<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</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/individuals-experiencing-faster-biological-aging-are-at-increased-risk-of-dementia/" 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;">Individuals experiencing faster biological aging are at increased risk of dementia</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 3rd 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>An analysis of UK Biobank data suggests that individuals undergoing accelerated biological aging face an increased risk of developing dementia. Those with both the most accelerated biological aging and the APOE ε4 gene variant had a 4.2 times higher risk of dementia compared to individuals with the slowest biological aging and without this gene variant. The study was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000213616"><em>Neurology</em></a>.</p>
<p>Biological age refers to the condition of a person’s body and organs based on physiological and molecular markers, rather than the number of years they have lived. It reflects how well—or poorly—the body is functioning relative to what is typical for someone of the same chronological age. Unlike calendar age, which progresses uniformly, biological age can advance more rapidly or slowly depending on health, lifestyle, and genetics.</p>
<p>Researchers often estimate biological age using indicators such as telomere length, DNA methylation patterns, cardiovascular function, and certain biochemical markers. Because it captures underlying physiological wear and tear, biological age is considered a better predictor of mortality and age-related diseases than chronological age alone.</p>
<p>Lifestyle factors such as physical activity, diet, sleep quality, and stress management tend to influence biological aging. Environmental exposures like pollution and smoking can also accelerate the process. These differences may help explain why some individuals remain healthy into old age, while others experience early functional decline. The concept plays a growing role in longevity research and the development of interventions aimed at extending healthspan.</p>
<p>In the new study, lead author Yacong Bo and colleagues aimed to investigate the link between biological aging and dementia, as well as the potential role of brain structure in mediating this association. They used data from the UK Biobank, a large population-based longitudinal cohort that enrolled over 500,000 participants in England, Scotland, and Wales between 2006 and 2010.</p>
<p>After applying exclusion criteria (e.g., existing dementia diagnosis and missing data), the final sample included 280,918 participants who were dementia-free at baseline. The average age of participants in the analysis was 56.8 years, and 54.6% were female. Over a median follow-up of 13.6 years, 4,770 individuals were diagnosed with dementia.</p>
<p>Participants were followed from baseline until dementia diagnosis, death, dropout, or the end of the follow-up period. Biological age was estimated using two validated algorithms: the Klemera-Doubal Method Biological Age (KDM-BA) and PhenoAge.</p>
<p>“The KDM-BA algorithm is based on the forced expiratory volume in 1 second, systolic blood pressure, and seven blood chemistry parameters, including albumin, alkaline phosphatase, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, C-reactive protein, glycated hemoglobin, and total cholesterol,” the authors explained. “Conversely, the PhenoAge algorithm was derived from nine blood chemistry parameters, four of which are shared with KDM-BA: albumin, alkaline phosphatase, creatinine, and C-reactive protein, along with glucose, mean cell volume, red cell distribution width, white blood cell count, and lymphocyte proportion.”</p>
<p>Dementia diagnoses were obtained from hospital inpatient and primary care records, while brain imaging data were available for a subset of participants via structural MRI.</p>
<p>The results indicated that individuals with faster biological aging—measured by either KDM-BA or PhenoAge—were more likely to develop dementia. Notably, individuals with both high biological age acceleration and the APOE ε4 genotype had a 4.2-fold increased risk of dementia compared to those with neither risk factor. The APOE ε4 allele is a well-established genetic risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.</p>
<p>While genetic risk measured via polygenic risk scores (PRS) also predicted dementia, the researchers found no significant interaction between PRS and biological aging. In other words, PRS and accelerated aging appeared to contribute additively, not synergistically, to dementia risk. However, there was a significant interaction between PhenoAge acceleration and APOE ε4 status—suggesting that their combined presence may compound dementia risk more than either alone.</p>
<p>To better understand the mechanism linking biological aging to dementia, the researchers analyzed brain imaging data. Individuals with higher biological age acceleration showed widespread reductions in gray matter volume, cortical thickness, and surface area—features commonly associated with brain aging and neurodegeneration. These structural changes were themselves associated with an increased risk of dementia.</p>
<p>A mediation analysis provided evidence that brain atrophy may partly explain the link between accelerated biological aging and dementia risk. Specifically, reductions in gray matter volume mediated between 13% and 18% of the association, depending on the metric used. Cortical thickness and surface area also contributed to a lesser extent.</p>
