<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/the-psychology-of-love-in-romantic-relationships-new-research-hints-at-its-true-purpose/" 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 psychology of love in romantic relationships: New research hints at its true purpose</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 4th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study published in the journal <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-024-09482-6"><em>Human Nature</em></a> provides evidence that romantic love is highly valued worldwide when people consider long-term relationships. Most people across different cultures are unwilling to commit to marriage without feeling love for their partner. Furthermore, the study reveals that the importance of love in choosing a marriage partner varies based on factors like gender, socioeconomic status, and the level of development in one’s country. These findings support the idea that love functions as a commitment mechanism, reinforcing bonds between partners and helping to maintain stable relationships.</p>
<p>The researchers were interested in understanding why romantic love exists and what its purpose might be. Several theories attempt to explain the phenomenon of love. One theory suggests that <a href="https://www.psypost.org/did-romantic-love-evolve-by-co-opting-mother-infant-bonding-mechanisms/">romantic love evolved from the attachment bonds</a> formed between infants and caregivers, which are essential for survival and well-being. Another theory proposes that romantic love is a biological system designed to encourage couples to stay together and raise children. A related idea is that love serves as a “commitment device,” helping partners remain faithful and committed to each other, which, in turn, increases their chances of successfully raising offspring.</p>
<p>If romantic love indeed serves to promote commitment, then it should be a universally desired trait when people choose partners for long-term relationships, such as marriage. This is because a committed partner is more likely to provide emotional and practical support, share resources, and help raise children.</p>
<p>Prior research has shown that people across many different countries rated love as the most important characteristic in a long-term mate. The researchers in the current study wanted to further investigate this concept and explore whether certain groups of people might value romantic love more than others. Specifically, they wanted to test the idea that romantic love might be particularly important for those who have more to lose if their relationship ends, such as people with fewer financial resources, women (who bear the greater biological costs of having children), and individuals with more children (who require more support from a partner).</p>
<p>“Love is ubiquitous in modern societies, especially the types of love people experience in romantic relationships. There has been an evolutionary theory since 1988 that love serves to signal and promote commitment to a loved one. While there have been some studies that support this notion, most have relied on relatively small samples in only one country,” said study author <a href="https://adambode.net/">Adam Bode</a>, a PhD student at the Australian National University.</p>
<p>“We wanted to see if there was support for this theory around the world, and if there are differences in different cultures. Marta Kowal, the lead author on this paper, is an expert on large, cross-cultural studies of love in romantic relationships, and she has access to some amazing data. One of those datasets asked a hypothetical question about the importance of being in love with a partner you choose to marry. That created the opportunity to test some hypotheses related to this theory in a really large international sample.”</p>
<p>The researchers collected survey data from 86,310 participants across 90 countries. The survey asked respondents how important romantic love was when considering a long-term romantic relationship. The key question was based on a classic study from 1967, which asked whether people would be willing to marry someone who had all their desired qualities except for romantic love. Responses were recorded on a scale from 0 (definitely would not marry) to 100 (definitely would marry), with higher scores indicating a lower emphasis on romantic love.</p>
<p>The survey also collected information about participants’ gender, socioeconomic status (based on their self-reported financial prospects), and the number of children they had. Additionally, the researchers used the Human Development Index, a measure that combines a country’s average life expectancy, education levels, and income, as an indicator of each country’s level of modernization.</p>
<p>The results confirmed that romantic love is highly valued across the globe, with most people expressing reluctance to enter a long-term relationship without it.</p>
<p>“Most people in most countries are not prepared to marry someone they haven’t fallen in love with,” Bode told PsyPost. “That should make people who desire and seek out love to feel that this is normal. The other interesting finding is that the importance of falling in love with the person you end up marrying differs according to demographics and environment.”</p>
<p>People with lower socioeconomic status valued romantic love more than wealthier individuals. This finding supports the idea that love plays an essential role in maintaining relationships when external resources are limited. For individuals with fewer financial means, a stable and committed romantic partnership can offer security and support, making love an important factor in their decision to commit.</p>
<p>Women also placed a higher value on romantic love compared to men. This aligns with evolutionary theories suggesting that women, who bear greater biological costs in reproduction, have historically been more selective in choosing partners. Because women face higher potential risks when a relationship ends, romantic love may serve as an important signal of commitment and long-term stability. This gender difference was the strongest observed effect in the study, reinforcing the idea that love plays a particularly significant role for women when evaluating long-term relationships.</p>
<p>The researchers also found that individuals with more children placed a greater emphasis on romantic love. Parents, especially those with multiple children, may view love as a stabilizing force that helps maintain a supportive and cooperative partnership. Raising children requires significant time, energy, and resources, and a committed, loving partner can ease the challenges of parenting. Although this effect was not as strong as the impact of socioeconomic status or gender, it suggests that love may become increasingly important as family responsibilities grow.</p>
<p>On a broader level, the study found that people from more developed countries placed a higher value on romantic love than those from less developed nations. This may be due to cultural influences, as modern societies tend to emphasize individual fulfillment and emotional satisfaction in relationships. In contrast, in less developed regions where economic or social factors play a larger role in marriage decisions, love may not be seen as a necessary requirement for long-term commitment.</p>
<p>“Not too much surprised us,” Bode said. “Our three hypotheses were supported. That being said, despite higher levels of national development being associated with a greater importance of love, lower individual-level socio-economic status was actually associated with a greater importance of love. Reconciling these two findings might require further research.”</p>
<p>While these findings provide strong support for the idea that love acts as a commitment mechanism, the study has some limitations. The sample was not entirely representative of all populations, as it included a higher proportion of well-educated individuals. Additionally, the researchers relied on a single question to measure the importance of love, which may not fully capture the complexity of romantic relationships. Cultural norms and attitudes toward marriage and commitment may also influence responses in ways that were not fully accounted for.</p>
<p>Future research could explore additional factors, such as age, religious beliefs, and societal norms around marriage and divorce, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how love is valued across different contexts.</p>
