Beliefs versus Reality: People Overestimate the Actual Dishonesty of Others

Martuza, J., Thorbjørnsen, H., & Sjåstad, H.

(2024, June 27).

https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nm2cz

Abstract

Beliefs about the dishonesty of other people can shape our collective behavior in powerful ways. How accurate are these beliefs? And do we believe that other people are similarly, more, or less dishonest than they truly are? In a research program on moral decision-making consisting of 31 different effects (N = 8,127), initially designed to test a broad collection of different hypotheses, participants were placed in various situations where they could lie for personal gain, without any repercussions or detection risk. Crucially, we also asked all participants to estimate what percentage of other people would lie in a similar situation. Conducting an internal meta-analysis across all experiments, including both incentivized choice experiments and hypothetical marketplace scenarios, the results revealed a substantial overestimation of others' dishonesty by an average of 14 percentage points (meta-analytic effect: Hedge’s g = 0.58). That is, people are less dishonest than we tend to think, in which about 70% of our participants told the truth despite having a financial incentive to lie. These findings reveal a pervasive tendency to overestimate the actual dishonesty of other people, suggesting a biased belief that the world is less moral than it truly is. Does belief accuracy matter? In a new experiment using an information treatment based on our meta-analytic results (N = 981), providing correct information about actual honesty levels did not only lead to more positive honesty beliefs, but also to a broader enhancement of pro-social expectations – including higher interpersonal trust, fairness and helpfulness beliefs, and reduced cynicism.

My interpretation:

The meta-analysis reveals a significant overestimation of others' dishonesty by an average of 14 percentage points, with a meta-analytic effect of Hedge's g = 0.58. This finding, based on 31 effect sizes and over 8,000 participants, supports the overestimation hypothesis of dishonesty and proves robust across variations in methods and procedures.

Further research demonstrates the impact of correcting these biased beliefs. Informing people about actual honesty rates led to more positive pro-social expectations, including higher interpersonal trust, increased fairness and helpfulness beliefs, and lower cynicism. These findings have important implications, challenging the 'wisdom of crowds' approach in moral judgment and contributing to our understanding of the mixed effects of social norm nudges.

The study highlights the importance of data-based views for leaders and policymakers. However, it's crucial to note the limitations of this research, including its focus on American participants, the potential gap between experimental tasks and real-world complexity, and the use of mostly one-shot belief reports.

In conclusion, this research provides robust evidence that people tend to overestimate others' dishonesty. Moreover, correcting these biased beliefs can positively impact social thinking and expectations, potentially leading to more trusting and cooperative societies.  Important points for clinical psychologists.

How perceived polarization predicts attitude moralization (and vice versa): A four-wave longitudinal study during the 2020 U.S. election

D'Amore, C., van Zomeren, M., & Koudenburg, N.

(2024). Journal of personality and social psychology,

126(4), 624–642.

https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000454

Abstract

Within structurally polarized and dynamic contexts, such as the U.S. 2020 presidential elections, the moralization of individuals' attitudes on a specific topic (e.g., climate policy) can dangerously escalate disagreements between groups into zero-sum conflict. However, limited knowledge exists regarding the factors that influence individuals' tendency to moralize their attitudes over time, and what the role of structural polarization is in this psychological process. Our objective is to test a theoretically integrative model of when and how perceived polarization is related to attitude moralization over time within the polarized context of the U.S. 2020 presidential elections and explore reciprocal feedback loops to understand the dynamic relationship between polarization and moralization over time. Our model predicts that, when repeatedly faced with outgroup expressions in the news, individuals' perceptions of polarization will predict within-person attitude moralization over time via strengthening their value-protective responses to these expressions (i.e., perceiving dyadic harm and experiencing negative moral emotions toward the outgroup). To test our model, we conducted a four-wave, 4-month longitudinal study among Biden supporters (N = 1,236) and Trump supporters (N = 617). The results of the within-person analyses generally supported the model's hypotheses across both samples and various attitude topics. Furthermore, cross-lagged structural equation models explored reciprocal influences, revealing positive feedback loops between structural polarization and attitude moralization over time. Our findings thus indicate that perceived polarization strengthens attitude moralization (and vice versa) over time-a dynamic process that helps to explain how nonmoralized conflict between groups can evolve into zero-sum conflict during periods of intense polarization.

Here is my interpretation of the study:

This research on the U.S. 2020 election campaign explored how people strengthen their moral beliefs over time in a polarized environment. They found that as individuals perceive more polarization and political homogeneity in their networks, they are more likely to develop strong moral convictions, especially when they see harm from the opposing political group and feel negative emotions towards them.

The study showed that increased perceptions of polarization lead to stronger moralization of attitudes across various topics. This process is reinforced over time by a feedback loop where perceived polarization and moralization influence each other. These findings were consistent among both Biden and Trump supporters.

In summary, the study confirms that polarization plays a crucial role in shaping strong moral attitudes, driving political engagement and conflict. This research highlights the need to understand the social factors that turn political disagreements into moral conflicts and suggests areas for future exploration.

Predicting Radicalism After Perceived Injustice: The Role of Separatist Identity, Sacred Values, and Police Violence

Pretus, C., Sheikh, H., Hamid, N., & Atran, S. (2023).

Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 

11(2), 730–746. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.11255

Abstract

Perceptions of injustice are central to fueling violent political action, though not everyone within a social movement will support violence in response to collective grievances. So who supports violence and who doesn't after perceived injustice? To address this question, we followed up on the same individuals (N = 805) before and after a court decision in Catalonia (Spain) sentencing nine separatist leaders to prison, an event that led to mass violent and nonviolent protests. We tested three hypotheses by combining classical theories of collective action and more recent extremism models and found support for all three hypotheses. Namely, individuals who exhibited steeper increases in radicalism (controlling for activism) after the court ruling were those who had previously experienced police violence (social dynamics hypothesis), those who identified as separatists (separatist identity hypothesis), and those who held Catalan 2 independence as a sacred value (sacred value hypothesis). Our findings offer a complex picture of real-world conflict settings, where the three evaluated factors seem to be intertwined. We discuss potential venues to restore inter-group relations after perceived injustice, with an assessment of how likely these strategies are to succeed based on the three adopted perspectives.

Here are some thoughts:

This study investigated what makes people who feel wronged turn to violence. Researchers studied people in Catalonia, Spain, following a court ruling that many Catalans felt was unfair. They found that people who felt more strongly about Catalan independence (separatist identity and sacred value) and had experienced police violence in the past were more likely to report increased support for violence after the court ruling.

The study suggests that these three factors may reinforce each other. For instance, experiencing police violence might strengthen someone's separatist identity and make them see independence as a more sacred value.

