Purpose We used data from adopted and nonadopted siblings to separate genetic and environmental confounding of the effect of parent-offspring relationships on offspring's risky sexual behavior. Methods Data came from the Sibling Interaction and Behavior Study, which included 617 two-offspring families enrolled between 1998 and 2004 (53% European, 39% Korean, 8% other), with either one or two adopted offspring (n = 409) or two nonadopted offspring (n = 208). At one assessment (M age = 17.3), parents and offspring reported on parent-offspring relationship quality; at a later assessment (M age = 20.7), offspring reported their sexual behavior. Univariate biometric models tested shared environmental effects and mixed-effects models examined between- and within-family effects. Results Biometric modeling indicated that 15% of the variance in sexual behavior reflected shared environmental effects. Prospectively assessed parent-offspring relationship quality was significantly associated with offspring sexual behavior in both nonadopted and adopted families, eliminating the possibility of genetic confounding, and within as well as between families, consistent with a causal effect. Results were similar across both parent and offspring ratings of relationship quality. Discussion We found consistent evidence for an environmental explanation: higher quality parent-offspring relationships predicted that offspring were less likely to engage in risky sexual behavior. These associations existed both between families, reflecting the impact of shared environmental factors, and within families, consistent with environmental influences that operate within families. Future research should use research designs that separate potential confounding from reactive gene-environment correlation and identify mechanisms underlying this association to inform interventions.

Maintaining multiple intimate relationships entails some risks and complications beyond exclusive pair bonding (i.e., monogamy). Consensual non-monogamy (CNM; e.g., polyamory, swinging, or open relationships) allegedly reduces these risks and complications, but no one has tried to comprehensively document typical CNM risk management practices, nor analyzed the relationship outcomes of those who use these practices. We developed the Multiple Relationships Maintenance Scale (MRMS) to examine how engagement in common CNM practices predicts relationship quality among people with one or more partners. In Study 1, a community sample of people with CNM experience (N = 429) nominated the best practices for maintaining CNM. Responses were combined with theory-derived practices to create the MRMS. In Study 2, we administered the MRMS in three international online surveys (N = 4,290) to assess factor structure and construct validity. Factor analysis revealed nine practices: disclosure of one’s extra-pair attractions to a partner, open communication about jealousy, compersion, willingness to care for unrelated children, shared extra-pair sexual experiences, partner (non)hierarchy, sexual health maintenance, thoughtful resource distribution among partners, and reputation management. Data from one of the three surveys (n = 871) showed that each practice had distinctive patterns of association with previous CNM experience, relationship and sexual satisfaction, partner investment and interdependence, and self-reported infidelity (i.e., how often extra-pair interactions feel to violate an existing relationship’s agreements). We discuss how the MRMS may be used to study how people in CNM relationships maintain multiple intimate relationships.

Bird, Jackson Jr., and Winston (BJ & W; 2024) argue that a "racial hereditarian research" (RHR) program exists, is prominently represented in academic literature, and is socially harmful as it supports "scientific racism" and emboldens the far-right. Consequently, drastic steps should be taken by the American Psychological Association to curb its production. They support these claims with a bibliography of alleged RHR publications and other outputs appearing from 2012 on. To determine the validity of their claims, we conducted a content meta-analysis of the 268 peer-reviewed articles (excluding editorials, book reviews, etc.) listed in Section 1 of their bibliography. These were independently rated using the following dimensions (as explicated by BJ&W): (1) use of "folk" racial categories; (2) biological race realism; (3) claims that differences between "races" are due to selection and/ or genetic factors - these being the core of BJ&W's definition of RHR. Additional criteria were: (4) discussion of racial "proxy" categories (e.g., nations); and (5) degree of interest shown in the articles by one White nationalist publication. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable (ICC3,k = 0.711, 95% CI = 0.633, 0.773). A Content factor was identified among the averaged ratings exhibiting strong positive loadings for 1, 2, and 3 (indicating an RHR program), but a significant negative loading for 4 (indicating that nations, etc. tend not to be employed as racial proxies, but are typically used rather than race in such studies), and a null loading for 5. The last result (along with consideration of data presented elsewhere in the bibliography) counteracts the idea that RHR constitutes "scientific racism", or supports White nationalism. Only 23 % of the publications unambiguously (based on 100 % convergence between raters for 1, 2, and 3) qualify as RHR, with the plurality (37 %) appearing in one niche journal, consistent with strong scientific taboos against RHR. Moreover, 30% of the publications unambiguously had nothing to do with RHR. BJ&W's characterisation of their bibliography as evidencing wide scale "scientific racism" is therefore not compellingly supported by its contents.