<p>“Some of the authors’ areas of interest include love in romantic relationships,” Bode explained. “There are plans for further large-scale and cross cultural research using this and similar datasets, as are more targeted studies looking at specific aspects and features of romantic love. Love is a fascinating, important, and understudied area of human mating. We hope that studies like this one will promote more researchers to look into love in romantic relationships.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-024-09482-6">Love as a Commitment Device: Evidence from a Cross-Cultural Study across 90 Countries</a>,” was authored by Marta Kowal, Adam Bode, Karolina Koszałkowska, S. Craig Roberts, Biljana Gjoneska, David Frederick, Anna Studzinska, Dmitrii Dubrov, Dmitry Grigoryev, Toivo Aavik, Pavol Prokop, Caterina Grano, Hakan Çetinkaya, Derya Atamtürk Duyar, Roberto Baiocco, Carlota Batres, Yakhlef Belkacem, Merve Boğa, Nana Burduli, Ali R. Can, Razieh Chegeni, William J. Chopik, Yahya Don, Seda Dural, Izzet Duyar, Edgardo Etchezahar, Feten Fekih-Romdhane, Tomasz Frackowiak, Felipe E. García, Talia Gomez Yepes, Farida Guemaz, Brahim B. Hamdaoui, Mehmet Koyuncu, Miguel Landa-Blanco, Samuel Lins, Tiago Marot, Marlon Mayorga-Lascano, Moises Mebarak, Mara Morelli, Izuchukwu L. G. Ndukaihe, Mohd Sofian Omar Fauzee, Ma. Criselda Tengco Pacquing, Miriam Parise, Farid Pazhoohi, Ekaterine Pirtskhalava, Koen Ponnet, Ulf-Dietrich Reips, Marc Eric Santos Reyes, Ayşegül Şahin, Fatima Zahra Sahli, Oksana Senyk, Ognen Spasovski, Singha Tulyakul, Joaquín Ungaretti, Mona Vintila, Tatiana Volkodav, Anna Wlodarczyk, Gyesook Yoo, Benjamin Gelbart, and Piotr Sorokowski.</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/tiktoks-algorithm-exhibited-pro-republican-bias-during-2024-presidential-race-study-finds/" 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;">TikTok’s algorithm exhibited pro-Republican bias during 2024 presidential race, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 4th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>TikTok, a widely used social media platform with over a billion active users worldwide, has become a key source of news, particularly for younger audiences. This growing influence has raised concerns about potential political biases in its recommendation algorithm, especially during election cycles. A <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17831">recent preprint study</a> examined this issue by analyzing how TikTok’s algorithm recommends political content ahead of the 2024 presidential election. Using a controlled experiment involving hundreds of simulated user accounts, the study found that Republican-leaning accounts received significantly more ideologically aligned content than Democratic-leaning accounts, while Democratic-leaning accounts were more frequently exposed to opposing viewpoints.</p>
<p>TikTok has become a major force among social media platforms, boasting over a billion monthly active users worldwide and 170 million in the United States. It has also emerged as a significant source of news, particularly for younger demographics. This has raised concerns about the platform’s <a href="https://www.psypost.org/algorithmic-manipulation-tiktok-use-predicts-positive-views-of-chinas-human-rights-record/">potential to shape political narratives</a> and influence elections.</p>
<p>Despite these concerns, there has been limited research investigating <a href="https://www.psypost.org/does-tiktok-really-cause-brain-rot-new-study-links-short-video-addiction-to-brain-abnormalities/">TikTok</a>‘s recommendation algorithm for political biases, especially in comparison to extensive research on other social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), and Reddit.</p>
<p>“We previously conducted experiments auditing YouTube’s recommendation algorithms. This study published at <a href="https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/8/pgad264/7242446"><em>PNAS Nexus</em></a> demonstrated that the algorithm <a href="https://www.psypost.org/youtubes-recommendation-system-exhibits-left-leaning-bias-new-study-suggests/">exhibited a left-leaning bias</a> in the United States,” said <a href="https://yasirzaki.net/">Yasir Zaki</a>, an assistant professor of computer science at New York University Abu Dhabi.</p>
<p>“Given TikTok’s widespread popularity—particularly among younger demographics—we sought to replicate this study on TikTok during the 2024 U.S. presidential elections. Another motivation was the concerns over TikTok’s Chinese ownership led many U.S. politicians to advocate for banning the platform, citing fears that its recommendation algorithm could be used to promote a political agenda.”</p>
<p>To examine how TikTok’s algorithm recommends political content, the researchers designed an extensive audit experiment. They created 323 “sock puppet” accounts—fake accounts programmed to simulate user behavior—across three politically diverse states: Texas, New York, and Georgia. Each account was assigned a political leaning: Democratic, Republican, or neutral (the control group).</p>
<p>The experiment consisted of two stages: a conditioning stage and a recommendation stage. In the conditioning stage, the Democratic accounts watched up to 400 Democratic-aligned videos, and the Republican accounts watched up to 400 Republican-aligned videos. Neutral accounts skipped this stage. This was done to “teach” TikTok’s algorithm the political preferences of each account.</p>
<p>In the recommendation stage, all accounts watched videos on TikTok’s “For You” page, which is the platform’s main feed of recommended content. The accounts watched 10 videos, followed by a one-hour pause, and repeated this process for six days. Each experimental run lasted one week. The researchers collected data on approximately 394,000 videos viewed by these accounts between April 30th and November 11th, 2024.</p>
<p>To analyze the political content of the recommended videos, the researchers downloaded the English transcripts of videos when available (22.8% of unique videos). They then used a system involving three large language models—GPT-4o, Gemini-Pro, and GPT-4—to classify each video. The language models answered questions about whether the video was political, whether it concerned the 2024 U.S. elections or major political figures, and what the ideological stance of the video was (pro-Democratic, anti-Democratic, pro-Republican, anti-Republican, or neutral). The majority vote of the three language models was used as the final classification for each question.</p>
<p>The analysis uncovered significant asymmetries in content distribution on TikTok. Republican-seeded accounts received approximately 11.8% more party-aligned recommendations compared to Democratic-seeded accounts. Democratic-seeded accounts were exposed to approximately 7.5% more opposite-party recommendations on average. These differences were consistent across all three states and could not be explained by differences in engagement metrics like likes, views, shares, comments, or followers.</p>
<p>“We found that TikTok’s recommendation algorithm was not neutral during the 2024 U.S. presidential elections,” explained <a href="https://www.trahwan.com/">Talal Rahwan</a>, an associate professor of computer science at New York University Abu Dhabi. “Across all three states analyzed in our study, the platform consistently promoted more Republican-leaning content. We showed that this bias cannot be explained by factors such as video popularity and engagement metrics—key variables that typically influence recommendation algorithms.”</p>
<p>Further analysis showed that the bias was primarily driven by negative partisanship content, meaning content that criticizes the opposing party rather than promoting one’s own party. Both Democratic- and Republican-conditioned accounts were recommended more negative partisan content, but this was more pronounced for Republican accounts. Negative-partisanship videos were 1.78 times more likely to be recommended as an ideological mismatch relative to positive-partisanship ones.</p>
<p>“We observed a bias toward negative partisanship in TikTok’s recommendations,” Zaki noted. “Regardless of the political party—Democratic or Republican—the algorithm prioritized content that criticized the opposing party over content that promoted one’s own party.”</p>
