Effect misestimations plague Psychological Science, but advances in the identification of dissemination biases in general and publication bias in particular have helped in dealing with biased effects in the literature. However, the application of publication bias detection methods appears to be not equally prevalent across subdisciplines. It has been suggested that particularly in I/O Psychology, appropriate publication bias detection methods are underused. In this meta-meta-analysis, we present prevalence estimates, predictors, and time trends of publication bias in 128 meta-analyses that were published in the Journal of Applied Psychology (7,263 effect sizes, 3,000,000 + participants). Moreover, we reanalyzed data of 87 meta-analyses and applied nine standard and more modern publication bias detection methods. We show that (a) the bias detection method applications are underused (only 41% of meta-analyses use at least one method) but have increased in recent years, (b) those meta-analyses that apply such methods now use more, but mostly inappropriate methods, and (c) the prevalence of potential publication bias is concerning but mostly remains undetected. Although our results indicate somewhat of a trend toward higher bias awareness, they substantiate concerns about potential publication bias in I/O Psychology, warranting increased researcher awareness about appropriate and state-of-the-art bias detection and triangulation. Embracing open science practices such as data sharing or study preregistration is needed to raise reproducibility and ultimately strengthen Psychological Science in general and I/O Psychology in particular. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Globally, parents and children in same-sex parent families are impacted by many laws related to the parental sexual orientation. These laws vary considerably from one country to another, ranging from full legal recognition to criminalization. The psychological consequences of living in an ambiguous or hostile legal climate likely interfere with parental health, family functioning, and child development. However, a systematic evidence synthesis of the pertinent literature and its placement within a broader psychological model are currently lacking. The aims of this review were thus (1) to systematically review qualitative and quantitative evidence on the impact of sexual orientation laws on same-sex parent families in key domains and (2) to place these findings within a broader model informed by minority stress and family theories. Our review was preregistered and conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines. We searched for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies on the impact of sexual orientation laws on target outcomes (parental health, family functioning, child outcomes) via systematic database search (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) and forward-backward searches. Fifty-five studies published between 1999 and 2020 were eligible for inclusion and were synthesized using a data-based convergent synthesis design. Thirteen descriptive and three overarching analytical themes were identified through thematic synthesis. Linking our findings with minority stress and family theories, we propose a novel legal vulnerability model for same-sex parent families. The model posits that legal vulnerability constitutes an increased risk for parental and child health as well as family functioning through individual and shared pathways between family members. Additionally, the model introduces counteractions that families engage in on the personal, familial, and systemic level to mitigate the impact of legal vulnerability, as well as moderators on the contextual, familial, couple, and individual level that modulate this impact. Implications for research and clinical practice are discussed.

Background: Parents and children in LGBTQ+ parent families face unique stressors (i.e., minority stress), but also possess unique resources (i.e., positive identity aspects) related to their family identity. Empirical evidence and theory suggest that these minority stressors and positive identity aspects are situated on the individual, couple, and family level and may be associated with key outcomes, including parent and child health, family functioning, and school-related outcomes. A systematic evidence synthesis and a theoretical placement are currently lacking. The aims of the systematic review outlined in this protocol are thus to (1) map minority stressors and positive identity aspects according to multiple levels in the family system, and (2) to synthesize evidence on their associations with key outcomes. Methods: We will conduct a PRISMA-conform mixed-methods systematic review. Studies will be retrieved using a multi-tiered search strategy, including database searches (PsycInfo, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science), cited literature searches, authors’ publication lists, and study requests. The mixed-methods synthesis will follow a parallel-results convergent synthesis design, where quantitative results will be synthesized via meta-analysis and qualitative results via thematic synthesis. Conclusions: Our proposed systematic review may add to the theoretical understanding of LGBTQ+ parent family functioning and advance social inclusion of LGBTQ+ parent families.

Investigations into the intimate relationships of sexual minorities are proliferating, but often adopt a deficit-oriented and US-centered perspective. In this tri-nation online study with sexual minority participants from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland (N = 571), we (i) assessed the construct validity of the German version of a well-known measure for positive minority identity aspects (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Positive Identity Measure; LGB-PIM), and (ii) explored associations between these aspects (self-awareness, authenticity, community, capacity for intimacy, and social justice) and self-reported relationship quality. Model fit of the German version of the LGB-PIM was deemed acceptable. Higher levels of positive minority identity aspects showed small to moderate associations with higher levels of relationship quality in bivariate analyses, but only capacity for intimacy was linked to relationship quality in higher-order models (controlling for country, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, relationship length, and psychological distress). Results remained robust in several sensitivity analyses. Our results highlight the differential role of positive identity aspects for relationship functioning, with capacity for intimacy as a fruitful leverage point for therapeutic work.

Social rewards are strong drivers of behavior and fundamental to well-being, yet there is a lack of consensus regarding what actually defines a reward as "social." Because a systematic overview of existing social reward operationalizations is currently absent, a review of the literature seems necessary to advance toward a unified framework and to better guide research and theory. To bridge this gap, we preregistered and conducted the first comprehensive systematic review of human and animal experimental studies that used the term "social reward" and charted existing operationalizations, revealing the implicit and explicit definitions used in the field. Stimulus characteristics and measures of social reward were extracted from a total of 384 studies encompassing 42,118 participants and subjects. We provide detailed summaries of these elements, stratified by species (human/animal) and study type (behavioral, brain imaging, pharmacological, and physiological). Two main aspects were found to account for most of the difference in operationalizations: the sensory richness of a stimulus (intimacy) and engagement in social interaction (i.e., the synchronous observation and action between at least two individuals, viz., immediacy). Drawing insights from second-person neuroscience approaches and theoretical models in the field of human-computer interaction, we propose that human and animal research can greatly benefit from considering these properties, as they have important theoretical and practical consequences for human and translational research, with far-reaching implications for neighboring research fields such as those pertaining to social media and the development of artificial intelligence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Empirical findings on the associations of positive and dysfunctional parent–child relationship (PPCR/DPCR) characteristics with child shame, adaptive guilt, and maladaptive guilt were synthesized in six meta-analyses. The 65 included samples yielded 633 effect sizes (N total = 19,144; M age = 15.24 years; 59.0% female; 67.7% U.S. samples, n = 12,036 with 65% White, 12.3% Hispanic and Latinx, 10.8% Black, 6.3% mixed race, 5.6% Asian American, 0.3% Native American participants). Small positive correlations were found between DPCR and shame (r = .17), DPCR and maladaptive guilt (r = .15), and PPCR and adaptive guilt (r = .14). A small negative correlation was found between PPCR and shame (r = −.12). Sample and study moderators and sources of bias are investigated and discussed.