Theories of donation decisions, particularly those addressing beneficiary effects, have attracted scholarly interest for decades. However, most studies have been conducted in settings where visual cues (e.g., photos of recipients) correspond to the actual number of beneficiaries. In this study, we analyze a large dataset of real-world fundraising campaigns from an online donation platform to test predictions from prevailing theories of charitable giving. We focus on the effects of visual cues alone, independent of the actual number of beneficiaries, as is typical in online appeals. Specifically, we examine whether including a photo featuring a human recipient (vs. a non-human image) increases prosocial engagement (visual identifiability), and whether campaigns with a photo of a single identified individual attract more donations than those with a photo of multiple identified individuals (visual singularity). We find evidence supporting the visual identifiable victim effect, but not the visual singularity effect. These findings clarify how laboratory-based insights into donation decisions extend to real-world fundraising contexts and have practical implications for individuals and organizations seeking to optimize fundraising campaigns.

Construal-level theory (CLT) proposes that psychological distance influences the level of abstraction at which something is mentally construed: Things perceived as less probable (likelihood) or further away from the here (spatial distance), now (temporal distance), or self (social distance) are thought about more abstractly. In this international multilab study, we tested four basic hypotheses derived from core assumptions of CLT and explore potential moderators and boundary conditions of the effects. Participants ( N = 11,775) from 27 countries and regions were randomly assigned to one of four experimental protocols focused on different types of psychological distance (temporal, spatial, social, or likelihood), and each experiment manipulated psychological distance (close vs. distant). The protocols for temporal distance ( n = 2,941) and spatial distance ( n = 2,973) were direct replications of Liberman and Trope (Study 1) and Fujita et al. (Study 1), respectively. The remaining two protocols were paradigmatic replications, applying to social distance ( n = 2,926) and likelihood ( n = 2,936). The effects of psychological distance on construal level for the four present studies were as follows (positive effects are consistent with hypotheses): temporal, d = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.003, 0.16] (effect in original study: d = 0.92); spatial, d = 0.04, 95% CI = [−0.03, 0.11] (effect in original study: d = 0.55); social, d = −0.27, 95% CI = [−0.34, −0.19]; and likelihood, d = 0.03, 95% CI = [−0.05, 0.11]. Pretests indicated that valence and abstraction were confounded in response options on the outcome measure. Controlling for this confound eliminated the hypothesis-inconsistent effect of social distance, d = 0.006, 95% CI = [−0.05, 0.07]. These findings provide limited evidence for the predictions of the theory and present a critical challenge for CLT.

The same dataset can be analysed in different justifiable ways to answer the same research question, potentially challenging the robustness of empirical science1-3. In this crowd initiative, we investigated the degree to which research findings in the social and behavioural sciences are contingent on analysts' choices. We examined a stratified random sample of 100 studies published between 2009 and 2018, in which, for one claim per study, at least five reanalysts independently reanalysed the original data. The statistical appropriateness of the reanalyses was assessed in peer evaluations, and the robustness indicators were inspected along a range of research characteristics and study designs. We found that 34% of the independent reanalyses yielded the same result (within a tolerance region of ±0.05 Cohen's d) as the original report; with a four times broader tolerance region, this indicator increased to 57%. Of the reanalyses conducted, 74% reached the same conclusion as the original investigation, 24% yielded no effects or inconclusive results and 2% reported the opposite effect. This exploratory study indicates that the common single-path analyses in social and behavioural research should not be simply assumed to be robust to alternative analyses4. Therefore, we recommend the development and use of practices to explore and communicate this neglected source of uncertainty.

Implementation science has a history of drawing from other fields to advance its science, yet understanding how approaches from marketing might enhance the field remains a largely untapped area of theoretical and methodological potential. Social marketing (i.e., applying commercial marketing to solve social or health problems) is a branch of marketing that shares many conceptual features with implementation science (e.g., behaviour change), but remains an unrealized opportunity for synergy. This review aimed to 1) describe studies that have tested social marketing interventions in controlled designs; 2) describe these interventions including their context, mechanism, and outcome; and 3) propose social marketing approaches that might be usefully applied to implementation science. This scoping review, with a team consensus discussion, followed JBI (formerly the Joanna Briggs Institute) methodological guidance and included a team of researchers and practitioners in implementation, marketing, and social marketing. Twelve databases were searched. Studies were included that 1) utilized a randomized or non-randomized controlled intervention design; and 2) tested a social marketing intervention as defined by five essential social marketing criteria. Two reviewers independently completed all screening and extraction. Variables extracted included intervention details per social marketing criteria and the intervention’s context, mechanism, and outcome. Team consensus discussions of the scoping review results were used to determine approaches that might be usefully applied more broadly across implementation science. Screening of 4,867 citations yielded 28 included studies published from 1999–2023. All topics were from the health field and included nutrition (13, 46