<p>The researchers also examined the top Democratic and Republican channels on TikTok by follower count. Republican channels had a significantly higher mismatch proportion, meaning their videos were more likely to be recommended to accounts with an opposite political leaning. Notably, videos from Donald Trump’s official TikTok channel were recommended to Democratic-conditioned accounts nearly 27% of the time, while Kamala Harris’s videos were recommended to Republican-conditioned accounts only 15.3% of the time.</p>
<p>Finally, the researchers analyzed the topics covered in partisan videos. Topics stereotypically associated with the Democratic party, like climate change and abortion, were more frequently covered by Democratic-aligned videos. Topics like immigration, foreign policy, and the Ukraine war were more frequently covered by Republican-aligned videos. Videos on immigration, crime, the Gaza conflict, and foreign policy were most likely to be recommended as ideological mismatches to Democratic-conditioned accounts.</p>
<p>To build on this work, future research could explore how TikTok’s algorithm behaves across different election cycles, investigate how misinformation is distributed within partisan content, and compare TikTok’s political content recommendations with those of other major platforms. Additionally, studies incorporating real user data alongside automated experiments could provide a more comprehensive understanding of how individuals experience political content on TikTok. Given the platform’s growing role in shaping public discourse, continued scrutiny of its recommendation system will be essential for assessing its impact on political knowledge and voter decision-making.</p>
<p>“We want to address fundamental questions about the neutrality of social media platforms,” Rahwan said.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://arxiv.org/html/2501.17831v1">TikTok’s recommendations skewed towards Republican content during the 2024 U.S. presidential race</a>,” was authored by Hazem Ibrahim, HyunSeok Daniel Jang, Nouar Aldahoul, Aaron R. Kaufman, Talal Rahwan, and Yasir Zaki.</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/married-people-have-fewer-depressive-symptoms-than-unmarried-people-large-international-study-finds/" 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;">Married people have fewer depressive symptoms than unmarried people, large international study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02033-0"><em>Nature Human Behaviour</em></a> reveals that unmarried individuals, regardless of whether they are single, divorced, separated, or widowed, tend to experience depressive symptoms more often than their married counterparts. However, the size of this difference varies based on factors such as country of residence, sex, and education level. The study also found that alcohol use and smoking might explain some of the increased risk of depressive symptoms among unmarried individuals in China, Korea, and Mexico.</p>
<p>Depression is a major public health concern worldwide, affecting an estimated 5% of adults globally. This rate is expected to rise in the coming years, potentially exceeding 10% by 2025. Depression is linked to a range of negative health outcomes, including an elevated risk of heart disease, disability, and suicide. Thus, identifying factors that contribute to depression is essential for developing effective prevention and treatment strategies. Given that marriage is a significant social bond with potential implications for health, researchers sought to investigate its relationship with depression across different countries.</p>
<p>Previous studies, primarily conducted in Western countries, have suggested that being married might offer some protection against depression. However, these findings might not apply universally due to cultural, socioeconomic, and educational differences between countries. Some research, for example, did not find a relationship between marital status and depression in women in Korea and Kenya. To address this gap, the researchers conducted a large-scale, cross-country analysis to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the association between marital status and depression.</p>
<p>The researchers utilized a large-scale, two-stage analysis that combined data from several nationally representative cohorts across seven countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Korea, Mexico, Indonesia, and Ireland. In the first stage, a cross-sectional analysis examined the relationship between marital status and current depressive symptoms. This analysis included 106,556 participants from various national health surveys conducted between 2005 and 2020. The researchers categorized participants into four marital status groups: married, single, divorced or separated, and widowed.</p>
<p>Depressive symptoms were measured using standardized questionnaires specific to each country, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale. To isolate the effect of marital status on depressive symptoms, the researchers controlled for potential confounding factors, including age, sex, educational attainment, income, and health behaviors such as alcohol consumption and smoking.</p>
<p>In the second stage, a longitudinal analysis was conducted to explore the causal pathways between marital status and later development of depressive symptoms. This part of the study followed 20,865 participants from five countries over several years, tracking changes in depressive symptoms and examining the mediating effects of alcohol and smoking. The researchers used statistical techniques, including causal mediation analysis, to assess whether these health behaviors played a role in the observed relationship between marital status and depression.</p>
<p>The results of the study showed that, overall, unmarried individuals had a higher likelihood of experiencing depressive symptoms than married individuals. This pattern held true across all countries studied, with unmarried people having nearly double the odds of reporting depressive symptoms compared to those who were married. The pooled odds ratio for depressive symptoms among unmarried individuals was 1.86, indicating a substantial increase in risk.</p>
<p>However, the magnitude of this increased risk varied depending on specific factors. For instance, the association between being unmarried and depressive symptoms was more pronounced in Western countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and Ireland compared to Eastern countries such as China, Korea, and Indonesia. The researchers suggest that cultural differences in social expectations, emotional expression, and coping mechanisms might explain why unmarried individuals in Western societies are more vulnerable to depression.</p>
<p>Sex was another important factor that influenced the relationship between marital status and depression. The researchers found that unmarried males had a higher risk of depressive symptoms compared to unmarried females, particularly among single individuals. This finding aligns with previous research suggesting that males may have fewer social support networks and face greater societal pressure when they are unmarried, potentially increasing their susceptibility to depression.</p>
<p>Educational attainment also emerged as a significant moderator. Unmarried individuals with higher levels of education experienced a greater risk of depressive symptoms compared to those with lower educational attainment. The researchers hypothesize that highly educated individuals may face increased societal expectations and career pressures, which, when combined with a lack of spousal support, could exacerbate psychological distress.</p>
<p>In the longitudinal analysis, the researchers found that alcohol use and smoking played a causal role in the development of depressive symptoms among unmarried individuals in China, Korea, and Mexico. For example, alcohol use accounted for 3.2% of the risk of developing depressive symptoms among single Mexicans, 34.1% among single Koreans, and 27.4% among single Chinese. For divorced/separated individuals in these countries, alcohol use accounted for 16.5%, 29.3%, and 21.2% of the risk, respectively. Among widowed individuals, alcohol use accounted for 13.4%, 5.9%, and 12.0% of the risk in Mexico, Korea, and China, respectively. Smoking was also found to be a significant mediator among single individuals in Mexico and China, accounting for 22.1% and 43.8% of the risk, respectively. However, alcohol use and smoking did not significantly mediate the relationship between marital status and depressive symptoms in the United States or Ireland.</p>
