood of sharing (Baek et al.,  2017 ). Activity in these regions is also positively associated with greater likelihood that online recommendations will propagate (Baek, O'Donnell et al.,  2021 ). Furthermore, a neural model of information virality (“value‐based virality”) posits that social considerations contribute to an overall subjective value signal that represents the expected value of sharing a piece of information; this overall value signal is directly associated with population‐level virality (how often information is actually shared in the real world; Scholz et al.,  2017 ). In other words, the more that a piece of content evokes activity in mentalizing‐related brain regions, the higher the overall value signal of sharing, which is then associated with population‐level sharing behavior (Scholz et al.,  2017 ).

Recent behavioral experiments extend these neural findings to suggest that this relationship between mentalizing and sharing is causal , such that mentalizing drives sharing; people are more likely to share information when instructed to think about other people's minds compared to control conditions (Baek, Tamir et al.,  2020 ). As such, people appear to actively consider other people's mental states when considering content to share with others and are motivated to share information to fulfill their needs to socially connect with others.

Thus, the extent to which a piece of content engages the brain's mentalizing regions is associated with both individual and population‐level sharing behavior, and mentalizing increases the likelihood of sharing. Given that experiencing generalized shared reality with others is strongly linked to social connection, one possibility is that these processes drive information sharing; people may share information that they believe that others will also find valuable because by doing so, they reinforce the shared perspectives, attitudes, and beliefs about happenings of the world around them that are already well‐established and agreed upon in their social circles. These effects may then create a positive reinforcing loop; sharing information that reflects the shared worldviews of a social group also contributes to the further creation and reinforcing of generalized shared realities (Figure  3 ).

Indeed, recent work provides empirical support for the idea that information sharing may be intertwined with motivations to achieve generalized shared reality with others. In one study, brain activity was measured while participants viewed naturalistic videos and provided their likelihood of sharing each video. Similarities in neural responses in regions associated with both low‐level sensory processing and high‐level cognition, including brain regions implicated in mentalizing, were associated with greater sharing likelihood, suggesting that people are more likely to share content that evokes similar interpretations across different individuals in a social group (Baek, Hyon et al.,  2020 ). These relationships were explicitly tested and supported in follow‐up behavioral experiments, which showed that people are more likely to share information when they believe that others in their social circles would share their own viewpoints on the information (Baek, Hyon et al.,  2020 ). Preliminary evidence also suggests that the relationship is causal, such that perceived shared understanding increases the likelihood of sharing (Baek, Hyon et al.,  2020 ). Combined, these findings support the idea that people are motivated to create and reinforce generalized shared reality about the world around them with others in their social circles, and that information sharing may be one way that such generalized shared realities are formed and maintained.

Notably, the mentalizing‐related regions of the brain that have been identified to be important in the information sharing process are part of the broader default mode network (Mars et al.,  2012 ; Meyer et al.,  2018 ; Spunt et al.,  2013 ). As discussed above, the default mode network has been theorized to play a critical role in integrating individuals' internal states with their environment (Yeshurun et al.,  2021 ), and similarities in neural responding in regions of this network have been linked with shared understanding and interpretation of events (Lahnakoski et al.,  2014 ; Nguyen et al.,  2019 ; Yeshurun et al.,  2017 ) and friendship (Parkinson et al.,  2018 ). The implication of these regions in information sharing corroborate theories of information sharing as critical in creating and establishing collective meaning that bind social groups together through shared worldviews (Baumeister et al.,  2018 ). In these ways, information sharing may fulfill both types of motives that have been proposed to underlie generalized shared reality by not only helping people relate to one another interpersonally (“relational motives”), but also to interpret and understand the world around them (“epistemic motives”) (Higgins et al.,  2021 ).

As we uncovered through the example of information sharing, the established associations between shared understanding across various contexts (and thereby generalized shared reality more broadly) and social connection have the potential to be used as a theoretical framework to elucidate mechanisms underlying various social psychological phenomena of interest. For instance, this framework could be used to study the motivations that drive the spread of misinformation, a behavior that has widespread negative consequences (Allcott & Gentzkow,  2017 ; Kata,  2010 ). Future research could test whether individuals' motivations to maintain and promote generalized shared reality with others in their social circles may lead them to be less concerned about the accuracy of content before sharing it, further perpetuating beliefs and attitudes based on false information in their communities. This framework can also be applied to uncover features in pro‐health and prosocial messages that are more likely to be successful in persuasion and behavior change, which has the potential for widespread positive outcomes. For instance, one could use tools such as neuroimaging to test whether public service announcements that are likely to be similarly interpreted and understood across individuals in a social group would be more successful in producing message‐congruent behavior change compared to messages that evoke idiosyncratic responses across individuals. Indeed, results from a small body of work provide preliminary support for this idea; effective speeches elicit greater neural similarity compared to ineffective speeches (Schmälzle et al.,  2014 ), and neural similarity scales with real‐world engagement levels of television shows and advertisements beyond individuals' self‐report ratings (Dmochowski et al.,  2014 ). Future work that explicitly tests whether similarly‐interpreted messages are more likely to be successful because they promote generalized shared reality (which is important to social connection and group cohesion) could be particularly fruitful. Another potential future direction is to investigate whether one could promote social connection by increasing neural similarity and correspondingly, shared understanding about various topics; given findings that suggest that lower levels of objective and subjective social connection are linked to idiosyncratic processing of the world (Baek et al.,  2022 ; Baek, Hyon et al.,  2021 ), interventions that promote shared understanding in different contexts, especially in populations who are vulnerable to social isolation, could be particularly fruitful. As these examples highlight, applying the established links between shared understanding and social connection as a framework to study psychosocial phenomena has the potential to advance understanding of the mechanisms that underlie such phenomena. This is a particularly exciting time to explore such questions, as the emergence of interdisciplinary methods that combine approaches from psychology, neuroscience, and network science has the potential to synergistically advance theoretical understanding of the associations between generalized shared reality, social connection, and psychosocial phenomenon that characterize the social world.

5. CONCLUSIONS

Recent research that integrates tools from neuroscience with approaches to study social networks corroborates and extends the importance of shared understanding across various contexts—and generalized shared reality more broadly—in social connection. The extent to which individuals show similarities in neural responding with one another is linked to both objective and subjective social connection, such that well‐connected and not‐lonely individuals are similar to one another, whereas less‐connected and highly‐lonely individuals show idiosyncrasy in neural responding that may reflect a lack of generalized shared reality with others. These findings support the notion that sharing one's worldview with social partners is critically related to social connection. Future work that applies this framework to study various psychosocial phenomena may be particularly fruitful in contributing to relevant theories in psychology, neuroscience, and related fields.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation SBE Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (Grant No. SBE‐1911783; ECB), the National Science Foundation (Grant No. SBE‐1835239; CP), and by the National Institute of Mental Health (Grant No. R01MH128720; CP).

Baek, E. C. , & Parkinson, C. (2022). Shared understanding and social connection: Integrating approaches from social psychology, social network analysis, and neuroscience . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 16 ( 11 ), e12710. 10.1111/spc3.12710 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Allcott, H. , & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election . Journal of Economic Perspectives , 31 ( 2 ), 211–236. 10.1257/jep.31.2.211 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andersen, S. M. , & Przybylinski, E. (2018). Shared reality in interpersonal relationships . Current Opinion in Psychology , 23 , 42–46. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.11.007 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In Guetzkow H. (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men; research in human relations (pp. 177–190). Carnegie Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority . Psychological Monographs: General and Applied , 70 ( 9 ), 1–70. 10.1109/ICCE-China.2014.7029897 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , & Falk, E. B. (2018). Persuasion and influence: What makes a successful persuader? Current Opinion in Psychology , 24 , 53–57. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.05.004 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , Hyon, R. , Lopez, K. , Porter, M. A. , & Parkinson, C. (2020). Convergence across subjects in neural responses during spontaneous viewing predicts sharing of naturalistic stimuli .
• Baek, E. C. , Hyon, R. , Lopez, K. , Porter, M. A. , & Parkinson, C. (2021). Lonely individuals process the world in idiosyncratic ways . ArXiv . https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.01312 [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , Hyon, R. , López, K. , Finn, E. S. , Porter, M. A. , & Parkinson, C. (2022). In‐degree centrality in a social network is linked to coordinated neural activity . Nature Communications , 13 ( 1 ), 1118. 10.1038/s41467-022-28432-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , O'Donnell, M. B. , Scholz, C. , Pei, R. , Garcia, J. O. , Vettel, J. M. , & Falk, E. B. (2021). Activity in the brain's valuation and mentalizing networks is associated with propagation of online recommendations . Scientific Reports , 11 ( 1 ), 11196. 10.1038/s41598-021-90420-2 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , Scholz, C. , O'Donnell, M. B. , & Falk, E. B. (2017). The value of sharing information: A neural account of information transmission . Psychological Science , 28 ( 7 ), 851–861. 10.1177/0956797617695073 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baek, E. C. , Tamir, D. I. , & Falk, E. B. (2020). Considering others' mental states causally increases feelings of social bonding and information sharing . PsyArXiv . 10.31234/osf.io/nw43x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bar‐Shachar, Y. , & Bar‐Kalifa, E. (2021). Responsiveness processes and daily experiences of shared reality among romantic couples . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 38 ( 11 ), 3156–3176. 10.1177/02654075211017675 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumeister, R. F. , & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation . Psychological Bulletin , 117 ( 3 ), 497–529. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumeister, R. F. , Maranges, H. M. , & Vohs, K. D. (2018). Human self as information agent: Functioning in a social environment based on shared meanings . Review of General Psychology , 22 ( 1 ), 36–47. 10.1037/gpr0000114 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berger, J. (2014). Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research . Journal of Consumer Psychology , 24 ( 4 ), 586–607. 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.05.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 62 ( 3 ), 713–715. 10.1037/h0044721 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 14 ( 3 ), 417–431. 10.1177/0265407597143008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cacioppo, J. T. , & Cacioppo, S. (2014). Social relationships and health: The toxic effects of perceived social isolation . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 8 ( 2 ), 58–72. 10.1111/spc3.12087 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cacioppo, J. T. , Fowler, J. H. , & Christakis, N. A. (2009). Alone in the crowd: The structure and spread of loneliness in a large social network . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 97 ( 6 ), 977–991. 10.1037/a0016076 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, S. , Shechter, D. , & Chaiken, S. (1996). Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy‐ versus impression‐motivated heuristic and systematic processing . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71 ( 2 ), 262–275. 10.1037//0022-3514.71.2.262 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Christakis, N. A. , & Fowler, J. H. (2007). The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years . New England Journal of Medicine , 357 ( 4 ), 370–379. 10.1056/NEJMsa066082 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini, R. B. , & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity . Annual Review of Psychology , 55 ( 1974 ), 591–621. 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini, R. B. , & Trost, M. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In Gilbert D. T., Fiske S. T., & Lindzey G. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 151–192). McGraw‐Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cross, S. E. , Bacon, P. L. , & Morris, M. L. (2000). The relational‐interdependent self‐construal and relationships . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 78 ( 4 ), 791–808. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.791 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De Angelis, M. , Bonezzi, A. , Peluso, A. M. , Rucker, D. D. , & Costabile, M. (2012). On braggarts and gossips: A self‐enhancement account of word‐of‐mouth generation and transmission . Journal of Marketing Research , 49 ( 4 ), 551–563. 10.1509/jmr.11.0136 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dehghani, M. , Johnson, K. , Hoover, J. , Sagi, E. , Garten, J. , Parmar, N. J. , Vaisey, S. , Iliev, R. , & Graham, J. (2016). Purity homophily in social networks . Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 145 ( 3 ), 366–375. 10.1037/xge0000139 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deutsch, M. , & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 51 ( 3 ), 629–636. 10.1037/h0046408 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dmochowski, J. P. , Bezdek, M. A. , Abelson, B. P. , Johnson, J. S. , Schumacher, E. H. , & Parra, L. C. (2014). Audience preferences are predicted by temporal reliability of neural processing . Nature Communications , 5 , 1–9. 10.1038/ncomms5567 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dufour, N. , Redcay, E. , Young, L. , Mavros, P. L. , Moran, J. M. , Triantafyllou, C. , Gabrieli, J. D. E. , & Saxe, R. (2013). Similar brain activation during false belief tasks in a large sample of adults with and without autism . PLoS One , 8 ( 9 ), e75468. 10.1371/journal.pone.0075468 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Echterhoff, G. , & Higgins, E. T. (2018). Shared reality: Construct and mechanisms . Current Opinion in Psychology , 23 , iv–vii. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.09.003 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Echterhoff, G. , Higgins, E. T. , & Levine, J. M. (2009). Shared reality: Experiencing commonality with others' inner states about the world . Perspectives on Psychological Science , 4 ( 5 ), 496–521. 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01161.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elfenbein, H. A. , & Ambady, N. (2002). On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta‐analysis . Psychological Bulletin , 128 ( 2 ), 203–235. 10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.203 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fang, R. , Landis, B. , Zhang, Z. , Anderson, M. H. , Shaw, J. D. , & Kilduff, M. (2015). Integrating personality and social networks: A meta‐analysis of personality, network position, and work outcomes in organizations . Organization Science , 26 ( 4 ), 1243–1260. 10.1287/orsc.2015.0972 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frith, U. , & Frith, C. D. (2003). Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing . Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 358 ( 1431 ), 459–473. 10.1098/rstb.2002.1218 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gonzales, A. L. , Hancock, J. T. , & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). Language style matching as a predictor of social dynamics in small groups . Communication Research , 37 ( 1 ), 3–19. 10.1177/0093650209351468 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawkley, L. C. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010). Loneliness matters: A theoretical and empirical review of consequences and mechanisms . Annals of Behavioral Medicine , 40 ( 2 ), 218–227. 10.1007/s12160-010-9210-8 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawkley, L. C. , Burleson, M. H. , Berntson, G. G. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (2003). Loneliness in everyday life: Cardiovascular activity, psychosocial context, and health behaviors . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 85 ( 1 ), 105–120. 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.105 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins, E. T. , Rossignac‐Milon, M. , & Echterhoff, G. (2021). Shared reality: From sharing‐is‐believing to merging minds . Current Directions in Psychological Science , 30 ( 2 ), 103–110. 10.1177/0963721421992027 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holwerda, T. J. , Deeg, D. J. H. , Beekman, A. T. F. , Van Tilburg, T. G. , Stek, M. L. , Jonker, C. , & Schoevers, R. A. (2014). Feelings of loneliness, but not social isolation, predict dementia onset: Results from the Amsterdam Study of the Elderly (AMSTEL) . Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry , 85 ( 2 ), 135–142. 10.1136/jnnp-2012-302755 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hyon, R. , Kleinbaum, A. M. , & Parkinson, C. (2020). Social network proximity predicts similar trajectories of psychological states: Evidence from multi‐voxel spatiotemporal dynamics . NeuroImage , 216 , 116492. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116492 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ireland, M. E. , Slatcher, R. B. , Eastwick, P. W. , Scissors, L. E. , Finkel, E. J. , & Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). Language style matching predicts relationship initiation and stability . Psychological Science , 22 ( 1 ), 39–44. 10.1177/0956797610392928 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kata, A. (2010). A postmodern Pandora's box: Anti‐vaccination misinformation on the Internet . Vaccine , 28 ( 7 ), 1709–1716. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kilduff, M. , & Day, D. V. (1994). Do chameleons get ahead? The effects of self‐monitoring on managerial careers . Academy of Management Journal , 37 ( 4 ), 1047–1060. 10.2307/256612 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kinreich, S. , Djalovski, A. , Kraus, L. , Louzoun, Y. , & Feldman, R. (2017). Brain‐to‐brain synchrony during naturalistic social interactions . Scientific Reports , 7 ( 1 ), 17060. 10.1038/s41598-017-17339-5 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kleinbaum, A. M. , Jordan, A. H. , & Audia, P. G. (2015). An altercentric perspective on the origins of brokerage in social networks: How perceived empathy moderates the self‐monitoring effect . Organization Science , 26 ( 4 ), 1226–1242. 10.1287/orsc.2014.0961 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klucharev, V. , Hytönen, K. , Rijpkema, M. , Smidts, A. , & Fernández, G. (2009). Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity . Neuron , 61 ( 1 ), 140–151. 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.11.027 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lahnakoski, J. M. , Glerean, E. , Jääskeläinen, I. P. , Hyönä, J. , Hari, R. , Sams, M. , & Nummenmaa, L. (2014). Synchronous brain activity across individuals underlies shared psychological perspectives . NeuroImage , 100 , 316–324. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.022 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lakin, J. L. , & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport . Psychological Science , 14 ( 4 ), 334–339. 10.1111/1467-9280.14481 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, Y. , & Ko, Y. G. (2018). Feeling lonely when not socially isolated: Social isolation moderates the association between loneliness and daily social interaction . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 35 ( 10 ), 1340–1355. 10.1177/0265407517712902 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lun, J. , Kesebir, S. , & Oishi, S. (2008). On feeling understood and feeling well: The role of interdependence . Journal of Research in Personality , 42 ( 6 ), 1623–1628. 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.009 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lönnqvist, J. E. , & Itkonen, J. V. A. (2016). Homogeneity of personal values and personality traits in Facebook social networks . Journal of Research in Personality , 60 , 24–35. 10.1016/j.jrp.2015.11.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ma, L. , Lee, C. S. , & Goh, D. H. (2011). That's news to me: The influence of perceived gratifications and personal experience on news sharing in social media. In Proceedings of the 11th annual international ACM/IEEE joint conference on digital libraries (pp. 141–144). 10.1145/1998076.1998103 [ CrossRef ]
• Mars, R. B. , Neubert, F. X. , Noonan, M. A. P. , Sallet, J. , Toni, I. , & Rushworth, M. F. S. (2012). On the relationship between the “default mode network” and the “social brain” . Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , 6 , 1–9. 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00189 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McPherson, M. , Smith‐Lovin, L. , & Cook, J. M. (2002). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks . Annual Review of Sociology , 27 ( 1 ), 415–444. 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meyer, M. L. , Davachi, L. , Ochsner, K. N. , & Lieberman, M. D. (2018). Evidence that default network connectivity during rest consolidates social information . Cerebral Cortex , 29 ( 5 ), 1910–1920. 10.1093/cercor/bhy071 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moieni, M. , & Eisenberger, N. I. (2020). Social isolation and health. In The Wiley encyclopedia of health psychology (vol. 2 , pp. 695–702). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 10.1002/9781119057840.ch121 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Montoya, R. M. , & Horton, R. S. (2013). A meta‐analytic investigation of the processes underlying the similarity‐attraction effect . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 30 ( 1 ), 64–94. 10.1177/0265407512452989 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nastase, S. A. , Gazzola, V. , Hasson, U. , & Keysers, C. (2019). Measuring shared responses across subjects using intersubject correlation . Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 14 ( 6 ), 669–687. 10.1093/scan/nsz037 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen, M. , Vanderwal, T. , & Hasson, U. (2019). Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses . NeuroImage , 184 , 161–170. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.09.010 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niederhoffer, K. G. , & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Linguistic Style matching in social interaction . Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 21 ( 4 ), 337–360. 10.1177/026192702237953 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nisbett, R. E. , Wilson, T. D. , Kruger, M. , Ross, L. , Indeed, A. , Bellows, N. , Cartwright, D. , Goldman, A. , Gurwitz, S. , Lemley, R. , London, H. , & Markus, H. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes . Psychological Review , 84 ( 3 ), 231–259. 10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oh, H. , & Kilduff, M. (2008). The ripple effect of personality on social structure: Self‐monitoring origins of network brokerage . Journal of Applied Psychology , 93 ( 5 ), 1155–1164. 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1155 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oishi, S. , Krochik, M. , & Akimoto, S. (2010). Felt understanding as a bridge between close relationships and subjective well‐being: Antecedents and consequences across individuals and cultures . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 4 ( 6 ), 403–416. 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00264.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parkinson, C. , Kleinbaum, A. M. , & Wheatley, T. (2018). Similar neural responses predict friendship . Nature Communications , 9 ( 1 ), 332. 10.1038/s41467-017-02722-7 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piazza, E. A. , Hasenfratz, L. , Hasson, U. , & Lew‐Williams, C. (2020). Infant and adult brains are coupled to the dynamics of natural communication . Psychological Science , 31 ( 1 ), 6–17. 10.1177/0956797619878698 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reis, H. T. , Lemay, E. P. , & Finkenauer, C. (2017). Toward understanding understanding: The importance of feeling understood in relationships . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 11 ( 3 ), e12308. 10.1111/spc3.12308 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reis, H. T. , Sheldon, K. M. , Gable, S. L. , Roscoe, J. , & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Daily well‐being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 26 ( 4 ), 419–435. 10.1177/0146167200266002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenquist, J. N. , Fowler, J. H. , & Christakis, N. A. (2011). Social network determinants of depression . Molecular Psychiatry , 16 ( 3 ), 273–281. 10.1038/mp.2010.13 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rossignac‐Milon, M. , & Higgins, E. T. (2018). Epistemic companions: Shared reality development in close relationships . Current Opinion in Psychology , 23 , 66–71. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.01.001 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rossignac‐Milon, M. , Bolger, N. , Zee, K. S. , Boothby, E. J. , & Higgins, E. T. (2021). Merged minds: Generalized shared reality in dyadic relationships . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 2 ( 999 ), 882–911. 10.1037/pspi0000266.supp [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmälzle, R. , Häcker, F. E. K. , Honey, C. J. , & Hasson, U. (2014). Engaged listeners: Shared neural processing of powerful political speeches . Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 10 ( 8 ), 1137–1143. 10.1093/scan/nsu168 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scholz, C. , Baek, E. C. , O'Donnell, M. B. , Kim, H. S. , Cappella, J. N. , & Falk, E. B. (2017). A neural model of valuation and information virality . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 114 ( 11 ), 2881–2886. 10.1073/pnas.1615259114 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sherif, M. (1935). A study on some social factors in perception . Archives of Psychology , 187 , 60. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms . Harper & Brothers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snyder, M. (1974). Self‐monitoring of expressive behavior . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 30 ( 4 ), 526–537. 10.1037/h0037039 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spunt, R. P. , Meyer, M. L. , Lieberman, M. D. , Smith, T. J. , Nako, R. , & Eimer, M. (2013). The default mode of human brain function primes the intentional stance . Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 25 ( 5 ), 719–729. 10.1162/jocn_a_00352 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tolstoy, L. (1878). Anna Karenina . The Russian Messenger. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence . Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang, S. , Hu, Q. , & Dong, B. (2015). Managing personal networks: An examination of how high self‐monitors achieve better job performance . Journal of Vocational Behavior , 91 , 180–188. 10.1016/j.jvb.2015.10.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Welborn, B. L. , Lieberman, M. D. , Goldenberg, D. , Fuligni, A. J. , Galván, A. , & Telzer, E. H. (2015). Neural mechanisms of social influence in adolescence . Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 11 ( 1 ), 100–109. 10.1093/scan/nsv095 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson, T. D. , & Schooler, J. W. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 60 ( 2 ), 181–192. 10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.181 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson, T. D. , Lisle, D. J. , Schooler, J. W. , Hodges, S. D. , Klaaren, K. J. , & Lafleur, S. J. (1993). Introspecting about reasons can reduce post‐choice satisfaction . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 19 ( 3 ), 331–339. 10.1177/0146167293193010 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeshurun, Y. , Nguyen, M. , & Hasson, U. (2021). The default mode network: Where the idiosyncratic self meets the shared social world . Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 22 ( 3 ), 181–192. 10.1038/s41583-020-00420-w [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeshurun, Y. , Swanson, S. , Simony, E. , Chen, J. , Lazaridi, C. , Honey, C. J. , & Hasson, U. (2017). Same story, different story: The neural representation of interpretive frameworks . Psychological Science , 28 ( 3 ), 307–319. 10.1177/0956797616682029 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Youyou, W. , Stillwell, D. , Schwartz, H. A. , & Kosinski, M. (2017). Birds of a feather do flock together: Behavior‐based personality‐assessment method reveals personality similarity among couples and friends . Psychological Science , 28 ( 3 ), 276–284. 10.1177/0956797616678187 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zaki, J. , Schirmer, J. , & Mitchell, J. P. (2011). Social influence modulates the neural computation of value . Psychological Science , 22 ( 7 ), 894–900. 10.1177/0956797611411057 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Social Psychology Experiments: 10 Of The Most Famous Studies

Ten of the most influential social psychology experiments explain why we sometimes do dumb or irrational things. 

