By Amy Summervile

Though you may not know it, when you watch the Super Bowl on Sunday—especially if you actually watch the game and not just the commercials— you’ll likely be engaging in a lot of what psychological scientists call counterfactual thinking: thoughts about “what might have been,” “at least,” and “if only.”

Research on counterfactual thought explains all kinds of surprising reactions to sporting events, and a couple of ways in which your judgment about the big game may not be as clear as you think.

By Lisa M.P. Munoz

My office recently underwent a makeover – replacing open and unwieldy shelves with sturdy drawers to conceal my clutter, and ditching my tiny desk for a spacious one with lots of open space for me to organize my projects. Throughout this renovation, my thought kept coming back to two major themes: productivity and storage.

By David Nussbaum

Barry Schwartz discusses the psychology of anchoring in Slate and how raising the minimum wage would affect other wages as well.

By Lisa M.P. Munoz

By Lisa M.P. Munoz

“Collect seven red apples directly from an apple tree. In the morning, before eating anything, peel the apples, eat them and save the peel. Right before going to bed, make a tea with the peel.” 
– Brazilian remedy for quitting smoking

By David Nussbaum

Two wonderful blog posts this week that you won’t want to miss if you’re interested in questions of statistical power in personality and social psychology. In the first, Simine Vazire (@siminevazire) argues that sample sizes can’t be too large:

you can’t have too large a sample.  there is no ‘double-edged sword’.  there are no downsides to a large sample.  more evidence is always better, and larger samples = more evidence.

By Dave Nussbaum

By Amie Gordon

By Simone Schnall