Zero-sum beliefs tend to be asymmetrical (the others gain at one’s own expense, but not vice versa), moderated by how threatened people feel by others’ success; reassuring people about their party’s strengths eliminates asymmetric zero-sum beliefs

Roberts, R., & Davidai, S. (2021). The psychology of asymmetric zero-sum beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Nov 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000378

Zero-sum beliefs reflect the perception that one party’s gains are necessarily offset by another party’s losses. Although zero-sum relationships are, from a strictly theoretical perspective, symmetrical, we find evidence for asymmetrical zero-sum beliefs: The belief that others gain at one’s own expense, but not vice versa. Across various contexts (international relations, interpersonal negotiations, political partisanship, organizational hierarchies) and research designs (within- and between-participant), we find that people are more prone to believe that others’ success comes at their own expense than they are to believe that their own success comes at others’ expense. Moreover, we find that people exhibit asymmetric zero-sum beliefs only when thinking about how their own party relates to other parties but not when thinking about how other parties relate to each other. Finally, we find that this effect is moderated by how threatened people feel by others’ success and that reassuring people about their party’s strengths eliminates asymmetric zero-sum beliefs. We discuss the theoretical contributions of our findings to research on interpersonal and intergroup zero-sum beliefs and their implications for understanding when and why people view life as zero-sum. 

Check also Johnson, Samuel G. B., Jiewen Zhang, and Frank Keil. 2020. “Win–win Denial: The Psychological Underpinnings of Zero-sum Thinking.” PsyArXiv. April 30. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2020/04/winwin-denial-psychological.html

And The politics of zero-sum thinking: The relationship between political ideology and the belief that life is a zero-sum game. Shai Davidai, Martino Ongis. Science Advances Dec 18 2019, Vol. 5, no. 12, eaay3761. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/12/liberals-exhibit-zero-sum-thinking-when.html

Tell Ekman! What are commonly known as the six classic basic emotions do not reliably co-occur with their predicted facial signal

Durán, J. I., & Fernández-Dols, J.-M. (2021). Do emotions result in their predicted facial expressions? A meta-analysis of studies on the co-occurrence of expression and emotion. Emotion, Nov 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001015

Abstract: That basic emotions produce a facial signal would—if true—provide a foundation for a science of emotion. Here, random-effects meta-analyses tested whether happiness, sadness, anger, disgust, fear, and surprise each co-occurs with its predicted facial signal. The first meta-analysis examined only those studies that measured full expressions through Facial Actions Coding System (FACS). Average co-occurrence effect size was .13. The second meta-analysis included both full and partial expressions, as measured by FACS or another system. Average co-occurrence effect size rose to .23. A third meta-analysis estimated the Pearson correlation between intensity of the reported emotion and intensity of the predicted facial expression. Average correlation was .30. Overall, co-occurrence and correlation were greatest for disgust, least for surprise. What are commonly known as the six classic basic emotions do not reliably co-occur with their predicted facial signal. Heterogeneity between samples was found, suggesting a more complex account of facial expressions.

Check also Research on Non-verbal Signs of Lies and Deceit: A Blind Alley. Tim Brennen and Svein Magnussen. Front. Psychol., December 14 2020. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2020/12/on-popular-paul-ekman-hypothesis-of.html

We also report men who believe that they are more successful at mating gaze more at male chests than less confident men & that women do gaze at sexualized body areas of men, specifically the hips and groin

Widman, D. R., Bennetti, M. K., & Anglemyer, R. (2021). Gaze patterns of sexually fluid women and men at nude females and males. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 15(4), 315–325. Nov 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000183

Abstract: Investigations of sexual fluidity have consistently found that women are more fluid than men. Several theories have been proposed to explain this sex difference. Two of these suggest that women are sexually fluid due to reproductive pressure from men. These theories suggest that women are fluid, in part, to satisfy male sexual behavior, either by engaging in and enhancing polygynous matings or allowing extrapair copulations for the men with those women the men’s mates select. This suggests that women, in their assessment of the attractiveness of other women, should assess female attractiveness as men do. The current study examined gaze patterns of heterosexual men and women while looking at nude male and female models. The results replicate the common findings that women are more fluid than men and that men gaze at the breasts of nude female models. We also report men who believe that they are more successful at mating gaze more at male chests than less confident men and that women do gaze at sexualized body areas of men, specifically the hips and groin. Finally, as hypothesized, more fluid women spend more time gazing at the breasts of nude female models, suggesting a male pattern of attractiveness assessment. 

Check also Widman, D. R., Bennetti, M. K., & Anglemyer, R. (2019). Gaze patterns of sexually fluid women and men at nude females and males. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, Sep 02 2019, https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/09/gaze-patterns-of-sexually-fluid-women.html