Age is the most important risk factor for loneliness, which peaks just prior to the peak age of onset for psychotic disorders; contrary to expectations, it declines thereafter over the lifespan

Shovestul, Bridget, Jiayin Han, Laura Germine, and David Dodell-Feder. 2019. “Risk Factors for Loneliness: The High Relative Importance of Age Versus Other Factors.” PsyArXiv. October 11. doi:10.31234/osf.io/t8n2h

Abstract
Background: Loneliness is a potent predictor of negative health outcomes making it important to identify risk factors for loneliness. Though extant studies have identified characteristics that are associated with loneliness, less is known about the cumulative and relative importance of these factors, and how their interaction may impact loneliness. Thus, here, we investigate risk factors for loneliness.

Methods: 4,885 individuals ages 10-97 years from the US completed the three-item UCLA Loneliness Survey on TestMyBrain.org. Using census data, we calculated the population and community household income of participants’ census area, and the proportion of individuals in the participant’s census area that shared the participant’s demographic characteristics (i.e., sociodemographic density). We evaluated the relative importance of three classes of variables for loneliness risk: those related to the person (e.g., age), place (e.g., community household income), and the interaction of person X place (sociodemographic density).

Results: We find that loneliness is highly prevalent and best explained by person (age) and place (community household income) characteristics. Of the variance in loneliness accounted for, the overwhelming majority was explained by age. On age, loneliness peaks at 19 years, and declines thereafter. The congruence between one’s sociodemographic characteristics and that of one’s neighborhood had no impact on loneliness.

Conclusions: Age appears to be the most important risk factor for loneliness, which peaks just prior to the peak age of onset for psychotic disorders, and, contrary to popular belief, declines thereafter over the lifespan. These data may have important implications for public health interventions.

Youth marijuana use can have adverse health outcomes; however, reports from Colorado, Oregon, & Washington indicate no statewide increase in youth marijuana use following retail legalization for adults

Ta M, Greto L, Bolt K. Trends and Characteristics in Marijuana Use Among Public School Students — King County, Washington, 2004–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2019;68:845–850. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6839a3.htm

Summary

What is already known about this topic?
Youth marijuana use can have adverse health outcomes. However, reports from Colorado, Oregon, and Washington indicate no statewide increase in youth marijuana use following retail legalization for adults.

What is added by this report?
Following 2012 legalization of retail marijuana sale to adults in Washington, past 30–day marijuana use decreased or remained stable through 2016 among King County students in grades 6, 8, 10, and 12. Among grade 10 students, the decline in use occurred among males while the rate among females remained steady. Use of alcohol or other substances was four times as frequent among marijuana users as among nonusers.

What are the implications for public health practice?
Understanding reasons for youth marijuana use, particularly among females, might help inform policy, strategies, and educational campaigns.

Use of marijuana at an early age can affect memory, school performance, attention, and learning; conclusions have been mixed regarding its impact on mental health conditions, including psychosis, depression, and anxiety (1–3). Medical marijuana has been legal in Washington since 1998, and in 2012, voters approved the retail sale of marijuana for recreational use to persons aged ≥21 years. The first retail stores opened for business in July 2014. As more states legalize marijuana use by adults aged ≥21 years, the effect of legalization on use by youths will be important to monitor. To guide planning of activities aimed at reducing marijuana use by youths and to inform ongoing policy development, Public Health—Seattle & King County assessed trends and characteristics of past 30–day marijuana use among King County, Washington, public school students in grades 6, 8, 10, and 12. This report used biennial data for 2004–2016 from the Washington State Healthy Youth Survey. Among grade 6 students there was a decreasing trend in self-reported past 30–day marijuana use from 2004 to 2016, while the percentage of grade 8 students who had used marijuana during the past 30 days did not change during that period. Among students in grades 10 and 12, self-reported past 30–day use of marijuana increased from 2004 to 2012, then declined from 2012 to 2016. In 2016, the percentage of students with past 30–day marijuana use in King County was 0.6% among grade 6, 4.1% among grade 8, 13.9% among grade 10, and 25.5% among grade 12 students. Among grade 10 students, 24.0% of past 30–day marijuana users also smoked cigarettes, compared with 1.3% of nonusers. From 2004 to 2016 the prevalence of perception of great risk of harm from regular marijuana use decreased across all grades. Continued surveillance using consistent measures is needed to monitor the impact of marijuana legalization and emerging public health issues, given variable legislation approaches among jurisdictions.

The Healthy Youth Survey is a school-based, anonymous, self-administered, cross-sectional survey conducted in the fall of even-numbered years in Washington public schools.* Schools with grades 6, 8, 10, and 12 are randomly selected using a clustered sampling design. Schools not selected for the state sample also can choose to participate in the survey. The survey measures risk behaviors, attitudes, and factors that contribute to youth health and safety, including alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, and other drug use; behaviors that result in unintentional and intentional injuries (e.g., violence); dietary behaviors, and physical activity.

This analysis used data from all participating schools, both sampled and nonsampled, representing all 19 King County school districts for biennial survey years 2004 through 2016 (the most currently available year of data at the time of analysis). King County is the largest metropolitan county in the state. Local jurisdictions have authority to regulate land uses and can impose additional time, place, and manner-of-use restrictions on state licensed businesses; thus, considerable variation in the availability of and restrictions on retail marijuana exists across the 39 cities in King County, including Seattle.

Survey response rates varied by grade and survey year, with higher rates in more recent surveys.† During 2004–2016, King County response rates ranged from 60%–80% for grades 6 and 8; 50%–70% for grade 10; and 40%–50% for grade 12. For the 2016 survey, response rates for King County were 80% for grades 6 and 8, 70% for grade 10, 40% for grade 12, and 67% for all grades combined.

Data representing substance use, perception of great risk of harm, risky behaviors, and factors associated with marijuana use were categorized dichotomously. Past 30–day marijuana use was considered use on 1 or more days during the past 30 days. Perceived great risk of harm associated with regular marijuana use (more than one or two times per week) was categorized dichotomously as great risk versus all other options combined (moderate, slight, and no perceived risk). Past 30–day use of alcohol, cigarettes, and electronic cigarettes/vape pens was considered use on 1 or more days in the past 30 days, past 30–day risky driving and riding behaviors,§ were considered one or more occurrences during the past 30 days and past binge drinking¶ was over a 2-week period.

Dichotomous factors generally reported to be associated with other substance use (4) were examined for marijuana use; these factors included whether students’ parents had talked about not using marijuana, use by one or more best friends or by a member in the youth’s household, and having been bullied one or more times in the past month.** Stata survey software (version 13; StataCorp) was used to generate percentage estimates and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To account for differential participation among school districts across survey years, percentage estimates were weighted to the school district total enrollment by grade and sex, with the final weights adjusted to sum to the county total public school enrollment by grade and sex. Joinpoint trend analysis software (https://surveillance.cancer.gov/joinpoint/external icon) was used to evaluate statistical significance of trends in survey-weighted percentage estimates by grade and sex. Analyses of trends by sex and examination of factors associated with past 30–day use were restricted to grade 10 students as a result of grade-specific sampling and the need for adequate response rates to accommodate a robust analysis.

During 2004–2016, the prevalence of reported past 30–day marijuana use was lowest among students in grade 6 and increased with school grade level (Figure 1). In 2016, past 30–day marijuana use was reported by 0.6% (CI = 0.4–0.7) of grade 6 students, 4.1% (CI = 3.5–4.8) of grade 8 students, 13.9% (CI = 12.6–15.3) of grade 10 students, and 25.5% (CI = 23.7–27.4) of grade 12 students in King County. Among students in grade 6, past 30–day marijuana use declined significantly, from 1.3% in 2004 to 0.6% in 2016. There was no statistically significant trend among students in grade 8; however, among students in grades 10 and 12, past 30–day use increased from 2004 to 2012, and then declined. Across all grades, the percentage of students reporting great risk of harm from regular marijuana use declined over the survey period, with the lowest perceived great risk of harm reported among older students in all years. In 2016, 26.7% (CI = 25.0–28.5) of students in grade 12 perceived great risk of harm from regular marijuana use, whereas 53.3% (CI = 50.5–56.1) reported this perception in 2004.

Among male students in grade 10, past 30–day marijuana use increased from 17.6% in 2004 to 21.4% in 2010 and subsequently declined to 13.5% in 2016 (Figure 2). Among female students in grade 10, there was no change in the prevalence of past 30–day use, which remained approximately 16% during this period. In 2016, there was no significant difference in past 30–day marijuana use between male and female students in grade 10.

Among past 30–day marijuana users in grade 10, 42.8% reported living with someone who uses marijuana, 88.5% reported having at least one best friend who used marijuana, and 26.3% reported having been bullied at least once in the past 30 days; these prevalences were higher than those among grade 10 nonusers (12.8%, 28.3%, and 16.5%, respectively) (Table). Among grade 10 marijuana users, 92.5% reported that it was not very hard to obtain marijuana, compared with 56.7% of nonusers. No parental discussion about marijuana during the past year was reported by similar percentages of past 30–day marijuana users (39.2%) and nonusers (39.8%).

Among grade 10 students, prevalence of past 30–day use of other substances was four times higher among those who had used marijuana in the past 30 days than among those who had not. Among marijuana users, the prevalences of past 30–day use of other substances were as follows; alcohol (67.0%), cigarettes (24.0%), e-cigarettes or vape pens (43.0%), and of binge drinking (43.5%), compared with 10.3%, 1.3%, 4.0%, and 3.7% among nonusers, respectively. Among grade 10 marijuana users, 36% reported driving within 3 hours of using marijuana at least once in the past month.

Discussion

Despite legalization of the retail sale of marijuana to adults in Washington in 2012, evidence from the biennial Washington State Healthy Youth Survey indicates that the prevalence of past 30–day marijuana use among students in grades 10 and 12 began to decline that year. The decline continued in 2016 among grade 10 students and did not change significantly among grade 12 students. This decline or absence of change in youth marijuana use after legalization of retail sales to adults is consistent with trends reported in Colorado and Oregon,†† states that legalized adult retail sales of marijuana in 2013 and 2014, respectively. However, causality of the observed decrease in youth use following retail sale legalization cannot be inferred, because effects might be delayed and this report does not include data from the timeframe that would capture the more recent surge in e-cigarette use by youth and the use of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) within electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) devices. Although the relationship between legal adult recreational use and youth use is not well understood, two possible reasons for the observed decline in youth use include reduction of illicit market supply through competition§§ and loss of novelty appeal among youths. Furthermore, it would be important to monitor the long-term role legalization might play to foster a permissive use environment given observed strong associations with use and individual and family factors that influence youth use.

Before initiation of retail marijuana sales in Washington in 2014, the statewide prevalence of use among grade 10 students had not changed significantly since 2002, although reported statewide use prevalence in 2016 was higher among students identifying as non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native and Hispanic than among non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic Asian students (5). Among grade 10 King County students, past 30–day marijuana use by male students has been decreasing since 2010, while the prevalence among female students has not changed. Continued monitoring is necessary to observe how local trends among males change over time. The narrowing of the sex difference gap reflects national trends (6) and suggests that female users might benefit from tailored prevention messages informed by an understanding of reasons for use.

Although overall youth rates of smoking and alcohol are declining nationally (7), the prevalence of any substance use, including alcohol, cigarettes, or vape pens, was four times higher among grade 10 past 30–day marijuana users than among nonusers. Statewide data from 2016 also show similar higher prevalence of household, peer and individual factors associated with youth substance use among grade 10 marijuana users than nonusers (https://www.askhys.net/library/2016/RecentMarijaunaUseGr10.pdfpdf iconexternal icon). Findings from a 2017 survey of Canadian residents aged 15–24 years found that marijuana users were significantly more likely to be past 30-day e-cigarette users, compared with nonusers (8). Polysubstance use and driving after using marijuana or riding in a car driven by someone who had used marijuana recently are public health issues that are important to monitor. Educational campaigns conveying health risk of marijuana use should also address impaired driving, in light of experimental data showing deteriorating control with increasing task complexity and increased risk for involvement in a motor vehicle crash (9).

The findings in this report are subject to at least six limitations. First, these data predate the recent reported increase in youth e-cigarette use and the use of THC in the newest generation of e-cigarette devices. The marijuana use question does not explicitly define use by method and estimates of youth marijuana use might be underestimated if respondents did not consider vaping or edible consumption of marijuana products when responding to the question. Second, data are from public school students only and might not be generalizable to all youths in this age group. Students who might be at higher risk might not be in school; it is estimated that 95.3% of King County residents aged 14–18 years are in school.¶¶ Third, survey participation is voluntary, and responses are based on self-report, which can be subject to recall or response bias. Fourth, these estimates might differ from other state or nationally representative youth health–surveillance systems, in part because of survey methods, age of participants, survey setting, and period during the year the survey was conducted. Fifth, local historical data for youth marijuana use before 2004 are not available, and the effects of medical marijuana legalization, which occurred in 1998, on use by youths is unknown. Finally, binge drinking is framed as five or more drinks in a row during the preceding 2 weeks for both males and females and would likely underestimate excessive alcohol consumption among females compared with using a sex-specific four-drink threshold (10).

The national goals for substance use set by Healthy People 2020*** include a target of 6% for youths aged 12–17 years with past 30–day marijuana use, and progress toward this target requires evidence-based interventions and policies for preventing and treating substance use and abuse among youths. Although some cross-cutting interventions addressing adolescent health are presented in the Community Preventive Task Force’s Community Guide,††† there currently is no specific category for marijuana use, as there is for alcohol and tobacco. The National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices,§§§ a project of the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, might be a potential alternative source for strategies that reduce marijuana use and prevent associated harms, but these strategies might not be sufficient for states with newly legalized retail marketplaces. In light of the limited evidence base, there is a need to identify individual, relationship, community, and societal determinants of youth substance use that would allow development of broad-based risk-reduction strategies. Continued surveillance would benefit from having a set of standard measures across jurisdictions to monitor the health impacts of retail marijuana sale legalization among states.

Language has emerged in no other species than humans, suggesting a profound obstacle to its evolution; maybe quite specific social conditions were prerequisite for the evolution of language- and symbol-ready hominins

The Role of Egalitarianism and Gender Ritual in the Evolution of Symbolic Cognition. Camilla Power. August 2019. Chp 19 in Handbook of Cognitive Archaeology, Routledge. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335062001

Abstract: Are there constraints on the social conditions that could have given rise to language and symbolic cognition? Language has emerged in no other species than humans, suggesting a profound obstacle to its evolution. If language is seen as an aspect of cognition, limitations can be expected in terms of computational capacity. But if it is seen it as fundamentally for communication, then the problems will be found in terms of social relationships. Below a certain threshold of cooperation and trust, no language or symbolic communication could evolve (Knight & Lewis, 2017a); this has been termed a “platform of trust” (Wacewicz, 2017).... In this chapter, I argue that quite specific social conditions were prerequisite for the evolution of language- and symbol-ready hominins. One of the requirements differentiating our ancestors from other African apes was a switch to mainly female philopatry – females living with their relatives, rather than dispersing at sexual maturity – coevolving with an increasing tendency to egalitarianism....How did increasing egalitarianism affect males and potentially “feminize” male behavior for cooperative offspring care? How were male and female relations affected in the evolution of genus Homo and Homo sapiens?

We are capable of making accurate personality judgements in computer-mediated communication by means of even small cues like nicknames

The Name Is the Game: Nicknames as Predictors of Personality and Mating Strategy in Online Dating. Benjamin P. Lange et al. Front. Commun., February 12 2019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00003

Abstract
Objective: We investigated the communicative function of online dating nicknames. Our aim was to assess if it is possible to correctly guess personality traits of a user simply by reading his/her nickname.

Method: We had 69 nickname users (average age: 33.59 years, 36 female) complete questionnaires assessing their personality (Big 5 + narcissism) and mating strategy (short- vs. long-term). We then checked (using a total of 638 participants, average age: 26.83 years, 355 female), whether personality and mating strategy of the nickname users could be assessed correctly based only on the nickname. We also captured the motivation to contact the user behind a nickname and looked at linguistic features of the nicknames.

Results: We found that personality and mating strategy could be inferred from a nickname. Furthermore, going by trends, women were better at intersexual personality judgments, whereas men were better in intrasexual judgements. We also found several correlates of the motivation to contact the person behind the nickname. Among other factors, long nicknames seemed to deter people from contacting the nickname user.

Conclusions: Findings display that humans are capable of making accurate personality judgements in computer-mediated communication by means of even small cues like nicknames.

Introduction

Language-based face-to-face (ftf) interaction can be considered the most natural way of communication (Kock, 2004). New social media have transformed communication, though, as sender and receiver are not necessarily copresent in such a mediated context. However, communication in the digital world is still language-based, even when only in the form of written language (Koch et al., 2005).

Research on such computer-mediated communication (cmc) can be divided into different approaches. Two of them are: (1) the reduced-social-cues approach (rsc) (Sproull and Kiesler, 1986), and (2) the hyperpersonal communication approach (hp) (Walther, 1996). The first assumes that cmc filters out social context cues. The second emphasizes that cmc might surpass ftf communication, as the sender has the opportunity to optimize their self-representation while the receiver idealizes the sender on the basis of the available cues. Here lies the question whether people are able to, and actually do hide their “true selves,” that is their identity (e.g., personality), or whether they, despite being relatively anonymous, inevitably communicate aspects of their respective identity and personality that are in turn perceived by the receiver (Walther and Parks, 2002).

Sex or gender, respectively, are central features of one's identity and personality (e.g., Mealey, 2000; Ellis et al., 2008). As a matter of fact, sex has been central in cmc research. For instance, Guiller and Durndell (2007) found that in cmc men are more dominant than women, whereas women are more supportive than men—findings reminiscent of sex differences in ftf communication (Eckert and McConnell-Ginet, 2003).

A large body of research (e.g., Savicki et al., 1999; Thomson and Murachver, 2001; Koch et al., 2005) shows that only by reading text, people are able to guess the sex of the writers above chance. The same seems to be true for personality judgments (Park et al., 2015). Entire texts are not necessary, though. Lange et al. (2016b) used pseudonyms chosen by students in written exams, and had participants rate them on assumed sex of the user and other attributes. They found that sex could be guessed correctly above chance with a large effect size. Also, participants ascribed typical female and male attributes to the pseudonyms and even tried to retrieve information on the users' personality. It was also found that women, more than men, used diminutive suffixes in their pseudonyms (like -i in “cuti”). In line with these findings, Heisler and Crabill (2006) demonstrated that the majority of their participants considered themselves capable of correctly guessing the sex and age of the users of e-mail usernames. Moreover, their participants attempted to rate the supposed owners of the e-mail addresses also with respect to, among other aspects, their relationship status.

Not only is sex a matter of interest with respect to the digital world, the phenomenon of online dating is, too (Valkenburg and Peter, 2007). Considering that mate choice is one of the most important areas in social life (Buss, 2003) and that people are increasingly shifting their activities from the offline to the online world, it does not surprise that online dating has become a billion-dollar business (Sautter et al., 2010).

Human mating in general and sex differences in human mating have attracted numerous researchers and have produced a veritable deluge of related literature (e.g., Buss and Barnes, 1986; Buss, 1989; Buss and Schmitt, 1993; for an overview, see Buss, 2003, 2016; Schwarz and Hassebrauck, 2012). This research has, on the one hand, identified several characteristics that both sexes prefer in a mate (e.g., healthy), as well as those that are more preferred by women (e.g., good earning capacity, college graduate) and those more preferred by men (e.g., physically attractive) (Buss et al., 1990). The role of language in human mate choice has also been examined recently (e.g., Lange et al., 2014, 2016a). On the other hand, empirical mate choice research has documented that women are more exacting in mate choice decisions, while men face stronger same-sex competition (for an overview, see Buss, 2003). The first process, called intersexual selection, is the actual mate choice, which in most species occurs as female mate choice. That is, women because of having higher obligatory costs (Trivers, 1972), are more selective, while men, whose obligatory costs are lower, compete more strongly with other men in order to be chosen. This is called intrasexual selection (for an overview, see Buss, 2003).

Another area of interest in mate choice research is the distinction between short-term mating (the search for an affair, a one-night stand, etc.) and long-term mating (the search for a committed, steady relationship) (Buss and Schmitt, 1993), which can be referred to as a person's mating strategy (Schmitt, 2005). This distinction is somewhat linked to females being choosier than males. As the costs for males are lower than for females, men show a tendency to be relatively indiscriminate in short-term mating. A bad mate choice imposes higher costs on women than on men—and this applies more to short-term than to long-term mating. Generally, women show a preference for a long-term mate (Buss and Schmitt, 1993). As a result, men for whom short-term mating is a particularly useful strategy might want to pretend to be interested in long-term mating, while in fact they are not. Thus, women should be particularly interested in detecting a man's mating strategy (Buss, 2003).

Not only dating in general but online dating as well has excited some research interest—among others, also with respect to rsc and hp (for an overview, see Finkel et al., 2012). It has been assumed, taking the hp perspective, that the cmc limitations in online dating can be compensated by language style and choice of words (Walther et al., 2005). While physical cues are missing in cmc, the importance of verbal cues might be rising. The question then might very well be, this time with respect to online dating: what about single words instead of entire texts?

As emphasized above, communication only by means of single words is even more limited than communicating through written texts. Still, those single words might communicate crucial information (Lange et al., 2016a). In accordance with findings on mate choice in “real life,” Whitty and Buchanan (2010) found that women were more attracted to online user names (hereinafter called nicknames) (e.g., in terms of the motivation to contact the person behind the name) that signaled intelligence, while men were more attracted to nicknames indicative of physical attractiveness. So the choice of a nickname in online dating can be used for impression management—just like hp would predict. Online dating is indeed an area in the digital world in which making a good first impression is essential (Whitty and Buchanan, 2010).

Apart from classical mate choice criteria, the personality of a potential mate is crucial, too (e.g., Buss et al., 1990; Botwin et al., 1997; Escorial and Martín-Buro, 2012). In this context, research by Back et al. (2008) is particularly relevant for the research presented in the article at hand. They retrieved personality scores of 599 participants (Big Five, e.g., extraversion; narcissism) and additionally asked them for their e-mail addresses. Back et al. (2008) then presented the e-mail names to 100 participants who judged the personality dimensions of the e-mail name users on the same personality items used before. Personality dimensions were detected correctly, with results being statistically significant for all dimensions except for extraversion. Back et al. (2008) also showed that personality ratings were linked to certain attributes of the e-mail address. For instance, the perception of conscientiousness was positively correlated with both the number of characters and dots the names consisted of, while number of digits was negatively correlated with it.

The current study had the objective of replicating the findings by Back et al. (2008) with respect to online dating as well as to extend them. Back et al. (2008) used e-mail names and had a general cmc context. We, on our part, wanted to focus more on nicknames. This was inspired by research on the psychology of pseudonyms (e.g., Lange et al., 2016b) as well as based on the following assumption: While e-mail addresses are often created based on the rule “first name.last name” (e.g., john.smith@…), nicknames are assumed to be more creative (cf. Whitty and Buchanan, 2010). Also unlike Back et al. (2008), we were interested in the context of online dating and mate choice. Whitty and Buchanan (2010) have already shown that such an approach is worthwhile. Still, the scarcity of such research calls for more studies of this kind.

The question might also be asked, as to whether people are able to detect the mating strategy of a potential mate. It was also of interest whether the motivations for contacting a person behind a nickname, based only on the nickname, might differ (Whitty and Buchanan, 2010). Furthermore, we wanted additionally to investigate whether one of the two sexes are better at judging women's and men's personality based on their nicknames. Mating is an area of social life, where making a proper choice seems particularly important (Buss, 2003). So, it seemed of practical relevance to elucidate what mate choice-relevant information can be retrieved form an online dating nickname.

Finally, we were interested in the linguistic features of the nicknames, and the subsequent question whether we would find correlations between these features and other variables of interest (Back et al., 2008; Lange et al., 2016b).

We proposed the following hypothesis (cf. Back et al., 2008):

H1: People are able to correctly guess online daters' personality by means only of their nicknames. Under personality, we understood the Big Five dimensions which are: openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (McCrae and John, 1992). The Big Five have been used quite often in research focusing on personality perceptions by means of certain cues (e.g., Küfner et al., 2010; Qui et al., 2015). As another personality dimensions, we added narcissism following the mentioned study by Back et al. (2008). Other researchers have also included this trait, which is one of three traits of the so-called Dark Triad, into their research in order to elucidate, whether it can be detected (e.g., Buffardi and Campbell, 2008; Vander Molen et al., 2018).

Furthermore, we had four research questions that were derived from mate choice research (see above) and other studies on the psychology of nicknames or usernames (Back et al., 2008; Whitty and Buchanan, 2010; Lange et al., 2016b):

RQ1: Are people able to correctly guess online daters' mating strategy by means only of their nicknames?

RQ2: What are the correlates of the motivation to contact a person behind a nickname?

RQ3: Does one sex show greater accuracy in personality judgments than the other?

RQ4: What are the linguistic correlates of the personality of the nickname users and how are they perceived? In other words, are linguistic features significant mediators of judgments?

A majority of the participants had been deceptive in therapy, and a majority were willing to be deceptive in future therapeutic contexts; participants were more likely to use white lies than other forms of deception in therapy

Deception in psychotherapy: Frequency, typology and relationship. Drew A. Curtis, Christian L. Hart. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, September 9 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12263

Abstract: Deception in therapy has been documented anecdotally through various narratives of therapists. The investigation of its occurrence within therapy has largely been overlooked. We explored the reported frequency of deception within psychotherapy, the types of deception used within therapy, the likelihood of people lying to a therapist compared to other groups of people, and client perceptions of the types of deception that therapists use. Ninety‐one participants were provided with a series of deception examples, asked questions about the use of these types of deception within therapy, and asked generally about their use of deception in therapy. We found that a majority of the participants had been deceptive in therapy, and a majority were willing to be deceptive in future therapeutic contexts. Participants were more likely to use white lies than other forms of deception in therapy. Lastly, participants were less likely to lie to therapists compared to strangers and acquaintances. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

1 INTRODUCTION

When people communicate with each other, there is typically a presumption of honesty; however, people lie (Levine, 2014). In classic diary studies, people report lying, on average, twice a day (DePaulo & Bell, 1996; DePaulo & Kashy, 1998; Kashy & DePaulo, 1996). However, recent research indicates that the distribution of lies is positively skewed, with a small set of people telling many lies and most people telling fewer than two lies per day (Serota & Levine, 2015). Deception takes on a variety of forms such as outright lies, exaggerations, omissions and subtle lies (DePaulo, Kashy, Kirkendol, Wyer, & Epstein, 1996; Vrij, 2000). While there are numerous forms of human deception, the common thread that ties them together is an intent to mislead others. Vrij (2008) discussed various definitions of deception that had been used in the past, noting their shortcomings. He ultimately submitted that deception is “a successful or unsuccessful deliberate attempt, without forewarning, to create in another a belief which the communicator considers to be untrue” (p. 15).
1.1 Background

Over the past several decades, there has been a tremendous amount of basic research investigating human deception (see Vrij, 2008). This research has examined deception in a variety of contexts including intimate relationships (Cole, 2001; Peterson, 1996), in the workplace (Hart, Hudson, Fillmore, & Griffith, 2006; Shulman, 2011) and in forensic areas (Granhag & Strömwall, 2004). However, the prevalence of deception within psychotherapeutic settings has been mostly overlooked. In fact, it has been suggested that “surprisingly little has been written in the counseling journals on the topic of lying” (Miller, 1992, p. 25).

While psychotherapy involves an exchange between a therapist and a client, often perceived as honest (Curtis & Hart, 2015; Kottler & Carlson, 2011), deception is occasionally found woven into components of practice. Deceitfulness is one of the criteria for antisocial personality disorder (301.7) found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM‐5; American Psychiatric Association; APA, 2013). The DSM‐5 also terms lying, motivated by external incentive, as malingering (V65.2). Within psychometrics, deception has been documented as a measure or scale in some assessments (e.g. Greene, 2000; Guenther & Otto, 2010). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory‐II (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 2001) contains scales that reveal if a client is attempting to lie or be deceptive in different manners (Greene, 2000). The scant research investigating deception in therapy has focused on psychologists’ ability to detect deception, finding that counsellors and psychologists achieve 62%–85% accuracy rates when attempting to discern lies from truths, where 50% would represent chance levels of accuracy (e.g. Briggs, 1992; Ekman, O'Sullivan, & Frank, 1999). However, meta‐analyses and other literature suggest that accuracy for detecting deception is not much higher than chance for laypeople (54%) and law enforcement professionals (56%; Bond & DePaulo, 2006; Vrij, 2000).

More recently, there has been a re‐emergence of research and literature regarding deception in therapy. One study investigated therapists’ beliefs and attitudes towards client deception (Curtis & Hart, 2015). Curtis and Hart (2015) recruited 112 therapists and asked them to identify their beliefs about indicators of deception and subsequently identify their attitudes towards clients who lie. The results found that therapists possessed a number of inaccurate beliefs about actual indicators of deception (e.g. eye gaze aversion when lying), held a number of negative attitudes towards client deception (e.g. liking the client less) and lied to their clients in therapy.

While investigating psychologists’ ability to detect deception and their beliefs and attitudes towards client deception are worthwhile pursuits, the prevalence of client deception within psychotherapy has remained largely unstudied. Some literature has referenced pathological aspects of lying, termed pseudologia phantastica (e.g. Garlipp, 2017; Muzinic, Kozaric‐Kovacic, & Marinic, 2016). Additionally, in their book, Duped, Kottler and Carlson (2011) documented a number of anecdotal accounts of psychotherapists discovering that their clients had lied in therapy. Some of these reports included fabricating an entire therapy experience (Grzegorek, 2011) and intentionally omitting information about having a terminal illness (Rochlan, 2011). Thus, there is clear evidence that some clients do deceive their therapists.

Even though psychologists’ stories provide anecdotal evidence for the presence of deception within psychotherapy, there remains a dearth of empirical investigation. One recent study explored the occurrence of lying in psychotherapy, finding that 93% of 547 psychotherapy patients reported having lied to a therapist (Blanchard & Farber, 2016). Due to the present study having been conducted prior to the Blanchard and Farber (2016) study, it was not designed as a replication or intended for direct comparison.

