To test their Global/Local Processing Style model, Förster, Liberman, and Kuschel found that after priming a concept (such as “aggressive”), people can assimilate that concept into their social judgments after a “global” prime (e.g., rate a person as being more aggressive compared to a no prime condition), or contrast their judgment away from the concept after a “local” prime (e.g., rate the person as being less aggressive compared to a no prime condition). This effect was not replicated by Reinhard (2015) in the Reproducibility Project: Psychology . However, the social judgment scenario in this replication may not have been sufficiently ambiguous or applicable for detecting the original effect. The current ManyLabs 5 investigation sought to reconcile the differences between the original and replication studies by testing Reinhard’s (2015) protocol and a revised protocol, responding to the original authors’ critiques that Reinhard’s protocol fell short on applicability and target ambiguity. Teams from nine universities contributed to these replications. We first conducted a pilot study and successfully selected ambiguous scenarios for each site (N=530). We then piloted the aggression prime to meet applicability at five different sites (N=363) and were not successful. We replaced the prime with a task that was found to be successful in a pilot of another project (McCarthy et al., 2016). For the final replication study (N=xxx), we [did| did not] find moderation by protocol type, with patterns in [the RP:P| revised | both] protocol[s] [consistent | inconsistent] with the effects observed in the original study. We discuss these findings and possible explanations.