The researchers acknowledge limitations like not having a control group that wasn't exposed to the court ruling. They also note their findings may not apply to groups that see non-violence as a core value. Future studies could look at these factors across different cultures and social movements.

Overall, the study suggests that a sense of injustice, combined with a strong group identity and a feeling that the group's values are under attack, can make people more likely to support violence.

Emotions explain diferences in the difusion of true vs. false social media rumors

Pröllochs, N., Bär, D. & Feuerriegel, S.

Sci Rep 11, 22721 (2021).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01813-2

Abstract

False rumors (often termed “fake news”) on social media pose a signifcant threat to modern societies. However, potential reasons for the widespread difusion of false rumors have been underexplored. In this work, we analyze whether sentiment words, as well as diferent emotional words, in social media content explain diferences in the spread of true vs. false rumors. For this purpose, we collected N = 126,301 rumor cascades from Twitter, comprising more than 4.5 million retweets that have been fact-checked for veracity. We then categorized the language in social media content to (1) sentiment (i.e., positive vs. negative) and (2) eight basic emotions (i. e., anger, anticipation, disgust, fear, joy, trust, sadness, and surprise). We find that sentiment and basic emotions explain differences in the structural properties of true vs. false rumor cascades. False rumors (as compared to true rumors) are more likely to go viral if they convey a higher proportion of terms associated with a positive sentiment.  Further, false rumors are viral when embedding emotional words classifed as trust, anticipation, or anger. All else being equal, false rumors conveying one standard deviation more positive sentiment have a 37.58% longer lifetime and reach 61.44% more users. Our fndings ofer insights into how true vs. false rumors spread and highlight the importance of managing emotions in social media content.

Here are some thoughts:

This research analyzes how language used in social media posts influences the spread of rumors, specifically true vs. false ones. The study focuses on sentiment (positive vs. negative) and basic emotions (anger, anticipation, trust) in online content. They found that positive language and emotions like anger, anticipation, and trust are linked to a wider spread of false rumors. This is because emotions are known to influence how online content is shared.

Final thought: When we encounter a rumor that evokes emotions like anger, anticipation, or trust, it is more likely to stand out to us. This increased salience makes us more likely to share the rumor, even if it is false.

Premature Death, Suicide, and Nonlethal Intentional Self-Harm After Psychiatric Discharge

Mortier, P., Conde, S., et al. (2024).

JAMA Network Open, 7(6), e2417131.

Link to article

Key Points

Question  What is the risk for premature death, suicide, and nonlethal intentional self-harm following discharge from psychiatric hospitalization?

Findings  In this cohort study including 49 108 patients, risk for postdischarge premature death (age <70 years) and suicide was significantly higher compared with the general population. Premature death was associated with cognitive disorders and alcohol-related disorders in both sexes; suicide was associated with postdischarge nonlethal intentional self-harm in both sexes, with depressive and adjustment disorders in males, and with bipolar disorder in females.

Meaning  The findings suggest individuals discharged from psychiatric inpatient care constitute a vulnerable population for premature death and suicidal behavior.

Here are some thoughts:

This study has shed light on a concerning reality: individuals discharged from psychiatric hospitalization face a significantly higher risk of premature death, suicide, and self-harm compared to the general population. This highlights the need for increased support and prevention strategies.

The study revealed specific mental health diagnoses, like cognitive and alcohol-related disorders, linked to a greater risk of premature death. Additionally, prior self-harm episodes and certain diagnoses, such as adjustment disorders and depression (males) or bipolar disorder (females), were identified as risk factors for suicide after discharge. The study also offers valuable insights into the prevalence of non-lethal self-harm, emphasizing the ongoing need for intervention.

These findings have significant implications. Early interventions for mental health conditions, particularly those linked to a higher risk of premature death, are crucial. Additionally, tailored support programs are essential for individuals with specific diagnoses and histories of self-harm. The study underscores the importance of robust aftercare plans that address suicide risk and self-harm tendencies as patients transition from inpatient care. Furthermore, the higher suicide rates among females discharged from care suggest potential disparities in access to treatment, highlighting the need for gender-sensitive approaches.

This research compels us to take action. We must advocate for increased resources for mental health services, raise awareness about suicide prevention and self-harm support systems, and work to reduce the stigma surrounding mental health conditions. By discussing these critical findings, we can contribute to a broader conversation about improving mental health outcomes and ensuring the well-being of individuals after discharge from psychiatric care.

A rural-urban political divide among whom? Race, ethnicity, and political behavior across place

Brown, T. E., et al. (2024).

Politics, Groups & Identities/Politics, Groups,

and Identities, 1–14.

https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2024.2328551

Abstract

Over the past 30 years, the United States has developed a rural-urban political divide, as rural voters have become increasingly reliable Republican voters while long-term patterns of Democratic voting in the largest cities have also consolidated in many smaller cities and suburbs as well. Yet, although 1 in 4 rural dwellers now identify as people of color, research on the rural-urban divide has either mostly centered on the behavior and attitudes of non-Hispanic whites, or assumed that nonwhites have exhibited similar behavior to whites. Does this political cleavage exist among people of color? We find that the growing rural-urban divide is driven primarily by white Americans, while rural people of color differ much less, if at all, from their urban counterparts in voting behavior and policy attitudes. In addition to highlighting the need for more research on the politics of rural people of color, our findings raise concerns about the political representation of rural Black Americans and Latinos.

Here are some thoughts:

The Rural-Urban Divide: Race Matters More Than You Think

For decades, the political landscape has been reshaped by a growing divide between rural and urban America. This research explores the complexities of this divide, particularly how race and ethnicity influence voting patterns and policy preferences.

The Widening Gap (But Not for Everyone)

Traditionally, rural and urban voters exhibited similar preferences. However, since the 2000s, a stark divide has emerged.  While rural voters have increasingly leaned Republican, Democratic support has solidified in cities. This trend, however, seems to hold true primarily for non-Hispanic whites.

People of Color: A Different Story

The research presented here sheds light on a crucial aspect often overlooked: the experiences of people of color in rural areas.  The data shows a surprising trend - Black and Latino voters, despite residing in rural areas, haven't mirrored the shift towards the Republican party seen in white voters. This challenges the notion that the rural-urban divide is solely driven by economic factors or cultural issues.

Beyond Economics: The Psychological Factors

The concept of "linked fate" might explain this phenomenon. Black and Latino voters may feel a stronger sense of solidarity with their racial/ethnic group, leading them to vote Democrat regardless of their location.  "Racialized social constraint" could also be at play, where social pressures within these communities influence voting behavior. Additionally, Republican rhetoric might be alienating these voters.

A Call for More Research

This study highlights the need for further investigation into the political experiences of rural people of color.  Future research should not only explore the voting behavior of Black and Latino populations but also delve into the experiences of other marginalized groups. Understanding the psychological aspects of race and ethnicity within the rural-urban divide is crucial for a more comprehensive picture of American politics.

