Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026You can find the preprint here: doi.org/10.31234/osf... 6/6doi.orgOSF 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026Relationships do not simply end with death; they often transform into new psychological forms. Still, we discuss the ways in which the psychology of the dead differs from that of the living (e.g., level of abstraction, functional value of social information) 5/ 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026We lay out some assumptions for this agenda: 🔎 We use the same cognitive tools to think about the dead as we do for the living (e.g., projection); 🧠 Memories of deceased people are dynamic (e.g., changing over time) 💭 Thinking of the dead may shape (e.g., moral) behavior 4/ 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026We explore the bidirectional psychological phenomena that drive the continuing bonds between the dead and the living: How thinking about the dead changes mental representations of them, but also how it can impact the living's thoughts and behavior 3/ 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026When biological life ends, many psychological and social processes continue: the living still think about the dead, imagine their views, talk about them, etc. Most research on this has focused on paranormal phenomena, more than on the "psychology of everyday life" 2/ 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 28/04/2026Excited to share a new preprint of my latest paper: "The Social Psychology of the Living and the Dead" In this work, we set a research agenda for exploring the social psychology of the dead as a potential lens through which we can learn about the social psychology of the living 1/ 120
Reposted by Francisco CruzJESP @jexpsocpsych.bsky.social · 06/11/2025Can reading one article change your belief in free will? New studies say maybe—but the effect doesn’t last. Our beliefs might be more resilient than they seem New work by @olivergenschow.bsky.social @protzko.bsky.social @sebraem.bsky.social 💡media.tenor.coma man pointing to a sign that says believeALT: a man pointing to a sign that says believe 2125
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 15/10/2025These findings inform current debates on what it means to become an expert (e.g., 10,000-hour rule), extending them to the domain of psychological science. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti... 5/5sciencedirect.comLearning psychology changes deep-rooted beliefs about the nature of psychological phenomena: Effects on intuitive dualism and beliefs about scienceLearning about certain disciplines can change students’ way of thinking (e.g., economy students become less cooperative, philosophy students become mo… 020
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 15/10/2025Knowledge about psychology was also associated with thinking that phenomena had a material basis (e.g., brain, vs. soul). This extended to intuitive responses -- which generally lean more towards dualism. Again, these effects were stronger for subjectively intense experiences. 4/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 15/10/2025More knowledgeable individuals believed that psychological phenomena were more explainable through science, in particular the ones that people do not consider to be explainable (i.e., with an intense subjective experience). 3/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 15/10/2025Importantly, we find that these shifts only happen with meaningful exposure to psychology -- that is, exposure that translates into knowledge about psychology --, not just by progressing through their degree. 🎓 2/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 15/10/2025New paper! 🚨 Does studying psychology change how people think about psychology (even at an intuitive level)? 🤔 We tracked students across their degree and found shifts in their beliefs about the bases of psychological phenomena and their scientific explainability. 1/5 143
Reposted by Francisco CruzProtzko @protzko.bsky.social · 01/10/2025Even if you tell people cognitive biases are good & lead to good outcomes, we still think they have the bias less than others. Only when we see the bias as very desirable we might think we are = to others on it. From @cruzf.bsky.social & André Mata link.springer.com/content/pdf/... #psych #phdsky 052
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 13/09/2025Visible light 🔆 or electromagnetic waves 📡: Which helps people understand better? In a new post for Character & Context (@spspnews.bsky.social), I dive into my work with @tanialombrozo.bsky.social on how jargon shapes scientific understanding. Check it out here! spsp.org/news/charact...spsp.orgUsing Jargon Can Make Bad Logic Seem Satisfying | SPSPAlthough technical language can make something harder to understand, it can have a convenient advantage. 051
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 01/09/2025🇬🇧 I recently had a conversation with @tiagoramalho.bsky.social about the research I've been conducting. 💡We talked about topics I'm passionate about: Overconfidence and science learning, how this is impacted by artificial intelligence, and more. 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 01/09/2025🇵🇹 Recentemente, estive à conversa com o @tiagoramalho.bsky.social a respeito da investigação que tenho conduzido. 💡 Falámos sobre temas que me entusiasmam: Sobreconfiança e aprendizagem de ciência, como isto é impactado pela inteligência artificial, etc. Para os interessados👇 101
Reposted by Francisco CruzJosh Wenger @jdweng.bsky.social · 01/08/2025So grateful for the chance to attend the EASP Summer School organized by @jimaceverett.bsky.social. Huge thanks to @jimaceverett.bsky.social and @mgreinecke.bsky.social for your mentorship in the Moral Psych of AI workstream, and to all of the other amazing students I had the chance to learn from! 2125
