Construal level theory (CLT) proposes that psychological distance influences the level of abstraction at which something is mentally construed: things perceived as less probable (likelihood) or further away from the here (spatial distance), now (temporal distance), or self (social distance) are thought about more abstractly. This international multi-lab study tests four basic hypotheses derived from core assumptions of CLT and explores potential moderators and boundary conditions of the effects. Participants (N = 11,775) from 27 countries and regions were randomly assigned to one of four experimental protocols focused on different types of psychological distance (temporal, spatial, social, or likelihood), and each experiment manipulated psychological distance (close vs. distant). The protocols for temporal distance (N = 2,941) and spatial distance (N = 2,973) were direct replications of Liberman and Trope (1998, Study 1) and Fujita et al. (2006, Study 1), respectively. The remaining two protocols were paradigmatic replications, applying to social distance (N = 2,926) and likelihood (N = 2,936). The effects of psychological distance on construal level for the four present studies were (original effects within parentheses; positive effects are consistent with hypotheses): dtemporal = 0.08, 95% CI 0.003, 0.16 (cf. d = 0.92); dspatial = 0.04, 95% CI -0.03, 0.11 (cf. d = 0.55); dsocial = -0.27, 95% CI -0.34, -0.19; and dlikelihood = 0.03, 95% CI -0.05, 0.11. Pretests indicated that valence and abstraction were confounded in response options on the outcome measure. Controlling for this confound eliminated the hypothesis-inconsistent effect of social distance, d = 0.006, 95% CI -0.05, 0.07. These findings provide limited evidence for the predictions of the theory and present a critical challenge for CLT.
Calderon et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: