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/taller-students-tend-to-perform-slightly-better-in-school-new-research-finds/) Taller students tend to perform slightly better in school, new research finds
Apr 27th 2025, 10:00

New research published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2025.101488) Economics and Human Biology suggests that taller students, on average, perform a little better on standardized tests than their shorter peers. Drawing on a large sample of students in New York City public schools, the study found that each standard deviation increase in height was associated with modestly higher scores in both English Language Arts and math across grades 3 through 8.
The researchers conducted this study to better understand why taller individuals often earn higher wages in adulthood, a pattern well-documented in prior research. One possible explanation is that taller individuals may have had academic advantages earlier in life, which could partly explain their later success in the labor market. While previous studies hinted at a link between height and early academic performance, this research aimed to examine that relationship more directly using a large, recent dataset from a major urban school district.
“There’s a well-known result in the social sciences that taller men and women have higher earnings than shorter ones in countries all over the world,” said Stephanie Coffey, an assistant professor of economics at Saint Anselm College, who conducted the research along with Amy Ellen Schwartz of the University of Delaware.
“Research has offered a few possible explanations for the phenomenon. One explanation is social channels (i.e. taller people may be more self-confident, or may be perceived more positively by others). Another is that height is positively associated with ability (taller individuals tend to score higher on tests of cognitive ability than shorter ones). So, maybe it’s ability that is rewarded on the labor market, rather than height per se. 
“Since academic achievement is an important determinant of eventual earnings, we were curious whether taller children might similarly perform better on state standardized tests during school. A great dataset from the New York City Department of Education that has annual measures of height and test scores for students enrolled in NYC public schools facilitated the analysis. A huge plus of these data is that they allow us to compare students directly to their peers within the same school.”
The dataset included longitudinal data from nearly 500,000 students enrolled in New York City public schools between 2010 and 2017. It contained detailed records of student height measurements, standardized test scores in math and English Language Arts, demographic characteristics, and other information such as obesity status and school attendance. Height was standardized relative to same-sex, same-grade peers within each school to capture a student’s height standing among classmates. The researchers then used regression models to examine how differences in height related to differences in test performance.
The findings showed a consistent, though small, association between height and academic achievement. Among boys, each one standard deviation increase in height was associated with a 0.03 standard deviation increase in math scores and a 0.039 standard deviation increase in English scores. Among girls, the corresponding increases were 0.034 and 0.04 standard deviations. Although these numbers may seem small, they add up over time. For instance, the tallest 2.5% of boys and girls in their grade performed around 0.18 to 0.19 standard deviations better in English compared to the shortest 2.5%, a difference that can be meaningful in large-scale educational assessments.
“Our primary finding is that boys and girls who are taller than their grade mates score higher in math and English Language Arts in every grade between 3-8 (the years in which tests are administered),” Coffey told PsyPost. “The size of the effect is small on average, but large enough to yield substantial disparities in achievement between the tallest and shortest kids.” 
“For example, after we control for some basic demographic characteristics, the tallest 2.5% of boys and girls score about 20% of one standard deviation higher in English Language arts than the shortest 2.5% of boys and girls in the same grade and school. An educational intervention is typically viewed as having a meaningful impact if it improves test scores by 10% of one standard deviation, so we consider this to be a pretty large effect.”
Interestingly, the study found that height relative to classmates, not just absolute height, also appeared to matter. Students who ranked higher in height compared to their peers tended to do slightly better in English, even after accounting for their actual height. This suggests that social perceptions tied to being taller than one’s peers might play a small role in academic performance, at least in language-related subjects.
“Something else our data allow us explore whether it is simply being tall that explains the effect, or being taller than peers specifically,” Coffey explained. “We can tease this out because the distribution of height varies between schools, so a student may be relatively tall or short for his grade depending on the heights of his peers. Essentially, our estimates show that if you compare two students of the same height in the same grade (but at different schools) the student who attends a school where he is relatively tall compared to peers will score slightly higher in English Language Arts than the same-height student who attends a school where he is relatively short. This suggests that social benefits of height are at least part of the story.”
An important part of the study was testing whether health could explain the relationship between height and achievement. Taller students might be healthier, and healthier students might perform better in school. To examine this possibility, the researchers controlled for obesity status and found that the relationship between height and achievement actually grew stronger after accounting for obesity. They also tested whether taller students were less likely to miss school, finding very little evidence that absenteeism played a meaningful role. This suggests that the observed height-achievement link is unlikely to be explained by better health among taller students alone.
