<table style="border:1px solid #adadad; background-color: #F3F1EC; color: #666666; padding:8px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; line-height:16px; margin-bottom:6px;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:20px;font-weight:bold;">PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/struggles-with-masculinity-drive-men-into-incel-communities/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Struggles with masculinity drive men into incel communities</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01478-x"><em>Sex Roles</em></a> highlights the pathways that lead men into so-called “incel” communities and identifies key points for intervention to prevent harmful engagement.</p>
<p>Incels, or “involuntary celibates,” are men who feel denied relationships and sex due to an unjust social system, sometimes adopting misogynistic beliefs and even committing acts of violence. Alyssa Maryn and colleagues conducted this research to understand the emotional and social factors that lead men into the incel community and how these pathways can be disrupted.</p>
<p>Past literature has linked incel identity to <a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-delves-into-the-mating-psychology-of-involuntarily-celibate-men/">failures in conforming to masculine norms</a>, which include sexual success and physical attractiveness. Men who fail to meet these expectations may seek help online, and often find themselves drawn to communities that validate their frustrations, like the incel community.</p>
<p>Previous studies have shown that the <a href="https://www.psypost.org/incels-exhibit-reduced-psychological-well-being-and-a-greater-tendency-for-interpersonal-victimhood-study-finds/">mental health struggles</a> of many incels are exacerbated by rigid gender norms, which discourage help-seeking and promote isolation. By focusing on former incels, Maryn and colleagues sought to understand how men found these communities and how they eventually left.</p>
<p>The research team interviewed 21 former incels, aged 18 to 38, who were recruited through Reddit. The researchers specifically targeted individuals who first identified as incels between ages 15 and 24. All participants were men attracted to women, and most identified as heterosexual, though some described themselves as bisexual or questioning their sexual orientation.</p>
<p>Participants were interviewed using a semi-structured format, which covered topics like their experiences with incel ideology and the reasons they joined and left the community. Interviews were conducted online and anonymized to protect participants’ identities. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, which is a flexible approach that organizes data into themes based on participants’ narratives.</p>
<p>The results of the study revealed two major themes. The first theme, “Seeking help online for struggles meeting masculinity norms,” highlighted participants’ struggles with societal pressures to conform to traditional masculine ideals. Many reported feelings of inadequacy related to their inability to form sexual or romantic relationships, as well as general social isolation. These unmet needs led participants to seek help online, where they found incel forums that seemed to offer validation and support for their struggles. They described feeling like “losers” because they could not meet societal expectations of sexual conquest, which compounded their sense of worthlessness and isolation.</p>
<p>The second theme, “Down the rabbit hole: Finding help online from the incel community,” illustrated how once these men found incel communities, they were drawn in by the validation and camaraderie offered by other members. The forums provided a space where participants felt they could discuss taboo topics, like their sexual frustrations, without fear of judgment. Many participants reported feeling a sense of belonging and even superiority, as the community allowed them to shift blame for their struggles onto women and society, rather than addressing their own personal or relational issues.</p>
<p>However, as participants matured and reflected on their time in these forums, many recognized the harmful effects of these communities on their mental health and social well-being, which eventually led them to disengage. This process of leaving the incel community was often driven by a desire to improve their lives by taking responsibility for their relationships and personal growth.</p>
<p>The findings from this study highlight the importance of addressing masculine norms and offering alternative sources of support to men at risk of becoming incels. Programs that challenge harmful gender norms and provide online, anonymous support could be key in preventing young men from turning to harmful communities.</p>
<p>One limitation is that the study focused solely on former incels, potentially excluding perspectives from those still actively engaged in these communities. Additionally, the gender of the interviewer may have influenced participants’ willingness to discuss certain topics openly.</p>
<p>The research “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01478-x">Identifying Pathways to the Incel Community and Where to Intervene: A Qualitative Study with Former Incels</a>”, was authored by Alyssa Maryn, Jordan Keough, Ceilidh McConnell, and Deinera Exner-Cortens.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/people-with-a-history-of-child-maltreatment-prefer-larger-social-distances-towards-friends-and-strangers/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">People with a history of child maltreatment prefer larger social distances towards friends and strangers</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new international study published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-024-02980-2"><em>Translational Psychiatry</em></a> has found that individuals who experienced childhood maltreatment tend to prefer greater physical distance from others in social interactions. The research, involving adults from dozens of countries, is the first to demonstrate that childhood maltreatment influences personal space preferences globally. The findings also show that insecure attachment styles and lower social support are linked to a larger comfortable interpersonal distance, further highlighting the impact of early trauma on social behavior.</p>
