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/trumps-attacks-on-voting-by-mail-have-global-implications-new-research-suggests/) Trump’s attacks on voting by mail have global implications, new research suggests
Sep 17th 2024, 10:00

A recent study published in (https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfae020) Public Opinion Quarterly suggests that the skepticism surrounding mail-in voting, heavily popularized during Donald Trump’s 2020 U.S. presidential campaign, may have influenced Canadians’ attitudes toward their own mail-in voting process. Researchers found that Canadians with populist, particularly right-wing, views were more likely to distrust mail-in voting. This study sheds light on how political narratives from one country can affect attitudes in another, even when those narratives are based on false claims.
Trump repeatedly criticized mail-in voting in the lead-up to the 2020 U.S. presidential election, claiming that it would lead to widespread fraud. Trump suggested that mail-in voting would be “substantially fraudulent” and described it as a system that could be easily manipulated, with ballots allegedly being forged, stolen, or fraudulently signed. He emphasized concerns about “unsolicited” ballots, referring to states sending out ballots to voters who had not specifically requested them, and claimed this could lead to chaos and a “rigged election.”
Despite these assertions, multiple fact-checking organizations and election experts have found little to no evidence to support these claims, and courts dismissed numerous lawsuits challenging the integrity of mail-in voting.
The motivation behind the new study was to investigate whether this rhetoric, particularly Trump’s claims about mail-in voting fraud, had an influence beyond the United States. With Canadians closely following U.S. news, the researchers aimed to explore how political discourse in the U.S. could affect public trust in democratic processes in neighboring countries like Canada.
“I have a long-standing research interest in public opinion, political trust, and issues that relate to democracy,” said study author (https://carywucom.wordpress.com/) Cary Wu, a York Research Chair and Associate Professor of Sociology at York University. “People’s trust in elections is critical to democracy. If people have no trust, they are less likely to come out and vote. Low trust in elections could also lead to political riots, as demonstrated by the January 6 United States Capitol attack in the United States. The increased use of mail-in voting, after the pandemic, and in the future in Canada, underscores the need to consider whether people perceive it to be as trustworthy as in-person voting.”
To investigate this, the research team conducted an in-depth analysis of data collected from the 2021 Canadian Election Study, a long-standing national survey that gathers political opinions and behaviors from Canadians during election periods. The sample for this study included over 10,000 Canadian citizens, making it one of the most comprehensive datasets available for examining public opinion during the election.
The researchers examined several factors that could influence trust in mail-in voting. First, they measured participants’ political ideology, asking them where they placed themselves on a spectrum from left to right. To gauge populist attitudes, they used questions such as whether participants agreed with the statement that “politicians do not care about the people” or that “ordinary people, not politicians, should make the most important policy decisions.”
The study also looked at participants’ exposure to political news, with particular emphasis on the consumption of U.S. media. The researchers explored whether those who consumed more political news, including U.S. sources, were more likely to be influenced by the narratives around mail-in voting popularized by Trump. In addition, the researchers conducted a separate analysis of respondents from Quebec, where French is the dominant language, to see if the impact of U.S. media was less pronounced.
The study confirmed that Canadians with right-wing populist views were indeed more likely to distrust mail-in voting. This group expressed significantly less confidence in the reliability of mail-in ballots, even though the Canadian electoral system has a long history of successful mail-in voting with few reported issues.
“Our analysis suggests that Canadians holding populist views—and, in particular, those holding right-wing populist views (would-be Trump supporters)—are less trusting of voting by mail,” Wu told PsyPost.
One of the key drivers behind this distrust appeared to be exposure to political news, particularly from U.S. sources. The study found that Canadians who frequently engaged with political news were more likely to exhibit skepticism toward mail-in voting if they also held populist views. This media exposure amplified the effect, suggesting that narratives from the U.S. had a measurable impact on how some Canadians viewed their own electoral process.
Interestingly, in Quebec, where French-language media dominates and where there is less direct exposure to U.S. news, the influence of political news on attitudes toward mail-in voting was significantly weaker. This further supports the idea that media narratives from the U.S. contributed to the skepticism seen in English-speaking Canada.
Overall, the researchers concluded that Trump’s claims about mail-in voting fraud had crossed the border, shaping public opinion among right-wing populists in Canada. Despite the lack of evidence for widespread fraud in both countries’ mail-in voting systems, the political and media discourse in the U.S. had an observable influence on Canadian views.
“Donald Trump’s attacks on voting by mail have global implications,” Wu said. “It lowers people’s trust in voting by mail in the United States and in Canada, as we have shown, and probably in other parts of the world as well.”
