Your Daily digest for PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

[Article Digests for Psychology & Social Work]

PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

 

(https://www.psypost.org/intelligent-men-exhibit-stronger-commitment-and-lower-hostility-in-romantic-relationships/) Intelligent men exhibit stronger commitment and lower hostility in romantic relationships
Oct 28th 2024, 10:00

Men’s general intelligence is associated with better relationship investment and lower aversive behaviors, according to a study published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112902) Personality and Individual Differences.
Past research shows that higher general intelligence (g) is associated with numerous positive life outcomes, such as academic success, better socioeconomic status, and lower likelihood of criminality. These studies also suggest that intelligence may play a role in romantic relationships. General intelligence has been linked to lower rates of divorce and higher chances of being married in mid-life, but the effects of intelligence on more nuanced relationship behaviors have not been as widely explored.
In their new study, Gavin S. Vance and colleagues examined how men’s intelligence related to behaviors such as partner-directed insults, sexual coercion, and relationship investment.
Their research builds on existing theories that intelligence could influence romantic relationship behaviors. Some past studies suggested that specific cognitive abilities, such as problem-solving and memory, can contribute to better conflict resolution between partners. For instance, people with strong working memory skills tend to recall their partner’s perspective during conflicts, helping to reduce the severity of relationship issues.
There is also evidence that intelligence supports self-regulation—potentially reducing harmful impulses in relationships. The researchers wanted to explore these ideas further, specifically focusing on men’s general intelligence and how it might predict both positive and negative relationship behaviors.
To examine these connections, the researchers recruited 202 men (age 18-65) in heterosexual relationships for at least six months. The average relationship length was 3.36 years. To assess general intelligence, the researchers used the 16-item International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR), which includes tasks from four subscales: letter-number series, matrix reasoning, verbal reasoning, and 3D rotation tasks. These tasks measured participants’ problem-solving abilities and abstract reasoning.
Participants also completed surveys designed to capture partner-directed behaviors, such as the frequency of partner-directed insults, sexual coercion, and cost-inflicting mate retention tactics. They further completed scales measuring jealousy, psychopathy, erectile dysfunction, and relationship investment, including satisfaction and commitment.
The researchers found that higher general intelligence was significantly associated with more positive behaviors and reduced negative behaviors in romantic relationships. Higher intelligence was associated with lower levels of partner-directed insults, sexual coercion, psychopathy, and the use of cost-inflicting mate retention strategies.
One notable aspect of the findings was the role of the letter-number series tasks within the intelligence test. Men’s performance on this subscale was a particularly strong predictor of both reduced negative behaviors and increased positive investment in the relationship. This task type, which emphasizes pattern recognition and sequential reasoning, may tap into cognitive skills that support impulse control, problem-solving, and the ability to think through consequences—all qualities that could contribute to healthier relationship dynamics.
Intelligence was also positively associated with more desirable relationship outcomes. Men with higher intelligence reported greater overall relationship investment, suggesting that intelligence might support a deeper, more consistent commitment to romantic relationships. These participants expressed higher levels of relationship satisfaction and were more likely to report that they prioritized maintaining their relationships, indicating that intelligence may play a role in fostering long-term, stable partnerships.
Interestingly, intelligence did not show significant associations with other variables, such as jealousy, partner-directed violence, or benefit-provisioning mate retention behaviors. This finding suggests that intelligence may specifically influence certain harmful behaviors and positive investments, rather than affecting all relationship dynamics across the board.
One limitation is the lack of control over the time participants took to complete the intelligence test, which may have influenced their scores. As well, the exploratory nature and correlational design prevent causal conclusions.
Despite these limitations, this research sheds new light on the potential role of intelligence in promoting healthy relationship behaviors, raising intriguing questions for future research. For example, studies could examine how these findings apply to women and whether similar associations between intelligence and relationship behaviors exist across different relationship types. Additionally, researchers could further investigate how specific components of intelligence impact relationship outcomes. This could help to clarify whether certain cognitive skills are more beneficial for relationship quality than others.
The research, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112902) Men’s general intelligence and heterosexual romantic relationship outcomes”, was authored by Gavin S. Vance, Tara DeLecce, and Todd K. Shackelford.