Ten of the most influential social psychology experiments explain why we sometimes do dumb or irrational things.

“I have been primarily interested in how and why ordinary people do unusual things, things that seem alien to their natures. Why do good people sometimes act evil? Why do smart people sometimes do dumb or irrational things?” –Philip Zimbardo

Like famous social psychologist Professor Philip Zimbardo (author of The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil ), I’m also obsessed with why we do dumb or irrational things.

The answer quite often is because of other people — something social psychologists have comprehensively shown.

Each of the 10 brilliant social psychology experiments below tells a unique, insightful story relevant to all our lives, every day.

Click the link in each social psychology experiment to get the full description and explanation of each phenomenon.

1. Social Psychology Experiments: The Halo Effect

The halo effect is a finding from a famous social psychology experiment.

It is the idea that global evaluations about a person (e.g. she is likeable) bleed over into judgements about their specific traits (e.g. she is intelligent).

It is sometimes called the “what is beautiful is good” principle, or the “physical attractiveness stereotype”.

It is called the halo effect because a halo was often used in religious art to show that a person is good.

2. Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort people feel when trying to hold two conflicting beliefs in their mind.

People resolve this discomfort by changing their thoughts to align with one of conflicting beliefs and rejecting the other.

The study provides a central insight into the stories we tell ourselves about why we think and behave the way we do.

3. Robbers Cave Experiment: How Group Conflicts Develop

The Robbers Cave experiment was a famous social psychology experiment on how prejudice and conflict emerged between two group of boys.

It shows how groups naturally develop their own cultures, status structures and boundaries — and then come into conflict with each other.

For example, each country has its own culture, its government, legal system and it draws boundaries to differentiate itself from neighbouring countries.

One of the reasons the became so famous is that it appeared to show how groups could be reconciled, how peace could flourish.

The key was the focus on superordinate goals, those stretching beyond the boundaries of the group itself.

4. Social Psychology Experiments: The Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford prison experiment was run to find out how people would react to being made a prisoner or prison guard.

The psychologist Philip Zimbardo, who led the Stanford prison experiment, thought ordinary, healthy people would come to behave cruelly, like prison guards, if they were put in that situation, even if it was against their personality.

It has since become a classic social psychology experiment, studied by generations of students and recently coming under a lot of criticism.

5. The Milgram Social Psychology Experiment

The Milgram experiment , led by the well-known psychologist Stanley Milgram in the 1960s, aimed to test people’s obedience to authority.

The results of Milgram’s social psychology experiment, sometimes known as the Milgram obedience study, continue to be both thought-provoking and controversial.

The Milgram experiment discovered people are much more obedient than you might imagine.

Fully 63 percent of the participants continued administering what appeared like electric shocks to another person while they screamed in agony, begged to stop and eventually fell silent — just because they were told to.

6. The False Consensus Effect

The false consensus effect is a famous social psychological finding that people tend to assume that others agree with them.

It could apply to opinions, values, beliefs or behaviours, but people assume others think and act in the same way as they do.

It is hard for many people to believe the false consensus effect exists because they quite naturally believe they are good ‘intuitive psychologists’, thinking it is relatively easy to predict other people’s attitudes and behaviours.

In reality, people show a number of predictable biases, such as the false consensus effect, when estimating other people’s behaviour and its causes.

7. Social Psychology Experiments: Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory helps to explain why people’s behaviour in groups is fascinating and sometimes disturbing.

People gain part of their self from the groups they belong to and that is at the heart of social identity theory.

The famous theory explains why as soon as humans are bunched together in groups we start to do odd things: copy other members of our group, favour members of own group over others, look for a leader to worship and fight other groups.

8. Negotiation: 2 Psychological Strategies That Matter Most

Negotiation is one of those activities we often engage in without quite realising it.

Negotiation doesn’t just happen in the boardroom, or when we ask our boss for a raise or down at the market, it happens every time we want to reach an agreement with someone.

In a classic, award-winning series of social psychology experiments, Morgan Deutsch and Robert Krauss investigated two central factors in negotiation: how we communicate with each other and how we use threats.

9. Bystander Effect And The Diffusion Of Responsibility

The bystander effect in social psychology is the surprising finding that the mere presence of other people inhibits our own helping behaviours in an emergency.

The bystander effect social psychology experiments are mentioned in every psychology textbook and often dubbed ‘seminal’.

This famous social psychology experiment on the bystander effect was inspired by the highly publicised murder of Kitty Genovese in 1964.

It found that in some circumstances, the presence of others inhibits people’s helping behaviours — partly because of a phenomenon called diffusion of responsibility.

10. Asch Conformity Experiment: The Power Of Social Pressure

The Asch conformity experiments — some of the most famous every done — were a series of social psychology experiments carried out by noted psychologist Solomon Asch.

The Asch conformity experiment reveals how strongly a person’s opinions are affected by people around them.

In fact, the Asch conformity experiment shows that many of us will deny our own senses just to conform with others.

Author: Dr Jeremy Dean

Psychologist, Jeremy Dean, PhD is the founder and author of PsyBlog. He holds a doctorate in psychology from University College London and two other advanced degrees in psychology. He has been writing about scientific research on PsyBlog since 2004. View all posts by Dr Jeremy Dean

Join the free PsyBlog mailing list. No spam, ever.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1.3 Conducting Research in Social Psychology

Learning objectives.

• Explain why social psychologists rely on empirical methods to study social behavior.
• Provide examples of how social psychologists measure the variables they are interested in.
• Review the three types of research designs, and evaluate the strengths and limitations of each type.
• Consider the role of validity in research, and describe how research programs should be evaluated.

Social psychologists are not the only people interested in understanding and predicting social behavior or the only people who study it. Social behavior is also considered by religious leaders, philosophers, politicians, novelists, and others, and it is a common topic on TV shows. But the social psychological approach to understanding social behavior goes beyond the mere observation of human actions. Social psychologists believe that a true understanding of the causes of social behavior can only be obtained through a systematic scientific approach, and that is why they conduct scientific research. Social psychologists believe that the study of social behavior should be empirical —that is, based on the collection and systematic analysis of observable data .

The Importance of Scientific Research

Because social psychology concerns the relationships among people, and because we can frequently find answers to questions about human behavior by using our own common sense or intuition, many people think that it is not necessary to study it empirically (Lilienfeld, 2011). But although we do learn about people by observing others and therefore social psychology is in fact partly common sense, social psychology is not entirely common sense.

In case you are not convinced about this, perhaps you would be willing to test whether or not social psychology is just common sense by taking a short true-or-false quiz. If so, please have a look at Table 1.1 “Is Social Psychology Just Common Sense?” and respond with either “True” or “False.” Based on your past observations of people’s behavior, along with your own common sense, you will likely have answers to each of the questions on the quiz. But how sure are you? Would you be willing to bet that all, or even most, of your answers have been shown to be correct by scientific research? Would you be willing to accept your score on this quiz for your final grade in this class? If you are like most of the students in my classes, you will get at least some of these answers wrong. (To see the answers and a brief description of the scientific research supporting each of these topics, please go to the Chapter Summary at the end of this chapter.)

Table 1.1 Is Social Psychology Just Common Sense?

Answer each of the following questions, using your own initution, as either true or false.
Opposites attract.
An athlete who wins the bronze medal (third place) in an event is happier about his or her performance than the athlete who wins the silver medal (second place).
Having good friends you can count on can keep you from catching colds.
Subliminal advertising (i.e., persuasive messages that are displayed out of our awareness on TV or movie screens) is very effective in getting us to buy products.
The greater the reward promised for an activity, the more one will come to enjoy engaging in that activity.
Physically attractive people are seen as less intelligent than less attractive people.
Punching a pillow or screaming out loud is a good way to reduce frustration and aggressive tendencies.
People pull harder in a tug-of-war when they’re pulling alone than when pulling in a group.

One of the reasons we might think that social psychology is common sense is that once we learn about the outcome of a given event (e.g., when we read about the results of a research project), we frequently believe that we would have been able to predict the outcome ahead of time. For instance, if half of a class of students is told that research concerning attraction between people has demonstrated that “opposites attract,” and if the other half is told that research has demonstrated that “birds of a feather flock together,” most of the students in both groups will report believing that the outcome is true and that they would have predicted the outcome before they had heard about it. Of course, both of these contradictory outcomes cannot be true. The problem is that just reading a description of research findings leads us to think of the many cases that we know that support the findings and thus makes them seem believable. The tendency to think that we could have predicted something that we probably would not have been able to predict is called the hindsight bias .

Our common sense also leads us to believe that we know why we engage in the behaviors that we engage in, when in fact we may not. Social psychologist Daniel Wegner and his colleagues have conducted a variety of studies showing that we do not always understand the causes of our own actions. When we think about a behavior before we engage in it, we believe that the thinking guided our behavior, even when it did not (Morewedge, Gray, & Wegner, 2010). People also report that they contribute more to solving a problem when they are led to believe that they have been working harder on it, even though the effort did not increase their contribution to the outcome (Preston & Wegner, 2007). These findings, and many others like them, demonstrate that our beliefs about the causes of social events, and even of our own actions, do not always match the true causes of those events.

Social psychologists conduct research because it often uncovers results that could not have been predicted ahead of time. Putting our hunches to the test exposes our ideas to scrutiny. The scientific approach brings a lot of surprises, but it also helps us test our explanations about behavior in a rigorous manner. It is important for you to understand the research methods used in psychology so that you can evaluate the validity of the research that you read about here, in other courses, and in your everyday life.

Social psychologists publish their research in scientific journals, and your instructor may require you to read some of these research articles. The most important social psychology journals are listed in Table 1.2 “Social Psychology Journals” . If you are asked to do a literature search on research in social psychology, you should look for articles from these journals.

Table 1.2 Social Psychology Journals

The research articles in these journals are likely to be available in your college library. A fuller list can be found here:

We’ll discuss the empirical approach and review the findings of many research projects throughout this book, but for now let’s take a look at the basics of how scientists use research to draw overall conclusions about social behavior. Keep in mind as you read this book, however, that although social psychologists are pretty good at understanding the causes of behavior, our predictions are a long way from perfect. We are not able to control the minds or the behaviors of others or to predict exactly what they will do in any given situation. Human behavior is complicated because people are complicated and because the social situations that they find themselves in every day are also complex. It is this complexity—at least for me—that makes studying people so interesting and fun.

Measuring Affect, Behavior, and Cognition

One important aspect of using an empirical approach to understand social behavior is that the concepts of interest must be measured ( Figure 1.4 “The Operational Definition” ). If we are interested in learning how much Sarah likes Robert, then we need to have a measure of her liking for him. But how, exactly, should we measure the broad idea of “liking”? In scientific terms, the characteristics that we are trying to measure are known as conceptual variables , and the particular method that we use to measure a variable of interest is called an operational definition .

For anything that we might wish to measure, there are many different operational definitions, and which one we use depends on the goal of the research and the type of situation we are studying. To better understand this, let’s look at an example of how we might operationally define “Sarah likes Robert.”

Figure 1.4 The Operational Definition

An idea or conceptual variable (such as “how much Sarah likes Robert”) is turned into a measure through an operational definition.

One approach to measurement involves directly asking people about their perceptions using self-report measures. Self-report measures are measures in which individuals are asked to respond to questions posed by an interviewer or on a questionnaire . Generally, because any one question might be misunderstood or answered incorrectly, in order to provide a better measure, more than one question is asked and the responses to the questions are averaged together. For example, an operational definition of Sarah’s liking for Robert might involve asking her to complete the following measure:

I enjoy being around Robert.

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 Strongly agree

I get along well with Robert.

I like Robert.

The operational definition would be the average of her responses across the three questions. Because each question assesses the attitude differently, and yet each question should nevertheless measure Sarah’s attitude toward Robert in some way, the average of the three questions will generally be a better measure than would any one question on its own.

Although it is easy to ask many questions on self-report measures, these measures have a potential disadvantage. As we have seen, people’s insights into their own opinions and their own behaviors may not be perfect, and they might also not want to tell the truth—perhaps Sarah really likes Robert, but she is unwilling or unable to tell us so. Therefore, an alternative to self-report that can sometimes provide a more valid measure is to measure behavior itself. Behavioral measures are measures designed to directly assess what people do . Instead of asking Sara how much she likes Robert, we might instead measure her liking by assessing how much time she spends with Robert or by coding how much she smiles at him when she talks to him. Some examples of behavioral measures that have been used in social psychological research are shown in Table 1.3 “Examples of Operational Definitions of Conceptual Variables That Have Been Used in Social Psychological Research” .

Table 1.3 Examples of Operational Definitions of Conceptual Variables That Have Been Used in Social Psychological Research

Conceptual variable	Operational definitions
Aggression	• Number of presses of a button that administers shock to another student
	• Number of seconds taken to honk the horn at the car ahead after a stoplight turns green
Interpersonal attraction	• Number of times that a person looks at another person
	• Number of millimeters of pupil dilation when one person looks at another
Altruism	• Number of pieces of paper a person helps another pick up
	• Number of hours of volunteering per week that a person engages in
Group decision-making skills	• Number of groups able to correctly solve a group performance task
	• Number of seconds in which a group correctly solves a problem
Prejudice	• Number of negative words used in a creative story about another person
	• Number of inches that a person places their chair away from another person

Social Neuroscience: Measuring Social Responses in the Brain

Still another approach to measuring our thoughts and feelings is to measure brain activity, and recent advances in brain science have created a wide variety of new techniques for doing so. One approach, known as electroencephalography (EEG) , is a technique that records the electrical activity produced by the brain’s neurons through the use of electrodes that are placed around the research participant’s head . An electroencephalogram (EEG) can show if a person is asleep, awake, or anesthetized because the brain wave patterns are known to differ during each state. An EEG can also track the waves that are produced when a person is reading, writing, and speaking with others. A particular advantage of the technique is that the participant can move around while the recordings are being taken, which is useful when measuring brain activity in children who often have difficulty keeping still. Furthermore, by following electrical impulses across the surface of the brain, researchers can observe changes over very fast time periods.

This woman is wearing an EEG cap.

goocy – Research – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Although EEGs can provide information about the general patterns of electrical activity within the brain, and although they allow the researcher to see these changes quickly as they occur in real time, the electrodes must be placed on the surface of the skull, and each electrode measures brain waves from large areas of the brain. As a result, EEGs do not provide a very clear picture of the structure of the brain.

But techniques exist to provide more specific brain images. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a neuroimaging technique that uses a magnetic field to create images of brain structure and function . In research studies that use the fMRI, the research participant lies on a bed within a large cylindrical structure containing a very strong magnet. Nerve cells in the brain that are active use more oxygen, and the need for oxygen increases blood flow to the area. The fMRI detects the amount of blood flow in each brain region and thus is an indicator of which parts of the brain are active.

Very clear and detailed pictures of brain structures (see Figure 1.5 “Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)” ) can be produced via fMRI. Often, the images take the form of cross-sectional “slices” that are obtained as the magnetic field is passed across the brain. The images of these slices are taken repeatedly and are superimposed on images of the brain structure itself to show how activity changes in different brain structures over time. Normally, the research participant is asked to engage in tasks while in the scanner, for instance, to make judgments about pictures of people, to solve problems, or to make decisions about appropriate behaviors. The fMRI images show which parts of the brain are associated with which types of tasks. Another advantage of the fMRI is that is it noninvasive. The research participant simply enters the machine and the scans begin.

Figure 1.5 Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)

The fMRI creates images of brain structure and activity. In this image, the red and yellow areas represent increased blood flow and thus increased activity.

Reigh LeBlanc – Reigh’s Brain rlwat – CC BY-NC 2.0; Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

Although the scanners themselves are expensive, the advantages of fMRIs are substantial, and scanners are now available in many university and hospital settings. The fMRI is now the most commonly used method of learning about brain structure, and it has been employed by social psychologists to study social cognition, attitudes, morality, emotions, responses to being rejected by others, and racial prejudice, to name just a few topics (Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; Greene, Sommerville, Nystrom, Darley, & Cohen, 2001; Lieberman, Hariri, Jarcho, Eisenberger, & Bookheimer, 2005; Ochsner, Bunge, Gross, & Gabrieli, 2002; Richeson et al., 2003).

Observational Research

Once we have decided how to measure our variables, we can begin the process of research itself. As you can see in Table 1.4 “Three Major Research Designs Used by Social Psychologists” , there are three major approaches to conducting research that are used by social psychologists—the observational approach , the correlational approach , and the experimental approach . Each approach has some advantages and disadvantages.

Table 1.4 Three Major Research Designs Used by Social Psychologists

Research Design	Goal	Advantages	Disadvantages
Observational	To create a snapshot of the current state of affairs	Provides a relatively complete picture of what is occurring at a given time. Allows the development of questions for further study.	Does not assess relationships between variables.
Correlational	To assess the relationships between two or more variables	Allows the testing of expected relationships between variables and the making of predictions. Can assess these relationships in everyday life events.	Cannot be used to draw inferences about the causal relationships between the variables.
Experimental	To assess the causal impact of one or more experimental manipulations on a dependent variable	Allows the drawing of conclusions about the causal relationships among variables.	Cannot experimentally manipulate many important variables. May be expensive and take much time to conduct.

The most basic research design, observational research , is research that involves making observations of behavior and recording those observations in an objective manner . Although it is possible in some cases to use observational data to draw conclusions about the relationships between variables (e.g., by comparing the behaviors of older versus younger children on a playground), in many cases the observational approach is used only to get a picture of what is happening to a given set of people at a given time and how they are responding to the social situation. In these cases, the observational approach involves creating a type of “snapshot” of the current state of affairs.

One advantage of observational research is that in many cases it is the only possible approach to collecting data about the topic of interest. A researcher who is interested in studying the impact of a hurricane on the residents of New Orleans, the reactions of New Yorkers to a terrorist attack, or the activities of the members of a religious cult cannot create such situations in a laboratory but must be ready to make observations in a systematic way when such events occur on their own. Thus observational research allows the study of unique situations that could not be created by the researcher. Another advantage of observational research is that the people whose behavior is being measured are doing the things they do every day, and in some cases they may not even know that their behavior is being recorded.

One early observational study that made an important contribution to understanding human behavior was reported in a book by Leon Festinger and his colleagues (Festinger, Riecken, & Schachter, 1956). The book, called When Prophecy Fails , reported an observational study of the members of a “doomsday” cult. The cult members believed that they had received information, supposedly sent through “automatic writing” from a planet called “Clarion,” that the world was going to end. More specifically, the group members were convinced that the earth would be destroyed, as the result of a gigantic flood, sometime before dawn on December 21, 1954.

When Festinger learned about the cult, he thought that it would be an interesting way to study how individuals in groups communicate with each other to reinforce their extreme beliefs. He and his colleagues observed the members of the cult over a period of several months, beginning in July of the year in which the flood was expected. The researchers collected a variety of behavioral and self-report measures by observing the cult, recording the conversations among the group members, and conducting detailed interviews with them. Festinger and his colleagues also recorded the reactions of the cult members, beginning on December 21, when the world did not end as they had predicted. This observational research provided a wealth of information about the indoctrination patterns of cult members and their reactions to disconfirmed predictions. This research also helped Festinger develop his important theory of cognitive dissonance.

Despite their advantages, observational research designs also have some limitations. Most important, because the data that are collected in observational studies are only a description of the events that are occurring, they do not tell us anything about the relationship between different variables. However, it is exactly this question that correlational research and experimental research are designed to answer.

The Research Hypothesis

Because social psychologists are generally interested in looking at relationships among variables, they begin by stating their predictions in the form of a precise statement known as a research hypothesis . A research hypothesis is a statement about the relationship between the variables of interest and about the specific direction of that relationship . For instance, the research hypothesis “People who are more similar to each other will be more attracted to each other” predicts that there is a relationship between a variable called similarity and another variable called attraction. In the research hypothesis “The attitudes of cult members become more extreme when their beliefs are challenged,” the variables that are expected to be related are extremity of beliefs and the degree to which the cults’ beliefs are challenged.

Because the research hypothesis states both that there is a relationship between the variables and the direction of that relationship, it is said to be falsifiable . Being falsifiable means that the outcome of the research can demonstrate empirically either that there is support for the hypothesis (i.e., the relationship between the variables was correctly specified) or that there is actually no relationship between the variables or that the actual relationship is not in the direction that was predicted . Thus the research hypothesis that “people will be more attracted to others who are similar to them” is falsifiable because the research could show either that there was no relationship between similarity and attraction or that people we see as similar to us are seen as less attractive than those who are dissimilar.

Correlational Research

The goal of correlational research is to search for and test hypotheses about the relationships between two or more variables. In the simplest case, the correlation is between only two variables, such as that between similarity and liking, or between gender (male versus female) and helping.

In a correlational design, the research hypothesis is that there is an association (i.e., a correlation) between the variables that are being measured. For instance, many researchers have tested the research hypothesis that a positive correlation exists between the use of violent video games and the incidence of aggressive behavior, such that people who play violent video games more frequently would also display more aggressive behavior.

A statistic known as the Pearson correlation coefficient (symbolized by the letter r ) is normally used to summarize the association, or correlation, between two variables. The correlation coefficient can range from −1 (indicating a very strong negative relationship between the variables) to +1 (indicating a very strong positive relationship between the variables). Research has found that there is a positive correlation between the use of violent video games and the incidence of aggressive behavior and that the size of the correlation is about r = .30 (Bushman & Huesmann, 2010).

One advantage of correlational research designs is that, like observational research (and in comparison with experimental research designs in which the researcher frequently creates relatively artificial situations in a laboratory setting), they are often used to study people doing the things that they do every day. And correlational research designs also have the advantage of allowing prediction. When two or more variables are correlated, we can use our knowledge of a person’s score on one of the variables to predict his or her likely score on another variable. Because high-school grade point averages are correlated with college grade point averages, if we know a person’s high-school grade point average, we can predict his or her likely college grade point average. Similarly, if we know how many violent video games a child plays, we can predict how aggressively he or she will behave. These predictions will not be perfect, but they will allow us to make a better guess than we would have been able to if we had not known the person’s score on the first variable ahead of time.

Despite their advantages, correlational designs have a very important limitation. This limitation is that they cannot be used to draw conclusions about the causal relationships among the variables that have been measured. An observed correlation between two variables does not necessarily indicate that either one of the variables caused the other. Although many studies have found a correlation between the number of violent video games that people play and the amount of aggressive behaviors they engage in, this does not mean that viewing the video games necessarily caused the aggression. Although one possibility is that playing violent games increases aggression,

another possibility is that the causal direction is exactly opposite to what has been hypothesized. Perhaps increased aggressiveness causes more interest in, and thus increased viewing of, violent games. Although this causal relationship might not seem as logical to you, there is no way to rule out the possibility of such reverse causation on the basis of the observed correlation.

Still another possible explanation for the observed correlation is that it has been produced by the presence of another variable that was not measured in the research. Common-causal variables (also known as third variables) are variables that are not part of the research hypothesis but that cause both the predictor and the outcome variable and thus produce the observed correlation between them ( Figure 1.6 “Correlation and Causality” ). It has been observed that students who sit in the front of a large class get better grades than those who sit in the back of the class. Although this could be because sitting in the front causes the student to take better notes or to understand the material better, the relationship could also be due to a common-causal variable, such as the interest or motivation of the students to do well in the class. Because a student’s interest in the class leads him or her to both get better grades and sit nearer to the teacher, seating position and class grade are correlated, even though neither one caused the other.

Figure 1.6 Correlation and Causality

The correlation between where we sit in a large class and our grade in the class is likely caused by the influence of one or more common-causal variables.