In Conclusion

The rural-urban divide is a complex issue with racial undertones. While economic factors play a role, the experiences of people of color challenge simplistic explanations.  Further research that considers the psychological aspects of race and ethnicity is essential for bridging this divide and fostering a more inclusive democracy.

Moral foundations elicit shared and dissociable cortical activation modulated by political ideology.

Hopp, F.R., Amir, O., Fisher, J.T. et al.

Nat Hum Behav 7, 2182–2198 (2023).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01693-8

Abstract

Moral foundations theory (MFT) holds that moral judgements are driven by modular and ideologically variable moral foundations but where and how these foundations are represented in the brain and shaped by political beliefs remains an open question. Using a moral vignette judgement task (n = 64), we probed the neural (dis)unity of moral foundations. Univariate analyses revealed that moral judgement of moral foundations, versus conventional norms, reliably recruits core areas implicated in theory of mind. Yet, multivariate pattern analysis demonstrated that each moral foundation elicits dissociable neural representations distributed throughout the cortex. As predicted by MFT, individuals’ liberal or conservative orientation modulated neural responses to moral foundations. Our results confirm that each moral foundation recruits domain-general mechanisms of social cognition but also has a dissociable neural signature malleable by sociomoral experience. We discuss these findings in view of unified versus dissociable accounts of morality and their neurological support for MFT.

A pdf is here.

Here is a summary, of sorts:

This fMRI study investigated the neural basis of moral judgment using Moral Foundations Theory (MFT). The findings suggest that while moral foundations share some common brain regions with social norm judgments, they also have distinct neural signatures. This supports the theory that moral foundations are not isolated modules but rather rely on distributed brain systems.

Interestingly, the study also revealed that judging violations of group-oriented moral foundations (loyalty, authority, sanctity) activates brain regions associated with processing others, compared to individual-focused foundations (care, fairness). Additionally, liberals and conservatives showed distinct neural responses to moral foundations, suggesting that political ideology influences the emotional experience of moral violations. Overall, the study strengthens MFT's framework by demonstrating a neural basis for moral foundations and highlighting the role of political ideology in moral judgment.

“Abuser” or “Tough Love” Boss?: The moderating role of leader performance in shaping the labels employees use in response to abusive supervision

Lount, R. B., Choi, W., & Tepper, B. J. (2024).

Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 183, 104339.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104339

Abstract

We invoke leader categorization theory and labeling theory to examine the circumstances under which individuals come to perceive their managerial leaders as “abusers” or “tough love” bosses. In a field study, we show that leader performance moderates the relationship between a leader’s abusive supervision and the degree to which their followers label them as an abuser or a tough love leader. Heightened leader performance lowers the willingness to label the leader as an “abuser” while increasing one’s labeling the leader as a “tough love” boss. This study also documents that leader performance moderates the indirect effect between abusive supervision and upward hostility (through abuser labeling) and the indirect effect between abusive supervision and positive career expectations (through tough love labeling). In a follow-up experiment, we again document that leader performance moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and the degree to which followers label their leaders as an abuser. Additionally, we provide support for a moderated indirect effect on a range of negative behavioral outcomes directed toward the leader through abuser labeling. We discuss the studies’ implications for theory, future research, and practice pertaining to abusive supervision.

Highlights

• Leader performance moderates labeling leaders who display abusive supervision.

• High leader performance weakens abuser labeling following abusive supervision.

• High leader performance strengthens tough love labeling following abusive supervision.

• Abuser labeling promotes upward hostility toward supervisor.

• Tough love labeling promotes increased career expectations.

The ethics of personalised digital duplicates: a minimally viable permissibility principle

Danaher, J., Nyholm, S.

AI Ethics (2024).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00513-7

Abstract

With recent technological advances, it is possible to create personalised digital duplicates. These are partial, at least semi-autonomous, recreations of real people in digital form. Should such duplicates be created? When can they be used? This article develops a general framework for thinking about the ethics of digital duplicates. It starts by clarifying the object of inquiry– digital duplicates themselves– defining them, giving examples, and justifying the focus on them rather than other kinds of artificial being. It then identifies a set of generic harms and benefits associated with digital duplicates and uses this as the basis for formulating a minimally viable permissible principle (MVPP) that stipulates widely agreeable conditions that should be met in order for the creation and use of digital duplicates to be ethically permissible. It concludes by assessing whether it is possible for those conditions to be met in practice, and whether it is possible for the use of digital duplicates to be more or less permissible.

Here are some thoughts:

Artificial intelligence advancements are making digital duplicates, recreations of real people in digital form, a more realistic possibility. This presentation explores the ethical considerations surrounding this new technology. The text defines "personalized digital duplicates" and clarifies how they differ from other AI creations.

A key concept introduced in the text is the "minimally viable permissible principle" (MVPP). This framework can be used to assess the ethics of creating and using digital duplicates in specific situations. The MVPP considers factors such as informed consent, potential benefits and harms, transparency, and whether the real person's presence is truly necessary.

The text acknowledges that the MVPP doesn't determine if creating a specific digital duplicate is a good idea, only if it's ethically permissible. Additionally, the authors recognize that permissibility can exist on a spectrum. There will be situations where creating a digital duplicate is clearly permissible, while others may be ethically questionable. The text concludes by calling for further research to weigh the potential benefits and harms of this technology.

Just brainstorming wildly here: The creation of a therapist's digital duplicate could provide wider access to psychotherapy services and enhance revenue, but ethical considerations around confidentiality, transparency, standards of care, psychologist responsibility, a lack of outcome data, safety, risk management, and the therapeutic relationship would need to be addressed.

Communal Narcissism and Sadism as Predictors of Everyday Vigilantism

Chen, F. X., Ok, E., & Aquino, K. (2023).

Personality Science, 4(1).

https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.10523

Abstract

Vigilantes monitor their social environment for signs of wrongdoing and administer unauthorized punishment on those who they perceive to be violating laws, social norms, or moral standards. We investigated whether the willingness to become a vigilante can be predicted by grandiose self-perceptions about one's communality (communal narcissism) and enjoyment of cruelty (sadism). As hypothesized, findings demonstrated both variables to be positively related to becoming a vigilante as measured by reports of past and anticipated vigilante behavior (Study 1) and by dispositional tendencies toward vigilantism (Studies 1 and 2). We also found communal narcissism and sadism predicted the perceived effectiveness of vigilante actions exhibited by others (Study 2) and the intention to engage in vigilantism after witnessing a norm violation (Study 3). Finally, Study 3 also demonstrated that the tendency for communal narcissists and sadists to become a vigilante might vary based on the expected consequences of the observed norm violation.

