SHEmazing!
follow us
more
 
HomeTagsPosts tagged with "study"

study

by

If you only have to hear the opening line of Lose Yourself in order to immediately launch into Eminem's 2002 track, then you may want to sit down before reading on.

The soundtrack to 8 Mile recently featured in scientific research, and the connotations associated with knowing the words of the track from start to finish aren't exactly uplifting.

According to a preliminary study into psychopathy, individuals who were fans of tracks including Lose Yourself and No Diggity scored the highest on the psychopath scale.

The study, which was conducted at New York City University, involved exposing 200 individuals to 260 songs while researchers compared the participants' personality tests to their taste in music.

And it turns out that Eminem fans along with Blackstreet fans raised more red flags than Sia fans, for example.

Speaking to The Guardian, head researcher, Pascal Wallisch, explained the motivation behind the study, saying: "The media portrays psychopaths as axe murderers and serial killers, but the reality is they are not obvious; they are not like The Joker in Batman,"

"They might be working right next to you and they blend in. They are like psychological dark matter," he added.

As many may consider the link between musical taste and psychopathy a tenuous one, Wallisch explains that the study allows for further investigation into a potentially dangerous group of people.

“You don’t want to have these people in positions where they can cause a lot of harm,” continued Wallisch. “We need a tool to identify them without their cooperation or consent.”

Wallisch stressed that the study was still in its preliminary phases, but are confident that their findings provide a foundation robust enough to launch a major study into the links between musical taste and psychopathic traits.

This work is very preliminary,” he said. “This is not the end of an investigation, it is the very beginning."

*Immediately deletes Lose Yourself from iPod.*

Trending

by

According to a recent study, being able to speak a language other than your native tongue provides you with more than just a key to another culture or country, but also effects your perception of time.

No, seriously.

A study, which investigated the theory that bilingual people have a more flexible understanding of time, established that this may, indeed, be the case as time is described with varying degrees of rigidity across languages.

The research, which was conducted by the University of Stockholm and the University of Lancaster, focussed on Spanish-Swedish bilinguals; 40 of whom were native Spanish speakers and 40 of whom were native Swedish speakers.

So, how did researchers go about testing the hypothesis?

Well, participants were shown a computer screen which featured a growing line alongside a video which featured a container filling with water, and asked to measure the duration of the process.

As Swedish uses 'distance' to imply time, such as a 'long' or 'short', and Spanish uses volume such as 'big' or 'small', the participants answered accordingly.

Interestingly, however, bilinguals were able to switch neatly between the two measurements leading researchers to conclude that their perception of time is much more flexible than a monolingual's.

Commenting on the findings, co-Author Panos Athansopoulos said: "By learning a new language, you suddenly become attuned to perceptual dimensions that you weren’t aware of before."

"The fact that bilinguals go between these different ways of estimating time effortlessly and unconsciously fits in with a growing body of evidence demonstrating the ease with which language can creep into our most basic senses, including our emotions, our visual perception, and now it turns out, our sense of time."

The study has been published in the Journal of Experiment Psychology: General

Trending

by

If you have ever struggled to explain your fear of small holes to other people, you may want to point them in the direction of a recent study which was conducted by psychologists at the University of Kent.

Eager to explore the hypothesis that trypophobia might be born of a fear of parasites or infectious diseases, a team of researchers set about measuring participants' reactions to 16 images of clustered circles.

Eight of these images were of skin clusters caused by an infection or a parasite while the other eight had no connection to disease, and included an image of drilled holes in a brick wall.

The 600 participants, half of whom were tryrophobic and half of whom were not, were asked to give their response to all 16 images.

Researchers established that both groups found the parasite-related images 'uncomfortable' but only trypophobics found all 16 uncomfortable.  

In fact, trypophobics experienced physiological reactions including skin itching and skin crawling when confronted with all 16.

Tom Kupfer, leading the team at Kent's School of Psychology, came to the conclusion that the fear stems from a heightened aversion to particular skin conditions including measles, scarlet fever, rubella, and typhus.

In other words, those who suffer from tryrophobia have an innate fear of infectious diseases which ultimately skews perception of images reminiscent of their symptoms or outcome.

The study was published in the journal Cognition and Emotion.

