Person: Genschow–Oliver

Psychology Today, 01.06.2021 | Susan Krauss Whitbourne

„Being chronically ambivalent may seem to be a maladaptive if not irritating quality. […] As pointed out in a new study by University of Cologne’s Iris Schneider and colleagues (2021), “Ambivalence is at the heart of many topics that people care deeply about.” […] Although ambivalence usually has negative connotations, Schneider and her fellow researchers propose that there can be some concrete benefits. […] [A]s the authors predicted, people higher in ambivalence were less likely to fall prey to […] attributional bias. […] Reflecting on their findings, the authors suggest that the reason ambivalent people are less prey to bias is that “ambivalence leads to broader processing and incorporation of diverse perspectives.””

In-Mind, 16.03.2020 | Oliver Genschow

“In Zeiten der Coronavirus-Krise haben Hamsterkäufe Hochkonjunktur. […] Zwei psychologische Prinzipien können dieses Kaufverhalten gut erklären. Das Prinzip der Knappheit […] [und] das Prinzip der selbsterfüllenden Prophezeiungen.”

This year, the German Society of Psychology (DGPs) awards the prize to the editorial team of the online magazine In-Mind. …

The Inquisitive Mind, 01/2018 | Jan Crusius & Oliver Genschow

“Can psychological research still be trusted? In-Mind interviewed Daniel Lakens and Klaus Fiedler-two of the most prominent voices in the debate on how psychological science can be improved. In this interview, they offer a personal view on how psychology has changed and how it should change in the future. They describe their personal motivation and how the debate has affected their own work.”

Our partners