phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | money priming— “Money priming experiments (totaling 165 to date, from 18 countries) point to at least 2 major effects.” | |
| claim-type | mechanism— “Variations in a prime’s meaning, the ease with which primed content comes to mind, the prime’s motivational importance, and the ambiguity of the outcome situation influence the impact of the prime.” | |
| method — evidence | — “This article discusses the factors that predict priming effects, and particularly those pertinent to differences between Caruso et al. and Rohrer et al.” | |
| transfer | from economics (into the psychology of money): the paper claims the subject of money has been left to economists and argues that the psychological side of it explains events economics could not— “For decades, economists have had the last (and often the only) word on money, and yet some of the biggest worldwide events of recent history stem from a failure to understand the psychology of money.” | transfers[0] |
| mechanism | Priming works by supplying an interpretation for an ambiguous outcome situation, so the more constrained and unambiguous the outcome, the less room the prime has to shift the response and the smaller the effect— “The more specific and less ambiguous the outcome (such as when responding to the word doctor after seeing the word nurse), the smaller the expected priming effect because there is less wiggle room for the prime to alter the response (e.g., Loersch & Payne, 2011).” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Frequent real-world contact with money keeps the concept chronically accessible, so that even subtle cues suffice to activate it and change behaviour— “When the content of a prime is easily accessible, it can take only subtle cues reminiscent of it to alter outcomes (Higgins & Brendl, 1995).” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | Money cues set two opposing forces in motion - one routing from money to free markets to endorsement of the systems supporting them, the other routing from money to personal agency and self-sufficiency, which removes the need to endorse those systems - and the two cancel— “Integrating the two lines of reasoning suggests that there might be countervailing forces when people are primed with money and asked to contemplate the righteousness of existing social systems.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | Money primes act by activating the phenomenological self as an owner of money, which is why primes tying money to the participant personally produce parallel and stronger effects— “Parallels between general money prime effects and primes that highlight the self owning money suggest that self activation might be an important contributor.” | mechanisms[3] |
| builds-on | Caruso, Vohs, Baxter, and Waytz (2013)— “Thus began our investigation of whether money priming could alter responses related to system justification, social dominance, belief in a just world, and free market ideology.” | claim_relations[0] |
| contradicts | Rohrer, Pashler, and Harris (2015)— “In summary, there are two theoretically derived reasons why Rohrer et al.’s (2015) results were inconsistent with Caruso et al.’s (2013).” | claim_relations[1] |
| sense | A THEORY OF WHEN PRIMING WORKS AT ALL, OFFERED IN REPLY TO A FAILED REPLICATION. `Variations in a prime's meaning, the ease with which primed content comes to mind, the prime's motivational importance, and the ambiguity of the outcome situation influence the impact of the prime.` Four moderators, stated in the abstract of a paper whose third sentence is that Rohrer, Pashler and Harris failed to replicate. The provenance matters as much as the content: these are conditions named AFTER a null, which is the weakest position from which to name them and also the position in which the field most needs them named— “Variations in a prime’s meaning, the ease with which primed content comes to mind, the prime’s motivational importance, and the ambiguity of the outcome situation influence the impact of the prime” | senses[0] |
| sense | AMBIGUITY OF THE OUTCOME IS OFFERED AS THE REASON COGNITIVE PRIMING EFFECTS ARE SMALLER THAN SOCIAL ONES, WHICH INVERTS THE USUAL READING. `The more specific and less ambiguous the outcome (such as when responding to the word doctor after seeing the word nurse), the smaller the expected priming effect because there is less wiggle room for the prime to alter the response.` The usual account of that same effect-size gap is that social priming effects are inflated. This says they are large because the outcome is loose - a property of the MEASURE, not of the phenomenon - and it makes the gap a prediction rather than an embarrassment. Both readings fit the same numbers, and this corpus holds papers from both sides of the gap— “The more specific and less ambiguous the outcome (such as when responding to the word doctor after seeing the word nurse), the smaller the expected priming effect because there is less wiggle room for the prime to alter the response” | senses[1] |
| sense | AND IT IS FALSIFIABLE, WITH THE TEST SUPPLIED: `A situation that does not leave much room for interpretation is unlikely to show a consistent or large priming effect.` The same outcome task was given two NAMES - Kay et al. (2004) called it either a bland `situation` or a `community game` - and `business priming led to more competitive behaviors than neutral primes when the task was blandly called a situation, there was no effect of prime condition when the task was called the community game`. Ambiguity manipulated by renaming, with a null in the constrained arm. That is a much stronger form of the claim than a post-hoc moderator, and it is the paper's best evidence— “Whereas business priming led to more competitive behaviors than neutral primes when the task was blandly called a “situation,” there was no effect of prime condition when the task was called the “community game” | senses[2] |
| sense | THE PAPER'S OWN SUMMARY OF 165 EXPERIMENTS IS TWO EFFECTS, BOTH STATED AS DIRECTIONS RATHER THAN SIZES: people reminded of money `are less interpersonally attuned. They are not prosocial, caring, or warm. They eschew interdependence.` And they `shift into professional, business, and work mentality. They exert effort on challenging tasks, demonstrate good performance, and feel efficacious.` A count that large (`165 to date, from 18 countries`) with no pooled effect size is itself a fact about the literature - the defence is breadth of replication rather than magnitude— “Money priming experiments (totaling 165 to date, from 18 countries) point to at least 2 major effects. First, compared to neutral primes, people reminded of money are less interpersonally attuned. They are not prosocial, caring, or warm. They eschew interdependence. Second, people reminded of money shift into professional, business, and work… | senses[3] |
