It's not WEIRD, it's WRONG: When Researchers Overlook uNderlying Genotypes, they will not detect universal processes.Lowell Gaertner,Constantine Sedikides,Huajian Cai &Jonathon D. Brown -2010 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):93-94.detailsWe dispute Henrich et al.'s analysis of cultural differences at the level of a narrow behavioral-expression for assessing a universalist argument. When Researchers Overlook uNderlying Genotypes (WRONG), they fail to detect universal processes that generate observed differences in expression. We reify this position with our own cross-cultural research on self-enhancement and self-esteem.
Automatic threat processing shows evidence of exclusivity.David S. March,Michael A. Olson &Lowell Gaertner -2023 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 46:e131.detailsDe Neys argues against assigning exclusive capacities to automatic versus controlled processes. The dual implicit process model provides a theoretical rationale for the exclusivity of automatic threat processing, and corresponding data provide empirical evidence of such exclusivity. De Neys's dismissal of exclusivity is premature and based on a limited sampling of psychological research.
Motivational (con)fusion: Identity fusion does not quell personal self-interest.Lowell Gaertner,Amy Heger &Constantine Sedikides -2018 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 41:e202.detailsWe question whether altruistic motivation links identity fusion and extreme self-sacrifice. We review two lines of research suggesting that the underlying motivation is plausibly egoistic.
No categories
Female advantage in threat avoidance manifests in threat reaction but not threat detection.David S. March &Lowell Gaertner -2022 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 45.detailsThreat avoidance involves both detection of a threatening stimulus and reaction to it. We demonstrate with empirically validated stimuli that threat detection is more pronounced among males, whereas threat reactivity is more pronounced among females. Why women are less efficient detectors of threat challenges Benenson et al.'s conceptual analysis.