Fusco, G., Scandola, M., Lin, H., Inzlicht, M., & Aglioti, S.M. (2024). Cortex, 171, 435-464.
Viewing entries tagged
neuroscience
Saunders, B., & Inzlicht, M. (2021). International Journal of Psychophysiology, 162, 112-120.
Frömer, R., Lin, H., Dean Wolf, C.K., Inzlicht, M., & Shenhav, A. (2021). Nature Communications, 12, 1230.
Saunders, B., & Inzlicht, M. (2020). International Journal of Psychophysiology, 155, 87-98.
Inzlicht, M. (2019). Cortex, 113, 360-362.
Elkins-Brown N., Saunders, B., & Inzlicht, M. (2018). Cortex, 109, 124-140.
Saunders, B., Riesel, A., Klawohn, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2018). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1066-1077.
Lin, H., Saunders, B., Hutcherson, C.A., & Inzlicht, M. (2018). NeuroImage.
* Download Supplemental Materials
Berkman, E.T., Hutcherson, C.A., Livingston, J.L., Kahn, L.E., & Inzlicht, M. (2017). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 422-428.
Saunders, B., Lin, H., Milyavskaya, M., & Inzlicht, M. (2017). International Journal of Psychophysiology, 119, 31-40.
Hobson, N.M., Gino, F., Norton, M.I., & Inzlicht, M. (2017). Psychological Science, 28, 733-750.
Hobson, N.M., Bonk, D., & Inzlicht, M. (2017). PeerJ, 5, e3363.
Randles, D., Kam, J.W.Y., Heine, S.J., Inzlicht, M., & Handy, T.C. (2016). Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11, 899-906.
Tritt, S.M., Peterson, J.B., Page-Gould, E., & Inzlicht, M. (2016). Emotion, 16, 1172-1185.
*Download Open Data and Materials
Hobson, N.M., & Inzlicht, M. (2016). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 11, 1698-1706
Harmon-Jones, E., & Inzlicht, M. (2016). In E. Harmon-Jones & M. Inzlicht (Eds.), Social Neuroscience: Biological Perspectives on Social Psychology (pp. 1-9). New York: Routledge.
Tags: social neuroscience, neuroscience
Inzlicht, M., Berkman, E., & Elkins-Brown, N. (2016). In E. Harmon-Jones & M. Inzlicht (Eds.), Social Neuroscience: Biological Approaches to Social Psychology (pp. 101-123). New York: Routledge.
Saunders, B., Rodrigo, A. H., & Inzlicht, M. (2016). Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 16, 93-105.
* Download Open Data and Materials
Elkins-Brown, Saunders, B., & Inzlicht, M. (2016). Psychophysiology, 53, 159-170. doi: 10.1111/psyp.12556
* Download Open Data and Materials
Saunders, B., He, F.F.H., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). PLOS One, 10(12): e0143312. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143312
* Download Open Data and Materials
Saunders, B., Milyavskaya, M., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). Psychophysiology, 52, 1205-1217.
Tullett, A. M., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). Psychophysiology, 52, 990–996.
Inzlicht, M., Bartholow, B. D., & Hirsh, J. B. (2015). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 126-132. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.01.004.
Tullett, A.M., Kay, A., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 10, 628-635.
Good, M., Inzlicht, M., & Larson, M.J. (2015). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 10, 357-363. doi:10.1093/scan/nsu096
Xu, X., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). International Journal of Psychophysiology, 95, 247-253.
Hobson, N. M., Saunders, B., Al-Khindi, T., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). Emotion, 14, 1014-1026.
Nash, K. N., Prentice, M., Hirsh, J. B., McGregor, I. D., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 9, 1239-1245. doi:10.1093/scan/nst099
Tritt, S M., Page-Gould, E., Peterson, J. B., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1004-1010. doi:10.1037/a0035179
Teper, R., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). Emotion, 14, 105- 114. doi:10.1037/a0034296
Hogeveen, J., Inzlicht, M., & Obhi, S. S. (2014). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 755-762. doi:10.1037/a0033477
Gutsell, J. N., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). In H. van Trijp. (Ed.). Encouraging Sustainable Behavior: Psychology and the Environment (pp.137-153). London: Psychology Press.
Tags: neuroscience
Legault, L., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 123-138. doi:10.1037/a0030426
Proudfit, G. H., Inzlicht, M., & Mennin, D. (2013). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 636. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00636
Teper, R., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 8, 85-92. doi:10.1093/scan/nss045.
Brown, K. W., Goodman, R, &, Inzlicht, M. (2013). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 8, 93-99. doi:10.1093/scan/nss004
Gutsell, J.N., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). In B. Derks, D. Scheepers and N. Ellemers (Eds.). The Neuroscience of Prejudice (pp. 278-298). London: Psychology Press.
Tullett, A., Prentice, M., Nash, K., Teper, R., Inzlicht, M., & McGregor, I. (2013). In K. Markman, T. Proulx, & M. Linberg (Eds.). The Psychology of Meaning (pp. 401-419). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Inzlicht, M., & Al-Khindi, T. (2012). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 799-807. doi: 10.1037/a0027586.
Legault, L., Al-Khindi, T., & Inzlicht, M. (2012). Psychological Science, 23, 1455-1460. doi:10.1177/0956797612448483.
Tullett, A. M., Harmon-Jones, E., & Inzlicht, M. (2012). Psychophysiology, 49, 1145-1153. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01395.x.