| audit | ambiguity —causes→ priming effect — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but attributed: the span cites Higgins & Brendl and Loersch & Payne for ambiguity determining priming effects.— “Ambiguity of the outcome variable determines when and why primes exert their effects (Higgins & Brendl, 1995; Loersch… | concept_edges[0] |
| effect direction | ambiguity —causes→ priming effect — increases Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[0] |
| note | ambiguity —causes→ priming effect — THE DIRECTION IS STATED AS ITS CONTRAPOSITIVE - less room, smaller effect - and the axis quote carries it that way rather than being paraphrased into the positive form. Weight 0.85: the first clause is cited to Higgins & Brendl and Loersch & Payne rather than demonstrated here, and this paper's own status is a reply to a null. The Kay et al. manipulation is the evidence, and it is in the senses. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[0] |
| weight | ambiguity —causes→ priming effect — 0.85 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[0] |
| replication | contested | |
| limitation | The review is explicitly partial: it does not cover the full body of money-priming experiments. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | The author's own proposed mediator (independence/interdependence) was only weakly supported. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | The originally hypothesised mechanism, feelings of power, was not supported by the authors' own measurements. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | The 165 money-priming experiments from 18 countries point to at least two major effects. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | People reminded of money are less interpersonally attuned than after neutral primes. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | People reminded of money work harder on difficult tasks, perform better on objective outcomes, and report feeling efficacious. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Feelings of power were tested repeatedly as the explanation for money-priming effects and were not supported: money primes did not change measured power. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | The independence-interdependence self-construal account fared only marginally better: scores moved in the predicted direction but only weakly. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | People reminded of new money make more moral decisions and seek fairness, compared with used money or neutral primes. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | Cash cues heighten sensitivity to costs: more attention to price and less desire to spend. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | College students, working adults, managers and children as young as 4 show similar effects. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | Different delivery methods for the money prime - images, physical handling, even play money - yield comparable effects. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | Withdrawing cash from a machine reduced helpfulness more than walking past a cash dispenser. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | The proposed reason the Caruso et al. system-justification result failed to replicate is that money priming induces self-sufficiency, which works against the defensive motive that normally drives system justification. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| quantity | 165 — total number of money-priming experiments counted to date, run in 18 countries Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 200% — increase in intended donations produced by a credit card prime relative to no prime Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | 113% — increase in bids in a real binding auction for a credit card prime versus a cash prime Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| variable | feelings of power (mediator) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| variable | ambiguity of the outcome situation (moderator) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| variable | accessibility (moderator) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[6] |
| variable | motivational relevance (moderator) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[7] |
| definition | exchange mentality Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | low control Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | independence Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | interdependence Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| concept | money priming — not defined in this paper's own words; the contested effect this paper defends - reminding people of money, with no money given or taken - and the defence is a list of conditions rather than a re-assertion of the result Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | ambiguity — not defined in this paper's own words; THE MODERATOR THAT DOES THE MOST WORK HERE: how much room the outcome situation leaves for interpretation. It is offered as a general law of priming, not a property of money - and it predicts a NULL wherever the outcome is tightly constrained Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | priming effect — not defined in this paper's own words; the quantity the paper is theorising - and its claim is about the SIZE of it as a function of the outcome task, which is a claim about measurement rather than about minds Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | accessibility — not defined in this paper's own words; a second moderator, tied to how often the primed content is met in ordinary life - which is why money is expected to prime strongly where an unfamiliar concept would not Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| concept | system justification — not defined in this paper's own words; the outcome the contested experiments used, and the one the replication failed on - so it is the specific place where this literature's dispute is located Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| effect size (Cohen's d) d | as written: dmoney vs. neutral Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| sample size N | as written: N Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| evidence status note | sample size — THE QUOTE STOPS WHERE THE EXTRACTED TEXT IS INTERRUPTED: after its last word the text runs into the publisher's copyright line - the quote's last word, 'This', is that line's first word ('This document is copyrighted…'), so the words that completed the sentence are not continuous with it and are not quoted. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824