To address the possibility that family background or early childhood conditions might explain both greater height and better academic performance, the researchers estimated models that controlled for each student’s fixed characteristics over time. Once they accounted for these unchanging traits, the relationship between height and test scores weakened considerably, but still remained statistically significant.
“I think what surprised us most was how robust the height achievement relationship is,” Coffey told PsyPost. “We find it in both math and English Language Arts achievement in every grade between 3-8 and for every racial/ethnic group we look at. Given social norms around height, we thought the ‘height premium’ might be larger for boys, but we found very similar effects for boys and girls.”
While the findings are robust across multiple statistical models, the study does have limitations. The researchers could not directly measure early childhood conditions, such as prenatal health or family socioeconomic status during infancy, which likely contribute to both height and academic performance. Nor could they fully separate the effects of social treatment based on height from the effects of innate ability or other factors. Although the fixed-effects models help address some of these concerns, they cannot completely rule out all potential sources of bias.
“The main caveat is that we’re limited in our ability to uncover the underlying mechanisms that drive the academic height premium,” Coffey noted. “We looked at attendance and found that shorter kids really aren’t absent more frequently than taller ones, so we don’t think it’s about health. However, it’s difficult to untangle how much of the effect might arise through early childhood advantage (that leads kids to be tall and to do well in school) vs. any social benefits of height per se.”
“We’re interested in exploring, more generally, how physical characteristics shape the way kids experience school. One way we could extend our research on height is by looking into the NYC School Climate Survey, which asks students about how they perceive the school environment, teachers and peers. We’ve also discussed the possibility of conducting similar analyses looking at childhood obesity rather than height. Something else we think might be very interesting is exploring how the switch to online schooling during Covid may have affected these relationships. Does your height matter if your peers only view you through Zoom?”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2025.101488) Towering Intellects? Sizing up the relationship between height and academic success,” was published March 28, 2025.

(https://www.psypost.org/eye-tracking-reveals-distinct-attention-patterns-in-high-risk-gamers-compared-to-esports-players/) Eye-tracking reveals distinct attention patterns in high-risk gamers compared to esports players
Apr 27th 2025, 08:00

A recent study investigating how different types of dedicated gamers pay attention to gaming-related images found distinct patterns among those considered high-risk for gaming problems. High-risk gamers spent more time looking at gaming images, fixated on them longer initially, and shifted their gaze less often compared to competitive esports gamers and casual gamers, even though esports gamers reported similar high levels of playtime. The research, published in the journal (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108662) Computers in Human Behavior, suggests that eye-tracking technology might help identify gamers potentially vulnerable to problematic gaming behaviors.
The world of video gaming, including competitive electronic sports (esports), has exploded in popularity. This raises questions about the well-being of individuals who spend many hours gaming. While some studies suggest that esports gamers, who often train for 6-12 hours daily, might be at higher risk for gaming disorders due to their extensive playtime, others view their dedication through the lens of sports psychology, highlighting the intense practice and potential occupational stresses similar to traditional athletes. It remained unclear whether the challenges faced by esports gamers stem more from addictive-like processes or from the pressures of competition and training.
“This study was motivated by our observations of two seemingly similar yet psychologically distinct groups: esports gamers and high-risk gamers,” said study authors Shan-Mei Chang of National Tsing Hua University and Zheng-Hong Guan of National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University.
“While both groups spend comparable amounts of time gaming, esports gamers often view gaming as a structured career, whereas high-risk gamers typically play to escape real-life stressors. We were curious whether this difference in motivation would be reflected in their attentional responses and craving-related behaviors. Eye-tracking technology provided an ideal, objective method to explore this question.”
Previous research has established that individuals with substance addictions often show an attentional bias – meaning they automatically pay more attention to cues related to their addiction (like images of alcohol for someone with alcohol dependence). This bias has also been observed in behavioral addictions like gambling and internet gaming disorder. Scientists believe this heightened attention is linked to craving. 
Since both esports gamers and individuals potentially developing problematic gaming habits (high-risk gamers) dedicate significant time to gaming, the researchers wanted to explore if their patterns of attention towards gaming cues differed. They hypothesized that high-risk gamers might show attentional bias driven by craving, possibly linked to using games as an escape, while esports gamers, viewing gaming as a career or structured practice, might not exhibit the same bias despite their long hours. Using eye-tracking technology provides an objective way to measure these subtle attention patterns, which might not be captured accurately by self-report questionnaires alone.