The possibility of common-causal variables must always be taken into account when considering correlational research designs. For instance, in a study that finds a correlation between playing violent video games and aggression, it is possible that a common-causal variable is producing the relationship. Some possibilities include the family background, diet, and hormone levels of the children. Any or all of these potential common-causal variables might be creating the observed correlation between playing violent video games and aggression. Higher levels of the male sex hormone testosterone, for instance, may cause children to both watch more violent TV and behave more aggressively.

I like to think of common-causal variables in correlational research designs as “mystery” variables, since their presence and identity is usually unknown to the researcher because they have not been measured. Because it is not possible to measure every variable that could possibly cause both variables, it is always possible that there is an unknown common-causal variable. For this reason, we are left with the basic limitation of correlational research: Correlation does not imply causation.

Experimental Research

The goal of much research in social psychology is to understand the causal relationships among variables, and for this we use experiments. Experimental research designs are research designs that include the manipulation of a given situation or experience for two or more groups of individuals who are initially created to be equivalent, followed by a measurement of the effect of that experience .

In an experimental research design, the variables of interest are called the independent variables and the dependent variables. The independent variable refers to the situation that is created by the experimenter through the experimental manipulations , and the dependent variable refers to the variable that is measured after the manipulations have occurred . In an experimental research design, the research hypothesis is that the manipulated independent variable (or variables) causes changes in the measured dependent variable (or variables). We can diagram the prediction like this, using an arrow that points in one direction to demonstrate the expected direction of causality:

viewing violence (independent variable) → aggressive behavior (dependent variable)

Consider an experiment conducted by Anderson and Dill (2000), which was designed to directly test the hypothesis that viewing violent video games would cause increased aggressive behavior. In this research, male and female undergraduates from Iowa State University were given a chance to play either a violent video game (Wolfenstein 3D) or a nonviolent video game (Myst). During the experimental session, the participants played the video game that they had been given for 15 minutes. Then, after the play, they participated in a competitive task with another student in which they had a chance to deliver blasts of white noise through the earphones of their opponent. The operational definition of the dependent variable (aggressive behavior) was the level and duration of noise delivered to the opponent. The design and the results of the experiment are shown in Figure 1.7 “An Experimental Research Design (After Anderson & Dill, 2000)” .

Figure 1.7 An Experimental Research Design (After Anderson & Dill, 2000)

Two advantages of the experimental research design are (a) an assurance that the independent variable (also known as the experimental manipulation) occurs prior to the measured dependent variable and (b) the creation of initial equivalence between the conditions of the experiment (in this case, by using random assignment to conditions).

Experimental designs have two very nice features. For one, they guarantee that the independent variable occurs prior to measuring the dependent variable. This eliminates the possibility of reverse causation. Second, the experimental manipulation allows ruling out the possibility of common-causal variables that cause both the independent variable and the dependent variable. In experimental designs, the influence of common-causal variables is controlled, and thus eliminated, by creating equivalence among the participants in each of the experimental conditions before the manipulation occurs.

The most common method of creating equivalence among the experimental conditions is through random assignment to conditions , which involves determining separately for each participant which condition he or she will experience through a random process, such as drawing numbers out of an envelope or using a website such as http://randomizer.org . Anderson and Dill first randomly assigned about 100 participants to each of their two groups. Let’s call them Group A and Group B. Because they used random assignment to conditions, they could be confident that before the experimental manipulation occurred , the students in Group A were, on average , equivalent to the students in Group B on every possible variable , including variables that are likely to be related to aggression, such as family, peers, hormone levels, and diet—and, in fact, everything else.

Then, after they had created initial equivalence, Anderson and Dill created the experimental manipulation—they had the participants in Group A play the violent video game and the participants in Group B the nonviolent video game. Then they compared the dependent variable (the white noise blasts) between the two groups and found that the students who had viewed the violent video game gave significantly longer noise blasts than did the students who had played the nonviolent game. Because they had created initial equivalence between the groups, when the researchers observed differences in the duration of white noise blasts between the two groups after the experimental manipulation, they could draw the conclusion that it was the independent variable (and not some other variable) that caused these differences. The idea is that the only thing that was different between the students in the two groups was which video game they had played.

When we create a situation in which the groups of participants are expected to be equivalent before the experiment begins, when we manipulate the independent variable before we measure the dependent variable, and when we change only the nature of independent variables between the conditions, then we can be confident that it is the independent variable that caused the differences in the dependent variable. Such experiments are said to have high internal validity , where internal validity refers to the confidence with which we can draw conclusions about the causal relationship between the variables .

Despite the advantage of determining causation, experimental research designs do have limitations. One is that the experiments are usually conducted in laboratory situations rather than in the everyday lives of people. Therefore, we do not know whether results that we find in a laboratory setting will necessarily hold up in everyday life. To counter this, in some cases experiments are conducted in everyday settings—for instance, in schools or other organizations . Such field experiments are difficult to conduct because they require a means of creating random assignment to conditions, and this is frequently not possible in natural settings.

A second and perhaps more important limitation of experimental research designs is that some of the most interesting and important social variables cannot be experimentally manipulated. If we want to study the influence of the size of a mob on the destructiveness of its behavior, or to compare the personality characteristics of people who join suicide cults with those of people who do not join suicide cults, these relationships must be assessed using correlational designs because it is simply not possible to manipulate mob size or cult membership.

Factorial Research Designs

Social psychological experiments are frequently designed to simultaneously study the effects of more than one independent variable on a dependent variable. Factorial research designs are experimental designs that have two or more independent variables . By using a factorial design, the scientist can study the influence of each variable on the dependent variable (known as the main effects of the variables) as well as how the variables work together to influence the dependent variable (known as the interaction between the variables). Factorial designs sometimes demonstrate the person by situation interaction.

In one such study, Brian Meier and his colleagues (Meier, Robinson, & Wilkowski, 2006) tested the hypothesis that exposure to aggression-related words would increase aggressive responses toward others. Although they did not directly manipulate the social context, they used a technique common in social psychology in which they primed (i.e., activated) thoughts relating to social settings. In their research, half of their participants were randomly assigned to see words relating to aggression and the other half were assigned to view neutral words that did not relate to aggression. The participants in the study also completed a measure of individual differences in agreeableness —a personality variable that assesses the extent to which the person sees themselves as compassionate, cooperative, and high on other-concern.

Then the research participants completed a task in which they thought they were competing with another student. Participants were told that they should press the space bar on the computer as soon as they heard a tone over their headphones, and the person who pressed the button the fastest would be the winner of the trial. Before the first trial, participants set the intensity of a blast of white noise that would be delivered to the loser of the trial. The participants could choose an intensity ranging from 0 (no noise) to the most aggressive response (10, or 105 decibels). In essence, participants controlled a “weapon” that could be used to blast the opponent with aversive noise, and this setting became the dependent variable. At this point, the experiment ended.

Figure 1.8 A Person-Situation Interaction

In this experiment by Meier, Robinson, and Wilkowski (2006) the independent variables are type of priming (aggression or neutral) and participant agreeableness (high or low). The dependent variable is the white noise level selected (a measure of aggression). The participants who were low in agreeableness became significantly more aggressive after seeing aggressive words, but those high in agreeableness did not.

As you can see in Figure 1.8 “A Person-Situation Interaction” , there was a person by situation interaction. Priming with aggression-related words (the situational variable) increased the noise levels selected by participants who were low on agreeableness, but priming did not increase aggression (in fact, it decreased it a bit) for students who were high on agreeableness. In this study, the social situation was important in creating aggression, but it had different effects for different people.

Deception in Social Psychology Experiments

You may have wondered whether the participants in the video game study and that we just discussed were told about the research hypothesis ahead of time. In fact, these experiments both used a cover story — a false statement of what the research was really about . The students in the video game study were not told that the study was about the effects of violent video games on aggression, but rather that it was an investigation of how people learn and develop skills at motor tasks like video games and how these skills affect other tasks, such as competitive games. The participants in the task performance study were not told that the research was about task performance . In some experiments, the researcher also makes use of an experimental confederate — a person who is actually part of the experimental team but who pretends to be another participant in the study . The confederate helps create the right “feel” of the study, making the cover story seem more real.

In many cases, it is not possible in social psychology experiments to tell the research participants about the real hypotheses in the study, and so cover stories or other types of deception may be used. You can imagine, for instance, that if a researcher wanted to study racial prejudice, he or she could not simply tell the participants that this was the topic of the research because people may not want to admit that they are prejudiced, even if they really are. Although the participants are always told—through the process of informed consent —as much as is possible about the study before the study begins, they may nevertheless sometimes be deceived to some extent. At the end of every research project, however, participants should always receive a complete debriefing in which all relevant information is given, including the real hypothesis, the nature of any deception used, and how the data are going to be used.

Interpreting Research

No matter how carefully it is conducted or what type of design is used, all research has limitations. Any given research project is conducted in only one setting and assesses only one or a few dependent variables. And any one study uses only one set of research participants. Social psychology research is sometimes criticized because it frequently uses college students from Western cultures as participants (Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). But relationships between variables are only really important if they can be expected to be found again when tested using other research designs, other operational definitions of the variables, other participants, and other experimenters, and in other times and settings.

External validity refers to the extent to which relationships can be expected to hold up when they are tested again in different ways and for different people . Science relies primarily upon replication —that is, the repeating of research —to study the external validity of research findings. Sometimes the original research is replicated exactly, but more often, replications involve using new operational definitions of the independent or dependent variables, or designs in which new conditions or variables are added to the original design. And to test whether a finding is limited to the particular participants used in a given research project, scientists may test the same hypotheses using people from different ages, backgrounds, or cultures. Replication allows scientists to test the external validity as well as the limitations of research findings.

In some cases, researchers may test their hypotheses, not by conducting their own study, but rather by looking at the results of many existing studies, using a meta-analysis — a statistical procedure in which the results of existing studies are combined to determine what conclusions can be drawn on the basis of all the studies considered together . For instance, in one meta-analysis, Anderson and Bushman (2001) found that across all the studies they could locate that included both children and adults, college students and people who were not in college, and people from a variety of different cultures, there was a clear positive correlation (about r = .30) between playing violent video games and acting aggressively. The summary information gained through a meta-analysis allows researchers to draw even clearer conclusions about the external validity of a research finding.

Figure 1.9 Some Important Aspects of the Scientific Approach

It is important to realize that the understanding of social behavior that we gain by conducting research is a slow, gradual, and cumulative process. The research findings of one scientist or one experiment do not stand alone—no one study “proves” a theory or a research hypothesis. Rather, research is designed to build on, add to, and expand the existing research that has been conducted by other scientists. That is why whenever a scientist decides to conduct research, he or she first reads journal articles and book chapters describing existing research in the domain and then designs his or her research on the basis of the prior findings. The result of this cumulative process is that over time, research findings are used to create a systematic set of knowledge about social psychology ( Figure 1.9 “Some Important Aspects of the Scientific Approach” ).

Key Takeaways

• Social psychologists study social behavior using an empirical approach. This allows them to discover results that could not have been reliably predicted ahead of time and that may violate our common sense and intuition.
• The variables that form the research hypothesis, known as conceptual variables, are assessed using measured variables by using, for instance, self-report, behavioral, or neuroimaging measures.
• Observational research is research that involves making observations of behavior and recording those observations in an objective manner. In some cases, it may be the only approach to studying behavior.
• Correlational and experimental research designs are based on developing falsifiable research hypotheses.
• Correlational research designs allow prediction but cannot be used to make statements about causality. Experimental research designs in which the independent variable is manipulated can be used to make statements about causality.
• Social psychological experiments are frequently factorial research designs in which the effects of more than one independent variable on a dependent variable are studied.
• All research has limitations, which is why scientists attempt to replicate their results using different measures, populations, and settings and to summarize those results using meta-analyses.

Exercises and Critical Thinking

1. Find journal articles that report observational, correlational, and experimental research designs. Specify the research design, the research hypothesis, and the conceptual and measured variables in each design. 2.

Consider the following variables that might have contributed to teach of the following events. For each one, (a) propose a research hypothesis in which the variable serves as an independent variable and (b) propose a research hypothesis in which the variable serves as a dependent variable.

• Liking another person
• Life satisfaction

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12 (5), 353–359.

Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (4), 772–790.

Bushman, B. J., & Huesmann, L. R. (2010). Aggression. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 833–863). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social exclusion. Science, 302 (5643), 290–292.

Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S. (1956). When prophecy fails: A social and psychological study of a modern group that predicted the destruction of the world . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293 (5537), 2105–2108.

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

Lieberman, M. D., Hariri, A., Jarcho, J. M., Eisenberger, N. I., & Bookheimer, S. Y. (2005). An fMRI investigation of race-related amygdala activity in African-American and Caucasian-American individuals. Nature Neuroscience, 8 (6), 720–722.

Lilienfeld, S. O. (2011, June 13). Public skepticism of psychology: Why many people perceive the study of human behavior as unscientific. American Psychologist. doi: 10.1037/a0023963

Meier, B. P., Robinson, M. D., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2006). Turning the other cheek: Agreeableness and the regulation of aggression-related crimes. Psychological Science, 17 (2), 136–142.

Morewedge, C. K., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2010). Perish the forethought: Premeditation engenders misperceptions of personal control. In R. R. Hassin, K. N. Ochsner, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Self-control in society, mind, and brain (pp. 260–278). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ochsner, K. N., Bunge, S. A., Gross, J. J., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2002). Rethinking feelings: An fMRI study of the cognitive regulation of emotion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14 (8), 1215–1229.

Preston, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). The eureka error: Inadvertent plagiarism by misattributions of effort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92 (4), 575–584.

Richeson, J. A., Baird, A. A., Gordon, H. L., Heatherton, T. F., Wyland, C. L., Trawalter, S., Richeson, J. A., Baird, A. A., Gordon, H. L., Heatherton, T. F., Wyland, C. L., Trawalter, S., et al.#8230.

Shelton, J. N. (2003). An fMRI investigation of the impact of interracial contact on executive function. Nature Neuroscience, 6 (12), 1323–1328.

Principles of Social Psychology Copyright © 2015 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Module 2: Research Methods in Social Psychology

Module Overview

In Module 2 we will address the fact that psychology is the scientific study of behavior and mental processes. We will do this by examining the steps of the scientific method and describing the five major designs used in psychological research. We will also differentiate between reliability and validity and their importance for measurement. Psychology has very clear ethical standards and procedures for scientific research. We will discuss these but also why they are needed. Finally, psychology as a field, but especially social psychology as a subfield, is faced with a replication crisis and issues with the generalizability of its findings. These will be explained to close out the module.

Module Outline

2.1. The Scientific Method

2.2. research designs used by social psychologists, 2.3. reliability and validity, 2.4. research ethics, 2.5. issues in social psychology.

Module Learning Outcomes

• Clarify what it means for psychology to be scientific by examining the steps of the scientific method and the three cardinal features of science.
• Outline the five main research methods used in psychology and clarify how they are utilized in social psychology.
• Differentiate and explain the concepts of reliability and validity.
• Describe key features of research ethics.
• Clarify the nature of the replication crisis in psychology and the importance of generalizability.

Section Learning Objectives

• Define scientific method.
• Outline and describe the steps of the scientific method, defining all key terms.
• Identify and clarify the importance of the three cardinal features of science.

In Module 1, we learned that psychology was the scientific study of behavior and mental processes. We will spend quite a lot of time on the behavior and mental processes part, but before we proceed, it is prudent to elaborate more on what makes psychology scientific. In fact, it is safe to say that most people not within our discipline or a sister science, would be surprised to learn that psychology utilizes the scientific method at all.

So what is the scientific method? Simply, the scientific method is a systematic method for gathering knowledge about the world around us. The key word here is that it is systematic meaning there is a set way to use it. What is that way? Well, depending on what source you look at it can include a varying number of steps. For our purposes, the following will be used:

Table 2.1: The Steps of the Scientific Method

0	Ask questions and be willing to wonder.	To study the world around us you have to wonder about it. This inquisitive nature is the hallmark of or our ability to assess claims made by others and make objective judgments that are independent of emotion and anecdote and based on hard evidence, and required to be a scientist. We might wonder why our friend chose to go to a technical school or the military over the four year university we went to, which falls under attribution theory in social psychology.
1	Generate a research question or identify a problem to investigate.	Through our wonderment about the world around us and why events occur as they do, we begin to ask questions that require further investigation to arrive at an answer. This investigation usually starts with a , or when we conduct a literature search through our university library or a search engine such as Google Scholar to see what questions have been investigated already and what answers have been found, so that we can identify or holes in this body of work. For instance, in relation to attribution theory, we would execute a search using those words as our parameters. Google Scholar and similar search engines, would look for attribution-theory in the key words authors identify when writing their abstract. The search would likely return quite a few articles at which time you would pick and choose which ones to read from the (the short summary of what the article is about; it is sort of like the description of a book found on the back cover or sometimes the inside cover of a book jacket). As you read articles you would try and figure out what has and has not been done to give your future research project direction.
2	Attempt to explain the phenomena we wish to study.	We now attempt to formulate an explanation of why the event occurs as it does. This systematic explanation of a phenomenon is a and our specific, testable prediction is the We will know if our theory is correct because we have formulated a hypothesis which we can now test. In the case of our example, we are not really creating a theory as one exists to explain why people do what they did (attribution theory) but we can formulate a specific, testable prediction in relation to it. You might examine whether or not your friend made his choice because he is genuinely interested in learning a trade or serving his country, or if he was pushed to do this by his parents. The former would be a dispositional or personal reason while the latter would be situational. You might focus your investigation on the effect parents can have on the career choices children make. Maybe you suppose if a child is securely attached to his parents he will follow their wishes as compared to a child who is insecurely attached. This question would actually blend social and developmental psychology.
3	Test the hypothesis.	It goes without saying that if we cannot test our hypothesis, then we cannot show whether our prediction is correct or not. Our plan of action of how we will go about testing the hypothesis is called our . In the planning stage, we will select the appropriate research method to answer our question/test our hypothesis. In this case that is to what extent parenting and attachment serve as situational factors affecting career choice decisions. We will discuss specific designs in the next section but for now, we could use a survey and observation.
4	Interpret the results.	With our research study done, we now examine the data to see if the pattern we predicted exists. We need to see if a cause and effect statement can be made, assuming our method allows for this inference. The statistics we use take on two forms. First, there are which provide a means of summarizing or describing data, and presenting the data in a usable form. You likely have heard of the mean or average, median, and mode. Along with standard deviation and variance, these are ways to describe our data. Second, there are which allow for the analysis of two or more sets of numerical data to determine the of the results. Significance is an indication of how confident we are that our results are due to our manipulation or design and not chance. Typically we set this significance at no higher than 5% due to chance.
5	Draw conclusions carefully.	We need to accurately interpret our results and not overstate our findings. To do this, we need to be aware of our biases and avoid emotional reasoning so that they do not cloud our judgment. How so? In our effort to stop a child from engaging in self-injurious behavior that could cause substantial harm or even death, we might overstate the success of our treatment method. In the case of our attribution study, we might not fudge our results like this but still need to make sure we interpret our statistical findings correctly.
6	Communicate our findings to the larger scientific community.	Once we have decided on whether our hypothesis is correct or not, we need to share this information with others so that they might comment critically on our methodology, statistical analyses, and conclusions. Sharing also allows for or repeating the study to confirm its results. Communication is accomplished via scientific journals, conferences, or newsletters released by many of the organizations mentioned in Section 1.4. As a note, there is actually a major issue in the field of psychology related to replication right now. We will discuss this in Section 2.5.

Science has at its root three cardinal features that we will see play out time and time again throughout this book, and as mentioned in Module 1. They are:

• Observation – In order to know about the world around us we must be able to see it firsthand. In relation to social psychology, we know our friend and his parents pretty well, and so in our time with them have observed the influence they exert on his life.
• Experimentation – To be able to make causal or cause and effect statements, we must be able to isolate variables. We have to manipulate one variable and see the effect of doing so on another variable. Experimentation is the primary method social psychology uses to test its hypotheses.
• Measurement – How do we know whether or not our friend is truly securely attached to his parents? Well, simply we measure attachment. In order to do that, we could give our friend a short questionnaire asking about his attachment pattern to his parents. For this questionnaire, let’s say we use a 5-point scale for all questions (with 1 meaning the question does not apply to 5 meaning it definitely is true or matters). If there were 10 questions, then our friend would have a score between 10 and 50. The 10 would come from him answering every question with a 1 and the 50 from answering every question with a 5. If you are not aware, there are four main styles of attachment (secure, anxious-ambivalent, avoidant, and disorganized-disoriented). We would have 2-3 questions assessing each of the 4 styles meaning that if we had 2 questions for that style, the score would range from 2 to 10. If 3 questions, the range would be 3 to 15. The higher the score, the more likely the person exhibits that style to the parent and our friend should only have a high score on one of the four styles if our scale correctly assesses attachment. We will discuss reliability and validity in Section 2.3.
• List the five main research methods used in psychology.
• Describe observational research, listing its advantages and disadvantages.
• Describe case study research, listing its advantages and disadvantages.
• Describe survey research, listing its advantages and disadvantages.
• Describe correlational research, listing its advantages and disadvantages.
• Describe experimental research, listing its advantages and disadvantages.
• State the utility and need for multimethod research.

Step 3 called on the scientist to test their hypothesis. Psychology as a discipline uses five main research designs. These include observational research, case studies, surveys, correlational designs, and experiments.

2.2.1. Observational Research

In terms of naturalistic observation , the scientist studies human or animal behavior in its natural environment which could include the home, school, or a forest. The researcher counts, measures, and rates behavior in a systematic way and at times uses multiple judges to ensure accuracy in how the behavior is being measured. This is called inter-rater reliability as you will see in Section 2.3. The advantage of this method is that you witness behavior as it occurs and it is not tainted by the experimenter. The disadvantage is that it could take a long time for the behavior to occur and if the researcher is detected then this may influence the behavior of those being observed. In the case of the latter, the behavior of the observed becomes artificial .

Laboratory observation involves observing people or animals in a laboratory setting. The researcher might want to know more about parent-child interactions and so brings a mother and her child into the lab to engage in preplanned tasks such as playing with toys, eating a meal, or the mother leaving the room for a short period of time. The advantage of this method over the naturalistic method is that the experimenter can use sophisticated equipment and videotape the session to examine it at a later time. The problem is that since the subjects know the experimenter is watching them, their behavior could become artificial from the start.

2.2.1.1. Example of an observational social psychology study. Griffiths (1991) studied the gambling behavior of adolescents by observing the clientele of 33 arcades in the UK. He used participant (when the researcher becomes an active participant in the group they are studying) and non-participant observation methodologies and found that adolescent gambling depended on the time of day and the time of year, and regular players had stereotypical behaviors and conformed to specific rules of etiquette. They played for fun, to win, to socialize, for excitement, and/or to escape.

2.2.2. Case Studies

Psychology can also utilize a detailed description of one person or a small group based on careful observation. This was the approach the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, took to develop his theories. The advantage of this method is that you arrive at a rich description of the behavior being investigated but the disadvantage is that what you are learning may be unrepresentative of the larger population and so lacks generalizability . Again, bear in mind that you are studying one person or a very small group. Can you possibly make conclusions about all people from just one or even five or ten? The other issue is that the case study is subject to the bias of the researcher in terms of what is included in the final write up and what is left out. Despite these limitations, case studies can lead us to novel ideas about the cause of behavior and help us to study unusual conditions that occur too infrequently to study with large sample sizes and in a systematic way. Though our field does make use of the case study methodology, social psychology does not frequently use the design.

