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/eye-tracking-study-sheds-light-on-sex-differences-in-evaluations-of-online-dating-profiles/) Eye-tracking study sheds light on sex differences in evaluations of online dating profiles
Sep 24th 2024, 10:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-024-02950-1) Archives of Sexual Behavior has employed eye-tracking methods to uncover intriguing differences in how men and women evaluate online dating profiles, shedding light on the priorities each gender has when seeking potential partners. Overall, men tend to focus on physical attractiveness, while women consider both attractiveness and resource potential.
In recent years, online dating profiles have become a popular method for finding both short-term and long-term partners. However, less is known about how individuals prioritize the information presented via images and text in these profiles. This study aimed to fill that gap by investigating how heterosexual men and women spontaneously allocate their visual attention to profile-based facial attractiveness and financial resources.
“I was interested in this topic because I’ve read a lot about evolutionary psychology and the research that has been done to support its arguments for the differences in how men and women select mates (i.e., what they prioritize in their decision-making processes and their preferences for short- vs. long-term relationships), but almost all of the research I’ve seen published to support these ideas has been self-report,” said study author (https://www.une.edu.au/staff-profiles/psychology/alykins) Amy D. Lykins, an associate professor in clinical psychology at the University of New England.
“As a researcher with a cognitive psychology background, I was interested to see how people’s visual attention to potential mates related both to these theories in terms of prioritization of different types of information, as well as to their decision-making about whether that person ‘ranked’ well as a potential romantic partner.”
The research team recruited 20 men and 20 women, all university students aged between 18 and 27. The participants viewed mock online dating profiles while their eye movements were recorded using an eye-tracking camera. The profiles varied in terms of facial attractiveness and text-based financial information, such as income and occupation.
The researchers found that both men and women spent the majority of their time focusing on the faces in the profiles. In fact, 83% of the total gaze time was directed to the face region, regardless of the other information presented.
However, deeper analysis revealed significant gender differences in how participants evaluated the profiles. Men, as expected, focused predominantly on the women’s faces, with little attention given to resource information such as income and occupation.
Interestingly, the study also found that men paid more attention to unattractive women when those women had higher incomes or prestigious occupations. This suggests that while physical attractiveness remains a top priority for men, resource information can still influence their attention to some extent, particularly when the woman is less attractive.
“We were surprised to see that men increased their visual attention to nominally unattractive women when their (the women’s) jobs were high-status and high-paying,” Lykins told PsyPost. “Normally, uninteresting information (i.e., unattractive faces in this case) wouldn’t attract much attention, but they did appear to attract more attention when the woman also had a good, high-paying job.”
In contrast, women’s visual attention patterns were more complex. Women’s attention to men’s faces varied depending on the level of income and occupation. Specifically, women spent more time evaluating men’s faces when the profiles indicated lower income or less prestigious occupations. This suggests that women may compensate for lower resource potential by scrutinizing physical attractiveness more closely, likely as a way to assess overall mate quality.
“Within the first 10 seconds of viewing an online profile of a potential relationship partner, we can see differences in the prioritization of different types of information,” Lykins explained. “Our broad findings found support for evolutionary theories in sex differences in mate choice preferences in visual attention, which was one of the first times (if not the first) that this has been shown using eye-tracking methodology to capture visual attention (which is harder to manipulate than self-report). The findings have real-world implications for how people may want to create their online dating profiles if using apps such as Tinder.”
In addition to eye-tracking data, the study also collected self-reported assessments of attractiveness and relationship interest. Men reported higher interest in women for short-term relationships, regardless of the women’s income or occupation, reinforcing the idea that men prioritize physical attractiveness in contexts where long-term resource investment is not a concern.
On the other hand, women expressed a preference for men in long-term relationships, especially those with higher income and prestigious occupations. This is consistent with evolutionary theories that suggest women seek resource-rich partners for stable, long-term commitments that can provide security for potential offspring.
Despite its insightful findings, the study has some limitations. For instance, the study only included heterosexual participants, so the findings may not be applicable to other sexual orientations. Additionally, the online dating profiles used in the study were simplified mock-ups, which may not fully capture the complexity of real-life profiles.
“The ‘profiles’ that we created were extremely basic,” Lykins noted. “They included images of faces (both attractive and unattractive), information about the person’s job and their annual income, and filler information (e.g., where they grew up and how many siblings they had) — all in black and white to control for color and luminance artificially attracting attention.”
“Of course, actual profiles on dating apps are richer and much more detailed, and it could be worth using those in future studies. It may also be worth looking at different visual attention outcomes (e.g., attentional switching between different areas rather than just overall attention spent within a 10-second period, what was the first thing they looked at when the profile came on the screen, etc.) to give us a more in-depth understanding of the cognitive and decision-making processes behind mate choice.”