(https://www.psypost.org/is-autism-a-factor-in-conspiracy-mentality-new-study-says-no/) Is autism a factor in conspiracy mentality? New study says no
Oct 28th 2024, 08:00

Is autism a risk factor for conspiracy thinking, or could it actually protect against it? A study in (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13546805.2024.2399505#abstract) Cognitive Neuropsychiatry set out to explore these contrasting ideas, finding that autism does not seem to influence belief in conspiracy theories at all. After examining large samples of both autistic and non-autistic adults, researchers found no difference in conspiracy mentality between the two groups.
The researchers aimed to test two main hypotheses about the relationship between autism and conspiracy beliefs. On one hand, some theories suggest that autism might increase susceptibility to conspiracy beliefs because autistic individuals may experience higher levels of social exclusion, stigmatization, and anxiety, which have been associated with increased conspiracy thinking. These social challenges could potentially lead autistic individuals to develop beliefs in conspiracies as a way to make sense of these experiences.
Alternatively, an opposing hypothesis suggests that autism might actually serve as a protective factor against conspiracy beliefs. This is based on cognitive traits often found in autism, such as analytical thinking and a tendency toward systematic information processing. These qualities could make autistic people more skeptical of unverified or irrational claims, potentially reducing their likelihood to believe in conspiracy theories.
“Initially, we were interested in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on autistic individuals. During the pandemic new conspiracy theories arose (e.g. regarding vaccinations) and we wanted to examine whether autistic individuals were more prone to endorse conspiracy theories or were more protected against conspiracy thinking, due to their enhanced rationality,” said study author Sanne Roels, a research assistant at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam who is also affiliated with the (https://nar.vu.nl/english/what-is-the-nar) Netherlands Autism Register.
To investigate this, the researchers designed a study comparing two groups: one group with diagnosed autism and another drawn from the general population. A total of 5,040 participants joined the study, including 682 autistic individuals and 4,358 non-autistic participants, all from the Netherlands. The autistic participants had been clinically diagnosed and represented a mix of genders, educational backgrounds, and ages.
The team used a well-known survey tool, the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire, which assesses a general tendency to believe in conspiracies rather than evaluating specific beliefs. The questionnaire includes items such as “I think events which superficially seem to lack a connection are often the result of secret activities.”
In other words, conspiracy mentality assess the broad inclination to suspect hidden agendas and secret operations, rather than single instances of conspiracy beliefs, which can be highly situational. The researchers also included a measure of autistic traits to see if certain characteristics of autism, rather than the diagnosis itself, could predict a tendency toward conspiracy thinking.
In their analysis, the researchers found no significant differences in conspiracy mentality between the autistic group and the general population. Both groups scored similarly, indicating that being autistic does not inherently affect one’s general susceptibility to conspiracy beliefs.
This finding suggests that conspiracy mentality is not linked with autism, contradicting two potential hypotheses the researchers explored: one that autism might increase susceptibility to conspiracy beliefs due to common experiences of social exclusion, and another that autism might offer a type of protection against these beliefs due to cognitive characteristics associated with autism, such as analytical thinking.
“It was somewhat surprising to find no significant difference between autistic individuals and the general population in terms of conspiracy mentality,” Roels told PsyPost. “Given previous research, one might expect that autism influences belief patterns, but this wasn’t the case in our study.”
Within the autistic sample, researchers conducted additional analyses to see if particular traits, such as a strong focus on patterns, might correlate with conspiracy mentality. They found that autistic participants who scored higher in recognizing patterns had slightly higher conspiracy mentality scores.
However, those with higher levels of imagination were somewhat less likely to believe in conspiracies. Despite these small correlations, the overall data suggested that autistic traits were not reliable indicators of conspiracy mentality. In other words, autism-related traits in this study sample did not provide a meaningful prediction for conspiracy beliefs.
“The key takeaway (based on a very large sample of autistic and general population individuals) is that autistic people are no more likely to believe in conspiracy theories than the general population,” Roels said. “Autism doesn’t make someone prone to conspiracy mentality, challenging misconceptions that may link autism to such beliefs. Also, autism was no safeguard against conspiracy mentality.”
Like any study, this research has its limitations. The findings are based on self-reported surveys, which can be affected by personal bias or varying interpretations of questions. The study also focused only on general conspiracy mentality, meaning that people’s beliefs in specific conspiracy theories—like certain political or health-related conspiracies—were not directly examined.
“While we controlled for several demographic factors, other unmeasured variables could play a role in shaping conspiracy mentality,” Roels noted.
Further research could provide a deeper understanding by examining other factors, such as individual experiences of social exclusion and its impact on conspiracy beliefs.
“We are continuously trying for to understand autism better, both the vulnerability and the strength,” Roels said. “People with autism have been shown to make more rational and moral decisions compared to non-autistic people in the past. We are aiming to further study these positive features of autism in our new projects.”
“This study helps dispel stereotypes about autism and conspiracy beliefs, contributing to a broader understanding of cognitive diversity. It highlights the need for more nuanced discussions about both autism and belief in misinformation.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1080/13546805.2024.2399505) Conspiracy mentality in autistic and non-autistic individuals,” was authored by Sanne Roels, Sander Begeer, Anke M. Scheeren, and Jan-Willem van Prooijen.

