Although flipped classroom pedagogies have been widely touted for their ability to foster diverse 21st-century learning objectives, previous syntheses of flipped learning have focused almost exclusively on outcomes related to academic achievement. Using data from 317 studies, our research addresses this deficit by providing a comprehensive meta-analysis of the effects of flipped versus lecture-based learning on academic, intra-/interpersonal, and satisfaction-related outcomes in higher education. Overall, flipped classroom interventions produced positive gains across all three learning domains, and we found significant advantages of flipped over lecture-based instruction for seven out of eight outcomes (gs = 0.20–0.53). At the same time, there was substantial heterogeneity in flipped learning effects, and we identified several variables that influenced the relative efficacy of flipped versus traditional courses. Of the three types of moderators examined (contextual, design-based, and methodological), educational context (e.g., discipline, location) accounted for the most variability in flipped learning outcomes.

Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, and Hannon (2002, Study 1) demonstrated a causal link between subjective commitment to a relationship and how people responded to hypothetical betrayals of that relationship. Participants primed to think about their commitment to their partner (high commitment) reacted to the betrayals with reduced exit and neglect responses relative to those primed to think about their independence from their partner (low commitment). The priming manipulation did not affect constructive voice and loyalty responses. Although other studies have demonstrated a correlation between subjective commitment and responses to betrayal, this study provides the only experimental evidence that inducing changes to subjective commitment can causally affect forgiveness responses. This Registered Replication Report (RRR) meta-analytically combines the results of 16 new direct replications of the original study, all of which followed a standardized, vetted, and preregistered protocol. The results showed little effect of the priming manipulation on the forgiveness outcome measures, but it also did not observe an effect of priming on subjective commitment, so the manipulation did not work as it had in the original study. We discuss possible explanations for the discrepancy between the findings from this RRR and the original study.

In Western societies, women are considered more adept than men at expressing love in romantic relationships. Although scholars have argued that this view of love gives short shrift to men's ways of showing love (e.g., Cancian, 1986; Noller, 1996), the widely embraced premise that men and women "love differently" has rarely been examined empirically. Using data collected at four time points over 13 years of marriage, the authors examined whether love is associated with different behaviors for husbands and wives. Multilevel analyses revealed that, counter to theoretical expectations, both genders were equally likely to show love through affection. But whereas wives expressed love by enacting fewer negative or antagonistic behaviors, husbands showed love by initiating sex, sharing leisure activities, and doing household work together with their wives. Overall, the findings indicate that men and women show their love in more nuanced ways than cultural stereotypes suggest.

Although most mate selection research has focused on what people want in a marriage partner, this research focuses on what people think they can get. Using survey data from a large, representative sample of unmarried individuals, this study revealed that people who believed they possessed fewer qualities that are valued in the mating marketplace and who reported meeting lower quality potential mates felt less confident about their chances of securing an acceptable partner to marry; these associations were no weaker for people who held lower versus higher standards for a mate. Consistent with predictions, individuals' perceptions of the desirability of the people in their mating pools partially mediated the link between their self‐reported market value and their confidence about marrying.

Although research on mate preferences has been built on the assumption that the criteria people report at one point in time should predict their future partnering behavior, little is known about the temporal stability of people's standards. Using survey data collected at four time points from 285 originally unmarried individuals, this study examined the rank-order, mean-level, individual-level and ipsative stability of people's mate criteria over 27 months. Overall, reported standards exhibited moderate to high baseline stability, with rank-order and ipsative estimates comparable to those reported for personality traits. At the same time, mean- and individual-level analyses revealed small, but significant, increases in participants' reported criteria over the study, as well as significant variability in individual trajectories. Consistent with theory, the stability of individuals' standards was moderated by several contextual factors, including age, changes in perceived mate value, and significant relationship events.