<p>The researchers found that these health behaviors explained a significant portion of the increased risk, suggesting that interventions aimed at reducing alcohol and tobacco use could be effective in mitigating depression among unmarried individuals.</p>
<p>Despite its comprehensive approach, the study has some limitations. First, it relied on self-reported measures of depressive symptoms, which may not fully capture the complexity of clinical depression. Additionally, the study was limited to heterosexual relationships due to the lack of data on same-sex partnerships, and the findings may not be generalizable to all cultural contexts.</p>
<p>Future research could address these limitations by including clinical diagnoses of depression and exploring the impact of marital status in more diverse relationship contexts. Moreover, further investigation into the cultural factors that influence the association between marital status and depression could provide deeper insights into the social determinants of mental health.</p>
<p>Despite these limitations, the study provides insights into the relationship between marital status and mental health across different countries. The findings suggest that unmarried individuals, particularly those who are single, highly educated men in Western countries, may be at a higher risk of developing depressive symptoms.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02033-0">Association and causal mediation between marital status and depression in seven countries</a>,” was authored by Xiaobing Zhai, Henry H. Y. Tong, Chi Kin Lam, Abao Xing, Yuyang Sha, Gang Luo, Weiyu Meng, Junfeng Li, Miao Zhou, Yangxi Huang, Ling Shing Wong, Cuicui Wang, and Kefeng Li.</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/right-wing-authoritarianism-linked-to-perceived-threat-from-minoritized-groups-but-national-context-matters/" 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;">Right-wing authoritarianism linked to perceived threat from minoritized groups, but national context matters</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Individuals who strongly endorse right-wing authoritarianism are more likely to view minority groups as a threat, according to new research published in the <a href="https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12830"><em>British Journal of Social Psychology</em></a>. This tendency was evident across various countries and cultures, but it was more pronounced in countries that were less religious or had lower levels of social marginalization. The study sheds new light on how right-wing authoritarianism interacts with sociocultural factors to shape perceptions of threat from refugees and other outgroups.</p>
<p>Right-wing authoritarianism refers to a belief system that emphasizes adherence to traditional values and authorities while supporting punishment for those perceived as challenging social cohesion. Previous research has established a consistent link between right-wing authoritarianism and negative attitudes toward minoritized groups, such as refugees and religious minorities. However, little was known about how broader sociocultural factors shape or moderate this relationship.</p>
<p>The researchers sought to address this gap by investigating whether and how right-wing authoritarianism, religiosity, and perceived societal marginalization contribute to perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat. They also examined whether these factors interact at both individual and country levels. Given the rise of right-wing movements and increasing global displacement due to conflict and economic instability, understanding these dynamics has important implications for social cohesion and public policy.</p>
<p>“There is a long tradition of associating right-wing authoritarianism with negative perceptions of minoritized groups,” said study author <a href="https://www.uni-muenster.de/PsyIFP/AEBack/members/farkhari.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fahima Farkhari</a>, a research associate at the University of Münster and member of Professor Mitja Back’s lab. “Negative perceptions include perceptions that minoritized groups, such as refugees and immigrants, pose a threat. Few studies have explored variations of the authoritarianism-threat link across countries and the related questions whether and how individual- and country-level sociocultural factors add to and moderate the influence of right-wing authoritarianism on such threat perceptions.”</p>
<p>The research consisted of three large-scale studies that examined how right-wing authoritarianism, religiosity, and perceived societal marginalization contribute to perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat. The studies varied in scope, ranging from national and regional surveys to a global study that included both cross-sectional and longitudinal daily assessments.</p>
<p>Study 1 was conducted in Germany and comprised two separate samples collected from online survey panels, totaling 1,896 participants. After excluding respondents who were not Christian or did not have German citizenship, the final sample included 923 participants in the first wave and 973 in the second. This study measured perceived threat from refugees using a scale that assessed three dimensions of threat: symbolic (e.g., perceived incompatibility of values), realistic (e.g., economic competition), and safety (e.g., concerns about public security).</p>
<p>Right-wing authoritarianism was measured using a validated scale that captures adherence to traditional authority and social conformity. Religiosity was assessed with a single item asking respondents to rate their level of religious belief on a seven-point scale. Perceived societal marginalization, which refers to individuals’ perceptions that people like them are economically, culturally, and politically marginalized, was measured using a 15-item scale.</p>
<p>Study 2 extended the investigation to a broader European context, collecting data from 3,227 participants in Germany, France, Poland, and Sweden. The study employed computer-assisted telephone interviews to gather responses from a nationally representative sample in each country. Unlike Study 1, this study assessed perceived threat from both refugees and Muslims, given that political and media discourse often frames these groups differently.</p>
<p>The measure of perceived threat included six items for Muslims and three for refugees, which were later combined due to their strong correlation. Right-wing authoritarianism was again measured using a three-item subset of the previously validated scale. Religiosity and perceived societal marginalization were measured similarly to Study 1, though the perceived societal marginalization scale was shortened to six items to fit the telephone survey format.</p>
<p>Study 3 adopted a global perspective, drawing from 3,154 participants across 41 countries, with a total of more than 52,000 daily assessments of threat perceptions. This study utilized data from the “Coping with Corona” project, which collected responses via an online survey platform. Participants first completed a presurvey assessing their ideological beliefs, religiosity, and perceptions of marginalization. Following this, they participated in a four-week daily diary study in which they reported their perceived threat from minoritized groups each day. This allowed researchers to examine whether the cross-sectional associations observed in the first two studies held at a more immediate, day-to-day level.</p>
<p>Country-level religiosity was assessed using an index that measured the proportion of people in each country who reported that religion was important in their daily lives. Country-level marginalization was estimated using economic, cultural, and political indicators, including income inequality (Gini index), civil liberties ratings, and measures of political participation.</p>
<p>Across all three studies, the researchers found a consistent and strong positive relationship between right-wing authoritarianism and perceptions that minority groups are threatening. In other words, individuals who scored higher on right-wing authoritarianism were significantly more likely to perceive minority groups as a threat. This finding held true whether the minority group in question was refugees, Muslims, or other ethnic, religious, or national groups.</p>
<p>The researchers also explored the roles of religiosity and perceived societal marginalization in shaping threat perceptions. They found that individuals who felt more marginalized in society – economically, culturally, or politically – were also more likely to perceive minority groups as threatening. This suggests that a sense of being left behind or excluded can contribute to negative attitudes toward minority groups.</p>