Identifying cues to contagious disease is critical for effectively tracking and defending against interpersonal infection threats. People hold lay beliefs about the types of sensory information most relevant for identifying whether others are sick with transmissible illnesses. Are these beliefs universal, or do they vary along cultural and ecological dimensions? Participants in 58 countries (N = 19,217) judged how effective, and how likely they were to use, cues involving each of the five major sensory modalities in an imagined social interaction during a flu outbreak. Belief patterns were strongly consistent across countries (sight > audition > touch > smell > taste), suggesting a largely universal conceptualization of the role of sensory information for interpersonal respiratory disease detection. Results also support a safe senses hypothesis, with perceivers reporting that they would use senses that function at a distance-and thus reduce pathogen transmission risk-more than would be expected given participants' beliefs as to the efficacy of these senses for disease detection. Where societal variation did emerge, it was captured by a cohesive set of socio-ecological factors, including human development, latitude, pathogen prevalence, and population density. Together, these findings reveal a shared lens through which contagious respiratory disease is assessed, one that prioritizes minimizing risk to perceivers, and may offer leverage for designing interventions to improve public health.

When processing and analyzing empirical data, researchers regularly face choices that may appear arbitrary (e.g., how to define and handle outliers). If one chooses to exclusively focus on a particular option and conduct a single analysis, its outcome might be of limited utility. That is, one remains agnostic regarding the generalizability of the results, because plausible alternative paths remain unexplored. A multiverse analysis offers a solution to this issue by exploring the various choices pertaining to data-processing and/or model building, and examining their impact on the conclusion of a study. However, even though multiverse analyses are arguably less susceptible to biases compared to the typical single-pathway approach, it is still possible to selectively add or omit pathways. To address this issue, we outline a novel, more principled approach to conducting multiverse analyses through crowdsourcing. The approach is detailed in a step-by-step tutorial to facilitate its implementation. We also provide a worked-out illustration featuring the Semantic Priming Across Many Languages project, thereby demonstrating its feasibility and its ability to increase objectivity and transparency. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Semantic priming has been studied for nearly 50 years across various experimental manipulations and theoretical frameworks. Although previous studies provide insight into the cognitive underpinnings of semantic representations, they have suffered from small sample sizes and a lack of linguistic and cultural diversity. In this Registered Report, we measured the size and the variability of the semantic priming effect across 19 languages (N = 25,163 participants analyzed) by creating the largest available database of semantic priming values based on an adaptive sampling procedure. We found evidence for semantic priming in terms of differences in response latencies between related word-pair conditions and unrelated word-pair conditions. Model comparisons showed that inclusion of a random intercept for language improved model fit, providing support for variability in semantic priming across languages. This study highlights the robustness and variability of semantic priming across languages and provides a rich, linguistically diverse dataset for further analysis.

Consumers' choices of whom to follow on digital platforms shape their informational landscape. In an era in which the credibility of informational sources is critical, this research examines two key questions: (1) When do consumers prioritize communicator credibility over likability in their decisions to follow? and (2) How do multiple credibility and likability cues interact to influence these decisions? Analyzing four large datasets from popular following-enabled platforms, we find that consumers' orientation toward content consumption-goal directed ("search") versus experiential ("scroll")-is key. Communicator credibility drives following on search-driven platforms (Yelp, Goodreads), whereas likability drives following on scroll-driven ones (Twitter/X, Instagram). Aggregate communicator sentiment across multiple posts serves as a cross-platform indicator of credibility and likability, and its effect on follower count differs by platform type. On scroll-driven platforms, communicators with positive aggregate sentiment benefit from a likability premium, attracting the most followers; this preference for positivity is mitigated by the presence of alternative communicator likability cues (e.g., using sociable language). On search-driven platforms, communicators with mixed aggregate sentiment benefit from a credibility premium, attracting the most followers; this preference for mixed sentiment is mitigated in the presence of alternative credibility cues (e.g., Yelp's "Elite" badge). Implications for consumer protection and platform design are discussed.

