You Can Leave Your Glasses on: Glasses Can Increase Electoral Success. Alexandra Fleischmann et al. In Press, Social Psychology, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326942161
Abstract: Does wearing glasses hurt or help politicians in elections? Although some research shows that glasses signal unattractiveness, glasses also increase perceptions of competence. In eight studies, participants voted for politicians wearing (photoshopped) glasses or not. Wearing glasses increased politicians’ electoral success in the U.S. (Study 1), independent of their political orientation (Studies 2a and 2b). This positive effect was especially strong when intelligence was important (Study 3), and even occurred if glasses were used strategically (Study 4). However, it did not extend to India (Study 5) due to different cultural associations with glasses (Study 6). Furthermore, while intelligence mediated the effect, warmth did not (Study 7). In summary, wearing glasses can robustly boost electoral success, at least in Western cultures.
Keywords: Glasses, voting, stereotypes, politicians, election
Monday, September 3, 2018
Gender Difference in Verbal Performance: In written tests, only 39pct of boys but 61pct of girls will reach proficiency
Gender Difference in Verbal Performance: a Meta-analysis of United States State Performance Assessments. Jennifer Petersen. Educational Psychology Review, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-018-9450-x
Abstract: A comprehensive, statistical review of gender differences in verbal performance has not been conducted in several decades and the majority of previous work on this topic used published studies that often include small, non-representative samples. The introduction of national legislation in US public schools required schools to assess and publicly report verbal performance, thus providing verbal assessment data for millions of American students. The current study presents a meta-analysis of gender differences in US state verbal assessments. Data were collected from the departments of education in 16 states representing more than 10 million US students in grades 3 through 11. Results indicated a small gender difference favoring females for overall verbal performance (d = 0.29). However, when type of assessment was considered, the female advantages in reading (d = 0.19) and language arts (d = 0.29) were smaller than in writing performance (d = 0.45). The small gender differences in verbal performance increased in a linear pattern from grades 3 to 8 and then remained steady in high school.
Abstract: A comprehensive, statistical review of gender differences in verbal performance has not been conducted in several decades and the majority of previous work on this topic used published studies that often include small, non-representative samples. The introduction of national legislation in US public schools required schools to assess and publicly report verbal performance, thus providing verbal assessment data for millions of American students. The current study presents a meta-analysis of gender differences in US state verbal assessments. Data were collected from the departments of education in 16 states representing more than 10 million US students in grades 3 through 11. Results indicated a small gender difference favoring females for overall verbal performance (d = 0.29). However, when type of assessment was considered, the female advantages in reading (d = 0.19) and language arts (d = 0.29) were smaller than in writing performance (d = 0.45). The small gender differences in verbal performance increased in a linear pattern from grades 3 to 8 and then remained steady in high school.
Monkeys: Collective intentions are inferable when they go on patrol, mob predators, go hunting, & when gang-attack disliked members of the same community (with significant pre-adaptive implications for the evolution of moralistic social control)
Collective intentionality: A basic and early component of moral evolution. Christopher Boehm. Philosophical Psychology. Volume 31, 2018 - Issue 5, Pages 680-702. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2018.1486607
ABSTRACT: Michael Tomasello’s account of moral evolution includes both a synthesis of extensive experimental work done on humans and chimpanzees on their potential for perspective-taking and helpful, altruistic generosity and a major emphasis on “collective intentionality” as an important component of morality in humans. Both will be very useful to the evolutionary study of this subject. However, his disavowal of collective intentions on the parts of chimpanzees would appear to be empirically incorrect, owing to reliance on experimental captive research focused only on dyadic interactions. Here, evidence to the contrary is provided from studies of wild chimpanzees as they naturally cooperate in sizable groups. Collective intentions are inferable when they go on patrol, when they mob predators, when they go hunting, and when large coalitions gang-attack disliked members of the same community. This last behavior has particularly significant pre-adaptive implications for the evolution of moralistic social control, and it suggests that moral evolution has deep roots, going back to the Last Common Ancestor of humans, bonobos, and chimpanzees.
KEYWORDS: Chimpanzee attacks, coalitions, collective intentions, cooperation, moral evolution, problem solving, punishment, social sanctions, social selection
ABSTRACT: Michael Tomasello’s account of moral evolution includes both a synthesis of extensive experimental work done on humans and chimpanzees on their potential for perspective-taking and helpful, altruistic generosity and a major emphasis on “collective intentionality” as an important component of morality in humans. Both will be very useful to the evolutionary study of this subject. However, his disavowal of collective intentions on the parts of chimpanzees would appear to be empirically incorrect, owing to reliance on experimental captive research focused only on dyadic interactions. Here, evidence to the contrary is provided from studies of wild chimpanzees as they naturally cooperate in sizable groups. Collective intentions are inferable when they go on patrol, when they mob predators, when they go hunting, and when large coalitions gang-attack disliked members of the same community. This last behavior has particularly significant pre-adaptive implications for the evolution of moralistic social control, and it suggests that moral evolution has deep roots, going back to the Last Common Ancestor of humans, bonobos, and chimpanzees.
KEYWORDS: Chimpanzee attacks, coalitions, collective intentions, cooperation, moral evolution, problem solving, punishment, social sanctions, social selection
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