(https://www.psypost.org/scientists-find-brain-network-is-doubled-in-size-in-depressed-people/) Scientists find brain network is doubled in size in depressed people
Oct 28th 2024, 06:00

In a recent study published in (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07805-2) Nature, researchers used advanced brain imaging techniques to explore how certain brain networks differ in people with depression. They discovered that a specific brain network, known as the “salience network,” was on average twice as large in individuals with depression compared to healthy individuals. The salience network plays a key role in processing rewards and deciding what deserves attention, and this expansion could help explain some unique mental and emotional features of depression.
Depression is a mental health disorder that affects millions worldwide, characterized by persistent sadness, lack of interest in activities, fatigue, and changes in appetite and sleep. These symptoms often come in episodes, meaning that individuals may experience periods of wellness before depression symptoms return. Depression’s effects go beyond mood, impacting a person’s ability to function in daily life, relationships, and work, making it one of the leading causes of disability.
The motivation behind this new study stems from the need for a more individualized understanding of depression at the brain level. Most traditional studies on depression take a “snapshot” approach, looking at brain activity at a single point in time. This approach, however, lacks the depth to capture the episodic nature of depression.
Additionally, many previous studies have focused on group averages, which overlook how each person’s brain may uniquely differ. Charles Lynch and Conor Liston, leading the research team at Weill Cornell Medicine, recognized that this lack of precision might prevent us from identifying brain patterns that could predict mood shifts or suggest new treatment approaches.
To address this, the team employed an advanced brain imaging technique called precision functional mapping. This “deep scanning” approach allows researchers to create detailed brain maps for each individual, capturing a more accurate view of brain activity and connectivity.
Precision functional mapping uses functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain connectivity by measuring blood flow changes, which reveal patterns of brain activity in real time. Unlike traditional fMRI studies that create averaged brain maps across groups, this approach examines each person’s unique brain network organization. This study focused on comparing the salience network—a brain network involved in decision-making and reward processing—between individuals with depression and those without.
“Depression is an episodic condition, meaning symptoms come and go over time. However, most brain imaging studies to date acquire a single brain scan at one point in time (a cross-sectional approach),” explained Lynch, an assistant professor of neuroscience at Weill Cornell Medicine.
“A few years ago now, Conor and I reasoned that studying an individual with depression repeatedly over time (a longitudinal approach) would help us understand what brain signals or processes regulate these mood state transitions. This was the original goal of our study, and we noticed the difference in salience network size in the process of carrying out that study, in part because we had collected an unprecedented amount of fMRI data (10+ hours) per patient, which allowed us to create really precise individual-specific maps of brain function.”
The study initially involved two groups of participants: six people with a clinical diagnosis of major depression and 37 healthy individuals without any psychiatric disorders. The participants in both groups underwent multiple brain scans over an extended period, allowing the researchers to capture changes and patterns in the brain that may develop gradually. Those in the depression group were scanned for an average of 621.5 minutes each, across an average of 22 sessions.
In four of the six depressed individuals studied in detail, the salience network was more than twice the size of any salience network observed in the healthy control group. This expansion was most noticeable in certain brain regions associated with emotional and cognitive processing, particularly in the anterior cingulate cortex and insular cortex. Notably, these regions are already known to play a role in how people process emotions and assess rewarding or meaningful experiences.
On average, the salience network occupied about 73% more of the cortical surface, or outer layer, of the brain in people with depression than in those without it. While the salience network typically covered about 3.17% of the cortical surface in healthy individuals, in people with depression, it occupied approximately 5.49% on average.
“We had set out originally to study the brain connectivity correlates or predictors of mood state transitions, and we were quite surprised to see these differences in the size of the salience network,” Lynch told PsyPost.
In addition to the initial six individuals with depression, the researchers then extended their analysis to three other groups of people with depression to see if their results would hold. These groups, recruited from two universities, included sample sizes of 48, 45, and 42 people. In these additional groups, they used standard brain imaging techniques to validate whether the findings could be generalized to a broader sample.
When the researchers looked at these broader sample groups, the results were consistent. The expansion in the salience network continued to appear even when using different imaging methods and sample populations.
