Imitation and interindividual differences: Belief in free will is not related to automatic imitation.

It is well known that individuals have the tendency to automatically imitate each other and that such imitative behavior is fostered by perceiving intentions in others' actions. That is, past research has shown that perceiving an action as internally driven enhances the shared representation of observed and executed actions increasing automatic imitation. An interpersonal factor that increases the perception that a behavior is internally driven is belief in free will.

A direct test of the similarity assumption - Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation.

Individuals automatically imitate a wide range of different behaviors. Previous research suggests that imitation as a social process depends on the similarity between interaction partners. However, some of the experiments supporting this notion could not be replicated and all of the supporting experiments manipulated not only similarity between actor and observer, but also other features.

Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation.

Individuals have the automatic tendency to imitate each other. A key prediction of different theories explaining automatic imitation is that individuals imitate in-group members more strongly than out-group members. However, the empirical basis for this prediction is rather inconclusive.

Counterfactual thoughts distinguish benign and malicious envy.

When people encounter others surpassing them in terms of an important quality, possession, or achievement, they often think about what might have happened differently so that they would have obtained a better outcome. Such upward counterfactual thoughts have been shown to contribute to the intensity of envy. We investigated whether specific counterfactual thoughts distinguish different forms of envy, namely benign envy, which entails upward motivation, and malicious envy-which entails hostility.

Does social psychology persist over half a century? A direct replication of Cialdini et al.'s (1975) classic door-in-the-face technique.

Many failed replications in social psychology have cast doubt on the validity of the field. Most of these replication attempts have focused on findings published from the 1990s on, ignoring a large body of older literature. As some scholars suggest that social psychological findings and theories are limited to a particular time, place, and population, we sought to test whether a classical social psychological finding that was published nearly half a century ago can be successfully replicated in another country on another continent.