Relevance Statement

A prosocial orientation and cruelty seem antithetical. However, our results showed that these traits may converge in predicting individuals’ tendency to become a vigilante, marked by imposing unauthorized punishments on others.

Key Insights

• We study factors that predict willingness to become a vigilante.
• We found that communal narcissism predicted vigilante tendencies.
• Sadism was also a significant predictor of vigilantism.
• Effects hold even after controlling for demographic covariates.

Some thoughts as a clinical psychologist

This research on communal narcissism and sadism as factors in vigilantism is interesting from a clinical perspective. It sheds light on the motivations behind individuals who take justice into their own hands, often in ways that can be harmful.

The focus on communal narcissism, where people believe their group is superior and deserves special treatment, resonates with our understanding of in-group/out-group dynamics. These individuals might see themselves as righteous defenders of their community's morals, justifying their aggressive actions.

The link to sadism, the enjoyment of inflicting suffering, suggests a darker side to vigilantism. It's important to consider how a desire for control or even punishment might fuel some vigilante behavior, potentially escalating situations and overshadowing any sense of justice.

Crying wolf: Warning about societal risks can be reputationally risky

Caviola, L., Coleman, M. B., 

Winter, C., & Lewis, J. (2024, June 14).

https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gtr53

Abstract

Society relies on expert warnings about large-scale risks like pandemics and natural disasters. Across ten studies (N = 5,342), we demonstrate people’s reluctance to warn about unlikely but large-scale risks because they are concerned about being blamed for being wrong. In particular, warners anticipate that if the risk doesn’t occur, they will be perceived as overly alarmist and responsible for wasting societal resources. This phenomenon appears in the context of natural, technological, and financial risks and in US and Chinese samples, local policymakers, AI researchers, and legal experts. The reluctance to warn is aggravated when the warner will be held epistemically responsible, such as when they are the only warner and when the risk is speculative, lacking objective evidence. A remedy is offering anonymous expert warning systems. Our studies emphasize the need for societal risk management policies to consider psychological biases and social incentives.

The research is here.

Here are some thoughts:

The research on the "crying wolf" phenomenon is crucial for clinical psychologists as it delves into the psychological and social dynamics of risk communication and trust. Clinical psychologists often work with individuals and communities to manage anxiety and stress related to perceived threats.

Understanding how repeated false alarms can lead to desensitization and reduced trust in warnings helps psychologists develop better strategies for communicating risks without causing undue alarm or complacency. This knowledge is particularly relevant in therapeutic settings where clients may struggle with anxiety disorders exacerbated by frequent, yet unfounded, warnings about societal risks.

Moreover, the study highlights the reputational risks faced by those who issue warnings, which can be a significant concern for mental health professionals who must balance the need to alert clients to potential dangers with the risk of being perceived as alarmist. This balance is critical in maintaining the therapeutic alliance and ensuring that clients continue to trust and follow professional advice. By understanding the dynamics of the "crying wolf" effect, clinical psychologists can better navigate these challenges, ensuring that their warnings are taken seriously without causing unnecessary panic or skepticism.

Finally, the research underscores the importance of effective communication strategies in mitigating the negative impacts of the "crying wolf" effect. Clinical psychologists can apply these insights to improve their own communication with clients, particularly in crisis situations. By adopting evidence-based approaches to risk communication, psychologists can help clients make informed decisions, reduce anxiety, and foster resilience. This is especially pertinent in the context of public health crises, natural disasters, and other scenarios where accurate and trusted communication can significantly impact mental health outcomes.

The Supreme Court upholds the conviction of woman who challenged expert testimony in a drug case

Lindsay Whitehurst

apnews.com

originally posted 20 June 24

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the conviction of a California woman who said she did not know about a stash of methamphetamine hidden inside her car.

In a ruling that crossed the court’s ideological lines, the 6-3 majority opinion dismissed arguments that an expert witness for the prosecution had gone too far in describing the woman’s mindset when he said that most larger scale drug couriers are aware of what they are transporting.

“An opinion about most couriers is not an opinion about all couriers,” said Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the decision. He was joined by fellow conservatives Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett as well as liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In a sharp dissent, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the ruling gives the government a “powerful new tool in its pocket.”

“Prosecutors can now put an expert on the stand — someone who apparently has the convenient ability to read minds — and let him hold forth on what ‘most’ people like the defendant think when they commit a legally proscribed act. Then, the government need do no more than urge the jury to find that the defendant is like ‘most’ people and convict,” he wrote. Joining him were the court’s other liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

The info is here.

Here are some thoughts:

The recent Supreme Court case involving a woman convicted of drug trafficking highlights a complex issue surrounding expert testimony, particularly for psychologists. In this case, the prosecution's expert offered an opinion on the general awareness of large-scale drug couriers, which the defense argued unfairly portrayed the defendant's mindset. While the Court allowed the testimony, it leaves some psychologists concerned.

The potential for expert testimony to blur the lines between general patterns and specific defendant behavior is a worry. Psychologists strive to present nuanced assessments based on individual cases. This ruling might incentivize broader generalizations, which could risk prejudicing juries against defendants. It's crucial to find a balance between allowing experts to provide helpful insights and ensuring they don't overstep into determining a defendant's guilt.

Moving forward, psychologists offering expert testimony may need to tread carefully.  They should ensure their testimony focuses on established psychological principles and avoids commenting on a specific defendant's knowledge or intent. This case underscores the importance of clear guidelines for expert witnesses to uphold the integrity of the justice system.

Turn a Kind Eye-Offering Positive Reframing

Menzin E. R. (2024).

JAMA internal medicine.

Advance online publication.

https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.2379

Here is an excerpt:

I have seen many patients struggle with anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder. I firmly believe in my obligation to connect them with evidence-based therapy and offer pharmacologic treatment. The cognitive behavioral therapy technique of reframing, which is so useful for treating anxiety disorders, can serve as a useful lens for the disorder itself.1 I try to reframe by pointing out their ability to see patterns and the strengths intrinsic to this nonneurotypical brain. Perhaps with this mindset, they can look at their behaviors with grace.

Physicians are problem solvers by nature and training. When faced with symptoms, we tend to go directly for the cure. When there are no or only suboptimal solutions, we tend to offer sympathy instead of strategy. Rather than apologize, we can reframe build the scaffolding to allow patients to change their thought patterns. As with all strategies, this is not universally applicable. You cannot positively reframe a life-threatening diagnosis; to do so insults and minimizes the patient's distress. There are times to sit with patients as their house crumbles, and there are times to help them reframe the chaos.