Nash, K., Inzlicht, M., & McGregor, I. D. (2012). Biological Psychology, 91, 96-102. doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.05.005.
Gutsell, J. N., & Inzlicht, M. (2012). Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 7, 596-603. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr035
Inzlicht, M., Tullett, A. M., & Good, M. (2011). Religion, Brain, & Behavior, 1, 192-212.
Inzlicht, M., Tullett, A. M., & Good, M. (2011). Religion, Brain, & Behavior, 1, 244-251.
Phills, C.E., Kawakami, K., Tabi, E., Nadolny, D., & Inzlicht, M. (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 197-210.
Inzlicht, M, & Tullett, A. M. (2010). Psychological Science, 21, 1184-1190.
Nash, K., McGregor, I., & Inzlicht, M. (2010). Psychophysiology. 47, 979–983.
Tags: alpha asymmetry, neuroscience
Gutsell, J. N., & Inzlicht, M. (2010). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 841-845.
Hirsh, J. B., & Inzlicht, M. (2010). Psychophysiology, 47, 192-196.
Kang, S. K., Inzlicht, M., & Derks, B. (2010). Journal of Social Issues, 66, 585-601.
Tags: neuroscience, methods
Inzlicht, M., McGregor, I., Hirsh, J. B., & Nash, K. (2009). Psychological Science, 20, 385-392.
McGregor, I., Nash, K., & Inzlicht, M. (2009). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1003-1007.
Hirsh, J. B., & Inzlicht, M. (2008). Psychological Science, 19, 962-967.
Derks, B., Inzlicht, M., & Kang, S. (2008). Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 11, 163-181.
Inzlicht, M. & Gutsell, J. N. (2007). Psychological Science, 18, 933-937.
Filter By Keyword
- neuroscience
- self-control
- emotion
- ego depletion
- motivation
- cognitive control
- ERN
- anterior cingulate cortex
- prejudice
- effort
- stigma
- empathy
- stereotype threat
- replication
- meaning
- self-regulation
- uncertainty
- decision making
- meta science
- religion
- education
- experience sampling
- morality
- acceptance
- fatigue
- cognitive dissonance
- mindfulness
- political psychology
- emotion regulation
- prosociality
Latest Tweets
News
Featured
…This isn’t a relic of a bygone era. The idea that marijuana makes you lazy has been a recurring theme in anti-drug campaigns and remains a widely held belief. Many people still view cannabis users as unmotivated slackers, content to waste their days in a haze of smoke. But is this really true? According to recent research published in Social Psychological and Personality Science, it may be little more than a myth.
Researchers conducted experiments to investigate the psychological effects of flicking by and fast-forwarding through online videos during moments of downtime
Scrolling through videos on TikTok or YouTube to avert boredom may have a decidedly unintended consequence: It can make people feel more bored, according to the paradoxical findings of a recent study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. People seem increasingly intolerant of it, and Michael Inzlicht has a counterintuitive tip for avoiding boredom: Lean into it. Sit with the discomfort of boredom for a bit before flitting to something else. “If we’re so addicted to escaping boredom, so intolerant of boredom, it would be like a foraging animal going tree to tree, but never searching long enough to see if it bears fruit,” Inzlicht said. “Eventually, that animal will die.”
Collaborators
- Joshua Aronson, New York University
- Avi Ben-Zeev, San Francisco State University
- Elliot Berkman, University of Oregon
- Kirk Brown, Virginia Commonwealth University
- Daryl Cameron, Penn State University
- Belle Derks, Utrecht University
- Jennifer Gutsell, Brandeis University
- Greg Hajcak, Florida State University
- Eddie Harmon-Jones, University of New South Wales
- Jacob Hirsh, University of Toronto
- Cendri Hutcherson, University of Toronto
- Sonia Kang, University of Toronto
- Michael Larson, Brigham Young University
- Lisa Legault, Clarkson University
- Ian McGregor, University of Waterloo
- Marina Milyavskaya, Carleton University
- Sukhvinder Obhi, McMaster University
- Liz Page-Gould, University of Toronto
- Travis Proulx, Cardiff University
- Blair Saunders, University of Dundee
- Brandon Schmeichel, Texas A&M University
- Zindel Segal, University of Toronto
- Alexa Tullett, University of Alabama
University of Toronto
Organizations
- Association for Psychological Science
- Canadian Psychological Association
- Canada Foundation for Innovation
- International Social Cognition Network
- International Society for Research on Emotion
- National Academy of Education
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Social and Affective Neuroscience Society
- Social Psychology Network
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
- Society for Personality and Social Psychology
- Society for Psychophysiological Research
- Spencer Foundation
Understanding the effort paradox can help you reshape your relationship to exertion so that you commit to those hard but truly meaningful activities
“On the one hand, effort is costly,” says Michael Inzlicht, a psychologist at the University of Toronto, Canada. “On the other hand, it looks like we tend to value those things that we exerted effort for.” In a seminal 2018 paper, he and his colleagues dubbed this apparent conflict the “effort paradox”. Since then, psychologists have been figuring out the origins of the effort paradox and why some of us struggle with tasks that others might find easy. What they are finding is offering fresh insights not only into how you can get off the couch and into your running shoes, but also how you can learn more effectively, better empathise with others and even cultivate a more meaningful life. “[It seems] that if we can become…
Read More