While this study provides evidence of a “Trump effect” in Canada, there are limitations to the research. First, the data used in the study were collected during the 2021 federal election, so it is difficult to compare whether Canadians’ views on mail-in voting had shifted significantly since before the 2020 U.S. election. Ideally, the researchers would have had data from earlier elections to establish a clear baseline of trust in mail-in voting among right-wing populists.
Additionally, while the researchers controlled for political ideology, they were unable to directly measure the impact of specific news sources, such as which U.S. networks or websites were most influential in spreading mistrust. Future research could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the role that individual media outlets play in shaping public opinion in Canada.
Looking forward, the researchers suggest that further studies could examine how other political narratives from the U.S. affect Canadian public opinion. For example, future research could explore whether other claims about election integrity, public health measures, or immigration have polarized Canadians in the same way that Trump’s rhetoric about mail-in voting did. The close relationship between Canada and the U.S. offers a unique opportunity to study how political discourse in one country can influence public opinion in another.
“I am interested in looking how other political/false claims from the Southern border can polarize Canadians,” Wu said.
The study, “(https://academic.oup.com/poq/article/88/SI/781/7715006) The Trump Effect? Right-Wing Populism and Distrust in Voting by Mail in Canada,” was authored by Cary Wu and Andrew Dawson.

(https://www.psypost.org/recreational-cannabis-laws-linked-to-rise-in-intimate-partner-violence/) Recreational cannabis laws linked to rise in intimate partner violence
Sep 17th 2024, 08:00

Recreational cannabis laws are associated with a 20% increase in intimate partner violence (IPV) incidents, as published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2024.101399) Economics & Human Biology.
Cannabis has been at the center of public policy debates, especially after several states in the U.S. began legalizing its use for recreational purposes. Proponents of these laws often cite potential benefits such as reduced opioid usage and decreased crime rates. However, the effects of cannabis consumption are not without controversy, as some research suggests it may have detrimental effects on mental health, potentially leading to increased paranoia, aggression, and violent behavior.
Michele Baggio and colleagues explored this potential connection between recreational cannabis legalization and IPV, considering the growing acceptance of cannabis as a relatively harmless substance.
IPV is a significant public health issue, affecting millions of people each year, making it crucial to understand the broader consequences of policy changes like cannabis legalization. The researchers examined how the legalization of cannabis for recreational use impacts IPV rates across U.S. states over a 10-year period.
The research team used a difference-in-differences approach, analyzing data from 2006 to 2016 across 39 U.S. states. This method allowed them to compare changes in IPV rates before and after the implementation of recreational cannabis laws in states that enacted them against those that did not. The primary dataset was drawn from the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which records detailed information about criminal incidents, including the victim-offender relationship, essential for identifying IPV cases.
The researchers included several control variables to account for differences across states, such as demographic factors, state-level economic conditions, and other relevant laws (e.g., medical cannabis laws). The study’s final sample comprised data from 1,611 counties across 132 months. The primary outcome of interest was the number of IPV incidents per 100,000 individuals, comparing IPV rates before and after recreational cannabis legalization.
The results indicated that recreational cannabis legalization was associated with a significant increase in IPV rates. Specifically, the legalization of recreational cannabis led to a 20% increase in IPV incidents per 100,000 people in the states that enacted these laws. This increase was consistent across various model specifications, and the findings remained robust even when accounting for state-level demographic and economic factors.
The study further highlighted that poor mental health and binge drinking were potential mediators. That is, in states where recreational cannabis use was legalized, individuals reported higher incidences of poor mental health and binge drinking, both of which are known contributors to IPV.
The researchers also found that the increase in IPV rates was particularly pronounced among White offenders and victims, with less significant effects observed among African American couples.
One limitation of the study is the potential underreporting of IPV incidents, especially in demographic groups such as African Americans. This may have resulted in conservative estimates of the true impact of recreational cannabis legalization on IPV rates.
The findings suggest that recreational cannabis legalization may have unintended consequences for IPV rates, underscoring the need for preventive policies to address this issue.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2024.101399) High times and troubled relationships: Recreational marijuana laws and intimate partner violence”, was authored by Michele Baggio, Alberto Chong, and Revathy Suryanarayana.

(https://www.psypost.org/neuroscientists-just-discovered-a-weird-effect-on-ketamine-on-the-brain/) Neuroscientists just discovered a weird effect of ketamine on the brain
Sep 17th 2024, 06:00

Researchers have long been intrigued by ketamine’s ability to alter consciousness and its potential therapeutic uses, particularly in treating mood disorders. A recent study published in (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-024-03029-0) Translational Psychiatry adds a new layer to this understanding by investigating how ketamine impacts brain function, specifically focusing on high-order interactions in brain activity.
Using portable electroencephalography (EEG), the researchers found that ketamine induces changes in brain dynamics, notably increasing redundancy—repetitive patterns of information—in the alpha frequency band, which is linked to shifts in conscious awareness and dissociative experiences.