The study, “(https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02950-1) Visual Attention to Evolutionarily Relevant Information by Heterosexual Men and Women While Viewing Mock Online Dating Profiles,” was authored by Madeleine Gale, Rosemary Torbay, and Amy D. Lykins.

(https://www.psypost.org/this-simple-narrative-element-can-predict-a-storys-popularity-study-finds/) This simple narrative element can predict a story’s popularity, study finds
Sep 24th 2024, 08:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adl2013) Science Advances reveals that the success of a story can be predicted by the number and intensity of narrative reversals, moments when the fortunes of characters dramatically shift. By analyzing 30,000 stories across various formats, researchers found that narratives with more frequent and pronounced changes in emotional tone tend to be more successful.
Stories have been a cornerstone of human culture for thousands of years, captivating audiences and imparting values across generations. Despite centuries of storytelling, the precise reasons why some stories resonate deeply while others fail remain elusive. Scholars have proposed many theories about what makes a story compelling, with concepts like plot progression, dramatic tension, and the balance between highs and lows often highlighted. Yet, past research has struggled to empirically verify these ideas or to predict the success of stories based on theoretical frameworks.
This study aimed to address that gap. With advances in computational linguistics, researchers saw an opportunity to quantify elements of storytelling, particularly focusing on narrative reversals. These are moments when a character’s fortune shifts drastically, such as a protagonist going from success to failure or from despair to triumph. By analyzing the frequency and magnitude of these shifts, the researchers hoped to uncover a measurable pattern that could explain why certain stories succeed.
“In addition to working as a quantitative researcher, I’m also a novelist, with an MFA from the Iowa Writers’ Workshop and my second novel coming out in 2025. I believe that new computational-linguistics tools allow us, for the first time, to build an empirically testable theory of narrative that can afford us new insights into why stories affect us the way they do,” said study author (https://www.samsunknight.com/) Samsun Knight, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Toronto.
The researchers collected data from four distinct domains: movies, TV shows, novels, and fundraising pitches. Each dataset included a large sample of stories—3,713 movies, 19,339 TV episodes, 8,663 novels, and 1,133 GoFundMe campaigns. They used computational tools to track the emotional tone, or valence, of these narratives. Valence measures how positive or negative a text is, based on the words it uses. For example, words like “beautiful” and “love” score as positive, while terms like “doomed” and “disaster” score as negative.
To detect narrative reversals, the researchers broke down each story into fixed intervals of time or text. For movies, this meant dividing scripts into 5-minute windows, while TV shows used 3-minute windows, novels used 10,000-word windows, and fundraising pitches were analyzed with 500-word windows. The researchers then tracked how the emotional tone of the narrative changed over time. A narrative reversal was defined as a significant shift from a positive state to a negative state, or vice versa, within these windows. The number of these reversals and their magnitude (the extent of the emotional shift) were calculated for each story.
To ensure robustness, the researchers also tested the effect of other narrative features, such as sentiment volatility (how much the emotional tone fluctuated), word count (to control for the length of the narrative), and semantic properties like the complexity of language. Additionally, they controlled for factors specific to each domain, such as the budget of movies, the release year for TV shows, and the category of fundraising pitches. These controls helped the researchers isolate the effect of narrative reversals on story success.
Finally, the success of each narrative was measured differently depending on the domain. For movies and TV shows, success was gauged by ratings on IMDb, a popular movie and TV rating platform. For novels, success was measured by the number of downloads from Project Gutenberg. For fundraising pitches, success was defined by whether the pitch met its fundraising goal on GoFundMe.
Across all four types of narratives, the results were consistent: stories with more narrative reversals and more dramatic shifts in emotional tone were more successful. For movies, the number and magnitude of reversals predicted higher ratings on IMDb. TV shows followed a similar pattern, with episodes containing more dramatic reversals receiving higher audience ratings. Even in novels, where only text could be analyzed without the benefit of visual or auditory elements, stories with more reversals were downloaded more often from Project Gutenberg, indicating greater popularity.
For instance, movies with the highest number of narrative reversals saw an increase in their IMDb rating by up to 1.4 stars—an effect comparable to a $40 million increase in the movie’s budget. Similarly, novels with more reversals saw over a 100% increase in downloads, and fundraising campaigns experienced a nearly 40% higher chance of success when their stories had frequent and significant reversals.
The findings extended to amateur storytelling as well. In the context of fundraising pitches on GoFundMe, campaigns with more frequent and significant narrative reversals were more likely to meet their fundraising goals. This suggests that the power of narrative reversals isn’t limited to professional, carefully crafted stories but applies even in everyday storytelling contexts.
