<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/trump-supporters-diverge-from-other-gun-owners-on-views-of-democracy-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;">Trump supporters diverge from other gun owners on views of democracy, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 5th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study finds that on the whole, gun owners in the United States are not meaningfully different from non-gun owners in their support for democratic principles. The research, published in the journal <em><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09973-3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Political Behavior</a></em>, reveals that while gun owners show slightly more support for some democratic norms, a notable divide between those who voted for Donald Trump and those who did not obscures any clear trend for the group on other key measures.</p>
<p>Researchers conducted the study to investigate a prevalent narrative in public discourse that describes gun-owning citizens as being hostile to democracy. This idea gained traction following several armed protests at government buildings in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election. However, this popular claim stands in contrast to ideas central to American gun culture, which often frames firearm ownership as a fundamental component of democratic citizenship and a necessary protection of constitutional rights.</p>
<p>This apparent contradiction presented a scientific question: are gun owners less supportive of democratic norms than people who do not own guns? The researchers theorized that because gun owners as a group benefit from the protections of a democratic system, they would likely be just as supportive of its norms as their non-owning peers. They also suspected that gun owners are not a uniform group and that other identities, such as political affiliation, could create divisions in their attitudes.</p>
<p>To explore these questions, the research team performed a statistical analysis of public opinion data from two large, nationally representative surveys: the 2020 American National Election Studies and the 2016 General Social Survey. These surveys asked a wide range of Americans about their backgrounds, political views, and whether they owned a firearm. The analysis compared the responses of gun owners and non-gun owners on a series of questions related to democratic principles, while accounting for other factors like age, gender, education, and political party identification.</p>
<p>The study measured support for democracy in several ways. One set of questions assessed attitudes toward core democratic functions, such as the importance of checks and balances between branches of government, whether elected officials should face consequences for misconduct, and the need for citizens to agree on basic facts. Another set of questions from the 2016 survey gauged support for civil liberties, specifically the right to organize public meetings and demonstrations against the government. A final group of questions examined support for a free press, an institution considered essential to a healthy democracy.</p>
<p>The findings showed that on several measures, gun owners expressed slightly stronger support for democratic norms than non-gun owners. Specifically, gun owners were more likely to support governmental checks and balances, to believe that officials should face consequences for misconduct, and to agree that it is important for citizens to have a shared understanding of basic facts. The analysis of the 2016 data also showed that gun owners were more supportive of the right to organize public protests against the government.</p>
<p>However, the analysis revealed a different pattern on other questions. There was no significant difference between gun owners and non-gun owners in their views on whether a president should be constrained by Congress and the courts. Similarly, the two groups did not differ on the appropriateness of a president investigating political rivals. There was also no overall difference in their support for the news media’s ability to act as a check on government power.</p>
<p>The researchers suggested that these particular issues, which were prominent during the presidency of Donald Trump, activated partisan identities more strongly than gun-owner identity. They hypothesized that gun owners were split on these topics, with their attitudes being pulled in opposite directions based on their support for the former president. This split would make the group appear neutral or average when analyzed as a whole.</p>
<p>To test this idea, the researchers conducted a more focused analysis, dividing gun owners into two subgroups: those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 and those who did not. This secondary analysis produced a much clearer picture. On the very issues where gun owners as a whole showed no difference from non-owners, the two subgroups of gun owners were starkly divided.</p>
<p>Gun owners who voted for Donald Trump were significantly less likely to express concern about a president not being restricted by Congress and the courts. They were also more likely to believe it is appropriate for a president to investigate political rivals. In addition, this subgroup of gun owners showed far less support for a free press compared to gun owners who did not vote for Trump. These opposing views effectively cancelled each other out in the initial analysis, masking the deep divisions within the gun-owning population.</p>