Recently, I saw this done in another unlikely corner. I took my 89-year-old father to discuss a shoulder replacement with the orthopedist. "Hang on," the surgeon exclaimed enthusiastically, holding his capable hands in the air. "Before we talk about the surgical options, you tore your rotator cuff skiing Killington at 86? That's amazing!" With that phrase, he reframed my father's injury from the frailty of old age to a badge of athletic honor (though he never saw my dad ski). It does not change my father's difficult decision to live with the tear or a grueling repair. Yet as he uses his right hand to lift his left arm, perhaps he will think of the 50 years of skiing or the feeling of fresh snow beneath his skis. Instead of feeling angry, I now watch him maneuver that arm and recall the family ski trips, the children and grandchildren he taught to ski. Sometimes, we all need kind eyes.

The information is paywalled here.

Here are some thoughts: 

The article explores the concept of well-being as a complex interplay between internal mental states and external socio-cultural factors. It proposes a holistic view, emphasizing the importance of both internal and external influences on happiness.

The article likely discusses strategies for positive reframing, which involves shifting negative interpretations of situations or experiences towards a more positive perspective. This reframing could be applied to both internal thoughts and emotions, as well as external circumstances.

"Turning a kind eye" is a metaphor for adopting a positive and understanding perspective towards oneself and one's environment, ultimately contributing to greater well-being.

Far-right extremist groups show surging growth, new annual study shows

Will Carless

USAToday.com

Originally published 7 June 24

Far-right extremist groups are actively working to undermine U.S. democracy and are organizing in record numbers, according to an annual report from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Meanwhile, extremist groups have been targeting faith-based groups that assist migrants on the U.S.-Mexico border, and a New Jersey state trooper is fired for having a racist tattoo.

It’s the week in extremism.

Far-right extremists suffered a blow in the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection. More than 1,000 people were charged and key leaders were imprisoned, some for decades. But a new annual report from the Southern Poverty Law Center suggests the far-right has regrouped and is taking aim at democratic institutions across the country. 

The information is here.

The Year in Hate and Extremism from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Here are some thoughts:

A new study highlighting the surge in far-right extremism holds significant weight for psychologists working with marginalized groups. This growth presents a heightened risk of threats and violence for these communities. Psychologists can play a vital role by understanding the vulnerabilities extremists prey on, fostering resilience in marginalized groups, and promoting social cohesion to counter extremist narratives. By acknowledging this trend, psychologists can equip themselves to better support the mental health of these vulnerable populations.

“I lost trust”: Why the OpenAI team in charge of safeguarding humanity imploded

By Sigal Samuel

vox.com

Originally posted 18 May 24

For months, OpenAI has been losing employees who care deeply about making sure AI is safe. Now, the company is positively hemorrhaging them.

Ilya Sutskever and Jan Leike announced their departures from OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, on Tuesday. They were the leaders of the company’s superalignment team — the team tasked with ensuring that AI stays aligned with the goals of its makers, rather than acting unpredictably and harming humanity. 

They’re not the only ones who’ve left. Since last November — when OpenAI’s board tried to fire CEO Sam Altman only to see him quickly claw his way back to power — at least five more of the company’s most safety-conscious employees have either quit or been pushed out. 

What’s going on here?

If you’ve been following the saga on social media, you might think OpenAI secretly made a huge technological breakthrough. The meme “What did Ilya see?” speculates that Sutskever, the former chief scientist, left because he saw something horrifying, like an AI system that could destroy humanity. 

But the real answer may have less to do with pessimism about technology and more to do with pessimism about humans — and one human in particular: Altman. According to sources familiar with the company, safety-minded employees have lost faith in him.

The information is here.

Here are some thoughts:

The OpenAI team's reported issues expose critical ethical concerns in AI development. A potential misalignment of values emerges when profit or technological advancement overshadows safety and ethical considerations. Businesses must strive for transparency, prioritizing human well-being and responsible innovation throughout the development process.

Prioritizing AI Safety

The departure of the safety team underscores the need for robust safeguards. Businesses developing AI should dedicate resources to mitigating risks like bias and misuse. Strong ethical frameworks and oversight committees can ensure responsible development.

Employee Concerns and Trust

The article hints at a lack of trust within OpenAI. Businesses must foster open communication by addressing employee concerns about project goals, risks, and ethics. Respecting employee rights to raise ethical concerns is crucial for maintaining trust and responsible AI development.

By prioritizing ethical considerations, aligning values, and fostering transparency, businesses can navigate the complexities of AI development and ensure their creations benefit humanity.

Robust and interpretable AI-guided marker for early dementia prediction in real-world clinical settings

Lee, L. Y., et al. (2024).

EClinicalMedicine, 102725.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102725

Background

Predicting dementia early has major implications for clinical management and patient outcomes. Yet, we still lack sensitive tools for stratifying patients early, resulting in patients being undiagnosed or wrongly diagnosed. Despite rapid expansion in machine learning models for dementia prediction, limited model interpretability and generalizability impede translation to the clinic.

Methods

We build a robust and interpretable predictive prognostic model (PPM) and validate its clinical utility using real-world, routinely-collected, non-invasive, and low-cost (cognitive tests, structural MRI) patient data. To enhance scalability and generalizability to the clinic, we: 1) train the PPM with clinically-relevant predictors (cognitive tests, grey matter atrophy) that are common across research and clinical cohorts, 2) test PPM predictions with independent multicenter real-world data from memory clinics across countries (UK, Singapore).

Interpretation

Our results provide evidence for a robust and explainable clinical AI-guided marker for early dementia prediction that is validated against longitudinal, multicenter patient data across countries, and has strong potential for adoption in clinical practice.

A pdf of the research can be found here.

Here is a summary and some thoughts:

Cambridge scientists have developed an AI tool capable of predicting with high accuracy whether individuals with early signs of dementia will remain stable or develop Alzheimer’s disease. This tool utilizes non-invasive, low-cost patient data such as cognitive tests and MRI scans to make its predictions, showing greater sensitivity than current diagnostic methods. The algorithm was able to correctly identify 82% of individuals who would develop Alzheimer’s and 81% of those who wouldn’t, surpassing standard clinical markers. This advancement could reduce the reliance on invasive and costly diagnostic tests and allow for early interventions, potentially improving treatment outcomes.

The machine learning model stratifies patients into three groups: those whose symptoms remain stable, those who progress slowly to Alzheimer’s, and those who progress rapidly. This stratification could help clinicians tailor treatments and closely monitor high-risk individuals. Validated with real-world data from memory clinics in the UK and Singapore, the tool demonstrates its applicability in clinical settings. The researchers aim to extend this model to other forms of dementia and incorporate additional data types, with the ultimate goal of providing precise diagnostic and treatment pathways, thereby accelerating the discovery of new treatments for dementia.

Behavioral attraction predicts morbidly curious women's mating interest in men with dark personalities

Khosbayar, A., Brown, M., & Scrivner, C. (2024).