In the current study, we sought to broaden the understanding of deception in therapy. We collected empirical data on the frequency of deception in therapy, the types of deception used and the influence of relational roles on deception. Given the previously noted research showing that many people report lying in their close relationships and in therapy, we predicted that the majority (>50%) of participants who had been in therapy would report that they had been deceptive within therapy at least once. Further, we predicted that the use of white lies and omissions would be more prevalent than other types of deception. Previous studies have found that people tell fewer lies to people with whom they are in emotionally close relationships (Vrij, 2008). Based on those findings, we predicted that participants would report being more likely to lie to a therapist than a significant other and family member, and we predicted that they would be less likely to lie to a therapist than social acquaintances and complete strangers. Based on the findings of Curtis (2013) that therapists believe clients are more likely to lie in earlier compared to later sessions, we predicted that people would report more willingness to lie to a therapist during the first session compared to subsequent sessions, due to the lack of emotional connection early in the relationship. Lastly, we predicted that people would be more likely to lie to a therapist that they did not like compared to a therapist they did like.

What are the Price Effects of Trade? Trade with China increased U.S. consumer surplus by about $400,000 per displaced job, and product categories catering to low-income consumers experienced larger price declines

What are the Price Effects of Trade? Evidence from the U.S. and Implications for Quantitative Trade Models. Xavier Jaravel, Erick Sager. Centre for Economic Policy Research, DP13902, August 2019. cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=13902

Abstract: This paper finds that U.S. consumer prices fell substantially due to increased trade with China. With comprehensive price micro-data and two complementary identification strategies, we estimate that a 1pp increase in import penetration from China causes a 1.91% decline in consumer prices. This price response is driven by declining markups for domestically-produced goods, and is one order of magnitude larger than in standard trade models that abstract from strategic price-setting. The estimates imply that trade with China increased U.S. consumer surplus by about $400,000 per displaced job, and that product categories catering to low-income consumers experienced larger price declines.

Keyword(s): Markups, prices, Trade
JEL(s):     F10, F13, F14

Some Lie a Lot: Most people are fairly honest, but there are prolific liars among us

Development of the Lying in Everyday Situations Scale. Christian L Hart et al. The American Journal of Psychology 132(3):343-352, September 2019. DOI: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.132.3.0343

Abstract: Deception researchers have developed various scales that measure the use of lying in specific contexts, but there are limited tools that measure the use of lies more broadly across the various contexts of day-today life. We developed a questionnaire that assesses the use of various forms of lying, including protecting others, image enhancement, saving face, avoiding punishment, vindictiveness, privacy, entertainment, avoiding confrontation, instrumental gain, and maintaining and facilitating relationships. The results of a factor analysis brought our original 45-item scale down to a two-dimensional, 14-item scale that we have titled the Lying in Everyday Situations (LiES) scale. In three studies, the concurrent validity of the scale was assessed with several domain-specific lying scales, two Machiavellianism scales, a social desirability scale, and reports of actual lie frequency over a 24-hour period. The scale was also assessed for interitem consistency (Cronbach's α) and test-retest reliability. We found that the LiES scale was a reliable and valid measure of lying. The LiES scale may be a useful tool for assessing the general tendency to lie across various contexts.

Popular version... Some Lie a Lot: Most people are fairly honest, but there are prolific liars among us. Christian L Hart. Psychology Today, Oct 10, 2019. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-nature-deception/201910/some-lie-lot

Check also Deception in psychotherapy: Frequency, typology and relationship. Drew A. Curtis, Christian L. Hart. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, September 9 2019. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/10/a-majority-of-participants-had-been.html

And, from 2009, The Prevalence of Lying in America: Three Studies of Self‐Reported Lies. Kim B. Serota, Timothy Levine, Franklin J. Boster. Human Communication Research 36(1):2 - 25, December 2009. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01366.x

Abstract: This study addresses the frequency and the distribution of reported lying in the adult population. A national survey asked 1,000 U.S. adults to report the number of lies told in a 24-hour period. Sixty percent of subjects report telling no lies at all, and almost half of all lies are told by only 5% of subjects; thus, prevalence varies widely and most reported lies are told by a few prolific liars. The pattern is replicated in a reanalysis of previously published research and with a student sample. Substantial individual differences in lying behavior have implications for the generality of truth-lie base rates in deception detection experiments. Explanations concerning the nature of lying and methods for detecting lies need to account for this variation.

And Sexual Coercion by Women: The Influence of Pornography and Narcissistic and Histrionic Personality Disorder Traits. Abigail Hughes, Gayle Brewer, Roxanne Khan. Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 7 2019. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/10/female-perpetrators-and-postrefusal.html

And “Sorry, I already have a boyfriend”: Masculine honor beliefs and perceptions of women’s use of deceptive rejection behaviors to avert unwanted romantic advances. Evelyn Stratmoen, Emilio D. Rivera, Donald A. Saucier. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 7, 2019. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/10/sorry-i-already-have-boyfriend.html

And Parenting by lying in childhood is associated with negative developmental outcomes in adulthood. Peipei Setoh et al. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, September 26 2019, 104680. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/09/childhood-experience-of-parents-lying.html

US private equity buyouts 1980-2013: Employment at targets shrinks 13% over two years in buyouts of publicly listed firms but expands 13% in buyouts of privately held firms; labor productivity rises 8% at targets over 2 years

Davis, Steven J. and Haltiwanger, John C. and Handley, Kyle and Lerner, Josh and Lipsius, Ben and Miranda, Javier, The Economic Effects of Private Equity Buyouts (October 7, 2019). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3465723

Abstract: We examine thousands of U.S. private equity (PE) buyouts from 1980 to 2013, a period that saw huge swings in credit market tightness and GDP growth. Our results show striking, systematic differences in the real-side effects of PE buyouts, depending on buyout type and external conditions. Employment at target firms shrinks 13% over two years in buyouts of publicly listed firms but expands 13% in buyouts of privately held firms, both relative to contemporaneous outcomes at control firms. Labor productivity rises 8% at targets over two years post buyout (again, relative to controls), with large gains for both public-to-private and private-to-private buyouts. Target productivity gains are larger yet for deals executed amidst tight credit conditions. A post-buyout widening of credit spreads or slowdown in GDP growth lowers employment growth at targets and sharply curtails productivity gains in public-to-private and divisional buyouts. Average earnings per worker fall by 1.7% at target firms after buyouts, largely erasing a pre-buyout wage premium relative to controls. Wage effects are also heterogeneous. In these and other respects, the economic effects of private equity vary greatly by buyout type and with external conditions.

Keywords: private equity, buyouts
JEL Classification: G24, G24, )31

From 2018... Some said prehistoric Africa was mankind's cradle & prehistoric Europe human intelligence's cradle; the African Middle Stone Age, going back 300,000 years, is challenging this view

From 2018... Symbolic arts and rituals in the African Middle Stone Age. E. John Collins. UTAFITI, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2018. http://www.journals.udsm.ac.tz/index.php/uj/article/viewFile/2329/2413

Abstract  Since the 1950s the huge amount of archaeological research done in Africa has shown that Homo sapiens originally came from Africa rather than Western Eurasia as was previously thought. Nevertheless, some Western scholars retain a Eurocentric bias by suggesting that humans only became fully intelligent after they migrated out of Africa and settled in Europe where, during the ‘Upper Palaeolithic Transition’ around 45,000 years ago, there was an abrupt advance in human neural wiring. Their evidence is the relatively sudden change from Middle Palaeolithic to more advanced Upper Palaeolithic2 tools and the appearance of the spectacular figurative cave art of Europe. This mental revolution was initially believed to have occurred in ‘Cro-Magnon Man’ who lived in Europe and Western Eurasia 45,00040,000 years ago and was considered to be the first human to have the cross-domain cognition and enhanced memory necessary for a sophisticated language and symbolic behaviour. In short, although after the 1950s archaeologists generally have acknowledged that prehistoric Africa was the cradle of mankind, some still insist that prehistoric Europe was the cradle of human intelligence. New research on the African Middle Stone Age (MSA), that itself goes back 300,000 years, is challenging this view. This paper provides some examples of symbolic, ritual and artistic behaviour, and indeed advanced tool making that took place during this period and up to around 60,000 years ago, long before the appearance of CroMagnon Man.

History backfires: Reminders of past injustices against women undermine support for workplace policies promoting women

History backfires: Reminders of past injustices against women undermine support for workplace policies promoting women. Ivona Hideg, Anne E. Wilson. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, October 10 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.10.001

Highlights
•    Reminders of past injustice toward women undermine men’s support for an EE policy.
•    Undermined support is due to men’s denial of current gender discrimination.
•    Reminders of past injustice toward women do not influence women’s reactions to EE.
•    Information about women’s advancement mitigate men’s negative reactions to EE.
•    Men’s undermined support for EE is further mediated by lower collective self-esteem.

Abstract: Public discourse on current inequalities often invokes past injustice endured by minorities. This rhetoric also sometimes underlies contemporary equality policies. Drawing on social identity theory and the employment equity literature, we suggest that reminding people about past injustice against a disadvantaged group (e.g., women) can invoke social identity threat among advantaged group members (e.g., men) and undermine support for employment equity (EE) policies by fostering the belief that inequality no longer exists. We find support for our hypotheses in four studies examining Canadian (three studies) and American (one study) EE policies. Overall, we found that reminders of past injustice toward women undermined men’s support for an EE policy promoting women by heightening their denial of current gender discrimination. Supporting a social identity account, men’s responses were mediated by collective self-esteem, and were attenuated when threat was mitigated. Reminders of past injustice did not influence women’s support for the EE policy.

Time spent using social media was not related to individual changes in depression or anxiety over 8 years,even in the transition between adolescence and emerging adulthood; no sex differences observed

Does time spent using social media impact mental health?: An eight year longitudinal study. Sarah M. Coyne et al. Computers in Human Behavior, October 10 2019, 106160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106160

Highlights
•    Time spent using social media was not related to individual changes in depression or anxiety over 8 years.
•    This lack of a relationship was found even in the transition between adolescence and emerging adulthood.
•    Results were not stronger for girls or boys.

Abstract: Many studies have found a link between time spent using social media and mental health issues, such as depression and anxiety. However, the existing research is plagued by cross-sectional research and lacks analytic techniques examining individual change over time. The current research involves an 8-year longitudinal study examining the association between time spent using social media and depression and anxiety at the intra-individual level. Participants included 500 adolescents who completed once-yearly questionnaires between the ages of 13 and 20. Results revealed that increased time spent on social media was not associated with increased mental health issues across development when examined at the individual level. Hopefully these results can move the field of research beyond its past focus on screen time.

