52% Yes, a signiicant crisis 3% No, there is no crisis 7% Don't know 38% Yes, a slight crisis 38% Yes, a slight crisis 1,576 RESEARCHERS SURVEYED M ore than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research. The data reveal sometimes-contradictory attitudes towards reproduc-ibility. Although 52% of those surveyed agree that there is a significant 'crisis' of reproducibility, less than 31% think that failure to reproduce published results means that the result is probably wrong, and most say that they still trust the published literature. Data on how much of the scientific literature is reproducible are rare and generally bleak. The best-known analyses, from psychology 1 and cancer biology 2 , found rates of around 40% and 10%, respectively. Our survey respondents were more optimistic: 73% said that they think that at least half of the papers in their field can be trusted, with physicists and chemists generally showing the most confidence. The results capture a confusing snapshot of attitudes around these issues, says Arturo Casadevall, a microbiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland. "At the current time there is no consensus on what reproducibility is or should be. " But just recognizing that is a step forward, he says. "The next step may be identifying what is the problem and to get a consensus. "

Given the heightened attention to visual impression management on social media websites, previous research has demonstrated an association between Facebook use and objectified body consciousness among adolescent girls and young women in various Western countries, including the U.S. (e.g., Meier & Gray, 2013). The current study aimed to test whether both young women and men using social networking sites are vulnerable to objectified body consciousness, and to extend this line of research to sexual health outcomes. We tested a path model of Facebook involvement, objectified body consciousness, body shame, and sexual assertiveness and examined whether the negative health consequences of objectified body consciousness were greater in magnitude for women than men. Participants in this study were U.S. college students in the Midwest, 467 women and 348 men, who on average reported using social networking sites for 6 years. They completed survey measures assessing their involvement in Facebook, body surveillance, appearance self-worth, and enjoyment of sexualization. They also reported on feelings of body shame and sexual assertiveness. For both women and men, Facebook involvement predicted objectified body consciousness, which in turn predicted greater body shame and decreased sexual assertiveness. The link between objectified body consciousness and body shame was greater in magnitude for women, but no gender difference was found in the association between body shame and sexual assertiveness. We suggest that social media foster a heightened experience of the self from 2 FACEBOOK OBJECTIFIED BODY CONSCIOUSNESS an observer's point of view, which has consequences for body image and sexual agency among women as well as men.

Three studies psychophysically measured people's discrimination among different sizes of monetary net gains or net losses. Participants imagined either gains or nonlosses (i.e., net gains) or losses or nongains (i.e., net losses). Participants discriminated more when the identical event was framed as the presence (gains and losses) versus the absence (nonlosses and nongains) of an outcome, presumably because the latter is harder to represent. Discrimination was enhanced when the motivational features of the imagined event were either both the same as or both different from a person's self-discrepancy. Discrimination was reduced when only one of the motivational features was different. A model of excitations, inhibitions, and disinhibitions between mental representation is suggested to account for these findings.

No abstract

A correlational study explored the role of intergroup contact and motivation to respond without prejudice on heterosexuals' expression of explicit and implicit (unconscious) bias against gay men. Participants who reported having more relationships and closer relationships with gay, lesbian, or bisexual people tended to exhibit more favorable attitudes toward gay men on implicit as well as explicit attitude measures. Attitudes were also related to self-reported motivation to be non-prejudiced, including motivation stemming from sources internal as well as external to the individual. Multiple regression analyses showed that contact and motivation explain unique variance in attitude but that motivation is a relatively stronger predictor. The results are interpreted to suggest that implicit and explicit prejudice may be reduced through motivation coupled with positive contact experiences.