Personality and Individual Differences, 228, 112738.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112738

Abstract

Morbid curiosity indexes interests in learning about dangerous phenomena. Individuals with high levels of dark triad traits (narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) can be dangerous, implicating them as relatively desirable to those reporting heightened morbid curiosity. Despite the potential costs of high-dark triad men, it could benefit morbidly curious women to upregulate their preference for such men to satisfy short-term mating goals. This study tasked women to men exhibiting high and low levels of dark personality traits and complete a measure of trait morbid curiosity. Men described as exhibiting high levels of dark personality traits were more desirable as short-term mates than as long-term mates, although men described as reporting low levels of dark traits were more desirable overall. Morbidly curious women reported greater behavioral attraction toward dark-personality men but did not affective attraction. Findings suggest a function to morbidly curious women's interest in dark personalities.

The research is here.

Here are some thoughts:

This research sheds light on an intriguing pattern: women with a high level of morbid curiosity often exhibit a strong attraction to men with dark personality traits, such as narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. This study highlights that behavioral attraction—initial intrigue and engagement—is a key predictor of these women’s mating interest in such men. For clinical psychologists, this insight is crucial in addressing the relational dynamics of their female patients who may be drawn to potentially harmful partners.

We play a pivotal role in helping these patients recognize and understand their attraction patterns. Through psychotherapy, we can assist patients in challenging and reframing their perceptions and decision-making processes regarding romantic interests. Emphasizing self-awareness and self-esteem can significantly reduce the allure of unhealthy relationships, enabling patients to set healthier boundaries and seek partners with positive traits.

Moreover, it's vital for therapists to educate their patients about the characteristics and risks associated with dark personality traits. By screening for attraction patterns during assessments and offering psychoeducation, psychologists can empower women to make safer relationship choices. Enhancing coping mechanisms and relationship skills are also critical strategies, providing patients with the tools to build healthy relationships and recognize red flags. Ultimately, these efforts can support women in navigating their romantic lives more safely and healthily.

Happiness and well-being: Is it all in your head?Evidence from the folk

Kneer, M., & Haybron, D. M. (2024).

Noûs/NoûS.

https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12492

Abstract

Despite a voluminous literature on happiness and well-being, debates have been stunted by persistent dissensus on what exactly the subject matter is. Commentators frequently appeal to intuitions about the nature of happiness or well-being, raising the question of how representative those intuitions are. In a series of studies, we examined lay intuitions involving happiness- and well-being-related terms to assess their sensitivity to internal (psychological) versus external conditions. We found that all terms, including ‘happy’, ‘doing well’ and ‘good life’, were far more sensitive to internal than external conditions, suggesting that for laypersons, mental states are the most important part of happiness and well-being. But several terms, including ‘doing well’, ‘good life’ and ‘enviable life’ were substantially more sensitive to external conditions than others, such as ‘happy’, consistent with dominant philosophical views of well-being. Interestingly, the expression ‘happy’ was completely insensitive to external conditions for about two thirds of our participants, suggesting a purely psychological concept among most individuals. Overall, our findings suggest that lay thinking in this domain divides between two concepts, or families thereof: a purely psychological notion of being happy, and one or more concepts equivalent to, or encompassing, the philosophical concept of well-being. In addition, being happy is dominantly regarded as just one element of well-being. These findings have considerable import for philosophical debates, empirical research and public policy.

The article is linked above.

Here are some thoughts:

The authors argue that while cognitive and emotional processes are crucial, happiness is also significantly shaped by external elements such as social relationships, economic conditions, and physical health. This perspective challenges the notion that happiness is solely an internal state, emphasizing the importance of environmental influences.

Cultural narratives play a pivotal role in shaping perceptions of happiness, as different societies prioritize various aspects of well-being. Collectivist cultures may value social harmony and community well-being, whereas individualist cultures emphasize personal achievement and autonomy. Additionally, the article explores how folk psychology—the intuitive beliefs people have about their own and others' mental states—affects how happiness is understood and pursued, highlighting the widespread belief in the power of mindset and attitudes.

The article also touches on the philosophical dimensions of happiness, questioning whether it is a static state or a dynamic process involving purpose, fulfillment, and engagement with life's challenges. This inquiry suggests that happiness is more than just a collection of pleasurable experiences, but rather a complex phenomenon that integrates internal and external factors. Overall, the article calls for a holistic understanding of well-being that acknowledges the intricate interplay between mental states and socio-cultural contexts.

Can AI Understand Human Personality? -- Comparing Human Experts and AI Systems at Predicting Personality Correlations

Schoenegger, P., et al. (2024, June 12).

arXiv.org.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.08170

Abstract

We test the abilities of specialised deep neural networks like PersonalityMap as well as general LLMs like GPT-4o and Claude 3 Opus in understanding human personality. Specifically, we compare their ability to predict correlations between personality items to the abilities of lay people and academic experts. We find that when compared with individual humans, all AI models make better predictions than the vast majority of lay people and academic experts. However, when selecting the median prediction for each item, we find a different pattern: Experts and PersonalityMap outperform LLMs and lay people on most measures. Our results suggest that while frontier LLMs' are better than most individual humans at predicting correlations between personality items, specialised models like PersonalityMap continue to match or exceed expert human performance even on some outcome measures where LLMs underperform. This provides evidence both in favour of the general capabilities of large language models and in favour of the continued place for specialised models trained and deployed for specific domains.

A pdf is here.

Here are some thoughts on the intersection of technology and psychology.

The research investigates how AI systems fare against human experts, including both laypeople and academic psychologists, in predicting correlations between personality traits.

The findings suggest that AI, particularly specialized deep learning models, may outperform individual humans in this specific task. This is intriguing, as it highlights the potential of AI to analyze vast amounts of data and identify patterns that might escape human intuition. However, it's important to remember that personality is a complex interplay of internal states, experiences, and environmental factors.

While AI may excel at recognizing statistical connections, it currently lacks the ability to grasp the underlying reasons behind these correlations.  A true understanding of personality necessitates the human capacity for empathy, cultural context, and consideration of individual narratives. In clinical settings, for instance, a skilled psychologist goes beyond identifying traits; they build rapport, explore the origin of these traits, and tailor interventions accordingly. AI, for now, remains a valuable tool for analysis, but it should be seen as complementary to, rather than a replacement for, human expertise in understanding the rich tapestry of human personality.

Why Scientific Fraud Is Suddenly Everywhere

Kevin T. Dugan

New York Magazine

Originally posted 21 May 24

Junk science has been forcing a reckoning among scientific and medical researchers for the past year, leading to thousands of retracted papers. Last year, Stanford president Marc Tessier-Lavigne resigned amid reporting that some of his most high-profile work on Alzheimer’s disease was at best inaccurate. (A probe commissioned by the university’s board of trustees later exonerated him of manipulating the data).

