Norm enforcement may be important for resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation. However, little is known about how preferred responses to norm violations vary across cultures and across domains. In a preregistered study of 57 countries (using convenience samples of 22,863 students and non-students), we measured perceptions of the appropriateness of various responses to a violation of a cooperative norm and to atypical social behaviors. Our findings highlight both cultural universals and cultural variation. We find a universal negative relation between appropriateness ratings of norm violations and appropriateness ratings of responses in the form of confrontation, social ostracism and gossip. Moreover, we find the country variation in the appropriateness of sanctions to be consistent across different norm violations but not across different sanctions. Specifically, in those countries where use of physical confrontation and social ostracism is rated as less appropriate, gossip is rated as more appropriate.

The relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data from 66 samples and 30 countries ( N = 12,788) and find that people with higher status see the social system as more legitimate than those with lower status, but there is variation across people and countries. The association between subjective status and perceived legitimacy was never negative at any levels of eight moderator variables, although the positive association was sometimes reduced. Although not always consistent with hypotheses, group identification, self‐esteem, and beliefs in social mobility were all associated with perceived legitimacy among people who have low subjective status. These findings enrich our understanding of the relationship between social status and legitimacy.

The main goal of the European Federation of Psychologists’Associations (EFPA) Standing Committee on Tests and Testing (SCTT) is the improvement of testing practices in European countries. In order to reach this goal, the SCTT carries out various actions and projects, some of which are described in this paper. To better inform its work, it decided to survey the opinions of professional psychologists on testing practices. A questionnaire of 33 items was administered to a sample of 12,606 professional psychologists from 17 European countries. The questionnaire was based on, but not identical to, one used in 2000. The new data show that the positive attitude of the respondents toward the use of tests that was obtained in 2000 has increased in most countries, with a high percentage of the surveyed psychologists using tests regularly. Five main dimensions explained 43% of the total item variance. The dimensions involve items relating to: Concern over incorrect test use, regulations on tests and testing, Internet testing, appreciation of tests, and knowledge and training relating to tests and test use. Important differences between countries were found on these five dimensions. Differences were found according to gender for four of the five dimensions and in relation to field of specialization for all five dimensions. The most commonly used tests are the classic psychometric tests of intelligence and personality: WISC, WAIS, MMPI, RAVEN, 16PF, NEO-PI-R, BDI, SCL-90. Finally, some future perspectives are discussed.

The purpose of this research is to quantitatively compare everyday situational experience around the world. Local collaborators recruited 5,447 members of college communities in 20 countries, who provided data via a Web site in 14 languages. Using the 89 items of the Riverside Situational Q‐sort (RSQ), participants described the situation they experienced the previous evening at 7:00 p.m. Correlations among the average situational profiles of each country ranged from r = .73 to r = .95; the typical situation was described as largely pleasant. Most similar were the United States/Canada; least similar were South Korea/Denmark. Japan had the most homogenous situational experience; South Korea, the least. The 15 RSQ items varying the most across countries described relatively negative aspects of situational experience; the 15 least varying items were more positive. Further analyses correlated RSQ items with national scores on six value dimensions, the Big Five traits, economic output, and population. Individualism, Neuroticism, Openness, and Gross Domestic Product yielded more significant correlations than expected by chance. Psychological research traditionally has paid more attention to the assessment of persons than of situations, a discrepancy that extends to cross‐cultural psychology. The present study demonstrates how cultures vary in situational experience in psychologically meaningful ways.