<p>“This study provided compelling evidence linking accelerated BA [biological aging] to incident dementia. Our findings suggested that advanced BA may contribute to changes in brain structures, thereby increasing susceptibility to dementia,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the links between biological aging and dementia. However, it should be noted that the study relied on official diagnoses of dementia only and did not take into account the period between the time when participants developed dementia and when it was diagnosed. This means that at least some of the participants could already have had undiagnosed dementia at the start of the study period. Results could have been affected by this, as one of the requirements for inclusion of the analysis was that participants did not suffer from dementia at the start.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000213616">Associations of Accelerated Biological Aging With Dementia and the Mediation Role of Brain Structure,</a>” was authored by Yacong Bo, Liuqiao Sun, Shengsheng Hou, Fenghua Zhang, Haowen Zhang, Xueyi Feng, Sisi Zhuo, Shiyu Feng, Hui Chang, Xiaoan Zhang, Zhengbin Wang, Zengli Yu, and Xin Zhao.</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/young-adults-with-different-adhd-symptom-profiles-face-distinct-cannabis-related-risks/" 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;">Young adults with different ADHD symptom profiles face distinct cannabis-related risks</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 3rd 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in the journal <em><a href="https://publications.sciences.ucf.edu/cannabis/index.php/Cannabis/article/view/312" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Cannabis</a></em> sheds light on how two core features of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder—namely inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity—relate to specific problems associated with cannabis use in young adults. The findings suggest that inattention symptoms are tied to functional consequences like academic struggles, poor self-care, and memory lapses, while hyperactive-impulsive symptoms may lead indirectly to cannabis dependence through increased consumption.</p>
<p>Cannabis use is widespread among young adults, a population that is both neurologically vulnerable to the effects of cannabis and more likely to use it regularly. This is especially concerning for individuals with ADHD, who are at elevated risk for developing problematic cannabis use. Past research has linked ADHD to higher rates of cannabis use disorder and earlier initiation of cannabis use, but few studies have examined how specific ADHD symptoms—such as inattention versus hyperactivity—relate to the different problems that can stem from cannabis use.</p>
<p>“Since cannabis became legal for non-medical use in Canada, there has been an increase in the number of young adults who report they use cannabis to self-medicate symptoms of physical and mental health conditions,” said study author Jeffrey Wardell, an associate professor of psychology at York University.</p>
<p>“Anecdotally working with this population, we have heard young adults report that cannabis helps them with their symptoms of ADHD. This was somewhat surprising to me because cannabis is known to cause impairments in attention, memory, and other cognitive functions, so I would have guessed that cannabis would make ADHD symptoms worse instead of better. But there is also a range of different ADHD symptoms, so I started to wonder if certain types of symptoms might be more related to cannabis use than others.”</p>
<p>“For example, perhaps young adults who have more of the hyperactivity or impulsive symptoms of ADHD (instead of the inattention/concentration symptoms) might perceive that cannabis helps them to relax and not be so fidgety and restless. While a few studies had been done looking at differential associations between the hyperactive/impulsive symptoms and inattention symptoms with cannabis use, findings were mixed, and no studies looked at how these different ADHD symptoms related to different types of cannabis-related outcomes. So, this is what we sought to uncover with this study.”</p>
<p>Wardell and his colleagues recruited 160 young adults in Toronto, aged 19 to 25, all of whom had a history of regular cannabis use. About 54% of participants met the criteria for cannabis use disorder in the past year, based on a structured clinical interview. To be eligible, participants had to have used cannabis at least twice a month for six months at some point in their lives, and they could not have a history of psychosis or regular use of substances other than cannabis.</p>
<p>Participants completed a battery of self-report questionnaires and interviews during an in-person session. ADHD symptoms were measured using a widely used 18-item adult screening tool, which produces separate scores for inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity. Cannabis-related consequences were assessed using a detailed questionnaire covering eight domains: social issues, impaired control, negative self-perception, self-care, risky behavior, academic or occupational problems, physical dependence, and blackout or memory impairment. The total amount of cannabis flower consumed over the past 90 days was measured using the Timeline Follow Back interview method, which asked participants to recall their daily usage.</p>
<p>The results suggest that inattention and hyperactivity symptoms relate to cannabis consequences in different ways. Inattention symptoms were directly associated with three specific types of cannabis-related problems: difficulties in academic or occupational functioning, poor self-care, and blackout or memory impairments. These associations were not explained by how much cannabis the individual used, suggesting that the presence of inattention symptoms alone may increase susceptibility to these outcomes.</p>