<p>Childhood maltreatment is a serious global issue that affects millions of children. It includes emotional, physical, and sexual abuse, as well as neglect, and its long-term effects on mental and physical health are well-documented. Those who experienced childhood maltreatment often struggle with social relationships, showing higher levels of isolation, difficulties in forming close bonds, and an increased risk of mental health issues such as anxiety and depression.</p>
<p>Previous research has shown that childhood maltreatment can change how people respond to social situations. Survivors of childhood abuse may be more sensitive to negative social cues, misinterpret neutral expressions as threatening, and feel discomfort with physical closeness.</p>
<p>However, studies on how childhood maltreatment influences preferences for personal space, or comfortable interpersonal distance, have been limited in scope and primarily focused on European populations. These studies also mostly examined how people interact with strangers, leaving open the question of how personal space preferences may change with close friends.</p>
<p>This study was designed to fill these gaps, exploring whether the effects of childhood maltreatment on interpersonal distance preferences extend beyond strangers to include friends. Additionally, the researchers aimed to examine these effects across a broad range of cultural contexts to understand whether they hold true globally.</p>
<p>“It is known that child maltreatment is linked to broad impairments in social well-being. However, our knowledge on the specific factors that underlie these impairments is limited,” said study author Monique C. Pfaltz of Mid Sweden University.</p>
<p>“Here, we were interested in alterations in non-verbal, socially relevant behavior (what distance to we preferably take towards other persons) as we think that these might contribute to problems in social interactions and social well-being.”</p>
<p>To explore the link between childhood maltreatment and interpersonal distance preferences, researchers recruited 2,986 participants from around the world. The participants were adults from 43 different countries, representing a diverse range of cultural and socio-economic backgrounds. They were recruited through social media, online platforms, and personal contacts. The study was conducted online, with participants completing tasks on their computers.</p>
<p>First, participants were asked to complete a task designed to measure comfortable interpersonal distance. In this task, participants viewed a virtual room on their screen where a figure representing another person (either a friend or a stranger) approached them. The participants had to press a button when they felt the figure was close enough and any more approach would make them uncomfortable. This method allowed the researchers to measure the distance at which participants wanted the approaching person to stop, providing a clear indication of their preferred personal space.</p>
<p>In addition to the distance task, participants completed a series of questionnaires. These surveys gathered information about their childhood experiences of maltreatment using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. The questionnaires also measured social anxiety, depression, attachment styles (how secure or insecure participants felt in relationships), and levels of social support.</p>
<p>The results showed that participants who reported higher levels of childhood maltreatment preferred larger distances from both strangers and friends. This indicates that childhood trauma impacts not only interactions with unfamiliar people but also affects relationships with close ones. The relationship between childhood maltreatment and preferred interpersonal distance was found across all countries studied, suggesting that the impact of early trauma on social behavior is robust and not limited by cultural differences.</p>
<p>“People with a history of child maltreatment prefer larger social distances towards friends and strangers,” Pfaltz told PsyPost. “This might be a consequence of unpleasant or lacking social relationships with caregivers during childhood. That is, based on affected persons early, negative experiences, other persons might be interpreted as potentially dangerous. Possibly, this affects non-verbal interpersonal behavior in social situations, contributing to impaired social well-being.”</p>
<p>People who reported insecure attachment styles (those who feel anxious or avoidant in relationships) were also more likely to prefer larger interpersonal distances. Similarly, those who reported receiving less social support from significant others, such as family members or close friends, tended to prefer more physical space from others. This finding aligns with previous research suggesting that individuals with insecure attachment and limited social support often struggle with intimacy and closeness in relationships.</p>
