Functional and Structural Brain Correlates of Socioeconomic Status

Functional and Structural Brain Correlates of Socioeconomic Status. Zachary A Yaple, Rongjun Yu. Cerebral Cortex, bhz080, May 2 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhz080

Abstract: Socioeconomic status (SES) is a multidimensional construct that includes not only measures of material wealth, but also education, social prestige, and neighborhood quality. Socioeconomic correlates between wealth and cognitive functions have been well established in behavioral studies. However, functional and structural brain correlates of SES remain unclear. Here, we sought to uncover the most likely neural regions to be affected by low SES, specifically associated with age. Using effect size–seed-based d Mapping, we compiled studies that examined individuals with low SES and performed functional magnetic resonance imaging and voxel-based morphometry meta-analyses. The results revealed that as from early to late age, individuals exposed to low SES are less likely to have sustained executive network activity yet a greater likelihood to enhanced activity within reward-related regions. A similar activity was shown for gray matter volume across early to older age. These findings provide the first quantitative integration of neuroimaging results pertaining to the neural basis of SES. Hypoactivation of the executive network and hyperactivation of the reward network in low SES individuals may support the scarcity hypothesis and animal models of the effects of early adversity.

Keywords: Socioeconomic status, Seed-based d mapping, VBM, fMRI

In Sweden: No support for the idea that framing the affirmative action scenario as adding minority women compared to framing it as rejecting majority men would reduce feelings of resentment

Sinclair, Samantha, and Rickard Carlsson. 2019. “Reactions to Affirmative Action Policies in Hiring: Effects of Framing and Beneficiary Gender.” PsyArXiv. September 6. doi:10.31234/osf.io/34tnv

Abstract: Affirmative action policies aim to reduce gaps between social groups, yet they are often perceived negatively. The present research examined reactions to an organization’s preferential treatment policy based on gender, focusing on whether positive versus negative framing of the scenario and gender of the beneficiary matter for these reactions. The results of two preregistered experiments conducted in Sweden (N = 556) did not provide support for the hypothesis that framing the affirmative action scenario as adding minority women compared to framing it as rejecting majority men would produce more favorable perceptions and reduced feelings of resentment. Moreover, we found no support for the hypothesis that the effects of framing would be weaker in the case of male beneficiaries compared to female beneficiaries. However, we found clear support for the hypothesis that the policy was perceived more favorably when the beneficiary was female rather than male. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Claims about the health dangers of red meat are not only improbable in the light of our evolutionary history, they are far from being supported by robust scientific evidence

Should dietary guidelines recommend low red meat intake? Frédéric Leroy & Nathan Cofnas. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, Sep 5 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1657063 

Abstract: Mainstream dietary recommendations now commonly advise people to minimize the intake of red meat for health and environmental reasons. Most recently, a major report issued by the EAT-Lancet Commission recommended a planetary reference diet mostly based on plants and with no or very low (14 g/d) consumption of red meat. We argue that claims about the health dangers of red meat are not only improbable in the light of our evolutionary history, they are far from being supported by robust scientific evidence.

Keywords: red meat, health, vegetarianism, veganism, dietary guidelines, disease

---
6. Conclusions

Although meat has been a central component of the diet of our lineage for millions of years, some nutrition authorities—who often have close connections to animal rights activists or other forms of ideological vegetarianism, such as Seventh-Day Adventism (Banta et al., 2018)—are promoting the view that meat causes a host of health problems and has no redeeming value. We contend that a large part of the case against meat is based on cherry-picked evidence and low-quality observational studies. The bald claim that red meat is an “unhealthy food” (Willett et al., 2019) is wildly unsupported.