<p>This pattern may reflect the cognitive demands of daily life. Tasks such as maintaining focus, remembering responsibilities, and sustaining routines may be especially challenging for individuals with high inattention, and cannabis use—known to impair memory and motivation—might exacerbate these difficulties.</p>
<p>By contrast, hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms were not directly linked to specific cannabis-related problems. However, they were associated with greater cannabis use overall, which in turn predicted higher levels of impaired control, physical dependence, and symptoms of cannabis use disorder. This suggests an indirect pathway: individuals high in hyperactivity-impulsivity may use more cannabis, which raises their risk for these more severe forms of cannabis-related harm.</p>
<p>Interestingly, inattention symptoms were negatively associated with physical dependence and impaired control, but only when taking into account their overlap with hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms. In other words, when statistical models controlled for the influence of hyperactivity symptoms, individuals with high inattention tended to report fewer problems associated with cannabis dependence. This counterintuitive result points to a suppression effect in the data—where the presence of one correlated symptom (in this case, hyperactivity) may mask the influence of another.</p>
<p>The findings also support the idea that individuals with hyperactive-impulsive tendencies may use cannabis in part as a form of self-medication. Previous studies suggest these individuals often report that cannabis helps reduce restlessness or agitation. However, frequent or heavy use can increase the risk of losing control over consumption, developing physical dependence, or meeting the clinical criteria for cannabis use disorder.</p>
<p>By contrast, individuals with high inattention may not experience cannabis as symptom-relieving. Some studies suggest that people with inattention symptoms view cannabis as ineffective or even detrimental for their symptoms. This may partially explain why they consume smaller quantities, even though they still experience negative outcomes in areas like work, school, and self-care.</p>
<p>“Young adults who have elevated levels of hyperactive/impulsive ADHD symptoms reported consuming larger amounts of cannabis, and this was associated with risk for more severe negative outcomes such as cannabis use disorder, inability to control cannabis use, and cannabis tolerance or withdrawal,” Wardell told PsyPost. “Further, although young adults with elevated inattention symptoms of ADHD did not report using more cannabis, they were still at heightened risk of certain types of negative outcomes of cannabis use such as poorer academic performance, poor self care, and memory impairment.”</p>
<p>“So, the main message I would have for young adults with ADHD is even if they perceive that cannabis may be helping their symptoms, there are still risks for negative outcomes. I would recommend that they talk to their healthcare provider for guidance if they plan to use of cannabis to manage ADHD symptoms.”</p>
<p>Although the study offers new insights into the distinct ways inattention and hyperactivity symptoms relate to cannabis-related harm, some limitations should be noted. The cross-sectional design means that causal conclusions cannot be drawn. It remains unclear whether ADHD symptoms lead to cannabis problems, or whether cannabis use exacerbates ADHD-like symptoms. Longitudinal research would be needed to clarify how these relationships develop over time.</p>
<p>The observed effect sizes were also small. For instance, a one-point increase in hyperactivity symptoms was associated with a one percent increase in some cannabis-related problems. While these are statistically significant relationships, their clinical relevance may be limited.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://publications.sciences.ucf.edu/cannabis/index.php/Cannabis/article/view/312" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Understanding the Relationships between ADHD Symptoms and Cannabis-Related Consequences among Young Adults</a>,” was authored by Claire Minister, Christian S. Hendershot, Matthew T. Keough, and Jeffrey D. Wardell.</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/dark-triad-personalities-may-be-easier-to-scam-than-youd-think/" 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;">Dark Triad personalities may be easier to scam than you’d think</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 3rd 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2025.2538176" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Journal of Psychology</a></em> offers evidence that individuals who score higher on socially antagonistic personality traits may be more prone to falling for email phishing scams. The research suggests this susceptibility may be explained, at least in part, by a deficit in social awareness—a component of social intelligence that helps individuals recognize others’ intentions. The findings challenge the idea that manipulative or self-serving people are inherently savvy about deception and instead indicate that such traits may make them easier to exploit.</p>
<p>Phishing emails are a leading cause of cybersecurity breaches around the world. These scams often use social engineering to trick individuals into revealing sensitive information, clicking malicious links, or downloading harmful attachments. Although these emails rely more on exploiting human error than breaking technical firewalls, only a fraction of people actually fall for them. This discrepancy has led researchers to explore what psychological characteristics predict susceptibility.</p>