The researchers were interested in understanding how ketamine alters brain function and the broader implications for its potential therapeutic uses. Ketamine, initially developed as an anesthetic, has gained attention in recent years for its rapid antidepressant effects, even for individuals with treatment-resistant depression. However, its use also induces dissociative experiences, where people feel detached from reality or themselves. These experiences are thought to be linked to changes in brain dynamics.
Past studies have used neuroimaging techniques like fMRI and EEG to capture these brain changes under ketamine. However, these methods often focus on single points of interaction between different regions of the brain. This study, in contrast, used a novel method that captures high-order interactions—how multiple regions of the brain work together as a system, which may provide a more comprehensive understanding of how ketamine affects brain function.
Additionally, the researchers wanted to test whether portable EEG devices could offer a reliable way to measure these changes. Portable EEG systems are less cumbersome than traditional setups, making them more feasible for real-world applications, including in clinical settings or at home.
“There are three main topics included in this work: alteration of consciousness, complexity and high-order interactions, and portable EEG,” explained study author Rubén Herzog of the Paris Brain Institute. “Each of them are very interesting to me for different reasons. Alteration of consciousness provides a controlled way to perturb and study human consciousness in a scientific way. Also, many mind-altering drugs have started to demonstrate a big potential for mental health disorders, but before using them on a global scale, we need rigorous and systematic study on how they work, their consequences and their potential negative effects.”
“Brain complexity, especially high-order interactions, are an emerging tool for working with complex systems. From a theoretical point of view, they are much more suitable for studying biological systems like the brain, because they can directly capture the collective behavior or many elements as a single functional unit. Besides, they maximize the information that can be retrieved from low-density EEG recordings, as the one we used.”
“Finally, portable EEG holds great promise for future applications and home medicine or brain-machine-interfaces. However, to exploit their potential we need to be able to extract as much information as possible from those devices, where the signal is not as good as a device that would be used in a laboratory where many variables can be controlled. These three topics together create a synergy of interests. ”
The study used a double-blind design, meaning neither the participants nor the researchers knew who was receiving ketamine or a placebo during the sessions. Thirty healthy male participants between the ages of 18 and 55 were recruited for the study. The researchers limited the study to men to reduce variability and prevent potential pregnancy risks in women. All participants were screened for any psychiatric disorders, history of substance abuse, or other serious health conditions to ensure a homogenous sample.
Each participant received two infusions—one of ketamine and one of a saline placebo—four weeks apart. While the participants received the infusions, researchers used a 16-channel portable EEG system to measure their brain activity. The EEG data was collected during two conditions: a resting state with eyes closed and an auditory oddball task, a common method for studying how the brain responds to repetitive versus unexpected stimuli.
The auditory oddball task involved listening to a series of tones. Most of these tones were the same (“standard” tones), but occasionally a “deviant” tone was played. Researchers wanted to see if ketamine affected how the brain processed these predictable versus unexpected stimuli.
In addition to the EEG recordings, participants completed questionnaires before and after the infusions to assess subjective experiences, such as feelings of dissociation, derealization (a sense of detachment from surroundings), and changes in conscious awareness.
The researchers found that ketamine increased redundancy in brain activity, particularly in the alpha frequency band (8-12 Hz) during the resting state. Redundancy refers to repetitive information in brain signals, suggesting that under ketamine, certain brain regions were sending similar information to multiple other regions. This effect was most pronounced when participants were resting with their eyes closed, a state often linked to altered consciousness and dissociation.
The increase in redundancy supports the idea that ketamine reduces “top-down” control—how the higher-order brain regions govern lower-order sensory processes. This shift in control could explain the dissociative experiences reported by participants, where normal sensory processing becomes disrupted, leading to feelings of detachment from reality.
When participants were engaged in the auditory oddball task, ketamine still influenced brain dynamics but in a more nuanced way. The drug increased redundancy primarily for the predictable “standard” tones, but not for the unexpected “deviant” tones. This suggests that ketamine may alter how the brain processes familiar, predictable information more than surprising or novel stimuli. In other words, the brain under ketamine seems to amplify responses to what it expects, rather than what it doesn’t expect.
“Finding that performing a task reduced the effects of ketamine on brain activity was surprising, as it suggests that cognitive tasks could help in attenuating their effects, similar to grounding exercises,” Herzog told PsyPost. “Also, finding large effect sizes with a portable EEG was unexpected, because these devices have small signal to noise ratio.”
Interestingly, the study found that changes in brain dynamics during ketamine administration were associated with subjective feelings of derealization. Specifically, an increase in redundancy in the theta frequency band (4-8 Hz) correlated with higher reports of derealization, further linking the brain’s altered information processing under ketamine to dissociative experiences.