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder: The Appraisal of Facial Attractiveness Requires Conscious Awareness, Contrary to Suggestions

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder: The Appraisal of Facial Attractiveness and Its Relation to Conscious Awareness. Myron Tsikandilakis, Persefoni Bali, Peter Chapman. Perception, December 19, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006618813035

Abstract: Previous research suggests that facial attractiveness relies on features such as symmetry, averageness and above-average sexual dimorphic characteristics. Due to the evolutionary and sociobiological value of these characteristics, it has been suggested that attractiveness can be processed in the absence of conscious awareness. This raises the possibility that attractiveness can also be appraised without conscious awareness. In this study, we addressed this hypothesis. We presented neutral and emotional faces that were rated high, medium and low for attractiveness during a pilot experimental stage. We presented these faces for 33.33 ms with backwards masking to a black and white pattern for 116.67 ms and measured face-detection and emotion-discrimination performance, and attractiveness ratings. We found that high-attractiveness faces were detected and discriminated more accurately and rated higher for attractiveness compared with other appearance types. A Bayesian analysis of signal detection performance indicated that faces were not processed significantly at-chance. Further assessment revealed that correct detection (hits) of a presented face was a necessary condition for reporting higher ratings for high-attractiveness faces. These findings suggest that the appraisal of attractiveness requires conscious awareness.

Keywords attractiveness, masking, awareness

The magnitude of sex differences in verbal episodic memory increases with social progress: Data from 54 countries across 40 years

Asperholm M, Nagar S, Dekhtyar S, Herlitz A (2019) The magnitude of sex differences in verbal episodic memory increases with social progress: Data from 54 countries across 40 years. PLoS ONE 14(4): e0214945. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214945

Abstract: Sex differences in episodic memory have been reported. We investigate (1) the existence of sex differences in verbal and other episodic memory tasks in 54 countries, and (2) the association between the time- and country-specific social progress indicators (a) female to male ratio in education and labor force participation, (b) population education and employment, and (c) GDP per capita, and magnitude of sex differences in verbal episodic memory tasks. Data were retrieved from 612 studies, published 1973–2013. Results showed that females outperformed (Cohen’s d > 0) males in verbal (42 out of 45 countries) and other (28 out of 45 countries) episodic memory tasks. Although all three social progress indicators were, separately, positively associated with the female advantage in verbal episodic memory performance, only population education and employment remained significant when considering the social indicators together. Results suggest that women’s verbal episodic memory performance benefits more than men’s from education and employment.

We Are Not Competent Combining Probability Forecasts: 60% and 60% Is 60%, but Likely and Likely Is Very Likely

Mislavsky, Robert and Gaertig, Celia, Combining Probability Forecasts: 60% and 60% Is 60%, but Likely and Likely Is Very Likely (September 16, 2019). SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3454796

Abstract: How do we combine others’ probability forecasts? Prior research has shown that when advisors provide numeric probability forecasts, people typically average them (i.e., they move closer to the average advisor’s forecast). However, what if the advisors say that an event is “likely” or “probable?” In 7 studies (N = 6,732), we find that people “count” verbal probabilities (i.e., they move closer to certainty than any individual advisor’s forecast). For example, when the advisors both say an event is “likely,” participants will say that it is “very likely.” This effect occurs for both probabilities above and below 50%, for hypothetical scenarios and real events, and when presenting the others’ forecasts simultaneously or sequentially. We also show that this combination strategy carries over to subsequent consumer decisions that rely on advisors’ likelihood judgments. We find inconsistent evidence on whether people are using a counting strategy because they believe that a verbal forecast from an additional advisor provides more new information than a numerical forecast from an additional advisor. We also discuss and rule out several other candidate mechanisms for our effect.

Keywords: uncertainty, forecasting, verbal probabilities, combining judgments, combining forecasts, predictions

Higher levels of physical activity (outdoor play & sport participation) were associated with greater white matter microstructure in children; no association was observed between screen time and white matter microstructure

Associations of physical activity and screen time with white matter microstructure in children from the general population. María Rodriguez-Ayllon et al. NeuroImage, October 9 2019, 116258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116258

Highlights
•    Higher levels of physical activity were associated with greater white matter microstructure in children.
•    Outdoor play and sport participation were specifically related to white matter microstructure.
•    No association was observed between screen time and white matter microstructure.

Abstract: Physical activity and sedentary behaviors have been linked to a variety of general health benefits and problems. However, few studies have examined how physical activity during childhood is related to brain development, with the majority of work to date focusing on cardio-metabolic health. This study examines the association between physical activity and screen time with white matter microstructure in the general pediatric population. In a sample of 2,532 children (10.12 ± 0.58 years; 50.04% boys) from the Generation R Study, a population-based cohort in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, we assessed physical activity and screen time using parent-reported questionnaires. Magnetic resonance imaging of white matter microstructure was conducted using diffusion tensor imaging. Total physical activity was positively associated with global fractional anisotropy (β = 0.057, 95% CI = 0.016, 0.098, p = 0.007) and negatively associated with global mean diffusivity (β = −0.079, 95% CI = −0.120, −0.038, p < 0.001), two commonly derived scalar measures of white matter microstructure. Two components of total physical activity, outdoor play and sport participation, were positively associated with global fractional anisotropy (β = 0.041, 95% CI=(0.000, 0.083), p = 0.047; β = 0.053, 95% CI=(0.010, 0.096), p = 0.015 respectively) and inversely associated with global mean diffusivity (β = −0.074, 95% CI= (−0.114, −0.033), p < 0.001; β = −0.043, 95% CI=(-0.086, 0.000), p = 0.049 respectively). No associations were observed between screen time and white matter microstructure (p > 0.05). This study provides new evidence that physical activity is modestly associated with white matter microstructure in children. In contrast, complementing other recent evidence on cognition, screen time was not associated with white matter microstructure. Causal inferences from these modest associations must be interpreted cautiously in the absence of longitudinal data. However, these data still offer a promising avenue for future work to explore to what extent physical activity may promote healthy white matter development.

Following a prolonged handshake (vs. a normal length or no handshake), participants showed less interactional enjoyment, as indicated by less laughing; also showed anxiety and behavioral freezing

Effects of Handshake Duration on Other Nonverbal Behavior. Emese Nagy et al. Perceptual and Motor Skills, October 8, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512519876743

Abstract: Although detailed descriptions of proper handshakes partly comprise many etiquette books, how a normal handshake can be described, its proper duration, and the consequences of violating handshake expectations remain empirically unexplored. This study measured the effect of temporal violations of the expected length of a handshake (less than three seconds according to previous studies) administered unobtrusively in a naturalistic experiment. We compared volunteer participants’ (N = 34; 25 females; 9 males; Mage = 23.76 years, SD = 6.85) nonverbal behavior before and after (a) a prolonged handshake (>3 seconds), (b) a normal length handshake (average length <3 seconds), and (c) a control encounter with no handshake. Frame-by-frame behavioral analyses revealed that, following a prolonged handshake (vs. a normal length or no handshake), participants showed less interactional enjoyment, as indicated by less laughing. They also showed evidence of anxiety and behavioral freezing, indicated by increased hands-on-hands movements, and they showed fewer hands-on-body movements. Normal length handshakes resulted in less subsequent smiling than did prolonged handshakes, but normal length handshakes were also followed by fewer hands-on-face movements than prolonged handshakes. No behavior changes were associated with the no-handshake control condition. We found no differences in participants’ level of empathy or state/trait anxiety related to these conditions. In summary, participants reacted behaviorally to temporal manipulations of handshakes, with relevant implications for interactions in interviews, business, educational, and social settings and for assisting patients with social skills difficulties.

Keywords: behavior, handshake, nonverbal communication, behavioral analysis, phenomenology

California income tax 2012 increase of up to 3 pct points for high-income households: Outward migration and behavioral responses by stayers together eroded 45.2% of the windfall tax revenues from the reform

Behavioral Responses to State Income Taxation of High Earners: Evidence from California. Joshua Rauh, Ryan J. Shyu. NBER Working Paper No. 26349, October 2019. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26349

Abstract: Drawing on the universe of California income tax filings and the variation imposed by a 2012 tax increase of up to 3 percentage points for high-income households, we present new findings about the effects of personal income taxation on household location choice and pre-tax income. First, over and above baseline rates of taxpayer departure from California, an additional 0.8% of the California residential tax filing base whose 2012 income would have been in the new top tax bracket moved out from full-year residency of California in 2013, mostly to states with zero income tax. Second, to identify the impact of the California tax policy shift on the pre-tax earnings of high-income California residents, we use as a control group high-earning out-of-state taxpayers who persistently file as California non-residents. Using a differences-in-differences strategy paired with propensity score matching, we estimate an intensive margin elasticity of 2013 income with respect to the marginal net-of-tax rate of 2.5 to 3.3. Among top-bracket California taxpayers, outward migration and behavioral responses by stayers together eroded 45.2% of the windfall tax revenues from the reform.

Biological systems are fundamentally computational in that they process information in an apparently purposeful fashion rather than just transferring bits of it in a purely syntactical manner

Reflexivity, coding and quantum biology. Peter R Wills. Biosystems, Volume 185, November 2019, 104027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2019.104027

Abstract: Biological systems are fundamentally computational in that they process information in an apparently purposeful fashion rather than just transferring bits of it in a purely syntactical manner. Biological information, such has genetic information stored in DNA sequences, has semantic content. It carries meaning that is defined by the molecular context of its cellular environment. Information processing in biological systems displays an inherent reflexivity, a tendency for the computational information-processing to be “about” the behaviour of the molecules that participate in the computational process. This is most evident in the operation of the genetic code, where the specificity of the reactions catalysed by the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase (aaRS) enzymes is required to be self-sustaining. A cell’s suite of aaRS enzymes completes a reflexively autocatalytic set of molecular components capable of making themselves through the operation of the code. This set requires the existence of a body of reflexive information to be stored in an organism’s genome. The genetic code is a reflexively self-organised mapping of the chemical properties of amino acid sidechains onto codon “tokens”. It is a highly evolved symbolic system of chemical self-description. Although molecular biological coding is generally portrayed in terms of classical bit-transfer events, various biochemical events explicitly require quantum coherence for their occurrence. Whether the implicit transfer of quantum information, qbits, is indicative of wide-ranging quantum computation in living systems is currently the subject of extensive investigation and speculation in the field of Quantum Biology.