Another significant insight was that the salience network’s expansion often involved the network’s borders shifting into areas that are usually managed by other networks in the brain. Specifically, the salience network in depressed individuals tended to encroach upon nearby networks, particularly those involved in self-reflection and higher-order cognitive functions, such as the default mode network and the frontoparietal network. This network encroachment was not random.
The researchers identified three distinct patterns of salience network expansion, which they called “border shifts,” and noted that they occurred mainly into higher-order networks rather than regions associated with sensory or motor functions. This suggested a targeted disruption in the brain’s higher-order networks, potentially affecting how people with depression process emotional and social information.
An interesting additional finding was that the size of the salience network was stable over time in each person with depression. This stability suggests that salience network expansion is a long-lasting characteristic of major depressive disorder, rather than a marker of individual depressive episodes or a reflection of symptom severity or illness duration.
To explore the possibility that salience network expansion might signal a risk for depression, the researchers turned to data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. This study provided brain imaging data from children aged 10 to 12, none of whom showed clinical symptoms of depression at the time of their scans.
The researchers specifically looked at a subset of 57 children who later went on to develop clinical symptoms of depression by ages 13 or 14, comparing them to another group of children who did not develop depressive symptoms over the same period. They found that the salience network was already larger in these children before they showed any signs of depression, hinting that this network expansion could potentially signal an increased risk for developing the disorder.
Finally, the study explored whether the salience network’s altered connections within the brain related to specific depression symptoms, such as anhedonia, or the loss of interest and pleasure, which is a common feature of depression. In two of the individuals with major depression who were studied over an extended period, the researchers found that the strength of connections between the anterior cingulate cortex and another area called the nucleus accumbens, which is involved in reward processing, varied with levels of anhedonia.
When these connections were stronger, individuals tended to experience lower levels of anhedonia. Similarly, a different connection in the brain was found to correlate with symptoms of anxiety, suggesting that the salience network may play a role in different symptoms of depression through its connections with various brain regions.
“Our study contributes to understanding the brain areas and networks responsible for individuals with depression transitioning between periods of relative wellness vs. periods of severe illness, in addition to identifying features of how these brain networks are organized spatially (for example, their size) that may confer risk for depression,” Lynch said.
While these findings provide an exciting step forward, the study has limitations. Precision functional mapping requires a high amount of data per individual, which may limit its accessibility in typical clinical settings. It remains unclear how salience network expansion might differ across various types of psychiatric conditions. Future research is needed to investigate whether network expansion is present in other disorders, as well as to explore whether early-life experiences or genetic factors contribute to this structural difference.
“I think it is important to be clear that in the short term we are not advocating for brain scans to diagnose depression, or anything like that,” Lynch noted. “This would be impractical in many cases, and there is still lots of work to be done, for example, to determine how specific this effect is to depression vs. other kinds of psychiatric illnesses.”
“But I do think there is an opportunity to incorporate information about how functional brain networks are organized spatially in individuals with depression to inform how we administer targeted brain stimulation therapies, like transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or deep brain stimulation (DBS). In other words, we can adjust how we deliver the brain stimulation to target the parts of the brain or brain networks that we think contribute to particular kinds of symptoms, as one example.”
“We hope to conduct additional longitudinal experiments with a larger number of individuals to better understand the cause-and-effect relationship between brain function and the emergence and remission of depressive symptoms, how this may differ across patients with different clinical profiles, and also to develop interventions so we can try to act in real time to rescue brain circuits before symptoms reemerge,” Lynch continued.
“We also want to better understand the developmental origins of salience network expansion, whether early life experiences or stressors may contribute to this difference in brain organization, or if this is primarily genetic in origin.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07805-2) Frontostriatal salience network expansion in individuals in depression,” was authored by Charles J. Lynch, Immanuel G. Elbau, Tommy Ng, Aliza Ayaz, Shasha Zhu, Danielle Wolk, Nicola Manfredi, Megan Johnson, Megan Chang, Jolin Chou, Indira Summerville, Claire Ho, Maximilian Lueckel, Hussain Bukhari, Derrick Buchanan, Lindsay W. Victoria, Nili Solomonov, Eric Goldwaser, Stefano Moia, Cesar Caballero-Gaudes, Jonathan Downar, Fidel Vila-Rodriguez, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Daniel M. Blumberger, Kendrick Kay, Amy Aloysi, Evan M. Gordon, Mahendra T. Bhati, Nolan Williams, Jonathan D. Power, Benjamin Zebley, Logan Grosenick, Faith M. Gunning, and Conor Liston.

