Search

This study was designed to assess the differential value of several psychological variables with regard to predicting safe-sex behavior. A sample of 94 male and 179 female undergraduate students, ranging in age from 16 to 66 years, were surveyed about sexual issues related to safe-sex practices. The survey included scales measuring participants' knowledge of transmission of AIDS, self-perception of safe-sex communication, fear and concern about AIDS, attitudes toward AIDS victims, and self-report of risky behavior. Several interesting relationships among predictor variables were found. For instance, favorable attitudes toward AIDS victims were positively correlated with knowledge about AIDS transmission, perceived communication with partners about safe sex, and fear of acquiring AIDS. However, only two predictor variables were independently predictive of self-reports of risky sexual behavior; specifically, fear about AIDS transmission was positively correlated with risky behavior, while communication was negatively correlated with risky behavior. These data suggest a need for a model that allows for complex, reciprocal relationships between the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components of safe-sex practice. Implications are applied to research with college populations.

The current research question sought to examine political psychology as it relates to evolutionary mismatch. The basic hypothesis is that people will be more cognitively prepared to think about political situations that are relatively small in scale compared with political situations that are large in scale. This research also examined the effects of whether the political situation is highly relevant to oneself. To test these questions, 49 young adults were presented with four sets of instructions. They were asked to write paragraphs describing (i) a large-scale, self-relevant political situation, (ii) a large-scale non-self-relevant political situation, (iii) a small-scale self-relevant political situation, and (iv) a small-scale non-self-relevant political situation. Paragraphs generated by the participants were analyzed using Tyler's () Writing Sample Readability Analyzer. Results demonstrated that paragraphs designed for large-scale political situations had more sentences and were less readable than paragraphs designed for small-scale situations-while paragraphs designed for small-scale political situations were relatively readable and included more words per sentence, suggesting that, consistent with the core hypothesis, participants had an easier time processing information related to small-scale political situations than large-scale political situations. Implications for the nature of modern politics are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article comments on the evolutionary mismatch and the large-scale shaping of cultural norms with reference to the article "Moral Beliefs about Homosexuality: Testing a Cultural Evolutionary Hypothesis," by Lesley Newson and Peter J. Richerson, published in the current issue.

Research on heterosexual mating has demonstrated that acoustic parameters (e.g., pitch) of men's voices influence their attractiveness to women and appearance of status and formidability to other men. However, little is known about how men's tendency to clearly articulate their speech influences these important social perceptions. In the current study, we used a repeated-measures design to investigate how men's articulatory clarity or conformity influenced women's (N = 45) evaluations of men's attractiveness for both short- and long-term relationships, and men's (N = 46) evaluations of physical formidability and prestige. Results largely supported our hypotheses: men who enunciated phonemes more distinctly were more attractive to women for long-term relationships than short-term relationships and were perceived by other men to have higher prestige than physical dominance. These findings suggest that aspects of articulatory behavior that influence perceptions of prestige and long-term mating attractiveness may indicate an early social history characterized by high socioeconomic status, likely owing to crystallization of articulatory patterns during the critical period of language development. These articulatory patterns may also be honest signals of condition or disposition owing to the nature of complex, multicomponent traits, which deserve further empirical attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is a response to a critique of a previous paper on scientific censorship. The authors clarify that their intention was to explain, not blame, and that they did not make claims about people from diverse backgrounds. They also address concerns about low response rates in one study and emphasize the need for more research. The authors argue for greater transparency and academic audits to identify discrimination and protect minority perspectives. They acknowledge the lack of data on the costs and benefits of censorship and caution against assuming that involving community members in research will eliminate harm-avoidant censorship. The authors disagree with the critique's demand for active participation of specific communities in all research, stating that it is impractical and unnecessarily restrictive. They conclude by highlighting the need for metascientific investigation to inform discussions on scientific censorship. [Extracted from the article]

Dirty Dozen is a recently developed, concise measure of the Dark Triad (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, & Machiavellianism). However, recent evidence has questioned the validity of this scale. In two studies we provide details about this measure in as much as it relates to the Big Five (i.e., Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness) whilst controlling for the shared variance amongst the three (Study 1: N = 123) and examining meta-traits and aspects of the Big Five (Study 2; N = 290). The Dirty Dozen subscales share an unstable core, which was localized to limited emotional stability, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. Each of the Dark Triad traits, however, was associated with unique aspects of the Big Five providing evidence that each trait measures something slightly different. For instance, psychopathy was linked to agreeableness through limited compassion but Machiavellianism was linked through limited politeness. In a series of factor analyses the scale is best explained by a bifactor model. Results provide multifaceted definitions of each of the aspects of the Dirty Dozen and evidence of its structural properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

The current research sought to shed light on the behavioral science that underlies the spread of SARS-CoV-2. We tested the extraversion hypothesis , which suggests that the sociability facet of extraversion may predispose people to becoming infected with the coronavirus via greater human-to-human contact. Since extraverts seek out social opportunities and seem less likely to follow containment measures related to social distancing, we hypothesized that people who have previously become infected would exhibit greater extraversion than would those who have not contracted the virus. We measured overall extraversion and three of its facets-sociability, assertiveness, and energy levels-as well as political orientation. We collected data from 217 adults, aged 40 and older, from the US and the UK, of whom 53 had had the virus at some point prior to the study, and 164 had not. Participants who had had COVID-19 were more dispositionally sociable and were also more conservative-leaning compared to participants who had never had COVID-19. Implications regarding the behavioral science underlying the current pandemic are discussed., (© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)