Aleksandra Cupta

Background: While pornography use is widespread and typically non-problematic, a subset of individuals report symptoms associated with problematic pornography use (PPU). Previous research suggests that the severity and prevalence of PPU are strongly influenced by gender and are linked to specific personality traits and attachment styles. The primary aim of this study was to explore the relationship between the Big Five personality traits, attachment styles, and PPU, taking gender into account as a moderating factor. Additionally, the study examined the reliability, validity, and measurement invariance of the Problematic Pornography Consumption Scale (PPCS-6) across genders. Participants and procedure: The sample comprised 591 Polish young adults: 318 women and 273 men. The data were gathered using both paper-and-pencil and online surveys. The PPCS-6 was used to measure PPU. Relations between the Big Five personality traits, attachment styles, and PPU were analyzed using correlational and hierarchical regression analyses. Results: Almost half (46.5%) of women and 16.8% of men had the lowest possible score on this scale, indicating a substantial floor effect. The PPCS-6 showed partial scalar invariance between genders. Negative correlations of PPU with emotional stability, conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness were significant only among men. In regression analysis, emotional stability was related to PPU only in men. The association between attachment anxiety and PPU was pronounced in both genders, although it was significantly stronger among men. Conclusions: The results are congruent with the notion that PPU among men may be associated with unfavorable individual predispositions. Results concerning women leave the open question of why and how women develop PPU. Lastly, the Polish version of the PPCS-6 is a valid and reliable tool for future research.

Evolutionary theory and historical evidence suggest humans possess distinct psychological tendencies for defensive and offensive violence, which have insufficiently been considered in research. In a large-scale preregistered study across 58 countries ( N = 18,128), we demonstrate that violent extremist intentions manifest along two distinct psychological phenomena: defensive extremism, motivated by protecting one’s group from (perceived) threats, and offensive extremism, driven by establishing group dominance. We show that these dimensions a) can be reliably differentiated across diverse cultural contexts, b) are distinctively associated with psychological dispositions, and c) systematically differentiate countries varying in macrolevel sociopolitical functioning and violence. Across nations, a two-factorial structure was observed that was invariant at the scalar level. Defensive extremist intentions were consistently higher than offensive extremism in 56 out of 58 countries, suggesting greater moral acceptance of protective violence. While psychopathy was positively related to both types of violent extremist intentions, those high in Machiavellianism and narcissism demonstrated particularly higher levels of defensive extremist intentions. By contrast, those scoring high on religious fundamentalism and social dominance orientation demonstrated particularly higher levels of offensive extremist intentions. Unexpectedly, liberal political group identification was associated with higher offensive but lower defensive extremist intentions. Crucially, offensive (but not defensive) intentions were associated with macrolevel societal dysfunction, including political terror and internal conflict. These findings establish that defensive and offensive violent extremist intentions represent two conceptually different forms of extremism across a large and diverse range of countries, with consequences for research and practice.

Objective: This research examined whether positive in‐group experiences—specifically those fulfilling the need for significance and the need for self‐expansion—predict intentions to engage in collective action. We also investigated whether these associations are stronger than those linked to negative emotions (e.g., significance loss), and whether they remain robust when controlling for known predictors of collective action.Method: Data were collected across three correlational studies (total N > 950) conducted in Poland and the United States. The studies used diverse sampling strategies, including a field study, an online survey, and a representative U.S. sample. Participants reported on their motivations and intentions to support various causes, including LGBTQ+ rights and political campaigns.Results: Across all studies, significance gain and self‐expansion were consistent positive predictors of normative, pro‐ingroup collective action. These factors generally showed stronger associations with collective action intentions than negative emotions, including significance loss. The predictive effects of these needs remained significant even when controlling for prior engagement, political orientation, group identification, perceived group efficacy, and anger at injustice.Conclusions: Fulfillment of psychological needs for significance and self‐expansion plays a robust and independent role in motivating collective action, beyond the influence of commonly studied negative emotional drivers.