“Stories with more back-and-forth movement between good and bad fortune tend to be more engaging,” Knight told PsyPost. “For example, if you’re trying to fundraise for an illness, you might imagine choosing between two different ways of telling your story: 1. Describing how bad things are since your illness, and then talking about how badly you need support from friends and family, and how much worse things will get if you don’t get enough fundraising support; or 2. Describing how well things were going before, until the illness made everything turn for the worse, and then describing how much better things would be if you were able to fundraise successfully.”
“According to our findings, the story structure of (1) would likely be less effective, all else equal—a flatly negative story would not be as effective as a story with reversals, going from good to bad to good, as in (2).”
But as with all research, there are some caveats to consider. While computational tools like the VADER lexicon used in this study are effective at measuring valence, they cannot fully capture all nuances of human emotion. For example, a story may feature morally ambiguous situations where good things happen to bad people, which the computational analysis might struggle to interpret correctly. As such, the measurement of reversals may not always align perfectly with how a human audience perceives the narrative.
Future research could address these limitations by conducting controlled experiments where specific elements of a story are altered while others are kept constant. This would help to isolate the exact impact of narrative reversals on audience engagement. Additionally, researchers could explore other dimensions of narrative structure, such as pacing, the regularity of reversals, or how the size of reversals evolves over the course of a story.
Another promising avenue for future research is investigating the psychological mechanisms behind why narrative reversals are so effective. The study hypothesizes that reversals keep audiences engaged by creating tension and surprise, but more work is needed to confirm these assumptions. Understanding the emotional and cognitive processes that drive a story’s appeal could deepen our understanding of what makes narratives resonate with audiences on a fundamental level.
The study, “(https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adl2013) Narrative reversals and story success,” was authored by Samsun Knight, Matthew D. Rocklage, and Yakov Bart.

(https://www.psypost.org/a-single-trump-tweet-has-been-connected-to-a-rise-in-arrests-of-white-americans/) A single Trump tweet has been connected to a rise in arrests of white Americans
Sep 24th 2024, 07:00

A new study published in the (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055424000741) American Political Science Review sheds light on how political elites, such as former President Donald Trump, can influence public behavior through polarizing messages on social media. The study provides evidence that Trump’s controversial tweets in April 2020, which called for the “liberation” of Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia from COVID-19 lockdowns, led to an a decrease in compliance with stay-at-home orders and a rise in arrests, especially among white Americans.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, political polarization in the United States reached new heights, with leaders from different parties often giving conflicting advice on health measures. Trump’s tweets about the need to “liberate” states under lockdown were especially controversial, as they directly challenged state-level policies. The researchers wanted to examine whether these messages, sent during a national health crisis, encouraged supporters to act in ways that violated government guidelines. The study’s aim was to understand the broader consequences of political elites using divisive rhetoric during crises.
To investigate the effects of Trump’s tweets, the researchers used a combination of social media analysis, mobility data, and arrest records. They specifically focused on the three states Trump mentioned in his tweets—Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia. By comparing behavior in these states to others that were also under COVID-19 lockdown orders, they were able to isolate the impact of Trump’s messages.
First, the researchers analyzed the public’s responses to Trump’s tweets on social media. They used topic modeling, a technique that identifies themes in large collections of text, to examine how people reacted. The findings revealed that many of the responses to Trump’s tweets contained anti-government, radical, and even violent rhetoric. Some responses explicitly interpreted the tweets as a call to arms, with phrases like “It’s time to fight” and “Take your state back” being common.
The researchers then used geographic Internet search data to track how often the word “liberate” was searched following Trump’s tweets. Searches for “liberate” spiked nationwide, especially in the targeted states, further indicating that the tweets reached a wide audience.
Next, the researchers looked at actual changes in behavior using county-level mobility data from social media platforms like Meta (formerly Facebook) and Google. These platforms track how much people move around based on their smartphone location data. They found that in the Republican-majority counties of Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia, there was a significant increase in movement and a corresponding decrease in adherence to stay-at-home orders in the days following Trump’s tweets.
In contrast, counties with Democratic majorities did not show the same changes in behavior, suggesting that the response to Trump’s messages was divided along partisan lines. The increase in movement was especially noticeable in the days immediately following the tweets and began to level off within a week.
The researchers also wanted to understand if Trump’s tweets calling for the “liberation” of Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia during the COVID-19 lockdowns led not just to minor noncompliance, like ignoring stay-at-home orders, but also to more extreme acts of defiance, including civil disobedience and criminal activity.
To investigate this, they analyzed arrest data from the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), a comprehensive database that tracks arrests and details about crimes across the U.S. The researchers focused on crimes related to disorderly conduct, assault (both simple and aggravated), and vandalism, which are commonly linked to civil disobedience or rebellion against authorities.
