Olfactory perception is positively linked to anxiety in young adults

Olfactory abilities show a high degree of inter-individual variability and this could be partly related to personality differences. Here, in two studies, we tested a potential link between personality dimensions and olfactory perception. Sixty-eight (study 1) and a hundred and fifty-six (study 2) young adults completed the Big Five questionnaire and performed the Sniffin' Sticks test for assessing odour threshold, identification, and (in study 2) discrimination. In neither study did we find a significant link between personality dimensions and olfactory identification scores. However, in study 1, we found a significant positive correlation between the neuroticism dimension and olfactory sensitivity. This was mainly due to the anxiety and self-consciousness subscales, which load onto the neuroticism dimension. In a follow-up study, we again found a significant association between anxiety and odour perception, specifically in odour discrimination. Our results indicate that variability in anxiety could partly explain the high inter-individual variation in olfactory perception

Taxonomy and structure of the Romanian personality lexicon

We identified 1746 personality-relevant trait-adjectives in a Romanian dictionary, of which 412 were classified as descriptors of dispositions by 10 judges. Self-ratings were collected from 515 participants on those 412 adjectives, and the ratings were factored using principal components analysis. Solutions with different numbers of factors were analysed. The two- and three-factor solutions, respectively, confirmed the Big Two and Big Three of personality traits. A five-factor solution reflected the Big Five model with a fifth factor emphasising Rebelliousness versus Conventionality. The five-factor solution was related to the International Personality Item Pool-Big Five scales, and the highest correlations were indeed between the corresponding factors and scales. A six-factor solution was indicative of the six-factor model as expressed in the HEXACO model, yet with a weak Honesty-Humility factor. Additional analysis with self-ratings from 218 participants on marker-scales for the six-factor solution and on the six scales of the HEXACO did not produce a clear one-to-one correspondence between the two sets of scales, confirming indeed that the six-factor model was only partially found

Family Matters:Rethinking the Psychology of Human Social Motivation

What motives do people prioritize in their social lives? Historically, social psychologists, especially those adopting an evolutionary perspective, have devoted a great deal of research attention to sexual attraction and romantic-partner choice (mate seeking). Research on long-term familial bonds (mate retention and kin care) has been less thoroughly connected to relevant comparative and evolutionary work on other species, and in the case of kin care, these bonds have been less well researched. Examining varied sources of data from 27 societies around the world, we found that people generally view familial motives as primary in importance and mate-seeking motives as relatively low in importance. Compared with other groups, college students, single people, and men place relatively higher emphasis on mate seeking, but even those samples rated kin-care motives as more important. Furthermore, motives linked to long-term familial bonds are positively associated with psychological well-being, but mate-seeking motives are associated with anxiety and depression. We address theoretical and empirical reasons why there has been extensive research on mate seeking and why people prioritize goals related to long-term familial bonds over mating goals. Reallocating relatively greater research effort toward long-term familial relationships would likely yield many interesting new findings relevant to everyday people’s highest social priorities

Social mindfulness and prosociality vary across the globe

Humans are social animals, but not everyone will be mindful of others to the same extent. Individual differences have been found, but would social mindfulness also be shaped by one’s location in the world? Expecting cross-national differences to exist, we examined if and how social mindfulness differs across countries. At little to no material cost, social mindfulness typically entails small acts of attention or kindness. Even though fairly common, such low-cost cooperation has received little empirical attention. Measuring social mindfulness across 31 samples from industrialized countries and regions (n = 8,354), we found considerable variation. Among selected country-level variables, greater social mindfulness was most strongly associated with countries’ better general performance on environmental protection. Together, our findings contribute to the literature on prosociality by targeting the kind of everyday cooperation that is more focused on communicating benevolence than on providing material benefits

Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies

Norm enforcement may be important for resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation. However, little is known about how preferred responses to norm violations vary across cultures and across domains. In a preregistered study of 57 countries (using convenience samples of 22,863 students and non-students), we measured perceptions of the appropriateness of various responses to a violation of a cooperative norm and to atypical social behaviors. Our findings highlight both cultural universals and cultural variation. We find a universal negative relation between appropriateness ratings of norm violations and appropriateness ratings of responses in the form of confrontation, social ostracism and gossip. Moreover, we find the country variation in the appropriateness of sanctions to be consistent across different norm violations but not across different sanctions. Specifically, in those countries where use of physical confrontation and social ostracism is rated as less appropriate, gossip is rated as more appropriate.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Reply to Komatsu et al.: From local social mindfulness to global sustainability efforts?

Komatsu et al. (1) argue that Van Doesum et al. (2) may have overlooked the role of GDP in reporting a positive association between social mindfulness (SoMi) and the Environmental Performance Index (EPI) at country level. Although the relationship between EPI and SoMi is relatively weaker for countries with higher GDP, that does not imply that the overall observed relationship is a statistical artifact. Rather, it implies that GDP may be a moderator of the relationship between EPI and SoMi. The observed correlation is a valid result on average across countries, and the actual effect size would, at least to some degree, depend on GDP

Reply to Nielsen et al.: Social mindfulness is associated with countries' environmental performance and individual environmental concern.

Nielsen et al. (1) argue that Van Doesum et al. (2) need to consider three points for their interpretation of a positive association between individual-level social mindfulness (SoMi) and environmental performance (EPI) at the country level (3). The association is weaker when 1) it is controlled for GDP and 2) when the data of three countries are removed; also, 3) the data do not address the association between SoMi and individual-level environmental concern. We discuss these points in turn

Body appreciation around the world: Measurement invariance of the Body Appreciation Scale-2 (BAS-2) across 65 nations, 40 languages, gender identities, and age.

The Body Appreciation Scale-2 (BAS-2) is a widely used measure of a core facet of the positive body image construct. However, extant research concerning measurement invariance of the BAS-2 across a large number of nations remains limited. Here, we utilised the Body Image in Nature (BINS) dataset - with data collected between 2020 and 2022 - to assess measurement invariance of the BAS-2 across 65 nations, 40 languages, gender identities, and age groups. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis indicated that full scalar invariance was upheld across all nations, languages, gender identities, and age groups, suggesting that the unidimensional BAS-2 model has widespread applicability. There were large differences across nations and languages in latent body appreciation, while differences across gender identities and age groups were negligible-to-small. Additionally, greater body appreciation was significantly associated with higher life satisfaction, being single (versus being married or in a committed relationship), and greater rurality (versus urbanicity). Across a subset of nations where nation-level data were available, greater body appreciation was also significantly associated with greater cultural distance from the United States and greater relative income inequality. These findings suggest that the BAS-2 likely captures a near-universal conceptualisation of the body appreciation construct, which should facilitate further cross-cultural research. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Personality profiles of cultures: aggregate personality traits

Personality profiles of cultures can be operationalized as the mean trait levels of culture members. College students from 51 cultures rated an individual from their country whom they knew well (N = 12, 156). Aggregate scores on Revised NEO Personality Inventory scales generalized across age and gender groups, approximated the individual-level Five-Factor Model, and correlated with aggregate self-report personality scores and other culture-level variables. Results were not attributable to national differences in economic development or to acquiescence. Geographical differences in scale variances and mean levels were replicated, with Europeans and Americans generally scoring higher in Extraversion than Asians and Africans. Findings support the rough scalar equivalence of NEO-PI-R factors and facets across cultures, and suggest that aggregate personality profiles provide insight into cultural differences