2.2.2.1. Example of a case study from clinical psychology. In 1895, the book, Studies on Hysteria , was published by Josef Breuer (1842-1925) and Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), and marked the birth of psychoanalysis, though Freud did not use this actual term until a year later. The book published several case studies, including that of Anna O., born February 27, 1859 in Vienna to Jewish parents Siegmund and Recha Pappenheim, strict Orthodox adherents and considered millionaires at the time. Bertha, known in published case studies as Anna O., was expected to complete the formal education of a girl in the upper middle class which included foreign language, religion, horseback riding, needlepoint, and piano. She felt confined and suffocated in this life and took to a fantasy world she called her “private theater.” Anna also developed hysteria to include symptoms such as memory loss, paralysis, disturbed eye movements, reduced speech, nausea, and mental deterioration. Her symptoms appeared as she cared for her dying father and her mother called on Breuer to diagnose her condition (note that Freud never actually treated her). Hypnosis was used at first and relieved her symptoms. Breuer made daily visits and allowed her to share stories from her private theater which he came to call “talking cure” or “chimney sweeping.” Many of the stories she shared were actually thoughts or events she found troubling and reliving them helped to relieve or eliminate the symptoms. Breuer’s wife, Mathilde, became jealous of her husband’s relationship with the young girl, leading Breuer to terminate treatment in the June of 1882 before Anna had fully recovered. She relapsed and was admitted to Bellevue Sanatorium on July 1, eventually being released in October of the same year. With time, Anna O. did recover from her hysteria and went on to become a prominent member of the Jewish Community, involving herself in social work, volunteering at soup kitchens, and becoming ‘House Mother’ at an orphanage for Jewish girls in 1895. Bertha (Anna O.) became involved in the German Feminist movement, and in 1904 founded the League of Jewish Women. She published many short stories; a play called Women’s Rights , in which she criticized the economic and sexual exploitation of women, and wrote a book in 1900 called The Jewish Problem in Galicia , in which she blamed the poverty of the Jews of Eastern Europe on their lack of education. In 1935 she was diagnosed with a tumor and was summoned by the Gestapo in 1936 to explain anti-Hitler statements she had allegedly made. She died shortly after this interrogation on May 28, 1936. Freud considered the talking cure of Anna O. to be the origin of psychoanalytic therapy and what would come to be called the cathartic method.

To learn more about observational and case study designs, please take a look at our Research Methods in Psychology textbook by visiting:

https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/observational-research/

For more on Anna O., please see:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freuds-patients-serial/201201/bertha-pappenheim-1859-1936

2.2.3. Surveys/Self-Report Data

A survey is a questionnaire consisting of at least one scale with some number of questions which assess a psychological construct of interest such as parenting style, depression, locus of control, attitudes, or sensation seeking behavior. It may be administered by paper and pencil or computer. Surveys allow for the collection of large amounts of data quickly but the actual survey could be tedious for the participant and social desirability , when a participant answers questions dishonestly so that he/she is seen in a more favorable light, could be an issue. For instance, if you are asking high school students about their sexual activity they may not give genuine answers for fear that their parents will find out. Or if you wanted to know about prejudicial attitudes of a group of people, you could use the survey method. You could alternatively gather this information via an interview in a structured or unstructured fashion. Important to survey research is that you have random sampling or when everyone in the population has an equal chance of being included in the sample. This helps the survey to be representative of the population and in terms of key demographic variables such as gender, age, ethnicity, race, education level, and religious orientation.

To learn more about the survey research design, please take a look at our Research Methods in Psychology textbook by visiting:

https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/7-1-overview-of-survey-research/

2.2.4. Correlational Research

This research method examines the relationship between two variables or two groups of variables. A numerical measure of the strength of this relationship is derived, called the correlation coefficient , and can range from -1.00, a perfect inverse relationship meaning that as one variable goes up the other goes down, to 0 or no relationship at all, to +1.00 or a perfect relationship in which as one variable goes up or down so does the other. In terms of a negative correlation we might say that as a parent becomes more rigid, controlling, and cold, the attachment of the child to the parent goes down. In contrast, as a parent becomes warmer, more loving, and provides structure, the child becomes more attached. The advantage of correlational research is that you can correlate anything. The disadvantage is that you can correlate anything. Variables that really do not have any relationship to one another could be viewed as related. Yes. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage. For instance, we might correlate instances of making peanut butter and jelly sandwiches with someone we are attracted to sitting near us at lunch. Are the two related? Not likely, unless you make a really good PB&J but then the person is probably only interested in you for food and not companionship. The main issue here is that correlation does not allow you to make a causal statement.

To learn more about the correlational research design, please take a look at our Research Methods in Psychology textbook by visiting:

https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/correlational-research/

2.2.5. Example of a Study Using Survey and Correlational Designs

Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, and Knafo (2002) examined the relationship of the big five personality traits and values by administering the Schwartz (1992) Values survey, NEO-PI, a positive affect scale, and a single item assessing religiosity to introductory to psychology students at an Israeli university. For Extraversion, it was found that values that define activity, challenge, excitement, and pleasure as desirable goals in life (i.e. stimulation, hedonism, and achievement) were important while valuing self-denial or self-abnegation, expressed in traditional values, was antithetical.

For Openness, values that emphasize intellectual and emotional autonomy, acceptance and cultivation of diversity, and pursuit of novelty and change (i.e. universalism, self-direction, and stimulation) were important while conformity, security, and tradition values were incompatible. Benevolence, tradition, and to a lesser degree conformity, were important for Agreeableness while power and achievement correlated negatively. In terms of Conscientiousness (C), there was a positive correlation with security values as both share the goal of maintaining smooth interpersonal relations and avoiding disruption of social order and there was a negative correlation with stimulation, indicating an avoidance of risk as a motivator of C.

Finally, there was little association of values with the domain of Neuroticism but a closer inspection of the pattern of correlations with the facets of N suggests two components. First, the angry hostility and impulsiveness facets could be called extrapunitive since the negative emotion is directed outward and tends to correlate positively with hedonism and stimulation values and negatively with benevolence, tradition, conformity, and C values. Second, the anxiety, depression, self-consciousness, and vulnerability facets could be called intrapunitive since the negative emotion is directed inward. This component tends to correlate positively with tradition values and negatively with achievement and stimulation values.

2.2.6. Experiments

An experiment is a controlled test of a hypothesis in which a researcher manipulates one variable and measures its effect on another variable. The variable that is manipulated is called the independent variable (IV) and the one that is measured is called the dependent variable (DV) . A common feature of experiments is to have a control group that does not receive the treatment or is not manipulated and an experimental group that does receive the treatment or manipulation. If the experiment includes random assignment participants have an equal chance of being placed in the control or experimental group. The control group allows the researcher to make a comparison to the experimental group, making a causal statement possible, and stronger.

2.2.6.1. Example of an experiment.    Allison and Messick (1990) led subjects to believe they were the first of six group members to take points from a common resource pool and that they could take as many points as desired which could later be exchanged for cash. Three variables were experimentally manipulated. First, subjects in the low payoff condition were led to believe the pool was only 18 or 21 points in size whereas those in the high payoff condition were told the pool consisted of either 24 or 27 points. Second, the pools were divisible (18 and 24) or nondivisible (21 or 27). Third, half of the subjects were placed in the fate control condition and told that if the requests from the six group members exceeded the pool size, then no one could keep any points, while the other half were in the no fate control condition and told there would be no penalties for overconsumption of the pool.  Finally, data for a fourth variable, social values, was collected via questionnaire four weeks prior to participation. In all, the study employed a 2 (fate control) x 2 (payoff size) x 2 (divisibility) x 2 (social values) between-subjects factorial design.

Results showed that subjects took the least number of points from the resource pool when the resource was divisible, the payoffs were low, and there was no fate control. On the other hand, subjects took the most points when the resource was nondivisible, the payoffs were high, and subjects were noncooperative. To further demonstrate this point, Allison and Messick (1990) counted the number of inducements to which participants were exposed. This number ranged from 0 to 4 inducements. Subjects took between one-fifth and one-fourth when there were one or two inducements, took about one-third when there were three inducements, and about half of the pool when all four were present. They state that an equal division rule was used when there were no temptations to violate equality but as the number of temptations increased, subjects became progressively more likely to overconsume the pool. The authors conclude that the presence of competing cues/factors tends to invite the use of self-serving rules to include “First-come, first-served” and “People who get to go first take more.”

To learn more about the experimental research design, please take a look at our Research Methods in Psychology textbook by visiting:

https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/experiment-basics/

2.2.7. Multi-Method Research

As you have seen above, no single method alone is perfect. All have their strengths and limitations. As such, for the psychologist to provide the clearest picture of what is affecting behavior or mental processes, several of these approaches are typically employed at different stages of the research process. This is called multi-method research.

2.2.8. Archival Research

Another technique used by psychologists is called archival research or when the researcher analyzes data that has already been collected and for another purpose. For instance, a researcher may request data from high schools about a student’s GPA and their SAT and/or ACT score(s) and then obtain their four-year GPA from the university they attended. This can be used to make a prediction about success in college and which measure – GPA or standardized test score – is the better predictor.

2.2.9. Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis is a statistical procedure that allows a researcher to combine data from more than one study. For example, Shariff et al. (2015) published an article on religious priming and prosociality in Personality and Social Psychology Review . The authors used effect-size analyses, p- curve analyses, and adjustments for publication bias (no worries, you don’t have to understand any of that), to evaluate the robustness of four types of religious priming, how religion affects prosocial behavior, and whether religious-priming effects generalize to those who are loosely or not religious at all. Results were presented across 93 studies and 11,653 participants and showed that religious priming has robust effects in relation to a variety of outcome measures, prosocial behavior included. It did not affect non-religious people though.

2.2.10. Communicating Results

In scientific research, it is common practice to communicate the findings of our investigation. By reporting what we found in our study other researchers can critique our methodology and address our limitations. Publishing allows psychology to grow its knowledge base about human behavior. We can also see where gaps still exist. We move it into the public domain so others can read and comment on it. Scientists can also replicate what we did and possibly extend our work if it is published.

There are several ways to communicate our findings. We can do so at conferences in the form of posters or oral presentations, through newsletters from APA itself or one of its many divisions or other organizations, or through research journals and specifically scientific research articles. Published journal articles represent a form of communication between scientists and in them, the researchers describe how their work relates to previous research, how it replicates and/or extends this work, and what their work might mean theoretically.

Research articles begin with an abstract or a 150-250 word summary of the entire article. The purpose is to describe the experiment and allows the reader to make a decision about whether he or she wants to read it further. The abstract provides a statement of purpose, overview of the methods, main results, and a brief statement of the conclusion. Keywords are also given that allow for students and other researchers alike to find the article when doing a search.

The abstract is followed by four major sections as described:

• Introduction – The first section is designed to provide a summary of the current literature as it relates to your topic. It helps the reader to see how you arrived at your hypothesis and the design of your study. Essentially, it gives the logic behind the decisions you made. You also state the purpose and share your predictions or hypothesis.
• Method – Since replication is a required element of science, we must have a way to share information on our design and sample with readers. This is the essence of the method section and covers three major aspects of your study – your participants, materials or apparatus, and procedure. The reader needs to know who was in your study so that limitations related to generalizability of your findings can be identified and investigated in the future. You will also state your operational definition, describe any groups you used, random sampling or assignment procedures, information about how a scale was scored, etc. Think of the Method section as a cookbook. The participants are your ingredients, the materials or apparatus are whatever tools you will need, and the procedure is the instructions for how to bake the cake.
• Results – In this section you state the outcome of your experiment and whether they were statistically significant or not. You can also present tables and figures.
• Discussion – In this section you start by restating the main findings and hypothesis of the study. Next, you offer an interpretation of the findings and what their significance might be. Finally, you state strengths and limitations of the study which will allow you to propose future directions.

Whether you are writing a research paper for a class or preparing an article for publication, or reading a research article, the structure and function of a research article is the same. Understanding this will help you when reading social psychological articles.

• Clarify why reliability and validity are important.
• Define reliability and list and describe forms it takes.
• Define validity and list and describe forms it takes.

Recall that measurement involves the assignment of scores to an individual which are used to represent aspects of the individual such as how conscientious they are or their level of depression. Whether or not the scores actually represent the individual is what is in question. Cuttler (2017) says in her book Research Methods in Psychology, “Psychologists do not simply  assume  that their measures work. Instead, they collect data to demonstrate  that they work. If their research does not demonstrate that a measure works, they stop using it.” So how do they demonstrate that a measure works? This is where reliability and validity come in.

2.3.1. Reliability

First, reliability describes how consistent a measure is. It can be measured in terms of test-retest reliability , or how reliable the measure is across time, internal consistency , or the “consistency of people’s responses across the items on multiple-item measures,” (Cuttler, 2017), and finally inter-rater reliability , or how consistent different observers are when making judgments. In terms of inter-rater reliability, Cuttler (2017) writes, “Inter-rater reliability would also have been measured in Bandura’s Bobo doll study. In this case, the observers’ ratings of how many acts of aggression a particular child committed while playing with the Bobo doll should have been highly positively correlated.”

2.3.2. Validity

A measure is considered to be valid if its scores represent the variable it is said to measure. For instance, if a scale says it measures depression, and it does, then we can say it is valid. Validity can take many forms. First, face validity is “the extent to which a measurement method appears “on its face” to measure the construct of interest” (Cuttler, 2017). A scale purported to measure values should have questions about values such as benevolence, conformity, and self-direction, and not questions about depression or attitudes toward toilet paper.

Content validity is to what degree a measure covers the construct of interest. Cuttler (2017) says, “… consider that attitudes are usually defined as involving thoughts, feelings, and actions toward something. By this conceptual definition, a person has a positive attitude toward exercise to the extent that he or she thinks positive thoughts about exercising, feels good about exercising, and actually exercises.”

Oftentimes, we expect a person’s scores on one measure to be correlated with scores on another measure that we expect it to be related to, called criterion validity . For instance, consider parenting style and attachment. We would expect that if a person indicates on one scale that their father was authoritarian (or dictatorial) then attachment would be low or insecure. In contrast, if the mother was authoritative (or democratic) we would expect the child to show a secure attachment style.

As researchers we expect that our results will generalize from our sample to the larger population. This was the issue with case studies as the sample is too small to make conclusions about everyone. If our results do generalize from the circumstances under which our study was conducted to similar situations, then we can say our study has external validity . External validity is also affected by how real the research is. Two types of realism are possible. First, mundane realism occurs when the research setting closely resembles the real world setting. Experimental realism is the degree to which the experimental procedures that are used feel real to the participant. It does not matter if they really mirror real life but that they only appear real to the participant. If so, his or her behavior will be more natural and less artificial.

In contrast, a study is said to have good internal validity when we can confidently say that the effect on the dependent variable (the one that is measured) was due solely to our manipulation or the independent variable. A confound occurs when a factor other than the independent variable leads to changes in the dependent variable.

To learn more about reliability and validity, please visit: https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/reliability-and-validity-of-measurement/

• Exemplify instances of ethical misconduct in research.
• List and describe principles of research ethics.

Throughout this module so far, we have seen that it is important for researchers to understand the methods they are using. Equally important, they must understand and appreciate ethical standards in research. The American Psychological Association identifies high standards of ethics and conduct as one of its four main guiding principles or missions. To read about the other three, please visit https://www.apa.org/about/index.aspx . So why are ethical standards needed and what do they look like?

2.4.1. Milgram’s Study on Learning…or Not

Possibly, the one social psychologist students know about the most is Stanley Milgram, if not by name, then by his study on obedience using shock (Milgram, 1974). Essentially, two individuals came to each experimental session but only one of these two individuals was a participant. The other was what is called a confederate and is part of the study without the participant knowing. The confederate was asked to pick heads or tails and then a coin was flipped. As you might expect, the confederate always won and chose to be the learner . The “experimenter,” who was also a confederate, took him into one room where he was hooked up to wires and electrodes. This was done while the “teacher,” the actual participant, watched and added to the realism of what was being done. The teacher was then taken into an adjacent room where he was seated in front of a shock generator. The teacher was told it was his task to read a series of word pairs to the learner. Upon completion of reading the list, he would ask the learner one of the two words and it was the learner’s task to state what the other word in the pair was. If the learner incorrectly paired any of the words, he would be shocked. The shock generator started at 30 volts and increased in 15-volt increments up to 450 volts. The switches were labeled with terms such as “Slight shock,” “Moderate shock,” “Danger: Severe Shock,” and the final two switches were ominously labeled “XXX.”

As the experiment progressed, the teacher would hear the learner scream, holler, plead to be released, complain about a heart condition, or say nothing at all. When the learner stopped replying, the teacher would turn to the experimenter and ask what to do, to which the experimenter indicated for him to treat nonresponses as incorrect and shock the learner. Most participants asked the experimenter whether they should continue at various points in the experiment. The experimenter issued a series of commands to include, “Please continue,” “It is absolutely essential that you continue,” and “You have no other choice, you must go on.”

Any guesses as to what happened? What percent of the participants would you hypothesize actually shocked the learner to death? Milgram found that 65 percent of participants/teachers shocked the learner to the XXX switches which would have killed him. Why? They were told to do so. How do you think the participant felt when they realized that they could kill someone simply because they were told to do so?

Source: Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.

2.4.2. GO TO JAIL:  Go Directly to Jail. Do Not Pass Go. Do Not Collect $200

Early in the morning on Sunday, August 14, 1971, a Palo Alto, CA police car began arresting college students for committing armed robbery and burglary. Each suspect was arrested at his home, charged, read his Miranda rights, searched, handcuffed, and placed in the back of the police car as neighbors watched. At the station, the suspect was booked, read his rights again, and identified. He was then placed in a cell. How were these individuals chosen? Of course, they did not really commit the crimes they were charged with. The suspects had answered a newspaper ad requesting volunteers for a study of the psychological effects of prison life.

After screening individuals who applied to partake in the study, a final group of 24 were selected. These individuals did not have any psychological problems, criminal record, history of drug use, or mental disorder. They were paid $15 for their participation. The participants were divided into two groups through a flip of a coin. One half became the prison guards and the other half the prisoners. The prison was constructed by boarding up each end of a corridor in the basement of Stanford University’s Psychology building. This space was called “The Yard” and was the only place where the prisoners were permitted to walk, exercise, and eat. Prison cells were created by removing doors from some of the labs and replacing them with specially made doors with steel bars and cell numbers. A small closet was used for solitary confinement and was called “The Hole.” There were no clocks or windows in the prison and an intercom was used to make announcements to all prisoners. The suspects who were arrested were transported to “Stanford County Jail” to be processed. It was there they were greeted by the warden and told what the seriousness of their crime was. They were stripped searched and deloused, and the process was made to be intentionally degrading and humiliating. They were given uniforms with a prison ID number on it. This number became the only way they were referred to during their time. A heavy chain was placed on each prisoner’s right ankle which served the purpose of reminding them of how oppressive their environment was.

The guards were given no training and could do what they felt was necessary to maintain order and command the respect of the prisoners. They made their own set of rules and were supervised by the warden, who was played by another student at Stanford. Guards were dressed in identical uniforms, carried a whistle, held a billy club, and wore special mirror sun-glasses so no one could see their eyes or read their emotions. Three guards were assigned to each of the three hour shifts and supervised the nine prisoners. At 2:30 am they would wake the prisoners to take counts. This provided an opportunity to exert control and to get a feel for their role. Similarly, prisoners had to figure out how they were to act and at first, tried to maintain their independence. As you might expect, this led to confrontations between the prisoners and the guards resulting in the guards physically punishing the prisoners with push-ups.

The first day was relatively quiet, but on the second day, a rebellion broke out in which prisoners removed their caps, ripped off their numbers, and put their beds against their cell doors creating a barricade. The guards responded by obtaining a fire extinguisher and shooting a stream of the cold carbon dioxide solution at the prisoners. The cells were then broken into, the prisoners stripped, beds removed, ringleaders put into solitary confinement, and a program of harassment and intimidation of the remaining inmates began. Since 9 guards could not be on duty at all times to maintain order, a special “privilege cell” was established and the three prisoners least involved in the rebellion were allowed to stay in it. They were given their beds and uniforms back, could brush their teeth and take a bath, and were allowed to eat special food in the presence of the other six prisoners. This broke the solidarity among the prisoners.

Less than 36 hours after the study began a prisoner began showing signs of uncontrollable crying, acute emotional disturbance, rage, and disorganized thinking. Though his emotional problems were initially seen as an attempt to gain release which resulted in his being returned to the prison and used as an informant, the symptoms worsened and he had to be released from the study. Then there was the rumor of a mass escape by the prisoners which the guards worked to foil. When it was revealed that the prisoners were never actually going to attempt the prison break, the guards became very frustrated and made the prisoners engage in menial work, pushups, jumping jacks, and anything else humiliating that they could think of.

A Catholic priest was invited to evaluate how realistic the prison was. Each prisoner was interviewed individually and most introduced himself to the priest by his prison number and not his name. He offered to help them obtain a lawyer and some accepted. One prisoner was feeling ill (#819) and did not meet with the priest right away. When he did, he broke down and began to cry. He was quickly taken to another room and all prison garments taken off. While this occurred, the guards lined up the other prisoners and broke them out into a chant of “Prisoner #819 is a bad prisoner. Because of what Prisoner #819 did, my cell is a mess. Mr. Correctional Officer.” This further upset the prisoner and he was encouraged to leave, though he refused each time. He finally did agree to leave after the researcher (i.e. Zimbardo) told him what he was undergoing was just a research study and not really prison. The next day parole hearings were held and prisoners who felt they deserved to be paroled were interviewed one at a time. Most, when asked if they would give up the money they were making for their participation so they could leave, said yes.

In all, the study lasted just six days. Zimbardo noted that three types of guards emerged—tough but fair who followed the prison rules; “good guys” who never punished the prisoners and did them little favors; and finally those who were hostile, inventive in their employment of punishment, and who truly enjoyed the power they had. As for the prisoners, they coped with the events in the prison in different ways. Some fought back, others broke down emotionally, one developed a rash over his entire body, and some tried to be good prisoners and do all that the guards asked of them. No matter what strategy they used early on, by the end of the study they all were disintegrated as a group, and as individuals. The guards commanded blind obedience from all of the prisoners.

When asked later why he ended the study, Zimbardo cited two reasons. First, it became apparent that the guards were escalating their abuse of the prisoners in the middle of the night when they thought no one was watching. Second, Christina Maslach, a recent Stanford Ph.D. was asked to conduct interviews with the guards and prisoners and saw the prisoners being marched to the toilet with bags on their heads and legs chained together. She was outraged and questioned the study’s morality.

Source: http://www.prisonexp.org/

If you would like to learn more about the moral foundations of ethical research, please visit: https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/moral-foundations-of-ethical-research/

2.4.3. Ethical Guidelines

Due to these studies, and others, the American Psychological Association (APA) established guiding principles for conducting psychological research. The principles can be broken down in terms of when they should occur during the process of a person participating in the study.

2.4.3.1. Before participating. First, researchers must obtain informed consent or when the person agrees to participate because they are told what will happen to them. They are given information about any risks they face, or potential harm that could come to them, whether physical or psychological. They are also told about confidentiality or the person’s right not to be identified. Since most research is conducted with students taking introductory psychology courses, they have to be given the right to do something other than a research study to likely earn required credits for the class. This is called an alternative activity and could take the form of reading and summarizing a research article. The amount of time taken to do this should not exceed the amount of time the student would be expected to participate in a study.

2.4.3.2. While participating. Participants are afforded the ability to withdraw or the person’s right to exit the study if any discomfort is experienced.

2.4.3.3. After participating . Once their participation is over, participants should be debriefed or when the true purpose of the study is revealed and they are told where to go if they need assistance and how to reach the researcher if they have questions. So can researchers deceive participants, or intentionally withhold the true purpose of the study from them? According to the APA, a minimal amount of deception is allowed.

Human research must be approved by an Institutional Review Board or IRB. It is the IRB that will determine whether the researcher is providing enough information for the participant to give consent that is truly informed, if debriefing is adequate, and if any deception is allowed or not.

If you would like to learn more about how to use ethics in your research, please read: https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/putting-ethics-into-practice/

• Describe the replication crisis in psychology.
• Describe the issue with generalizability faced by social psychologists.

2.5.1. The Replication Crisis in Social Psychology

Today, the field of psychology faces what is called a replication crisis. Simply, published findings in psychology are not replicable, one of the hallmarks of science. Swiatkowski and Dompnier (2017) addressed this issue but with a focus on social psychology. They note that the field faces a confidence crisis due to events such as Diederick Staple intentionally fabricating data over a dozen years which lead to the retraction of over 50 published papers. They cite a study by John et al. (2012) in which 56% of 2,155 respondents admitted to collecting more data after discovering that the initial statistical test was not significant and 46% selectively reported studies that “worked” in a paper to be published. They also note that Nuijten et al. (2015) collected a sample of over 30,000 articles from the top 8 psychology journals and found that 1 in 8 possibly had an inconsistent p value that could have affected the conclusion the researchers drew.

