The willingness of those in power to act fairly depends on how easily others can collectively push back against unfair treatment, psychologists have found.

A newly published study by Dr David Gordon at University of Staffordshire (UK) and Dr Mikael Puurtinen at the University of Jyväskylä (Finland), investigated the impact of collective action against those in positions of power, using a multiplayer version of a classic psychological experiment called the Ultimatum Game.

Results suggest that the ease of collective action induces more egalitarian behaviour by individuals in a position of power and makes those without power less willing to accept unfairness.

We’re more likely to empathize with someone when their happiness rewards us.

Once an emotional connection is established, it remains strong even after the rewards stop. The findings may shed light on how to foster empathy in people and shape how AI responds to human emotions.

Climate-related wildfires are once again making headlines as they rage across the northern hemisphere this summer. New IIASA research shows that addressing social and economic vulnerability across countries will be a key factor in mitigating the scale of resulting financial damage and emphasize sustainable development as key to reducing climate-related impacts.

People are more likely to do something good for others when they understand the consequences of their actions and would feel guilty if they made a less prosocial choice. This finding comes from a new international study conducted in 20 countries, which also found that people often avoid guilt by deliberately ignoring the impact of their decisions. Surprisingly, shame about what others might think had little effect on social behaviour.

When it comes to susceptibility to influence on social media, “It’s not just about who you are—it’s about where you are in a network, and who you’re connected to,” said Luca Luceri, a lead scientist at USC’s Information Sciences Institute (ISI). A new study by Luceri and his team finds that the likelihood someone will be influenced online isn’t spread evenly across a social platform. Instead, it clusters.

They call this the Susceptibility Paradox; it’s a pattern in which users’ friends are, on average, more influenceable than the users themselves. And it may help explain how behaviors, trends, and ideas catch on—and why some corners of the internet are more vulnerable to influence than others.