We examined the degree to which cognitive style, cultural worldview, conspiracy ideation, and religious and politi-cal demographic variables correspond to agreement with scientific claims across four domains. Participants rated their level ofagreement with scientific statements in four domains (evolution, GMOs, vaccinations, climate change) along with open-endedquestions to investigate participants’ reasons for their support or rejection, filled out individual difference measures, and com-pleted a demographics questionnaire asking about frequency of attendance at religious services as a proxy for religiosity, andpolitical ideology along the liberal-conservative spectrum. Lower agreement with scientific statements was found to be relatedto a lower analytic thinking style and a stronger conservative political ideology. Our results contribute to a better understandingof the cognitive and social profiles of individuals who reject scientific conclusions and can be useful in designing future researchefforts aimed at investigating science acceptance and science denial.

We examined the effects of individual versus joint action and racial similarity and dissimilarity on a Simon task using mouse tracking to explore the implicit cognitive dynamics underlying responses. Participants were slower to respond when working with a partner than when working alone, and their mouse movements also differed across conditions. Participants paired with a different-race partner took longer to respond than participants paired with a same-race partner. We argue that, in the joint conditions, participants’ longer responses were the result of automatic inhibitory processes that arise within the social context.

We examined the effects of individual versus joint action on aSimon task using motion tracking to explore the implicitcognitive dynamics underlying responses. In both individual andjoint conditions, participants were slower to respond, and weredifferentially attracted to the distracter response location, whenthe spatial component of the stimulus was incompatible with theresponse location. When two people completed similar twochoice tasks together, the results were not statistically differentfrom the individual condition, even though the magnitude of thestimulus-response compatibility effect was slightly larger.Neither was there an increased effect when the partner had nostimulus-response conflict to resolve. We found no evidence foran action conflict when the responses of the two partners weredifferent. These data imply that the literature regarding the JointSimon task is still in the process of determining the relevantevents that interact with and support joint action.