Human players/signallers act as coding intermediaries who use lee-way alongside “a small set of arbitrary rules selected from a potentially unlimited number" to "ensure a specific correspondence between two independent worlds"

Wide coding: Tetris, Morse and, perhaps, language. S J Cowley. Biosystems, Volume 185, November 2019, 104025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2019.104025

Abstract
Code biology uses protein synthesis to pursue how living systems fabricate themselves. Weight falls on intermediary systems or adaptors that enable translated DNA to function within a cellular apparatus. Specifically, code intermediaries bridge between independent worlds (e.g. those of RNAs and proteins) to grant functional lee-way to the resulting products. Using this Organic Code (OC) model, the paper draws parallels with how people use artificial codes. As illustrated by Tetris and Morse, human players/signallers manage code functionality by using bodies as (or like) adaptors. They act as coding intermediaries who use lee-way alongside “a small set of arbitrary rules selected from a potentially unlimited number in order to ensure a specific correspondence between two independent worlds” (Barbieri, 2015). As with deep learning, networked bodily systems mesh inputs from a coded past with current inputs.

Received models reduce ‘use’ of codes to a run-time or program like process. They overlook how molecular memory is extended by living apparatuses that link codes with functioning adaptors. In applying the OC model to humans, the paper connects Turing’s (1937) view of thinking to Wilson’s (2004) appeal to wide cognition. The approach opens up a new view of Kirsh and Maglio’s (1994) seminal studies on Tetris. As players use an interface that actualizes a code or program, their goal-directed (i.e. ‘pragmatic’) actions co-occur with adaptor-like ‘filling in’ (i.e. ‘epistemic’ moves). In terms of the OC model, flexible functions derive from, not actions, but epistemic dynamics that arise in the human-interface-computer system. Second, I pursue how a Morse radio operator uses dibs and dabs that enable the workings of an artificial code. While using knowledge (‘the rules’) to resemiotize by tapping on a transmission key, bodily dynamics are controlled by adaptor-like resources. Finally, turning to language, I sketch how the model applies to writing and reading. Like Morse operators, writers resemiotize a code-like domain of alphabets, spelling-systems etc. by acting as (or like) bodily adaptors. Further, in attending to a text-interface (symbolizations), a reader relies on filling-in that is (or feels) epistemic. Given that humans enact or mimic adaptor functions, it is likely that the OC model also applies to multi-modal language.

These results suggest that genetic assortative mating (choosing those that are more like us) may be speeding up evolution in humans

Assortative Mating at Loci Under Recent Natural Selection in Humans. Akihiro Nishi et al. Biosystems, October 1 2019, 104040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2019.104040

Abstract: Genetic correlation between mates at specific loci can greatly alter the evolutionary trajectory of a species. Genetic assortative mating has been documented in humans, but its existence beyond population stratification (shared ancestry) has been a matter of controversy. Here, we develop a method to measure assortative mating across the genome at 1,044,854 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), controlling for population stratification and cohort-specific cryptic relatedness. Using data on 1,683 human couples from two data sources, we find evidence for both assortative and disassortative mating at specific, discernible loci throughout the entire genome. Then, using the composite of multiple signals (CMS) score, we also show that the group of SNPs exhibiting the most assortativity has been under stronger recent positive selection. Simulations using realistic inputs confirm that assortative mating might indeed affect changes in allele frequency over time. These results suggest that genetic assortative mating may be speeding up evolution in humans.

Religion and the Extension of Trust: The ability to cooperate with others, both individuals and institutions, is an essential social function built on trust

Religion and the Extension of Trust. Benjamin O. Hsiung, Paul A. Djupe. Political Behavior, September 2019, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 609–631. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-018-9466-4

Abstract: The ability to cooperate with others, both individuals and institutions, is an essential social function built on trust. We explore the competing religious logics that shape the radius of trust, placing emphasis on communicated values in the social context of the congregation. Using cross-sectional data from American adults, we show the effects of religious beliefs that augment risk, values that demand outreach, and practices that capture experience with collective action. With a survey experiment, we show that priming different religious styles (inclusive of beliefs, values, and outreach) shifts the propensity to trust government and the social other in expected ways. In this way, we attempt to make sense of previous variant findings by suggesting that religious influence is dynamic and dependent on the religious style choices communicated to congregants.

Keywords: Political trust Social trust Religion and politics Experiment Devil

Highly educated people are more likely to view voting as a civic duty; but also education is associated with a higher likelihood of overreporting voting in the 2016 election

Educational Attainment and Social Norms of Voting. Eric R. Hansen, Andrew Tyner. Political Behavior, October 8 2019. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-019-09571-8

Abstract: Why does the likelihood of voting increase with education in the US? Prominent theories attribute education’s effect to human capital, which affords individuals resources needed to participate, but neglect social motivations. We test a theory of internalized social norms as another contributing factor, providing evidence in three studies. First, we show that highly educated people are more likely to view voting as a civic duty, and that civic duty partially mediates the effect of education on voting. Second, we show education is associated with a higher likelihood of overreporting voting in the 2016 election. Third, we show that educated respondents are more likely to withstand stimuli incentivizing them to report they will not vote in an upcoming election. The results imply that voting norms vary by education, and invite more attention to social explanations for socioeconomic disparities in turnout.

Keywords: Voting Education Civic duty Norms

What Does It Take to Get a Vegetarian to Eat Meat? The majority (54%) of vegetarians were open to the possibility of eating meat

Rosenfeld, Daniel L. 2019. “What Does It Take to Get a Vegetarian to Eat Meat? Factors Predicting Dietary Adherence.” PsyArXiv. October 8. doi:10.31234/osf.io/97a2s

Abstract: Many people say they are vegetarian yet still eat meat on occasion. Despite this paradox having been documented extensively, multivariate attempts to explain individual differences in vegetarians’ levels of dietary adherence are lacking. The current paper presents three highly powered studies (Ns = 589, 592, and 594) that examined what psychological constructs predict a vegetarian’s level of self-imposed dietary adherence, along with a meta-analysis (Study 4) of these studies. The meta-analysis indicated that the majority (54%) of vegetarians were open to the possibility of eating meat. Consistently, factors that distinguished low-adherence from high-adherence vegetarians were social identity variables related to vegetarianism, motivation for vegetarianism, disgust toward meat, and general liking of meat. Higher centrality of vegetarian dieting to one’s identity, greater disgust toward meat, lower liking of meat, longer duration of following a vegetarian diet, and considering oneself to be a vegan were unique predictors of higher dietary adherence intention. Implications for theory, research methodology, and practice are discussed.

Is Nutrition Knowledge Related to Diet Quality and Obesity?; & men had a poorer diet

Is Nutrition Knowledge Related to Diet Quality and Obesity? Şengül Akkartal & Ceren Gezer. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, Oct 8 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.2019.1675654

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to assess the relationship between nutrition knowledge and diet quality. It was conducted with 382 individuals aged 18–64 living in Famagusta, Cyprus. Data was obtained through face-to-face interviews. Individuals with a high-quality diet had high nutrition knowledge (p < .05). Nutrition knowledge level increases as education level increases (p < .001). An increase in the level of nutrition knowledge is related to a reduction in body mass index (r = −0.12, p = .02), waist circumference (r = −0.16, p < .001), and body fat mass (r = −0.10, p = .04). Gender, education level, obesity, and diet quality were all found to be correlated with nutrition knowledge. There is a need for advanced analysis of nutrition knowledge level, diet quality, and obesity with larger samples.

KEYWORDS: Nutrition knowledge, diet quality, obesity

Analysis of 72 Social Science Reviews of the Literature Published Between 2001 and 2017: Consensus is That LGBTQ Parents Are Not More Likely to Have LGBTQ Children

Schumm, Walter and Crawford, Duane (2019). Scientific Consensus on Whether LGBTQ Parents Are More Likely (or Not) to Have LGBTQ Children: An Analysis of 72 Social Science Reviews of the Literature Published Between 2001 and 2017. Journal of International Women's Studies, 20(7), 1-12. https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol20/iss7/1

Abstract: Until the 1950’s, it was widely assumed that homosexuality was a pathological condition. Even after leading social science organizations rejected that assumption in the early 1970’s, many believed that LGBTQ parents would not be able to parent as well as heterosexual parents. Further social science research has generally rejected the latter assumption as well. Using a complex citation network method of assessing scientific consensus, Adams and Light (2015) concluded that consensus on same-sex or LGBTQ parenting had been achieved by the late 1990’s and that the consensus formed was that children’s outcomes were no different than for children of heterosexual parents. We have proposed a more direct and simple measure of scientific consensus, using social science literature reviews. We evaluated 72 social science reviews of the literature between 2001 and 2017, based on English language social science journal sources, in the area of same-sex or LGBTQ parenting, with a focus on whether the authors concluded if there was any apparent association between parental and child sexual orientations. Over 90% of the reviews assessed concluded that there was no association between parent and child sexual orientations, demonstrating a clear scientific consensus on the issue since at least 2001. The small minority of reviews that concluded otherwise often had issues that might lead many scholars to discredit the validity of their conclusions. Our results provide another approach for assessing scientific consensus in the social sciences and confirm the findings of Adams and Light (2015), despite our different methodologies, about the development of scientific consensus in the area of same-sex parenting, that it was probably achieved by the late 1990’s. Future research might investigate the existence of similar consensus in medical or legal journals prior to 2001 or take the quality of literature reviews into account, including their consideration of intersectionality.

References

*Indicates part of the set of reviews included in analysis.