The analysis compared arrest rates before and after Trump’s tweets in the three targeted states (Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia) with other states that were also under lockdown but not mentioned in the tweets. This allowed the researchers to isolate the effects of Trump’s specific messages on behavior in the targeted states. They used a difference-in-differences approach, which helped them identify changes in arrest patterns that were likely driven by the tweets.
The findings showed a clear increase in arrests for crimes related to civil disobedience, but this spike was primarily concentrated among white Americans in the three targeted states. The rise in arrests of white individuals suggests that Trump’s tweets were particularly effective in motivating his base, which is largely white, to engage in rebellious activities. In contrast, there was no significant rise in arrests among non-white Americans in the same states, pointing to a demographic divide in how different groups responded to Trump’s calls for “liberation.”
While the study provides important insights into the power of elite cues, it also has limitations. One major limitation is that the data used to track mobility and arrests are aggregated, meaning the researchers were unable to analyze individual-level behavior. This makes it difficult to know for certain whether specific individuals who saw Trump’s tweets were the ones engaging in noncompliant or criminal behavior.
Additionally, the effects of Trump’s tweets appeared to be short-lived, with behavior returning to normal within a week in most cases. This suggests that while elite cues can have an immediate impact, their influence may fade over time.
The study also raises several questions for future research. One important area to explore is the long-term impact of repeated polarizing messages from political elites. While Trump’s tweets had a noticeable but short-term effect, it’s possible that a sustained campaign of divisive rhetoric could lead to more significant and lasting changes in public behavior. Future research could also examine whether similar effects are observed in other countries or contexts, where political polarization and elite messaging play a role in shaping public response during crises.
The study, “(https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/elite-cues-and-noncompliance/8A5F20C549D02AADB490223B2E3F2B7E) Elite Cues and Noncompliance,” was authored by Zachary P. Dickson and Sara B. Hobolt.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-psychology-research-reveals-a-surprising-fact-about-narcissistic-individuals/) New psychology research reveals a surprising fact about narcissistic individuals
Sep 24th 2024, 06:00

Narcissists may not be as self-deceptive about their reputation as commonly thought, according to new research published in (https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506241263636) Social Psychological and Personality Science. Researchers found that while individuals higher in narcissistic admiration expected others to see them positively, their beliefs about how they were perceived were not overly inflated. In other words, their expectations were mostly accurate. Interestingly, those higher in narcissistic rivalry believed they were seen more negatively. This study adds to the growing understanding of narcissism, showing that it is not necessarily characterized by unrealistic beliefs about how others view them.
Narcissism is a personality trait characterized by a high sense of self-importance, a deep need for admiration, a strong sense of entitlement, and a lack of empathy for others. People with high levels of narcissism often believe they are superior to others and expect to be recognized for their achievements and qualities, regardless of whether these perceptions are justified. Narcissism can manifest in two primary forms: narcissistic admiration, where individuals seek approval and social status, and narcissistic rivalry, where they adopt a competitive and antagonistic stance towards others.
The motivation behind the new study was to explore whether narcissistic individuals, particularly those with grandiose traits, systematically overestimate how positively others view them. While past research has suggested that narcissists have inflated self-views, less is known about their “metaperceptions,” or beliefs about how they are perceived by others.
“When people think of narcissists, they’re usually imagining someone with an inflated sense of self, and we were curious how narcissists might maintain that sense of self,” explained study author Victoria Pringle, a PhD student at the University of Toronto Mississauga. “Some theories of narcissism posit that narcissists use their social arena to boost their self-views, so our work was based on the premise that narcissists might expect that they’re seen positively and that this might be a mechanism by which they maintain their positive self-views.”
The study was conducted using four separate samples, totaling 1,537 participants, most of whom were undergraduate students from North American universities. These participants were involved in different types of social interactions, which allowed researchers to explore their perceptions of how others viewed them (metaperceptions) and compare those to the actual impressions they made.
In the first two samples, participants were involved in brief interactions with others. In the first sample, participants engaged in two- to three-minute conversations with multiple group members. In the second sample, participants took part in group activities, such as problem-solving tasks. After each conversation or activity, participants rated how they believed they were perceived by their partners or group members on various attributes such as intelligence, extraversion, and likability.
The participants also provided their self-ratings and were assessed on levels of narcissism using standardized questionnaires. The researchers used a method called condition-based regression analysis, which allowed them to see if people higher in narcissism systematically overestimated how positively others viewed them.
The third sample involved a longitudinal study in which participants met with small groups for structured discussions multiple times over the course of a semester. They rated how they believed they were perceived at both the beginning and the end of the semester, which allowed the researchers to assess how perceptions changed over time.