Herzog highlighted the three main takeaways from the study: “1) Ketamine induces more redundant brain activity, meaning the same signal is repeated in the brain. 2) Performing a task during the effects of ketamine reduces its impact on brain activity. 3) On a more practical level, portable EEG devices, which can be used at home, can track changes in states of consciousness.”
As with all research, however, there are some limitations. The portable EEG system used in this study had only 16 channels, which is a lower number than more traditional EEG setups. While this was sufficient to capture broad patterns of brain activity, it limits the spatial resolution of the data. High-density EEG or other neuroimaging techniques could provide more detailed insights into the specific brain regions involved in ketamine’s effects.
In addition, the study only included 30 participants, all of whom were healthy men. This limits the generalizability of the findings, as the effects of ketamine on brain function could differ in women or in individuals with psychiatric disorders, such as depression or post-traumatic stress disorder.
“Our results can be interpreted only in the context of healthy participants,” Herzog noted. “The effects that we’ve found could be totally different in a population with mental disorders, so our findings cannot be used, by now, to understand the therapeutic effect of ketamine on mental disorders such as depression or PTSD.”
“Now I’m collaborating with a team that works with ketamine as a treatment for depression. Our experiment used only healthy participants, but to understand the therapeutic role of ketamine we need to work with a population that actually has a diagnosis of mental illness.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41398-024-03029-0) High-order brain interactions in ketamine during rest and task: a double-blinded cross-over design using portable EEG on male participants,” was authored by Rubén Herzog, Florentine Marie Barbey, Md Nurul Islam, Laura Rueda-Delgado, Hugh Nolan, Pavel Prado, Marina Krylova, Igor Izyurov, Nooshin Javaheripour, Lena Vera Danyeli, Zümrüt Duygu Sen, Martin Walter, Patricio O’Donnell, Derek L. Buhl, Brian Murphy, and Agustin Ibanez.

(https://www.psypost.org/ai-could-be-the-breakthrough-that-allows-humanoid-robots-to-jump-from-science-fiction-to-reality/) AI could be the breakthrough that allows humanoid robots to jump from science fiction to reality
Sep 16th 2024, 18:00

Humanoid robots have long been a staple of science fiction, but there is now real progress being made. A range of new models made by or backed by the likes of (https://bostondynamics.com/atlas/) Boston Dynamics, (https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/AI) Tesla and (https://www.figure.ai/) OpenAI are able to walk and move like humans, as well as perform feats of agility and dexterity.
But it’s the ability to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) into these humanoid robots that could truly allow them to make the leap into everyday life. AI-enabled “brains” could help dramatically improve the ways that humanoid robots interact with humans and the outside world. This would give humanoid robots their “iPhone moment”, meaning they break through into the market in a big way.
(https://www.ibm.com/topics/large-language-models) Large language models, the technology behind AI chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, have shown they are good at learning from the vast amounts of data they are fed with and are good at selecting the right information and using it to reason with. They are the key to something called (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25874-z) “embodied intelligence”.
Embodied intelligence refers to the integration of cognitive processes with physical actions, a bit like how our brains control our limbs. The aim of embodied intelligence is to enable robots to interact with the world in a similar manner to humans. This concept relies on large language models and visual AI systems to help computers make sense of objects in videos and pictures.
It establishes a machine logic about the relationships between the observer and the objects, and helps the robot understand how interactions could happen between them. LLMs alone wouldn’t be acting as the robot’s “brain” necessarily, but the technology could help improve how they generally interact with the world.
A good example (https://research.google/blog/palm-e-an-embodied-multimodal-language-model/) is an AI system built by Google called PaLM-E. Engineers behind the development of PaLM-E trained it to directly ingest raw streams of robot sensor data. The resulting AI system allowed the robot to learn very effectively.
This field is advancing so quickly that by the time I finish writing this article, a new, innovative AI model or paradigm may be released. Advancements such as PaLM-E infuse humanoids with visual-spatial intelligence, allowing them to make sense of our world without requiring extensive programming.
>From factories to homes
The potential applications of humanoid robots are vast and varied. Early modern research in humanoid robotics focused on developing robots to operate in extreme environments that are dangerous and difficult for human operators to access. These include (https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/r5-fact-sheet.pdf) Nasa’s Valkyrie robot, designed for space exploration. However, we will probably first see commercial humanoid robots deployed in controlled environments such as manufacturing.
Robots such as Tesla’s Optimus could revolutionise manufacturing and logistics by performing tasks that require precision and endurance. They could work alongside
human employees, enhancing productivity and safety.