*Abbott, D. A.(2012).Do lesbian couples make better parents than heterosexual couples?International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(13), 30-46.Adams, J., & Light, R.(2015).Scientific consensus, the law, and same sex parenting outcomes.Social Science Research, 53, 300-310.
*Allen, D. W.(2015).More heat thanlight: A critical assessment of the same-sex parenting literature, 1995-2013.Marriage & Family Review, 51, 154-182.
*Allen, M., & Burrell, N. A.(2002).Sexual orientation of the parent: The impact on thechild.In M. Allen, R. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, & N. A. Burrell (Eds.), Interpersonal communication research: Advances through meta-analysis(pp. 125-143).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*Anderssen, N., Amlie, C., & Ytteroy, E. A.(2002).Outcomes for children with lesbian or gay parents: A review of studies from 1978 to 2000.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 335-351.
*Armesto, J. C.(2002).Developmental and contextual factors that influence gay fathers’ parental competence: A review of the literature.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 3, 67-78.
Bailey,J. M., & Dawood, K.(1998).Behavioral genetics, sexual orientation, and the family.In C. J. Patterson & A. R. D’Augelli (Eds.), Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities in families: Psychological perspectives(pp. 3-18).New York: Oxford University Press.
Ball, C. A.(2003).Lesbian and gay families: Gender nonconformity and the implications of difference.Capital University Law Review, 31, 691-749.
Ball, C. A.(2016a).Same-sex marriage and children: A tale of history, social science, and the law.New York: Oxford University Press.
*Ball, C. A.(2016b).Sexual orientation and parenting.In C. A. Ball, Same-sex marriage and children: A tale of history, social science, and law(pp. 83-110, 168-174).New York: Oxford University Press.
*Barrett, H., & Tasker, F.(2002).Gay fathers and their children: What we know and what we need to know.Lesbian & Gay Psychology Review, 3(Part 1), 3-10.Bem, D. J.(1995).Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin.Psychological Bulletin, 118, 172-177.
*Biblarz, T. J., & Savci, E.(2010).Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender families.Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 480-497.
*Biblarz, T. J., & Stacey, J.(2010).How does the gender of parents matter?Journal ofMarriage and Family, 72, 3-22.*Bos, H. M. W.(2013).Lesbian-mother families formed through donor insemination.In A. E. Goldberg & K. R. Allen (Eds.), LGBT-parent families: Innovations in research and implications for practice(pp. 21-37).New York: Springer.Byrd, A. D.(2011).Homosexual couples and parenting: What science can and cannot say.Journal of Human Sexuality, 3, 4-34.
*Cameron, P.(2006).Children of homosexuals and transsexuals more apt to be homosexual.Journal of Biosocial Science, 38, 413-418.
8Journal of InternationalWomen’s Studies  Vol. 20, No. 7August2019Carroll, M.(2018).Gay fathers on the margins: Race, class, marital status, and pathway to parenthood.Family Relations, 67, 104-117.
Chan, C. D., & Erby, A. N.(2018).A critical analysis and applied intersectionality framework with intercultural queer couples.Journal of Homosexuality, 65, 1249-1274.
*Clarke, V.(2001).What about the children? Arguments against lesbian and gay parenting.Women’s Studies International Forum, 24, 555-570.
*Crowl, A., Ahn, S., & Baker, J.(2008).A meta-analysis of developmental outcomes for children of same-sex and heterosexual parents.Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 4, 385-407.
*Dempsey, D.(2013).Same-sex parented families in Australia.(CFCA Paper No. 18). Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
*Diamond, L. M., & Butterworth, M.(2009).The close relationships of sexual minorities: Partners, friends, and family.In M. C. Smith & N. DeFrates-Densch (Eds.), Handbook of research on adult learning and development (pp. 355-377).New York: Routledge(Taylor & Francis Group).
*Diamond, L. M., & Rosky, C. J.(2016).Scrutinizing immutability: Research on sexual orientation and U.S. legal advocacy for sexual minorities.Journal of Sex Research, 53, 363-391.DiBennardo, R., & Saguy, A.(2018).How children of LGBQ parents negotiate courtesystigma over the life course.Journal of International Women’s Studies, 19, 290-304.
*Duncan, M.(2016).Adoption, GLBT.In C. Shehan (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Family Studies(Vol. 1, pp. 44-49).Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.
*Fedewa, A. L., Black, W. W., & Ahn, S.(2015).Children and adolescents with same-gender parents: A meta-analytic approach in assessing outcomes.Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 11, 1-34.Fish, J. N., & Russell, S. T.(2018).Queering methodologies to understandqueer families.Family Relations, 67, 12-25.*Fisher, S. K., Easterly, S., & Lazear, K. J.(2008).Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender families.In T. P. Gulotta & G. M. Blau (Eds.), Family influences on childhood behavior and development: Evidence-based prevention and treatment approaches (pp. 187-208).New York: Routledge.
Gartrell, N., Bos, H. M. W., & Goldberg, N. G.(2011).Adolescents ofthe U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study: Sexual orientation, sexual behavior, and sexual risk exposure.Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1199-1209.
 *Gartrell, N., Peyser, H., & Bos, H.(2012).Planned lesbian families: A review of the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study.In D. Brodzinsky & A. Pertman (Eds.), Adoption by lesbians and gay men: A new dimension in family diversity(pp. 112-129).New York: Oxford University Press.
*Gates, G. J.(2015).Marriage and family: LGBT individuals and same-sex couples.Future of Children, 25, 67-87.
*Gates, G. J., & Romero, A. P.(2009).Parenting by gay men and lesbians: Beyond the current research.In H. E. Peters & C. M. Kamp Dush (Eds.), Marriage and family: Perspectives and complexities(pp. 227-243).New York, NY:Columbia University Press.
*Gilmore, D. L., Esmail, A., & Eargle, L. A. (2016).Lesbian parents.In C. Shehan (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Family Studies(Vol. 3, pp. 1287-1291).Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.
9Journal of InternationalWomen’s Studies  Vol. 20, No. 7August2019
*Goldberg, A. E.(2009).Lesbian, gay, and bisexual family psychology: A systemic, life-cycle perspective.In J. H. Bray & M. Stanton (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of family psychology(pp. 576-587).Malden, MA:Wiley-Blackwell.*Goldberg, A. E.(2010).Lesbian and gay parents and their children: Research on the family life cycle.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
*Goldberg, A. E.(2017).LGBQ-parent families: Development and functioning in context.In C. A. Price, K. R. Bush, & S. J. Price (Eds.), Families & change: Coping with stressful events and transitions(pp. 95-117).Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
*Goldberg, A. E., Downing, J. B., & Richardson, H. B.(2012).Lesbian and gay parenting.In R. Levesque, Jr. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence(21-38).New York: Springer.
*Goldberg, A. E., & Gartrell, N. K.(2014).LGB-parent families: The current state of the research and directions for the future.Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 46, 57-88.
*Goldberg, A. E., Gartrell, N. K., & Gates, G.(2014).Research report on LGB-parent families.Los Angeles, CA:The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law.
*Goldberg, A.E., & Weber, E. R.(2015).Parenting, gay and lesbian.In P. Whelehan & A. Bolin (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of humansexuality(Vol. 2, pp. 872-874).Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
*Golombok, S.(2015).Modern families: Parents and children in new family forms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Golombok, S., Perry, B., Burston, A., Murray, C., Mooney-Somers, J., Stevens, M., & Golding, J.(2003).Children with lesbian parents: A community study.Developmental Psychology, 39, 20-33.
*Golombok, S., & Tasker, F.(2015).Socioemotional development in changing families.In M. E. Lamb & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology anddevelopmental science(pp. 419-463).Hoboken, NJ:Wiley
*Grotevant, H. D., & Lo, A. Y. H.(2017).Adoptive parenting.Current Opinion in Psychology, 15, 71-75.
*Haney-Caron, E., & Heilbrun, K.(2014).Lesbian and gay parents and determination of child custody: The changing legal landscape and implications for policy and practice.Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1, 19-29.
*Harder, B. M.(2016a).Lesbian relationships.In C. Shehan (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Family Studies(Vol. 3, pp. 1292-1297).Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.*Harder, B. M.(2016b).Gay men’s relationships in the United States.In C. Shehan (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Family Studies(Vol. 2, pp. 896-901).Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.Hequembourg, A.(2007).Lesbian motherhood: Stories of becoming.New York: Harrington Park Press.
*Herek, G. M.(2006).Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective.American Psychologist, 61, 607-621.
*Herek, G. M.(2010).Sexual orientation differences as deficits: Science and stigma in the history of American psychology.Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 693-699.*Hicks, S.(2005).Is gay parenting bad for kids? Responding to the ‘very idea of difference’ in research on lesbian and gay parents. Sexualities, 8, 153-168.
*James, W. H.(2004).The sexual orientation of men who were brought up in gay or lesbian households.Journal of Biosocial Science, 36, 371-374.
10Journal of InternationalWomen’s Studies  Vol. 20, No. 7August2019Juros, T. V.(2017).Comparing the outcomes of children of same-sex and opposite-sex partners: Overview of the quantitative studies conducted on random representative samples.Revija za Sociologiju, 47, 65-95.
*Kuvalanka, K.(2013).The “second generation”: LGBTQ youthwith LGBTQ parents.In A. E. Goldberg & K. R. Allen (Eds.), LGBT-parent families: Innovations in research and implications (pp. 163-175).New York: Springer Science+Business Media.*Laird, J.(2003).Lesbian and gay families.In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family processes: Growing diversity and complexity(pp. 176-209).New York, NY: Guilford Press.
*Lambert, S.(2005).Gay and lesbian families: What we know and where to go from here.The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 13,43-51.*Marks, L.(2012).Same-sex parenting and children’s outcomes: A closer examination of the American Psychological Association’s brief on lesbian and gay parenting.Social Science Research, 41, 735-751.*McCann, D., & Delmonte, H.(2005).Lesbian and gayparenting: Babes in arms or babes in the woods?Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 20, 333-347.
*McClellan, D. L.(2006).Bisexual relationships and families.In D. F. Morrow & L. Messinger (Eds.), Sexual orientation and gender expression in social work practice(pp. 243-262).New York: Columbia University Press.
*McKinney, R. E.(2006).Gay male relationships and families.In D. F. Morrow & L. Messinger (Eds.), Sexual orientation and gender expression in social work practice(pp. 198-215).New York: Columbia University Press.
*Meezan, W., & Rauch, J.(2005).Gay marriage, same-sex parenting, and America’s children.Future of Children, 15, 97-115.*Mendez, N.(2009).Lesbian families.In S. Loue (Ed.), Sexualities and identities of minority women(pp. 91-104).New York: Springer-Science+Business Media.
Milardo, R. M.(2009).Editorial: Following a sociological imagination.Journal of FamilyTheory & Review, 1, 1-3.Milardo, R. M., (2014).Exit act I: JFTR, 2009-2013.Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6, 437-442.
*Millbank, J.(2003).From here tomaternity: A review of research on lesbian and gay families.Australian Journal of Social Issues, 38, 541-600.*Moore, M. R., & Stambolis-Ruhstorfer, M.(2013).LGBT sexuality and families at the start of the twenty-first century.Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 491-507.
*Parks, C. A., & Humphreys, N. A.(2006).Lesbian relationships and families.In D. F. Morrow & L. Messinger (Eds.), Sexual orientation and gender expression in social work practice(pp. 216-242).New York: Columbia University Press.
*Patterson, C. J. (2002).Lesbian and gay parenthood.In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook ofparenting(2ndEd., Vol. 3, pp. 317-338).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
*Patterson, C. J.(2003).Children of lesbian and gay parents.In L. D. Garnets & D. C. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual experiences(pp. 497-548).New York: Columbia University Press.
*Patterson, C. J.(2005).Lesbian and gay parents and their children: Summary of research findings.In Lesbian and gay parenting(pp. 5-22).Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
*Patterson, C. J.(2006).Children of lesbian and gay parents.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 241-244.
11Journal of InternationalWomen’s Studies  Vol. 20, No. 7August2019
*Patterson, C. J.(2009a).Children of lesbian and gay parents: Psychology, law, and policy. American Psychologist, 64, 727-736.
*Patterson, C. J.(2009b).Lesbian and gay parents and their children: A social science perspective.In D. A. Hope (Ed.), Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay, andbisexual identities(pp. 141-182).New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
*Patterson, C. J.(2013).Family lives of lesbian and gay adults.In G. W. Peterson & K. R. Bush (Eds.),Handbook of marriage and the family(pp. 659-681).New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
*Patterson, C. J.(2017).Parents’ sexual orientation and children’s development.ChildDevelopment Perspectives, 11, 45-49.
*Patterson, C. J., & Farr, R. H.(2016).Children of lesbian and gay parents: Reflections on the research-policy interface.In K. Durkin & H. R. Schaffer (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of developmental psychology in practice: Implementation and impact(pp. 129-142).Malden, MA: Wiley.
*Patterson, C. J., & Goldberg, A. E.(2016).Lesbian and gay parents and their children.NCFR Policy Brief, 1, 1-4.
*Patterson, C. J., Fulcher, M., & Wainwright, J.(2002).Children of lesbian and gay parents: Research, law, and policy.In B. L. Bottoms, M. B. Kovera, & B. D. McAuliff (Eds.), Children, social science, and the law(pp. 176-199).New York: Cambridge University Press.
Patterson, C. J., & Redding, R. E.(1996).Lesbian and gay families with children: Implications of social science research for policy.Journal of Social Issues, 52, 29-50.Riley, M.(1975).The avowed lesbian mother and her right to child custody: A constitutional challenge that can no longer be denied.San Diego Law Review, 12, 799-864.
*Ross, L. E., & Dobinson, C.(2013).Where is the “B” in LGBT parenting?A call for research on bisexual parenting.In A. E. Goldberg & K. R. Allen (Eds.), LGBT-parentfamilies: Innovations in research and implications (pp. 87-103).New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
*Ruspini, E.(2016).Gay men as parents.In C. Shehan (Ed.), The Wiley-BlackwellEncyclopedia of Family Studies(Vol. 2, pp. 893-896).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Schumm, W. R.(2010).Children of homosexuals more apt to be homosexuals? A reply to Morrison and to Cameron based on anexamination of multiple sources of data.Journal of Biosocial Science, 42, 721-742.
Schumm, W. R.(2018).Same-sex parenting research: A critical assessment.London, UK:Wilberforce Press.Schumm, W. R., & Crawford, D. W.(2015).Violations of fairness insocial science research: The case of same-sex marriage and parenting.International Journal of Jurisprudence of the Family, 6, 67-113.
*Schofield, T.(2016).Knowing what we don’t know: A meta-analysis of children being raised by gay or lesbian parents.The Winnower, 3, e147568.84110.
*Short, E., Riggs, D. W., Perlesz, A., Brown, R., & Kane, G.(2007).Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) parented families: A literature review prepared for the Australian Psychological Society.Melbourne, Australia: Australian Psychological Society.Stacey, J.(2011).Unhitched: Love, marriage, and family values from West Hollywood to Western China.New York: New York University Press.
*Stacey, J., & Biblarz,T. J. (2001).(How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter?American Sociological Review, 66, 159-183.
*Tasker, F.(2002).Lesbian and gay parenting.In A. Coyle & C. Kitzinger (Eds.), Lesbian and gay psychology: New perspectives (pp. 81-97).Bodmin, UK: MPG Books.Tasker, F.(2010).Same-sex parenting and child development: Reviewing the contribution of parental gender.Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 35-40.
*Tasker, F.(2013) Lesbian and gay parenting post-heterosexual divorce and separation.In A. E. Goldberg & K. R. Allen (Eds.), LGBT-parent families: Innovations in research and implications (pp. 3-20).New York: Springer Science+Business Media.*Tasker, F., & Patterson, C. J.(2007).Research on gay and lesbian parenting: Retrospect and prospect.Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 3(2/3), 9-34.
*Telingator, C. J., & Patterson, C. J.(2008).Children and adolescents of lesbian and gay parents.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47, 1364-1368.
Van Eeden-Moorefield, B.(2018).Introduction to the special issue: Intersectional variationsin theexperiences of queer families.Family Relations, 67, 7-11.