<p>Among the more provocative hypotheses in the literature is the suggestion that people who exhibit traits associated with the Dark Triad—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—might be especially vulnerable to phishing. These personality traits are often studied in the context of how they enable people to manipulate or exploit others. But some researchers have speculated that these same traits might also make individuals more likely to be deceived, particularly if they impair social awareness or lead to overconfidence.</p>
<p>Previous studies have produced mixed results. Some have found that people with higher levels of narcissism are more likely to trust or respond to scam emails. Others have found no meaningful connection between Dark Triad traits and phishing behavior. A common limitation of these earlier studies was the use of unidimensional personality measures, which do not account for the fact that each Dark Triad trait can manifest in different ways.</p>
<p>The new study, led by <a href="https://sites.ua.edu/wphart/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">William Hart</a> and colleagues at the University of Alabama, aimed to provide a more fine-grained analysis. The researchers examined how specific subtypes of each Dark Triad trait relate to phishing susceptibility, while also considering the potential mediating role of social awareness.</p>
<p>“In addition to trying to understand the personality correlates of one of the most costly types of cyberattacks, we were intrigued by the paradoxical idea that individuals high in ‘dark’ personality traits—people often thought of as manipulators or exploiters—might themselves be more likely to fall for phishing scams,” said Hart, an associate professor. “We suspected this vulnerability might be explained not by gullibility in the traditional sense, but by deficiencies in social awareness, meaning that people high in these traits may fail to appropriately consider others’ motives and intentions.”</p>
<p>The study included 461 undergraduate students, most of whom were female and white, and between the ages of 18 and 19. Participants completed the study online and were compensated with partial course credit. The researchers administered a series of validated questionnaires and behavioral tasks designed to measure Dark Triad traits, social intelligence, cognitive reflectiveness, and susceptibility to phishing.</p>
<p>Each Dark Triad trait was assessed using multidimensional scales. Machiavellianism was measured in terms of “tactics” (manipulative behavior) and “views” (cynical distrust). Narcissism was divided into “rivalry” (antagonistic self-enhancement) and “admiration” (agentic self-promotion). Psychopathy was broken down into interpersonal manipulation, callousness, erratic lifestyle, and criminal tendencies.</p>
<p>To assess social intelligence, the researchers used a scale that distinguishes between two components: social awareness and social information processing. Social awareness refers to sensitivity to social cues and awareness of others’ motivations, while social information processing refers to the ability to analyze and use that social information effectively.</p>
<p>Participants also completed a version of the Cognitive Reflection Test, which measures the tendency to override intuitive but incorrect responses in favor of more reflective thinking. Phishing susceptibility was evaluated using 12 real-looking scam emails. Participants rated each email on how likely they would be to respond, how trustworthy they found it, and how persuasive it seemed. These ratings were combined into a composite phishing susceptibility score.</p>
<p>Initial analyses found that most Dark Triad facets were not directly associated with phishing susceptibility. Only one trait—admiration, the agentic form of narcissism that emphasizes self-promotion and uniqueness—showed a small positive correlation with phishing vulnerability. In other words, people high in narcissistic admiration were slightly more likely to rate scam emails as credible or respond to them.</p>
<p>However, when the researchers looked deeper, they found a pattern. Nearly all of the Dark Triad facets were indirectly associated with greater phishing susceptibility, and this link was explained by lower levels of social awareness. That is, people with higher levels of traits like Machiavellian cynicism, psychopathic callousness, or narcissistic rivalry tended to score lower on social awareness, which in turn made them more vulnerable to phishing scams.</p>
<p>“The consistency of the findings across all the facets of each dark trait was somewhat surprising,” Hart told PsyPost. “Nearly all facets of Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism showed indirect links to phishing susceptibility through social awareness. These facets do not always predict similar outcomes like that.”</p>
<p>This held true even when controlling for cognitive reflection and social information processing. Social awareness—not intelligence in general or cognitive caution—emerged as a key factor. The one partial exception was admiration. While it was weakly linked to phishing both directly and through social awareness, the indirect effect was only marginally significant.</p>
<p>The study’s regression models further supported these findings. Social awareness and cognitive reflectiveness both predicted lower phishing susceptibility, while most of the Dark Triad facets did not show unique effects once these other variables were included.</p>
<p>Taken together, these results suggest that deficiencies in social awareness are a common thread linking various antisocial traits to increased vulnerability to phishing. These findings also help reconcile earlier mixed results by showing that the apparent absence of direct effects can mask underlying associations mediated by social intelligence.</p>
<p>The results provide evidence that individuals with higher levels of socially aversive traits may not be as immune to manipulation as stereotypes suggest. On the contrary, their lower sensitivity to others’ intentions might make them more likely to fall for socially engineered scams.</p>