<p>Interestingly, people with higher levels of social anxiety showed a preference for smaller interpersonal distances, contrary to the researchers’ expectations. This suggests that in some cases, individuals with social anxiety may feel more secure by keeping others closer in social settings, possibly because being closer allows them to better monitor and control interactions.</p>
<p>The researchers also looked at how different types of childhood maltreatment—such as emotional abuse, physical abuse, and neglect—affected interpersonal distance. They found that physical abuse and neglect had the strongest impact on personal space preferences, while emotional abuse showed a weaker, non-significant association.</p>
<p>But as with all research, there are some limitations to consider. The research was conducted online, and the personal space preferences were measured using a virtual task. While this method has been validated in previous studies, it does not perfectly replicate real-world social interactions, where factors like body language and emotional expressions also play a role.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-024-02980-2">Childhood maltreatment is linked to larger preferred interpersonal distances towards friends and strangers across the globe</a>,” was authored by Shilat Haim-Nachum, Marie R. Sopp, Antonia M. Lüönd, Nimrah Afzal, Fredrik Åhs, Antje-Kathrin Allgaier, Adrián Arévalo, Christian Asongwe, Rahel Bachem, Stefanie R. Balle, Habte Belete, Tilahun Belete Mossie, Azi Berzengi, Necip Capraz, Deniz Ceylan, Daniel Dukes, Aziz Essadek, Natalia E. Fares-Otero, Sarah L. Halligan, Alla Hemi, Naved Iqbal, Laura Jobson, Einat Levy-Gigi, Chantal Martin-Soelch, Tanja Michael, Misari Oe, Miranda Olff, Helena Örnkloo, Krithika Prakash, Sarah M. Quaatz, Vijaya Raghavan, Muniarajan Ramakrishnan, Dorota Reis, Vedat Şar, Ulrich Schnyder, Soraya Seedat, Ibtihal Najm Shihab, Susilkumar Vandhana, Dany Laure Wadji, Rachel Wamser, Reut Zabag, Georgina Spies, and Monique C. Pfaltz.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/replication-study-undermines-claim-of-women-leadership-advantage-during-covid-19-crisis/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Replication study undermines claim of “women leadership advantage” during COVID-19 crisis</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study in The Leadership Quarterly revisits the claim that women governors during COVID-19 achieved better outcomes, including fewer deaths. The study shows that earlier findings are highly sensitive to specific assumptions, and once adjusted, gender has no significant impact on COVID-19 deaths.</p>
<p>The motivation behind the new study stemmed from the substantial media and academic attention given to the idea that women political leaders were particularly effective during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Reports highlighted leaders such as Angela Merkel of Germany and Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand as examples of women who handled the crisis better than many of their male counterparts.</p>
<p>Building on this narrative, academic studies, including a 2020 influential paper by Sergent and Stajkovic, indicated that U.S. states led by women governors experienced fewer COVID-19 deaths. The researchers behind the new study sought to test the robustness of this “women leadership advantage during crisis” hypothesis.</p>
<p>“I am a strong advocate of replication research. No single research project, including ours, should ever be seen as the final answer,” said study author William “Billy” Obenauer, an associate professor of management at the University of Maine.</p>
<p>“Instead, we should work to build on previous research and understand the boundary conditions of previously observed relationships. Given the implications of associating gender with leadership effectiveness, it seemed like using replication to gain a stronger understanding of the relationships reported by Sergent and Stajkovic (2020) was an important task to take on.”</p>
<p>The study was divided into several stages, starting with a literal replication of the original 2020 study by Sergent and Stajkovic. This replication used similar data and methods to see if the original findings—an association between women governors and lower COVID-19 death rates—could be reproduced. The researchers focused on COVID-19 death counts through May 2020 and utilized the same control variables, such as governor attributes (age, political affiliation, and tenure), state population, and various pandemic response measures (stay-at-home orders, travel bans, mask mandates, and more).</p>
<p>The literal replication successfully reproduced the original results, showing that women governors were associated with fewer COVID-19 deaths when the same variables and statistical methods were applied. This initial success validated the dataset and served as a foundation for the subsequent studies, which aimed to explore the robustness of these findings under different conditions.</p>
<p>Next, the researchers conducted four constructive replications (Studies 2A-D) designed to challenge the assumptions and methodological choices of the original study. Constructive replications are studies that repeat previous research but with modifications to the methods or assumptions, aiming to test the robustness and generalizability of the original findings under different conditions.</p>
<p>In the first constructive replication, the researchers tested the effects of removing potentially problematic control variables from the model, such as various non-pharmaceutical interventions. These variables, like stay-at-home orders and travel bans, were problematic because they may have been influenced by the very leaders whose effectiveness was being studied. This could create a bias in the results. Once these variables were removed, the relationship between governor gender and COVID-19 deaths no longer reached statistical significance, suggesting that the original finding was not robust.</p>