For example, in a factory, Optimus could handle hazardous materials, perform quality control inspections, and assist in assembly processes. The new Boston Dynamics Atlas2, announced a few months ago, already demonstrates some use cases for use in factories, such as lifting and storing heavy components.
Beyond industrial applications, humanoid robots could also find a place in households. Imagine a future where Optimus helps with daily chores, such as cleaning, cooking, and even caring for the elderly.
Earlier this year, (https://mobile-aloha.github.io/) Stanford University’s Aloha robot went viral on the internet for demonstrating its ability to make Chinese food, load dishes into a dishwasher, prepare beds, and put laundry into the wardrobe on its own. Eventually, we may see humanoids deployed in more professional areas such as hospitals for care roles or in public security, requiring professional domain knowledge and high public acceptance.
Market viability
While the technological potential of humanoid robots is undeniable, the market viability of such products remains uncertain. Several factors will influence their acceptance and success, including cost, reliability, and public perception.
Historically, the adoption of new technologies often faces hurdles related to consumer trust and affordability. For Tesla’s Optimus to succeed commercially, it must not only prove its technical capabilities but also demonstrate tangible benefits that outweigh its costs.
There are ethical considerations too. For instance, who has access to all the data collected by the robot as they interact with humans, sometimes in what could be deeply private moments? There is also the potential for humanoid robots to displace jobs, such as in the elderly care sector where they could have a key role.
These ethical factors will play a critical role in shaping public opinion and regulatory frameworks. Science fiction author (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Three-Laws-of-Robotics) Isaac Asimov drafted Three Laws of Robotics for humans to interact with robots effectively. In abridged form, they stipulate that a robot may not injure a human being, that a robot must obey orders given it by human beings and that a robot must protect its own existence as long this doesn’t clash with the first or second law.
These laws may still be relevant, as current debates extend beyond just humanoid robots to include any high-level autonomous systems that could pose societal risks and cybersecurity issues.
But it’s important to remember that current AI is still far from the real intelligence we are familiar with, so the scenarios depicted in movies like (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212720/) AI: Artificial Intelligence, directed by Steven Spielberg, or (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343818/?ref_=tt_tpks_tt_i_3_pd_detail_2_pbr_ic) I, Robot, starring Will Smith, are unlikely to happen anytime soon.
We need experts from various fields, including robotics, ethics and economics, to weigh in on the development of humanoid robots. Their insights will be crucial in navigating the challenges and opportunities presented by the technology.
As we stand on the brink of this new technological frontier, it is essential to consider not only what is possible but also what is desirable for our collective future. Meanwhile, as I watch my garden’s grass grow steadily upwards, all I can think about is having a humanoid robot trim it – after it has made me a relaxing cup of tea.
 
This article is republished from (https://theconversation.com) The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the (https://theconversation.com/ai-could-be-the-breakthrough-that-allows-humanoid-robots-to-jump-from-science-fiction-to-reality-236281) original article.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-research-sheds-light-on-the-influence-of-the-apprentice-on-donald-trumps-political-rise/) New research sheds light on the influence of “The Apprentice” on Donald Trump’s political rise
Sep 16th 2024, 16:00

A new study published in the (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055424000728) American Political Science Review explores how Donald Trump’s role on the reality television show The Apprentice helped propel his success in the 2016 Republican presidential primary. The research suggests that Trump’s carefully cultivated image as a successful businessman and savvy negotiator on the show helped create a lasting, favorable impression among viewers, boosting his appeal among voters. The findings add to the growing evidence that entertainment media, often viewed as politically neutral, can have significant political consequences.
Television plays a major role in shaping public perceptions in the U.S., where most households still watch hours of TV daily. While much research has been devoted to understanding how news media influences political opinions, there’s been less focus on how entertainment media shapes politics.
However, the new study by Eunji Kim of Columbia University and Shawn Patterson Jr. of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center suggests that entertainment, which more Americans consume than traditional news, has the potential to shape public perceptions of political figures in unexpected ways.
Kim and Patterson set out to examine how Trump’s portrayal as a tough but fair business leader on The Apprentice contributed to his later political success. They hypothesized that Trump’s frequent and positive portrayal on the show helped forge “parasocial” bonds—one-sided relationships between viewers and the media figure—between him and the audience. These relationships, they believed, would contribute to Trump’s support in the 2016 primary elections by making viewers more likely to view him favorably and trust his leadership abilities.
The Apprentice first aired in 2004 on NBC. Created by Mark Burnett and hosted by Trump, the show ran for 15 seasons, concluding in 2017. The basic premise of The Apprentice revolves around a group of contestants competing for a chance to run one of Trump’s companies. Each season featured business-themed challenges where participants were tested on their ability to manage tasks, negotiate deals, and display leadership skills.