But the problems around credible science appear to be getting worse. Last week, scientific publisher Wiley decided to shutter 19 scientific journals after retracting 11,300 sham papers. There is a large-scale industry of so-called “paper mills” that sell fictive research, sometimes written by artificial intelligence, to researchers who then publish it in peer-reviewed journals — which are sometimes edited by people who had been placed by those sham groups. Among the institutions exposing such practices is Retraction Watch, a 14-year-old organization co-founded by journalists Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus. I spoke with Oransky about why there has been a surge in fake research and whether fraud accusations against the presidents of Harvard and Stanford are actually good for academia.

I’ll start by saying that paper mills are not the problem; they are a symptom of the actual problem. Adam Marcus, my co-founder, had broken a really big and frightening story about a painkiller involving scientific fraud, which led to dozens of retractions. That’s what got us interested in that. There were all these retractions, far more than we thought but far fewer than there are now. Now, they’re hiding in plain sight.

The info is here.

Here are some thoughts:

Recent headlines might suggest a surge in scientific misconduct. However, it's more likely that increased awareness and stricter scrutiny are uncovering existing issues. From an ethical standpoint, the pressure to publish groundbreaking research can create a challenging environment. Publication pressure, coupled with the human tendency towards confirmation bias, can incentivize researchers to take unethical shortcuts that align data with their hypotheses. This can have a ripple effect, potentially undermining the entire scientific process.

Fortunately, the heightened focus on research integrity presents an opportunity for positive change. Initiatives promoting open science practices, such as data sharing and robust replication studies, can foster greater transparency. Furthermore, cultivating a culture that rewards ethical research conduct and whistleblowing, even in the absence of earth-shattering results, is crucial.  Science thrives on self-correction. By acknowledging these challenges and implementing solutions, the scientific community can safeguard the integrity of research and ensure continued progress.

Harassment of scientists is surging — institutions aren’t sure how to help

Bianca Nogrady

Nature.com

Originally posted 21 May 24

As a vocal advocate of vaccinations for public health, Peter Hotez was no stranger to online harassment and threats. But then the abuse showed up on his doorstep.

It was a Sunday during a brutal Texas heatwave in June 2023 when a man turned up at Hotez’s home, filming himself as he shouted questions at the scientist, who is a paediatrician and virologist at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

Because of the long-running online and real-life abuse he has faced, Hotez now has the Texas Medical Center Police, Houston Police Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Office on speed dial, an agent tasked to him from the FBI and extra security whenever he speaks publicly.

“This is a very powerful adversarial force that is seeking to undermine science, and now it’s not only going after the science. It’s going after the scientists,” he says.

Hotez is an especially well-known scientist, but his experience is far from unique. Every day around the world, scientists are being abused and harassed online. They are being attacked on social media and by e-mail, telephone, letter and in person. And their reputations are being smeared with baseless accusations of misconduct. Sometimes, this escalates to real-world confrontations and attacks.

The article is here.

Here is my summary:

The article discusses a rise in harassment faced by scientists, particularly those doing research on hot-button topics like climate change. Universities and research institutions are struggling to develop effective ways to help these scientists.

Some scientists are targeted with online abuse and threats. Others fear repercussions within their field if they report harassment. This fear can silence important voices and discourage scientists from communicating their research.

The article highlights the debate about balancing safety with academic freedom. While some suggest limiting scientists' communication, others argue for better support systems and protection for researchers engaging in public outreach.

Honest Government Ad (aka PSA from John Connor)

JuiceMedia

Honest Government Ad - AI

July 2024

Note: Give me gallows humor that illuminates.  Since I post a great deal about the ethics, morality, and risk of AI, this seems appropriate. Enjoy!!

I like it because it hurts you: On the association of everyday sadism, sadistic pleasure, and victim blaming.

Sassenrath, C., et al. (2024).

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

126(1), 105–127.

https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000464

Abstract

Past research on determinants of victim blaming mainly concentrated on individuals’ just-world beliefs as motivational process underlying this harsh reaction to others’ suffering. The present work provides novel insights regarding underlying affective processes by showing how individuals prone to derive pleasure from others’ suffering—individuals high in everyday sadism—engage in victim blaming due to increased sadistic pleasure and reduced empathic concern they experience. Results of three cross-sectional studies and one ambulatory assessment study applying online experience sampling method (ESM; overall N = 2,653) document this association. Importantly, the relation emerged over and above the honesty–humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness personality model (Study 1a), and other so-called dark traits (Study 1b), across different cultural backgrounds (Study 1c), and also when sampling from a population of individuals frequently confronted with victim–perpetrator constellations: police officers (Study 1d). Studies 2 and 3 highlight a significant behavioral correlate of victim blaming. Everyday sadism is related to reduced willingness to engage in effortful cognitive activity as individuals high (vs. low) in everyday sadism recall less information regarding victim–perpetrator constellations of sexual assault. Results obtained in the ESM study (Study 4) indicate that the relation of everyday sadism, sadistic pleasure, and victim blaming holds in everyday life and is not significantly moderated by interpersonal closeness to the blamed victim or impactfulness of the incident. Overall, the present article extends our understanding of what determines innocent victims’ derogation and highlights emotional mechanisms, societal relevance, and generalizability of the observed associations beyond the laboratory.

The paper can be downloaded here.

The research discusses the phenomenon of victim blaming - the tendency to blame innocent victims for their misfortunes - and explores the role of everyday sadism as a potential determinant. The key points are:

1. Victim blaming is a prevalent reaction when confronted with others' suffering, often explained by the belief in a just world where people get what they deserve. 
2. However, recent research has challenged just-world explanations, suggesting emotional reactions play a role in victim blaming. 
3. The text proposes that individuals high in everyday sadism - the tendency to derive pleasure from others' suffering - are more likely to engage in victim blaming due to experiencing sadistic pleasure and lacking empathic concern. 
4. Everyday sadism is distinct from other "dark" personality traits like psychopathy and is uniquely associated with dehumanization, moral disengagement, and aggressive behavior. 
5. The research aims to establish the link between everyday sadism and victim blaming across various contexts, including non-Western samples, and explore its association with reduced willingness to help victims. 
6. Multiple cross-sectional and experience sampling studies are reported to investigate these hypotheses while controlling for just-world beliefs and other relevant factors. 

Fake beauty queens charm judges at the Miss AI pageant

Chloe Veltman

npr.org

Originally posted 9 June 24

Here is an excerpt:

But in the real world, beauty pageants are fading. They are no longer the giant cultural draw they once were, attracting tens of millions of TV viewers during their peak in the 1970s and '80s.

The events are controversial, because there’s a long history of them feeding into harmful stereotypes of women. 

Indeed, all 10 Miss AI finalists fit in with traditional beauty queen tropes: They all look young, buxom and thin.