<p>The second replication introduced a new control variable: the proximity of a state to New York City, the early epicenter of the pandemic in the U.S. States near New York, including New Jersey and Connecticut, experienced high COVID-19 case numbers early in the pandemic. These states were all led by male governors, potentially skewing the original results. When this geographic factor was included in the analysis, the relationship between governor gender and COVID-19 deaths disappeared, indicating that proximity to the pandemic’s epicenter, not leader gender, was a more significant predictor of death rates.</p>
<p>In the third replication, the researchers focused on a key statistical method used in the original study called analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). ANCOVA is a technique that helps control for the effects of other variables (called covariates) when examining the relationship between an independent variable (in this case, governor gender) and a dependent variable (COVID-19 deaths). However, ANCOVA operates under the assumption that the relationship between these covariates and the outcome is linear. But several of the variables in the original model did not meet this assumption. When the model was adjusted to account for these non-linear relationships, the association between governor gender and COVID-19 deaths again became non-significant.</p>
<p>In the final constructive replication, the researchers applied all of the previous modifications simultaneously: removing problematic control variables, accounting for proximity to New York City, and correcting for non-linear relationships. In this fully adjusted model, there was no evidence of a relationship between governor gender and COVID-19 deaths, strongly suggesting that the original findings were largely the result of model specification errors.</p>
<p>To go beyond the correlational findings of the earlier studies, the researchers implemented two causal testing methods: a geographic matching design and a regression discontinuity design. These methodologies are better suited to identifying causal relationships by comparing more similar groups and reducing the likelihood of confounding factors.</p>
<p>First, the researchers compared U.S. counties located on either side of state borders where the governors had different genders. The idea was that counties close to each other would share many demographic, economic, and cultural similarities, allowing the researchers to isolate the effect of governor gender on COVID-19 deaths. The results showed no significant difference in COVID-19 deaths between counties led by women governors and those led by men governors. This finding suggested that the earlier results linking governor gender to better crisis management did not hold up under more rigorous, localized analysis.</p>
<p>Next, the researchers extended their analysis to Brazilian municipalities. They used a regression discontinuity design, which compares municipalities that had very close elections between male and female candidates. This design is particularly powerful for causal inference because the close election results create a scenario similar to random assignment: the municipalities just above or below the vote threshold for electing a woman are likely very similar in other respects. Again, the analysis found no significant difference in COVID-19 deaths based on the gender of the elected mayor, reinforcing the conclusion that there is no causal relationship between leader gender and crisis outcomes.</p>
<p>In short, the results of the constructive replications and causal tests demonstrated that the initial findings were highly dependent on specific methodological choices. Once adjustments were made to the model—such as accounting for geographic proximity to pandemic hotspots and removing problematic control variables—the gender effect disappeared. While women leaders were initially celebrated for their pandemic response, this new research suggests that any perceived advantage may have been overstated.</p>
<p>“News organizations get clicks by promoting research with eye-catching findings,” Obenauer told PsyPost. “The public often sees these findings as ‘established knowledge,’ but they’re really just a piece of the puzzle. If you are interested in research that you learn about in the news, look into other academic research on the topic. Before your company implements something based on organizational research reported in the news, consider working with the business school at your local university to understand more about the topic.”</p>
<p>While this study makes a strong case for the importance of robust statistical methods in leadership research, it also has limitations of its own. One notable limitation is the relatively small sample of women governors in the U.S., as only 12 out of 55 states and territories were led by women during the study period. This imbalance could have contributed to the difficulty in detecting meaningful differences.</p>
<p>“I can’t stress this enough – no single research project should ever be seen as the final answer,” Obenauer said.</p>
<p>Replication studies are important because they test the reliability and validity of previous research findings, ensuring that results are not due to chance or specific conditions. By repeating studies with varied methods or in different contexts, replication helps confirm the generalizability and robustness of scientific conclusions.</p>