In the fourth sample, participants provided contact information for close friends or family members, who then rated the participant on various attributes. This part of the study aimed to understand how narcissistic individuals think they are seen by people who know them well, as opposed to strangers or acquaintances.
The researchers found that individuals who scored higher on narcissistic admiration generally believed that others saw them in a positive light. They thought they were viewed as more intelligent, attractive, and likable, particularly in settings where first impressions were being formed. Interestingly, these beliefs were often in line with how others actually saw them.
In other words, narcissists with high admiration didn’t necessarily overestimate their social appeal but instead had relatively accurate perceptions of their reputation, especially when it came to traits that enhance social standing, such as intelligence and attractiveness.
“We found that people higher in narcissism expected that others saw them positively, but we didn’t find that they overestimate how positively they’re seen,” Pringle told PsyPost. “As an example, consider Natalie and Nicolas, who are both high in narcissism. They both expect to be seen positively, but only Natalie actually makes a good impression. Hence, narcissism isn’t strictly about overestimating how one is seen by others, but about generally expecting to be seen positively, even if how they’re actually seen is more complicated.”
However, the findings were different for people high in narcissistic rivalry, a more antagonistic form of narcissism. These individuals tended to believe that others saw them in a more negative light, particularly in traits related to agreeableness and emotional stability. In many cases, these negative perceptions were accurate—others did view them less favorably.
Narcissistic rivalry involves a more competitive, defensive stance in social interactions, so it makes sense that individuals high in this trait expected and often received less positive evaluations from others. This suggests that people with narcissistic rivalry may be aware of the negative impressions they leave, particularly in terms of their cooperativeness and emotional balance.
Overall, the study did not find evidence to support the idea that people with narcissistic traits systematically overestimate the impressions they make on others. While they do expect to be seen in a positive light, their beliefs were not overly inflated. Moreover, the way in which narcissists believed they were perceived differed significantly between the two facets of narcissism.
“The general pattern of results was somewhat surprising, because it suggests that narcissism is marked less by a systematic bias and more by positive metaperceptions (i.e., expecting to be seen positively),” Pringle explained. “This was a bit surprising given that a lot of the language around narcissism calls to mind that bias (e.g., ‘inflated’ self-views, ‘enhancement,’ and so on), but we didn’t find evidence of that.”
But the study, like all research, includes some caveats.
“It’s worth noting that when we talk about ‘narcissists’ here, we’re talking about non-clinical narcissism: all of our samples comprised undergraduate students, the majority of whom were women,” Pringle noted. “In some ways, this makes the findings more applicable to the average person, who is less likely to have clinical levels of narcissism, but given the popularity of narcissism in the general public’s lexicon I think it’s important to keep that distinction in mind. If we had used a clinical sample instead, it’s possible that the effects we found would be even stronger, or that those higher in narcissism would be viewed negatively, which we didn’t see as much in our samples.”
Future research could explore how narcissistic traits influence perceptions in more diverse populations, including clinical samples, to see if the findings extend beyond non-clinical settings. Additionally, examining narcissists’ self-perceptions in high-stakes or competitive environments could provide insights into whether their biases become more pronounced under pressure. Longitudinal studies could also investigate how narcissistic traits affect relationships over time, particularly how metaperceptions evolve as acquaintanceships deepen.
“Much of my work involves quantitative methods, so in this line of work I hope to continue to explore accuracy research with more rigorous methods like the condition-based regression analysis that we used in this paper,” Pringle said.
The study, “(https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/19485506241263636) Do Narcissists Think They Make a Better Impression Than They Really Do? Re-Evaluating Enhancement as a Dominant Feature of Narcissism,” was authored by Victoria Pringle, Hasagani Tissera, Norhan Elsaadawy, Erika Carlson, and Lauren Human.

(https://www.psypost.org/study-uncovers-shared-genetic-factors-between-adhd-and-risk-taking-behavior/) Study uncovers shared genetic factors between ADHD and risk-taking behavior
Sep 23rd 2024, 14:00

A recent study published in the (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.03.107) Journal of Affective Disorders explores the genetic connections between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and risk-taking behavior. The researchers identified shared genetic factors between ADHD and risky behavior, highlighting a complex biological link between the two traits. The findings provide insight into how certain genetic variations may predispose individuals to both ADHD and impulsive decision-making.
ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition that affects a person’s ability to focus, control impulses, and regulate behavior. It is typically diagnosed in childhood but can persist into adulthood. Individuals with ADHD often display symptoms such as inattentiveness, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, which can interfere with daily functioning, relationships, and academic or work performance.
Risk-taking behaviors, such as impulsive decision-making or engaging in activities with potentially harmful outcomes, are commonly observed in people with ADHD. These behaviors can lead to further negative consequences, making it important to understand why individuals with ADHD may be more prone to engaging in risky activities.