<p>The study also confirmed that gun owners in general report lower levels of trust in the media to report news fully and accurately compared to non-owners. This distrust was even more pronounced among gun owners who voted for Trump. The researchers noted that this finding is consistent with frequent criticisms of the news media by conservative political figures and organizations. The analysis indicated that it was support for a specific political figure, Donald Trump, rather than general Republican party identification, that was most strongly associated with these attitudes.</p>
<p>The study has some limitations. The researchers acknowledge that their measures capture support for democratic principles in the abstract. An individual might agree with a general democratic norm on a survey but hold conflicting views about specific actions that threaten democracy in the real world. The study also did not examine attitudes toward political violence, which the authors suggest would be an important area for future investigation, especially given recent political events.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09973-3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Democracy at Gunpoint: American Gun Owners and Attitudes Towards Democracy</a>,” was authored by Alexandra T. Middlewood, Rachel E. Finnell, and Abigail Vegter.</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/scientists-analyzed-38-million-obituaries-and-found-a-hidden-story-about-american-values/" 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;">Scientists analyzed 38 million obituaries and found a hidden story about American values</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 5th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A sweeping linguistic analysis of over 38 million obituaries from across the United States provides new insight into how Americans collectively define a meaningful life. The study, published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2510318122" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PNAS</a></em>, suggests that values such as tradition and caring for others tend to be the most emphasized in memorials. It also finds that historical events like the September 11 attacks, the 2008 financial crisis, and the COVID-19 pandemic correspond to changes in the values highlighted in these final tributes.</p>
<p>Obituaries are one of the most enduring public records of an individual’s life. They serve not only as announcements of death but also as brief accounts of who someone was and what they stood for. Written by family members or close acquaintances, these short texts often condense a person’s character, accomplishments, and relationships into just a few paragraphs.</p>
<p>Psychologists and social scientists have long studied how people want to be remembered, often focusing on what is referred to as “symbolic immortality”—the sense that some part of the self will outlast death. But far fewer studies have examined how people are actually remembered by others. This distinction matters because legacies are co-constructed, not just imagined. The current study aimed to fill this gap by analyzing the content of obituaries at scale to understand how societal values are encoded in posthumous narratives.</p>
<p>“I’m a psychology of language scholar who is interested in learning about the human condition through words — what people are thinking, feeling, and experiencing psychologically in everyday life,” explained study author <a href="https://www.davidmarkowitz.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">David Markowitz</a>, an associate professor of communication at Michigan State University.</p>
<p>“Obituaries provide an incredible source of social, psychological, and sociological information to understand how people reflect on the lives of those who have come before us. From them, we can glean what it means to have lived a good life, and we were interested in tackling this question in a way that has not been addressed before.”</p>
<p>The researchers analyzed more than 38 million English-language obituaries published between 1998 and 2024 on Legacy.com, a widely used online memorial platform that hosts about 70% of death notices in the United States. Using a dictionary of words associated with ten personal values—based on a well-known framework called Schwartz’s theory of basic human values—the team measured how often each value appeared in obituary texts. These values include benevolence, tradition, universalism, self-direction, hedonism, power, achievement, security, conformity, and stimulation.</p>
<p>The analysis showed that the most commonly represented values in obituaries were tradition and benevolence. Tradition appeared in over 80% of obituaries, while benevolence was present in around 76%. Values like power and stimulation were much less common, showing up in less than a quarter of cases. This pattern suggests that Americans tend to remember the deceased for qualities such as honoring cultural customs and caring for others, rather than for seeking dominance or excitement.</p>
<p>“One high-level takeaway is that every obituary tells two stories — one about an individual life and another about what our society values at that moment in time,” Markowitz told PsyPost. “By understanding these patterns, we can become more conscious of how we remember others and what kind of legacy we want to leave behind for the next generation, both individually and as a culture.”</p>