Reposted by Francisco CruzNina Franiatte @ninafraniatte.bsky.social · 17/06/2025🚨Check out our new paper with @boissinesther.bsky.social, Alexandra Delmas & @wimdeneys.bsky.social in Acta Psych! 📹 We show that video debiasing training can boost reasoning accuracy - not just deliberation, but intuition too! 🔓 Open access: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti... Quick summary👇 153
Reposted by Francisco Cruzkoenfucius @koenfucius.bsky.social · 16/06/2025Research by @cruzf.bsky.social & @tanialombrozo.bsky.social suggests laypeople may find explanations containing jargon more satisfying despite understanding them less well because they assume the jargon fills gaps in explanations that are otherwise incomplete: buff.ly/FWgSBaZ 021
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025Thank you, @rafmbatista.bsky.social! Let us know if you have any thoughts or questions! 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025A special thanks to @tanialombrozo.bsky.social, my advisor, without whom this wouldn't be possible, for all the guidance and all she taught me! And shout-out to my lab mates @keremoktar.bsky.social @caseylewry.bsky.social Read more here: www.nature.com/articles/s41... 9/9nature.comHow laypeople evaluate scientific explanations containing jargon - Nature Human BehaviourCruz and Lombrozo examine how laypeople make sense of scientific explanations and find that although jargon reduces understanding, for short explanations, jargon makes the explanation more satisfying. 042
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025This work has implications for the present epistemic landscape, which is becoming increasingly complex. We discuss downstream consequences for conceptualizing overconfidence, delivering science communication, and thinking about human-AI alignment! 8/9 141
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025✅ We find that people are poorly calibrated in the perceptions they have about the quality of their own explanations. In particular, miscalibration emerges for those that are exposed to explanations but fail to reproduce it in their own (S4). 7/9 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025✅ Effects of jargon even when they are misguided (i.e., for made-up jargon) and for naturalistic stimuli (e.g., tweets, S2B-S2C); ✅ We can correct people's biased responses by showing them that gaps persist (e.g., asking them to generate their own explanations, S3A-S3B); 6/9 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025💡 Main findings 💡 ✅ Jargon increases explanatory satisfaction (for circular explanations, Studies 1A-4 [S1A-S4]), but decreases comprehensibility (S1A-S1C); ✅ Jargon increases perceptions of explanations by filling explanatory gaps (S2A-S3B); 5/9 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025We identified how to reduce this bias as well: Asking people to e.g., generate explanations impacted more their ratings of explanations with jargon. We also observed overconfidence, which we found the most for those that read explanations with jargon, but fail to reproduce them. 4/9 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025We then tested an explanatory account for this dissociation: People assume the jargon is doing important work, filling in conceptual gaps. So, this boost in quality for explanations with jargon is punctured for more complete explanations, since there are less gaps to fill. 3/9 110
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025Across 9 experiments (+6600 participants), we explored a paradox: How do non-experts judge scientific explanations they can’t fully understand? We found that scientific jargon can increase people’s satisfaction with explanations, even though it makes them less comprehensible. 2/9 132
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 12/06/2025🚨 I’m incredibly excited to share this one: Latest paper out in Nature Human Behaviour! Publishing in Nature has always been a goal of mine, and I’m so happy I got there with work developed at Princeton, where I learned so much and grew as a researcher. 1/9 131
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 07/06/2025🔬 How did we test this? We manipulated bias desirability. Biases were framed as desirable (e.g., beneficial to the individual) or undesirable (e.g., harmful). We tested this both within the same bias and across different biases. 5/5 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 07/06/2025💡 What did we find? Our study shows that the bias blind spot is smaller when the bias is considered desirable (e.g., being overly positive about close others). The more someone sees a bias as desirable, the smaller their blind spot for that bias. 4/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 07/06/2025🧠 What was our objective? We aimed to reframe the bias blind spot. While it's often thought to be due to introspection, we tested whether it’s driven by motivations to maintain a positive self-image. People deny their biases but may accept those they see as desirable. 3/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 07/06/2025🔍 What is the Bias Blind Spot? The Bias Blind Spot is when people recognize biases in others but not in themselves. Despite being subject to the same biases, we often see ourselves as less biased than others. 2/5 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 07/06/2025🚨 New Research Published! 🚨 "Motivated Bias Blind Spot: People confess to more or less bias depending on its desirability" link.springer.com/article/10.1... 1/5link.springer.comMotivated bias blind spot: people confess to more or less bias depending on its desirability - Mind & SocietyThough people readily claim that others fall prey to several biases, they are less likely to recognize those same biases in themselves – a tendency termed bias blind spot (Pronin et al. in Personality... 132