<p>“I am currently leading a global team of more than 30 researchers conducting a large-scale replication of a seminal piece of leadership research through <a href="http://arimweb.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the Advancement of Replications Initiative in Management</a>,” Obenauer said. “We are in the midst of data collection and should have a first draft of a paper ready to submit to a journal this spring. We will also be recruiting collaborators for our next project this spring. I have four or five other active replication projects. I hope that by continuing to publish high-quality replication research that builds upon prior research, rather than tearing it down, my work will contribute to a culture where replication research is embraced by top journals in the organizational sciences.”</p>
<p>“A colleague and I are looking for a large organization that would be interested in having managers and subordinates participate in a research study—we would provide customized insights in exchange for collaboration. I would love to talk with organizational leaders who would like to explore such a partnership.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1048984324000419" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Are women strategic leaders more effective during a crisis than men strategic leaders? A causal analysis of the relationship between strategic leader gender and outcomes during the COVID-19 crisis</a>,” was authored by William G. Obenauer, Jost Sieweke, Nicolas Bastardoz, Paulo R. Arvate, Brooke A. Gazdag, and Tanja Hentschel.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/when-facts-dont-matter-how-voters-justify-political-misinformation/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">When facts don’t matter: How voters justify political misinformation</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 18th 2024, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Many voters are willing to accept misinformation from political leaders – even when they know it’s factually inaccurate. According to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/730763">our research</a>, voters often recognize when their parties’ claims are not based on objective evidence. Yet they still respond positively, if they believe these inaccurate statements evoke a deeper, more important “truth.”</p>
<p>Our team conducted a series of online surveys from 2018 to 2023 with over 3,900 American voters. These surveys were designed to elicit responses about how they evaluated political statements from several politicians, even when they recognized those statements as factually inaccurate.</p>
<p>Consider former President Donald Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Even among supporters who recognized that his claims about fraud <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-fact-check-on-jan-6-anniversary-trump-sticks-to-election-falsehoods">were not grounded in objective evidence</a>, we found that they were more likely to see these allegations as important for “American priorities”: for example, they believe the political system is illegitimate and stacked against their interests.</p>
<p>The same logic applies to factually inaccurate statements <a href="https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/12/30/fact-check-can-vaccinated-people-spread-covid-19/9028463002/">about COVID-19 vaccinations</a> that President Joe Biden made, suggesting that vaccinated people <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/dec/22/joe-biden/biden-says-vaccinated-people-cant-spread-covid-19-/">could not spread the disease</a>. In our surveys, voters who supported the president saw the statement as important for American priorities, despite recognizing its factual inaccuracy.</p>
<p>Through these questions, we were able to uncover the criteria that guide voter behavior, depending on who makes which statement. Voters from both parties cared more about “moral truth” when they were evaluating a politician they liked. When evaluating a politician they didn’t like, on the other hand, voters relied more on strict factuality.</p>
<p>Our surveys documented how voters provide such justifications for their partisan standard-bearers, revealing a significant degree of “moral flexibility” in voters’ political judgment. I conducted this research with <a href="https://scholars.cmu.edu/3783-oliver-hahl">Oliver Hahl</a> of Carnegie Mellon University, <a href="https://www.colorado.edu/business/leeds-directory/faculty/ethan-poskanzer">Ethan Poskanzer</a> of the University of Colorado, and <a href="https://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/directory/ezra-w-zuckerman-sivan">Ezra Zuckerman Sivan</a> of MIT.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Conversations about how to combat misinformation often focus on the need for better fact-checking and education. However, our discovery illustrates the deeper but overlooked drivers behind voters’ tolerance and support for factually inaccurate statements. The findings suggest that misinformation survives not only due to voters’ “gullibility” but their moral calculations about whether partisan ends justify the means.</p>
<p>If voters are deliberately choosing to support misinformation because it aligns with their partisan perspectives, then providing factual corrections will not be enough to protect the democratic norm of grounding public policies in objective facts.</p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>Our research leaves critical questions about how to combat such moral flexibility and its consequences.</p>
<p>To be sure, we do not see such moral flexibility as categorically wrong. As a society, for instance, we tend to think that telling kids that Santa Claus exists is unproblematic, because doing so protects certain values – such as children’s innocence and imagination.</p>