We make the case that Bird, Jackson Jr., and Winston's (BJ&W; 2024) policy proposals boil down to a rejection of Merton's (1942) traditional scientific norms of communality, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism, and a demand for anti-Mertonian norms to be imposed, top down, upon psychological science. Their anti-Mertonian norms (specifically secrecy, particularism, interestedness, and organized dogmatism) are at odds with the scientific ethos. We highlight problems with their argument that Racial Hereditarian Research (RHR) is uniquely "socially pernicious". We then discuss adverse effects that their imposition of anti-Mertonian norms would likely cause in relation to: 1) instances of research on racial and ethnic differences that have produced findings agreeable to egalitarianism, and which would be proscribed under their framework; 2) the fomenting of genuinely scientifically racist beliefs that are empirically at odds with RHR; and 3) the chilling effect on other areas of science whose findings have also been misused, including “mainstream human genetics”. Ultimately, we observe that BJ&W's anti-Mertonian policy prescriptions are unworkable in practice, and would be highly damaging to psychological science if widely enforced.

We identify points of conflict and consensus regarding (a) controversial empirical claims and (b) normative preferences for how controversial scholarship—and scholars—should be treated. In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews ( n = 41) to generate a quantitative survey ( N = 470) of U.S. psychology professors’ beliefs and values. Professors strongly disagreed on the truth status of 10 candidate taboo conclusions: For each conclusion, some professors reported 100% certainty in its veracity and others 100% certainty in its falsehood. Professors more confident in the truth of the taboo conclusions reported more self-censorship, a pattern that could bias perceived scientific consensus regarding the inaccuracy of controversial conclusions. Almost all professors worried about social sanctions if they were to express their own empirical beliefs. Tenured professors reported as much self-censorship and as much fear of consequences as untenured professors, including fear of getting fired. Most professors opposed suppressing scholarship and punishing peers on the basis of moral concerns about research conclusions and reported contempt for peers who petition to retract papers on moral grounds. Younger, more left-leaning, and female faculty were generally more opposed to controversial scholarship. These results do not resolve empirical or normative disagreements among psychology professors, but they may provide an empirical context for their discussion.

Emotions coordinate our behavior and physiological states during survival-salient events and pleasurable interactions. Even though we are often consciously aware of our current emotional state, such as anger or happiness, the mechanisms giving ...Emotions are often felt in the body, and somatosensory feedback has been proposed to trigger conscious emotional experiences. Here we reveal maps of bodily sensations associated with different emotions using a unique topographical self-report method. In ...

This research explores how biracial facial cues affect racial perception and social judgment. We tested a coalition-signaling hypothesis of biracial cues in two studies conducted in the United States ( n = 227) and China ( n = 116). From the perspective of intergroup and interpersonal relations theories in social psychology, biracial features would likely be perceived as cues of threat or resource competition. In contrast, we propose an evolutionary hypothesis that biracial facial cues reveal the ancestral history of intergroup alliances between members of two races or ethnic groups. When racial cues are mixed, we predict that biracial individuals may be viewed more positively than other-race or even own-race members who often compete for limited ingroup resources. The participants observed facial images that ranged from 100% Asian to 100% Caucasian, including morphed biracial composites of 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, and 70% Caucasian or Asian. The participants evaluated each image regarding perceived Caucasianness (Asianness), attractiveness, trustworthiness, health, intelligence, and career prospects. The US and Chinese samples yielded a similar pattern of own-race bias in racial perception and biracial favoritism in social judgment. The social judgment ratings were not correlated with the racial perception scores and were independent of the sex of the participants or biracial images, indicating a coalitional motive, instead of a mating motive, underlying social perception of biracial individuals. Overall, the results suggest that biracial facial features signal a successful genetic admixture and coalition in parental generations and thus increase the trustworthiness and cooperative potential of a biracial person.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic bring people together or push them apart? While infectious diseases tend to push people apart, crises can also bring people together through positive interdependence. We studied this question by asking an international sample (N = 1,006) about their inclinations to cooperate, perceptions of interdependence (i.e., shared fate), and perceived risk as well as local prevalence of COVID-19 infection across 14 time points from March to August, 2020. While perceived interdependence with others tended to increase during this time period, inclinations to cooperate decreased over time. At the within-person level, higher local prevalence of COVID-19 attenuated increases in perceived interdependence with others, and was associated with lower inclinations to cooperate. At the between-person level, people with high perceived interdependence with others reported more stable, or increasing, inclinations to cooperate over time than people with low perceived interdependence. Establishing a high sense of perceived interdependence with others may thus allow people to maintain cooperation during crises, even in the face of challenging circumstances such as those posed by a highly transmissible virus.