<p>Beyond identifying which values appeared most often, the researchers also explored how the prominence of these values changed over time, particularly during periods of national crisis. They examined obituary content before and after three significant events: the September 11 attacks in 2001, the 2008 financial collapse, and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.</p>
<p>After September 11, the value of security—reflected in words like “health” and “order”—declined and remained below baseline for at least a year. At the same time, tradition and benevolence increased, suggesting a collective emphasis on family, faith, and social cohesion. During the financial crisis, references to achievement declined, possibly reflecting a cultural reevaluation of success in the face of economic hardship.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of COVID-19, the most pronounced change was a sharp and lasting drop in benevolence-related language. This decline began about a month into the pandemic and persisted for years, never returning to pre-pandemic levels. Obituaries also became less likely to mention hedonism—pleasure and enjoyment—suggesting a broader cultural shift in how lives were framed during this prolonged crisis.</p>
<p>“The finding that was most surprising related to the personal value of benevolence decreasing after the COVID-19 pandemic and never returning to baseline,” Markowitz said. “During a time when communities were making extraordinary sacrifices – wearing masks, social distancing, staying home – obituaries became less likely to emphasize caring for others, which felt like a paradox. However, we think this reflects how in times of crisis and personal distress, prosocial behavior becomes harder to publicly recognize, even when it is widespread.”</p>
<p>The study also looked at how values varied across demographic categories, particularly gender and age. Men were more often remembered for achievement, power, and conformity. Women, on the other hand, were more likely to be remembered for benevolence and hedonism. Older individuals were remembered more frequently for tradition and conformity, while younger people were more associated with self-direction and benevolence. These patterns reflect broader cultural stereotypes: men as agents of power and success, women as nurturers, and older adults as keepers of tradition.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the way values changed with age differed between men and women. The value profiles for women remained relatively stable across the lifespan, while men’s legacies showed more fluctuation with age. For example, as men grew older, their obituaries increasingly emphasized conformity and power, possibly reflecting accumulated achievements and social roles over time.</p>
<p>While the dataset was large and rich in detail, the researchers acknowledged several limitations. First, they were unable to analyze certain demographic factors, such as race, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, because that information is not typically included in obituaries. Gender was inferred based on first names using predictive tools, which may not always be accurate or inclusive of non-binary identities.</p>
<p>Obituaries also tend to be written in a constrained format, which limits the length and depth of the narrative. However, this constraint may also reflect what loved ones prioritize most in remembrance, making the text an efficient representation of perceived core values.</p>
<p>Another limitation involves generalizability. “These data only came from obituaries in the United States, so it is unclear how the findings might generalize to others in different countries or cultures,” Markowitz noted.</p>
<p>Future research might explore longer historical trends by examining obituaries from earlier time periods. Researchers could also investigate how occupational roles or community status influence legacy construction. Additionally, examining obituaries during other major events—such as wars, social movements, or natural disasters—could help clarify how collective memory shifts in response to different types of societal disruption.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2510318122" target="_blank" rel="noopener">An exploration of basic human values in 38 million obituaries over 30 years</a>,” was authored by David M. Markowitz, Thomas Mazzuchi, Stylianos Syropoulos, Kyle Fiore Law, and Liane Young.</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/heart-rate-patterns-may-predict-success-in-elite-military-selection-new-research-suggests/" 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;">Heart rate patterns may predict success in elite military selection, new research suggests</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 4th 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study has found a connection between a person’s heart rate patterns at rest and their likelihood of passing an extremely demanding selection course for a special operations forces naval unit. The findings, published in the journal <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-025-09702-4" target="_blank">Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback</a></em>, suggest that this physiological measurement could offer an objective way to help identify candidates who are better equipped to handle high-stress environments.</p>
<p>The researchers, led by Yosef Kula of the University of Haifa, conducted this study to explore better ways of selecting candidates for elite military roles. Special operations forces soldiers must perform complex tasks under immense physical and psychological pressure. </p>
