Maternal and paternal family history of diabetes in second-degree relatives and metabolic outcomes at age 5-6 years: The ABCD Study

Aim. - To investigate whether children with a family history of diabetes (FHD) in second-degree relatives (grandparents, aunts/uncles) are at increased risk of developing obesity and diabetes, and whether the risk differs between maternal or paternal transmission. Methods. - In the multiethnic population-based cohort Amsterdam-Born Children and Their Development (ABCD) Study, body mass index (BMI), waist-to-height ratio (WHR), fat percentage (fat%), fasting glucose and C-peptide in 5- or 6-year-old children with no second-degree FHD (n = 2226) were compared with children with maternal-only (n = 353), paternal-only (n = 281) or both maternal and paternal (n = 164) second-degree FHD. Children of diabetic mothers or fathers were excluded. Results. - None of the children in any of our FHD categories differed in body composition after adjusting for maternal, paternal and childhood lifestyle covariates. However, children with both maternal and paternal second-degree FHD had increased C-peptide levels (0.03 nmol, 95% CI: 0.01-0.05) compared with those in the other three study groups. Results were similar when analyses were restricted to only the Dutch children. Conclusion. - Children with FHD in second-degree relatives on both maternal and paternal sides already have higher C-peptide levels at an early age. This might be the result of a double burden of a shared obesogenic lifestyle, or of more diverse diabetogenic genes compared to children without FHD or with only FHD in one side of the family. In any case, second-degree FHD could be used as a public-health screening tool to identify children at risk of adverse metabolic outcomes and of possible future disease. (C) 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserve

Should the moral core of climate issues be emphasized or downplayed in public discourse? Three ways to successfully manage the double-edged sword of moral communication

The main objective of this paper is to identify a serious problem for communicators regarding the framing of climate issues in public discourse, namely that moralizing such an issue can motivate individuals while at the same time defensively lead them to avoid solving the problem. We review recent social-psychological research on moral motivation, concluding that moralization is a double-edged sword: It provides people with a powerful motivation to act for a cause they believe in, yet people often cope with moral threats in defensive ways. Fortunately, recent research also hints at possible solutions of this dilemma of communication. One solution involves the non-moral framing of persuasive messages as a means to avoid defensive responses. Another solution revolves around promoting coping mechanisms that do not reflect defensiveness, such as the promotion of value-driven group identities and the development of moral convictions that increase a sense of agency. Finally, we suggest ways to developing change-oriented moral convictions about climate issues. Our findings are of substantial relevance for scientists and policy makers who aim at stimulating behavioural change (e.g., governments' commitment to the reduction of GHG emissions)

Facing Sorrow as a Group Unites. Facing Sorrow in a Group Divides

Collective gatherings foster group cohesion through providing occasion for emotional sharing among participants. However, prior studies have failed to disentangle two processes that are involved in emotional sharing: 1) focusing shared attention on the same emotion-eliciting event and 2) actively sharing one's experiences and disclosing one's feelings to others. To date, it has remained untested if shared attention influences group cohesion independent of active emotional sharing. Our experiment investigated the effect of shared versus individual attention on cohesion in groups of strangers. We predicted that differences in group cohesion as called forth by shared vs. individual attention are most pronounced when experiencing highly arousing negative affect, in that the act of experiencing intensely negative affect with others buffers negative affect's otherwise detrimental effect on group cohesion. Two-hundred sixteen participants were assembled in groups of 3 to 4 people to either watch an emotion-eliciting film simultaneously on a common screen or to watch the same emotion-eliciting film clip on a laptop in front of each group member using earphones. The film clips were chosen to elicit either highly arousing negative affect or one of three other affective states representing the other poles in Russel's Circumplex model of affect. We examined self-reported affective and cognitive group cohesion and a behavioral measure of group cohesion. Results support our buffer-hypothesis, in that experiencing intense negative affect in unison leads to higher levels of group cohesion than experiencing this affect individually despite the group setting. The present study demonstrates that shared attention to intense negative emotional stimuli affects group cohesion independently of active emotional sharing