Science is among humanity’s greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.

The correlation between primate “Big G” scores and brain volume in 68 extant species was employed to estimate probable G values for an additional 68 extinct and 1 extant species with endocranial volume data, employing phylogenetic bracketing. Three different methods were used to generate bracketed estimates, which all showed high convergence. The average of these G estimates (for the extinct primates) coupled with the values from the extant species were found to correlate strongly with neurocognitive measures of both extant and extinct primate taxa, specifically Transfer Index scores (an indicator of cognitive flexibility) and the neuroanatomical covariance ratio (a measure of neural integration). Ancestral character reconstruction incorporating G values was made possible with a phylogenetic tree containing data on the relationships among extant and extinct primates. Negative correlations were found between G and branch length, indicating that higher-G species do not persist as long as lower-G ones, consistent with the presence of the grey-ceiling effect (brain mass negatively predicts maximum population growth rate, and therefore a heightened vulnerability to extinction). Cladogenesis rates were also positively associated with G. Both associations were robust to models that controlled for false positive rates. Comparative models revealed that G evolved in extinct and extant primates in a punctuated pattern. The biggest increase in G occurred after the split between the members of the tribes Hominini and Gorillini 10 million years ago. Hence at the macroevolutionary scale, there can be said to have been a “ten-million-year explosion” in primate G leading up to modern humans.

Madole & Harden develop some good ideas about how to understand genetic causality more clearly, but they frame the benefits of behavior genetics research at a largely collective level, focused on the pros and cons of different ways to engineer the gene pool or social behavior. This neglects the individual benefits of hereditarian insights for mate choice and parenting.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic bring people together or push them apart? We asked an international sample (N = 1,006) about their inclinations to cooperate, perceptions of interdependence with others, and perceived risk of COVID-19 infection on fourteen different occasions from March 6, 2020 to August 22, 2020. We found that willingness to cooperate decreased over the first six months of the pandemic. However, perceptions of interdependence towards neighbors and all of humanity tended to increase over time. In addition, people who reported high interdependence with others showed slower or no declines in their willingness to cooperate over time. These results suggest that, even during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, interdependence might allow cooperation to remain relatively stable. Keywords: COVID-19, crises, interdependence, cooperation

To understand the possible forms of extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI), we need not only astrobiology theories about how life evolves given habitable planets, but also evolutionary psychology theories about how intelligence emerges given life. Wherever intelligent organisms evolve, they are likely to face similar behavioral challenges in their physical and social worlds. The cognitive mechanisms that arise to meet these challenges may then be copied, repurposed, and shaped by further evolutionary selection to deal with more abstract, higher-level cognitive tasks such as conceptual reasoning, symbolic communication, and technological innovation, while retaining traces of the earlier adaptations for solving physical and social problems. These traces of evolutionary pathways may be leveraged to gain insight into the likely cognitive processes of ETIs. We demonstrate such analysis in the domain of search strategies and show its application in the domains of emotional aversions and social/sexual signaling. Knowing the likely evolutionary pathways to intelligence will help us to better search for and process any alien signals from the search for ETIs (SETI) and to assess the likely benefits, costs, and risks of humans actively messaging ETIs (METI).

