zlatiah

Byline: A study has outlined eight indicators of toxic masculinity in heterosexual men — and finds that ‘manliness’ is not necessarily a problematic aspect of masculinity.

How rife is the problem of ‘toxic masculinity’ in Western societies? A research study run in New Zealand has found that only a small percentage of men surveyed fell into the worst category of hostile toxicity — and that a desire to feel ‘manly’ wasn’t necessarily indicative that a person held socially damaging views.

In 2024, Sanders and his colleagues published a ‘toxic masculinity scale’, identifying 28 questions that assessed the degree of toxicity expressed by white male university students in the United States. Psychology doctoral candidate Deborah Hill Cone at the University of Auckland in New Zealand and her colleagues have now added to this with a more all-encompassing view of toxicity and a larger, broader sample of men in a study published in Psychology of Men & Masculinities.

The team dug into the results of the 2018–19 New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study, a broad survey with responses from nearly 50,000 people. More than 15,000 of the participants identified as heterosexual males and had answered relevant questions such as “being a woman/man is an important part of how I see myself” and “inferior groups should stay in their place”.

In a statistical analysis, the respondents fell into five groups. The good news is that only the smallest group (3.2% of the men) was characterized by the researchers as ‘hostile toxic’, whereas the largest group was ‘atoxic’ (35.4%)... Hill Cone and her colleagues found two moderate groups split between those who were more- or less-tolerant of people from sexual and gender minorities (LGBTQ+) , and a ‘benevolent toxic’ group, whose members got relatively high scores in measures of sexism but not in hostility... The odds of men in the sample having the hostile toxic profile were higher for those who were older, single, unemployed, religious or an ethnic minority, as well as those high on scales of political conservatism, economic deprivation or emotional dysregulation, or who had a low level of education... “The entitled rich tech bro or frat boy didn’t really appear” in the hostile toxic group, says Hill Cone. Instead, the hostile toxic group was made up mainly of marginalized, disadvantaged men... Importantly, how central ‘being a man’ was to someone’s sense of self wasn’t particularly predictive of which group they landed in. Although the men in the hostile toxic group did tend to report that their gender was important to them, so did many men in the other categories.

Of course as pointed out: this is a well-executed study but is only in New Zealand. Results may vary depending on location. Results are overall not surprising.

The two featured key studies are both open access:

• The toxic masculinity scale developed by Sanders et al.
• The featured study by Hill Cone et al. itself

At least 39 people have been killed and 12 are in intensive care after two trains collided in southern Spain on Sunday night in what the prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, called “a night of deep pain for our country”.

A high-speed Iryo train travelling from Málaga to Madrid derailed near the municipality of Adamuz in Córdoba province at around 7.40pm on Sunday, crossing on to the other track where it hit an oncoming train, Adif, Spain’s rail infrastructure authority, posted on X.

The death/injury numbers have been going up since the last report a few hours ago

Sometimes the hardest part of doing an unpleasant task is simply getting started – typing the first word of a long report, lifting the dirty dish atop an overfilled sink, or removing the clothes from an unused exercise machine. The obstacle isn’t necessarily a lack of interest in completing the task, but the brain’s resistance to taking the first step.

Now, scientists may have identified the neural circuit behind this resistance, and a way to ease it. In a study published today in Current Biology, researchers describe a pathway in the brain that seems to act as a ‘motivation brake’, dampening the drive to begin a task. When the team selectively suppressed this circuit in macaque monkeys, goal-directed behaviour rebounded.

Previous work on task initiation has implicated a neural circuit connecting two parts of the brain known as the ventral striatum and ventral pallidum[...] But attempts to isolate the circuit’s role have fallen short[...] In the new study, Amemori and his team used a more precise approach. They first trained two male macaque monkeys to perform two decision-making tasks. In one, completion earned a water reward; in the other, the reward was paired with an unpleasant puff of air to the face. Each trial required the monkeys to initiate the task by fixing their gaze on a central spot on a screen until the reward-punishment offer appeared. This allowed the researchers to measure motivation by how often the monkeys failed to begin.