To investigate these differences, the researchers recruited 47 male participants between the ages of 15 and 19, all experienced in playing Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) games like League of Legends or Arena of Valor. These participants were carefully categorized into three distinct groups. 
Seventeen were designated as esports gamers, identified from a high school esports program where they had received over a year of formal training and competed in tournaments. Fourteen were classified as casual gamers, who played for fun and did not show signs of problematic gaming based on a screening questionnaire. The remaining sixteen were categorized as high-risk gamers, selected because their scores on the Internet Gaming Disorder Test met the threshold indicating potential problematic gaming patterns.
Each participant underwent an eye-tracking experiment. They sat comfortably with their head stabilized by a chin rest, looking at a computer monitor. An advanced eye-tracking device (EyeLink 1000) precisely recorded their eye movements. Participants were shown pairs of images side-by-side for two seconds at a time. In the key trials (56 stimulus conditions), one image was related to MOBA games (stimulus image), and the other was a neutral image matched for visual properties like brightness and size. 
To prevent participants from guessing the study’s purpose, there were also 56 control trials where two neutral images were paired together. Researchers measured three main aspects of their eye movements: total viewing time (the total duration participants spent looking at each specific image area), first fixation duration (how long their very first gaze lingered on an image area after looking at it), and saccade count (the number of rapid eye movements, or jumps, between the two image areas on the screen). 
In addition to the eye-tracking task, all participants completed several questionnaires assessing their weekly and weekend gaming time, impulsivity levels, symptoms of problematic internet use, depression symptoms, and their ability to control their attention (specifically focusing and shifting attention).
The analysis of the eye-tracking data revealed significant differences between the groups. When looking at the pairs containing a game-related image and a neutral image, the high-risk gamer group spent more total viewing time looking at the game-related images compared to the neutral images. Neither the esports gamer group nor the casual gamer group showed this difference; their viewing time was similar for both types of images. Furthermore, high-risk gamers spent more total viewing time on the game-related images than both esports gamers and casual gamers did.
Regarding first fixation duration, the high-risk gamer group generally had longer first fixations on the images (combining both game-related and neutral) compared to both the esports gamers and casual gamers. This suggests their initial gaze tended to linger longer before moving on. In terms of eye movements between images, the high-risk gamer group exhibited fewer saccade counts compared to the other two groups. This pattern indicates they shifted their attention back and forth between the paired images less frequently, potentially suggesting difficulty disengaging from an image once they looked at it or a slower pace of visual exploration.
“We expected that esports gamers, given their extensive gaming involvement, might also show attentional biases,” Chang and Guan told PsyPost. “However, their eye-movement patterns were more similar to those of casual gamers, suggesting their high gaming time is not driven by compulsive cravings.”
The self-report questionnaires added another layer to the findings. While esports gamers and high-risk gamers reported spending similar amounts of time gaming per week and on weekends (both significantly more than casual gamers), their psychological profiles differed. High-risk gamers reported significantly higher levels of impulsivity and more symptoms of problematic internet use compared to both esports gamers and casual gamers. 
“A major takeaway is that gaming duration alone is not a reliable indicator of addiction risk,” the researchers explained. “Although esports gamers and high-risk gamers report similar gaming hours, only high-risk gamers showed significant attentional bias and impulsivity traits. This suggests that eye-tracking measures may reveal early risk factors missed by self-report tools, such as total viewing time. Our findings caution against diagnosing gaming disorder based solely on time spent gaming.”
The researchers noted some limitations to their study. The high-risk group was identified using a questionnaire score, not a formal clinical diagnosis by a psychiatrist. The study focused exclusively on MOBA games, so the findings might not apply to players of other game genres. The sample size, while statistically adequate according to their calculations, was relatively small and only included males. Future research could address these points by using clinically diagnosed participants, including gamers who play different types of games, and recruiting larger and more diverse samples.