According to cognitive-dissonance theory, performing counterattitudinal behavior produces a state of dissonance that people are motivated to resolve, usually by changing their attitude to be in line with their behavior. One of the most popular experimental paradigms used to produce such attitude change is the induced-compliance paradigm. Despite its popularity, the replication crisis in social psychology and other fields, as well as methodological limitations associated with the paradigm, raise concerns about the robustness of classic studies in this literature. We therefore conducted a multilab constructive replication of the induced-compliance paradigm based on Croyle and Cooper (Experiment 1). In a total of 39 labs from 19 countries and 14 languages, participants (N = 4,898) were assigned to one of three conditions: writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice, writing a counterattitudinal essay under low choice, or writing a neutral essay under high choice. The primary analyses failed to support the core hypothesis: No significant difference in attitude was observed after writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice compared with low choice. However, we did observe a significant difference in attitude after writing a counterattitudinal essay compared with writing a neutral essay. Secondary analyses revealed the pattern of results to be robust to data exclusions, lab variability, and attitude assessment. Additional exploratory analyses were conducted to test predictions from cognitive-dissonance theory. Overall, the results call into question whether the induced-compliance paradigm provides robust evidence for cognitive dissonance.

In this commentary, we examine the implications of the failed replication reported by Vaidis et al., which represents the largest multilab attempt to replicate the induced-compliance paradigm in cognitive-dissonance theory. We respond to commentaries on this study and discuss potential explanations for the null findings, including issues with the perceived choice manipulation and various post hoc explanations. Our commentary includes an assessment of the broader landscape of cognitive-dissonance research, revealing pervasive methodological limitations, such as underpowered studies and a lack of open-science practices. We conclude that our replication study and our examination of the literature raise substantial concerns about the reliability of the induced-compliance paradigm and highlight the need for more rigorous research practices in the field of cognitive dissonance.

Meaning-making systems underlie perceptions of the efficacy of threat-mitigating behaviors. Religion and science both offer threat mitigation, yet these two meaning-making systems are often considered incompatible. Do such epistemological conflicts swamp the desire to employ diverse precautions against threats? Or do individuals – particularly individuals who are highly reactive to threats – hedge their bets by using multiple threat-mitigating practices despite their potential epistemological incompatibility? Complicating this question, perceptions of conflict between religion and science likely vary across cultures; likewise, pragmatic features of precautions prescribed by some religions make them incompatible with some scientifically-based precautions. The COVID-19 pandemic elicited diverse precautionary behaviors, and thus provided an opportunity to investigate these questions. Across 27 societies from five continents (N = 7,844), in the majority of countries, individuals’ practice of religious precautions such as prayer correlates positively with their use of scientifically-based precautions. Prior work indicates that greater adherence to tradition likely reflects greater reactivity to threats. Unsurprisingly given associations between many traditions and religion, we find that valuing tradition is predictive of employing religious precautions. However, consonant with its association with threat reactivity, we also find that traditionalism predicts adherence to public health precautions – a pattern that underscores threat-avoidant individuals’ apparent tolerance for epistemological conflict in pursuit of safety.

Cultural logic is a set of cultural scripts and patterns organized around a central theme. The cultural logics of dignity, honor, and face describe different ways of evaluating a person’s worth and maintaining cooperation. These cultural logics vary in prevalence across cultures. In this study, we collaboratively develop and validate a measure capturing these cultural logics, which will allow us to map world cultures based on the prevalence of these logics. We will further explore the interrelations of dignity, honor, and face with prosocial behavior, values, moral beliefs, and religiosity as well as examine the generalizability of these relationships across cultures. Finally, we will explore historical antecedents (e.g., resource scarcity) and current correlates (e.g., inequality) of the country-level prevalence of these cultural logics. This study will generate a new dataset of country scores for dignity, honor, and face that will be available for future comparative research. It will also provide theoretical insights for researchers and practitioners interested in cooperation and social behavior within and between cultures.

Morals constrain self-serving behavior. Yet, self-regulation failures in the face of monetary temptation are common at the workplace. To limit such failures, organizations can design environments that limit the temptation to behave self-servingly, nudging workers to uphold their morals. In a series of experiments where participants may be tempted to take excessive pay after exerting effort, we study whether a simple intervention—asking individuals to state the wage they believe should be paid ex ante, before facing the temptation to take excessive compensation—prevents self-serving behavior. In contrast to lay beliefs and the predictions from prior work, we find that such an intervention is not effective, leading to self-serving behavior. However, a more realistic elicitation procedure of the appropriate wage mitigates this effect. These findings contribute to work on the malleability of moral behavior showing that simple interventions thought to effectively mitigate self-serving behavior can prompt individuals to stretch their moral boundaries. They also stress the importance of properly testing interventions that might seem intuitive. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: Financial support from the Israel Science Foundation [Grant 766/19] is gratefully acknowledged. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4344 .

