This study examines whether the zero-sum mindset will predict implicit hostile attribution bias across a variety of situations.

This study examines the extent to which zero-sum configurations of competitions increase hostile attributions, and the extent to which a zero-sum mindset predicts patterns of social cognition consistent with being a zero-sum situation even when it is objectively non-zero-sum.

This study examines whether a zero-sum mindset will predict specific zero-sum beliefs about a disparate variety of social and economic resources (H4a), about different kinds of intragroup and intergroup relationships in the US, Pakistan and India (H4b).

This study examines the coherence and parsimony of the zero-sum mindset by testing the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 3a Zero-sum mindset predicts general beliefs that the world is scarce, competitive, unimprovable, interconnected, hierarchical, dangerous, and unfair. Hypothesis 3b The zero-sum mindset is not reducible to any single primal world belief or personality trait.

This study examines the stability of the zero-sum mindset (across several days, weeks, and up to nine months) in five longitudinal samples.

Is this study we test the hypothesis that a zero-sum mindset (generalized zero-sum belief) is psychologically distinct from economic-domain zero-sum beliefs.

This study examines whether the zero-sum mindset will predict lower behavioral cooperation even when such cooperation is monetarily incentivized. This study uses the "Trust Game" paradigm where participants play to win raffle tickets for a real £100 prize.

This study examines whether zero-sum mindset will predict willingness to cooperate during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is examined longitudinally (with zero-sum mindset measured 8 months prior to the pandemic) and cross-sectionally in another cultural context later in the pandemic (large scale field study in Belgium).

Factor Analysis for Regulatory Focus Measures for Charitable Giving Motives