“We aim to develop a diagnostic framework that integrates eye-tracking with psychometric assessments for early identification of high-risk gaming behaviors,” Chang and Guan added. “Such tools could also support interventions such as cognitive-behavioral therapy or mindfulness-based training. Identical behaviors (e.g., long gaming sessions) may stem from different psychological drivers. By shifting focus from ‘ow much they play’ to ‘why they play,’ we can more effectively understand and support at-risk youth in digital environments.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108662) Craving and attentional bias in gaming: Comparing esports, casual, and high-risk gamers using eye-tracking,” was authored by Shan-Mei Chang, Dai-Yi Wang, and Zheng-Hong Guan.

(https://www.psypost.org/gen-z-and-conservatives-show-higher-misinformation-susceptibility-large-scale-study-finds/) Gen Z and conservatives show higher misinformation susceptibility, large-scale study finds
Apr 27th 2025, 06:00

A large-scale international study sheds light on who is more likely to struggle with identifying false information online. The research found that individuals belonging to Generation Z, those who do not identify as male, people with lower levels of formal education, and individuals identifying as politically conservative generally showed greater susceptibility to misinformation. Additionally, the study revealed complexities in self-awareness, noting that while confidence often tracked actual ability, the accuracy of this self-perception differed among various groups. The findings have been published in the journal (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886925001394) Personality and Individual Differences.
Misinformation has been connected to offline violence, public health crises like vaccine hesitancy, and political manipulation. International bodies have identified combating misinformation as a global priority. However, understanding how to effectively tackle this issue requires a clearer picture of the factors—cognitive, social, and demographic—that make individuals more prone to believing false information. 
Previous research in this area often faced limitations. Studies frequently used inconsistent or unvalidated methods to measure susceptibility, making comparisons difficult. Research predominantly focused on a few specific countries, particularly Western nations like the United States, leaving uncertainty about whether findings applied more broadly across different cultures and populations.
“We were interested in this topic because misinformation is a growing global threat that impacts everything from public health to democratic stability. Yet much of what we know is based on narrow samples concentrated in just a few countries. We wanted to better understand who is most vulnerable to misinformation—across diverse populations—using a validated measure of misinformation susceptibility,” explained study author Jin (Hyunjin) Koo, a postdoctoral research associate at the University of British Columbia.
To overcome previous shortcomings, the current study employed a two-part strategy. First, the researchers used a standardized and validated tool called the Misinformation Susceptibility Test. This test was developed over several years and specifically designed to measure a person’s ability to distinguish real news headlines from fake ones. It presents participants with a mix of 10 genuine headlines, sourced from factually accurate and politically neutral media outlets, and 10 fake headlines generated using artificial intelligence and selected through a rigorous vetting process. This standardized approach allows for more reliable measurement and comparison across different groups and studies.
Second, the researchers created a publicly accessible website where individuals anywhere in the world could take the Misinformation Susceptibility Test. The website was promoted through press releases, social media, university communications, and word-of-mouth. This recruitment method proved highly effective, attracting a massive and diverse pool of participants. 
Upon visiting the site, individuals received information about the test and could choose to participate. They were given the option to receive personalized feedback on their performance without sharing their data, or they could explicitly agree (opt-in) to allow their anonymized responses to be used for scientific research. Participants could choose between a 20-item or a 16-item version of the test; this study focused on those who completed the 20-item version.
>From June 2023 to July 2024, over 114,000 submissions were received from people who agreed to share their data. For this specific analysis, the researchers included data from 66,242 participants residing in 24 different countries, selecting only countries with at least 250 submissions to ensure stable statistical comparisons. 
The sample was diverse, with the largest numbers coming from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. Participants provided demographic information including their gender identity (Male, Female, Non-binary/Third), birth year (used to determine generation: Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, Baby Boomers), highest level of education attained (from High School or less up to Graduate/professional degree), and political orientation (on a 7-point scale from Extremely liberal to Extremely conservative). 
The participants also answered a single question about how good they believed their own ability was to distinguish real from fake news, using a 5-point scale from very poor to very good. The researchers then used statistical techniques designed to analyze large datasets with participants nested within different countries to examine the associations between these demographic factors, self-perceived ability, and actual performance on the Misinformation Susceptibility Test.
After accounting for other factors, individuals who identified as female or non-binary/third tended to score lower on the test compared to those identifying as male, indicating greater susceptibility to misinformation. 
A clear generational pattern also emerged: Generation Z participants (born 1997–2012) scored the lowest on average. Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers all performed significantly better than Generation Z. 