IntroductionKnowledge translation has emerged as a practice and a science to bridge the gap between evidence and practice in healthcare. While the field has appropriately borrowed from other related fields to advance its science, there remain fields less mined. One such field with potential relevance to knowledge translation, but limited application to date, is social marketing. This review aims to determine elements of social marketing interventions that could be applied to knowledge translation science. Our objectives are to: (1) summarise the types of studies that have tested social marketing interventions in controlled intervention study designs; (2) describe the social marketing interventions and their effects; and (3) propose strategies for the integration of social marketing interventions into knowledge translation science. Methods and analysisThis scoping review will be conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodological Guidance. For the first and second objectives, all English-language studies published from 1971 onwards will be included if they (1) used a randomised or non-randomised controlled intervention design, and (2) tested a social marketing intervention as defined by five essential social marketing criteria. The research team will address the third objective through discussion and consensus. All screening and extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Variables extracted will include intervention details using essential and desirable social marketing criteria and the context, mechanism and outcomes of the interventions. Ethics and disseminationThis project is a secondary analysis of published papers and does not require ethics approval. We will disseminate our review outputs in knowledge translation journals and present at relevant conferences across the spectrum of the field. We will produce a short and long version of a plain language summary that will be tailored to various groups including implementation scientists and quality improvement researchers. Registration detailsOpen Science Framework Registration link: osf.io/6q834.

The current study uses a massive dataset of real-world fundraising campaigns to test the predictions of several theories in charitable giving in a unique context. We find that merely adding a photo to a campaign description has a positive effect on the average donation amount and on the likelihood of reaching the campaign goal. By analyzing the identifiability of the donation recipients in the campaign photos, we find evidence for the identifiable victim effect. Contrarily, we observe results that are inconsistent with the expected singularity effect and scope insensitivity. A follow-up controlled experiment shows that the studied effects are context dependent. These findings help to increase trust in some of the above theories and call for more evidence on others. Our approach motivates future studies to embrace advanced technologies in replicating and identifying boundaries for existing human behavioral theories in dynamic real-world and large-scale contexts.

People vary both in their embrace of their society’s traditions, and in their perception of hazards as salient and necessitating a response. Over evolutionary time, traditions have offered avenues for addressing hazards, plausibly resulting in linkages between orientations toward tradition and orientations toward danger. Emerging research documents connections between traditionalism and threat responsivity, including pathogen-avoidance motivations. Additionally, because hazard-mitigating behaviors can conflict with competing priorities, associations between traditionalism and pathogen avoidance may hinge on contextually contingent tradeoffs. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a real-world test of the posited relationship between traditionalism and hazard avoidance. Across 27 societies (N = 7844), we find that, in a majority of countries, individuals’ endorsement of tradition positively correlates with their adherence to costly COVID-19-avoidance behaviors; accounting for some of the conflicts that arise between public health precautions and other objectives further strengthens this evidence that traditionalism is associated with greater attention to hazards.

Online fundraisers often showcase information about the number of donations received and the proximity to the campaign goal. This practice follows research on descriptive norms and goal-directed motivation, which predicts higher contributions as the number of donors increases and as the campaign goal is approached. However, across three studies, we demonstrate that when the campaign is close to completion, individuals give more when they see that there are few (vs. many) donors to the campaign. We observe this result across real campaigns on a fundraising website and obtain causal evidence for this effect in two laboratory experiments. We find that this effect is driven in part by an increase in the perceived progress that one's donation makes towards reaching the campaign goal. This work identifies a counterintuitive consequence of norm-based marketing appeals and has important implications for fundraisers.

In the context of charitable donation decisions, we demonstrate that adding information to the decision context about a fundraising campaign one cannot act on (i.e., an unavailable alternative) increases donations for the remaining, available campaign. At times, adding an unavailable alternative is even more effective at increasing the donation rate than adding an available alternative to the choice set, contradicting the normative assumption that having more options is better. We find preliminary evidence suggesting that the effect is driven by perceived impact—adding an unavailable alternative leads consumers to believe their donation will have a greater impact on the remaining cause. This investigation contributes to the consumer prosocial behavior literature by demonstrating the positive effect of unavailable alternatives on donation choice and identifying its extent and determinants. Future directions and practical implications for fundraising managers are discussed.