At the end of each episode, one contestant was eliminated by Trump in the iconic “You’re fired!” boardroom segment. The show reached its peak popularity in its early seasons, drawing millions of viewers and helping solidify Trump’s image as a successful businessman and authoritative leader.
The researchers utilized several data sources to investigate how Trump’s reality TV persona influenced voter behavior. To begin, the researchers drew on Nielsen ratings data to measure the viewership of The Apprentice from 2003 to 2015. This data allowed them to identify geographic regions where the show was especially popular, providing a foundation to examine whether higher viewership correlated with increased voter support for Trump in the 2016 Republican primary.
The study also incorporated data from a national survey of voters conducted prior to the 2016 election. This survey asked respondents about their political preferences, as well as their media consumption habits, including whether they had watched The Apprentice. The researchers were particularly interested in understanding whether regular viewers of the show felt a stronger personal connection to Trump and were more likely to support him politically.
To probe these personal connections, they analyzed open-ended responses in which voters explained their reasons for supporting Trump. They were looking for patterns that might indicate viewers were drawing on Trump’s TV persona as a successful businessman and strong leader to justify their political support.
In addition to this survey data, the researchers analyzed transcripts from The Apprentice to explore how Trump was portrayed on the show. They found that throughout the show’s run, Trump was depicted as a decisive leader and savvy businessman, traits that were repeatedly emphasized in the show’s narrative.
By presenting Trump in this light, The Apprentice helped to solidify an image of him as “America’s Boss,” a competent and authoritative figure capable of making tough decisions. This image, the researchers hypothesized, resonated with voters when they considered him as a political candidate in 2016.
The study’s findings suggest that exposure to The Apprentice did have a significant effect on voter perceptions of Trump. Regular viewers of the show were more likely to trust Trump and feel connected to him on a personal level. This was reflected in their likelihood to defend him against negative information, such as the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, and to rely on his business experience and leadership qualities when explaining their political support.
Geographically, regions with higher viewership of The Apprentice saw a corresponding increase in Trump’s vote share in the Republican primary. This effect was not found for other Republican candidates, nor did it significantly influence Trump’s performance in the general election.
The researchers argue that The Apprentice gave Trump a unique advantage in the primary, where partisan cues were less prominent, and voters were more open to considering alternative candidates. The uncontested, positive portrayal of Trump on The Apprentice provided a powerful boost to his public credibility, helping him stand out in a crowded field of Republican candidates.
In short, the study shows that Trump’s role on The Apprentice helped create a favorable image that translated into political support during the 2016 Republican primary. The researchers highlight the importance of entertainment media in shaping voter behavior, suggesting that political figures who leverage these platforms can build strong, one-sided personal bonds with voters that can be difficult to challenge, even in the face of negative information.
“Granted, no single piece of evidence is an ideal test of our hypothesis, but taken together, the evidence suggests that Donald Trump’s role as ‘America’s Boss’ on The Apprentice provided him with the public credibility necessary to secure an advantage in the Republican nomination in 2016,” said Patterson.
While the study provides compelling evidence of a connection between Trump’s television persona and his political success, it also has some limitations. The researchers acknowledge that much of their data is correlational, meaning it can show a relationship between viewership and support for Trump but can’t definitively prove that watching The Apprentice caused people to vote for him.
Future research could further explore how other forms of entertainment media influence political attitudes and behaviors. The researchers suggest that entertainment may have a greater impact in contexts where traditional political cues, such as party affiliation, are less prominent, as they were during the Republican primary. In contrast, during general elections, voters may rely more on established party preferences, limiting the influence of entertainment figures.
The study, “(https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/american-viewer-political-consequences-of-entertainment-media/A0BADA28D5C551DE4EEBDAAAE33B76E8) The American Viewer: Political Consequences of Entertainment Media,” was published in American Political Science Review on August 2, 2024.

(https://www.psypost.org/people-generally-do-not-believe-in-ability-contagion/) People generally do not believe in ability contagion
Sep 16th 2024, 14:00

A series of studies conducted with U.S. and Canadian children and adults examined whether people believe that their abilities would improve if they used objects owned by celebrities with related skills. The results showed that people prefer using objects that belonged to celebrities and view them as more valuable, but they generally do not believe these objects would enhance their abilities. The research was published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2024.101461) Cognitive Development.
People are often willing to pay large sums of money for items that once belonged to celebrities. For example, Babe Ruth’s baseball bat and John Lennon’s guitar sold at auctions for $1.9 million and $2.4 million, respectively, in recent years. This, along with many similar examples, suggests that people tend to believe objects once owned by celebrities have greater value than identical objects not associated with a famous person.