“Despite being digital natives, members of Generation Z were among the most vulnerable to misinformation,” Koo told PsyPost. “This challenges the common assumption that younger generations are more media savvy simply because they’ve grown up online.”
Education level showed a strong association with test performance; individuals with higher levels of formal education consistently scored higher than those with a high school education or less. 
Political orientation was also linked to test scores. Compared to participants identifying as extremely liberal, scores generally decreased as individuals identified further towards the conservative end of the spectrum. Those identifying as conservative or extremely conservative showed the lowest average scores. These patterns generally held true even when looking at U.S. participants separately or excluding them entirely.
The study also examined the relationship between how well people thought they could spot misinformation and how well they actually performed. Generally, participants who rated their ability higher did tend to score better on the test. Those who rated their ability as “very good” scored highest, while those rating it “very poor” scored lowest. 
However, the researchers explored whether this connection between perceived ability and actual performance was consistent across different groups. They found interesting variations. Women’s self-assessments were more closely aligned with their actual test scores compared to men’s. Across generations, Generation Z participants, despite having the lowest average scores, showed the most accurate self-perception – the link between their confidence and their actual ability was stronger than for older generations. 
Political orientation also played a role; the connection between self-perceived ability and actual performance weakened significantly for those identifying as extremely conservative, suggesting their confidence was less indicative of their true skill level compared to other political groups. Interestingly, participants with the highest levels of education (Bachelor’s degree or graduate degree) were slightly less accurate in estimating their abilities compared to those with high school or lower education.
Finally, the researchers looked at broad country-level differences. Performance varied across the 24 countries included. Participants from nations like Belgium, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden performed similarly to those in the United States (which served as the reference point). Participants from the remaining countries included in the analysis generally scored lower than the U.S. group, with notable differences observed for some nations.
“Misinformation susceptibility is shaped by a range of social, psychological, and demographic factors,” Koo said. “Since everyone is vulnerable in different ways, strengthening critical thinking and digital literacy is essential for us all.”
“No matter who you are, no matter what you think you know, none of us is immune to misinformation,” added Friedrich Götz, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia and the study’s senior author. “People should realize that all of us are exposed to misinformation on a regular basis, and all of us are likely to fall for it at some point.”
The researchers acknowledge some limitations. Although the sample was geographically diverse, the test was only available in English. This means the sample likely skewed towards participants from English-speaking countries or those with high English proficiency. The findings might not fully generalize to populations or cultures where English is not the primary language. Future research could involve translating and validating the Misinformation Susceptibility Test in other languages to better understand cultural nuances in misinformation vulnerability. 
While some of the observed differences between groups might seem numerically small (e.g., the average score difference between generations), the researchers suggest that even small differences in susceptibility can have meaningful real-world consequences, given the sheer volume of information encountered online and the potential impact of misinformation on critical decisions, from personal health choices to voting.
“My long-term goal is to build a global understanding of misinformation susceptibility that can inform efforts to help individuals and organizations strengthen their resistance to fake news,” Koo explained.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113177) Profiling misinformation susceptibility,” was authored by Yara Kyrychenko, Hyunjin J. Koo, Rakoen Maertens, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander van der Linden, and Friedrich M. Götz.

(https://www.psypost.org/neuroscientists-show-childrens-brains-function-differently-during-book-reading-and-screen-time/) Neuroscientists show children’s brains function differently during book reading and screen time
Apr 26th 2025, 16:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13615) Developmental Science has found that preschool children’s brain activity differs when they are read to from a book compared to when they view and listen to stories on a screen. Using a neuroimaging technique called functional near-infrared spectroscopy, the researchers observed greater activation in the right hemisphere of the brain during live book reading, particularly in regions involved in social understanding, while screen time produced more balanced activity across both hemispheres.
Reading to young children plays an important role in supporting language development and brain growth. Book reading offers opportunities for children to hear rich language, learn the structure of stories, build vocabulary, and engage in social interaction with caregivers. In contrast, growing concerns have emerged about the effects of screen time, as many studies link high screen exposure to language delays and weaker connections in brain areas important for literacy. 
While past research has demonstrated broad differences between book reading and screen media in children’s outcomes, fewer studies have directly compared what happens in the brain during these two activities. The researchers aimed to fill this gap by measuring brain activity during live reading and screen-based storytelling in preschoolers.