 

Trending

by

Better dig out the Mr Sheen, because according to a new study, household dust could encourage weight gain. 

Researchers from the American Chemical Society have discovered that compounds called endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) found in dust can spur fat cells to accumulate more fat.

The study found that house dust caused the fat cells to accumulate an additional type of fat called triglycerides when it was introduced to the petri dish.

EDCs are synthetic or naturally occurring compounds that can that act as a replica for the body's hormones.

They are commonly found in consumer goods and thus ends up in household dust which is then inhaled, ingested or absorbed through the skin (what?).

In order to conduct the research, scientists tested samples of dust from 11 different homes in North California.

The results showed 7 of the 11 samples had triggered the fat cells to develop and accumulate triglyerides while only one sample had no effect on the cells at all.

Furthermore,  just three micrograms of dust was shown to have an adverse affect on cells – far less than the estimated 50 milligrams consumed by children each day. 

Researchers concluded the study by suggesting that exposure to the chemicals through house dust may disrupt metabolic health, particularly in children.

Excuse us while we hoover for several days.

Trending

by

Work wives and work husbands – we've all had them.

They're the people that make those long days more bearable thanks to your inside jokes and mutual hatred of the noisy coffee machine.

Sure, you might send the odd “dreading tomorrow” text on a Sunday night, but for the most part, the relationship is confined to working hours.

So, why is it that most of us choose to keep our partners in the dark when it comes to our workplace friendships?

A study conducted by totaljobs asked 4,000 employees and employers across the UK a series of questions to find out how relationships develop and play out in the workplace.

Results showed that 65 per cent of participants had at least one office bestie, however only 17 per cent admitted to having a work husband or wife.

It seems people felt uncomfortable with the term and instead referred to their favourite co-worker as 'my buddy' (38 per cent) or 'my colleague' (28 per cent).

And while the vast majority of work spouse relationships are purely platonic, less than half of people said they had actually introduced their work partner to their actual partner.

In fact, only 36 per cent of participants were aware of their partners work spouse.

The study also revealed that having a close friend in the workplace actually has a huge impact on your attitude – for better and for worse.

60 per cent said that they looked forward to seeing their partner in crime at work everyday, while almost one quarter said they would consider leaving their job if their BFF was to quit.

However, it's not all good news. It turns out that 50 per cent of workers with a professional other half were actually more dissatisfied with their workplace when compared to those who had multiple close friends.

According to Marie Claire, communication expert Judi James, warned of the dangers of a work marriage, saying, "Aligning yourself to one ‘best friend’ in the workplace might increase your feelings of security and comfort but it can cause hell for your colleagues, who could even find your exclusive little double act threatening."

"By creating your own ‘in crowd’ of two in the midst of a larger social pack you risk making the others feel like the ‘out’ crowd. Apart from all those shared jokes and banter and the way you have one another’s backs, there’s an implicit hiccup in the overall hierarchy that can be seen as unfair."

So, if you've ever been jealous of a close bond shared between colleagues, don't be. Chances are they're dying to branch out. 

Trending

by

So, sunglasses are pretty much the universal symbol of coolness, and you’re probably lying if you say you don’t feel bad-ass in a pair of Ray-Bans (even if they are a knock-off pair from Penneys).

From Danny Zuko to JLo, sunglasses can make anyone look instantly more attractive, and it turns out there’s actually a scientific reason for it.

According to Marie Claire, Vanessa Brown, senior lecturer at Nottingham Trent University, has found that shades make you look better because they bring symmetry to your face.  Check your pair for sunnies that will be delivered overnight on overnight glasses.

As I’m sure anyone who’s ever suffered through a hangover knows, the dark lenses cover those puffy eyes, meaning the face appears fresher and less flawed.

Vanessa also explained how a good pair of shades can make your bone structure looked extra defined.

And let’s not forget about the layer of mystery they add.

According to Vanessa, ‘’The eyes are such a tremendous source of information — and vulnerability — for the human being.’’

So, with shades working to mask your dark circles and your inner most thoughts, you really can trick people into thinking you’re a fully functioning human being.

Trending

by

So, a new study has claimed to have found the origins of lesbianism and apparently it all stems back to the belief that men find it attractive.

Sorry, what?

According to Pink News, researchers at the University of Nicosia, in Cyprus have made the controversial claim that women who are attracted to the same sex only feel this way because the idea of two women together turns men on.