(https://www.psypost.org/how-shifting-gender-stereotypes-could-benefit-kamala-harris-3-lessons-from-recent-research/) How shifting gender stereotypes could benefit Kamala Harris: 3 lessons from recent research
Oct 27th 2024, 14:00

If U.S. voters elect Kamala Harris – a Black, Asian American woman – president, it would be historic on multiple levels. This is now a real possibility due to voters’ positively evolving stereotypes of women politicians.
Stereotypes have (https://theconversation.com/kamala-harris-is-being-held-to-the-same-old-double-standard-240268) long hindered female candidates, casting them as emotional, weak and sensitive. But now (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-023-09888-5) our political science research shows that voters in the U.S. increasingly see women leaders as synonymous with political leadership – and as more effective than men politicians.
This transformation reflects a broader change in what voters expect in political leaders. They are now more likely to see a woman candidate as a better “fit” for public office. This might help pave the way for Harris to break through the highest glass ceiling in U.S. politics.
The classic double bind
Gender stereotypes are the assumptions and expectations people have about men and women. They traditionally present an obstacle for women leaders, including in politics.
Among the many barriers to a (https://theconversation.com/us-voters-say-theyre-ready-for-a-woman-president-but-sexist-attitudes-still-go-along-with-opposition-to-harris-236754) woman becoming president in the U.S. are voters’ gender stereotypes. Men are generally assumed to have masculine traits such as being ambitious and competitive, while women are assumed to possess feminine traits such as being warm and compassionate. In applying gender stereotypes to politicians, voters end up with very different expectations for men and women candidates.
This presents a classic (https://www.catalyst.org/research/infographic-the-double-bind-dilemma-for-women-in-leadership/) double bind for women leaders. If they behave like leaders and act dominantly and assertively, they violate expectations of femininity. But if they behave in a stereotypical way, they are not seen as strong leaders.
The double bind extends to politics. It was long the case that stereotypes of men politicians, but not women politicians, aligned with the (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.2307/2647824) leadership qualities that voters desire in political leaders. These traits include competence, strong leadership, empathy and integrity. A 2011 study showed that (https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12040) stereotypes of women politicians lacked clarity, meaning people had no clear expectations. Voters also did not see women politicians in alignment with those same four leadership qualities that voters seek.
But by 2021, prominent women political leaders such as Hillary Clinton, Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi had reshaped the landscape for women seeking office by shaping and solidifying public expectations.
More women politicians in the spotlight
More women have assumed political leadership roles in the U.S. over the past decade than in previous decades. The (https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/levels-office/congress/history-women-us-congress) number of women in Congress increased from 90 to 145 between the 111th Congress, which met from 2009 to 2011, to the 117th Congress, which met from 2021 to 2023.
In addition, high-profile women politicians such as Democrats Pelosi and Clinton, as well as Liz Cheney, a Republican, have received considerable attention from both the media and the electorate. Gender stereotypes about women politicians evolved from being ambiguous to becoming both well defined and positive as voters grew more familiar with them. This has created a political landscape for Harris today that is notably different from the early 2010s.
