The results reported by Kidd and Castano (2013) indicated that reading a short passage of literary fiction improves theory of mind (ToM) relative to reading popular fiction. However, when we entered Kidd and Castano’s results in a p-curve analysis, it turned out that the evidential value of their findings is low. It is good practice to back up a p-curve analysis of a single paper with an adequately powered direct replication of at least one of the studies in the p-curve analysis. Therefore, we conducted a direct replication of the literary fiction condition and the popular fiction condition from Kidd and Castano’s Experiment 5 to scrutinize the effect of reading literary fiction on ToM. The results of this replication were largely consistent with Kidd and Castano’s original findings. Furthermore, we conducted a small-scale meta-analysis on the findings of the present study, those of Kidd and Castano and those reported in other published direct replications. The meta-analytic effect of reading literary fiction on ToM was small and non-significant but there was considerable heterogeneity between the included studies. The results of the present study and of the small-scale meta-analysis are discussed in the light of reading-times exclusion criteria as well as reliability and validity of ToM measures.

The current study investigated how psychological distance affects people’s preference for direct and indirect speech in a narrative task. In three experiments, participants were instructed to first watch a video and then retell what happened in the video to an imagined/anticipated listener. We manipulated social distance (Experiment 1), temporal distance (Experiment 2), and spatial distance (Experiment 3) between participants and the listener. We compared the proportions of direct speech in the narrations from psychologically proximal versus distal conditions. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that social and temporal proximity increased the rates of direct speech. Social and temporal distance, conversely, increased the rates of indirect speech. Experiment 3 did not yield a significant difference in the use of direct and indirect speech between spatially proximal and distal conditions. Taken together, our results indicate that different psychological dimensions might have discrepant effects on people’s choices between direct and indirect speech. Possible explanations for the discrepancy among different psychological distance dimensions are discussed.

Over the past decade or so, developments in language comprehension research in the domain of cognitive aging have converged on support for resilience in older adults with regard to situation model updating when reading texts. Several studies have shown that even though age-related declines in language comprehension appear at the level of the surface form and text base of the text, these age differences do not apply to the creation and updating of situation models. In fact, older adults seem more sensitive to certain manipulations of situation model updating. This article presents a review of theories on situation model updating as well how they match with research on situation model updating in younger and older adults. Factors that may be responsible for the resilience of language comprehension in older age will be discussed as well as avenues for future research.

Adults’ reports of earliest autobiographical memories from before the age of 3 are typically scarce. However, recent research suggests that the age range of this childhood amnesia is flexible when participant instructions provide a context in which earlier or later ages of childhood events are plausible (Kingo et al., 2013). This age manipulation may be more or less effective depending on the type of memories, i.e., event memories that describe a specific event, or fragments / snapshots that describe elements of a past event. One earlier study showed that after reading an early age example, the age in event memories was younger than after a late age example, whereas this difference was less pronounced in snapshot memories (Wessel et al., 2019). The present aim was to examine the malleability of the age in earliest childhood memories and replicate this age manipulation by memory type interaction as well as the overall effects of the age manipulation demonstrated earlier (Wessel et al., 2019). Three studies varied the age in example event memories and fragments (early, late, or no age). Overall, the results suggested that age information affects the reported age, but not necessarily more for event memories than for fragments. That is, all present studies failed to replicate the age manipulation by memory type interaction reflecting that relative to the early condition, event memories in the late condition were older than snapshot memories (Wessel et al., 2019). Even though we cannot conclude that a true effect does not exist, the original finding may be taken as reflecting a false positive.

Learning to evaluate information in digital contexts relies not only on critical thinking but also on how children acquire and apply knowledge when evaluating news content. In an era in which children increasingly rely on social media as a primary source of information, understanding how cognitive and social factors shape judgments is crucial. The present study examined how an inoculation intervention, cognitive reflection skills, and social context (social media use and adult support) influence children’s credibility judgments of real and fake news. Children evaluated news items before and after completing an inoculation quiz with or without feedback. Results showed that feedback was associated with a greater difference in credibility ratings between true and false news items, but no causal effect of feedback on changes in these ratings. Higher CRT-D scores were associated with credibility judgments overall, but were not associated with greater differentiation between true and false news items. Importantly, the combination of feedback, social media experience, and support from parents or school was associated with higher credibility for true news items, underscoring the role of social context in the evaluation of true and false news items. These findings highlight that learning to evaluate information is a process influenced by both individual cognitive mechanisms and social environments.