This study examined whether parents’ gratitude toward their children’s coaches inhibits their intention to report incidents of corporal punishment in extracurricular school sports settings. Applying the protection motivation theory, two scenario-based experimental studies were conducted with mothers of junior high school students who participated in extracurricular sports activities. In Study 1, no inhibitory effect of parental gratitude on reporting intention was observed. This finding may be attributable to insufficient manipulation of gratitude and parents’ perception of reporting corporal punishment as a parental responsibility rather than a discretionary action. Study 2 employed a revised scenario designed to strengthen the manipulation of gratitude and examined whether the results differed depending on whether the victim was the participant’s own child or another child. The analysis indicated that parents’ gratitude toward coaches does not differentially influence reporting intention based on whether the victim was their own child or another child. Moreover, even when the manipulation of gratitude was successful, no inhibitory effect was noted. However, given limitations related to the ecological validity of the hypothetical scenarios and a potential ceiling effect in the measurement of intention, future studies should reexamine these hypotheses using ecologically grounded designs and alternative measurement strategies.

This study examined whether individuals experience empathic responses toward inanimate objects, with a particular focus on anthropomorphic products that resemble humans or animals, and investigated how such responses are associated with individual differences by conducting two experiments (Experiment 1: n＝50; Experiment 2: n＝55). Animal-shaped food products (e.g., panda-shaped sweets) were used as anthropomorphic stimuli, whereas non-anthropomorphic food products (e.g., donuts) served as control stimuli. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with image stimuli manipulating anthropomorphism (anthropomorphic vs. non-anthropomorphic) and object condition (damaged vs. intact). The results indicated that damaged anthropomorphic products elicited significantly stronger negative emotional responses than damaged non-anthropomorphic products, with emotions intensifying as the severity of damage increased. In Experiment 2, the associations between empathy for inanimate objects and individual characteristics—specifically dispositional empathy and animistic thinking—were explored. The findings revealed that empathy for inanimate objects was positively correlated with general empathy and all subscales of animistic thinking, particularly “anthropomorphism of possessions.” Collectively, these findings suggest that empathy responses toward inanimate objects are not merely situational reactions but are systematically related to broader cognitive and emotional tendencies, particularly animistic thinking and empathy.

This study investigated the psychological mechanisms underlying resistance to change and the status quo maintenance of gender inequality, drawing on system justification theory. Prior research shows that threats to the social system elicit conservative, system-justifying responses. To identify means of weakening such justification, the present study examined how system threats during gender-related social change affect the motivation to justify gender inequality, conceptualized as gender system justification. Across two experiments, Study 1 (N＝239, female university students) and Study 2 (N＝257, female online sample), participants read passages designed to induce system threat during social change, and then, reported the perceived system threat and justification. Results showed that high-threat conditions led to stronger system justification, increasing motivation to delay policies aimed at reducing gender inequality, relative to low-threat conditions. These findings suggest that system threat, such as instability during social change, can act as a psychological barrier to change, reinforcing the justification of the gender system. Theoretical and practical implications and limitations of this study were discussed.

During the 2025 House of Councillors election campaign, conspiracy theories and misinformation circulated widely across digital media platforms, raising concerns about how such content might be addressed. This study examined whether individuals with stronger conspiracy beliefs were more susceptible to misinformation and whether this relationship was moderated by the perceived credibility of digital media. Data were collected from 294 participants (147 women; Mage＝45.32 years). Participants completed measures of perceived digital media credibility and conspiracy beliefs, with the latter assessed using the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Approximately one week later, participants were presented with misinformation from the campaign and were asked to rate their level of acceptance. Results revealed a significant interaction between perceived digital media credibility and conspiracy beliefs in the prediction of misinformation acceptance. Participants who perceived digital media as highly credible tended to accept misinformation, regardless of their level of conspiracy beliefs, suggesting that perceptions of credibility alone may increase vulnerability. In contrast, among those who perceived digital media as less credible, individuals with stronger conspiracy beliefs reported significantly greater levels of misinformation acceptance than those with weaker conspiracy beliefs. These findings highlight the importance of interventions that address generalized trust in digital media and individuals’ underlying conspiracy beliefs. Theoretical and practical implications, as well as limitations and directions for future research, are discussed.