<p>But when it comes to public debate on an issue that should be based on objective evidence, moral flexibility limits the extent to which partisan groups can come to an agreement about facts, let alone what policy to derive from them.</p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>What can pull people on opposite sides of the political spectrum to cooperate with one another, if they cannot agree on what is factually correct?</p>
<p>There are likely more areas where partisan voters do agree with one another than the “culture war” narrative implies – and we hope to learn from them. In work in progress with <a href="https://www.sangwonhan.com/">sociologist Sang Won Han</a>, we are studying lawmakers who frequently co-sponsor bills with politicians in the opposite party.</p>
<p>Sociologists <a href="https://www.danieldellaposta.com/">Daniel DellaPosta</a>, <a href="https://sociology.la.psu.edu/people/lee-essig/">Liam Essig</a> and I are also researching what contributes to politicians’ polarization in situations where opposite partisan voters actually do share a consensus. For example, a majority of both Democratic and Republican voters <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/may/25/steve-kerr/polls-consistently-show-high-support-gun-backgroun/">support background checks</a> for gun purchases, while bills for such measures consistently fail to pass.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/voters-moral-flexibility-helps-them-defend-politicians-misinformation-if-they-believe-the-inaccurate-info-speaks-to-a-larger-truth-236832">original article</a>.</em></p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/use-of-gps-might-reduce-environmental-knowledge-and-sense-of-direction/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Use of GPS might reduce environmental knowledge and sense of direction</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 18th 2024, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent meta-analysis exploring the relationship between GPS use and navigational abilities found that individuals who rely more heavily on GPS tend to have slightly worse environmental knowledge and a poorer sense of direction. However, the study found no significant association between GPS use and wayfinding ability. The research was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102417"><em>Journal of Environmental Psychology</em></a>.</p>
<p>GPS, or the Global Positioning System, is a satellite-based navigation system that provides location and time data anywhere on Earth. It operates through a network of at least 24 satellites orbiting the planet, which transmit signals to GPS receivers on the ground. These receivers calculate their precise location by triangulating signals from multiple satellites. Initially developed by the U.S. government for military purposes, GPS is now widely used in civilian applications such as mapping, navigation, and tracking.</p>
<p>Today, GPS technology is integrated into smartphones, vehicles, and wearable devices, playing a crucial role in transportation, logistics, emergency services, and scientific research. It is a tool embedded in nearly every aspect of daily life where navigation is essential.</p>
<p>However, there are growing concerns that heavy reliance on GPS might erode traditional navigational skills that humans have used for centuries. Relying on GPS can reduce the need for individuals to memorize landmarks and spatial cues from their environment, which were once essential for navigation. Furthermore, since GPS continuously provides directional information, individuals may gradually lose their innate sense of direction and ability to find their way without technological assistance.</p>
<p>Study author Laura Miola and her colleagues set out to examine the existing body of scientific evidence regarding the impact of GPS use on navigational abilities. They conducted a meta-analysis of studies that explored the relationship between GPS use and three main navigation-related outcomes: environmental knowledge, wayfinding performance, and sense of direction.</p>
<p>The research team searched for studies involving individuals aged 16 years or older that included experimental conditions where participants used GPS and compared them to conditions where participants navigated without GPS or used alternative methods (such as maps, asking for directions, or navigating unaided). They focused on studies that measured outcomes related to environmental knowledge, wayfinding, and self-reported navigational abilities.</p>
<p>The search identified 23 studies that met the inclusion criteria. The sample sizes of these studies ranged from 13 to 636 participants, with ages spanning from 16 to 84 years. Most of the studies collected data at a single time point, although one study measured results after three months, and another followed participants over a three-year period.</p>
<p>Out of the 23 studies, 11 assessed environmental knowledge, which involved a learning phase where participants familiarized themselves with a specific environment. Similarly, 11 studies evaluated wayfinding performance, measuring how participants navigated from one location to another. Another 11 studies assessed participants’ sense of direction using questionnaires.</p>
<p>The overall findings revealed that frequent GPS use was associated with slightly poorer environmental knowledge and sense of direction. Interestingly, the study did not find a significant relationship between GPS use and wayfinding performance, suggesting that using GPS may not hinder people’s ability to follow routes or find their destination during navigation tasks.</p>
