Taken together, these findings suggest that naturalistic stimuli drive perception in a similar way in younger and older adults, but age differences in neural synchrony further up the information processing stream may contribute to subtle differences in event memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).Reports an error in "Older adults consider others' intentions less but allocentric outcomes more than young adults during an ultimatum game" by Isu Cho, Hyun-joo Song, Hackjin Kim and Sunhae Sul (Psychology and Aging, 2020[Nov], Vol 35[7], 974-980). In the original article, there was a typographical error in the grant number awarded to Hyun-joo Song. The correct grant number is NRF-2018S1A3A2075114. The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2020-68198-001). The present research investigated age-related differences in other-regarding preferences-the preference for taking others' benefit into account during social decision-making-between young and elderly adults. Young and older Korean adults responded to multiple rounds of a mini-ultimatum game, and the extent to which each individual considered outcome and intention was quantified using economic utility models. We found that older adults, compared to young adults, were less likely to consider others' intentions, while focusing more on others' outcomes. Possible psychological factors underlying our findings, including theory of mind, prosocial values, and decision strategies, are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).What are the consequences for older adults who confront ageism and the perpetrators who engage in ageist behaviors? We compared young (n = 265), middle-aged (n = 338), and older adults' (n = 235) impressions of an older target and the perpetrator of an ageist action. Participants read a vignette about a pedestrian offering unwanted help to an older woman crossing the street. We manipulated the type of ageism (benevolent or hostile), the reaction of the older target (acceptance, moderate confrontation, or strong confrontation) and assessed perceptions of perpetrator appropriateness and how evaluations of warmth, competence, and overall impression of the target changed over time. The perpetrator's act of benevolent ageism was perceived to be more appropriate than hostile ageism, and middle-aged and older adult participants reported the benevolent act to be more acceptable than young participants. This finding supports an age stereotype assimilation account. For target perceptions, accepting a hostile ageist behavior led to lower warmth and competence ratings but accepting benevolent ageism reduced warmth but not competence evaluations. Age differences in target perceptions were predicted by social identity theory, in that older adults rated the older target more positively overall. Perceptions of targets who confronted varied by type of ageism and the intensity of the confrontation. When participants perceived the target's reaction to be disproportionate to the ageist act, the target was viewed more negatively overall. The findings suggest that ageism directed toward older adults is perceived to be normative by adults of all ages and that confrontations of ageist behavior result in negative perceptions of the older target. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).Subjective age discordance (SAD) captures the difference between how old one feels and how old one would ideally like to be. We investigated the presence, strength, and fluctuation of this discordance in daily life as well as its relationship to various indicators of physical and psychological well-being with an 8-day diary study. Participants were 116 older and 107 younger adults who completed daily measures of felt age, ideal age, positive and negative affect, physical symptoms, and stressors. We operationalized SAD as felt age minus ideal age divided by chronological age and compared the utility of this discordance to the more established proportional discrepancy of felt age from chronological age. Daily SAD was present in both age groups, such that individuals idealized younger ages than they felt. This discordance was larger in older than younger adults, although younger adults exhibited more daily fluctuations in SAD. Within-person increases in SAD were associated with lower positive affect, whereas larger SAD at the between-person level was associated with more physical symptoms and stressors. These relationships were over and above the associations of felt and chronological age with the outcomes suggesting the utility of daily SAD for understanding daily physical and psychological well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).The articulatory in-out effect describes the preference for stimuli with an inward-wandering consonant order (e.g., BODIKA) as opposed to an outward-wandering consonant order (e.g., KODIBA). Originally, the in-out effect has been explained in terms of articulation trajectories, with inward trajectories being preferred over outward trajectories. https://www.selleckchem.com/products/Pitavastatin-calcium(Livalo).html However, recent research by Maschmann et al. (2020) raised doubts on this explanation of articulation trajectory preferences and offered a parsimonious alternative explanation for the in-out effect based on consonant preferences instead. As we show in the present article, stimulus materials in Maschmann et al. (2020) diverged from materials used in previous research and might have prevented the experience of articulation trajectories. Here, we present a conceptual replication of Maschmann et al. (2020), using stimulus materials more likely to elicit articulation trajectory preferences. In a preregistered, high-powered experiment (N = 349), we find strong support for the original idea of trajectory preferences but no evidence for the consonant preference account. Our research shows that preferences for articulation trajectories are robust and cannot be explained by mere consonant preferences. We discuss further implications of these findings for future research on the processes involved in the empirical in-out effect. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).