Paul A. M. Van Lange

Prosocial risk-taking, helping others at uncertain personal costs, has been proposed to emerge from the intersection of prosociality and risk-taking, suggesting that prosocial risk-taking is most likely to occur when adolescents are both motivated to help others and willing to engage in risk-taking. Empirical findings on its correlates have been mixed, leaving unclear whether prosocial risk-taking is best understood as a form of risk-taking, a form of prosocial behavior, or a distinct construct emerging from both. The present study examined how prosociality, risk-taking and individual differences related to social orientation are associated with prosocial risk-taking. Participants were 355 Dutch adolescents (M _age = 16.04 years, SD _age = 1.11; 58% girls). Complementary variable- and person-centered approaches were used, as well as a broader model including different measures related to prosocial behavior, risk-taking and social orientation. Across approaches, indicators of prosocial orientation showed the strongest associations with prosocial risk-taking. Contrary to predictions from the theoretical model, risk-taking was negatively related to prosocial risk-taking. These findings suggest that prosocial risk-taking is better understood as a form of high-cost prosocial behavior than as a manifestation of adolescents’ general risk-taking tendencies.

Many commentaries subscribe to the main conclusions of the target article. Here, we primarily address the need for greater theorizing and empirical findings that seem contradictory to parts of our conclusions. We highlight the importance of integrating evolutionary, ontological, and proximate mechanisms in order to understand differences more comprehensively between men and women in heterosexual relationships in most Western societies.

Crises may bring people together or drive them apart. However, it is not clear whether crises undermine or enhance social cohesion or how such effects might develop over time. We compare four types of crises-natural hazards, pandemics, economic downturns, and wars-to explain their effects on social cohesion from an interdependence theoretical perspective. We argue that social cohesion depends on how much people depend on each other and the government, the (un)equality of these dependencies, and whether people's interests conflict or align. Based on our theory-guided review, we conclude that the four crises are likely to differ in how (and when) they might affect social cohesion within societies. These insights may help societies better prepare for future crises by clarifying when they may heighten cohesion or division.

This paper introduces the concept of Moral Attachment, defined as a rigid psychological bond to moral beliefs, in which disagreement is interpreted as a threat to the self. In turn, this leads to inflexibility, defensiveness, and dismissiveness when faced with moral opposition. We developed and validated the Moral Attachment scale through five studies. Study 1 used exploratory factor analysis to identify three dimensions: (1) certainty and inflexibility, (2) emotional defense, and (3) character judgment. Study 2A confirmed this structure via confirmatory factor analysis, further demonstrating convergent and criterion validity. Study 2B showed that Moral Attachment is linked to the integration of moral beliefs into the self, and strongly predicts distancing from those who disagree. Study 3 provided evidence for the short-term stability of Moral Attachment, indicating that the construct is relatively consistent over a two-week period. Study 4 tested incremental validity, revealing that Moral Attachment uniquely predicts polarizing responses to the Israel-Hamas conflict above and beyond moral conviction. Study 5 tested the scale’s measurement equivalence across 44 countries, achieving approximate measurement invariance and linking higher Moral Attachment scores to greater societal instability at the country level. By understanding the nature and consequences of Moral Attachment, we provide an account of how moral disagreement becomes personally threatening and contributes to enduring social division.

Amidst growing global challenges, perceptions of human cooperation—a cornerstone of societal progress—appear to be in decline. Despite empirical evidence showing that people in both the USA and China exhibit increased cooperation in experimental games, the public remains convinced that morality and trust—two key ingredients of cooperation—have declined over time. To investigate this paradox, this study examines trends in cooperation that people perceive from the past into the future, along with the reasons they perceive to underlie these trends. We conducted a cross-cultural survey of 628 Americans and 449 Chinese, asking them to estimate the likelihood of others’ cooperative behavior in a prisoner’s dilemma game and to rate four cooperation-related traits—warmth, morality, assertiveness, and competence—at various times between 1960 and 2030. Participants also provided reasons for their beliefs. Our findings revealed a stable belief in declining cooperative behavior in the game, along with all four traits, with a relatively small decline in competence, in both the USA and China. Moreover, over 60% of respondents believed in a more general decline in cooperation. Declining social trust and increasing stress and wealth were the primary perceived reasons for their beliefs in both countries; also, increasing exposure to social media was a stronger perceived reason for U.S. participants, whereas increasing education was stronger for Chinese participants. This study reveals a widespread belief in the declining cooperation in two of the world’s largest nations and highlights the profound influence of sociocultural factors on public beliefs.

Every social situation that people encounter in their daily lives comes with a set of unwritten rules about what behavior is considered appropriate or inappropriate. These everyday norms can vary across societies: some societies may have more permissive norms in general or for certain behaviors, or for certain behaviors in specific situations. In a preregistered survey of 25,422 participants across 90 societies, we map societal differences in 150 everyday norms and show that they can be explained by how societies prioritize individualizing moral foundations such as care and liberty versus binding moral foundations such as purity. Specifically, societies with more individualistic morality tend to have more permissive norms in general (greater liberty) and especially for behaviors deemed vulgar (less purity), but they exhibit less permissive norms for behaviors perceived to have negative consequences in specific situations (greater care). By comparing our data with available data collected twenty years ago, we find a global pattern of change toward more permissive norms overall but less permissive norms for the most vulgar and inconsiderate behaviors. This study explains how social norms vary across behaviors, situations, societies, and time.

While negative risk-taking behavior in adolescents is a classic topic, extant research has long spent little attention to the positive aspects of adolescents’ development. One topic that started to gain more research focus is prosocial risk-taking behavior—defined as behavior where an individual takes a risk to help someone else. However, validated measures are still limitedly available. The goal of the study is to construct and validate a multifaceted measure to assess prosocial risk-taking in adolescents. A sample of 234 Dutch adolescents (149 girls) aged 14–17 filled in the unvalidated prosocial adolescent risk-taking questionnaire (PAR-Q) to perform iterative exploratory factor analyses to indicate initial factor structure. A separate data sample of 357 Dutch adolescents (208 girls) aged 14–17 filled in the PAR-Q to confirm this factor structure with iterative confirmatory factor analyses and additional questionnaires for convergent validity. In this sample, also test–retest reliability was assessed. The final two-factor structure, which represented Social and Material prosocial risk subscales, exhibited acceptable internal consistency and excellent test–retest reliability. The PAR-Q correlated positively with prosocial behaviors and empathy. The PAR-Q is a newly validated measure with adequate psychometric properties that can be used to gain more information on prosocial risk-taking behavior in adolescents.