Unconvenient scientific evidence: Harm over-estimators were more supportive of censoring scientific research; & those more offended by scientific findings reported greater difficulty understanding them (“motivated confusion”)

Harm Hypervigilance in Public Reactions to Scientific Evidence. Cory Clark, Maja Graso, Ilana Redstone, Philip E. Tetlock. March 2022. DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.35921.20329

Abstract: Two preregistered studies (n = 1,423; one with a U.S. nationally representative sample) tested the harm-hypervigilance hypothesis in citizens’ risk assessments of controversial behavioral science findings. As expected, people consistently overestimated all harmful reactions to scientific findings with a medium-to-large average effect size (and underestimated all helpful ones). Additional analyses found (1) harm over-estimators were more supportive of censoring scientific research; (2) those more offended by scientific findings reported greater difficulty understanding them (“motivated confusion”); (3) social network ideological heterogeneity predicted more accurate (lower) estimates of harmful reactions (especially among ideologically extreme participants) and social network ideological homogeneity predicted more accurate (higher) estimates of helpful reactions; (4) mixed evidence on whether ideological groups overestimated harms that challenged their moral concerns. These findings raise the question: When does harm hypervigilance become net harmful by impeding scientific discovery and delaying evidence-based solutions to societal problems?

Extensive research suggests that short-term meditation interventions may hold therapeutic promise for a wide range of psychosocial outcomes; methodologically rigorous study finds null effect of mindfulness & compassion interventions

Kaplan, Deanna M., Matthias R. Mehl, Steven P. Cole, and Charles Raison. 2022. “Implications of a “null” Randomized Controlled Trial of Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions in Healthy Adults” PsyArXiv. March 15. doi:10.31234/osf.io/38xv6 - Implications of a “null” randomized controlled trial of mindfulness and compassion interventions in healthy adults

Abstract

Objective: Extensive research suggests that short-term meditation interventions may hold therapeutic promise for a wide range of psychosocial outcomes. In response to calls to subject these interventions to more methodologically rigorous tests, a randomized controlled trial tested the effectiveness of a mindfulness meditation intervention and a compassion meditation intervention against an active control in a sample of demographically diverse, medically and psychiatrically healthy adults.

Methods: Two hundred and four participants completed a battery of questionnaires to assess psychological experience, participated in a laboratory stress test to measure their biological stress reactivity, and wore the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR) to assess daily behaviors before and after an eight-week intervention (mindfulness meditation intervention, compassion meditation intervention, or health education discussion group).

Results: Neither meditation intervention reliably impacted participants’ subjective experience, biological stress reactivity, or objectively assessed daily behaviors. Further, post-hoc moderation analyses found that neither baseline distress nor intervention engagement significantly moderated the effects.

Conclusion: Results from this trial – which was methodologically rigorous and powered to detect all but small effects – were essentially null. These results are an important data point for the body of research about meditation interventions. Implications of these non-significant effects are discussed in the context of prior studies, and future directions for contemplative intervention research are recommended.

Biological processes have provided new insights into diverging labour market trajectories; higher testosterone levels reduce the risk of becoming or staying unemployed

In And Out Of Unemployment –Labour Market Transitions And The Role Of Testosterone. Peter Eibich t al. Economics & Human Biology, March 15 2022, 101123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2022.101123

Highlights

• We examine the impact of testosterone on labour market transitions of British men.

• We link UK Household Longitudinal Study with the Health and biomarkers Survey.

• We estimate probit regression models adjusting for known confounders.

• We use genetic variants as instruments in a Mendelian Randomisation analysis.

• Higher testosterone levels reduce the risk of becoming or staying unemployed.

Abstract: Biological processes have provided new insights into diverging labour market trajectories. This paper uses population variation in testosterone levels to explain transition probabilities into and out of unemployment. We examine labour market transitions for 2,004 initially employed and 111 initially unemployed British men from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (“Understanding Society”) between 2011 and 2013. We address the endogeneity of testosterone levels by using genetic variation as instrumental variables (Mendelian Randomization). We find that for both initially unemployed men as well as initially employed men, higher testosterone levels reduce the risk of unemployment. Based on previous studies and descriptive evidence, we argue that these effects are likely driven by differences in cognitive and non-cognitive skills as well as job search behaviour of men with higher testosterone levels. Our findings suggest that latent biological processes can affect job search behaviour and labour market outcomes without necessarily relating to illness and disability.

JEL: I10J64C23

Keywords: labour market dynamicsunemploymenttestosterone