<p>“People higher in traits like narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism were more likely to fall for phishing scams, but this link was explained largely by their lower social awareness rather than the traits themselves,” Hart explained. “It was the ability to detect subtle social cues and consider others’ motives, which is diminished in people higher in these traits, that seemed to play a key role in protecting people from being scammed. Although our effects tended to be small, there may be some benefit to improving social awareness; people may want to pause and consider the sender’s intentions prior to responding to reduce the chances of being victimized.”</p>
<p>There are some limitations to take into account. The sample consisted entirely of college students, which may limit the generalizability of the results to older or more diverse populations. In addition, all measures were based on self-report, which can introduce bias. Future research could use task-based or observational assessments of social awareness and phishing behavior to build on these findings.</p>
<p>Another direction for future research could involve testing how these relationships hold in real-world contexts. For instance, do people high in Dark Triad traits click more often on actual scam emails outside the lab? Do interventions aimed at improving social awareness reduce this tendency?</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2025.2538176" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Phishing in the Dark: Dark Personality is Associated with Phishing Susceptibility Due to Decreased Social Awareness</a>,” was authored by William Hart, Joshua T. Lambert, and Braden T. Hall.</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/study-finds-women-tend-to-favor-sweet-actions-over-sweet-words-in-romantic-partners/" 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;">Study finds women tend to favor sweet actions over sweet words in romantic partners</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 2nd 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People often say that actions speak louder than words, but whether that holds true may depend on one’s sex. A new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-025-00431-9" target="_blank">Evolutionary Psychological Science</a></em> suggests that women are more likely than men to prefer tangible expressions of affection—such as help with chores or small acts of care—over verbal declarations like “I love you” or “I’m here for you.” This preference appears to be tied to how women and men differently perceive warmth and trustworthiness in potential partners.</p>
<p>The research offers new insight into how small, everyday behaviors—rather than grand gestures or expensive gifts—can influence mate selection. While both men and women value warmth and trustworthiness in romantic partners, the study indicates that they differ in what kinds of signals they find most compelling during early courtship.</p>
<p>Much of the previous research on mate preferences has focused on large-scale traits like attractiveness, intelligence, or social status. While these qualities play a role in partner selection, they are relatively difficult to modify. In contrast, small expressions of affection—such as what someone says or does in daily life—can be adjusted more easily and may carry important social signals, especially during the early stages of a relationship.</p>
<p>The researchers were particularly interested in the perceived importance of “sweet words” versus “sweet actions.” Sweet words included phrases like “I miss you,” “I understand you,” or verbal encouragement. Sweet actions referred to small but tangible gestures, such as helping with errands or cooking a meal. These two types of behavior are common in everyday relationships and offer different ways of expressing care.</p>
<p>Drawing on evolutionary theory, the researchers predicted that women would be more likely than men to prefer sweet actions over sweet words. This prediction was grounded in theories of reproductive investment: Women tend to prioritize signs that a partner is dependable and willing to invest in the relationship, while men are more sensitive to signals of immediate emotional or sexual interest. Sweet actions may serve as better indicators of commitment, while sweet words might offer more immediate gratification.</p>
<p>The study was conducted across three experiments with 513 heterosexual Chinese adults recruited online. Each study was designed to test whether women and men differ in how they perceive and evaluate sweet actions versus sweet words, especially when choosing a romantic partner.</p>
<p>Study 1 asked participants to imagine scenarios in which their partner expressed affection either through words or actions. For example, a sweet word scenario involved a partner offering comforting words after a stressful day, while a sweet action scenario described a partner doing the laundry. Participants then rated how desirable these behaviors were.</p>
<p>The results showed a significant interaction between sex and affection type. Women rated sweet actions as more desirable than sweet words, whereas men showed the opposite pattern. Men favored verbal expressions of affection more than behavioral ones, although the effect was not as strong.</p>
<p>Study 2 introduced two hypothetical partner profiles: one who excelled at sweet words and one who was better at sweet actions. Participants chose which person they would prefer to start a romantic relationship with and rated how warm or trustworthy each one seemed.</p>