<p>The relationship between religiosity and threat perceptions was less clear-cut. While there was some evidence that more religious individuals were slightly more likely to perceive threats, this relationship was not consistent across all samples.</p>
<p>“Right-wing authoritarian individuals tend to perceive minoritized groups (i.e., individuals of an ethnic, religious, or national minority) as a threat,” Farkhari told PsyPost. “In our studies, this tendency has been found to be strong across several countries. This relationship also holds when additionally considering the individuals’ religiosity and their feeling of being marginalized. That is, those threat perceptions can be explained by right-wing authoritarianism over and above religiosity and feelings of societal depreciation.”</p>
<p>One of the main goals of the study was to see if individual levels of religiosity and perceived societal marginalization might alter the relationship between right-wing authoritarianism and threat perceptions. The results here were mixed. There was limited evidence that individuals who were both highly religious and highly authoritarian were more likely to see minority groups as threatening. Similarly, in a few cases, individuals who were both highly marginalized and highly authoritarian showed an increased tendency to perceive threats. However, these effects were small and not consistent across all the studies.</p>
<p>“Whereas our data leave no doubt that individual-level right-wing authoritarianism is a strong overall predictor of majority groups’ perceptions of threat from minoritized groups, the effect sizes still varied considerably across the individual samples,” Farkhari noted</p>
<p>At the country level, the researchers found more consistent patterns. The positive relationship between right-wing authoritarianism and perceived threat was weaker in countries with higher levels of religiosity or marginalization. In other words, in countries where religion played a larger role in daily life or where there were higher levels of social inequality, the connection between authoritarian attitudes and threat perceptions was less pronounced. This suggests that broader cultural and social factors can indeed shape how individual attitudes translate into perceptions of threat.</p>
<p>“The question why the authoritarianism-threat link is stronger in some countries than in others requires further exploration,” Farkhari said.</p>
<p>The researchers also compared the results from the one-time survey responses to those from the daily diary entries. They found that right-wing authoritarianism was a stronger predictor of threat perceptions in the one-time surveys than in the daily reports. This indicates that while right-wing authoritarianism is linked to general perceptions of threat, it may be less predictive of day-to-day feelings of threat.</p>
<p>As with all research, there are caveats to consider. The study did not examine the specific situational factors that might trigger increases in threat perception. Future studies could use experience sampling methods to investigate whether real-world events, such as media coverage of immigration or political rhetoric, contribute to fluctuations in perceived threat.</p>
<p>“Our global study ran for a time frame of approximately 1 year, with individual participation taking place within a time span of a few weeks at some point during this year,” Farkhari said. “That is, different individuals participated in the study during different time periods. Consequently, the contexts in which the participants were embedded varied.”</p>
<p>“While the country-level indicators chosen for the present work are not subject to extreme short-term fluctuations (e.g. country-level religiosity does not increase or drop dramatically within months), it is known that perceived disruptions of order, for example, due to terrorist attacks, may activate right-wing authoritarianism and its downstream attitudinal consequences.”</p>
<p>Additionally, the samples were still predominantly from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research should aim to replicate these findings with larger and more diverse samples from a wider range of countries.</p>
<p>“This research is part of my PhD,” Farkhari said. “It is embedded within a series of other research questions related to correlates and consequences of right-wing authoritarian attitudes. In a previously published article (<a href="https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/5865">Farkhari et al., 2022</a>), for instance, we investigated the relationship between right-wing authoritarianism and conspiracy mentality.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12830" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Right-wing authoritarianism and perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat: The moderating roles of individual- and country-level religiosity and marginalization</a>,” was authored by Fahima Farkhari, Julian Scharbert, Lara Kroencke, Christin Schwarzer, Jonas F. Koch, Maarten H. W. van Zalk, Bernd Schlipphak, and Mitja D. Back.</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/social-class-shapes-perceptions-of-societal-contribution/" 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;">Social class shapes perceptions of societal contribution</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Research published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000411"><em>Journal of Personality & Social Psychology</em></a> finds that Americans in lower social class contexts perceive their contributions to society as less significant than those in higher social class contexts.</p>
<p>Ellen C. Reinhart and colleagues examined the factors underlying this perception. Previous studies have shown that prosocial behaviors, like helping others, are crucial to individuals’ sense of societal contribution. However, they noted that lower social class individuals are more likely to engage in “bonding help,” such as caring for family, which is perceived as less of a societal contribution than “bridging help,” like volunteering for strangers.</p>
<p>This research employed a series of five studies to explore how social class disparities shape perceptions of societal contribution through different types of helping behaviors.</p>
<p>Study 1 utilized survey-based research, with Study 1A (<em>N</em> = 1,250) assessing self-perceived societal contributions and Study 1B (<em>N</em> = 1,052) extending the investigation to meta-perceived contributions, which capture how individuals believe others perceive their societal contributions. Participants were stratified by social class contexts, defined using educational attainment (e.g., high school degree or less vs. college degree or more). In addition to completing measures like the Social Contribution Subscale, open-ended prompts encouraged participants to describe their recent actions that they considered contributions to society.</p>
<p>Study 2 employed an experimental design with 282 participants to compare perceptions of t bridging and bonding help. Participants read vignettes in which individuals engaged in these forms of helping, and they rated the perceived societal value, morality, and volitional choice of each action. Study 3 expanded this by manipulating the element of choice in helping behaviors to test whether freedom to choose influences perceptions of societal value. Study 4 focused on the helpers themselves, examining whether people who engage in bridging versus bonding help perceive their own actions differently in terms of societal contribution.</p>
<p>Study 5 leveraged data from the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) study, a nationally representative, longitudinal dataset collected across three waves: Wave 1 (1995-1996), Wave 2 (2004-2006), and Wave 3 (2013-2014). This dataset provided a long-term perspective on how helping behaviors and perceptions of societal contribution vary across social classes.</p>
<p>The findings of Study 1 revealed a persistent social class disparity in perceived societal contributions. Participants from lower social class contexts reported lower self-perceived societal contributions (Study 1A) and meta-perceived contributions (Study 1B) compared to those from higher social class contexts. Open-ended responses demonstrated that individuals from lower social class contexts were more likely to report that none of their actions counted as contributions, and they listed fewer overall actions compared to their higher-class counterparts. This discrepancy was not attributed to a lack of helpful behaviors but rather to a difference in how those behaviors were perceived and valued.</p>