The study involved 28 typically developing children between the ages of 3 and 6 years old. All participants came from predominantly English-speaking households, although some were multilingual. The children listened to two different stories: one presented during a live book reading session, and the other delivered as an audio recording paired with images on a screen. In the book reading condition, a live experimenter sat beside the child, reading aloud from a printed book. 
In the screen time condition, the child viewed the story on a computer while hearing a recorded voice. Both stories were carefully matched for length, vocabulary, and content. Brain activity was recorded throughout using functional near-infrared spectroscopy, which measures changes in blood oxygenation linked to neural activity.
The researchers focused on specific brain regions involved in language, narrative understanding, and social cognition, including the inferior and middle frontal gyri, the superior and middle temporal gyri, and the temporal parietal junction. The team analyzed differences in activation across left and right hemispheres during each condition.
Results showed that live book reading produced greater activation in the right temporal parietal junction, a brain area associated with social processes like joint attention and understanding others’ thoughts. Activation in this area was significant during the book reading condition but not during the screen time condition. Across the broader regions of interest, brain responses during book reading were stronger in the right hemisphere than in the left, suggesting a right-lateralized pattern. In contrast, brain responses during screen time were relatively even across both hemispheres, showing no strong lateralization.
The findings suggest that live book reading may engage preschool children in more socially oriented cognitive processes compared to solitary screen time. Book reading may encourage children to focus on the reader’s emotions, intentions, and shared attention toward the book, all of which involve right-hemisphere brain networks. In contrast, screen-based storytelling might involve more isolated language processing, relying less on social engagement.
While these patterns are consistent with previous research showing that book reading benefits language and social development, the study also highlights important nuances. For example, the right-lateralized response during live reading might reflect children’s sensitivity to the human voice, facial expressions, and social interaction, even if the reading interaction itself was somewhat scripted and controlled in this study.
As with any study, there are limitations. The relatively small sample size, particularly when accounting for missing data in some brain channels, limits the strength of the conclusions. Many of the children also came from highly educated and high-income households, so the findings may not generalize to more diverse populations. 
The researchers also noted that the structured nature of the book reading task—designed to minimize variation across participants—reduced the natural, conversational aspects of typical reading interactions between parents and children. Future studies could examine brain activity during more naturalistic reading sessions that include back-and-forth conversation and emotional expression.
In addition, although the study showed different patterns of brain activation between book reading and screen time, it did not directly measure children’s language learning outcomes. Future research could explore whether these neural differences are linked to improvements in vocabulary, comprehension, or later academic skills.
Despite these limitations, the study adds important new evidence to the understanding of how different early experiences shape brain function. It reinforces previous findings that social interaction during language exposure matters for young children’s brain development. Live, shared activities like book reading seem to recruit brain systems involved in understanding others and processing complex social cues, which could give children a stronger foundation for later communication and learning.
The results also suggest that screen-based media might not activate the same social brain systems, especially when the child is passively viewing without a live social partner. While not all screen time is equal, and some interactive or educational media may still be beneficial, the findings support recommendations that live social interaction remains important during early childhood.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13615) Do Children’s Brains Function Differently During Book Reading and Screen Time? A fNIRS Study,” was authored by Meredith Pecukonis, Meryem Yücel, Henry Lee, Cory Knox, David A. Boas, and Helen Tager-Flusberg.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-study-suggests-entertainment-is-key-to-populist-political-success/) New study suggests entertainment is key to populist political success
Apr 26th 2025, 14:00

A new study published in the (https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12791) British Journal of Psychology suggests that people are more likely to support populist politicians when they find them entertaining. Across four studies involving United States participants, researchers found that the extent to which people viewed a leader as exciting, engaging, or attention-grabbing predicted their support—more strongly for populist leaders like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders than for non-populist figures like Joe Biden or Mitt Romney. The findings offer new insights into how emotional experiences and personal style shape political preferences.
The researchers aimed to better understand why populist leaders have gained substantial support across many countries. Previous research had largely focused on negative emotions, such as fear or anger, as drivers of populist support. However, the researchers proposed that positive feelings—particularly the enjoyment of an entertaining political style—might also play an important role. They suggested that populist leaders, by portraying society as a struggle between the “corrupt elites” and the “noble people,” create emotionally charged narratives that are more gripping and emotionally intense than conventional political messages.