<p>“GPS use is negatively associated with navigation ability, specifically environmental knowledge and sense of direction, indicating that the more individuals rely on GPS to reach destinations, the more poorly they perceive their navigation skills and the poorer is their knowledge of the environment,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The researchers also emphasized the bidirectional nature of this relationship. Individuals who already struggle with spatial learning or forming a mental map of their environment may turn to GPS more frequently, which further weakens their natural navigation skills. “This intriguing link might suggest that individuals who have a weaker ‘internal’ ability to use spatial knowledge to navigate their surroundings are also more prone to rely on ‘external’ devices or systems to navigate successfully,” the authors explained.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the links between individual navigational abilities and the use of GPS. However, it should be noted that the associations found were very weak, indicating that the sense of direction and environmental knowledge of individuals who frequently use GPS are only slightly worse than those who use it less often.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102417">GPS use and navigation ability: A systematic review and meta-analysis,</a>” was authored by Laura Miola, Veronica Muffato, Enrico Sella, Chiara Meneghetti, and Francesca Pazzaglia.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/the-fading-affect-bias-impacts-most-memories-but-election-related-memories-are-surprisingly-resilient/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">The fading affect bias impacts most memories — but election-related memories are surprisingly resilient</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 18th 2024, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>In a recent study published in <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.4253"><em>Applied Cognitive Psychology</em>,</a> researchers explored how the emotions associated with memories of political events, specifically the 2020 U.S. presidential election, fade over time compared to non-political events. They found that unpleasant emotions tend to fade faster than pleasant ones, a phenomenon known as the fading affect bias. However, emotions related to political events appear to be more resistant to fading than those tied to non-political events.</p>
<p>The 2020 U.S. presidential election was one of the most polarizing political events in recent history, eliciting strong emotional reactions from voters. Previous studies have shown that people experience a fading affect bias—unpleasant emotions linked to autobiographical memories diminish faster than pleasant ones.</p>
<p>Although this bias has been studied in many contexts, it had not been thoroughly examined within the realm of politics. Given the heightened emotional impact of political events, particularly elections, the researchers aimed to understand how this bias applied to political memories compared to non-political ones. Additionally, they wanted to investigate the role of mental rehearsal, such as thinking or talking about events, in shaping this emotional fading.</p>
<p>“We started long ago (2003-2013) examining affect ratings and believability ratings for news headlines and some of them included stories related to elections, especially presidential elections and candidates,” said study author Jeffrey A. Gibbons, an associate professor of psychology at Christopher Newport University.</p>
<p>“In 2011, we pinpointed the temporal genesis (within 24 hours of the event’s occurrence) of the fading affect bias, which is the faster fading of unpleasant than pleasant affect for autobiographical events and we examined the fading affect bias for individuals above 60 years old and compared it to the fading affect bias for college students.</p>
<p>“Although my lab still examines recognition and believability for news headlines and we investigate the fading affect bias across many contexts, we melded the two topics to examine the fading affect bias for pleasant and unpleasant non-political events along with pleasant and unpleasant political events for the 2016 U.S. presidential election because it seemed like an opportunity that we should not miss and no one else had done it.”</p>
<p>That study, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.3741" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published in 2020</a>, found initial evidence that the fading affect bias was larger for non-political events than for political events. To build upon those findings, Gibbons and his colleagues focused on the 2020 U.S. presidential election for their new study, in which Joe Biden won against incumbent Donald Trump. The study involved 197 undergraduate students from a liberal arts university.</p>
<p>The ages of participants ranged from 18 to 24, and the group had a relatively balanced gender composition, with 67.7% identifying as female, 30.4% as male, and a small percentage as non-binary or preferring not to disclose. Politically, the sample was diverse, with participants reporting a range of political ideologies from liberal to conservative, as well as varying levels of political engagement.</p>
<p>Participants were asked to recall and describe four events: (1) the announcement of the results of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, (2) a different political event with an emotional tone opposite to their reaction to the election, (3) a pleasant non-political event, and (4) an unpleasant non-political event.</p>
<p>Participants were prompted to describe these events and rate both their initial emotional intensity and their current emotional intensity on a scale from -3 (very unpleasant) to +3 (very pleasant). They also reported how often they had thought about or discussed these events since they occurred, providing ratings for emotional rehearsal.</p>