<p>In Study 2, bridging help (e.g., helping distant others) was rated as a greater societal contribution compared to bonding help (e.g., helping close others) by participants across social classes. Bridging help was viewed as more freely chosen and morally significant, while bonding help was often seen as obligatory. Study 3 found that helping behaviors perceived as freely chosen were considered more valuable contributions to society. Study 4 further revealed that helpers themselves mirrored these biases: individuals engaging in bridging help rated their actions as more meaningful than those engaged in bonding help, underscoring the cultural preference for helping strangers over close others.</p>
<p>Study 5 revealed that individuals in lower social class contexts were more likely to engage in bonding help, such as caregiving for family members, while those in higher social class contexts were more likely to participate in bridging help, such as formal volunteering. Bridging help was found to have a stronger association with feelings of societal contribution than bonding help. Over the three waves of MIDUS data collection, these patterns remained consistent.</p>
<p>Together, these findings highlight how societal norms and perceptions of contribution reinforce social class disparities in perceived value and belonging.</p>
<p>One limitation is the focus on U.S. cultural contexts, where individualism and the emphasis on choice may shape perceptions of societal value. The findings may not generalize to cultures where familial obligations hold greater moral significance.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000411">Who Feels They Contribute to U.S. Society? Helping Behaviors and Social Class Disparities in Perceived Contributions</a>,” was authored by Ellen C. Reinhart, Rebecca M. Carey, and Hazel Rose Markus.</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/emotional-support-through-words-and-touch-study-examines-what-works-best/" 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;">Emotional support through words and touch: Study examines what works best</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 13:30</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>In a recent experiment, students watched a video depicting a female student offering verbal and tactile support to another female student who had failed a midterm exam. The study found that verbal support centered on emotions was perceived as the most effective in boosting self-esteem, self-efficacy, and reducing distress. When the verbal support addressed the problem directly, interactions that included tactile support, such as a hug or a pat on the back, were perceived as more effective. The paper was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-024-00461-0"><em>Journal of Nonverbal Behavior</em></a>.</p>
<p>Throughout life, individuals encounter various stressors, ranging from minor daily inconveniences to severe hardships and even traumatic experiences. During such times, support from others within one’s social circle becomes invaluable. While verbal support is common, often the most potent support is conveyed nonverbally—through actions and gestures.</p>
<p>A common form of nonverbal support is supportive touch, which includes behaviors like patting someone on the back, hugging, or offering a shoulder to cry on. These gestures express affection, immediacy, and trust and are believed to enhance the emotional well-being of the individuals involved. Researchers suggest that supportive touch may also bolster the recipient’s self-esteem.</p>
<p>Study author <a href="https://www.drsamanthajshebib.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Samantha J. Shebib</a> (<a href="https://www.instagram.com/drshebib/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@drshebib</a>) and her colleagues wanted to explore how supportive touch and verbal support messages—whether focused on emotions or the problem at hand—affect self-esteem, self-efficacy, and distress in the person receiving support.</p>
<p>“My doctoral advisor, Dr. Amanda Holmstrom at Michigan State University, is the theorist behind the cognitive-emotional theory of esteem support messages (CETESM),” explained Shebib, who is now an assistant professor and associate scientist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham and co-editor of <em><a href="https://titles.cognella.com/understanding-human-communication-9781793545978" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Understanding Human Communication</a></em>.</p>
<p>“Throughout my time working with her, I came to see a gap in our understanding of how esteem support messages take effect. The gap was in addressing the role of nonverbal behaviors—specifically, haptics (the use of touch)—when giving esteem support. Previous CETESM research focused exclusively on verbal instantiations of esteem support messages.”</p>
<p>“While these studies provide valuable insight into how people react (or how they think they or others will react) to verbal esteem support messages, they do not capture nonverbal influences on message content, even though nonverbal and verbal behaviors interact to create the social meaning of supportive interactions. This led me to theorize about how nonverbal behaviors impact the verbal message being communicated.”</p>
<p>To examine this, Shebib and her colleagues conducted a study in which they videotaped a short interaction between two female students. In the scenario, one student named Courtney had failed a midterm exam and was the recipient of support from another student named Payton.</p>
<p>There were four variations of the video, differing in two key ways: whether Payton provided supportive touch (i.e., patting Courtney on the back and hugging her) or refrained from it, and whether Payton’s verbal message focused on the problem (e.g., “Talk to a professor”) or on Courtney’s emotions (e.g., “I’m really sorry that you’re having such a tough time”).</p>
<p>The researchers noted a strong agreement between how individuals personally experience interpersonal interactions and how observers perceive them, as indicated in previous studies. Accordingly, they presented the video to study participants, who then assessed the impact of Payton’s actions on Courtney’s emotional state. The researchers believed that these assessments would closely reflect what someone in Courtney’s position would genuinely feel.</p>
<p>The participants included 409 students from a large Midwestern university, who were recruited through an online participant pool. The average age was 20 years, with 59% identifying as female and 77% as White. Each participant viewed one of the four video variations and evaluated the interaction’s impact on Courtney’s self-esteem, self-efficacy, and distress alleviation. They also rated the severity of Courtney’s situation, the realism of the video scenario, the physical attractiveness of Courtney and Payton, and their own receptiveness to supportive tactile communication.</p>
<p>The results showed that observers rated emotion-focused messages as more effective at enhancing self-esteem, boosting self-efficacy, and reducing distress compared to problem-focused messages. This aligns with previous research suggesting that addressing emotions and self-perceptions is often the most effective way to support someone experiencing a self-esteem threat.</p>
<p>When supportive touch was added to problem-focused messages, observers perceived the support as more effective at enhancing self-esteem and alleviating distress. For example, a hug or pat on the back seemed to soften the directness of problem-focused advice, making it feel more caring and less critical.</p>
<p>“The most novel contribution of my colleagues’ and my study is that in the supportive tactile communication conditions, observers had higher perceptions of the recipient’s enhanced state self-esteem compared to the no supportive tactile communication conditions,” Shebib told PsyPost.</p>
<p>Unlike its effects on self-esteem and distress, however, supportive touch did not significantly influence perceptions of self-efficacy.</p>