“Common explanations of populist support mostly focus on factors that ‘push’ people away from mainstream politics, such as feelings of anger, anxiety, and insecurity,” said study author Jan-Willem van Prooijen, an associate professor at VU Amsterdam, senior researcher at the NSCR, and Endowed Professor of Radicalization, Extremism, and Conspiracy Thinking at Maastricht University.
“But I believe that is only part of the story. Often a vote for a populist candidate is more than just a protest vote: Many voters are genuinely excited about populist leaders. What makes populist leaders so appealing? This research sought to find out to what extent being considered entertaining matters in populist support.”
To investigate this idea, the researchers conducted four preregistered studies with 1,802 participants based in the United States. Study 1 compared Trump and Biden voters, asking participants to rate how entertaining they found the leader they supported and how much they continued to support that leader. Study 2a and Study 2b shifted the focus to comparisons within political parties. In Study 2a, Republican voters rated both Donald Trump and Mitt Romney, while in Study 2b, Democratic voters rated Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. Finally, Study 3 used an experimental design where participants were randomly assigned to read either a populist or a non-populist speech written by an unknown fictional politician. This approach allowed the researchers to isolate the effect of a populist style without the influence of prior knowledge about real-world political figures.
Across all four studies, entertainment appraisals consistently predicted greater political support, and this effect was stronger for populist figures. In Study 1, participants who found Trump more entertaining were more likely to support him, compared to Biden voters, whose support was less dependent on entertainment appraisals. Study 2a found the same pattern among Republicans: Trump’s support was more closely tied to entertainment than Romney’s. In Study 2b, the pattern held for Sanders compared to Biden, although the difference was smaller.
Study 3 provided the most direct evidence. Participants who read the populist speech found it more entertaining and reported stronger support for the fictional politician. Those in the non-populist condition still showed a link between entertainment and support, but the relationship was weaker. Importantly, participants exposed to the populist speech also reported more intense emotions, suggesting that emotional intensity—not just positive or negative feelings—plays a role in the appeal of populist rhetoric.
“In the first few studies, we compared existing and well-known politicians, both between parties (Trump vs. Biden) but also within parties (e.g., Trump vs. Romney). These are all well-known figures that everyone has an opinion about,” van Prooijen told PsyPost.
“What surprised me, however, is that we found these effects even when participants were exposed to an AI-generated populist or non-populist speech. So even for an unknown political figure, people are more likely to base their support on how entertaining they found a single speech when the speech was populist (blaming societal problems on corrupt elites that try to oppress the people) than non-populist (emphasizing a need to work together to solve societal problems).”
Another key finding was that general populist attitudes—such as distrust of elites and strong identification with “ordinary people”—predicted support for populist leaders through the pathway of entertainment. In other words, people who already held populist views tended to find populist leaders more entertaining, which in turn made them more likely to support them. This mediation effect did not appear for non-populist leaders.
“All politicians benefit to some extent from being considered entertaining by the public, but populist politicians benefit more from this than non-populist politicians,” van Prooijen explained. “This suggests that populism is a form of ‘popcorn politics’: Supporters of populist candidates are more strongly inclined to base their choice on superficial traits that might be considered entertaining, and which might distract from the actual contents of the proposed policies.”
The research was preregistered, meaning the researchers publicly documented their study designs, hypotheses, and analysis plans before collecting data. Preregistration is important because it helps prevent selective reporting and increases the credibility of the findings by making it clear that the analyses were planned in advance rather than chosen after seeing the results.
But, as with all research, there are still some limitations. Most participants were based in the United States, and the politicians tested were primarily American. Populist movements vary across countries, sometimes blending left-wing and right-wing ideas in ways that do not fit neatly into a U.S. political framework. Future research could explore whether the same entertainment-driven effects are present in other political systems, such as in Europe, Latin America, or Asia.
“So far, we have only examined these effects in the United States, but populist movements differ enormously in various regions of the world,” van Prooijen noted. “Moreover, we have not extensively distinguished between left- versus right-wing populist leaders. One of our studies tentatively suggested that these effects may be more pronounced for right-wing populism, but more research is needed to examine that possibility.”
“This line of research fits in a broader research goal to better understand the emotional underpinnings of populism. Researchers have often stressed that emotions are important, but then only focus on negative emotions such as anger and fear. Positive emotions also matter; for instance, populist rhetoric may give citizens hope for a better future. And, our findings suggest that the intensity of emotional experiences may actually be more closely associated with populism than the positive or negative valence of emotions per se. All of these issues are important to examine further in future research.”