Scientists studied over 1,500 heterosexual couples and found that about half of all male participants admitted they would become aroused if their female partners revealed they were attracted to the same sex.

What's more, 34 per cent of men said they would like their female partners to be attracted “predominantly to members of the opposite-sex but occasionally of the same-sex”.

Again, what?

On a slightly more cave-man level, it's thought that men seek females who are attracted to the same sex because if that partner cheat on them, their ability to father a child isn't threatened. 

“A woman, driven by her sexual desires, may seek sexual contact outside of her long-term intimate relationship. When this woman has sex with another woman she does not have sex with another man which translates into same-sex contact reducing the risk of cuckoldry," the scientists write in the study.

Lead researcher, Apostolou, told Pink News, "My argument in the paper is this: A considerable proportion of men desire same-sex attractions in women, and this is one possible reason why many women have such attractions."

Sorry science, you seem to have completely missed the mark on this one. 

 

Trending

by

Abortion pills bought online can provide a ‘safe and effective’ outcome for women who wish to have a non-surgical termination, according to a new study published in the British Medical Journal.

The study was carried out by a team at the University of Texas who, along with online group Women on Web, analysed data from over 1,000 women in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland who had sought to terminate unwanted pregnancies through the use of abortion pills. 

After seeking follow-up information from over 1,000 women in Ireland, researchers determined that 95 per cent of those who took these abortion pills had the desired result. 

Each of these women had previously purchased abortion pills online through WoW, and reported back on their experiences. 

78 per cent were under seven weeks pregnant, while the remaining 22 per cent were seven to nine weeks pregnant.

According to the study, 'self-sourced medical abortion provides a vital alternative to dangerous methods such as using sharp objects or noxious substance.'

93 women out of the 1,000 surveyed experienced symptoms which required them to seek medical attention, and 87 of these women actually did seek medical attention after taking the pills.

'No deaths…were reported by family, friends, the authorities of the media,' the study authors wrote in the British Medical Journal report.

The purchase and import of abortion pills is currently illegal in the Republic of Ireland, as well as in Northern Ireland.

However, recent developments have been made thanks to the Citizens' Assembly and the work of the Repeal Project, with calls for the 8th Amendment which prohibit abortion to be changed or abolished. 

'Often media reports in Ireland imply early medical abortion with pills is unsafe – this study shows that that simply isn’t the case,' said Abortion Rights Campaign spokesperson Linda Kavanagh in a statement.

'In countries where medical abortion is legal, women are largely unsupervised while taking the pill.'

'In the UK for example women ingest the first pill at an abortion clinic, but then go home to have their abortion.'

'Our governments continue to shirk their responsibility to women despite having a clear mandate to introduce proper abortion access North and South, following the results of the Citizens’ Assembly and various reports by human rights watchdogs,' she continued.

'Our politicians are happy to outsource their responsibility to other countries and organisations that provide the abortion pill illegally.'

'Our current laws are irresponsible, cowardly and lazy. If the physical and mental health of women on this island is being put at risk, it is the fault of our legislators – and not these pills which have been used safely, in both supervised and unsupervised contexts for almost 30 years,' she concluded. 

Trending

by

Everyone is entitled to freely practice their religion, or lack thereof, but there often comes the question as to who is right.

While this may be a question which never cohesively gets agreed upon, studies on the differences between atheists and religious folk have been conducted to answer other questions, and there is one answer which stands out among 63 studies.

According to multiple experiments, atheists are more intelligent than religious people.

A meta-analysis, which is a statistical study that looks at the results of multiple other studies and analyses them to get a conclusive result, was done using the results of different 63 studies.

This analysis showed that people who have a devotion to religion have a lower association to intelligence. 

The meta-analysis defined intelligence as 'the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience.'

Miron Zuckerman, Jordan Silberman and Judith A. Hall conducted the study, which proved that the association between the two concepts was strongest among university students and weakest in kids and teens.

The study speculates that the reason for the association with intelligence and religion in university is because atheism might be considered to be a form of nonconformity in societies where the majority is religious, with more intelligent people being drawn to free thinking. 

There was also a stronger association for religious beliefs than religious behaviour, so people who follow and appreciate religious teachings but don't practice were seen by the meta-analysis to be more intelligent. 

