Tolerance has been identified as a way to reduce prejudice. However, tolerance has also been posited as an ideological dilemma and may have its limits. The present research explores this idea, utilizing insights from Terror Management Theory. Three studies were conducted using online samples. Study 1 found that a tolerance prime led to less discrimination towards Muslims after being reminded of death, but increased discrimination when reminded of terrorism. Additionally, tolerance did not affect levels of affective prejudice. Study 2 found that reading an essay that threatened the norm of tolerance led to increased levels of death‐thought accessibility and worldview defence, particularly amongst liberal participants. Study 3 found that a tolerance prime attenuated mortality salience decreasing support for author rights, but not if the worldview critic was intolerant. Taken together, the present findings suggest that using tolerance to reduce prejudice and foster more positive intergroup relations has its boundaries. If others are perceived to not be tolerant themselves, then people may be more motivated to defend, rather than uphold the norm of tolerance.

Recent studies have explored ways to increase cognitive load in liars to identify cues to deception. This study used a driving simulator as a load-inducing technique to explore differences between truth-tellers and liars during an investigative interview scenario and also investigated the effect of rehearsing lies in this context. Deception affected driving performance. Truthtellers drove more slowly compared with their own baseline, whereas unrehearsed liars sped up. There was no difference in speed between truth-tellers and rehearsed liars. In addition, truth-tellers had significantly faster reaction times compared with their own baseline, than both rehearsed and unrehearsed liars. During the interviews, truth-tellers provided significantly more visual and auditory details and mentioned significantly fewer cognitive operations than liars. The findings add to the body of literature exploring the optimal relationship between cognitive load and secondary task performance to identify cues to deception. Copyright

Self-esteem has a long history concerning its relationship with achievement and well-being, both of which are important issues in higher education. Whereas historically, high self-esteem has been touted as having positive benefits for student success and well-being, the present paper explores how self-esteem, namely when it is contingent and based on one's academic work, may be more detrimental than beneficial to these outcomes. Evidence regarding academic contingent self-worth is reviewed, with the main outcomes being that it can produce deficits to one's learning, success, and well-being. A lot of the reviewed evidence therefore goes against popular wisdom that investing in one's academic work can produce positive outcomes. Strategies to tackle contingent self-worth are discussed including reducing levels of contingent self-worth, changing the culture of learning in higher education, the role of learning orientations, and self-compassion.

developed conceived and designed the study. S. Fairlamb collected and analyzed the data. J. Juhl and S. Fairlamb drafted the manuscript, and both approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.

Evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased rates of depression worldwide. Many factors have been identified to relate to this increase depression, but according to Terror Management Theory, the heightened awareness of death during the pandemic has the potential to increase depression for those with low self-esteem. This hypothesis was examined in a U.K. sample during the first national lockdown where depression, self-esteem and death-thought accessibility (DTA) were measured, and a COVID Index (COVID-19 cases and deaths on date of participation) was produced. The COVID Index was positively related to DTA. Additionally, DTA mediated the relationship between the COVID Index and depression scores when participants had low levels of self-esteem. These findings suggest that heightened existential concerns may be a neglected factor increasing depression during the pandemic.