Search

Aversion to uncertainty about the future has been proposed as a transdiagnostic trait underlying psychiatric diagnoses including obsessive-compulsive disorder and generalised anxiety. This association might explain the frequency of pathological information-seeking behaviours such as compulsive checking and reassurance-seeking in these disorders. Here we tested the behavioural predictions of this model using a non-instrumental information-seeking task that measured preferences for unusable information about future outcomes in different payout domains (gain, loss, and mixed gain/loss). We administered this task, along with a targeted battery of self-report questionnaires, to a general-population sample of 146 adult participants. Using computational cognitive modelling of choices to test competing theories of information valuation, we found evidence for a model in which preferences for costless and costly information about future outcomes were independent, and in which information preference was modulated by both outcome mean and outcome variance. Critically, we also found positive associations between a model parameter controlling preference for costly information and individual differences in latent traits of both anxiety and obsessive-compulsion. These associations were invariant across different payout domains, providing evidence that individuals high in obsessive-compulsive and anxious traits show a generalised increase in willingness-to-pay for unusable information about uncertain future outcomes, even though this behaviour reduces their expected future reward. Author Note Daniel Bennett, Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University and Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne; Kiran Sutcliffe, Nicholas Poh-Jie Tan, and Luke D. Smillie, Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne; Stefan Bode, Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne and Department of Psychology, University of Cologne. This work was supported by an ARC Discovery Project grant (DP180102383) to SB. DB receives salary support from an NHMRC CJ Martin Early Career Fellowship (1165010). We thank Trevor Chong and Sam Zorowitz for comments on an earlier draft. De-identified behavioural and self-report data, as well as analysis code (for reproducing correlational analyses and Stan models) are publicly available in an Open Science Framework repository at https://osf.io/eg74d/ .

A recent theory proposes that the personality trait openness/intellect is underpinned by differential sensitivity to the reward value of information. This theory draws on evidence that midbrain dopamine neurons respond to unpredicted information gain, mirroring their responses to unpredicted primary rewards. Using a choice task modelled on this seminal work (Experiment 1, N = 139, 69% female), we examined the relation between openness/intellect and willingness to pay for non-instrumental information (i.e., information with no secondary utility). We also assessed whether any such relation was moderated by the dopamine D2 receptor antagonist sulpiride (Experiment 2, N = 164, 100% male). Unexpectedly, most measures of openness/ intellect were unrelated to costly information preference in both experiments, and some predicted a decreased willingness to incur a cost for information. In Experiment 2, this cost-dependent association between openness/intellect and information valuation appeared in the placebo condition but not under sulpiride. In addition, participants were more willing to pay for moderately costly information under sulpiride compared to placebo, consistent with a dopaminergic basis to information valuation. Potential refinements to the information valuation theory of openness/intellect are discussed in the light of these and other emerging findings.

With rates of vegetarianism and veganism (i.e., veg*nism) rising around the world, a growing body of research has begun to explore psychological characteristics that distinguish vegetarians and vegans from omnivores. However, relatively few studies have examined how veg*nism is related to differences in basic personality traits such as the “Big Five”, with those that have tending to yield conflicting results. Moreover, none of these studies have examined personality at the lower levels of the personality trait hierarchy (i.e., aspects and facets of the Big Five). Thus, we sought to clarify how personality traits are related to veg*nism. In Study 1, comprising two samples (S1a: N = 797, S1b: N = 1534), participants were categorised as Veg*n vs Restricted-omnivore vs Omnivore, and completed personality questionnaires at the domain and aspect levels of the Big Five. In Study 2, participants (N = 562) completed both categorical and continuous measures of veg*nism, along with personality questionnaires at the domain, aspect, and facet levels. Across both studies, we found that people who scored higher on traits within the openness/intellect and agreeableness domains most consistently reported higher levels of veg*nism. Patterns in the data also suggested that the relation between personality and veg*nism might depend on the way veg*nism is measured. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Conservationists have sought to identify avenues through which to gain public support for efforts to halt the accelerating decline in animal diversity. Previous research has identified perceived internal qualities of animals that lead people to view them as deserving of protection for their own sake; that is, increase their moral standing. In two studies, we found that perceived beauty is an external aesthetic quality that leads people to attribute moral standing to animals independently from animals' perceived mental capacities associated with patiency or agency, and dispositional harmfulness, as well as other factors likely to influence moral standing. In Study 1, we found that beauty perceptions predicted moral standing independently from perceived patiency, agency, and harmfulness across a wide range of animal species. In Study 2 (pre-registered), we found that beauty causally influenced moral standing attributions to animals independently from animals’ perceived internal qualities, as well as their perceived similarity to humans, familiarity, and edibility. Our findings provide insight into another factor which contributes to the perceived moral status of animals, and therefore may help conservationists to identify the most effective ways to attract funds for conservation efforts.