<p>The results provided support for the fading affect bias across both political and non-political events. Participants’ unpleasant emotions faded more quickly than their pleasant emotions, demonstrating the robust nature of this phenomenon. However, the fading affect bias was stronger for non-political events than for political ones. This suggests that people tend to hold onto their emotions about political events—whether pleasant or unpleasant—more intensely than they do for everyday, non-political events.</p>
<p>The researchers also found that as conservatism increased, the fading of unpleasant emotions for political events decreased, meaning that participants with more conservative views were more likely to hold onto their negative feelings about the election. Conversely, participants with more liberal views showed a stronger fading affect bias, with their negative emotions about political events fading faster. This effect was not present for non-political events, where conservatism and political affiliation did not significantly impact how emotions faded.</p>
<p>Rehearsal also played a key role in the fading of emotions. Participants who frequently thought or talked about an event experienced a stronger fading affect bias, particularly for non-political events. The more they revisited the event, the more their unpleasant emotions faded, and their pleasant emotions remained more stable. This suggests that rehearsing an event—either through mental reflection or social sharing—can help people process their emotions more effectively, especially for non-political memories.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the study found that rehearsal had less of an impact on the fading of emotions for political events compared to non-political events. This indicates that the emotional charge of political events may be more resistant to the effects of emotional rehearsal, meaning that even when people think or talk about a political event frequently, they may still hold onto their initial emotional reactions.</p>
<p>The findings were replicated in a more diverse and older sample drawn from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), a crowdsourcing platform. The MTurk sample included 225 participants, ranging in age from 18 to 72, with a mean age of 38.4.</p>
<p>“The original results for the 2016 U.S. presidential election only suggested that losing voters showed a higher fading affect bias for non-political than political events, whereas winning voters showed a higher fading affect bias for political than non-political events, because they trended in that direction without being statistically significant,” Gibbons told PsyPost. “The current results for the 2020 U.S. presidential election replicated the previous trend and provided significant results in two online studies; one with college students and one with participants from MTurk.”</p>
<p>“Therefore, one general take-away point from the current study is that replication is important and reasonable predictions are not always supported. A more specific take-away point is that losing voters show poor emotion regulation after U.S. presidential elections and they may need clinical help to overcome unwanted political outcomes.”</p>
<p>The study offers important insights into how people handle emotions tied to political events, but it does have some limitations. The study relied on participants’ self-reports of their emotions, which can sometimes be inaccurate due to memory biases. The researchers suggested that future studies could use more objective measures of emotional intensity or track participants’ emotional responses in real time.</p>
<p>“We submitted and are awaiting approval from the Internal Review Board at Christopher Newport University to replicate the study using the 2024 U.S. presidential election and we plan to extend the research by asking participants to recall their events and their affect ratings 7 days after they initially described their events,” Gibbons said. “Past research in our lab suggests that accurate and false recall may predict the fading affect bias.”</p>
<p>The study also focused solely on U.S. politics and the specific context of the 2020 presidential election. Future research could examine how the fading affect bias functions in other countries or in relation to other political events, such as local elections or referendums. Another area for further exploration is the impact of social media consumption on the fading affect bias, as frequent exposure to political content through platforms like Twitter or Facebook could potentially slow the fading of emotional responses.</p>
<p>“Every study contains limitations, but this study replicated and extended a trend from a previous study, which is good science, and the research covers a topic that is interesting to many U.S. citizens as well as citizens across the world,” Gibbons said. “We were very excited to publish the paper online before the 2024 U,S, presidential election and we are happy that the article has already gained readership.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4253" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Political Variables Predicted the Fading Affect Bias More Strongly for Political Than Nonpolitical Events in the 2020 Presidential Election</a>,” was authored by Jeffrey A. Gibbons, Aimee Buchanan, Krystal Langhorne, and Sevrin Vandevender.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Forwarded by:<br />
Michael Reeder LCPC<br />
Baltimore, MD</strong></p>
<p><strong>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. </strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p><s><small><a href="#" style="color:#ffffff;"><a href="https://blogtrottr.com/unsubscribe/565/DY9DKf">unsubscribe from this feed</a></a></small></s></p>