<p>The selection processes are designed to be incredibly difficult to identify individuals who possess the necessary resilience. These processes are not only a significant burden on the candidates but also represent a substantial investment of resources. Finding objective, reliable predictors of success could make these selection processes more accurate, benefiting both the organization and the applicants.</p>
<p>The scientific team focused on a biological process related to the body’s stress response. Our bodies have an autonomic nervous system that operates automatically to regulate functions like breathing and heart rate. This system has two main branches. The sympathetic nervous system is responsible for the “fight or flight” response, preparing the body for action by increasing heart rate and alertness. The parasympathetic nervous system promotes a “rest and digest” state, helping the body calm down and recover.</p>
<p>A key component of the parasympathetic nervous system is the vagus nerve. The activity of this nerve helps moderate the body’s stress reactions. One way to measure the influence of the vagus nerve is by looking at heart rate variability. This is not the same as heart rate, which is the number of beats per minute. Instead, heart rate variability measures the small, natural fluctuations in the time intervals between consecutive heartbeats. A higher level of heart rate variability when a person is at rest is generally considered a sign of a healthy, flexible, and adaptive nervous system, one that is well-prepared to respond to and recover from challenges.</p>
<p>To investigate its predictive power, the researchers designed a historical prospective study, meaning they analyzed data that had been collected in the past. The data came from 365 healthy male high school students, aged 16 to 17, who were candidates for an Israeli naval commando unit. The team analyzed a standard 10-second electrocardiogram that was taken for each candidate as part of a routine medical examination approximately two months before they attended the five-day selection course. >From this recording, they calculated a specific measure of heart rate variability known as the root mean square of successive differences between normal heartbeats.</p>
<p>In addition to the heart rate data, the researchers had access to other information on each candidate. This included their score on a 2-kilometer run, which served as a measure of physical fitness, a score from an intelligence test, and a score from a structured psychological interview designed to assess their suitability for military combat service. The main goal was to see if heart rate variability, measured well before the stressful event, could predict the outcome of the selection course, which was categorized simply as pass or fail.</p>
<p>The initial analysis directly compared the candidates who passed the course with those who failed. The results showed that the successful group had a higher average heart rate variability than the group that did not pass. The successful candidates also tended to have better run scores, higher intelligence scores, and higher scores on the adjustment interview. This first finding was in line with the researchers’ hypothesis that a more adaptive nervous system would be associated with success.</p>
<p>However, the picture became more complex in the next stage of analysis. The researchers used a statistical technique called logistic regression to determine which of these factors was the most powerful predictor when considered all together. In this analysis, the link between heart rate variability and passing the course disappeared. The only measure that remained a significant predictor was the 2-kilometer run score. This result suggested that the initial connection might have been driven by physical fitness, as fitter individuals often exhibit higher heart rate variability.</p>
<p>To explore the relationship further and untangle the influence of these overlapping factors, the research team employed another analytical strategy. They created a smaller, matched sample of participants. They did this by finding pairs of candidates, with one individual who passed and one who failed in each pair. The key was that the two people in each pair had nearly identical scores on the 2-kilometer run and the psychological adjustment interview. By matching candidates on these strong predictors, the researchers could better isolate the unique contribution of heart rate variability. This process resulted in 29 matched pairs.</p>
<p>When analyzing this carefully matched group, the original finding re-emerged with clarity. Within these pairs, the candidates who successfully passed the selection course consistently had higher heart rate variability than their matched counterparts who failed. This finding suggests that when two individuals have comparable levels of physical fitness and similar psychological profiles, the person with higher resting heart rate variability may have an edge. It points to heart rate variability as an independent indicator of a person’s capacity to manage the intense demands of the course.</p>
<p>The authors believe these results support the idea that heart rate variability could be a useful, evidence-based tool in the screening process for tactical professionals. Since it reflects both physiological and cognitive capacities for self-regulation, it offers an objective glimpse into a candidate’s underlying resilience. Improving the accuracy of selection could lead to significant resource savings and reduce the number of candidates who are ultimately unsuccessful after enduring the physically and mentally exhausting course. </p>