So, how extensive is the issue? The Psychology Reproducibility Project was started to determine to what degree psychological effects from the literature could be replicated. One hundred published studies were attempted to be replicated by independent research teams and from different subfields in psychology. Only 39% of the findings were considered to be successfully replicated. For social psychology the results were worse. Only 25% were replicated.

Why might a study not replicate? Swiatkowski and Dompnier (2017) cite a few reasons. First, they believe that statistical power, or making the decision to not reject the null hypothesis (H0 – hypothesis stating that there is no effect or your hypothesis was not correct) when it is actually false, is an issue in social psychology. Many studies are underpowered as shown by small effect sizes observed in the field, which inflates the rate of false-positive findings and leads to unreplicable findings.

Second, they say that some researchers use “unjustifiable flexibility in data analysis, such as working with several undisclosed dependent variables, collecting more observations after initial hypothesis testing, stopping data collection earlier than planned because of a statistically significant predicted finding, controlling for gender effects a posterior, dropping experimental conditions, and so on” (pg. 114). Some also do undisclosed multiple testing without making adjustments, called p-hacking, or dropping observations to achieve a significance level, called cherry picking . Such practices could explain the high prevalence of false positives in social psychological research.

Third, some current publication standards may promote bad research practices in a few ways. Statistical significance has been set at p = 0.05 as the sine qua non condition for publication. According to Swiattkowski and Dompnier (2017) this leads to dichotomous thinking in terms of the “strict existence and non-existence of an effect” (pg. 115). Also, positive, statistically significant results are more likely to be published than negative, statistically, non-significant results which can be hard to interpret. This bias leads to a structural incentive to seek out positive results. Finally, the authors point out that current editorial standards show a preference for novelty or accepting studies which report new and original psychological effects. This reduces the importance of replications which lack prestige and inspire little interest among researchers. It should also be pointed out that there is a mentality of ‘Publish or perish’ at universities for full time faculty. Those who are prolific and publish often are rewarded with promotions, pay raises, tenure, or prestigious professorships. Also, studies that present highly novel and cool findings are showcased by the media.

The authors state, “In the long run, the lack of a viable falsification procedure seriously undermines the quality of scientific knowledge psychology produces. Without a way to build a cumulative net of well-tested theories and to abandon those that are false, social psychology risks ending up with a confused mixture of both instead”(pg. 117).

For more on this issue, check out the following articles

• 2016 Article in the Atlantic – https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/03/psychologys-replication-crisis-cant-be-wished-away/472272/
• 2018 Article in The Atlantic – https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/
• 2018 Article in the Washington Post – https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2018/08/27/researchers-replicate-just-13-of-21-social-science-experiments-published-in-top-journals/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2a05aff2d7de
• 2018 Article from Science News – https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-public/replication-crisis-psychology-science-studies-statistics

2.5.2. Generalizability

Earlier we discussed how researchers want to generalize their findings from the sample to the population, or from a small, representative group to everyone. The problem that plagues social psychology is who makes up our samples. Many social psychological studies are conducted with college students working for course credit (Sears, 1986). They represent what is called a convenience sample . Can we generalize from college students to the larger group?

Module Recap

In Module 1 we stated that psychology studied behavior and mental processes using the strict standards of science. In Module 2 we showed you how that is done via adoption of the scientific method and use of the research designs of observation, case study, surveys, correlation, and experiments. To make sure our measurement of a variable is sound, we need to have measures that are reliable and valid. And to give our research legitimacy we have to use clear ethical standards for research to include gaining informed consent from participants, telling them of the risks, giving them the right to withdraw, debriefing them, and using nothing more than minimal deception. Despite all this, psychology faces a crisis in which many studies are not replicating and findings from some social psychological research are not generalizable to the population.

This concludes Part I of the book. In Part II we will discuss how we think about ourselves and others. First, we will tackle the self and then move to the perception of others. Part II will conclude with a discussion of attitudes.

2nd edition

Share This Book

• Increase Font Size

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Research methods

Social perception.

• Interaction processes
• Small social groups
• Social organizations
• Personality
• Socialization
• Attitudes and beliefs
• Various specialties in social psychology

social psychology

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• BCcampus Open Publishing - Defining Social Psychology: History and Principles
• Simply Psychology - Social Psychology: Definition, Theories, Principles, & Examples
• Social Sciences LibreTexts - Social Psychology
• Maryville University - What is Social Psychology? Definition, Key Terms, and Examples
• University of Saskatchewan Pressbooks - An Introduction to the Science of Social Psychology
• Verywell Mind - An Overview of Social Psychology
• National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - Social psychology as a natural kind
• WebMD - What Is Social Psychology?
• Table Of Contents

social psychology , the scientific study of the behaviour of individuals in their social and cultural setting. Although the term may be taken to include the social activity of laboratory animals or those in the wild, the emphasis here is on human social behaviour.

Once a relatively speculative, intuitive enterprise, social psychology has become an active form of empirical investigation, the volume of research literature having risen rapidly after about 1925. Social psychologists now have a substantial volume of observation data covering a range of topics; the evidence remains loosely coordinated, however, and the field is beset by many different theories and conceptual schemes.

Early impetus in research came from the United States , and much work in other countries has followed U.S. tradition, though independent research efforts are being made elsewhere in the world. Social psychology is being actively pursued in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Scandinavia, Japan, and Russia. Most social psychologists are members of university departments of psychology ; others are in departments of sociology or work in such applied settings as industry and government.

Much research in social psychology has consisted of laboratory experiments on social behaviour, but this approach has been criticized in recent years as being too stultifying, artificial, and unrealistic. Much of the conceptual background of research in social psychology derives from other fields of psychology. While learning theory and psychoanalysis were once most influential, cognitive and linguistic approaches to research have become more popular; sociological contributions also have been influential.

Social psychologists are employed, or used as consultants, in setting up the social organization of businesses and psychiatric communities; some work to reduce conflict between ethnic groups, to design mass communications (e.g., advertising), and to advise on child rearing. They have helped in the treatment of mental patients and in the rehabilitation of convicts. Fundamental research in social psychology has been brought to the attention of the public through popular books and in the periodical press.

Laboratory experiments, often using volunteer students as subjects, omit many features of daily social life. Such experiments also have been criticized as being subject to bias, since the experimenters themselves may influence the results. Research workers who are concerned more with realistic settings than with rigour tend to leave the laboratory to perform field studies , as do those who come from sociological traditions. Field research, however, also can be experimental, and the effectiveness of each approach may be enhanced by the use of the methods of the other.

Many colleges and universities have a social-psychology laboratory equipped with observation rooms permitting one-way vision of subjects. Sound and video recorders and other devices record ongoing social interaction; computing equipment and other paraphernalia may be employed for specific studies.

Social behaviour is understood to be the product of innate biological factors resulting from evolution and of cultural factors that have emerged in the course of history. Early writers (e.g., William McDougall, a psychologist) emphasized instinctive roots of social behaviour. Later research and writing that tended to stress learning theory emphasized the influence of environmental factors in social behaviour. In the 1960s and ’70s field studies of nonhuman primates (such as baboons) drew attention to a number of similarities to human social behaviour, while research in cultural anthropology has shown that many features of human social behaviour are the same regardless of the culture studied. It is coming to be a widely accepted view that human social behaviour seems to have a biological basis and to reflect the operation of evolution as in the case of patterns of emotional expression and other nonverbal communication , the structure of language, and aspects of group behaviour .

Much research has been done on socialization (the process of learning from a culture), and learning has been found to interact with innate factors. An innate capacity for language, for example, makes it possible to learn a local language. Culture consists of patterns of behaviour and ways of organizing experience; it develops over the course of history as new elements are introduced from a variety of sources, only some of which are retained. Many aspects of social behaviour can be partly accounted for in terms of their history.

In some laboratory experiments, subjects watch stills or moving pictures, listen to tape recordings, or directly observe or interact with another person. Subjects may be asked to reveal their social perception of such persons on rating scales, to give free descriptions of them, or to respond evaluatively in other ways. Although such studies can produce results that do not correspond to those in real-life settings, they can provide useful information on the perception of personality , social roles, emotions, and interpersonal attitudes or responses during ongoing social interaction .

Research has been directed to how social perception is affected by cultural stereotypes (e.g., racial prejudice ), by inferences from different verbal and nonverbal cues, by the pattern of perceptual activity during social interaction, and by the general personality structure of the perceiver. The work has found practical application in the assessment of employees and of candidates for positions.

There also has been research on the ways in which perception of objects and people is affected by social factors such as culture and group membership. It has been shown, for example, how coins, colours, and other physical cues are categorized differently by people as a result of their group membership and of the categories provided by language. Other studies have shown the effect of group pressures on perception.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

11.4: Research Methods in Social Psychology

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 10665

• https://nobaproject.com/ via The Noba Project

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Kwantlen Polytechnic University

Social psychologists are interested in the ways that other people affect thought, emotion, and behavior. To explore these concepts requires special research methods. Following a brief overview of traditional research designs, this module introduces how complex experimental designs, field experiments, naturalistic observation, experience sampling techniques, survey research, subtle and nonconscious techniques such as priming, and archival research and the use of big data may each be adapted to address social psychological questions. This module also discusses the importance of obtaining a representative sample along with some ethical considerations that social psychologists face.

learning objectives

• Describe the key features of basic and complex experimental designs.
• Describe the key features of field experiments, naturalistic observation, and experience sampling techniques.
• Describe survey research and explain the importance of obtaining a representative sample.
• Describe the implicit association test and the use of priming.
• Describe use of archival research techniques.
• Explain five principles of ethical research that most concern social psychologists.

Introduction

Are you passionate about cycling? Norman Triplett certainly was. At the turn of last century he studied the lap times of cycling races and noticed a striking fact: riding in competitive races appeared to improve riders’ times by about 20-30 seconds every mile compared to when they rode the same courses alone. Triplett suspected that the riders’ enhanced performance could not be explained simply by the slipstream caused by other cyclists blocking the wind. To test his hunch, he designed what is widely described as the first experimental study in social psychology (published in 1898!)—in this case, having children reel in a length of fishing line as fast as they could. The children were tested alone, then again when paired with another child. The results? The children who performed the task in the presence of others out-reeled those that did so alone.

Although Triplett’s research fell short of contemporary standards of scientific rigor (e.g., he eyeballed the data instead of measuring performance precisely; Stroebe, 2012), we now know that this effect, referred to as “ social facilitation ,” is reliable—performance on simple or well-rehearsed tasks tends to be enhanced when we are in the presence of others (even when we are not competing against them). To put it another way, the next time you think about showing off your pool-playing skills on a date, the odds are you’ll play better than when you practice by yourself. (If you haven’t practiced, maybe you should watch a movie instead!)

Research Methods in Social Psychology

One of the things Triplett’s early experiment illustrated is scientists’ reliance on systematic observation over opinion, or anecdotal evidence . The scientific method usually begins with observing the world around us (e.g., results of cycling competitions) and thinking of an interesting question (e.g., Why do cyclists perform better in groups?). The next step involves generating a specific testable prediction, or hypothesis (e.g., performance on simple tasks is enhanced in the presence of others). Next, scientists must operationalize the variables they are studying. This means they must figure out a way to define and measure abstract concepts. For example, the phrase “perform better” could mean different things in different situations; in Triplett’s experiment it referred to the amount of time (measured with a stopwatch) it took to wind a fishing reel. Similarly, “in the presence of others” in this case was operationalized as another child winding a fishing reel at the same time in the same room. Creating specific operational definitions like this allows scientists to precisely manipulate the independent variable , or “cause” (the presence of others), and to measure the dependent variable , or “effect” (performance)—in other words, to collect data. Clearly described operational definitions also help reveal possible limitations to studies (e.g., Triplett’s study did not investigate the impact of another child in the room who was not also winding a fishing reel) and help later researchers replicate them precisely.

Laboratory Research

As you can see, social psychologists have always relied on carefully designed laboratory environments to run experiments where they can closely control situations and manipulate variables (see the NOBA module on Research Designs for an overview of traditional methods). However, in the decades since Triplett discovered social facilitation, a wide range of methods and techniques have been devised, uniquely suited to demystifying the mechanics of how we relate to and influence one another. This module provides an introduction to the use of complex laboratory experiments, field experiments, naturalistic observation, survey research, nonconscious techniques, and archival research, as well as more recent methods that harness the power of technology and large data sets, to study the broad range of topics that fall within the domain of social psychology. At the end of this module we will also consider some of the key ethical principles that govern research in this diverse field.

The use of complex experimental designs , with multiple independent and/or dependent variables, has grown increasingly popular because they permit researchers to study both the individual and joint effects of several factors on a range of related situations. Moreover, thanks to technological advancements and the growth of social neuroscience , an increasing number of researchers now integrate biological markers (e.g., hormones) or use neuroimaging techniques (e.g., fMRI) in their research designs to better understand the biological mechanisms that underlie social processes.

We can dissect the fascinating research of Dov Cohen and his colleagues (1996) on “culture of honor” to provide insights into complex lab studies. A culture of honor is one that emphasizes personal or family reputation. In a series of lab studies, the Cohen research team invited dozens of university students into the lab to see how they responded to aggression. Half were from the Southern United States (a culture of honor) and half were from the Northern United States (not a culture of honor; this type of setup constitutes a participant variable of two levels). Region of origin was independent variable #1. Participants also provided a saliva sample immediately upon arriving at the lab; (they were given a cover story about how their blood sugar levels would be monitored over a series of tasks).

The participants completed a brief questionnaire and were then sent down a narrow corridor to drop it off on a table. En route, they encountered a confederate at an open file cabinet who pushed the drawer in to let them pass. When the participant returned a few seconds later, the confederate, who had re-opened the file drawer, slammed it shut and bumped into the participant with his shoulder, muttering “asshole” before walking away. In a manipulation of an independent variable—in this case, the insult—some of the participants were insulted publicly (in view of two other confederates pretending to be doing homework) while others were insulted privately (no one else was around). In a third condition—the control group—participants experienced a modified procedure in which they were not insulted at all.

Although this is a fairly elaborate procedure on its face, what is particularly impressive is the number of dependent variables the researchers were able to measure. First, in the public insult condition, the two additional confederates (who observed the interaction, pretending to do homework) rated the participants’ emotional reaction (e.g., anger, amusement, etc.) to being bumped into and insulted. Second, upon returning to the lab, participants in all three conditions were told they would later undergo electric shocks as part of a stress test, and were asked how much of a shock they would be willing to receive (between 10 volts and 250 volts). This decision was made in front of two confederates who had already chosen shock levels of 75 and 25 volts, presumably providing an opportunity for participants to publicly demonstrate their toughness. Third, across all conditions, the participants rated the likelihood of a variety of ambiguously provocative scenarios (e.g., one driver cutting another driver off) escalating into a fight or verbal argument. And fourth, in one of the studies, participants provided saliva samples, one right after returning to the lab, and a final one after completing the questionnaire with the ambiguous scenarios. Later, all three saliva samples were tested for levels of cortisol (a hormone associated with stress) and testosterone (a hormone associated with aggression).

The results showed that people from the Northern United States were far more likely to laugh off the incident (only 35% having anger ratings as high as or higher than amusement ratings), whereas the opposite was true for people from the South (85% of whom had anger ratings as high as or higher than amusement ratings). Also, only those from the South experienced significant increases in cortisol and testosterone following the insult (with no difference between the public and private insult conditions). Finally, no regional differences emerged in the interpretation of the ambiguous scenarios; however, the participants from the South were more likely to choose to receive a greater shock in the presence of the two confederates.

Field Research

Because social psychology is primarily focused on the social context—groups, families, cultures—researchers commonly leave the laboratory to collect data on life as it is actually lived. To do so, they use a variation of the laboratory experiment, called a field experiment . A field experiment is similar to a lab experiment except it uses real-world situations, such as people shopping at a grocery store. One of the major differences between field experiments and laboratory experiments is that the people in field experiments do not know they are participating in research, so—in theory—they will act more naturally. In a classic example from 1972, Alice Isen and Paula Levin wanted to explore the ways emotions affect helping behavior. To investigate this they observed the behavior of people at pay phones (I know! Pay phones! ). Half of the unsuspecting participants (determined by random assignment ) found a dime planted by researchers (I know! A dime! ) in the coin slot, while the other half did not. Presumably, finding a dime felt surprising and lucky and gave people a small jolt of happiness. Immediately after the unsuspecting participant left the phone booth, a confederate walked by and dropped a stack of papers. Almost 100% of those who found a dime helped to pick up the papers. And what about those who didn’t find a dime? Only 1 out 25 of them bothered to help.

In cases where it’s not practical or ethical to randomly assign participants to different experimental conditions, we can use naturalistic observation —unobtrusively watching people as they go about their lives. Consider, for example, a classic demonstration of the “ basking in reflected glory ” phenomenon: Robert Cialdini and his colleagues used naturalistic observation at seven universities to confirm that students are significantly more likely to wear clothing bearing the school name or logo on days following wins (vs. draws or losses) by the school’s varsity football team (Cialdini et al., 1976). In another study, by Jenny Radesky and her colleagues (2014), 40 out of 55 observations of caregivers eating at fast food restaurants with children involved a caregiver using a mobile device. The researchers also noted that caregivers who were most absorbed in their device tended to ignore the children’s behavior, followed by scolding, issuing repeated instructions, or using physical responses, such as kicking the children’s feet or pushing away their hands.

A group of techniques collectively referred to as experience sampling methods represent yet another way of conducting naturalistic observation, often by harnessing the power of technology. In some cases, participants are notified several times during the day by a pager, wristwatch, or a smartphone app to record data (e.g., by responding to a brief survey or scale on their smartphone, or in a diary). For example, in a study by Reed Larson and his colleagues (1994), mothers and fathers carried pagers for one week and reported their emotional states when beeped at random times during their daily activities at work or at home. The results showed that mothers reported experiencing more positive emotional states when away from home (including at work), whereas fathers showed the reverse pattern. A more recently developed technique, known as the electronically activated recorder , or EAR, does not even require participants to stop what they are doing to record their thoughts or feelings; instead, a small portable audio recorder or smartphone app is used to automatically record brief snippets of participants’ conversations throughout the day for later coding and analysis. For a more in-depth description of the EAR technique and other experience-sampling methods, see the NOBA module on Conducting Psychology Research in the Real World.

Survey Research

In this diverse world, survey research offers itself as an invaluable tool for social psychologists to study individual and group differences in people’s feelings, attitudes, or behaviors. For example, the World Values Survey II was based on large representative samples of 19 countries and allowed researchers to determine that the relationship between income and subjective well-being was stronger in poorer countries (Diener & Oishi, 2000). In other words, an increase in income has a much larger impact on your life satisfaction if you live in Nigeria than if you live in Canada. In another example, a nationally-representative survey in Germany with 16,000 respondents revealed that holding cynical beliefs is related to lower income (e.g., between 2003-2012 the income of the least cynical individuals increased by $300 per month, whereas the income of the most cynical individuals did not increase at all). Furthermore, survey data collected from 41 countries revealed that this negative correlation between cynicism and income is especially strong in countries where people in general engage in more altruistic behavior and tend not to be very cynical (Stavrova & Ehlebracht, 2016).

Of course, obtaining large, cross-cultural, and representative samples has become far easier since the advent of the internet and the proliferation of web-based survey platforms—such as Qualtrics—and participant recruitment platforms—such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. And although some researchers harbor doubts about the representativeness of online samples, studies have shown that internet samples are in many ways more diverse and representative than samples recruited from human subject pools (e.g., with respect to gender; Gosling et al., 2004). Online samples also compare favorably with traditional samples on attentiveness while completing the survey, reliability of data, and proportion of non-respondents (Paolacci et al., 2010).

Subtle/Nonconscious Research Methods

The methods we have considered thus far—field experiments, naturalistic observation, and surveys—work well when the thoughts, feelings, or behaviors being investigated are conscious and directly or indirectly observable. However, social psychologists often wish to measure or manipulate elements that are involuntary or nonconscious, such as when studying prejudicial attitudes people may be unaware of or embarrassed by. A good example of a technique that was developed to measure people’s nonconscious (and often ugly) attitudes is known as the implicit association test (IAT) (Greenwald et al., 1998). This computer-based task requires participants to sort a series of stimuli (as rapidly and accurately as possible) into simple and combined categories while their reaction time is measured (in milliseconds). For example, an IAT might begin with participants sorting the names of relatives (such as “Niece” or “Grandfather”) into the categories “Male” and “Female,” followed by a round of sorting the names of disciplines (such as “Chemistry” or “English”) into the categories “Arts” and “Science.” A third round might combine the earlier two by requiring participants to sort stimuli into either “Male or Science” or “Female and Arts” before the fourth round switches the combinations to “Female or Science” and “Male and Arts.” If across all of the trials a person is quicker at accurately sorting incoming stimuli into the compound category “Male or Science” than into “Female or Science,” the authors of the IAT suggest that the participant likely has a stronger association between males and science than between females and science. Incredibly, this specific gender-science IAT has been completed by more than half a million participants across 34 countries, about 70% of whom show an implicit stereotype associating science with males more than with females (Nosek et al., 2009). What’s more, when the data are grouped by country, national differences in implicit stereotypes predict national differences in the achievement gap between boys and girls in science and math. Our automatic associations, apparently, carry serious societal consequences.

Another nonconscious technique, known as priming , is often used to subtly manipulate behavior by activating or making more accessible certain concepts or beliefs. Consider the fascinating example of terror management theory (TMT) , whose authors believe that human beings are (unconsciously) terrified of their mortality (i.e., the fact that, some day, we will all die; Pyszczynski et al., 2003). According to TMT, in order to cope with this unpleasant reality (and the possibility that our lives are ultimately essentially meaningless), we cling firmly to systems of cultural and religious beliefs that give our lives meaning and purpose. If this hypothesis is correct, one straightforward prediction would be that people should cling even more firmly to their cultural beliefs when they are subtly reminded of their own mortality.

In one of the earliest tests of this hypothesis, actual municipal court judges in Arizona were asked to set a bond for an alleged prostitute immediately after completing a brief questionnaire. For half of the judges the questionnaire ended with questions about their thoughts and feelings regarding the prospect of their own death. Incredibly, judges in the experimental group that were primed with thoughts about their mortality set a significantly higher bond than those in the control group ($455 vs. $50!)—presumably because they were especially motivated to defend their belief system in the face of a violation of the law (Rosenblatt et al., 1989). Although the judges consciously completed the survey, what makes this a study of priming is that the second task (sentencing) was unrelated, so any influence of the survey on their later judgments would have been nonconscious. Similar results have been found in TMT studies in which participants were primed to think about death even more subtly, such as by having them complete questionnaires just before or after they passed a funeral home (Pyszczynski et al., 1996).

To verify that the subtle manipulation (e.g., questions about one’s death) has the intended effect (activating death-related thoughts), priming studies like these often include a manipulation check following the introduction of a prime. For example, right after being primed, participants in a TMT study might be given a word fragment task in which they have to complete words such as COFF_ _ or SK _ _ L. As you might imagine, participants in the mortality-primed experimental group typically complete these fragments as COFFIN and SKULL, whereas participants in the control group complete them as COFFEE and SKILL.

The use of priming to unwittingly influence behavior, known as social or behavioral priming (Ferguson & Mann, 2014), has been at the center of the recent “replication crisis” in Psychology (see the NOBA module on replication). Whereas earlier studies showed, for example, that priming people to think about old age makes them walk slower (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996), that priming them to think about a university professor boosts performance on a trivia game (Dijksterhuis & van Knippenberg, 1998), and that reminding them of mating motives (e.g., sex) makes them more willing to engage in risky behavior (Greitemeyer, Kastenmüller, & Fischer, 2013), several recent efforts to replicate these findings have failed (e.g., Harris et al., 2013; Shanks et al., 2013). Such failures to replicate findings highlight the need to ensure that both the original studies and replications are carefully designed, have adequate sample sizes, and that researchers pre-register their hypotheses and openly share their results—whether these support the initial hypothesis or not.

