Two studies are presented showing that the social facilitation of eating has its roots in the phase of ordering food, both in an ecologically valid context (a real restaurant) and in a simulated context (a mock scenario). In both studies people ordered a number of dishes as a function of their co-eater group size. We contend that this is due to the activation of the “social meal” script assuming a normative nature. In line with our hypothesis, participants’ self-monitoring orientation moderated the effects of group size on the amount of food people ordered.

Research in the field shows the crucial role of trust in the functioning of many aspects of social life, especially when dealing with emergencies. We report the results of a study (N = 883) carried out in Italy during the first phase of the COVID-19 crisis to assess whether and how social trust (i.e., trust in those who have the authority and responsibility for making decisions, such as the Italian government, the regional government, the Civil Protection, the European Union, the Catholic Church, and the scientific community) and general trust (i.e., trust in the trustworthiness of other individuals, such as Italians and humankind) are associated with the employment of coping strategies in dealing with the challenges of the pandemic. Overall, the results highlight that trust in different authorities and institutions and trust in other human beings are positively associated with the adoption of adaptive coping strategies such as seeking social support, positive reinterpretation and growth, problem-solving orientation, and transcendent orientation. In contrast, they are negatively related to the adoption of maladaptive coping strategies such as avoidance. These findings point out the benefits of various types of trust in helping individuals deal with crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

A robust body of research has highlighted the fundamental role of social identifications in dealing with emergencies and in predicting commitment behaviors. We report the results of two studies carried out in Italy to assess whether the subjective sense of belonging to meaningful proximal and distal social groups affected people’s ability to cope with the pandemic crisis. Study 1 (N = 846) shows that different identifications with proximal (i.e., family and friends) and distal social groups (i.e., nation, European, and humankind) may act as buffers for individuals by reducing negative emotions and negative expectations about the future after COVID-19 and by increasing people’s intentions to adhere to containment measures and to be involved in prosocial actions. Study 2 (N = 350) highlights the role of European identification in predicting propensities for using the tracing app and getting vaccinated. These results confirm the benefits of various types of identification (proximal vs. distant) in helping individuals deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Two studies compared omnivores’ and veg*ns’ attitudes and dehumanization tendencies toward each other and identified the social psychological factors explaining them. Study 1 (N = 208, Italians) showed that veg*ns’ hold less positive attitudes toward omnivores than the reverse, and attributed to them less human uniqueness and nature; these differences were explained by veg*ns’ stronger identification with the ingroup and higher perceptions of reproach from the outgroup, even if omnivores’ higher levels of social dominance orientation worsened their attitude toward veg*ns. Study 2 (preregistered,N = 200, mostly from UK) overall replicated Study 1 findings at the explicit level. Interestingly, omnivores’ and veg*ns’ implicit attitudes were equally positive (but less positive than self‐reported attitudes) and not predicted by the same mediators associated with the explicit measures. This work suggests that neither veg*ns nor omnivores hold negative attitudes toward each other: they were both positive or neutral toward the outgroup, even if at the explicit level this positivity is greater for omnivores.