“Red wins”, “black wins” and “blue loses” effects are in the eye of beholder, but they are culturally universal: A cross-cultural analysis of the influence of outfit colours on sports performance

Although many studies have demonstrated an influence of uniform colors on sports performance, there are still more questions than answers regarding this issue. In our study, participants from Poland (N = 147) and China (N = 143) watched a two-minute video of a semi-professional boxing match. The participants viewed six different versions of the same fight – the original was modified to change the colors of the boxers’ trunks (red vs. blue, blue vs. red, blue vs. black, black vs. blue, red vs. black, and black vs. red). We experimentally confirmed that “black wins” and “red wins” effects exist, but in a way that caused an erroneous perception of the number of blows landed by boxers wearing red and black trunks fighting against boxers in blue trunks. We also showed that both effects are similarly strong even in Chinese culture, where the color red has different connotations from those in Western cultures. Additionally, our results suggest that context might play a very important role in the assessments of the boxers – color only influenced the perception of the weaker boxer. Finally, our findings suggest that the topic of the influence of colors on sports competitions has not been thoroughly investigated and further studies are necessary

Sex differences in mate preferences across 45 countries: A large-scale replication

Considerable research has examined human mate preferences across cultures, finding universal sex differences in preferences for attractiveness and resources as well as sources of systematic cultural variation. Two competing perspectives-an evolutionary psychological perspective and a biosocial role perspective-offer alternative explanations for these findings. However, the original data on which each perspective relies are decades old, and the literature is fraught with conflicting methods, analyses, results, and conclusions. Using a new 45-country sample (N = 14,399), we attempted to replicate classic studies and test both the evolutionary and biosocial role perspectives. Support for universal sex differences in preferences remains robust: Men, more than women, prefer attractive, young mates, and women, more than men, prefer older mates with financial prospects. Cross-culturally, both sexes have mates closer to their own ages as gender equality increases. Beyond age of partner, neither pathogen prevalence nor gender equality robustly predicted sex differences or preferences across countries.info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersio

What Makes a Better Smeller?

Olfaction is often viewed as difficult, yet the empirical evidence suggests a different picture. A closer look shows people around the world differ in their ability to detect, discriminate, and name odors. This gives rise to the question of what influences our ability to smell. Instead of focusing on olfactory deficiencies, this review presents a positive perspective by focusing on factors that make someone a better smeller. We consider three driving forces in improving olfactory ability: one's biological makeup, one's experience, and the environment. For each factor, we consider aspects proposed to improve odor perception and critically examine the evidence; as well as introducing lesser discussed areas. In terms of biology, there are cases of neurodiversity, such as olfactory synesthesia, that serve to enhance olfactory ability. Our lifetime experience, be it typical development or unique training experience, can also modify the trajectory of olfaction. Finally, our odor environment, in terms of ambient odor or culinary traditions, can influence odor perception too. Rather than highlighting the weaknesses of olfaction, we emphasize routes to harnessing our olfactory potential

Development of an International Odor Identification Test for Children: The Universal Sniff Test

Objective: To assess olfactory function in children and to create and validate an odor identification test to diagnose olfactory dysfunction in children, which we called the Universal Sniff (U-Sniff) test.  Study design: This is a multicenter study involving 19 countries. The U-Sniff test was developed in 3 phases including 1760 children age 5-7 years. Phase 1: identification of potentially recognizable odors; phase 2: selection of odorants for the odor identification test; and phase 3: evaluation of the test and acquisition of normative data. Test—retest reliability was evaluated in a subgroup of children (n = 27), and the test was validated using children with congenital anosmia (n = 14).  Results: Twelve odors were familiar to children and, therefore, included in the U-Sniff test. Children scored a mean ± SD of 9.88 ± 1.80 points out of 12. Normative data was obtained and reported for each country. The U-Sniff test demonstrated a high test—retest reliability (r27 = 0.83, P < .001) and enabled discrimination between normosmia and children with congenital anosmia with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 86%.  Conclusions: The U-Sniff is a valid and reliable method of testing olfaction in children and can be used internationally

Voice-based assessments of trustworthiness, competence, and warmth in blind and sighted adults

The study of voice perception in congenitally blind individuals allows researchers rare insight into how a lifetime of visual deprivation affects the development of voice perception. Previous studies have suggested that blind adults outperform their sighted counterparts in low-level auditory tasks testing spatial localization and pitch discrimination, as well as in verbal speech processing; however, blind persons generally show no advantage in nonverbal voice recognition or discrimination tasks. The present study is the first to examine whether visual experience influences the development of social stereotypes that are formed on the basis of nonverbal vocal characteristics (i.e., voice pitch). Groups of 27 congenitally or early-blind adults and 23 sighted controls assessed the trustworthiness, competence, and warmth of men and women speaking a series of vowels, whose voice pitches had been experimentally raised or lowered. Blind and sighted listeners judged both men’s and women’s voices with lowered pitch as being more competent and trustworthy than voices with raised pitch. In contrast, raised-pitch voices were judged as being warmer than were lowered-pitch voices, but only for women’s voices. Crucially, blind and sighted persons did not differ in their voice-based assessments of competence or warmth, or in their certainty of these assessments, whereas the association between low pitch and trustworthiness in women’s voices was weaker among blind than sighted participants. This latter result suggests that blind persons may rely less heavily on nonverbal cues to trustworthiness compared to sighted persons. Ultimately, our findings suggest that robust perceptual associations that systematically link voice pitch to the social and personal dimensions of a speaker can develop without visual input

Not all flavor expertise is equal : The language of wine and coffee experts

People in Western cultures are poor at naming smells and flavors. However, for wine and coffee experts, describing smells and flavors is part of their daily routine. So are experts better than lay people at conveying smells and flavors in language? If smells and flavors are more easily linguistically expressed by experts, or more "codable", then experts should be better than novices at describing smells and flavors. If experts are indeed better, we can also ask how general this advantage is: do experts show higher codability only for smells and flavors they are expert in (i.e., wine experts for wine and coffee experts for coffee) or is their linguistic dexterity more general? To address these questions, wine experts, coffee experts, and novices were asked to describe the smell and flavor of wines, coffees, everyday odors, and basic tastes. The resulting descriptions were compared on a number of measures. We found expertise endows a modest advantage in smell and flavor naming. Wine experts showed more consistency in how they described wine smells and flavors than coffee experts, and novices; but coffee experts were not more consistent for coffee descriptions. Neither expert group was any more accurate at identifying everyday smells or tastes. Interestingly, both wine and coffee experts tended to use more source-based terms (e.g., vanilla) in descriptions of their own area of expertise whereas novices tended to use more evaluative terms (e.g., nice). However, the overall linguistic strategies for both groups were en par. To conclude, experts only have a limited, domain-specific advantage when communicating about smells and flavors. The ability to communicate about smells and flavors is a matter not only of perceptual training, but specific linguistic training too