<p>The study also highlights the importance of when the measurement is taken. By obtaining the reading two months before the selection test, the researchers captured a true resting state, which may be more predictive of future performance under stress.</p>
<p>The study did have several limitations that the authors acknowledged. Because it was a retrospective study, the researchers had no control over the exact conditions in which the electrocardiograms were recorded. The measurements were also taken from a very short 10-second recording, which is not the standard length for a detailed heart rate variability analysis. Finally, the measurement was taken at only a single point in time.</p>
<p>For future research, the scientists suggest that studies should measure heart rate variability using longer electrocardiogram records to ensure greater reliability. They also propose that taking measurements at several different time points, both before and during training, could provide a more complete understanding of its role in performance and adaptation. Despite its limitations, this study provides new evidence that the body’s own regulatory patterns, reflected in the subtle rhythm of the heart, may help identify those best suited for the world’s most demanding professions.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-025-09702-4" target="_blank">Does Vagal Nerve Activity Predict Performance in a Naval Commando Selection Test?</a>,” was authored by Yosef Kula, Zev Iversen, Adi Cohen, Ariel D. Levine, and Yori Gidron.</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/are-conservative-evangelical-men-really-more-insecure-about-their-penis-size/" 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;">Are conservative evangelical men really more insecure about their penis size?</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 4th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new analysis using national survey data indicates that conservative Protestant men in the United States are not more likely than other men to feel insecure about the size or appearance of their genitals, nor are they more likely to attempt enlargement. These findings challenge a theory that has gained attention in recent years, suggesting a cultural link between evangelical religious beliefs and phallic insecurity. The study, conducted by sociologists Terrence D. Hill and Amy M. Burdette, was published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-025-02423-2" target="_blank">Journal of Religion and Health</a></em>.</p>
<p>The study is a direct response to earlier research proposing that regions with high concentrations of evangelical Christians show more online activity related to male enhancement. In particular, <a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-links-evangelical-christianity-to-insecurity/" target="_blank">a 2021 study by Perry and Whitehead suggested</a> that men in these areas may be responding to cultural pressure that links masculinity with sexual dominance and bodily ideals, including penis size. Their argument was that certain religious leaders contribute to a sense of masculine inadequacy, reinforcing the belief that men are falling short of ideal manhood.</p>
<p>While Perry and Whitehead’s original work relied on state-level internet search trends, it did not assess whether individual men who identify as conservative Protestants actually internalize these concerns. This limitation led to questions about whether the theory applies to individual behaviors and attitudes. Hill and Burdette’s study seeks to clarify this by looking directly at self-reports from a large, representative sample of American men.</p>
<p>To test these ideas, the researchers used data from the 2023 Masculinity, Sexual Health, and Politics survey. This national survey sampled over 2,000 adult men living in the United States, gathering responses through a secure online platform administered by the National Opinion Research Center. Respondents were asked about their satisfaction with the size and appearance of their penises when fully erect, and whether they had ever tried any method of penis enlargement, including devices, supplements, or surgeries.</p>
<p>Religious affiliation was measured using six categories: conservative Protestants (evangelical or born-again Protestants), moderate Protestants, Catholics, other Christians, members of other religions (such as Judaism, Buddhism, or Islam), and those with no religious affiliation. The researchers also accounted for a wide range of factors that might influence body image, including age, race, education, income, political views, social desirability bias, and obesity.</p>
<p>Using statistical models, the study examined whether conservative Protestant men differed from other men in their responses, while adjusting for these background characteristics.</p>
<p>Overall, Hill and Burdette found little support for the theory linking evangelical culture to insecurity about penis size. Conservative Protestant men reported similar levels of dissatisfaction with the appearance and size of their penises compared to men from most other religious groups and men who claimed no religious affiliation.</p>
<p>The only notable differences appeared when comparing conservative Protestant men to those who belonged to non-Christian religious traditions such as Judaism, Islam, or Buddhism. Men from these groups reported somewhat lower dissatisfaction with penis appearance and size. These differences remained after adjusting for background factors, but their interpretation remains unclear due to the diversity within the “other religions” category.</p>
