Search

This project aimed to cultivate library patrons' interest in earth and space science, using research on how situations can trigger and support interest to deepen across time. The project featured a dynamic but low-tech library display that showcased thematic content to help patrons realize and develop their interest in earth and space science topics. Patrons engaged with and returned regularly to the display, which predicted their participation in additional activities outside of viewing the display, indicating deepening interest. This approach uses a passive program to help libraries build patrons' interest in accessing science resources and programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors offer a response to critiques by J. K. Sakaluk on studies by A. Wisman and I. Shrira from which they concluded men could detect olfactory signals of women's sexual arousal. Topics discussed include the small sample sizes used in the study, ways to compute effect sizes, and the magnitude of an effect for a phenomenon observed in an artificial laboratory setting.

The authors argue for expanding the definition of collective sex environment to fully embrace BDSM. Topics include the challenge of identifying the population of participants in any type of collective sex environment, stigma and discrimination faced by BDSM practitioners, along with economic, legal, and physical threats, and challenges faced by BDSM practitioners in negotiating health risks.

Aggressive behaviors occur when one person, a perpetrator, intentionally harms another person, a victim (e.g., Parrott and Giancola, 2007). When reporting their judgments, victims often report aggressive behaviors as being more harmful than perpetrators do—a so-called victim-perpetrator asymmetry. This asymmetry is well-established (Baumeister et al., 1990; Elshout et al., 2017; Ent and Parton, 2019; McCarthy and Rivers, 2021); however, there is scant experimental tests of the conditions under which the effect is especially strong. In that vein, the current Registered Report examined whether the victim-perpetrator asymmetry is stronger in conditions when people feel they will be evaluated for blameworthiness. In our first study, participants read a vignette describing an aggressive interaction and were assigned to adopt the perspective of either the victim or the perpetrator. In our second study, participants either recalled an instance when they intentionally harmed another person or an instance when they were harmed by another person. Further, in both studies, half the participants were told we were interested in determining who was more to blame in the situation and half received no such instructions. All participants then rated the harmfulness of the aggressive behavior. The victim-perpetrator asymmetry was unchanged by our blameworthiness manipulations in both studies. These results did not support our hypothesis that telling people they will be evaluated for blame will increase victims' and perpetrators' judgments of aggressive behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aggressive behaviors occur when one person, a perpetrator, intentionally harms another person, a victim (e.g., Parrott & Giancola, 2007). When reporting their judgments, victims often report the aggressive behaviors as being more harmful than perpetrators—a so-called victim-perpetrator asymmetry. This asymmetry is well-established (Baumeister et al., 1990; Elshout et al., 2017; Ent & Parton, 2019; McCarthy & Rivers, 2021); however, there is little empirical evidence that experimentally tests the conditions under which the victim-perpetrator asymmetry is especially strong. We propose two studies to examine whether the victim-perpetrator asymmetry is stronger in conditions when people feel they will be evaluated for blameworthiness. Specifically, in our first proposed study, participants will read a vignette describing an aggressive interaction and will be assigned to adopt the perspective of either the victim or the perpetrator. In our second proposed study, participants will either recall an instance when they intentionally harmed another person (as the perpetrator of aggression) or an instance when they were harmed by another person (as the victim of aggression). Further, in both studies, half the participants will be told we are interested in determining who was more to blame in the situation (i.e., "blameworthiness" condition) and half will receive no such instructions (i.e., the control condition). All participants will then rate the harmfulness of the aggressive behavior. We hypothesize that the victim-perpetrator asymmetry will be found in both conditions but will be stronger in situations where blame will purportedly be assigned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]