We are political scientists whose research examines how gender stereotypes (https://theconversation.com/women-are-still-underrepresented-in-local-government-despite-a-woman-running-for-president-220916) affect women’s political underrepresentation. In 2021, we conducted a study of how voters’ gender stereotypes of politicians (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-023-09888-5) had evolved over the previous decade. These are the three main lessons:
1. Stereotypes of women politicians are increasingly positive
A decade ago, people did not agree on the traits that defined women politicians. While some people described them as tough, others thought they were weak. Similarly, some reported them as rational, while others saw them as unable to separate feelings from ideas. There were no traits that large groups of people agreed upon to describe women politicians.
But our study shows that (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-023-09888-5) voters now hold clear and positive stereotypes of them.
When asked about the traits they associate with women politicians, respondents listed positive traits such as intelligent, rational, analytical, ambitious and moral. At the same time, women politicians are least associated with negative traits such as being weak and spineless.
2. Stereotypes of men politicians have shifted to increased negativity and distrust
Male politicians were previously seen as confident, well educated, charismatic and driven. But there’s bad news for men in politics: This perception has shifted. Our study revealed that stereotypes of male politicians (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-023-09888-5) became much more negative over the decade we studied.
Today, male politicians are more commonly viewed as power-hungry, selfish, manipulative and self-interested. They are least associated with traits such as being sympathetic or caring about “people like me.” This indicates that voters have become more negative and distrustful toward male politicians.
3. Women politicians have gained ground on leadership perceptions, surpassing men politicians
In the past, stereotypes of women politicians were incompatible with leadership stereotypes. But our study shows that this mismatch has subsided. In fact, between 2011 and 2021, scores for women politicians increased on all four leadership traits valued by voters: competence, leadership, empathy and integrity.
Men politicians, in contrast, have lost ground on all four leadership traits. Women politicians now surpass men politicians in three out of the four leadership traits: competence, empathy and integrity. Expectations of men politicians concerning the fourth trait, strong leadership, are now equal to those of female politicians.
Kamala Harris may benefit
Gender stereotypes have long hindered women seeking political office, but more women in prominent leadership positions have fostered positive stereotype change.
Granted, highly visible women leaders such as Pelosi and Clinton excite both admiration and intense dislike. But seeing them and many other examples in their wake has familiarized voters with women holding power in politics. Voters are thus now more likely to view women candidates like Harris as fitting into leadership roles such as the presidency.
With growing distrust in politics, and of male politicians specifically, women political leaders – who are (https://cawp.rutgers.edu/research-and-scholarship/politics-difference-women-public-officials-agents-change) viewed as agents of change – may have an opportunity to restore trust in politics.
 