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 02/06/20255/end This is highly consequential: If we want the public to better understand and accept psychological science, we should match our explanations to appeal to their intuitions (or alternatively reframe these intuitions gently). Paper link: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....tandfonline.comLay perceptions of psychology: the (mis)match between lay beliefs and explanatory stancesPeople do not think that all psychological phenomena are equally explainable through science: Psychological phenomena associated with a high first-person subjective experience (henceforth, FPSE; i.... 010
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 02/06/20254/ This suggests people default to “prototype” (brain-based) explanations, aligned with their views of low-subjectivity phenomena (but not high-subjectivity ones). When you give people the right kind of explanation, even these subjective phenomena become more explainable. 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 02/06/20253/ We found that: 1) Low-subjectivity phenomena are seen as more explainable... 2) ...unless people choose what explanation to consider: This effect disappears if high-subjectivity phenomena are paired with intentional explanations. 120
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 02/06/20252/ People judge explainability not just by what the phenomenon is, but by how well it matches common explanatory templates: - Brain-based explanations (e.g., neuroscience); - Intention-based explanations (e.g., beliefs and desires); - Functional/process-based explanations. 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 02/06/20251/ 🧠 New research out now! Why do people think some psychological phenomena (like falling in love) are harder to explain scientifically than others (like reading a map)? Turns out it depends on the type of explanation people think about! 111
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 24/04/2025Behaviors perceived as reflecting someone's true self were rated as more moral -- and more rooted in the soul (S3) We also replicated Study 1 and found that people were more likely to attribute soul-based moral actions to themselves than to others (S4) 4/4 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 24/04/2025Participants read moral dilemmas involving decisions driven by either the soul or the brain. Moral behaviors were more often linked to the soul (Study 1) Impulses coming from the soul were seen as more reflective of the agent's true self than those stemming from the brain (S2) 3/4 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 24/04/2025💭 Where do people believe moral and immoral actions come from? ✍️ People tend to credit the soul for moral actions but blame the brain for immoral ones. Why? Because many view their true self as fundamentally moral -- and they associate that true self with the soul. 2/4 110
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 24/04/2025🚨 New paper out! 🚨 "The spirit is noble, but the flesh is corrupt: lay beliefs about the bases of (im)moral behavior" www.researchgate.net/publication/... 1/4researchgate.netThe spirit is noble, but the flesh is corrupt: lay beliefs about the bases of (im)moral behavior | Request PDFRequest PDF | On Apr 23, 2025, Francisco Cruz and others published The spirit is noble, but the flesh is corrupt: lay beliefs about the bases of (im)moral behavior | Find, read and cite all the resear... 231
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 10/04/2025Amazing news, @steverathje.bsky.social! Best of luck! 010
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 29/11/2024Learn more about this award here: apadiv1.org/awards-grant...apadiv1.orgThe Anne Anastasi General Psychology Graduate Student AwardThe Anne Anastasi awards, named for APA past-president and funded by the Anne Anastasi Foundation, are given to two outstanding psychology graduate students, one in the first two years of graduate stu... 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 29/11/2024I'd also like to sincerely thank all my colleagues and mentors, namely @tapalma.bsky.social -- for all their guidance and encouragement! Doing research is not a sole endeavor and exchanging ideas and learning from one another is also part of what I believe interdisciplinarity means. 2/3 110
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 29/11/2024Absolutely thrilled to announce that I've been selected as a recipient of the APA's 2024 Anne Anastasi Graduate Student Research Award! To me, interdisciplinarity is key to good research -- and being recognized as doing research that embodies that is a dream come true! 1/3 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 14/12/2023Thus, despite behavioral equivalence, it appears that the neural mechanisms behind holistic face processing distinguish between natural faces and faces in paintings across styles. 4/4 000
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 14/12/2023Photographs and Renaissance paintings elicited similar N170 (i.e., face-like stimuli processing) responses. These were than N170 responses obtained for other art styles, for which graded responses as a function of distortion were found. 3/4 100
Francisco Cruz @cruzf.bsky.social · 14/12/2023In this new paper, we explore address this same question. We presented participants faces in paintings (varying in a realism-distortion continuum), as well as photographs, and measured EEG activity. 2/4 100