More news from Advances: Also commenting on Arceneaux, Bakker, Fasching, and Lelkes, Elizabeth Simas and Sebastian Ege use their article, titled "Psychological Dispositions and Political Attitudes in a Hyperpartisan Context," to draw attention to partisan polarization.

News from Advances: Responding to Arceneaux, Bakker, Fasching and Lelkes, Christopher Federico and Ariel Malka wrote "From “what” and “when” to “how” and “why”: Moving the study of psychological dispositions and political preferences forward."

(3) Bottom line: we need better theory and stronger designs—experiments, panels, lifespan data, and predictive ML.

(2) Many findings come from small, nonrepresentative samples and confounded designs. he authors argue simple correlations won’t settle the debate. They propose a more complex, bidirectional model where personality and ideology influence each other, moderated by engagement, geography, and threat.

In Advances 2025: (1) New review by Arceneaux et al. challenges the idea that conservatives and liberals differ in stable psychological traits, arguing the evidence for the “ideological asymmetry hypothesis” is weak and plagued by measurement, sampling, and causal-inference problems.

Here you’ll find spotlights on big-picture work in PolPsych---all with a commitment to **global perspectives, methodological pluralism, and open, ethical science**. 🔗 Read our editorial vision: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...

Hello Bluesky! 👋 We’re the new editors of **Advances in Political Psychology**, a curated home for invited, agenda-setting articles that weave together fragmented findings and map out where our field is headed next. This is where we showcase what is happening.