In humans and other species, males show greater variability in multiple traits; there is also evidence of higher male susceptibility to environmental factors; hypothesis is that early androgen exposure increases plasticity in both sexes

Individual differences in developmental plasticity: A role for early androgens? Marco Del Giudice et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology, Volume 90, April 2018, Pages 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2018.02.025

Highlights
•    In humans and other species, males show greater variability in multiple traits.
•    There is also evidence of higher male susceptibility to environmental factors.
•    We hypothesize that early androgen exposure increases plasticity in both sexes.
•    Androgens may promote plasticity through various physiological pathways.
•    Our hypothesis is speculative but testable, and can inform developmental research.

Abstract: Developmental plasticity is a widespread property of living organisms, but different individuals in the same species can vary greatly in how susceptible they are to environmental influences. In humans, research has sought to link variation in plasticity to physiological traits such as stress reactivity, exposure to prenatal stress-related hormones such as cortisol, and specific genes involved in major neurobiological pathways. However, the determinants of individual differences in plasticity are still poorly understood. Here we present the novel hypothesis that, in both sexes, higher exposure to androgens during prenatal and early postnatal life should lead to increased plasticity in traits that display greater male variability (i.e., a majority of physical and behavioral traits). First, we review evidence of greater phenotypic variation and higher susceptibility to environmental factors in males; we then consider evolutionary models that explain greater male variability and plasticity as a result of sexual selection. These empirical and theoretical strands converge on the hypothesis that androgens may promote developmental plasticity, at least for traits that show greater male variability. We discuss a number of potential mechanisms that may mediate this effect (including upregulation of neural plasticity), and address the question of whether androgen-induced plasticity is likely to be adaptive or maladaptive. We conclude by offering suggestions for future studies in this area, and considering some research designs that could be used to empirically test our hypothesis.

Two types of sexual content – “details of my sex life” and “my sexual desires and fantasies” – were the most common topics of dishonesty with therapists; motivation of 80% of clients was to avoid shame or embarrassment

Sex, Dishonesty, and Psychotherapy. Melanie Nicole Love. PhD Thesis, Columbia Univ. October 2, 2019. https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/d8-cpz2-yq18

Purpose: Honest disclosure about salient information is at the heart of the therapy process but sexual material has been found to be among the most frequently concealed types of content. Understanding why clients choose to be avoidant or explicitly dishonest about sexual topics may attune therapists to the types of concerns clients have when deciding whether or not to disclose this material, how non-disclosure or dishonesty about sex impacts therapy, and what would help clients be more honest about such material. This study directly queried clients who had been dishonest about four types of sexual content in order to learn how therapists can better promote honest disclosure about different domains of sex and sexuality.

Method: As part of a comprehensive study of client “secrets and lies,” a sample of 798 outpatient therapy clients rated their dishonesty or honesty about four sexually related topics (“details of my sex life,” “my sexual desires or fantasies,” “my sexual orientation,” and “times I have cheated on a partner”) and completed measures about attitudes toward disclosure along with ratings of the therapeutic alliance. Follow-up samples of clients who stated that a sexual topic had been hardest to talk about in therapy answered multiple-choice and open-text questions about their motivations for being dishonest with the therapist, how it impacted them in terms of therapy progress and feelings about the decision, and what they believed the therapist could do to help them be more honest about this topic.

Results: Two types of sexual content – “details of my sex life” and “my sexual desires and fantasies” – were the most common topics of dishonesty across the whole sample. Dishonesty about sex tended to manifest in total avoidance of the topic in therapy. Approximately 80% of clients indicated that their motivation for dishonesty was to avoid shame or embarrassment, while smaller numbers reported concerns about how the therapist would react to the disclosure. These clients cited worries about being stigmatized or judged, or felt unsure that the therapist would understand or be able to help; some referred to their belief that the therapy relationship could be jeopardized if they were more disclosing, a particularly salient theme for those who had been dishonest about sexual orientation and sexual fantasies. Based on a multiple choice format, a majority stated that their dishonesty about sexual issues had “no effect” but in an open-text format, a majority described more negative impacts, mainly the inability to address a relevant topic. A significant number of clients felt conflicted, guilty, or regretful about being dishonest, though some felt largely neutral; very few had positive feelings. When asked what would help facilitate honesty, about 80% of clients stated their wish for the therapist to “ask directly.” Some differences occurred in terms of specific facilitators based on topic. For instance, clients who had concealed a more overtly sexual topic (e.g., “details of my sex life” and “my sexual desires or fantasies”) wanted the therapist to normalize or provide a rationale for why it would be helpful to disclose; clients who concealed their sexual orientation wished for the therapist to display cultural competence and to ensure the safety of the relationship; and clients concealing infidelity were unsure if there was anything the therapist could do.

Limitations: The findings of this study may be limited in its generalizability due to a few key factors. First, the sample contained a majority of highly educated Caucasian female clients, which mirrors the therapy-seeking population but may not accurately reflect the concerns of male or minority clients. Second, it was comprised solely of individuals who were willing to speak more about their experience in therapy, while the follow-up samples contained respondents who identified that a sexual topic had been hardest to talk about in therapy. Finally, self-report data is by its very nature limited by the willingness of clients to answer accurately. As such, it is unclear how these data extend to the general or clinical population more broadly.

Conclusions: The concerns expressed by clients suggest that shame and the anticipation of a negative therapist reaction primarily motivate sexual dishonesty, and that direct inquiry by the therapist can help alleviate both of these interconnected worries by signaling that sex is a welcomed topic of disclosure. These findings also indicate the high prevalence of dishonesty about a spectrum of sexual topics and highlight the way that clients tend to avoid these discussions, which further supports the need for more active therapist intervention to frame the rationale and normalize honest discussion about clinically relevant sexual material.

Subjects: Clinical psychology Psychotherapy Therapist and patient Sex