Based on misrepresentations of the state of the science, some organizations are attempting to influence policy makers to take action to reduce meat consumption. Simplification of complex science increases persuasive power but may also serve ideological purposes and lead to scientistic approaches. According to Mayes and Thompson (2015), manifestations of nutritional scientism in the context of biopolitics can have various ethical implications for “individual responsibility and freedom, concerning iatrogenic harm, and for well-being”. Well-meaning yet overemphasized and premature recommendations may eventually cause more damage than benefit, not only physiologically but also by unjustifiably holding individuals accountable for their health outcomes. We believe that a large reduction in meat consumption, such as has been advocated by the EAT-Lancet Commission (Willett et al., 2019), could produce serious harm. Meat has long been, and continues to be, a primary source of high-quality nutrition. The theory that it can be replaced with legumes and supplements is mere speculation. While diets high in meat have proved successful over the long history of our species, the benefits of vegetarian diets are far from being established, and its dangers have been largely ignored by those who have endorsed it prematurely on the basis of questionable evidence.

Check also Ben-Dor, Miki (2019) "How carnivorous are we? The implication for protein consumption," Journal of Evolution and Health: Vol. 3: Iss. 1, Article 10. https://doi.org/10.15310/2334-3591.1096 https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/03/although-we-are-undoubtedly-omnivores.html

From 2017... The Imaginary Intrasexual Competition: Advertisements Featuring Provocative Female Models Trigger Women to Engage in Indirect Aggression, as with real-life sexual rivals

From 2017... The Imaginary Intrasexual Competition: Advertisements Featuring Provocative Female Models Trigger Women to Engage in Indirect Aggression. Sylvie Borau, Jean-François Bonnefon. Journal of Business Ethics, June 2019, Volume 157, Issue 1, pp 45–63, July 20 2017. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-017-3643-y

Abstract: Recent research suggests that women react to idealized female models in advertising as they would react to real-life sexual rivals. Across four studies, we investigate the negative consequences of this imaginary competition on consumers’ mate-guarding jealousy, indirect aggression, and drive for thinness. A meta-analysis of studies 1–3 shows that women exposed to an idealized model report more mate-guarding jealousy and show increased indirect aggression (i.e., derogation and social exclusion), but do not report a higher desire for thinness. Study 4 replicates these findings and reveals that the main driver of aggression is the sexually provocative attitude of the model (a signal of a flirting behavior and of sexual availability), rather than her thin body size. The ethical implications of these findings for advertising are discussed in light of recent concerns about female bullying, online, and in the workplace.

Keywords: Advertising models Derogation Intrasexual competition Mate-guarding jealousy Provocative attitude Slut-shaming

Conscious thought comprises mental simulations that enable the person to imagine & respond to reflections on the past, anticipations about the future, & other nonpresent events

Masicampo, E. J., Luebber, F., & Baumeister, R. F. (2019). The influence of conscious thought is best observed over time. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, Sep 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cns0000205

Abstract: The capacity for complex, conscious thought is arguably the human mind’s most defining feature. Nevertheless, the efficacy of consciousness has long been debated, with some arguing that consciousness is a feckless epiphenomenon or that its influence on behavior is trivial. We focus specifically on conscious thought, which appears to be a uniquely human capacity, rather than the more basic phenomenal consciousness that humans appear to share with other animals. We argue that the influence of conscious thought on behavior is profound, and that to detect this influence requires observing behavior across multiple events scattered across time. In our view, conscious thought is not the executor of behavior but rather serves as an input into an unconscious executive. Specifically, conscious thought comprises mental simulations that enable the person to imagine and respond to reflections on the past, anticipations about the future, and other nonpresent events. Thus, conscious thought should not be expected in most cases to influence behavior directly and in the current moment. Instead, we argue that conscious thought is for planning for the future, that conscious thought changes automatic responses slowly over time, and that accurate conscious reflections requires observation across multiple events. Therefore, to detect conscious thought’s influence requires tests with much broader time spans than is typical in extant research. We argue that an empirical approach that takes such a broad perspective is necessary for understanding fully how conscious thought guides behavior, makes decisions, and otherwise adapts the self to the complexities of human social life.