This article is republished from (https://theconversation.com) The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the (https://theconversation.com/is-america-ready-for-a-woman-president-voters-attitudes-to-women-politicians-are-radically-different-from-a-decade-ago-240326) original article.

(https://www.psypost.org/moderate-altruism-enhances-romantic-desirability-in-online-dating-profiles/) Moderate altruism enhances romantic desirability in online dating profiles
Oct 27th 2024, 12:00

A study published in (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-024-00409-z) Evolutionary Psychological Science found that moderately altruistic individuals are rated as more romantically desirable than highly altruistic or non-altruistic individuals in online dating contexts.
Altruism is considered an attractive trait in romantic partners. Studies suggest that altruistic behaviors can signal good genetic quality and strong parenting potential, making altruistic individuals more desirable for long-term relationships. However, much of the research has focused on the overall presence or absence of altruism without accounting for the “costs” associated with altruistic acts. Exaggerated altruism could be seen as wasteful and, thus, less desirable than moderate displays of altruism.
In this work, Simran Dehal and Manpal Singh Bhogal expanded this understanding by exploring how different levels of altruism influence romantic desirability. Motivated by the rise of online dating, the study investigated how these altruistic costs affect perceptions in modern romantic interactions through dating profiles and messaging scenarios.
The researchers recruited 180 heterosexual participants, comprising 56 males and 124 females, aged 18 to 25. They specifically sought younger adults who would likely be familiar with online dating contexts. Participants were provided with a series of online dating profiles and messaging scenarios that manipulated the level of altruism displayed by the potential suitors.
These profiles described three distinct types of individuals: highly altruistic, moderately altruistic, and non-altruistic. For instance, the highly altruistic profile portrayed a person who regularly volunteered and engaged in charitable work, while the non-altruistic profile emphasized more self-serving behaviors like prioritizing personal interests over helping others.
Participants were asked to read and evaluate three fictional online dating profiles. Each profile reflected one of the three levels of altruism: high, moderate, or none. Next, participants were exposed to three messaging scenarios where the content of the messages reflected different altruistic behaviors. One message contained high altruism (e.g., volunteering discussions), another reflected moderate altruism, and the third showed a lack of altruism (e.g., focusing on going out and having fun).
After reviewing both the profiles and messages, participants rated each target on how desirable they found the individual for both short- and long-term relationships on a 5-point Likert scale. This dual-method approach allowed the researchers to explore whether different forms of altruistic expression—either in how a person presents themselves or how they communicate—affect romantic interest.
The researchers found that moderate altruism is more attractive than either high or low levels of altruism, regardless of whether participants were considering a long-term or short-term relationship. When reviewing the online dating profiles, participants consistently rated the moderately altruistic individual as the most desirable for both types of relationships. Highly altruistic individuals were generally rated as more desirable than non-altruistic ones but still fell behind those displaying moderate altruism.
The messaging scenarios produced similar findings. Participants found the moderate altruism messages most appealing, especially in the context of long-term relationships. Highly altruistic messages, which emphasized charitable actions and a strong drive to help others, were less attractive compared to moderate ones, particularly for short-term relationships. Non-altruistic messages received the lowest desirability ratings across the board.
These results suggest that while some degree of altruism is desirable, overly altruistic behavior might raise concerns about practicality or vulnerability.
A limitation to this work is the hypothetical dating scenarios, which may not fully reflect real-life behavior.
The research, “(https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-024-00409-z) Further Support for the Impact of Altruistic Costs in Human Mate Choice”, was authored by Simran Dehal and Manpal Singh Bhogal.

Forwarded by:
Michael Reeder LCPC
Baltimore, MD

This information is taken from free public RSS feeds published by each organization for the purpose of public distribution. Readers are linked back to the article content on each organization's website. This email is an unaffiliated unofficial redistribution of this freely provided content from the publishers. 

 

(#) unsubscribe from this feed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clinicians-exchange.org/pipermail/article-digests-clinicians-exchange.org/attachments/20241028/9a107512/attachment.htm>