Archival Research

Imagine that a researcher wants to investigate how the presence of passengers in a car affects drivers’ performance. She could ask research participants to respond to questions about their own driving habits. Alternately, she might be able to access police records of the number of speeding tickets issued by automatic camera devices, then count the number of solo drivers versus those with passengers. This would be an example of archival research . The examination of archives, statistics, and other records such as speeches, letters, or even tweets, provides yet another window into social psychology. Although this method is typically used as a type of correlational research design—due to the lack of control over the relevant variables—archival research shares the higher ecological validity of naturalistic observation. That is, the observations are conducted outside the laboratory and represent real world behaviors. Moreover, because the archives being examined can be collected at any time and from many sources, this technique is especially flexible and often involves less expenditure of time and other resources during data collection.

Social psychologists have used archival research to test a wide variety of hypotheses using real-world data. For example, analyses of major league baseball games played during the 1986, 1987, and 1988 seasons showed that baseball pitchers were more likely to hit batters with a pitch on hot days (Reifman et al., 1991). Another study compared records of race-based lynching in the United States between 1882-1930 to the inflation-adjusted price of cotton during that time (a key indicator of the Deep South’s economic health), demonstrating a significant negative correlation between these variables. Simply put, there were significantly more lynchings when the price of cotton stayed flat, and fewer lynchings when the price of cotton rose (Beck & Tolnay, 1990; Hovland & Sears, 1940). This suggests that race-based violence is associated with the health of the economy.

More recently, analyses of social media posts have provided social psychologists with extremely large sets of data (“ big data ”) to test creative hypotheses. In an example of research on attitudes about vaccinations, Mitra and her colleagues (2016) collected over 3 million tweets sent by more than 32 thousand users over four years. Interestingly, they found that those who held (and tweeted) anti-vaccination attitudes were also more likely to tweet about their mistrust of government and beliefs in government conspiracies. Similarly, Eichstaedt and his colleagues (2015) used the language of 826 million tweets to predict community-level mortality rates from heart disease. That’s right: more anger-related words and fewer positive-emotion words in tweets predicted higher rates of heart disease.

In a more controversial example, researchers at Facebook attempted to test whether emotional contagion—the transfer of emotional states from one person to another—would occur if Facebook manipulated the content that showed up in its users’ News Feed (Kramer et al., 2014). And it did. When friends’ posts with positive expressions were concealed, users wrote slightly fewer positive posts (e.g., “Loving my new phone!”). Conversely, when posts with negative expressions were hidden, users wrote slightly fewer negative posts (e.g., “Got to go to work. Ugh.”). This suggests that people’s positivity or negativity can impact their social circles.

The controversial part of this study—which included 689,003 Facebook users and involved the analysis of over 3 million posts made over just one week—was the fact that Facebook did not explicitly request permission from users to participate. Instead, Facebook relied on the fine print in their data-use policy. And, although academic researchers who collaborated with Facebook on this study applied for ethical approval from their institutional review board (IRB), they apparently only did so after data collection was complete, raising further questions about the ethicality of the study and highlighting concerns about the ability of large, profit-driven corporations to subtly manipulate people’s social lives and choices.

Research Issues in Social Psychology

The question of representativeness.

Along with our counterparts in the other areas of psychology, social psychologists have been guilty of largely recruiting samples of convenience from the thin slice of humanity—students—found at universities and colleges (Sears, 1986). This presents a problem when trying to assess the social mechanics of the public at large. Aside from being an overrepresentation of young, middle-class Caucasians, college students may also be more compliant and more susceptible to attitude change, have less stable personality traits and interpersonal relationships, and possess stronger cognitive skills than samples reflecting a wider range of age and experience (Peterson & Merunka, 2014; Visser, Krosnick, & Lavrakas, 2000). Put simply, these traditional samples (college students) may not be sufficiently representative of the broader population. Furthermore, considering that 96% of participants in psychology studies come from western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic countries (so-called WEIRD cultures ; Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010), and that the majority of these are also psychology students , the question of non-representativeness becomes even more serious.

Of course, when studying a basic cognitive process (like working memory capacity) or an aspect of social behavior that appears to be fairly universal (e.g., even cockroaches exhibit social facilitation!), a non-representative sample may not be a big deal. However, over time research has repeatedly demonstrated the important role that individual differences (e.g., personality traits, cognitive abilities, etc.) and culture (e.g., individualism vs. collectivism) play in shaping social behavior. For instance, even if we only consider a tiny sample of research on aggression, we know that narcissists are more likely to respond to criticism with aggression (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998); conservatives, who have a low tolerance for uncertainty, are more likely to prefer aggressive actions against those considered to be “outsiders” (de Zavala et al., 2010); countries where men hold the bulk of power in society have higher rates of physical aggression directed against female partners (Archer, 2006); and males from the southern part of the United States are more likely to react with aggression following an insult (Cohen et al., 1996).

Ethics in Social Psychological Research

For better or worse (but probably for worse), when we think about the most unethical studies in psychology, we think about social psychology. Imagine, for example, encouraging people to deliver what they believe to be a dangerous electric shock to a stranger (with bloodcurdling screams for added effect!). This is considered a “classic” study in social psychology. Or, how about having students play the role of prison guards, deliberately and sadistically abusing other students in the role of prison inmates. Yep, social psychology too. Of course, both Stanley Milgram’s (1963) experiments on obedience to authority and the Stanford prison study (Haney et al., 1973) would be considered unethical by today’s standards, which have progressed with our understanding of the field. Today, we follow a series of guidelines and receive prior approval from our institutional research boards before beginning such experiments. Among the most important principles are the following:

• Informed consent: In general, people should know when they are involved in research, and understand what will happen to them during the study (at least in general terms that do not give away the hypothesis). They are then given the choice to participate, along with the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time. This is precisely why the Facebook emotional contagion study discussed earlier is considered ethically questionable. Still, it’s important to note that certain kinds of methods—such as naturalistic observation in public spaces, or archival research based on public records—do not require obtaining informed consent.
• Privacy: Although it is permissible to observe people’s actions in public—even without them knowing—researchers cannot violate their privacy by observing them in restrooms or other private spaces without their knowledge and consent. Researchers also may not identify individual participants in their research reports (we typically report only group means and other statistics). With online data collection becoming increasingly popular, researchers also have to be mindful that they follow local data privacy laws, collect only the data that they really need (e.g., avoiding including unnecessary questions in surveys), strictly restrict access to the raw data, and have a plan in place to securely destroy the data after it is no longer needed.
• Risks and Benefits: People who participate in psychological studies should be exposed to risk only if they fully understand the risks and only if the likely benefits clearly outweigh those risks. The Stanford prison study is a notorious example of a failure to meet this obligation. It was planned to run for two weeks but had to be shut down after only six days because of the abuse suffered by the “prison inmates.” But even less extreme cases, such as researchers wishing to investigate implicit prejudice using the IAT, need to be considerate of the consequences of providing feedback to participants about their nonconscious biases. Similarly, any manipulations that could potentially provoke serious emotional reactions (e.g., the culture of honor study described above) or relatively permanent changes in people’s beliefs or behaviors (e.g., attitudes towards recycling) need to be carefully reviewed by the IRB.
• Deception: Social psychologists sometimes need to deceive participants (e.g., using a cover story) to avoid demand characteristics by hiding the true nature of the study. This is typically done to prevent participants from modifying their behavior in unnatural ways, especially in laboratory or field experiments. For example, when Milgram recruited participants for his experiments on obedience to authority, he described it as being a study of the effects of punishment on memory! Deception is typically only permitted (a) when the benefits of the study outweigh the risks, (b) participants are not reasonably expected to be harmed, (c) the research question cannot be answered without the use of deception, and (d) participants are informed about the deception as soon as possible, usually through debriefing.
• Debriefing: This is the process of informing research participants as soon as possible of the purpose of the study, revealing any deceptions, and correcting any misconceptions they might have as a result of participating. Debriefing also involves minimizing harm that might have occurred. For example, an experiment examining the effects of sad moods on charitable behavior might involve inducing a sad mood in participants by having them think sad thoughts, watch a sad video, or listen to sad music. Debriefing would therefore be the time to return participants’ moods to normal by having them think happy thoughts, watch a happy video, or listen to happy music.

As an immensely social species, we affect and influence each other in many ways, particularly through our interactions and cultural expectations, both conscious and nonconscious. The study of social psychology examines much of the business of our everyday lives, including our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors we are unaware or ashamed of. The desire to carefully and precisely study these topics, together with advances in technology, has led to the development of many creative techniques that allow researchers to explore the mechanics of how we relate to one another. Consider this your invitation to join the investigation.

Outside Resources

Discussion questions.

• What are some pros and cons of experimental research, field research, and archival research?
• How would you feel if you learned that you had been a participant in a naturalistic observation study (without explicitly providing your consent)? How would you feel if you learned during a debriefing procedure that you have a stronger association between the concept of violence and members of visible minorities? Can you think of other examples of when following principles of ethical research create challenging situations?
• Can you think of an attitude (other than those related to prejudice) that would be difficult or impossible to measure by asking people directly?
• What do you think is the difference between a manipulation check and a dependent variable?
• Archer, J. (2006). Cross-cultural differences in physical aggression between partners: A social-role analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review , 10(2), 133-153. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_3
• Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71(2), 230-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230
• Beck, E. M., & Tolnay, S. E. (1990). The killing fields of the Deep South: The market for cotton and the lynching of Blacks, 1882-1930. American Sociological Review , 55(4), 526-539.
• Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 75(1), 219-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.219
• Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 34(3), 366-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.34.3.366
• Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B. F. & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: An "experimental ethnography." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70(5), 945-960. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.945
• Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 185-218). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Dijksterhuis, A., & van Knippenberg, A. (1998). The relation between perception and behavior, or how to win a game of trivial pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 74(4), 865-877. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.865
• Eichstaedt, J. C., Schwartz, H. A., Kern, M. L., Park, G., Labarthe, D. R., Merchant, R. M., & Sap, M. (2015). Psychological language on twitter predicts county-level heart disease mortality. Psychological Science , 26(2), 159–169. doi: 10.1177/0956797614557867
• Ferguson, M. J., & Mann, T. C. (2014). Effects of evaluation: An example of robust “social” priming. Social Cognition , 32, 33-46. doi: 10.1521/soco.2014.32.supp.33
• Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist , 59(2), 93-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.93
• Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 74(6), 1464-1480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
• Greitemeyer, T., Kastenmüller, A., & Fischer, P. (2013). Romantic motives and risk-taking: An evolutionary approach. Journal of Risk Research , 16, 19-38. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2012.713388
• Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97.
• Harris, C. R., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2013). Two failures to replicate high-performance-goal priming effects. PLoS ONE , 8(8): e72467. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0072467
• Henrich, J., Heine, S., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 33(2-3), 61-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
• Hovland, C. I., & Sears, R. R. (1940). Minor studies of aggression: VI. Correlation of lynchings with economic indices. The Journal of Psychology , 9(2), 301-310. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1940.9917696
• Isen, A. M., & Levin, P. F. (1972). Effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and kindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 21(3), 384-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0032317
• Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 111(24), 8788-8790. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320040111
• Larson, R. W., Richards, M. H., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (1994). Divergent worlds: the daily emotional experience of mothers and fathers in the domestic and public spheres. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 67(6), 1034-1046.
• Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 67(4), 371–378. doi: 10.1037/h0040525
• Mitra, T., Counts, S., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2016). Understanding anti-vaccination attitudes in social media. Presentation at the Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media . Retrieved from comp.social.gatech.edu/papers...cine.mitra.pdf
• Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., ... & Kesebir, S. (2009). National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 106(26), 10593-10597. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809921106
• Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making , 51(5), 411-419.
• Peterson, R. A., & Merunka, D. R. (2014). Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility. Journal of Business Research , 67(5), 1035-1041. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.010
• Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J. (2003). In the wake of 9/11: The psychology of terror . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Pyszczynski, T., Wicklund, R. A., Floresku, S., Koch, H., Gauch, G., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J. (1996). Whistling in the dark: Exaggerated consensus estimates in response to incidental reminders of mortality. Psychological Science , 7(6), 332-336. doi: 10.111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00384.x
• Radesky, J. S., Kistin, C. J., Zuckerman, B., Nitzberg, K., Gross, J., Kaplan-Sanoff, M., Augustyn, M., & Silverstein, M. (2014). Patterns of mobile device use by caregivers and children during meals in fast food restaurants. Pediatrics , 133(4), e843-849. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-3703
• Reifman, A. S., Larrick, R. P., & Fein, S. (1991). Temper and temperature on the diamond: The heat-aggression relationship in major league baseball. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 17(5), 580-585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167291175013
• Rosenblatt, A., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski. T, & Lyon, D. (1989). Evidence for terror management theory I: The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who violate or uphold cultural values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57(4), 681-690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.681
• 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.515
• Shanks, D. R., Newell, B. R., Lee, E. H., Balakrishnan, D., Ekelund L., Cenac Z., … Moore, C. (2013). Priming intelligent behavior: An elusive phenomenon. PLoS ONE , 8(4): e56515. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056515
• Stavrova, O., & Ehlebracht, D. (2016). Cynical beliefs about human nature and income: Longitudinal and cross-cultural analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 110(1), 116-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000050
• Stroebe, W. (2012). The truth about Triplett (1898), but nobody seems to care. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 7(1), 54-57. doi: 10.1177/1745691611427306
• Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of Psychology , 9, 507-533.
• Visser, P. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Lavrakas, P. (2000). Survey research. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 223-252). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• de Zavala, A. G., Cislak, A., & Wesolowska, E. (2010). Political conservatism, need for cognitive closure, and intergroup hostility. Political Psychology , 31(4), 521-541. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00767.x

--> --> , --> --> '; } else { document.getElementById("sessionDropdown").innerHTML = ' '; } --> --> -->