The motivation behind the study stems from the desire to better understand the genetic factors that link ADHD and risk-taking behavior. While previous research has noted the connection between these two traits, the biological mechanisms that underpin this relationship remain unclear. By investigating the shared genetic architecture of ADHD and risk-taking behavior, the researchers aimed to uncover specific genetic variants that contribute to both conditions.
The researchers conducted a large-scale analysis using data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which examine genetic variations across large populations to identify markers associated with specific traits or disorders. The ADHD data, including 225,534 participants with 38,691 diagnosed cases, came from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, while the risk-taking behavior data, comprising 466,571 participants, was sourced from the Social Science Genetic Association Consortium. After standardizing the data for consistency, the researchers focused on identifying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)—small genetic variations that could be linked to both traits.
The researchers used several techniques to analyze the genetic data. First, they performed a general genetic correlation analysis using a method known as linkage disequilibrium score regression. This allowed them to estimate how much of the genetic risk for ADHD is shared with risk-taking behavior. Next, they applied a more detailed analysis to identify specific regions of the genome where the two traits share genetic factors. A statistical tool called LAVA (Local Analysis of Variant Association) helped them isolate genetic regions that contribute to both ADHD and risk-taking behavior at a localized level.
In addition to looking for overlapping genetic regions, the researchers used cross-trait meta-analysis to identify pleiotropic loci—areas of the genome where a single genetic variant influences multiple traits. This was followed by fine-mapping to identify specific genetic variants that could be driving both traits. They also conducted colocalization analysis to determine whether the same genetic variants were involved in both ADHD and risk-taking behavior, or if the two traits were influenced by different variants in the same genomic region.
The researchers found a genetic overlap between ADHD and risk-taking behavior. The overall genetic correlation between the two traits was positive, meaning that individuals with a genetic predisposition for ADHD were also more likely to have a genetic predisposition for risky behavior. Specifically, the researchers identified 21 loci with pleiotropic effects—meaning that these regions of the genome are involved in both ADHD and risk-taking behavior.
Two genes stood out as particularly important in this overlap: CADM2 and FOXP2. CADM2 has been previously linked to personality traits like impulsivity and adventurousness, and the study confirmed its role in both ADHD and risk-taking behavior. The FOXP2 gene, on the other hand, is known for its involvement in language development and motor control. Mutations in FOXP2 have been linked to speech and language disorders, and this study found that it may also be associated with risk-taking behavior in individuals with ADHD.
Further analysis showed that the shared genetic factors between ADHD and risk-taking behavior were most strongly expressed in brain tissues, particularly in regions involved in decision-making and impulse control. The brain cortex and frontal cortex showed the highest levels of gene expression linked to both traits, reinforcing the idea that both ADHD and risk-taking behavior are deeply connected to brain function.
Additionally, the researchers found that the pituitary gland—a critical part of the endocrine system—was also significantly involved in the shared genetic architecture. This suggests that hormonal factors may play a role in the connection between ADHD and impulsivity.
Despite these findings, the study also had some limitations. One major limitation was that the genetic data came from individuals of European descent, which means the results may not be applicable to other populations. Future research will need to examine whether the same genetic factors are involved in different ethnic groups.
Additionally, while the study provided strong evidence of a genetic link between ADHD and risk-taking behavior, it did not include sex chromosome analyses, which could reveal important gender-related differences in how these traits are expressed.
Looking ahead, the researchers suggest several directions for future research. One important area of investigation is the role of hormonal and metabolic systems in the relationship between ADHD and risky behavior. The significant involvement of the pituitary gland points to the possibility that hormonal regulation, particularly stress hormones like cortisol, could influence the development of impulsive behaviors in people with ADHD. Understanding this connection could help refine treatment strategies by addressing not only the cognitive and behavioral aspects of ADHD but also the underlying biological systems.
Additionally, further research is needed to explore the environmental factors that may interact with these genetic predispositions. For example, how do upbringing, social environment, or early childhood experiences affect the likelihood that a person with a genetic predisposition for ADHD will engage in risk-taking behavior? Identifying these environmental influences could lead to more effective interventions, particularly for young people with ADHD who are at risk for engaging in dangerous or harmful activities.
The study, “(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165032724005317) Investigating the shared genetic architecture between attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder and risk taking behavior: A large-scale genomewide cross-trait analysis,” was authored by Yanjing Chen, Ping Liu, Sijie Yi, Chunhua Fan, Wei Zhao, and Jun Liu.