<p>A slight difference also appeared between conservative Protestant men and men with no religious affiliation, with the former expressing somewhat more dissatisfaction with penis appearance. However, this difference disappeared once body mass was taken into account. Men with higher body mass were more likely to report dissatisfaction, and conservative Protestant men were more likely to be classified as obese. This pattern suggests that any religious difference in penis-related concerns may reflect physical characteristics rather than ideological or cultural ones.</p>
<p>When it came to actual behavior, the researchers found no differences across religious groups in the likelihood of attempting penis enlargement. In other words, conservative Protestant men were no more likely than others to try products or procedures to increase penis size. Only two factors showed any relationship to penis enlargement efforts: higher income was linked to lower odds of having attempted enlargement, and greater social desirability (a tendency to present oneself in a positive light) was associated with less likelihood of admitting to such behaviors.</p>
<p>These findings offer a more direct test of the theory that evangelical culture fosters masculine insecurity linked to penis size. Unlike earlier studies that relied on aggregate data or internet search trends, this study focused on individual experiences. The results do not support the idea that conservative Protestant identity leads men to feel especially inadequate about their genitals or to seek enlargement.</p>
<p>The authors note that the findings are more consistent with an earlier 2022 study by Hill and colleagues, which also failed to find links between conservative Protestantism and broader measures of sexual insecurity, including performance anxiety and use of erectile dysfunction medication.</p>
<p>But the new study, like all research, has limitations. Since the study relied on self-reported data, there is always the possibility that men may not have answered honestly due to embarrassment. However, the survey design was meant to encourage candid responses, and the researchers adjusted for social desirability bias. The study is also cross-sectional, meaning it captures a single moment in time and cannot determine causality or long-term effects.</p>
<p>The findings suggest that scholars should reconsider the theory of evangelicalism and phallic insecurity, at least in its current form. The authors argue that claims about widespread cultural effects need to be grounded in individual-level data that show clear patterns of behavior and belief. Without this evidence, they suggest, the theory may not hold up under scrutiny.</p>
<p>The study also raises questions about the reliability of using tools like Google Trends to make inferences about psychological or cultural phenomena. While big data can reveal patterns, it may not accurately reflect the intentions or identities of the people generating those data points.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-025-02423-2" target="_blank">Conservative Protestantism and Penis Size: More Evidence Against the Theory of Evangelicalism and Phallocentric Masculine Insecurity</a>,” was published August 17, 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>
<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/does-bad-sleep-make-adhd-homework-problems-worse/" 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;">Does bad sleep make ADHD homework problems worse?</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 4th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A study of adolescents with ADHD, some of whom also experienced sleep problems, found that sleep problems are not associated with homework problems. Weaker neuropsychological functioning was associated with increased homework problems in adolescents with ADHD in general, but not specifically in those with sleep problems. The paper was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547251329772"><em>Journal of Attention Disorders</em></a><em>.</em></p>
<p>Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by persistent patterns of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that interfere with daily functioning. It typically begins in childhood (most often when a child starts school) but symptoms can continue into adolescence and adulthood.</p>
<p>Common signs of inattention include difficulty sustaining focus, forgetfulness, and being easily distracted. Hyperactivity may manifest as excessive fidgeting, restlessness, or an inability to stay seated when expected. Impulsivity involves hasty actions without considering consequences, such as interrupting others or making decisions too quickly. Statistics indicate that around 5.6% of adolescents worldwide have ADHD.</p>
<p>Study author Liv Smets and her colleagues note that many adolescents with ADHD also experience sleep problems. They wanted to explore whether sleep problems are associated with homework problems in adolescents with ADHD and whether issues with neuropsychological functioning explain this link. In this study, homework was “any task that teachers assign to their students that is intended to be completed outside of school hours”.</p>
<p>Homework is generally very important for academic achievement in school, and previous studies indicated that problems with doing homework might be associated with sleep problems. The idea is that sleep problems adversely impact adolescents’ neuropsychological functioning, and this would make them less able to do homework. Neuropsychological functioning, in this case, refers to how well adolescents can stay focused, remember things, manage their impulses, and keep themselves motivated in everyday life.</p>