<p>“I was probably most surprised that supportive tactile communication did not influence observers’ ratings of enhanced state self-efficacy because it contradicts past research,” Shebib said. “Self-efficacy refers to one’s confidence in one’s ability to accomplish a goal. However, I think this was due to our participants being third-party observers and not actually in the interaction itself. Perhaps self-efficacy is a state that must be internally reconciled and is difficult to interpret for an observer.”</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the effects of supportive touch in situations that pose a threat to self-esteem. However, it is important to note that the participants and actors were all students, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other demographic groups. Additionally, whether a touch is perceived as supportive, neutral, or unwelcome can vary depending on the context and the relationship between the individuals involved.</p>
<p>“The major limitation lies in the fact that participants were third-party observers and were not actually participating in the supportive interaction,” Shebib noted. “Therefore, we were unable to draw conclusions about esteem support messages with the presence or absence of supportive tactile communication from recipients currently experiencing an esteem threat and interacting face-to-face with a support provider.”</p>
<p>“My longer-term goal related to this study is twofold: first, I want to investigate other nonverbal behaviors. Second, I want to conduct a laboratory experiment with individuals going through an esteem-threatening situation and train confederates on the manipulated message (emotion-focused vs. problem-focused) while also manipulating the use of touch.”</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-024-00461-0">An Experimental Investigation of Supportive Tactile Communication During Esteem Support Conversations,</a>” was authored by Samantha J. Shebib, Josephine K. Boumis, Amanda Allard, Amanda J. Holmstrom, and Adam J. Mason.</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/new-research-uncovers-miranda-penalty-exercising-the-right-to-remain-silent-increases-suspicion/" 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;">New research uncovers ‘Miranda penalty’: Exercising the right to remain silent increases suspicion</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-47448-001?doi=1"><em>Law and Human Behavior</em></a> shows that people tend to perceive criminal suspects who exercise their right to remain silent or request a lawyer as more likely to be guilty compared to those who waive their rights and speak to the police. This phenomenon, dubbed the “Miranda penalty,” suggests that invoking the constitutional protection against self-incrimination may, paradoxically, make suspects appear more suspicious. These findings raise concerns about potential biases in criminal investigations.</p>
<p>The Miranda warning, established by the landmark Supreme Court case <em>Miranda v. Arizona</em> (1966), is intended to protect individuals from self-incrimination during police interrogations. Before questioning, law enforcement officers must inform suspects of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney. Despite this safeguard, an overwhelming majority of suspects, both innocent and guilty, choose to waive their rights and speak to the police. This has long puzzled researchers and legal experts alike.</p>
<p>Prior research has suggested two dominant explanations for this phenomenon. First, many people do not fully understand their Miranda rights because of the complex legal language often used in the warnings, or because of individual factors like youth, intellectual disability, or the stress of the interrogation itself. Second, innocent suspects often believe that their innocence will be obvious to investigators, leading them to believe that they don’t need the protection of their rights. The current study, however, proposed a third explanation: suspects may waive their rights because they fear that invoking them will make them appear guilty.</p>
<p>“We were curious about why so many innocent people choose to waive their Miranda rights and speak to the police during a criminal investigation, even though it’s often not in their best interest,” explained study author <a href="https://mlawrence556.wixsite.com/megan-lawrence" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Megan Lawrence</a>, a PhD student in law and psychology at Arizona State University.</p>
<p>“One explanation is that people are worried that refusing to talk to the police will make them look guilty. While this seems intuitive, we were surprised to find that there was no published research that actually tested whether people make assumptions about a suspect’s guilt when they refuse to speak to the police in a criminal investigation. So, we designed two studies that would get at this question.”</p>
<p>To test this hypothesis, the researchers conducted two experiments. In the first experiment, 256 undergraduate psychology students participated. In the second, the researchers recruited 119 undergraduate and graduate students pursuing degrees in law enforcement or related fields, such as criminology and criminal justice. This second sample was recruited in order to better understand if those who work in law enforcement or who are interested in careers in this area are susceptible to this same bias.</p>
<p>In both experiments, participants were asked to imagine themselves as police officers investigating a series of crimes. They read six short case descriptions, each detailing a different crime and presenting ambiguous evidence against a suspect. Three of these descriptions, the experimental cases, included information about the suspect’s decision during police questioning. In one condition, the suspect waived their Miranda rights, agreed to talk to the police, and denied involvement in the crime. In another condition, the suspect explicitly invoked their right to remain silent. In a third condition, the suspect simply sat silently and did not answer any questions.</p>
<p>Additionally, in the first experiment, half of the participants in the “invoke” condition read that the suspect invoked only their right to silence, while the other half read that the suspect invoked both their right to silence and their right to an attorney. After reading each case description, participants rated the likelihood that the suspect was guilty on a scale from 0% (definitely innocent) to 100% (definitely guilty). They also indicated whether they would judge the suspect as “innocent” or “guilty” if they had to make an immediate decision. Participants then rated the suspect on various characteristics, such as trustworthiness, honesty, intelligence, cooperativeness, and suspiciousness. Finally, they were asked to imagine they had 10 hours to allocate to investigating the suspect versus other potential leads, and to indicate how they would distribute those hours.</p>
<p>The results across both experiments provided strong evidence for a “Miranda penalty.” Participants consistently rated suspects who invoked their right to remain silent or who simply sat in silence as more likely to be guilty compared to those who waived their rights and spoke to the police. This effect was observed in both the continuous guilt ratings and the dichotomous “innocent” or “guilty” judgments.</p>
<p>“Our study highlights a catch-22 that suspects face during interrogations: speaking to police carries the risk of saying something incriminating, but we found that refusing to speak can also make someone look guilty,” Lawrence told PsyPost.</p>
<p>For instance, in the first experiment, participants judged 58.2% of suspects who invoked their Miranda rights and 62.1% of those who remained silent as guilty, a significantly higher rate than the 47.3% guilty judgment for suspects who waived their rights and spoke to police. Interestingly, the difference in guilt perceptions between suspects who explicitly invoked their rights and those who simply remained silent was not statistically significant.</p>
<p>“In the legal world, there’s a key difference between simply sitting in silence and explicitly stating the intention to remain silent,” Lawrence noted. “In order to end an interrogation, a suspect must clearly say they want to invoke their right to silence. If someone just sits quietly, the police are still allowed to continue questioning them.”</p>
<p>“Given this difference in how the law treats these two behaviors, we were curious to see if people perceive suspects in these two situations differently. We found that suspects who sit in silence and suspects who expressly invoke their right to remain silent are both viewed as more guilty than suspects who waive their rights and speak to the police.”</p>
