Jordan Axt

McGill University in early Autumn

Delighted to share that we are currently hiring for a tenure-track position (open rank) in Clinical Psychology in the Department of Psychology at McGill University. Come join a great department! Link to apply: mcgill.wd3.myworkdayjobs.com/en-US/mcgill....

For sure, I think there is a "physiological" component here that contributes to differences in *desired* portion sizes. Though there are also societal factors in terms of bodily expectations. Paper finds that explicit gender-portion beliefs do correlate with things like support for beauty ideals.

Your husband orders your chipotle order… when he orders it for me, I get wayyyy more food #chipotle #chipotlehacks #foodie #mexicanfood #burritobowl #rvlife #fulltimetraveler #husbandgoals TikTok video by Fulltime Travel| Libby & Alex

Though also interesting that many people seem to believe in a gender effect. Check out the 500k likes on this video, for example: www.tiktok.com/@travelintho...

Yeah, I think that's right. There is certainly variance in portion sizes given at these restos -- here is a fun demonstration of that:
www.cnn.com/chipotle-por...
But that variance does not seem related to customer gender alone. Could also be as you note that men are more into order 'hacks'

Read much more about this (open access) work, led by lab members Elisabeth Irvine and William Li, here: authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S...

This field study finding was far from obvious, though – a majority of both a laypeople and social psychologist sample predicted that men would receive larger portions than women in our field study.

Perhaps surprisingly, the field study showed no significant difference in portion sizes given to men vs. women. Hard to know exactly why this occurred, but one possibility is that standardization in serving practices at such restaurants may have limited the impact of gender on portion decisions.

But my favorite (and most expensive) part is the field study, where we sent 91 pairs of men and women – matched on BMI -- to fast-casual restaurants where they ordered the exact same meal from the same server separated by a few minutes. We then weighed their portions outside the restaurant.

Another study showed that these stereotypes impact memory. Using a “Who ordered what?” paradigm found that people remembered counter-stereotypical pairings (women with large portions, men with small portions) better than stereotype-consistent ones!

First, studies using both direct and indirect measures found that gender-portion stereotypes exist -- people consistently associate men with larger food portions and women with smaller portions, even when using the exact same foods but just showing different amounts.

New lab paper in JESP! What is the association between gender and food portion sizes? And how might such associations impact actual real-world treatment? We used lab and field studies to explore this question 🍽️

Read much more about this (open access) work, led by lab members Elisabeth Irvine and William Li, here: authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S...

This field study finding was far from obvious, though – a majority of both a laypeople and social psychologist sample predicted that men would receive larger portions than women in our field study.

Perhaps surprisingly, the field study showed no significant difference in portion sizes given to men vs. women. Hard to know exactly why this occurred, but one possibility is that standardization in serving practices at such restaurants may have limited the impact of gender on portion decisions.

First, studies using both direct and indirect measures found that gender-portion stereotypes exist -- people consistently associate men with larger food portions and women with smaller portions, even when using the exact same foods but just showing different amounts.

Happy pub day, @dgraham.bsky.social ! From all of your friends and also extremely on brand Ben Affleck

Reupping, we start looking next week

Please RT and share! Eric Hehman and I are looking for a shared postdoc to join us (in Canada) starting next year! And no April Fools here, outside of Eric and myself. Applications due April 24th. See link for full ad: hehmanlab.org/ad

Strong teak?

Project Implicit Demo Website Datasets 14 PI Demo site IAT study data from 2002 to current Hosted on the Open Science Framework

The 2024 data for all of the Project Implicit Demonstration tasks are on the OSF: osf.io/y9hiq/

Thank you to the Scientific Advisory Board for their work in making it available.

In basketball you can do 2009 UNC / 2010 Duke.

2024 was the first year I kept track of every book I read, so for no reason here is what I read - in order - over the year. Top 5 in bold.

Yes, we do! OSF page should have RT information for each trial. osf.io/m2a9w

So happy for @elianeroy.bsky.social that this is out! All props to her for seeing through this giant project. See below for details on our 'contest' study comparing interventions to reduce attractiveness-based discrimination...

Big props to Neil and @erichehman.bsky.social! Also Eric is now officially half-way to the social psychology EGOT of prizes (Gordon Allport, ISCON, Cialdini, Wegner).

Plenty more details in the full paper:
Print version: doi.org/10.1037/pspa...
Pre-print: osf.io/preprints/ps...
Data and materials: osf.io/gx6dk/

These findings are consistent with the Belief-Sampling Model, where individual responses on attitude measures are pulled from distributions of available “considerations” that might vary across topics in their consistency.

One takeaway? Many attitudes may not be as fixed as we think. Even self-reported, explicit attitudes showed notable levels of inconsistency even when measured just minutes apart.

A follow-up study was able to replicate this general pattern in a longitudinal sample whose attitudes were measured at three weeks apart.

Predictors of reliability for both implicit and explicit attitudes were characterized more by their similarities than their differences. Attitudes experienced as high in distinctiveness, certainty, familiarity, and self-relevance had higher reliability for both implicit and explicit attitudes.