However, it remains unclear where this perception of extra value comes from. Do people believe that objects owned by celebrities confer the celebrity’s special abilities or skills to the person using them? For instance, would someone expect to become a better tennis player by using a racquet belonging to Serena Williams or Novak Đoković, as opposed to an identical racquet that was not owned by a famous tennis player or had no previous owner? Such beliefs are referred to as “ability contagion,” described as “an expected improvement in a person’s performance when using a celebrity’s object.”
Study author Kristan A. Marchak and her colleagues sought to explore people’s beliefs in ability contagion. They conducted three studies to examine judgments made by U.S. and Canadian children about objects belonging to celebrities.
Study 1 examined whether children believed in ability contagion. Seventy 4- to 7-year-olds participated in the study at a university laboratory in the U.S. Midwest. Children played a drawing game for which they chose one of two pens. One pen was presented as belonging to President Obama, while the other was said to belong to a Mr. Smith (a non-celebrity). The study included an introduction to ensure children knew who President Obama was.
In the second stage of the game, the researchers randomly assigned the pens to children, making sure they knew whose pen they were using. The researchers then compared the children’s performance in the drawing game as an implicit measure of their belief in ability contagion. The expectation was that children would perform better with “President Obama’s pen” if they believed it would enhance their abilities.
The second study included 72 children aged 5 to 8 and 36 adults. Participants were told four stories about pairs of different objects. In each story, one object belonged to a celebrity (e.g., Taylor Swift’s guitar), and the other belonged to a non-celebrity. Participants were asked to indicate which object in each pair was worth more, which belonged in a museum, and which would help them perform better in the activity associated with the object (e.g., playing guitar).
The third study replicated Study 2, with one key difference: participants were given the option to say that the two objects they were comparing were the same. This additional option allowed the researchers to determine if participants believed the objects were truly equal in their ability to enhance performance or if they felt compelled to choose between them. Participants included 72 children aged 5 to 8 and 36 adults, the same demographic groups as in Study 2.
In Study 1, over 90% of children chose President Obama’s pen to play the game. However, there were no differences in the children’s game performance based on which pen they used. Confidence ratings also did not differ, indicating that children did not believe President Obama’s pen would make them better at the game.
In Studies 2 and 3, the responses of adults and older children suggested that they saw objects owned by celebrities as more valuable than identical objects owned by non-celebrities, and they believed these objects belonged in a museum. However, their answers did not support the idea of ability contagion. In Study 2, 99% of adults said that celebrity-owned objects were worth more and that they belonged in a museum. Children gave similar responses, although they were slightly less likely than adults to choose the celebrity object. While they occasionally said that a celebrity’s object might help them perform better, the difference was small, and they were not given the option to say both objects were the same in this study.
In Study 3, over 90% of adults again said that celebrity-owned objects were worth more and belonged in a museum more than non-celebrity-owned objects. However, when asked whether these objects would improve their abilities, they said the effects were the same. In other words, they did not believe in ability contagion. About half of the children in Study 3 believed the objects were worth the same and belonged in a museum, and around 60% said that both objects would equally help with performance. These responses indicated that neither adults nor children generally believed in ability contagion.
“The results of three studies show that children and adults do not believe that a person’s performance will improve when using a celebrity object. Our data do not support the ability contagion account of the valuation of celebrity objects and open future avenues of research to explore the qualities that children and adults expect to transfer from people to objects or vice versa,” the study authors concluded.
The study provides an intriguing exploration of ability contagion beliefs, but the authors note several limitations. One challenge was finding real-world celebrities that very young children would recognize. Most celebrities familiar to young children are fictional characters, which may not evoke the same perceptions as real-life figures. The results for the youngest children might have been different if the study had focused on celebrities more familiar to them, such as cartoon characters or figures from children’s television shows. Additionally, future studies could explore whether people’s beliefs in ability contagion might vary depending on their emotional connection to the celebrity or the type of object in question.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2024.101461) Can Serena Williams’s tennis racquet make me a better tennis player? Beliefs about Ability Contagion in Children and Adults,” was authored by Kristan A. Marchak, Marianne Turgeon, Merranda McLaughlin, and Susan A. Gelman.

(https://www.psypost.org/black-lives-matter-protests-in-2020-triggered-rapid-but-fleeting-decline-in-subconscious-racial-bias/) Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 triggered rapid but fleeting decline in subconscious racial bias
Sep 16th 2024, 12:00

A recent study published in (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/01461672241269841) Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin explored how the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests impacted racial bias in the United States. Researchers found that implicit racial bias—bias that operates subconsciously—decreased rapidly following the protests. However, this drop was temporary, and the decrease did not persist over time. Interestingly, explicit bias, which refers to consciously held attitudes, did not show a similar reduction.
The death of George Floyd in May 2020 and the subsequent resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement raised widespread public concern about systemic racism in the United States. The protests that followed were massive, receiving global attention and signaling a collective societal call to address racial inequality.