<p>Study participants were 53 adolescents with ADHD who also had sleep problems, 24 adolescents with ADHD without sleep problems, and 53 adolescents without ADHD. Their age ranged between 13 and 17 years. They were all attending secondary school. Participants were recruited across Flanders, Belgium via academic hospitals, secondary schools, general practitioners, psychiatrists, psychologists, social media, and the network of the researchers.</p>
<p>The study authors assessed participants’ homework problems (reported by parents using the Homework Problems Checklist), behavioral indicators of neuropsychological functioning (again reported by parents using the Cognition and Motivation in Everyday Life questionnaire), and pubertal status (using the Pubertal Developmental Scale).</p>
<p>Results showed that participants with ADHD who also had sleep problems did not have more homework problems than their peers with ADHD but without sleep problems. These two groups also did not differ in most aspects of neuropsychological functioning. As expected, adolescents with poorer neuropsychological functioning were reported to have more homework problems, but this was not specifically linked to sleep problems. Also as expected, adolescents with ADHD, regardless of whether they had sleep problems or not, had more homework problems than adolescents without the disorder.</p>
<p>“In adolescents with ADHD, sleep problems were not associated with more homework problems by weaker behavioral indicators of neuropsychological functioning. However, regardless of sleep problems, the behavioral indicators of neuropsychological functioning relate to the homework problems in adolescents with ADHD,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the specificities of adolescents with ADHD. However, the study authors note that mothers of the study participants tended to be better educated than the general population of Belgium, indicating that participating adolescents, on average, come from families with higher socioeconomic status. Children from such families generally receive good support for school activities, leading to better academic achievements. Because of this, studies focusing on adolescents from families with lower socioeconomic status might report different results.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547251329772">Exploring the Association Between ADHD, Sleep, and Homework Problems: The Role of Behavioral Indicators of Neuropsychological Functioning</a>,” was authored by Liv Smets, Finja Marten, Lena Keuppens, Dieter Baeyens, Bianca E. Boyer, and Saskia Van der Oord.</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/just-a-few-chats-with-a-biased-ai-can-alter-your-political-opinions/" 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;">Just a few chats with a biased AI can alter your political opinions</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 4th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study shows that artificial intelligence chatbots with political biases can sway the opinions and decisions of users who interact with them. This effect occurred regardless of a person’s own political party and after only a few conversational exchanges. The research, <a href="https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-long.328/" target="_blank">presented at the Association for Computational Linguistics conference</a>, also suggests that greater user knowledge about artificial intelligence may help reduce this influence.</p>
<p>Large language models are complex artificial intelligence systems trained on immense quantities of text and data from the internet. Because this training data contains inherent human biases, the models often reflect and can even amplify these biases in their responses. While the existence of bias in these systems is well-documented, less was understood about how these biases affect people during dynamic, back-and-forth conversations.</p>
<p>Jillian Fisher, the study’s first author from the University of Washington, and a team of colleagues wanted to investigate this gap. Previous research had often used static, pre-written artificial intelligence content or focused on impersonal tasks, which might not engage a person’s own values. The researchers designed a new study to see how interactive conversations with biased language models would influence people’s personal political opinions and decisions.</p>
<p>To conduct their experiment, the researchers recruited 299 participants from the online platform Prolific who identified as either Democrats or Republicans. These participants were then randomly assigned to interact with one of three versions of a language model. One version was a neutral base model, a second was engineered to have a liberal bias, and a third was given a conservative bias. The researchers created the biased versions by adding hidden instructions, or prefixes, to every participant input, such as “Respond as a radical left U.S. Democrat.” The participants were not told that the model they were using might be biased.</p>
<p>Each participant completed two tasks. The first was a Topic Opinion Task. In this task, participants were asked for their opinions on relatively obscure political topics, such as covenant marriages or the Lacey Act of 1900. These topics were chosen because participants were unlikely to have strong pre-existing views on them. After stating their initial opinion, participants engaged in a conversation with their assigned chatbot to learn more before reporting their opinion again.</p>