(https://www.psypost.org/study-reveals-how-both-bright-and-dark-personality-traits-predict-criminality/) Study reveals how both bright and dark personality traits predict criminality
Sep 23rd 2024, 12:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69288-5) Scientific Reports has revealed that a combination of “bright” and “dark” personality traits may help predict criminal behavior, including both first-time offenses and recidivism. Researchers found that higher levels of emotional instability (neuroticism), risk-taking (openness), and harmful tendencies (sadism, deceitfulness) were associated with a higher likelihood of criminal activity, with deceitfulness and neuroticism standing out as strong indicators of reoffending.
Criminal behavior is a serious societal problem, and understanding what drives individuals to commit crimes is essential for prevention and rehabilitation. Previous research has explored how personality traits might predict antisocial behaviors, but much of the focus has been on either the “bright” or “dark” side of personality, rather than a combination of the two. The bright side includes traits like emotional stability and conscientiousness, while the dark side includes traits such as narcissism and psychopathy. This study aimed to bridge that gap by examining both sides simultaneously to see how they influence criminal behavior.
“The research in our Lab ((https://riddlelab.ro/) RiddleLab – Research in Individual Differences and Legal Psychology) focuses on the emergence and development of individual differences in socio-cognitive functioning (theory of mind, executive functions) to predict prosocial and problematic behavior. We also explore how the continuum of ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ personality traits can be related to disruptive conduct, including criminal behavior,” said study author Laura Visu-Petra, a professor at Babes-Bolyai University.
“Most studies conducted in prisons to this date have focused either on adaptive (bright) or on maladaptive (dark) personality dimensions, without integrating them in a unitary design to identify the combination of protective and vulnerability factors predicting occasional criminal behavior and even the tendency to persevere in it (recidivism). ”
The study included 578 participants, split into two groups: a general community sample of 282 individuals and a group of 296 inmates from two maximum-security prisons in Romania. The inmate group was further divided into two subgroups: first-time offenders (129 people) and repeat offenders (167 people).
“The two co-author PhD candidates (Lili Hurezan and Andreea Turi) are ideally placed inside the prison system (correctional officers working directly with convicted offenders, including high-risk inmates) and this facilitated our access to this uniquely fascinating population,” Visu-Petra explained.
To measure personality traits, the researchers used two main tools. First, they assessed the Five-Factor Model of personality, which includes the traits neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Second, they used the Dark Factor Inventory to assess dark personality traits, such as sadism, deceitfulness, narcissistic entitlement, and callousness. These dark traits are often associated with antisocial behaviors like manipulation, cruelty, and disregard for others’ well-being.
Each participant completed a set of questionnaires to measure their personality traits, with the inmate sample providing additional information from prison records about their criminal history and prison conduct. The researchers controlled for factors like age, gender, and the tendency to present oneself in a socially desirable way, which can sometimes skew results in personality assessments.
One of the most important findings was the association between neuroticism and criminal behavior. Neuroticism, which reflects a tendency to experience negative emotions like anxiety, anger, and sadness, was consistently linked to both first-time offending and recidivism. Individuals who scored higher in neuroticism were more likely to commit crimes and to reoffend. This suggests that emotional instability may be a risk factor for engaging in criminal activities and continuing to do so over time.
Another key finding was the role of openness to experience in predicting first-time offending. Openness is a personality trait associated with curiosity, imagination, and a willingness to try new things. In this study, individuals with higher levels of openness were more likely to be first-time offenders. This might suggest that people who are more open to new experiences may also be more willing to take risks, which could lead to criminal behavior. However, openness did not appear to predict recidivism, indicating that this trait may be more relevant to initial criminal acts rather than repeated offenses.
Interestingly, the study found that extraversion, which is typically associated with sociability and assertiveness, was lower in both first-time offenders and repeat offenders compared to individuals without a criminal history. This suggests that individuals who are more reserved or less outgoing may be more likely to engage in criminal behavior. The researchers hypothesize that this could be related to the prison environment, where being overly sociable or assertive might lead to conflicts or other risks, prompting individuals to adopt more reserved behaviors.
However, agreeableness did not emerge as a significant predictor of either first-time offending or recidivism once the researchers controlled for social desirability (the tendency to present oneself in a favorable light). Conscientiousness also did not show a strong connection to criminal behavior in this study.
“One surprising finding was that positive traits like agreeableness (the tendency to be cooperative, polite, kind, and friendly) and conscientiousness (the tendency to be organized, hard-working and to adhere to norms and rules) did not strongly predict whether someone would commit a crime or reoffend, once we accounted for the individual tendency to present oneself in a more favorable way,” Visu-Petra told PsyPost. “This suggests that earlier studies might have overstated the role these traits play in criminal behavior, and the importance of optimizing them through rehabilitation.”
The researchers also found that sadism, or the tendency to enjoy causing harm to others, was linked to first-time offending but not to recidivism. This indicates that while sadistic tendencies may play a role in the initial decision to break the law, they do not necessarily predict repeated criminal behavior.