Ageing was another interesting aspect of the study, as with age comes a boding sense of ones own mortality, which can lead to a deepening of religious beliefs. 

The study showed that in the highest intelligence bracket, those in the age group of 75+ still did not show a significant increase in religiosity. 

The results of the study have caused a heated debate on Twitter, with those who hold deep religious beliefs finding the conclusion to be insulting. 

'Nobody becomes smarter by becoming atheists. A brain does not grow just for abandoning religion,' said one. 

However, others feel that the results of the study are accurate. 

Trending

by

If you're the type of person who regularly wakes from a short nap feeling like you could take on the world, then the latest news from the world of science may not surprise you.

According to researchers at the University of Hertfordshire, people who take naps are generally more contented than their counterparts who fight the urge to grab 40 winks.

Commenting on the findings, psychology professor Richard Wiseman said: "Previous research has shown that naps of under 30 minutes make you more focused, productive and creativity."

"These new findings suggest the tantalising possibility that you can also become happier by just taking a short nap," he added.

However, it's important to note that the longer you nap does not guarantee more contented periods in the aftermath.

Following a study conducted at the Edinburgh International Science Festival, researchers established that 'short nappers' were happier than 'long nappers' or, indeed, 'no nappers'.

So, go nap… but don't pass the 30-minute mark.

Trending

by

If you're the oldest in the family, you're probably used to getting your own way, hogging the remote and being (secretly) looked up to by your younger siblings.

And the good times don't stop there, with studies often reminding us that the oldest sibling in the family is more likely to excel in life and meet certain expectations with ease.

Unfortunately, however, the latest findings on this front prove that being the oldest isn't all it's cracked up to be.

According to recent research based on data collected from 400,000 Norwegians, first-born children are more likely to be obese and suffer from high blood pressure.

Commenting on the study's findings, lead author Professor Sandra Black of the University of Texas at Austin said: “While first-borns are taller, they are also more likely to be overweight and obese."

"Compared to second-borns, first-borns are four per cent more likely to be overweight, and two per cent more likely to be obese."

"Overall, we find that first-borns are less healthy in terms of physical markers such as blood pressure, triglycerides, and indicators of overweight and obesity.”

And if that wasn't enough to contend with, the research suggests that expectations placed on first-borns may be to blame for their ill health.

"Firstborns are often perceived to be intense and career-orientated while later-borns are considered to be more laid back and creative," Dr Black explained. "This provides a possible set of explanations for these findings."

“High blood pressure and triglycerides may be caused by the stress that results from this driven, competitive personality type," she concluded.

Well, there you have it…

Trending

by

If you've actively avoided social occasions while on a health kick, you're most definitely not alone.

While we may be able to stay on the straight and narrow for the vast majority of the week, the minute we begin socialising all bets are off.

Whether it comes down to manners or sheer lack of willpower, many of us find it difficult to decline a plate of goodies when pressed upon us by the friend or co-worker hosting us.

But according to new research, the easiest way to curb how much you consume at a party or gathering is by serving yourself, and ensuring you're the only one looking after your food intake.

The findings, which were published in the Journal of Marketing Research, concluded that people ate less unhealthy food when they tasked themselves with filling their own plates.

"We find that when participants are given the choice of whether or not to consume snacks that they perceive as relatively unhealthy, they have a greater inclination to consume these snacks when less (versus more) physical involvement is required to help themselves to the food." study authors Linda Hagen, Aradhna Krishna, and Brent McFerran said.

In other words, if you tell your host that you're good for now and will help yourself in a bit, you'll be less likely to consistently tuck in because, hey, who wants to keep getting up and down from the buffet?

When you accept a plate of unhealthy (but obviously delicious food) you tend to relinquish responsibility, but you don't have to.

“We suggest that this behaviour occurs because being less physically involved in serving one's food allows participants to reject responsibility for unhealthy eating and thus to feel better about themselves following indulgent consumption," the authors added.

Simply put, if you insist that it's your responsibility to keep yourself fed and watered at the next party, you're much less likely to overindulge.

And while that seems to make sense, all we can think about is getting free reign over a buffet…

Trending
© Copyright 2012-2024 - Shemazing.net. Déanta in Éirinn - Sheology.