<p>The results of this task showed that the chatbots had a significant influence. Participants who conversed with a biased model were more likely to shift their opinions in the direction of that model’s bias compared to those who used the neutral model. For example, on a topic typically supported by conservatives, Democrats who spoke with a liberal-biased model became less supportive of the topic. Conversely, Democrats who spoke with a conservative-biased model became more supportive of it. The same pattern held for Republicans, though the effect was smaller on conservative topics, likely because their initial support was already high.</p>
<p>“We know that bias in media or in personal interactions can sway people,” said lead author Jillian Fisher, a doctoral student at the University of Washington. “And we’ve seen a lot of research showing that AI models are biased. But there wasn’t a lot of research showing how it affects the people using them. We found strong evidence that, after just a few interactions and regardless of initial partisanship, people were more likely to mirror the model’s bias.”</p>
<p>The second part of the experiment was a Budget Allocation Task. Here, participants were asked to act as a city mayor and distribute a budget across four government sectors: Public Safety, Education, Veteran Services, and Welfare. Participants first made an initial budget allocation. Then they submitted it to the chatbot for feedback and were encouraged to discuss it further. After the conversation, they made their final budget allocation.</p>
<p>The findings from this task were even more pronounced. Interactions with the biased models strongly affected how participants decided to allocate funds. For instance, Democrats who interacted with a conservative-biased model significantly decreased their funding for Education and increased funding for Veterans and Public Safety. In a similar way, Republicans who interacted with a liberal-biased model increased their allocations for Education and Welfare while decreasing funds for Public Safety. In both cases, participants shifted their decisions to align with the political leanings of the chatbot they spoke with.</p>
<p>The research team also looked at factors that might change how susceptible a person is to the model’s influence. They found that participants who reported having more knowledge about artificial intelligence were slightly less affected by the model’s bias. This finding suggests that educating the public about how these systems work could be a potential way to mitigate their persuasive effects.</p>
<p>However, the study revealed that simply being aware of the bias was not enough to counter its effect. About half of the participants who interacted with a biased model correctly identified it as biased when asked after the experiment. Yet, this group was just as influenced by the model as the participants who did not detect any bias. This indicates that even when people recognize that the information source is skewed, they may still be persuaded by it.</p>
<p>To understand how the models were so persuasive, the researchers analyzed the chat transcripts from the budget task. They found that the biased models did not use different persuasion techniques, like appealing to authority, more often than the neutral model. Instead, the bias was expressed through framing. The conservative-biased model framed its arguments around themes of “Security and Defense” and “Health and Safety,” using phrases about protecting citizens and supporting veterans. The liberal-biased model focused its framing on “Fairness and Equality” and “Economic” issues, emphasizing support for the vulnerable and investing in an equitable society.</p>
<p>“These models are biased from the get-go, and it’s super easy to make them more biased,” said co-senior author Katharina Reinecke, a professor at the University of Washington. “That gives any creator so much power. If you just interact with them for a few minutes and we already see this strong effect, what happens when people interact with them for years?”</p>
<p>“My hope with doing this research is not to scare people about these models,” Fisher said. “It’s to find ways to allow users to make informed decisions when they are interacting with them, and for researchers to see the effects and research ways to mitigate them.”</p>
<p>The study includes some limitations that the authors acknowledge. The research focused on political affiliations within the United States, so the findings may not apply to other political systems. The experiment also limited the number of interactions participants could have with the chatbot and only measured the immediate effects on their opinions. Future work could explore if these changes in opinion persist over longer periods and how prolonged interactions with biased systems might affect users. Additionally, the study used only one type of large language model, so more research is needed to see if these effects are consistent across different artificial intelligence systems.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.328" target="_blank">Biased LLMs can Influence Political Decision-Making</a>,” was authored by Jillian Fisher, Shangbin Feng, Robert Aron, Thomas Richardson, Yejin Choi, Daniel W. Fisher, Jennifer Pan, Yulia Tsvetkov, and Katharina Reinecke.</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>