The researchers emphasized that their work highlights the importance of considering positive and emotionally intense experiences when studying political preferences. Populist leaders often present simple solutions to complex problems, attack establishment figures, and portray themselves as champions of the people—all ingredients that make their messages more compelling and emotionally resonant.
“One of the things that have struck me for years is that populist leaders around the world often tend to be somewhat eccentric, attention-grabbing individuals who stir up the established order by seeking conflict,” van Prooijen explained. “This research suggest that these features, that some citizens might find entertaining, have an electoral function.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12791) Popcorn politics: Entertainment appraisals predict support for populist leaders,” was authored by Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Julia Kipperman, Yuxuan Li, Yifan Mo, and Paul Nachtwey.

(https://www.psypost.org/obese-women-tend-to-have-more-severe-sexual-disorder-symptoms/) Obese women tend to have more severe sexual disorder symptoms
Apr 26th 2025, 12:00

A study of overweight and obese women of reproductive age in Poland found that they tend to experience more severe symptoms of sexual dysfunctions and sexual preference disorders compared to their normal-weight peers. Women with more severe sexuality-related disorders also tended to report a lower quality of life. The research was published in (https://doi.org/10.12740/PP/OnlineFirst/162429) Psychiatria Polska.
Sexuality-related disorders include a range of conditions that affect sexual function, desire, and preference, causing distress or difficulties in intimate relationships. Sexual dysfunctions refer to problems occurring during any phase of the sexual response cycle—desire, arousal, orgasm, or resolution. In women, these include disorders such as female sexual interest/arousal disorder, genito-pelvic pain/penetration disorder, and female orgasmic disorder.
In contrast, sexual preference disorders, often referred to in clinical settings as paraphilic disorders, involve atypical sexual interests that may cause harm or distress. Examples include fetishistic disorder, voyeuristic disorder, and sexual masochism disorder, although these conditions are rarer among women. Such conditions are only classified as disorders when they cause significant distress or impair functioning. Cultural, psychological, and relational factors play an important role in how these disorders manifest in women.
Study author Anna Fuksiewicz and her colleagues aimed to explore the frequency and severity of sexuality-related disorders in overweight and obese women, and to compare these findings to those in normal-weight women. They note that previous studies have found that 67% of individuals with excessive body weight report a reduced quality of sex life—a statistic that includes women.
The study included 95 women between 18 and 40 years of age. Among them, 51 had normal weight, 32 were classified as obese, and 12 were overweight. The average age of overweight and obese women was 25–26 years, while the average age of the normal-weight participants was 23 years.
Participants completed several assessments, including measures of eating attitudes (the Eating Attitude Test), beliefs about food (the Eating Beliefs Questionnaire), anxiety and depression symptoms (the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), alcohol use (the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), sexuality-related disorder symptoms (the Sexological Questionnaire), quality of life (the SF-36 Quality of Life Questionnaire), and difficulties in emotion regulation (the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale).
The results showed that overweight and obese women tended to have worse scores across most measures. They exhibited less healthy eating habits, more severe symptoms of depression and anxiety, more severe symptoms of sexuality-related disorders, worse overall emotion regulation (though not on every subscale), and more maladaptive beliefs about food. Their quality of life was also worse compared to their normal-weight peers.
Women with more severe sexuality-related disorder symptoms were more likely to report a lower quality of life and higher levels of depression and anxiety. These factors were the strongest predictors of quality of life.
“Overweight or obese women show a higher occurrence of symptoms of sexuality-related disorders (especially sexual dysfunctions and sexual preference disorders) than women with a normal body weight. These symptoms are associated with difficulties in other areas of functioning and constitute a significant predictor of the quality of life,” the study authors concluded.
The study sheds light on the links between body mass status and sexual functioning. However, it should be noted that the study was conducted on a relatively small group of reproductive age women. Results on larger groups might not be identical. Additionally, the design of the study does not allow any causal inferences to be derived from the results.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.12740/PP/OnlineFirst/162429) Symptoms of sexuality-related disorders in the group of overweight and obese women,” was authored by Anna Fuksiewicz, Barbara Kostecka, Emilia Kot, Aleksandra Jodko-Modlińska, and Katarzyna Kucharska.

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/20250427/fbc746c4/attachment.htm>