Deceitfulness, on the other hand, emerged as a significant predictor of both first-time offenses and recidivism. Individuals who were more likely to lie, manipulate, or engage in other dishonest behaviors were at higher risk for both committing crimes and reoffending. This finding highlights the importance of deceitfulness as a consistent trait in criminal behavior.
But other dark traits like callousness (a lack of empathy), vindictiveness (a desire for revenge), and narcissistic entitlement (a sense of deserving more than others) did not emerge as significant predictors of criminal behavior or recidivism in this study. While these traits have been associated with antisocial behavior in other contexts, they did not seem to play a major role in distinguishing between first-time offenders, repeat offenders, and the general population in this sample.
“We were also surprised that, among the various dark personality dimensions, only deceitfulness stood out as a key factor in both first-time offenses and reoffending,” Visu-Petra said. “This suggests that not all self-serving behaviors lead to crime, but especially those involving dishonesty and breaking rules to achieve personal goals.”
In sum, the study’s findings demonstrate that a complex interplay of bright and dark personality traits contributes to criminal behavior.
“The primary takeaway from our study is that even when we look in a maximum security prison environment, human personality is highly multifaceted, encompassing a wide repertoire of adaptive (bright) and maladaptive (dark) traits,” Visu-Petra told PsyPost. “Each individual combination of these traits relates to criminal behavior and to the likelihood of reoffending in significant ways. Individuals involved in criminal activities report emotional instability (high neuroticism), reduced positive emotions, lower assertiveness, and diminished sensitivity to social feedback (low extraversion).”
“However, first time offenders are also more prone to new experiences and taking risks (high openness) and report higher levels of sadism. They agree to prioritizing their own interests, sometimes at the expense of others (high (https://darkfactor.org/) Dark Factor). Inmates may be more prone to engage in deceitful and illicit behavior (deceitfulness), yet they don’t necessarily differ from others in their motivation to cooperate or form bonds (similar levels of agreeableness).”
The researchers emphasize that dark personality traits, such as deceitfulness and sadism, while associated with criminality, should not be viewed as direct or definitive causes of criminal behavior.
“First of all, when we talk about personality, especially dark personality dimensions, we shouldn’t use such labels as an unequivocal predictor of criminal behavior,” Visu-Petra explained. “These ‘dark’ personality dimensions are universally found in the general population and are not causally linked to offending behavior. Therefore, a high Dark Factor score does not immediately signify that a person will become a criminal, since dark personality traits (such as high psychopathy or Machiavellianism) have been related to functional outcomes such as efficient corporate leadership styles.”
“Secondly, personality traits are not a static set of personal characteristics, and teaching individuals to recognize and challenge their antisocial beliefs and behaviors can foster greater cognitive flexibility, assertive problem-solving skills, and resilience. However, caution should be exercised when designing social skills enhancing programs to reduce reoffending, as these abilities may also enable malevolent tactics and better equip offenders to manipulate and take advantage of their victims’ vulnerabilities.”
Looking ahead, the research team intends to deepen their understanding of how personality traits, both bright and dark, evolve over time and influence behavior. They aim to study how these traits interact with beliefs and social environments to better predict both prosocial and antisocial behavior.
“Our long-term goal is to continue exploring how both bright and dark personality traits affect prosocial and antisocial behavior throughout a person’s life,” Visu-Petra said. “My team and I plan to investigate how these traits interact with personal beliefs, attitudes and with cognitive and emotional propensities which influence whether someone behaves in a communal or agentic, self interested manner.”
“We rely on an arsenal of self-reports and experimental, performance based, often creative methods to study adaptive and antisocial behaviors across the lifespan. By taking this comprehensive approach, we aim to gain a deeper understanding of how these traits evolve from childhood to adulthood, which can generate effective strategies for preventing and managing antisocial behavior and for fostering prosocial tendencies and (even dark) authenticity.”
“In order to develop and implement effective prevention and rehabilitation policies (designing tailored training programs for prison staff, reducing self-serving justifications supporting a criminal lifestyle), it is important to conduct studies with diverse populations, and we rely on their support and active collaboration throughout the (sometimes tedious) research endeavors,” Visu-Petra said. “This will impact not only practitioners working in correctional facilities, but also contribute to a safer and more accepting community for us all – so we would like to express our gratitude and to welcome further involvement from all participants in our studies.”
The study, “(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-69288-5) Dark and bright personality dimensions as predictors of criminal behavior and recidivism,” was authored by Liliana Hurezan, Andreea Turi, Andrei Ion, and Laura Visu-Petra.

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/20240924/cbb4e405/attachment.htm>