TY - JOUR
T1 - Effects of Psychological Distance on Mental Abstraction
T2 - A Registered Report of Four Tests of Construal-Level Theory
AU - Calderon, Sofia
AU - Mac Giolla, Erik
AU - Ask, Karl
AU - Adler, Susanne Jana
AU - Agerstroem, Jens
AU - Akpinar, Burcu
AU - Albayrak, Nihan
AU - Alparone, Francesca Romana
AU - Amin, Shahrazad
AU - Aquino, Antonio
AU - Bachet, Melissa
AU - Baisile, Baisile
AU - Bausenhart, Karin M.
AU - Beylat, Magali
AU - Bialobrzeska, Olga
AU - Bloomfield, Eliana C.
AU - Boecker, Lea
AU - Bonora, Matteo
AU - Brady, Shannon T.
AU - Branch, Jared G.
AU - Brandy, Nicole E.
AU - Bui, Kelley T.
AU - Bustos-Ortega, Mariela
AU - Caballero, Amparo
AU - Cai, Andi
AU - Cantarero, Katarzyna
AU - Cardenas, Stephanie A.
AU - Carrera, Pilar
AU - Chang, Jung-Tzu
AU - Chao, Hsuan-Fu
AU - Christy, Andrew G.
AU - Cook, Jennifer A.
AU - Dang, Junhua
AU - Danielson, Scott
AU - Davis, William E.
AU - de Boer, Cara
AU - de Groot, Elise
AU - Derrick, Jaye L.
AU - Dittmar, Sarah
AU - Doering, Tim
AU - Douilliez, Celine
AU - Egger, Martin
AU - Escher, Yannik A.
AU - Evans, Thomas Rhys
AU - Fabiani, Sofia
AU - Feldman, Gilad
AU - Fernandez, Nicole
AU - Fischer, Julia
AU - Formanowicz, Magdalena
AU - Friese, Malte
AU - Et al.
N1 - data:
PY - 2026/4/1
Y1 - 2026/4/1
N2 - Construal-level theory (CLT) proposes that psychological distance influences the level of abstraction at which something is mentally construed: Things perceived as less probable (likelihood) or further away from the here (spatial distance), now (temporal distance), or self (social distance) are thought about more abstractly. In this international multilab study, we tested four basic hypotheses derived from core assumptions of CLT and explore potential moderators and boundary conditions of the effects. Participants (N = 11,775) from 27 countries and regions were randomly assigned to one of four experimental protocols focused on different types of psychological distance (temporal, spatial, social, or likelihood), and each experiment manipulated psychological distance (close vs. distant). The protocols for temporal distance (n = 2,941) and spatial distance (n = 2,973) were direct replications of Liberman and Trope (Study 1) and Fujita et al. (Study 1), respectively. The remaining two protocols were paradigmatic replications, applying to social distance (n = 2,926) and likelihood (n = 2,936). The effects of psychological distance on construal level for the four present studies were as follows (positive effects are consistent with hypotheses): temporal, d = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.003, 0.16] (effect in original study: d = 0.92); spatial, d = 0.04, 95% CI = [-0.03, 0.11] (effect in original study: d = 0.55); social, d = -0.27, 95% CI = [-0.34, -0.19]; and likelihood, d = 0.03, 95% CI = [-0.05, 0.11]. Pretests indicated that valence and abstraction were confounded in response options on the outcome measure. Controlling for this confound eliminated the hypothesis-inconsistent effect of social distance, d = 0.006, 95% CI = [-0.05, 0.07]. These findings provide limited evidence for the predictions of the theory and present a critical challenge for CLT.
AB - Construal-level theory (CLT) proposes that psychological distance influences the level of abstraction at which something is mentally construed: Things perceived as less probable (likelihood) or further away from the here (spatial distance), now (temporal distance), or self (social distance) are thought about more abstractly. In this international multilab study, we tested four basic hypotheses derived from core assumptions of CLT and explore potential moderators and boundary conditions of the effects. Participants (N = 11,775) from 27 countries and regions were randomly assigned to one of four experimental protocols focused on different types of psychological distance (temporal, spatial, social, or likelihood), and each experiment manipulated psychological distance (close vs. distant). The protocols for temporal distance (n = 2,941) and spatial distance (n = 2,973) were direct replications of Liberman and Trope (Study 1) and Fujita et al. (Study 1), respectively. The remaining two protocols were paradigmatic replications, applying to social distance (n = 2,926) and likelihood (n = 2,936). The effects of psychological distance on construal level for the four present studies were as follows (positive effects are consistent with hypotheses): temporal, d = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.003, 0.16] (effect in original study: d = 0.92); spatial, d = 0.04, 95% CI = [-0.03, 0.11] (effect in original study: d = 0.55); social, d = -0.27, 95% CI = [-0.34, -0.19]; and likelihood, d = 0.03, 95% CI = [-0.05, 0.11]. Pretests indicated that valence and abstraction were confounded in response options on the outcome measure. Controlling for this confound eliminated the hypothesis-inconsistent effect of social distance, d = 0.006, 95% CI = [-0.05, 0.07]. These findings provide limited evidence for the predictions of the theory and present a critical challenge for CLT.
KW - construal-level theory
KW - mental abstraction
KW - psychological distance
KW - replication
KW - multilab
KW - open data
KW - open materials
KW - preregistration
KW - TEMPORAL DISTANCE
KW - MORAL JUDGMENT
KW - FOREST
KW - TREES
U2 - 10.1177/25152459251401177
DO - 10.1177/25152459251401177
M3 - Article
SN - 2515-2459
VL - 9
JO - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
JF - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
IS - 2
M1 - 25152459251401177
ER -