The controversial nature of pageants, coupled with the application of cutting-edge AI technology, is proving to be catnip for the media and the public. Simply put, sexy images of fake women are an easy way to connect with fans.

"With this technology, we're very much in the early stages, where I think this is the perfect type of content that's highly engaging and super low hanging fruit to go after, said Eric Dahan, CEO of the social media marketing company Mighty Joy.

In an interview with NPR, beauty pageant historian and Miss AI judge Sally-Ann Fawcett said she hopes to be able to change these stereotypes "from the inside" by focusing her judging efforts on the messaging around these AI beauty queens — and not just on their looks.

The info is here.

------------

Here are some thoughts:

While the use of AI to create realistic human models is technologically impressive, its application in a beauty pageant context is concerning. It reinforces the idea that a woman's worth is primarily based on her physical appearance, which can have negative psychological impacts, especially on young girls and women. The technology could be better utilized to promote more positive and inclusive representations of beauty and human diversity.

I would urge the organizers and participants of the Miss AI pageant to critically reflect on the potential harm their actions may cause. They should strive to use this powerful technology in a more responsible and socially conscious manner, challenging rather than reinforcing harmful stereotypes and objectification. Promoting diverse and inclusive representations of beauty would be a more ethical and psychologically healthy approach.

Impulsivity in fatal suicide behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological autopsy studies

Sanz-Gómez, S., et al. (2024).

Psychiatry research, 337, 115952. 

Advance online publication.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2024.115952

Abstract

Our aim is to review and perform a meta-analysis on the role of impulsivity in fatal suicide behaviour. We included papers who used psychological autopsy methodology, assessed adult death by suicide, and included assessment of impulsivity. We excluded papers about assisted suicide, terrorist suicide, or other cause of death other than suicide or postmortem diagnosis made only from medical records or database. 97 articles were identified. 33 were included in the systematic review and nine in the meta-analysis. We found that people who die by suicide with high impulsivity are associated with younger age, substance abuse, and low intention to die, whereas those with low impulsivity were associated with older age, depression, schizophrenia, high intention to die and low social support. In the meta-analysis, suicide cases had higher impulsivity scores than living controls (Hedges' g = 0.59, 95 % CI [0.28, 0.89], p=.002). However, studies showed heterogeneity (Q = 90.86, p<.001, I2=89.0 %). Impulsivity-aggressiveness interaction was assessed through meta-regression (β=0.447, p=.045). Individuals with high impulsivity would be exposed to a higher risk of fatal suicide behaviour, aggressiveness would play a mediating role. People who die by suicide with high and low impulsivity display distinct characteristics, which may reflect different endophenotypes leading to suicide by different pathways.

Here is the conclusion.

This systematic review has shed light on the role of impulsivity on fatal suicide behaviour. This topic has been subject to less attention than impulsivity in other behaviours of the suicidal spectrum, mostly due to the methodological barriers that it entails. We found that impulsivity as a trait plays a role in deaths by suicide. Individuals with high impulsivity traits who die by suicide exhibit distinct characteristics such as younger age, substance abuse and low intent to die, whereas non-impulsive people who die by suicide tend to be older age, experience depression or schizophrenia and have high intent to die. Social support is not a protective factor for death by suicide in people with high impulsivity which poses challenges for suicide prevention in this population.

The research is here.

We built this culture (so we can change it): Seven principles for intentional culture change.

Hamedani, M. G., et al. (2024).

American Psychologist, 79(3), 384–402.

https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001209

Abstract

Calls for culture change abound. Headlines regularly feature calls to change the “broken” or “toxic” cultures of institutions and organizations, and people debate which norms and practices across society are now defunct. As people blame current societal problems on culture, the proposed fix is “culture change.” But what is culture change? How does it work? Can it be effective? This article presents a novel social psychological framework for intentional culture change—actively and deliberately modifying the mutually reinforcing features of a culture. Synthesizing insights from research and application, it proposes an integrated, evidence-based perspective centered around seven core principles for intentional culture change: Principle 1: People are culturally shaped shapers, so they can be culture changers; Principle 2: Identifying, mapping, and evaluating the key levels of culture helps locate where to target change; Principle 3: Culture change happens in both top-down and bottom-up ways and is more effective when the levels are in alignment; Principle 4: Culture change can be easier when it leverages existing core values and harder when it challenges deep-seated defaults and biases; Principle 5: Culture change typically involves power struggles and identity threats; Principle 6: Cultures interact with one another and change can cause backlash, resistance, and clashes; and Principle 7: Timing and readiness matter. While these principles may be broadly used, here they are applied to the issue of social inequality in the United States. Even though culture change feels particularly daunting in this problem area, it can also be empowering—especially when people leverage evidence-based insights and tools to reimagine and rebuild their cultures.

Public Significance Statement

Calls for culture change abound. Headlines regularly feature calls to change the “broken” or “toxic” cultures of the police, the workplace, U.S. politics, and more, and norms and practices across society are hotly debated. The proposed fix is “culture change.” But what is culture change? How does it work? And can it be effective? This article presents an emerging social psychological framework for intentional culture change, with a focus on behavioral change and addressing societal disparities in the United States.

-----------------

Here are some thoughts:

People as Changemakers:  The concept of "culturally shaped shapers" can be empowering to everyone in the organization, not just a top-down approach to leadership. It emphasizes that everyone, from executives to frontline employees, has the power to influence the culture.  This empowers individuals and fosters a sense of ownership.

Multi-Level Mapping:  The idea of mapping the different cultural levels (individual, team, organizational, societal) is insightful. By understanding these interconnected layers, leaders can pinpoint areas for focused intervention and ensure their efforts have a cascading effect.

The Power of Alignment:  The emphasis on both top-down and bottom-up approaches is crucial. When leadership aspirations align with employee experiences,  genuine cultural change flourishes. Leaders who actively listen and incorporate employee voices create a sense of trust and shared purpose.

Leveraging Values:  Building upon existing core values is a smart strategy.  Change feels less disruptive when it complements established principles. However, confronting deep-seated biases is also important. Leaders need the courage to address outdated norms that may be hindering progress.

The Inevitability of Conflict:  The acknowledgment of power struggles and identity threats during cultural change is an important reminder.  Leaders should prepare for resistance and be open to navigating these challenges constructively. Transparency and open communication are key.

The Ripple Effect:  The highlight that cultures interact is valuable. Leaders must consider how their organization's culture interacts with external forces,  like industry norms or societal shifts. This awareness can help them anticipate potential challenges and opportunities.

Timing is Everything:  The importance of timing and readiness resonates deeply.  Leaders need to assess their organization's receptiveness to change and tailor their approach accordingly.  Forcing change before the groundwork is laid can backfire.