Institutional review boards (IRBs) have expressed concerns that certain individuals or groups, such as participants who are younger, ethnic minorities, or who have certain psychological or personality traits, may be particularly distressed when participating in “sensitive topics” research. This study examined the effects of several demographic and individual difference factors (i.e., age, sex, ethnicity, religiosity, Big Five personality traits, and baseline psychological distress levels) on reactions to participation in sensitive topics research. Participants were 504 undergraduates who completed an extensive battery of either trauma/sex questionnaires or cognitive tests and rated their positive and negative emotional reactions and the perceived benefits and mental costs of participating. They also compared research participation to normal life stressors. Our findings indicated that individual difference and demographic risk factors do not increase participant distress after participating in sex/trauma research over and above that experienced after participating in traditionally minimal-risk cognitive tasks. Participants generally found research participation less distressing than normal life stressors and even enjoyable.

* ) Notice: Sub disclai h f thi Artificial Evolution: A New W Path for Artificial Intelli (*) Notice: Subject to any y the SM tly gence? P. Husbands, I. Harvey, D. Cliff, and G. Miller (Brain p E. 6. justed under and Cognition 34,130–159 (1997) Article No. BR970910).* a -(b) by 0 days. The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to Evolutionary Computation (FAQ for comp.aigenetic) by Jorg Heitkotter and David (21) Appl. No.: 09/317,905 Beasley (1997).* (22) Filed: May 24, 1999 The design of natural and artificial adaptive Systems, Frank, S. A. (1996) pp. 451-505, in Adaption, M. R. Rose and G. Related U.S. Application Data V. Lauder, eds. Academic Press, New York.*

Introduction: Most women report that clitoral stimulation is an integral aspect of their orgasm experience. Thus, recent claims that vaginal stimulation and vaginally generated orgasms are superior to clitoral stimulation and clitorally generated orgasms pathologize most women and maintain a clitoral vs vaginal dichotomy that might not accurately reflect the complexity of women's sexual experience.Aim: To have women report on their experienced source of orgasm, including combinations of vaginal and clitoral stimulation, the solo or partnered context of the stimulation, and the intensity of the orgasms from different sources and to predict indicators of mental health and sexual health using the orgasm source.Methods: Eighty-eight women 18 to 53 years old answered detailed questions about their usual and recent orgasm experiences, sexual history, depression, and anxiety. Then, they viewed a series of neutral and sexual films. They were instructed to increase or decrease their sexual arousal or respond "as usual" to the sexual films. They reported their sexual arousal after each film.Main Outcome Measures: Outcomes assessed included mental health (depression and anxiety) and sexual health (orgasm quality, ability to regulate sexual response to sex films). Reported sexual arousal was analyzed for the regulation task.Results: Most women (64%) reported that clitoral and vaginal stimulation contributed to their usual method of reaching orgasm. Women who reported that clitoral stimulation was primarily responsible for their orgasm reported a higher desire to self-stimulate and demonstrated greater control over their self-reported sexual arousal. The primary stimulation site for orgasm was unrelated to measurements of depression or anxiety despite sufficient statistical power.Conclusion: Most women reported that clitoral and vaginal stimulation is important in orgasm. Women experience orgasms in many varied patterns, a complexity that is often ignored by current methods of assessing orgasm source. The reported source of orgasm was unrelated to orgasm intensity, overall sex-life satisfaction, sexual distress, depression, or anxiety. Women who reported primarily stimulating their clitoris to reach orgasm reported higher trait sexual drive and higher sexual arousal to visual sexual stimulation and were better able to increase their sexual arousal to visual sexual stimulation when instructed than women who reported orgasms primarily from vaginal sources. Copyright (C) 2016, International Society for Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The Ravens Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) is a widely used measure of general intelligence ( g ), both across settings and cultures. Due to its lengthy 40-min administration time, several researchers have developed short-form scales, yet these forms typically yield a significantly lower reliability. This article describes the creation of an 18-item short form (APM-18) and its validation in three samples of Southwestern U.S. university students (total N = 633). The APM-18 shows similar psychometric properties to both the previously published 36-item long form and 12-item short form, but retains a reliability estimate closer to the original APM. This, plus the shorter administration time (25 min) relative to the complete APM (40-60 min), makes it useful for time-constrained or mass-testing situations.