<p>Again, women showed a stronger preference for the partner who expressed affection through actions, and they rated this person as warmer and more trustworthy. Men showed a weaker preference overall and did not strongly differentiate between the two profiles. Importantly, the researchers found that the perception of warmth and trustworthiness explained the relationship between sex and mate preference—supporting the idea that women find actions to be stronger indicators of a partner’s emotional reliability.</p>
<p>Study 3 followed a similar design to Study 2 but used new profile descriptions and a more detailed measurement of perceived warmth and trustworthiness. The results replicated those of the earlier studies. Women again showed a stronger preference for sweet actions and rated those partners as warmer and more trustworthy. Men showed no significant preference and rated both types of partners similarly.</p>
<p>Across all three studies, the researchers tested whether participants’ usual style of expressing affection—either through words or actions—might explain their preferences. The results showed no sex differences in how people typically express affection themselves, suggesting that the preferences observed were not merely a reflection of habit or personal communication style.</p>
<p>The researchers focused on warmth and trustworthiness because these traits consistently appear at the top of people’s lists of ideal partner qualities. Prior studies have identified warmth, attractiveness, and status as three core dimensions in romantic attraction, with warmth and trustworthiness being the most important for long-term relationship satisfaction.</p>
<p>Sweet actions may be more meaningful in signaling warmth and trustworthiness because they require effort and are harder to fake. Words, while emotionally powerful, can be spoken without follow-through. From an evolutionary perspective, women may be especially sensitive to behaviors that signal a partner’s willingness to invest time and effort—key factors in successful parenting and long-term stability.</p>
<p>In contrast, men may be less reliant on these cues when forming judgments about a potential partner’s intentions or emotional depth. Verbal expressions of affection might be more immediately rewarding or easier to interpret as signs of romantic or sexual interest, especially in early stages of dating.</p>
<p>There are some limitations. First, the studies were based entirely on hypothetical scenarios and self-report measures. While these methods are useful for isolating variables and testing specific ideas, they do not necessarily reflect how people behave in real-world situations like speed dating or ongoing relationships.</p>
<p>Second, the sample consisted solely of Chinese participants. Cultural norms around gender roles and emotional expression vary widely, and it is not yet clear how these findings would generalize to other societies. Future studies could examine whether the same patterns appear across different cultural settings.</p>
<p>The study also did not account for variables such as attachment style, relationship history, or sociosexual orientation, all of which could influence how people interpret or prioritize expressions of affection. Future research might explore how these psychological factors interact with sex to shape romantic preferences.</p>
<p>Lastly, the study did not directly measure relationship outcomes. It remains to be seen whether preferences for sweet words or sweet actions are linked to greater satisfaction, trust, or longevity in actual relationships.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-025-00431-9" target="_blank">Who Favor Sweet Actions over Sweet Words More – Females or Males?</a>,” was authored by Xing Shu and Jianmin Zeng.</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/study-finds-partisan-hostility-drives-protest-participation-in-the-united-states/" 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;">Study finds partisan hostility drives protest participation in the United States</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 2nd 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 <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf066" target="_blank">Social Forces</a></em> suggests that in the United States, people are more likely to protest not simply because they identify with a political party, but because they feel anger or threat toward the opposing one. Drawing from three large survey-based studies conducted between 2014 and 2022, political scientist <a href="https://www.sethbwarner.com/" target="_blank">Seth Warner</a> found that partisan animosity—feelings of hostility toward the other party—consistently predicted whether someone participated in a protest. In contrast, merely identifying strongly with a party had little or even negative effects on protest participation.</p>
<p>In the past two decades, protest activity has grown significantly across developed democracies, and the United States has seen some of the largest nonviolent mobilizations in its history. The reasons why some individuals take to the streets while others do not has long interested political scientists and sociologists, but explanations have often centered on digital organizing, ideological commitments, or shared group identities.</p>
<p>Warner was particularly intrigued by the growing overlap between protest movements and partisan politics in the U.S. Though many demonstrations are not explicitly organized by political parties, they tend to align with party-affiliated agendas. For instance, the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests were often perceived as supportive of the Democratic Party, while Tea Party protests aligned with Republican priorities.</p>
<p>Warner observed that even when protests are framed in terms of social justice or policy concerns, many participants appear to be motivated by their feelings toward political opponents. This raised the question: is it loyalty to one’s party that drives protest behavior, or is it antagonism toward the opposing side?</p>
