Casey Lewry

Emerging Scholars in Psychological Science Speaker Nominations Nominate yourself or another late-stage PhD student to speak at Princeton's Department of Psychology this academic semester (Spring 2026). The Emerging Scholars in Psychological Science (ESPS) talk ...

Are you a grad student who wants to give a talk at Princeton’s psychology department (in-person or on Zoom)?

Nominate yourself or someone you know: forms.gle/WN2ybYMuZiW3...

Priority given to non-Ivy and URM students. International applicants welcome.

Deadline is this Friday (Feb 6)!

Most existing research focuses on judgments of who or what caused inequality to exist. Far less examines how people decide who can or should help reduce it going forward.

We use this framework to organize existing findings, identify gaps, and provide guidance for future research.

I am thrilled to announce that this framework is out!

Who is responsible for inequality?

@tanialombrozo.bsky.social and I show that answers depend on whether people are judging causes or obligations, and the past vs the future.

doi.org/10.1177/1745...

Congratulations, Dr. Francisco Cruz (@cruzf.bsky.social), on on an incredibly clear and comprehensive PhD dissertation on "The psychology of lay beliefs about science" as well as an engaging and thoughtful defense. And thank you for inviting me to be on your jury; I learned so much from your work!

I'll be at SPSSI in Portland this week presenting our latest work on voting behavior.

Come say hi!

Across 9 experiments (+6600 participants), we explored a paradox: How do non-experts judge scientific explanations they can’t fully understand? We found that scientific jargon can increase people’s satisfaction with explanations, even though it makes them less comprehensible.
2/9

How laypeople evaluate scientific explanations containing jargon - Nature Human Behaviour Cruz and Lombrozo examine how laypeople make sense of scientific explanations and find that although jargon reduces understanding, for short explanations, jargon makes the explanation more satisfying.

A special thanks to @tanialombrozo.bsky.social, my advisor, without whom this wouldn't be possible, for all the guidance and all she taught me!

And shout-out to my lab mates @keremoktar.bsky.social @caseylewry.bsky.social

Read more here: www.nature.com/articles/s41...
9/9

@tanialombrozo.bsky.social

🎊 New preprint 🎊 w/ Tania Lombrozo

Why do people engage in collective actions, even when they believe their actions won't make a difference?

Based on evidence from the 2024 election and a hypothetical election, we find that *moral* responsibility, not causal, drives voting

osf.io/preprints/ps...

Thanks for having me and for all the great feedback! Still thinking about the retrospective moral-causal distinction :)

Lay Theories of Moral Progress Many consider the world to be morally better today than it was in the past and expect moral improvement to continue. How do people explain what drives this change? In this paper, we identify two ways...

Related work: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...

Thanks @caseylewry.bsky.social for sharing your work with us on how "Moral responsibility, not causal responsibility, drives voting: Evidence from the 2024 US presidential election".

Casey finds that people who believe that moral progress is caused by human actions were more likely to vote.

Do you want there to be more funding to do research related to climate action? 🌎

I'm working with XPRIZE to make this happen - fill out this survey so we can figure out how to help researchers like you (and enter to win a $50 gift card)

princetonsurvey.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_...