This page contains links to web-based experiments, surveys, and other social psychology studies. If you would like us to add a link to your study, click . To help reach a wide audience, study links posted here are also publicized via and an (a combined subscriber base of over 294,000 people). All told, SPN has posted links to 3,067 studies and generated a total of 2,142,329 visits to these studies (an average of 14 visits per study for links posted in the past month). Please note, however, that SPN does not endorse the content or quality of studies that appear below. Any use of SPN pages, feeds, or derivative services indicates acceptance of the . Table of Contents (click on a category of interest) Professional Research (Wesleyan University) (Princeton University) (American University) (Durham University, UK) (Saint Mary's University) (Uni. of Southern Queensland) (Queens College of the CUNY) (Alliant International University) (Clark University) (Kwantlen Polytechnic Univ., CA) (Saint Mary's Univ., Canada) (University of Sunderland, UK) (Princeton University) (Leeds Beckett University, United Kingdom) (Illinois State University) (Mount Saint Mary's University, Los Angeles) (Boston University) (Virginia Union University) (Barry University) (Barry University) (Barry University) (Barry University) (KPU, Canada) (Monk Prayogshala) (Cairnmillar Institute) (Univ. of Illinois at Chicago) (Kwantlen Polytechnic University) (Towson University) (Manchester Metro. Univ., UK) (Walden University) (Rowan University) (Liverpool Hope University) (Barry University) (University of Twente, Netherlands) (Monk Prayogshala, India) (Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Canada) (Penn State Univ.) (Elizabethtown College) (Psychologische Hochschule Berlin) (Queen's University, Canada) (Wesleyan University) (Manhattan College) (McGill University, Canada) (James Cook University) (University of Surrey) (James Cook University) (Vrije Universiteit (Netherlands)) (Manhattan College) (James Cook University) (Univ. of Lincoln, UK) (Vanderbilt University) (Oregon Institute of Technology) (St Francis College) (Rowan University) Student Research (Mercy College) (Saint Mary's University, Canada) (Univ. of Quebec Montreal) (Univ. of Essex, UK) (Murdoch University, AU) (University of Chicago) (Muhlenberg College) (Washington State Univ.) (Charles Sturt University, AU) (Pace University) (Columbia University) (Charles Sturt University) (James Cook University, AU) (Illinois State Univ.) (Manchester Metropolitan Univ., UK) (Eastern Connecticut State University) (London South Bank University, UK) (UMass Amherst) (Adelphi University) (St. Francis College) (UMass Boston) (University of New South Wales, Australia) (Univ. of Texas at Austin) (Brunel University) (Adelphi University) (Northumbria University, UK) (Endicott College) (Adelphi University) (Goldsmiths, Univ. of London, UK) (Anglia Ruskin U., U.K.) (Maryville University) (Ouachita Baptist University) (University of Lincoln, UK) (Western Illinois University) (Penn. State University) (Adelphi University) (Charles Sturt University, AU) (McGill University, Canada) (Brunel University London, UK) (Anglia Ruskin University, UK) (Adelphi University) (Pace University) (University of Westminster, UK) (Albertus Magnus College) (University of Lincoln, UK) (Northumbria Univ., UK) (Oregon Institute of Technology) (Barry University) (Albertus Magnus College) (Claremont Graduate University) (Univ. of Bristol, UK) (Northumbria University, UK) (The University of Hawaii at Hilo) (Adelphi University) (Spiru Haret Uni. Brasov, RO) (Royal Holloway, U. of London, UK) (University of California, Santa Cruz) (Dickinson College) (University of Central Lancashire, UK) (UCLA) (Sheffield Hallam University, UK) (Adelphi University) Web Experiment Resources (extensive links grouped by topic) (United Kingdom compendium) (large archive of current and past studies) (compendium maintained by the Inquisitive Mind) (a virtual laboratory of studies) (Yahoo! listing) (has variety of interactive psychology experiments) (studies of online consumer behavior) (APA report) (Windows-based research software) (millisecond reaction time software) (for high-precision psychological measures) (freeware for research on ostracism and social exclusion) (tool for designing lab and web experiments) (for research, teaching, and practice) (commercial online survey software) (Mac freeware for psychological experiments) (commercial software for Internet-mediated research) (freeware for web-based studies) (for Macintosh computers) (online course) (free; NSF-supported) (popular web data collection service; short surveys free) (software for high quality online surveys) (specializing in social science research) (web tool that captures live conversation data) (online psychology experiments made easy) (service for building and analyzing online surveys) (commercial service and software) (online survey software and research management services) (custom-built online surveys for academic research) (web survey application developed by I/O psychologists) (creates and hosts psychology web experiments) (web-based service for managing participant pools) (web-based software for managing participant pools) (instant random sampling and assignment) (interactive teaching resources) (software and customized hardware for experiments) (edited volume) (archive of MediaLab applications) Psychology Headlines From around the world. Could Artificial Intelligence Put an End to Animal Testing? Spain Applies to Join South Africa's Genocide Case Against Israel U.N. Chief Says World Is on "Highway to Climate Hell" As Record Heat Hits Palestinians Apply to Join U.N. Court Case Accusing Israel of Genocide Free AI Website Matches Patients with the Most Effective Antidepressant Admission Criteria for Graduate Psychology Programs Are Changing Climate Activist Defaces Monet Paining in Paris Impact of Psychology Association's Apology to Indigenous Peoples Source: Psychology News Center Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. View all journals Explore content About the journal Publish with us Sign up for alerts Review Article Published: 07 June 2024 The unique nature and psychosocial implications of awe Tonglin Jiang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3588-3195 1 , Joshua A. Hicks   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6237-4935 2 , Wenying Yuan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2470-2547 1 , Yige Yin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3432-7565 1 , Lydia Needy   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0936-5279 2 & Matthew Vess 2   Nature Reviews Psychology ( 2024 ) Cite this article Metrics details Human behaviour Interdisciplinary studies Psychological research has explored awe’s intricate nature and far-reaching consequences. Awe profoundly influences the sense of self (which has considerable psychosocial implications), but there are complexities across the literature regarding how awe impacts the self. In this Review, we synthesize the literature about awe and suggest an integrative approach to understanding awe’s psychosocial implications. We begin by introducing awe as defined by an established theoretical model and examining the methodological challenges to the scientific study of awe. We then discuss discrepancies in current research on awe’s impacts on the self and consider an alternative approach in which awe promotes a broad, non-egocentric perspective on the self. We argue that this approach offers deep insight into the implications of awe and review related findings focusing on cognition and motivation, social dynamics and well-being. Finally, we examine cultural commonalities and diversity in experiences of awe and conclude by suggesting avenues for future inquiry. This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution Access options Subscribe to this journal Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles 55,14 € per year only 4,60 € per issue Buy this article Purchase on Springer Link Instant access to full article PDF Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout Similar content being viewed by others Ideological differences in the expanse of the moral circle Microdosing with psilocybin mushrooms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study Adults who microdose psychedelics report health related motivations and lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to non-microdosers Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D. & Mossman, A. The nature of awe: elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cogn. Emot. 21 , 944–963 (2007). Article   Google Scholar   Pan, X. & Jiang, T. Awe fosters global self-continuity: the mediating effect of global processing and narrative. Emotion 23 , 1618–1632 (2023). Article   PubMed   Google Scholar   Jiang, L., Yin, J., Mei, D., Zhu, H. & Zhou, X. Awe weakens the desire for money. J. Pac. Rim Psychol. 12 , e4 (2018). Jiang, T. & Sedikides, C. Awe motivates authentic-self pursuit via self-transcendence: implications for prosociality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 123 , 576–596 (2022). Dai, Y. & Jiang, T. Inspired by awe: awe promotes inspiration via self-transcendence. J. Posit. Psychol . https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2023.2254737 (2023). Yaden, D. B., Haidt, J., Hood, R. W., Vago, D. R. & Newberg, A. B. The varieties of self-transcendent experience. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 21 , 143–160 (2017). Schneider, K. J. Awakening to Awe: Personal Stories of Profound Transformation (Jason Aronson, 2009). Keltner, D. & Haidt, J. Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cogn. Emot. 17 , 297–314 (2003). Richesin, M. T. & Baldwin, D. R. How awe shaped us: an evolutionary perspective. Emot. Rev. 15 , 17–27 (2023). Valdesolo, P. in The Oxford Handbook of the Positive Humanities (eds Tay, L. & Pawelski, J. O.) 232–242 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2022). Chirico, A. & Yaden, D. B. in The Function of Emotions (ed. Lench, H. C.) 221–233 (Springer, 2018). Gocłowska, M. A. et al. Awe arises in reaction to exceeded rather than disconfirmed expectancies. Emotion 23 , 15–29 (2023). Gordon, A. et al. The dark side of the sublime: distinguishing a threat-based variant of awe. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 113 , 310–328 (2017). Piff, P., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. & Keltner, D. Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 108 , 883–899 (2015). Bai, Y. et al. Awe, daily stress, and elevated life satisfaction. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 120 , 837–860 (2021). Bai, Y. et al. Awe, the diminished self, and collective engagement: universals and cultural variations in the small self. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 113 , 185–209 (2017). Pérez, K., Lench, H., Thompson, C. & North, S. Experimental elicitations of awe: a meta-analysis. Cogn. Emot. 37 , 18–33 (2023). Campos, B., Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., Gonzaga, G. C. & Goetz, J. L. What is shared, what is different? Core relational themes and expressive displays of eight positive emotions. Cogn. Emot. 27 , 37–52 (2013). Shiota, M. N., Campos, B. & Keltner, D. The faces of positive emotion: prototype displays of awe, amusement, and pride. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1000 , 296–299 (2003). Cordaro, D. T., Keltner, D., Tshering, S., Wangchuk, D. & Flynn, L. M. The voice conveys emotion in ten globalized cultures and one remote village in Bhutan. Emotion 16 , 117–128 (2016). Chirico, A. et al. Effectiveness of immersive videos in inducing awe: an experimental study. Sci. Rep. 7 , 1218 (2017). Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar   Van Elk, M., Arciniegas Gomez, M. A., Van Der Zwaag, W., Van Schie, H. T. & Sauter, D. The neural correlates of the awe experience: reduced default mode network activity during feelings of awe. Hum. Brain Mapp. 40 , 3561–3574 (2019). Joye, Y. & Bolderdijk, J. An exploratory study into the effects of extraordinary nature on emotions, mood, and prosociality. Front. Psychol. 5 , 1577 (2015). Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. & Neufeld, S. Influence of different positive emotions on persuasion processing: a functional evolutionary approach. Emotion 10 , 190–206 (2010). Monroy, M. & Keltner, D. Awe as a pathway to mental and physical health. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 18 , 309–320 (2023). Yuan, W., Du, Y. & Jiang, T. How and when awe improves meaning in life: the role of authentic-self pursuit and trait authenticity. Emotion 24 , 412–430 (2024). Mills, C. & D’Mello, S. On the validity of the autobiographical emotional memory task for emotion induction. PLoS ONE 9 , e95837 (2014). Darbor, K., Lench, H., Davis, W. & Hicks, J. Experiencing versus contemplating: language use during descriptions of awe and wonder. Cogn. Emot. 30 , 1188–1196 (2016). Adler, O. & Pansky, A. in Cognitive Biases in Health and Psychiatric Disorders (eds Aue, T. & Okon-Singer, H.) 139–171 (Elsevier, 2020). Levine, L. J. & Safer, M. A. Sources of bias in memory for emotions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 11 , 169–173 (2002). Mill, A., Realo, A. & Allik, J. Retrospective ratings of emotions: the effects of age, daily tiredness, and personality. Front. Psychol. 6 , 2020 (2016). Silvia, P. J., Fayn, K., Nusbaum, E. C. & Beaty, R. E. Openness to experience and awe in response to nature and music: personality and profound aesthetic experiences. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 9 , 376–384 (2015). Danvers, A. & Shiota, M. Going off script: effects of awe on memory for script-typical and -irrelevant narrative detail. Emotion 17 , 938–952 (2017). Valdesolo, P. & Graham, J. Awe, uncertainty, and agency detection. Psychol. Sci. 25 , 170–178 (2014). Chirico, A., Ferrise, F., Cordella, L. & Gaggioli, A. Designing awe in virtual reality: an experimental study. Front. Psychol. 8 , 2351 (2018). Nelson-Coffey, S. K. et al. The proximal experience of awe. PLoS ONE 14 , e0216780 (2019). Chirico, A., Yaden, D. B., Riva, G. & Gaggioli, A. The potential of virtual reality for the investigation of awe. Front. Psychol. 7 , 1766 (2016). Quesnel, D. & Riecke, B. Are you awed yet? How virtual reality gives us awe and goose bumps. Front. Psychol. 9 , 2158 (2018). Chirico, A. & Gaggioli, A. When virtual feels real: comparing emotional responses and presence in virtual and natural environments. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 22 , 220–226 (2019). Goldy, S., Jones, N. & Piff, P. The social effects of an awesome solar eclipse. Psychol. Sci. 33 , 1452–1462 (2022). Yin, Y. et al. Awe fosters positive attitudes toward solitude. Nat. Ment. Health https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-024-00244-y (2024). Schneider, K. J. Awe: more than a lab experience — a rejoinder to “Awe: ‘more than a feeling’” by Alice Chirico and Andrea Gaggioli. Humanist. Psychol. 48 , 100–104 (2020). Cuzzolino, M. P. “The awe is in the process”: the nature and impact of professional scientists’ experiences of awe. Sci. Educ. 105 , 681–706 (2021). Google Scholar   Thompson, J. NASA resilience and leadership: examining the phenomenon of awe. Front. Psychol. 14 , 1158437 (2023). Stellar, J. E. et al. Awe and humility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 114 , 258–269 (2018). Seo, M., Yang, S. & Laurent, S. No one is an island: awe encourages global citizenship identification. Emotion 23 , 601–612 (2022). Rivera, G. N., Vess, M., Hicks, J. A. & Routledge, C. Awe and meaning: elucidating complex effects of awe experiences on meaning in life. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 50 , 392–405 (2020). Brewer, J. A. et al. Meditation experience is associated with differences in default mode network activity and connectivity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 20254–20259 (2011). Farb, N. A. S. et al. Minding one’s emotions: mindfulness training alters the neural expression of sadness. Emotion 10 , 25–33 (2010). Stellar, J. E. Awe helps us remember why it is important to forget the self. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1501 , 81–84 (2021). Song, J. Y., Klebl, C. & Bastian, B. Awe promotes moral expansiveness via the small-self. Front. Psychol. 14 , 1097627 (2023). Crimston, C. R., Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J. & Bastian, B. Moral expansiveness: examining variability in the extension of the moral world. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 111 , 636–653 (2016). Tyson, C., Hornsey, M. J. & Barlow, F. K. What does it mean to feel small? Three dimensions of the small self. Self Identity 21 , 387–405 (2022). Perlin, J. D. & Li, L. Why does awe have prosocial effects? New perspectives on awe and the small self. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 15 , 291–308 (2020). Bird, D. The power of a new story: the bigger picture: narrative therapy and the role of aesthetic distance within the process of re-authoring in dramatherapy. Dramatherapy 31 , 10–14 (2010). Kross, E. & Ayduk, O. Making meaning out of negative experiences by self-distancing. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 20 , 187–191 (2011). Kross, E. & Ayduk, O. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 55 (ed Olson, J. M.) 81–136 (Elsevier, 2017). Heintzelman, S. J. & King, L. A. Life is pretty meaningful. Am. Psychol. 69 , 561–574 (2014). Park, C. L. Making sense of the meaning literature: an integrative review of meaning making and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events. Psychol. Bull. 136 , 257–301 (2010). McPhetres, J. Oh, the things you don’t know: awe promotes awareness of knowledge gaps and science interest. Cogn. Emot. 33 , 1599–1615 (2019). Valdesolo, P., Park, J. & Gottlieb, S. Awe and scientific explanation. Emotion 16 , 937–940 (2016). Johnson, K. et al. Science, God, and the cosmos: science both erodes (via logic) and promotes (via awe) belief in God. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 84 , 103826 (2019). Anderson, C., Dixson, D., Monroy, M. & Keltner, D. Are awe-prone people more curious? The relationship between dispositional awe, curiosity, and academic outcomes. J. Pers. 88 , 762–779 (2020). Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D. & John, O. P. Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. J. Posit. Psychol. 1 , 61–71 (2006). Gottlieb, S., Keltner, D. & Lombrozo, T. Awe as a scientific emotion. Cogn. Sci. 42 , 2081–2094 (2018). Hicks, J. R. & Stewart, W. P. Learning from wildlife-inspired awe. J. Environ. Educ. 51 , 44–54 (2020). Chirico, A., Glaveanu, V. P., Cipresso, P., Riva, G. & Gaggioli, A. Awe enhances creative thinking: an experimental study. Creat. Res. J. 30 , 123–131 (2018). Zhang, J. W. et al. Awe is associated with creative personality, convergent creativity, and everyday creativity. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 18 , 209–221 (2021). Colantonio, J. & Bonawitz, E. Awesome play: awe increases preschooler’s exploration and discovery. Preprint at OSFPreprints https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/pjhrq (2018). Lucht, A. & Van Schie, H. T. The evolutionary function of awe: a review and integrated model of seven theoretical perspectives. Emot. Rev. 16 , 46–63 (2024). Septianto, F., Seo, Y., Li, L. P. & Shi, L. Awe in advertising: the mediating role of an abstract mindset. J. Advert. 52 , 24–38 (2023). Rudd, M., Vohs, K. D. & Aaker, J. Awe expands people’s perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances well-being. Psychol. Sci. 23 , 1130–1136 (2012). Yaden, D. B. et al. The overview effect: awe and self-transcendent experience in space flight. Psychol. Conscious. Theory Res. Pract. 3 , 1–11 (2016). Yang, Y., Yang, Z., Bao, T., Liu, Y. & Passmore, H. Elicited awe decreases aggression. J. Pac. Rim Psychol. 10 , e11 (2016). Luo, L. et al. Awe weakens the AIDS-related stigma: the mediation effects of connectedness and empathy. Front. Psychiatry 13 , 1043101 (2022). Dale, K. R. et al. Awe and stereotypes: examining awe as an intervention against stereotypical media portrayals of African Americans. Commun. Stud. 71 , 699–707 (2020). Yang, Y. & Hu, J. Self-diminishing effects of awe on consumer forgiveness in service encounters. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 60 , 102491 (2021). Stancato, D. & Keltner, D. Awe, ideological conviction, and perceptions of ideological opponents. Emotion 21 , 61–72 (2021). Acevedo, E. & Tost, J. Self-transcendent experience and prosociality: connecting dispositional awe, compassion, and the moral foundations. Personal. Individ. Differ. 214 , 112347 (2023). Prade, C. & Saroglou, V. Awe’s effects on generosity and helping. J. Posit. Psychol. 11 , 522–530 (2016). Stamkou, E., Brummelman, E., Dunham, R., Nikolic, M. & Keltner, D. Awe sparks prosociality in children. Psychol. Sci. 34 , 455–467 (2023). Guan, F., Chen, J., Chen, O., Liu, L. & Zha, Y. Awe and prosocial tendency. Curr. Psychol. 38 , 1033–1041 (2019). Kaplan, B., Miller, E. G. & Iyer, E. S. Shades of awe: the role of awe in consumers’ pro‐environmental behavior. J. Consum. Behav. 23 , 540–555 (2023). Fu, Y. et al. Awe and prosocial behavior: the mediating role of presence of meaning in life and the moderating role of perceived social support. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 19 , 6466 (2022). Septianto, F., Nasution, R. A., Arnita, D. & Seo, Y. The role of threat-based awe and construal level in charitable advertising. Eur. J. Mark. 56 , 1532–1555 (2022). Lin, R. et al. Dispositional awe and online altruism: testing a moderated mediating model. Front. Psychol. 12 , 688591 (2021). Wayment, H. A., Bauer, J. J. & Sylaska, K. The quiet ego scale: measuring the compassionate self-identity. J. Happiness Stud. 16 , 999–1033 (2015). Kasser, T. & Ryan, R. M. Further examining the American dream: differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22 , 280–287 (1996). Koltko-Rivera, M. E. Rediscovering the later version of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: self-transcendence and opportunities for theory, research, and unification. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 10 , 302–317 (2006). Lenton, A. P., Bruder, M., Slabu, L. & Sedikides, C. How does “being real” feel? The experience of state authenticity. J. Pers. 81 , 276–289 (2013). Luo, L., Zou, R., Yang, D. & Yuan, J. Awe experience trigged by fighting against COVID-19 promotes prosociality through increased feeling of connectedness and empathy. J. Posit. Psychol. 18 , 866–882 (2023). Sturm, V. E. et al. Big smile, small self: awe walks promote prosocial positive emotions in older adults. Emotion 22 , 1044–1058 (2022). Anderson, C., Monroy, M. & Keltner, D. Awe in nature heals: evidence from military veterans, at-risk youth, and college students. Emotion 18 , 1195–1202 (2018). Stellar, J. et al. Positive affect and markers of inflammation: discrete positive emotions predict lower levels of inflammatory cytokines. Emotion 15 , 129–133 (2015). Koh, A., Tong, E. & Yuen, A. The buffering effect of awe on negative affect towards lost possessions. J. Posit. Psychol. 14 , 156–165 (2019). Rankin, K., Andrews, S. & Sweeny, K. Awe-full uncertainty: easing discomfort during waiting periods. J. Posit. Psychol. 15 , 338–347 (2020). Yuan, W., Guo, T., Jiang, T. & Wang, F. Online social pain reliever: online awe-intervening approach promotes recovery via the global sense of connectedness. Comput. Hum. Behav . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108283 (2024). Danvers, A. F., O’Neil, M. J. & Shiota, M. N. in Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being (ed. Vittersø, J.) 323–335 (Springer, 2016). Ihm, E. D., Paloutzian, P. F., van Elk, M. & Schooler, J. W. in The Evolution of Religion, Religiosity and Theology (eds Feierman, J. R. & Oviedo, L.) 138–153 (Routledge, 2019). Dai, Y., Jiang, T. & Miao, M. Uncovering the effects of awe on meaning in life. J. Happiness Stud. 23 , 3517–3529 (2022). Kim, J. et al. Experiential appreciation as a pathway to meaning in life. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6 , 677–690 (2022). Bonner, E. T. & Friedman, H. L. A conceptual clarification of the experience of awe: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Humanist. Psychol. 39 , 222–235 (2011). Razavi, P., Zhang, J., Hekiert, D., Yoo, S. & Howell, R. Cross-cultural similarities and differences in the experience of awe. Emotion 16 , 1097–1101 (2016). Keltner, D. Awe: The New Science of Everyday Wonder and How It Can Transform Your Life (Penguin, 2023). Nomura, M., Tsuda, A. & Rappleye, J. in Oxford Handbook of Cultural Neuroscience and Global Mental Health (eds Chiao, J. Y., Li, S.-C., Turner, R., Lee-Tauler, S. Y. & Pringle, B. A.) 221–232 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2021). Nakayama, M., Nozaki, Y., Taylor, P., Keltner, D. & Uchida, Y. Individual and cultural differences in predispositions to feel positive and negative aspects of awe. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 51 , 771–793 (2020). Prusinksi, L. Wabi-sabi, mono no aware, and ma: tracing traditional Japanese aesthetics through Japanese history. Stud. Asia 4 , 25–49 (2012). Cong, Y., Keltner, D. & Sauter, D. Cultural variability in appraisal patterns for nine positive emotions. J. Cult. Cogn. Sci. 6 , 51–75 (2022). Spencer-Rodgers, J. & Peng, K. The Psychological and Cultural Foundations of East Asian Cognition: Contradiction, Change, and Holism (Oxford Univ. Press, 2018). Chen, E. Y. Cultural Variations in the Appraisals of Awe (Univ. of California, Berkeley, 2020). Hitsuwari, J. & Nomura, M. Ambiguity and beauty: Japanese–German cross-cultural comparisons on aesthetic evaluation of Haiku poetry. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000497 (2022). Fiske, S. T. & Yamamoto, M. in The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying (eds Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P. & von Hippel, W.) 185–198 (Psychology Press, 2005). Baumeister, R. F. in Advanced Social Psychology: The State of the Science (eds Baumeister, R. F. & Finkel, E. J.) 139–175 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2010). Le, P. et al. When a small self means manageable obstacles: spontaneous self-distancing predicts divergent effects of awe during a subsequent performance stressor. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 80 , 59–66 (2019). Sundararajan, L. Religious awe: potential contributions of negative theology to psychology, ‘positive’ or otherwise. J. Theor. Philos. Psychol. 22 , 174–197 (2002). Adame, A. L. & Leitner, L. M. Reverence and recovery: experiential personal construct psychotherapy and transpersonal reverence. J. Constr. Psychol. 22 , 253–267 (2009). Elkins, D. N. in The Handbook of Humanistic Psychology: Theory, Research, and Practice 2nd edn (eds Schneider, K. J., Pierson, J. F. & Bugental, J. F. T.) 681–692 (Sage, 2015). Schneider, K. J. Enchanted agnosticism, awe, and existential-integrative therapy. Spiritual. Clin. Pract. 1 , 71–73 (2014). Schneider, K. The resurgence of awe in psychology: promise, hope, and perils. Humanist. Psychol. 45 , 103–108 (2017). Graziosi, M. & Yaden, D. Interpersonal awe: exploring the social domain of awe elicitors. J. Posit. Psychol. 16 , 263–271 (2021). Negami, H. R. & Ellard, C. G. How architecture evokes awe: predicting awe through architectural features of building interiors. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 17 , 3–15 (2023). Hornsey, M., Faulkner, C., Crimston, D. & Moreton, S. A microscopic dot on a microscopic dot: self-esteem buffers the negative effects of exposure to the enormity of the universe. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 76 , 198–207 (2018). Fredrickson, B. L. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 47 (eds Devine, P. & Plant, A.) 1–53 (Elsevier, 2013). Fredrickson, B. L., Tugade, M. M., Waugh, C. E. & Larkin, G. R. What good are positive emotions in crisis? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84 , 365–376 (2003). Yaden, D. B. et al. The development of the Awe Experience Scale (AWE-S): a multifactorial measure for a complex emotion. J. Posit. Psychol. 14 , 474–488 (2019). Adler, M. G. & Fagley, N. S. Appreciation: individual differences in finding value and meaning as a unique predictor of subjective well-being. J. Pers. 73 , 79–114 (2005). Krenzer, W. L. D., Krogh-Jespersen, S., Greenslit, J., Price, A. & Quinn, K. A. Assessing the experience of awe: validating the Situational Awe Scale. Preprint at OSFPreprints https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dsytn (2020). Sawada, K. & Nomura, M. Influence of positive and threatened awe on the attitude toward norm violations. Front. Psychol. 11 , 148 (2020). Lv, Y., Shi, J., Yu, F. & Zhang, C. The effect of awe on natural risk-taking preferences: the role of need for closure. Curr. Psychol. 42 , 4181–4195 (2023). Chaudhury, S. H., Garg, N. & Jiang, Z. The curious case of threat-awe: a theoretical and empirical reconceptualization. Emotion 22 , 1653–1669 (2022). Yang, Y., Hu, J. & Jing, F. Does awe facilitate conformity in tourism consumption? Evidence from China. Serv. Ind. J. 44 , 437–455 (2021). Sun, X., Su, W., Guo, X. & Tian, Z. The impact of awe induced by COVID-19 pandemic on green consumption behavior in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 18 , 543 (2021). Maruskin, L., Thrash, T. & Elliot, A. The chills as a psychological construct: content universe, factor structure, affective composition, elicitors, trait antecedents, and consequences. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 103 , 135–157 (2012). Schurtz, D. et al. Exploring the social aspects of goose bumps and their role in awe and envy. Motiv. Emot. 36 , 205–217 (2012). Shiota, M. N., Neufeld, S. L., Yeung, W. H., Moser, S. E. & Perea, E. F. Feeling good: autonomic nervous system responding in five positive emotions. Emotion 11 , 1368–1378 (2011). Takano, R. & Nomura, M. Neural representations of awe: distinguishing common and distinct neural mechanisms. Emotion 22 , 669–677 (2022). Ballew, M. T. & Omoto, A. M. Absorption: how nature experiences promote awe and other positive emotions. Ecopsychology 10 , 26–35 (2018). McMahan, E. A. & Estes, D. The effect of contact with natural environments on positive and negative affect: a meta-analysis. J. Posit. Psychol. 10 , 507–519 (2015). Goldy, S. P. The Impact of a Two-Week Daily Intervention on Increased and Sustained Experiences of Awe (Univ. of California, Irvine, 2020). Download references Author information Authors and affiliations. School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China Tonglin Jiang, Wenying Yuan & Yige Yin Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA Joshua A. Hicks, Lydia Needy & Matthew Vess You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar Contributions All authors wrote the article and reviewed and/or edited the manuscript before submission. T.J., J.A.H., W.Y. and Y.Y contributed substantially to discussion of the content. Corresponding author Correspondence to Tonglin Jiang . Ethics declarations Competing interests. The authors declare no competing interests. Peer review Peer review information. Nature Reviews Psychology thanks Masataka Nakayama, Kim Quinn and the other, anonymous, reviewer for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Additional information Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Reprints and permissions About this article Cite this article. Jiang, T., Hicks, J.A., Yuan, W. et al. The unique nature and psychosocial implications of awe. Nat Rev Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00322-z Download citation Accepted : 15 May 2024 Published : 07 June 2024 DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00322-z Share this article Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative Quick links Explore articles by subject Guide to authors Editorial policies Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily. Case Study Research Method in Psychology Saul Mcleod, PhD Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology. Learn about our Editorial Process Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc Associate Editor for Simply Psychology BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors. On This Page: Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. Typically, data is gathered from various sources using several methods (e.g., observations & interviews). The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e., the patient’s personal history). In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual. The information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual’s past (i.e., retrospective), as well as to significant events that are currently occurring in his or her everyday life. The case study is not a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that will generate material suitable for case studies. Freud (1909a, 1909b) conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses. This makes it clear that the case study is a method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist, or psychiatrist, i.e., someone with a professional qualification. There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e., abnormal) behavior or atypical development.  