<p>“The idea for the study came to mind even before I went to graduate school, in 2017. The first big protest event of the Trump presidency was the Women’s March, which occurred the day after President Trump’s first inauguration,” said Warner, an assistant professor at the University of Connecticut.</p>
<p>“I remember thinking that even though the protest was ‘about’ women’s issues, a lot of people were probably there to protest Donald Trump more generally. Then, when I began working on this study for my dissertation, I noticed a lot of conservative protests as well that seemed to be more partisan than anything. People’s signs expressed anger at Joe Biden, or support of Donald Trump, but did not have a lot of policy substance otherwise.”</p>
<p>Warner conducted three empirical studies, each designed to assess the influence of partisan identity and partisan animosity on protest participation. These studies used different datasets and methodologies but were unified by the same goal: to test whether identifying with a political party or harboring negative feelings toward the other side better explained participation in protests.</p>
<p>Study 1 used data from the American National Election Study (ANES) panel, tracking 2,839 respondents from 2016 to 2020. Warner examined whether levels of partisan identity and animosity in 2016 could predict protest participation four years later. He accounted for prior protest activity and a range of other factors, including ideological extremism, news interest, and demographic characteristics.</p>
<p>In this study, partisan animosity was measured by how coldly respondents rated the opposing party on a 0 to 100 scale. Strength of partisan identity was based on how strongly they aligned with their own party. The analysis revealed that partisan animosity significantly predicted protest participation in 2020, even after controlling for earlier behavior. By contrast, strong party identification was associated with a lower likelihood of protest participation.</p>
<p>Study 2 looked more closely at specific protest movements. Drawing on data from the Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel, Warner analyzed participation in protests tied to the Black Lives Matter movement, the climate movement, and the Tea Party. Each dataset included information about participants’ views on the protest’s central issues, their partisan identity, and their feelings toward the other party.</p>
<p>Here again, Warner found that animosity toward the opposing party was a robust predictor of participation. In the case of Black Lives Matter and Tea Party protests, feelings of hostility toward the opposing party accounted for about half as much variation in protest behavior as policy alignment. For climate protests, partisan animosity was even more predictive than issue concern. Meanwhile, being a strong Democrat or Republican had little influence on whether someone participated in a protest related to their party’s general platform.</p>
<p>Study 3 explored how the political atmosphere in a respondent’s local community influenced protest behavior. Using data from the Cooperative Election Study and a method known as multilevel regression with poststratification, Warner estimated the level of partisan identity and animosity across U.S. counties. He then tested whether living in a county with higher levels of animosity or partisanship made people more likely to protest.</p>
<p>The results indicated that local environments shaped by high levels of partisan animosity increased the likelihood of protest participation. Interestingly, it was not just the animosity expressed by one’s own party that made a difference. Animosity from the opposing party—what people perceived as hostility directed at them—was especially influential. Warner found that living in a high-animosity county increased a person’s odds of protesting by nearly 50 percent. The presence of many like-minded partisans in the area also slightly increased protest participation, though to a lesser extent.</p>
<p>“Partisan polarization is a big reason why we see so many protests today,” Warner told PsyPost. “The number of protests has <a href="https://wagingnonviolence.org/2025/06/american-spring-nonviolent-protest-accelerating/" target="_blank">gone up a lot in recent years</a>, and even though many of them touch on perfectly valid policy concerns (like racial inequality or the extent of COVID-19 restrictions), polarization is part of what has led so many people to take to the streets.”</p>
<p>While Warner’s findings are supported across multiple studies, they come with some limitations. The research relies on self-reported survey data, which can be subject to memory errors or social desirability bias. Participants may have misremembered or misrepresented their involvement in protests, and the studies may not fully capture the wide range of protest experiences or motivations behind participation.</p>
<p>The data also reflect a uniquely American political context, shaped by a polarized two-party system. In countries with multi-party systems or different protest traditions, the relationship between identity, animosity, and protest may look different. Warner encourages future research to examine whether similar dynamics exist in contexts where hostility is directed at other groups, such as far-right factions or political elites. His emphasis on anger as a driving emotion also leaves open questions about how other feelings—like fear, hope, or sadness—might influence political behavior in different ways.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf066" target="_blank">Partisan animosity and protest participation in the United States</a>,” was published May 30, 2025.</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>