<p>Participants also judged suspects who remained silent or invoked their rights more negatively on other characteristics, such as trustworthiness and honesty, compared to those who waived their rights. Furthermore, participants indicated they would allocate more investigative hours to suspects who invoked their rights or remained silent. This pattern was consistent across both the undergraduate sample and the sample of students in law enforcement-related programs, suggesting that the bias may be present even among those with more knowledge of the legal system.</p>
<p>As with all research, the study has some limitations that should be considered. First, the researchers used hypothetical scenarios and short case descriptions, which may not fully capture the complexities of real-world investigations. Second, although the second experiment included students in law enforcement-related programs, a sample of actual police officers would have been ideal.</p>
<p>“One key limitation is that participants had relatively little information about each criminal investigation before giving their gut impressions about the suspect’s guilt,” Lawrence said. “In real-world settings, police often have access to much more information. However, we think our findings are still likely to extend to real-world contexts, as police are often trained to make rapid judgments based on suspects’ verbal and nonverbal behaviors. Still, a valuable next step would be to replicate these findings using more detailed case materials.”</p>
<p>The findings of this study have significant implications for the criminal justice system. They suggest that the very act of exercising one’s constitutional rights can create suspicion and potentially lead to more intense scrutiny from law enforcement. This could exacerbate existing biases in investigations and increase the risk of wrongful convictions, particularly for innocent suspects who may be pressured to waive their rights to avoid appearing guilty.</p>
<p>“There are a lot of interesting future directions for this line of work,” Lawrence explained. “One we’ve discussed is based on the idea that people likely have different assumptions about how often innocent and guilty people invoke their Miranda rights. I would love to explore how these general assumptions influence people’s evaluation of a specific suspect based on their decision to speak or not speak to the police.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000587" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Miranda Penalty: Inferring Guilt From Suspects’ Silence</a>,” was authored by Megan L. Lawrence, Emma R. Saiter, Rose E. Eerdmans, and Laura Smalarz.</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/little-known-psychedelic-drug-reduces-motivation-to-take-heroin-in-rats-study-finds/" 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;">Little-known psychedelic drug reduces motivation to take heroin in rats, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Feb 3rd 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A study on rats found that administering 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine before giving them an opportunity to take heroin reduced their motivation to do so—that is, it lowered the maximum effort the animals were willing to expend to obtain a single dose of heroin. The study also identified a specific type of receptor on neural cells that is crucial for this effect. The paper was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2024.110163"><em>Neuropharmacology</em></a>.</p>
<p>Opioid use disorder is a chronic medical condition characterized by the compulsive use of opioids despite negative consequences to health, relationships, and daily life. It involves physical dependence, tolerance, and withdrawal symptoms when opioid use is reduced or stopped. Common opioids associated with opioid use disorder include prescription painkillers like oxycodone and fentanyl, as well as illicit drugs such as heroin.</p>
<p>Mainstream treatments for opioid use disorder involve giving the patient a substitute drug, a substance that activates the same receptors in the brain that opioids attach to when exerting their effects. However, many of these substitute drugs come with the same disadvantages as opioids themselves, such as the risk of overdose and abnormally slow or shallow breathing, which can sometimes be life-threatening (respiratory depression). That is why scientists are still searching for an alternative that does not produce these effects.</p>
<p>Study author Joel Bonilla and his colleagues wanted to explore whether the psychedelic drug 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine, or DOI, has the potential to be used as a substitute drug in opioid use disorder treatment. Previous studies showed that its use might reduce the motivation to consume fentanyl and alcohol, so they wanted to determine whether it could have similar effects in rats accustomed to consuming heroin and alcohol.</p>
<p>DOI strongly activates certain receptors in the brain called 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C, which normally respond to the neurotransmitter serotonin, leading to altered perceptions, mood changes, enhanced sensory experiences, and changes in thought patterns.</p>
<p>The researchers conducted a study on Wistar rats of both sexes. Wistar rats are a widely used albino strain of laboratory rats known for their docile nature, rapid growth, and genetic consistency. The rats were 50–60 days old at the start of the study and were kept in a temperature- and humidity-controlled environment with free access to food and water.</p>
<p>Using an intricate apparatus, the rats were trained to self-administer substances. One group of rats was trained to self-administer alcohol and heroin, while the other group self-administered heroin and saccharin. The rats self-administered heroin directly into their jugular veins by pressing a lever. Similarly, they received access to alcohol or saccharin solutions. One dose of heroin amounted to 40 μg/50 μl.</p>
<p>After the rats learned the self-administration procedure, the researchers gradually increased the number of lever presses needed to obtain the desired substance. At one point, the rats were given the opportunity to press the lever but did not receive the substance regardless of the number of presses. These trials are called progressive ratio tests. They were conducted to assess the rats’ breakpoints—that is, the highest effort (number of lever presses) a rat was willing to exert before stopping—indicating how motivated the rat was to receive a dose of the substance in question.</p>
<p>The first series of progressive ratio tests was conducted without administering any substances. Subsequent tests were conducted after administering DOI, after administering substances meant to block the receptors in the brain that DOI activates, and after administering both DOI and these blockers (receptor antagonists).</p>
<p>Results showed that the rats’ motivation to obtain heroin (i.e., breakpoint) was higher than their motivation to obtain alcohol. However, their motivation to obtain heroin was reduced after receiving a shot of DOI. This effect was observed 30 minutes after DOI administration. When the researchers also gave the rats a substance that blocks the 5-HT2A receptors, the effect of DOI on heroin motivation disappeared. However, it did not disappear when the 5-HT2C receptors were blocked. This indicated that the effects of DOI are achieved through the 5-HT2A receptors. DOI had no effect on the rats’ motivation to obtain alcohol.</p>
<p>“These data support the view that psychedelic drugs like DOI may have therapeutic effects on opioid use in individuals with OUD [opioid use disorder] and comorbid alcohol use, by acting as a 5-HT2A receptor agonist,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the potential therapeutic effects of 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine in opioid use disorder. However, it should be emphasized that this study was conducted on rats, not humans. While humans and rodents share many physiological similarities, they are still very different species, and the effects in humans may not be identical.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2024.110163">The psychedelic drug DOI reduces heroin motivation by targeting 5-HT2A receptors in a heroin and alcohol co-use model,</a>” was authored by Joel Bonilla, Giuseppe Giannotti, Nathaniel P. Kregar, Jasper A. Heinsbroek, David E. Olson, and Jamie Peter.</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>