Famous Case Studies Anna O – One of the most famous case studies, documenting psychoanalyst Josef Breuer’s treatment of “Anna O” (real name Bertha Pappenheim) for hysteria in the late 1800s using early psychoanalytic theory. Little Hans – A child psychoanalysis case study published by Sigmund Freud in 1909 analyzing his five-year-old patient Herbert Graf’s house phobia as related to the Oedipus complex. Bruce/Brenda – Gender identity case of the boy (Bruce) whose botched circumcision led psychologist John Money to advise gender reassignment and raise him as a girl (Brenda) in the 1960s. Genie Wiley – Linguistics/psychological development case of the victim of extreme isolation abuse who was studied in 1970s California for effects of early language deprivation on acquiring speech later in life. Phineas Gage – One of the most famous neuropsychology case studies analyzes personality changes in railroad worker Phineas Gage after an 1848 brain injury involving a tamping iron piercing his skull. Clinical Case Studies Studying the effectiveness of psychotherapy approaches with an individual patient Assessing and treating mental illnesses like depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD Neuropsychological cases investigating brain injuries or disorders Child Psychology Case Studies Studying psychological development from birth through adolescence Cases of learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, ADHD Effects of trauma, abuse, deprivation on development Types of Case Studies Explanatory case studies : Used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles. Helpful for doing qualitative analysis to explain presumed causal links. Exploratory case studies : Used to explore situations where an intervention being evaluated has no clear set of outcomes. It helps define questions and hypotheses for future research. Descriptive case studies : Describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. It is helpful for illustrating certain topics within an evaluation. Multiple-case studies : Used to explore differences between cases and replicate findings across cases. Helpful for comparing and contrasting specific cases. Intrinsic : Used to gain a better understanding of a particular case. Helpful for capturing the complexity of a single case. Collective : Used to explore a general phenomenon using multiple case studies. Helpful for jointly studying a group of cases in order to inquire into the phenomenon. Where Do You Find Data for a Case Study? There are several places to find data for a case study. The key is to gather data from multiple sources to get a complete picture of the case and corroborate facts or findings through triangulation of evidence. Most of this information is likely qualitative (i.e., verbal description rather than measurement), but the psychologist might also collect numerical data. 1. Primary sources Interviews – Interviewing key people related to the case to get their perspectives and insights. The interview is an extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect comments from the person’s friends, parents, employer, workmates, and others who have a good knowledge of the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself. Observations – Observing behaviors, interactions, processes, etc., related to the case as they unfold in real-time. Documents & Records – Reviewing private documents, diaries, public records, correspondence, meeting minutes, etc., relevant to the case. 2. Secondary sources News/Media – News coverage of events related to the case study. Academic articles – Journal articles, dissertations etc. that discuss the case. Government reports – Official data and records related to the case context. Books/films – Books, documentaries or films discussing the case. 3. Archival records Searching historical archives, museum collections and databases to find relevant documents, visual/audio records related to the case history and context. Public archives like newspapers, organizational records, photographic collections could all include potentially relevant pieces of information to shed light on attitudes, cultural perspectives, common practices and historical contexts related to psychology. 4. Organizational records Organizational records offer the advantage of often having large datasets collected over time that can reveal or confirm psychological insights. Of course, privacy and ethical concerns regarding confidential data must be navigated carefully. However, with proper protocols, organizational records can provide invaluable context and empirical depth to qualitative case studies exploring the intersection of psychology and organizations. Organizational/industrial psychology research : Organizational records like employee surveys, turnover/retention data, policies, incident reports etc. may provide insight into topics like job satisfaction, workplace culture and dynamics, leadership issues, employee behaviors etc. Clinical psychology : Therapists/hospitals may grant access to anonymized medical records to study aspects like assessments, diagnoses, treatment plans etc. This could shed light on clinical practices. School psychology : Studies could utilize anonymized student records like test scores, grades, disciplinary issues, and counseling referrals to study child development, learning barriers, effectiveness of support programs, and more. How do I Write a Case Study in Psychology? Follow specified case study guidelines provided by a journal or your psychology tutor. General components of clinical case studies include: background, symptoms, assessments, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave out. A good case study should always clarify which information is the factual description and which is an inference or the researcher’s opinion. 1. Introduction Provide background on the case context and why it is of interest, presenting background information like demographics, relevant history, and presenting problem. Compare briefly to similar published cases if applicable. Clearly state the focus/importance of the case. 2. Case Presentation Describe the presenting problem in detail, including symptoms, duration,and impact on daily life. Include client demographics like age and gender, information about social relationships, and mental health history. Describe all physical, emotional, and/or sensory symptoms reported by the client. Use patient quotes to describe the initial complaint verbatim. Follow with full-sentence summaries of relevant history details gathered, including key components that led to a working diagnosis. Summarize clinical exam results, namely orthopedic/neurological tests, imaging, lab tests, etc. Note actual results rather than subjective conclusions. Provide images if clearly reproducible/anonymized. Clearly state the working diagnosis or clinical impression before transitioning to management. 3. Management and Outcome Indicate the total duration of care and number of treatments given over what timeframe. Use specific names/descriptions for any therapies/interventions applied. Present the results of the intervention,including any quantitative or qualitative data collected. For outcomes, utilize visual analog scales for pain, medication usage logs, etc., if possible. Include patient self-reports of improvement/worsening of symptoms. Note the reason for discharge/end of care. 4. Discussion Analyze the case, exploring contributing factors, limitations of the study, and connections to existing research. Analyze the effectiveness of the intervention,considering factors like participant adherence, limitations of the study, and potential alternative explanations for the results. Identify any questions raised in the case analysis and relate insights to established theories and current research if applicable. Avoid definitive claims about physiological explanations. Offer clinical implications, and suggest future research directions. 5. Additional Items Thank specific assistants for writing support only. No patient acknowledgments. References should directly support any key claims or quotes included. Use tables/figures/images only if substantially informative. Include permissions and legends/explanatory notes. Provides detailed (rich qualitative) information. Provides insight for further research. Permitting investigation of otherwise impractical (or unethical) situations. Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (nomothetic approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’. Because of their in-depth, multi-sided approach, case studies often shed light on aspects of human thinking and behavior that would be unethical or impractical to study in other ways. Research that only looks into the measurable aspects of human behavior is not likely to give us insights into the subjective dimension of experience, which is important to psychoanalytic and humanistic psychologists. Case studies are often used in exploratory research. They can help us generate new ideas (that might be tested by other methods). They are an important way of illustrating theories and can help show how different aspects of a person’s life are related to each other. The method is, therefore, important for psychologists who adopt a holistic point of view (i.e., humanistic psychologists ). Limitations Lacking scientific rigor and providing little basis for generalization of results to the wider population. Researchers’ own subjective feelings may influence the case study (researcher bias). Difficult to replicate. Time-consuming and expensive. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. Because a case study deals with only one person/event/group, we can never be sure if the case study investigated is representative of the wider body of “similar” instances. This means the conclusions drawn from a particular case may not be transferable to other settings. Because case studies are based on the analysis of qualitative (i.e., descriptive) data , a lot depends on the psychologist’s interpretation of the information she has acquired. This means that there is a lot of scope for Anna O , and it could be that the subjective opinions of the psychologist intrude in the assessment of what the data means. For example, Freud has been criticized for producing case studies in which the information was sometimes distorted to fit particular behavioral theories (e.g., Little Hans ). This is also true of Money’s interpretation of the Bruce/Brenda case study (Diamond, 1997) when he ignored evidence that went against his theory. Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1895).  Studies on hysteria . Standard Edition 2: London. Curtiss, S. (1981). Genie: The case of a modern wild child . Diamond, M., & Sigmundson, K. (1997). Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-term Review and Clinical Implications. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 151(3), 298-304 Freud, S. (1909a). Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. In The Pelican Freud Library (1977), Vol 8, Case Histories 1, pages 169-306 Freud, S. (1909b). Bemerkungen über einen Fall von Zwangsneurose (Der “Rattenmann”). Jb. psychoanal. psychopathol. Forsch ., I, p. 357-421; GW, VII, p. 379-463; Notes upon a case of obsessional neurosis, SE , 10: 151-318. Harlow J. M. (1848). Passage of an iron rod through the head.  Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, 39 , 389–393. Harlow, J. M. (1868).  Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head .  Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society. 2  (3), 327-347. Money, J., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972).  Man & Woman, Boy & Girl : The Differentiation and Dimorphism of Gender Identity from Conception to Maturity. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. Money, J., & Tucker, P. (1975). Sexual signatures: On being a man or a woman. Further Information Case Study Approach Case Study Method Enhancing the Quality of Case Studies in Health Services Research “We do things together” A case study of “couplehood” in dementia Using mixed methods for evaluating an integrative approach to cancer care: a case study Related Articles Research Methodology Qualitative Data Coding What Is a Focus Group? Cross-Cultural Research Methodology In Psychology What Is Internal Validity In Research? Research Methodology , Statistics What Is Face Validity In Research? Importance & How To Measure Criterion Validity: Definition & Examples Are You Emotionally Numb? A Key to Healing Find a Therapist Verified by Psychology Today Psychiatrists Treatment Centers Support Groups Professionals Therapists Sign Up | Login Psychology Today: Health, Help, Happiness + Find a Therapist Today’s essentials today’s essential reads. A New Peek Behind the Mirror of Narcissism Susan Krauss Whitbourne PhD, ABPP on June 8, 2024 in Fulfillment at Any Age Narcissists are seen as antagonistic and attention-grabbing, but is that always true? A new study shows 5 ways to consider narcissism's true qualities. Consumer Behavior Reviews with pictures are (sometimes) helpful. Art Markman Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Ulterior Motives Many factors may make a review more or less helpful. How do photos help a review have more impact? New research explores this question. How Old Is Too Old to Look Young? Wendy L. Patrick, J.D., Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Why Bad Looks Good What do younger people think about your attempts to look more like them? Research has some interesting answers. The New Fentanyl and Speedballing Crisis of 2024 Mark S. Gold M.D. on June 6, 2024 in Addiction Outlook Smoking fentanyl and speedballing is a new dangerous trend. Newer overdose reversal protocols and recovery medications are needed while we try to improve access and initiation. Do You Know These 5 Unconventional Tools to Reduce Anxiety? Victoria Maxwell on June 8, 2024 in Crazy for Life A Personal Perspective: Let go of preconceived ideas about wellness tools and allow yourself the freedom to find what works for you, no matter how uncommon it seems. With Disagreements: Try Respect, Walking Away, and Gratitude Rita Watson MPH on June 8, 2024 in With Love and Gratitude UCLA Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access found that students were angry. Learning to disagree with respect is an important aspect of a civil society. Leaning Into Slowing Down Jennifer Caspari Ph.D. on June 8, 2024 in Living Well When Your Body Doesn't Cooperate Practicing leaning into slowing down creates an opportunity to rest, support your well-being, and challenge the idea that you must prove your worth. The Impact of Evolving Medical Practice Ran D. Anbar M.D. on June 8, 2024 in Understanding Hypnosis A Personal Perspective: How will advances in artificial intelligence impact the practice of medicine? Teamwork: Stop Looking for the Root Cause Move Forward Stephen Friedman MA Psych on June 8, 2024 in Leadership Learning and Growth When a problem disrupts teamwork, do you look for the root cause? You might not want to do that. Artificial Intelligence Can llms become our new moral compass. John Nosta on June 8, 2024 in The Digital Self New data suggest LLMs can provide moral advice rated more thoughtful, trustworthy, and correct than laypeople and expert ethicists. Adult Children of Polyamorous Parents Elisabeth A. Sheff Ph.D., CSE on June 7, 2024 in The Polyamorists Next Door This post explores the three most common reactions that adult children have to their parents who come out to them as polyamorous. Emotion Regulation The key to effective discipline. Kat Scherer, Ph.D., and Elizabeth Sylvester, Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Relationship-Based Parenting Children's misbehavior is stressful, and adult emotional reactivity can worsen it. Sometimes, our attempts to discipline children can backfire, escalating upset and acting out. Every Parent's Biggest Regret Jeffrey Bernstein Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Liking the Child You Love Discover the lessons learned from parents who wish they could turn back time to fix their biggest parenting regret. Why Politics Get Nasty Heather Lench Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in The Emotional Toolkit Ever wonder why arguments about politics get so heated? The political messages we all watch could hold the answer. Balancing Needs as a Caregiver Kristi Rendahl DPA on June 7, 2024 in The Family Caregiver Caregiving is fundamentally about caring for someone, but it shouldn't be done at the expense of caregivers themselves. Caregiver wellness is also a top priority. Growth Mindset How a growth mindset can enhance romantic relationships. Jessica Koehler Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Beyond School Walls How can adopting a growth mindset transform your romantic relationship into a thriving, resilient partnership? How Religious Themes Can Aid Those With Mental Illness David T. Culkin Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in OCD and Marriage Religious experience can remind us that we are not alone, a key to healing in a divided world. The Shadow Self Iskra Fileva Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in The Philosopher's Diaries Sometimes, details about our lives that we keep private become a source of anxiety and shame. Silence weighs on us. Our shadow self haunts us. Stress and Decision Making When Dealing With Infertility Lisa Schuman on June 7, 2024 in Building Your Family Everyone knows that going through infertility is stressful but perhaps we don’t consider that it may be so stressful that it can lead you to make unhelpful decisions. Find Your Life’s Fulfillment In Love and Work What We Tell Ourselves Hard Experiences "Mean" Matters a Lot John-Manuel Andriote on June 7, 2024 in Stonewall Strong Personal Perspective: A trip to Paris could have been ruined on the first day if I had chosen to let it. Life happens. All we get to choose is whether to accept that fact or not. The Power of Never Giving Up Robert Puff Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Meditation for Modern Life How to overcome your past, embrace hope, and find lasting happiness. Relationships How the Big 5 Personality Traits Shape Romantic Success Frank J. Ninivaggi M.D., DLF-A.P.A. on June 7, 2024 in Envy This! Why the Big Five traits matter for couples. How Much Should You Tell Your Kids About Adult Problems? Robert Taibbi L.C.S.W. on June 7, 2024 in Fixing Families Children and teens are naturally sensitive to their parent's world. The challenge is knowing how much or how little to say as a parent. Here are some guidelines. Psychopharmacology The normalization of anxiety medication: what is the impact. Michele Leno Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Mind Matters Psychological approaches to anxiety treatment have become more personalized and holistic as stigmas surrounding mental health have waned in recent years. Interpersonal Emotional Regulation in a Digital World Phil Reed D.Phil. on June 7, 2024 in Digital World, Real World Why digital communication may hurt emotional regulation strategies. Climate Anxiety Child mental health and climate change adaptation. Ilan Kelman Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Disaster By Choice A review of 160 national climate change adaptation policies found a complete absence of addressing child mental health. Lighten Your (Cognitive) Load Carlos Alós-Ferrer Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Decisions and the Brain If you are always in a hurry and have too much on your mind, you might be setting yourself up for failure. Here is why and how to stop. Harnessing the Power of Behavior to Feel Better James Gross Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in Feel Better Learn how to harness your behavior to help you feel better, overcome burnout, depression, and anxiety, and get closer to living the life you want. 8 Questions to Ask Before Giving Up on Your Marriage Melissa Orlov on June 7, 2024 in May I Have Your Attention If you've been struggling in your relationship, you might wonder if you will ever be able to be happy again. But calling it quits is hard. Explore these questions first. Assessing Suicidality: Beyond Issues of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Kyle D. Killian Ph.D., LMFT on June 7, 2024 in Intersections Accurate clinical information is needed for good decision-making about suicide. Rekindling Love: How Deep Listening Can Rescue Relationship Guy Itzchakov Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in The Listening Lens Discover how deep listening saved a marriage and reignited connection. Inspired by Thich Nhat Hanh, it's a tale of empathy and lasting love. Why Does Making Friends Get Harder as We Age? Kaytee Gillis, LCSW-BACS on June 7, 2024 in Invisible Bruises While building friendships in childhood may have seemed effortless, many individuals find that making new friends becomes noticeably more difficult as they grow older. The Process of Putting Yourself First Justin Kompf Ph.D. on June 7, 2024 in A Practical Approach to Addressing Barriers to Physical Activity Overcome the struggle of putting yourself first. Discover how ingrained emotions and identities might be holding you back from behavior change. Find a Treatment Center Find a Psychiatrist Find a Support Group Find Online Therapy United States Brooklyn, NY Chicago, IL Houston, TX Los Angeles, CA New York, NY Portland, OR San Diego, CA San Francisco, CA Seattle, WA Washington, DC Asperger's Bipolar Disorder Chronic Pain Eating Disorders Passive Aggression Personality Goal Setting Positive Psychology Stopping Smoking Low Sexual Desire Child Development Self Tests NEW Therapy Center Diagnosis Dictionary Types of Therapy At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives. Emotional Intelligence Gaslighting Affective Forecasting Neuroscience American Psychological Association The impact of transgender legislation Psychological science points to an increased risk of suicide and poor mental health amid a record number of bills aimed at restricting the rights of the LGBTQ+ population APA policy supporting transgender, gender diverse, nonbinary individuals Membership in APA APA Community A new exclusive destination tailored for APA members Membership benefits Unlock the tools, discounts, and services included with your membership Renew your membership Keep your benefits and access to leading psychological information Psychology topics spotlight Misinformation and disinformation Resources to navigate trauma Tips to foster a healthy workplace Science and practice of psychology Ethics Code Continuing Education Grants, Awards, and Funding Standards and Guidelines Networks and communities Network with peers, enhance your professional development, expand your personal growth, and more APA Divisions High school teachers Undergraduate educators Graduate students Early career psychologists Managing your career Resources to help you throughout your career in psychology, including finding a job, salary data, finances and money management, mentoring and supervision, and training and professional development Explore career paths Psychologist profiles How did you get that job? Events and training Featured jobs Apa publications and products. Write with clarity, precision, and inclusion Children’s books Monitor on Psychology Newsletters Reports and surveys Continuing education Merchandise Real Siblings Jacob's Missing Book Harper Becomes a Big Sister Attachment-Based Family Therapy for Sexual and Gender Minority Young Adults and Their Non-Accepting Parents Dismantling Everyday Discrimination APA Services Learn how you can help APA advocate for psychology-informed federal policy and legislation, and support psychological research APA Services, Inc. A companion professional organization to APA, serving all members and advocating for psychology Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World Read our research on: Full Topic List Regions & Countries Publications Our Methods Short Reads Tools & Resources Read Our Research On: Internet & Technology 6 facts about americans and tiktok. 62% of U.S. adults under 30 say they use TikTok, compared with 39% of those ages 30 to 49, 24% of those 50 to 64, and 10% of those 65 and older. Many Americans think generative AI programs should credit the sources they rely on Americans’ use of chatgpt is ticking up, but few trust its election information, whatsapp and facebook dominate the social media landscape in middle-income nations, sign up for our internet, science, and tech newsletter. New findings, delivered monthly Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in the U.S. 64% of Americans live within 2 miles of a public electric vehicle charging station, and those who live closest to chargers view EVs more positively. When Online Content Disappears A quarter of all webpages that existed at one point between 2013 and 2023 are no longer accessible. A quarter of U.S. teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education High school teachers are more likely than elementary and middle school teachers to hold negative views about AI tools in education. Teens and Video Games Today 85% of U.S. teens say they play video games. They see both positive and negative sides, from making friends to harassment and sleep loss. Americans’ Views of Technology Companies Most Americans are wary of social media’s role in politics and its overall impact on the country, and these concerns are ticking up among Democrats. Still, Republicans stand out on several measures, with a majority believing major technology companies are biased toward liberals. 22% of Americans say they interact with artificial intelligence almost constantly or several times a day. 27% say they do this about once a day or several times a week. About one-in-five U.S. adults have used ChatGPT to learn something new (17%) or for entertainment (17%). Across eight countries surveyed in Latin America, Africa and South Asia, a median of 73% of adults say they use WhatsApp and 62% say they use Facebook. 5 facts about Americans and sports About half of Americans (48%) say they took part in organized, competitive sports in high school or college. REFINE YOUR SELECTION Research teams, signature reports. The State of Online Harassment Roughly four-in-ten Americans have experienced online harassment, with half of this group citing politics as the reason they think they were targeted. Growing shares face more severe online abuse such as sexual harassment or stalking Parenting Children in the Age of Screens Two-thirds of parents in the U.S. say parenting is harder today than it was 20 years ago, with many citing technologies – like social media or smartphones – as a reason. Dating and Relationships in the Digital Age From distractions to jealousy, how Americans navigate cellphones and social media in their romantic relationships. Americans and Privacy: Concerned, Confused and Feeling Lack of Control Over Their Personal Information Majorities of U.S. adults believe their personal data is less secure now, that data collection poses more risks than benefits, and that it is not possible to go through daily life without being tracked. Americans and ‘Cancel Culture’: Where Some See Calls for Accountability, Others See Censorship, Punishment Social media fact sheet, digital knowledge quiz, video: how do americans define online harassment. 1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries Research Topics Email Newsletters ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts . © 2024 Pew Research Center 354 IMAGES PPT Social Psychology Study Guide (Social Psychology) Chapter 2 Research Methodology In Social Psychology (PDF) The Social in Social Psychology case study on social psychology VIDEO Integrative Science Symposium: Intergenerational Transmission of Psychopathology علم النفس الاجتماعي، بسيكسوسويولوجيا التربية Social Psychology مدخل إلى علم النفس الإجتماعى جزء1 differences between social research and social survey #sociology #bathirdyear Does peer pressure also work among avatars?How virtual environments influence our moral views Methods of Social Psychology: Exploring Sociometry COMMENTS The 9 Major Research Areas in Social Psychology Social influence: Social influence refers to the ways in which our opinions and behavior are affected by the presence of others.This includes studies on topics such as conformity, obedience, and social pressure. Social perception: Social perception refers to the ways in which we form impressions of other people.This includes research on topics including first impressions, stereotyping, and ... Current Research in Social Psychology Current Research in Social Psychology (CRISP) is a peer reviewed, electronic journal publishing theoretically driven, empirical research in major areas of social psychology. Publication is sponsored by the Center for the Study of Group Processes at the University of Iowa, which provides free access to its contents. Social Psychology: Articles, Research, & Case Studies on Social New research on social psychology from Harvard Business School faculty on issues including behavioral economics research, habit formation, and the effects of group loyalty. ... A study of 70,000 decisions by Thomas Graeber and Benjamin Enke finds that self-assurance doesn't necessarily reflect skill. Shrewd decision-making often comes down to ... The Journal of Social Psychology Since John Dewey and Carl Murchison founded it in 1929, The Journal of Social Psychology has published original empirical research in all areas of basic and applied social psychology. Most articles report laboratory or field research in core areas of social and organizational psychology including the self and social identity, person perception and social cognition, attitudes and persuasion ... Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Effective July 1, 2021, empirical research, including meta-analyses, submitted to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology must at least meet the "requirement" level (Level 2) for citation; data, code, and materials transparency; design and analysis transparency; and study and analysis plan preregistration. Authors should include a ... Social Psychological Theory as History: Outlining the Critical Here, we arrive at the "modernity study" and the fact that social psychology, in its a-historical orientation, has failed to develop an adequate theory of the influence of neoliberalism on psychology. This is a significant omission, as the emergence of neoliberalism is probably the most important economic event of the last half-century. Social Psychology Quarterly: Sage Journals Social Psychology Quarterly. Social Psychology Quarterly (SPQ) publishes theoretical and empirical papers on the link between the individual and society. This includes the study of the relations of individuals to one another, as well as to groups, collectivities, and institutions. It also … | View full journal description. Shared understanding and social connection: Integrating approaches from In these ways, neuroimaging can be used synergistically with traditional behavioral and experimental methods in social psychology to study links between shared reality and social connection. In the following sections, we highlight neuroimaging research that corroborates these established links, showing that shared understanding of various ... Psychological Science: Sage Journals The journal publishes cutting-edge research articles and short reports, spanning the entire spectrum of the science of psychology. This journal is the source for the latest findings in cognitive, social, developmental, and health psychology, as well as behavioral neuroscience and biopsychology. View full journal description Social Psychology: Definition, Theories, Scope, & Examples Social psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings, beliefs, intentions, and goals are constructed within a social context by the actual or imagined interactions with others. It, therefore, looks at human behavior as influenced by other people and the conditions under which social behavior and feelings occur. Social Psychology Experiments: 10 Of The Most Brilliant Studies It has since become a classic social psychology experiment, studied by generations of students and recently coming under a lot of criticism. 5. The Milgram Social Psychology Experiment. The Milgram experiment, led by the well-known psychologist Stanley Milgram in the 1960s, aimed to test people's obedience to authority. 1.3 Conducting Research in Social Psychology Any given research project is conducted in only one setting and assesses only one or a few dependent variables. And any one study uses only one set of research participants. Social psychology research is sometimes criticized because it frequently uses college students from Western cultures as participants (Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). History of Social Psychology: Insights ... The disappearance from flagship social psychology journals of research using laboratory animals to study social phenomena is a case in point. Throughout the 1960s, there had been a steady stream of provocative articles on affiliation, imitation, empathy, and cooperation. ... Indeed, most memorable studies in social psychology combine elements ... Module 2: Research Methods in Social Psychology Module 2: Research Methods in Social Psychology. Module Overview. In Module 2 we will address the fact that psychology is the scientific study of behavior and mental processes. We will do this by examining the steps of the scientific method and describing the five major designs used in psychological research. We will also differentiate between ... Social Psychology Examines Interpersonal Relationships Social psychologists are interested in all aspects of interpersonal relationships and the ways that psychology can improve those interactions. For example, their research helps us understand how people form attitudes toward others and, when these are harmful — as in the case of prejudice, for example — provides insight into ways to change them. Social psychology social psychology, the scientific study of the behaviour of individuals in their social and cultural setting.Although the term may be taken to include the social activity of laboratory animals or those in the wild, the emphasis here is on human social behaviour.. Once a relatively speculative, intuitive enterprise, social psychology has become an active form of empirical investigation, the ... Racial Inequality in Psychological Research: Trends of the Past and Race plays an important role in how people think, develop, and behave. In the current article, we queried more than 26,000 empirical articles published between 1974 and 2018 in top-tier cognitive, developmental, and social psychology journals to document how often psychological research acknowledges this reality and to examine whether people who edit, write, and participate in the research are ... 11.4: Research Methods in Social Psychology This page titled 11.4: Research Methods in Social Psychology is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by NOBA ( The Noba Project) . To explore these concepts requires special research methods. Following a brief overview of traditional research designs, this module introduces how complex experimental ... Online Social Psychology Studies Online Social Psychology Studies. This page contains links to 116 web-based experiments, surveys, and other social psychology studies. If you would like us to add a link to your study, click . To help reach a wide audience, study links posted here are also publicized via Twitter and an RSS feed (a combined subscriber base of over 294,000 people). The unique nature and psychosocial implications of awe Psychological research has explored awe's intricate nature and far-reaching consequences. Awe profoundly influences the sense of self (which has considerable psychosocial implications), but ... Case Study Research Method in Psychology Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. Typically, data is gathered from various sources using several methods (e.g., observations & interviews). The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e., the patient's personal history). In psychology, case studies are ... Psychology Today: Health, Help, Happiness + Find a Therapist View the latest from the world of psychology: from behavioral research to practical guidance on relationships, mental health and addiction. Find help from our directory of therapists ... American Psychological Association (APA) The American Psychological Association (APA) is a scientific and professional organization that represents psychologists in the United States. APA educates the public about psychology, behavioral science and mental health; promotes psychological science and practice; fosters the education and training of psychological scientists, practitioners and educators; advocates for psychological ... Internet & Technology Americans' Views of Technology Companies. Most Americans are wary of social media's role in politics and its overall impact on the country, and these concerns are ticking up among Democrats. Still, Republicans stand out on several measures, with a majority believing major technology companies are biased toward liberals. short readsApr 3, 2024. assignment essay homework paper phd report resume review speech thesis