Pancultural nostalgia in action: Prevalence, triggers, and psychological functions of nostalgia across cultures.

Nostalgia is a social, self-relevant, and bittersweet (although mostly positive) emotion that arises when reflecting on fond past memories and serves key psychological functions. The majority of evidence concerning the prevalence, triggers, and functions of nostalgia has been amassed in samples from a handful of largely Western cultures. If nostalgia is a fundamental psychological resource, it should perform similar functions across cultures, although its operational dynamics may be shaped by culture. This study (N = 2,606) examined dispositional nostalgia, self-reported triggers of nostalgia, and functions of experimentally induced nostalgia in young adults across 28 countries and a special administrative region of China (i.e., Hong Kong). Results indicated that nostalgia is frequently experienced across cultures, albeit better valued in more-developed countries (i.e., higher national wealth and life-expectancy). Nostalgia is triggered by psychological threats (especially in warmer countries), sensory stimuli (especially in more-developed countries), and social gatherings (especially in less-developed countries). The positive or negative affect prompted by experimentally induced nostalgia varied by country, but was mild overall. More importantly, recalling a nostalgic (vs. ordinary) memory increased social connectedness, self-continuity, and meaning in life across cultures. In less-developed countries, recalling an ordinary memory also conferred some of these functions, reducing the effect size of nostalgia. Finally, recalling a nostalgic (vs. ordinary) memory augmented state satisfaction with life in countries with lower quality of living (i.e., lower life-expectancy and life-satisfaction). Overall, findings confirm the relevance of nostalgia across a wide range of cultures and indicate cultural nuances in its functioning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Special Issue Introduction: The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021: A Pilot Project on the Applicability of Registered Reports in Quantitative Political Science.

The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pioneering initiative in quantitative political science. Aimed at increasing the adoption of replicable and transparent research practices, it led to this special issue. The project combined the rigor of registered reports-a new publication format in which studies are evaluated prior to data collection/access and analysis-with quantitative political science research in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This special issue, which features the registered reports that resulted from the project, shows that transparent research following open science principles benefits our discipline and substantially contributes to quantitative political science. In this introduction to the special issue, we first elaborate on why more transparent research practices are necessary to guarantee the cumulative progress of scientific knowledge. We then show how registered reports can contribute to increasing the transparency of scientific practices. Next, we discuss the application of open science practices in quantitative political science to date. And finally, we present the process and schedule of the GLES Open Science Challenge and give an overview of the contributions included in this special issue.

Do Smarter People Have More Conservative Economic Attitudes? Assessing the Relationship Between Cognitive Ability and Economic Ideology.

Evidence on the association of cognitive ability with economic attitudes is mixed. We conducted a meta-analysis (k = 20, N = 46,426) to examine the relationship between objective measures of cognitive ability and economic ideology and analyzed survey data (N = 3,375) to test theoretical explanations for the association. The meta-analysis provided evidence for a small positive association with a weighted mean effect size of r = .07 (95% CI = [0.02, 0.12]), suggesting that higher cognitive ability is associated with conservative views on economic issues, but effect sizes were extremely heterogeneous. Tests using representative survey data provided support for both a positive association of cognitive ability with economic conservatism that is mediated through income as well as for a negative association that is mediated through a higher need for certainty. Hence, multiple causal mechanisms with countervailing effects might explain the low overall association of cognitive ability with economic political attitudes.

The role of motivation in the association of political ideology with cognitive performance.

Previous research reports a negative association between individuals' tendency to endorse right- versus left-wing socio-cultural views and performance in cognitive tasks. We hypothesized that this association results to some extent from explicit epistemic preferences and low motivation to perform well in such tasks, rather than resulting from low ability only. In two studies we found support for this hypothesis. In Study 1, we show that part of the association of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) with performance in the cognitive reflection task (CRT) could be explained by the motivational construct of need for cognition. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated the motivation of participants by providing (vs. not providing) monetary incentives in the CRT and documented an improvement in the performance of participants high in RWA but not of participants low in RWA. The crucial role of ideology-based motivational differences in the context of cognitive performance is discussed.

A Closer Look at Social Psychologists' Silver Bullet: Inevitable and Evitable Side Effects of the Experimental Approach.

The main advantage of experimental research lies in the possibility of systematically investigating the causal relation between the variables of interest. The well-known advantages result from (a) the possibility to manipulate the independent variable, (b) random assignment of participants to the experimental conditions, and (c) the experimenter's control over the operationalization of the variables and the general experimental setting. We argue that it is exactly these elements that constitute core advantages of experimental research but that are-at the same time-associated with side effects, which are often out of focus when researchers derive theoretical conclusions from their experimental findings. We discuss potential restrictions linked to these core elements of experimental research. Implications for both theory development and research design are discussed.