Erratum: Social mindfulness and prosociality vary across the globe (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2021) 118 (e2023846118) DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2023846118)

Niels J. Van Doesum, Ryan O. Murphy, Marcello Gallucci, Efrat Aharonov-Majar, Ursula Athenstaedt, Wing Tung Au, Liying Bai, Robert Bohm, Inna Bovina, Nancy R. Buchan, Xiao Ping Chen, Kitty B. Dumont, Jan B. Engelmann, Kimmo Eriksson, Hyun Euh, Susann Fiedler, Justin Friesen, Simon Gachter, Camilo Garcia, Roberto GonzalezSylvie Graf, Katarzyna Growiec, Serge Guimond, Martina Hrebickova, Elizabeth Immer-Bernold, Jeff Joireman, Gokhan Karagonlar, Kerry Kawakami, Toko Kiyonari, Yu Kou, D. Michael Kuhlman, Alexandros Andreas Kyrtsis, Siugmin Lay, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Norman P. Li, Yang Li, Boris Maciejovsky, Zoi Manesi, Ali Mashuri, Aurelia Mok, Karin S. Moser, Ladislav Motak, Adrian Netedu, Chandrasekhar Pammi, Michael J. Platow, Karolina Raczka-Winkler, Christopher P. Reinders Folmer, Cecilia Reyna, Angelo Romano, Shaul Shalvi, Claudia Simão, Adam W. Stivers, Pontus Strimling, Yannis Tsirbas, Sonja Utz, Leander Van der Meij, Sven Waldzus, Yiwen Wang, Bernd Weber, Ori Weisel, Tim Wildschut, Fabian Winter, Junhui Wu, Jose C. Yong, Paul A.M. Van Lange

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate


The authors wish to note the following: "We thank the attentive readers who noticed some mistakes in the country labels of Fig. 2: Romania was labeled twice, Republic of Korea did not have a label, and Mexico was labeled in the wrong position. These mistakes did not involve the underlying data. We discovered that the main analyses used environmental performance data (EPI) from 2008, reported in Table 2. However, the prediction models and Fig. 2 used EPI data from 2016, which are also referenced in the text. Reanalysis showed very similar results with each dataset and led to the same conclusion: The bivariate association of social mindfulness (SoMi) with EPI-2008 is β = 0.60, t(27.04) = 3.83, P = 0.001; for EPI-2016 this is β = 0.61, t(27.02) = 4.00, P < 0.001. Table 2 has been updated with the EPI-2016 data in the online version. The online Supplementary Information remains unchanged but has been updated with a correct reference to the EPI-2008 dataset. Finally, a labeling error in one of the datafiles made it so that Singapore was not included in the country-level analyses. Reanalysis including Singapore produced close to identical results. All effect sizes showed to be practically unchanged and all inferential tests led to the same conclusions as the original ones, including the association between SoMi and the income inequality (Gini) index that was confirmed nonsignificant, P = 0.070 (see OSF link, Because no conclusions change, all results are retained and no further changes were made. Updated results are provided in the OSF repository (" The corrected Fig. 2, its legend, and the corrected Table 2 appear below. The online version has been corrected. The SI Appendix has been corrected online to display the correct dataset reference as described above.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere2118687118
JournalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Issue number47
StatePublished - 23 Nov 2021


Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum: Social mindfulness and prosociality vary across the globe (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2021) 118 (e2023846118) DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2023846118)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this