This raised an important question: Can protests change racial attitudes on a large scale? The study aimed to examine whether the 2020 BLM protests reduced both implicit (unconscious) and explicit (conscious) racial bias toward Black people. By using data from Project Implicit, an online platform that tracks changes in bias, the researchers hoped to provide insights into the potential of protests to shift social attitudes.
“In my research, I’m investigating how our social and cultural environment influences how we think about minorities. Considering the sheer size of the 2020 BLM protests and the dominance of the movement on traditional and social media, these protests constituted a big shift in how society talked about race. I wanted to know whether this shift also was associated with a shift in how people implicitly feel about Black people,” said study author (https://max-primbs.netlify.app/) Maximilian Primbs, a PhD candidate at the Behavioural Science Institute of Radboud University.
The researchers analyzed data from Project Implicit, which collects day-to-day measures of implicit and explicit racial bias. Participants in the study were 428,855 white Americans who completed the Implicit Association Test (IAT), a widely used measure of unconscious bias. The IAT involves associating faces of different races with either positive or negative words to detect the speed and accuracy of participants’ responses. Faster and more accurate associations between white faces and positive words, or Black faces and negative words, indicate a higher level of implicit racial bias.
The researchers tracked changes in racial bias during the year 2020 and compared the data from before and after the onset of the BLM protests. They also considered factors such as the number of protests in each state and the frequency of Google searches for “Black Lives Matter,” which they used as indicators of the public’s awareness and engagement with the movement. In addition to implicit bias, the study measured explicit bias through feeling thermometers, where participants rated how warm or cold they felt toward Black and white people.
The results of the study showed a notable but temporary decrease in implicit racial bias immediately after the onset of the BLM protests. This was a rapid change, indicating that large-scale societal movements can influence subconscious attitudes, at least in the short term. However, this reduction in implicit bias did not sustain over time, and bias levels gradually returned to pre-protest levels.
This contrasts with earlier research on the 2013–2016 BLM protests, which found more sustained reductions in racial bias, as well as research on other societal events, such as a Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage, which also had a more lasting effect on bias.
“Originally, we expected that racial bias would decline faster over time after the onset of the protests compared to before,” Primbs told PsyPost. “Instead, we observed a massive and rapid drop in racial bias right after the onset of the protests, followed by a slow and steady increase in racial bias as attention to the protests faded.”
For explicit bias, the researchers did not observe any significant long-term changes after the protests. While there was a small visual drop in explicit bias scores shortly after the protests, the change was not statistically significant. This suggests that consciously held racial attitudes were not as easily influenced by the protests as implicit attitudes were.
The study also tested whether the decrease in racial bias was more pronounced in areas with more BLM protests or higher interest in the movement, as measured by Google searches. Interestingly, the number of protests and searches did not significantly impact the level of bias reduction. Additionally, political orientation played a role, with more liberal individuals showing a larger decrease in bias than more conservative individuals.
“The average person should take from our study that even large-scale protests highlighting racial inequalities alone are not sufficient to change how people feel about minorities – long-term change in racial bias requires long-term changes in our social and cultural environment, think changes in laws, customs, and cultural habits,” Primbs said.
While this study provides important insights, it also has some limitations to consider. One of the primary challenges is the potential for sample bias in Project Implicit data. The platform tends to attract younger, more liberal participants who may already have lower levels of implicit bias. This limits the generalizability of the results to the broader U.S. population.
Furthermore, the study’s reliance on cross-sectional data makes it difficult to draw strong causal conclusions. While the researchers observed changes in bias following the protests, they could not definitively rule out other factors that might have contributed to these shifts, such as changes in the demographic composition of the participants.
The study suggests that lasting changes in racial bias require more than short-lived movements or temporary interventions. Future work could explore how ongoing changes in policies, laws, and social norms can create more permanent shifts in attitudes.
“I want to build robust evidence for the claim that racial bias is determined by our social and cultural environment – that it reflects our past as well as our present,” Primbs said. “Racial bias reflects our social and cultural environment, how we grow up, who we surround ourselves with, and how groups are portrayed in the media. Sustainable changes in racial bias therefore require permanent changes in our social and cultural environment. This also explains why things like diversity trainings mostly do not work – you cannot expect one-hour trainings to undo years of associations. I want people to understand that and think of actual solutions to promote diversity and equality instead of window dressing-solutions like diversity training.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241269841) The Effects of the 2020 BLM Protests on Racial Bias in the United States,” was authored by Maximilian A. Primbs, Rob W. Holland, Freek Oude Maatman, Tessa A. M. Lansu, Ruddy Faure, and Gijsbert Bijlstra.

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/20240917/222b34ed/attachment.htm>