Not surprisingly, monkeys were more hesitant when the possibility of punishment loomed. But that changed when the team used a targeted genetic technique to suppress signalling from the ventral striatum to the ventral pallidum. Although the suppression had little effect on the monkeys’ behaviour during the reward-only trials, it made them significantly more willing to start in the face of a potentially unpleasant outcome. The suppression did not, however, alter how the animals weighed reward against punishment.

If confirmed in humans, the findings could shift how clinicians approach one of depression’s most debilitating symptoms. Treatments often aim to restore enjoyment or reduce anxiety, yet many patients continue to struggle to start simple tasks. By pinpointing a circuit that selectively dampens motivation in the face of discomfort, the study opens the door to therapies aimed at lowering that barrier.

Note that the authors acknowledged that this is a smaller study that was done on only two male monkeys, so future studies should include females, find specific cell types, and find biochemical pathways across the signaling circuit

The paper (should be open access): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2025.12.035

Any dog owner will tell you that dogs understand many words, and studies support this impression. In addition to dogs with regular, “family dog” knowledge levels are dogs with an extraordinary level of word comprehension. These dogs have been called “gifted word learners” and they appear idiosyncratically across countries, breeds, and households. Dror et al. examined the ability of these dogs to pick up words through conversations not directed at them. Using an approach designed to study understanding in toddlers, they found that the dogs were able learn words through overhearing just like, or even better than, 1.5-year-old children. —Sacha Vignieri [Editor]

From abstract:

... In this study, we demonstrated that a small group of Gifted Word Learner dogs, which possess an extensive vocabulary of object labels, can learn new labels by overhearing their owners’ interactions. Moreover, we show that these dogs can acquire novel object-label mappings even when the labels and objects are not presented simultaneously. Taken together, these results suggest that Gifted Word Learner dogs possess sociocognitive skills functionally parallel to those of 18-month-old children.

Note that this is only for what the authors described as a subset of "gifted dogs": "Although dogs readily learn action labels (23), to date, behavioral evidence of learning object labels were documented in only a small group of dogs (24). We previously defined this small group as Gifted Word Learner dogs..."

The full article seems to be behind paywall/institutional access. If anyone finds a full-text link please definitely share here

Asking because... On one hand I do see smartphones being released left-and-right, and they are rather integral to modern life

On the other hand I'm still chugging alone with my Pixel 6a that I bought 3 years ago with a replaced battery and a somewhat clogged charging port... and all my previous phones I only replaced when they have serious deficits that make them difficult to use

Wondering when you all replace phones. Please definitely mention it too if you ended up repurposing the old phone for something else

Yes I am serious in the title. This whole... experience went on for way too long that I'd love to chat about it because I find it a bit funny

I moved to a new city/country four months ago. I play a lot of arcade rhythm games that don't exist in this country... except that there are a lot of Pump It Up cabinets. So I've gotten back into PIU again. Gotten decent at it too

Problem is that... I didn't really have the right pair of shoes for it. I have flat feet & most shoes don't suit me, so I wear New Balance (or knockoff brand) sneakers... except that these shoes aren't flat. Games like DDR and PIU benefit from flat and lightweight shoes. Flat because you need to use your heels and toes to press the pads, lightweight because good luck doing the harder stages with a heavy pair of sneakers

Back in the US, my go-to arcade shoes was a pair of random slide-on shoes/slippers that I got from the closest Marshall's. I thought it was kind-of pointless to waste luggage space with a pair of $20 shoes when I left the US... Boy was I wrong. I never found anything quite like that when I moved to Europe

So... I started with going to the local markets and flea markets. First pair of shoes was wayyy too expensive (50€ or 60€), and was too heavy; I was somewhat pressured by the store owner to buy them... I then spent 2-3 weeks going to the weekend flea markets, and finally settled on a 10€ random pair of shoes (probably a Chinese knockoff of something) that was reasonably light and reasonably flat. Only downside is that it's a bit tight, but I can somehow squiggle my feet in

Well a month ago I realized I was playing too aggressively that the insoles keep sliding off & it was somewhat uncomfortable, so I started looking again:

• Went to r/PumpItUp, a lot of people recommended Nike Free Run... which is not available in my country (and I don't like Nike)
• Went to local stores and started lifting sneakers up & down to test their weight like an absolute weirdo
• Spent quite some time looking at ways to buy the legendary "Korean water shoes", gave up; on more than one occasion
• Seriously questioned myself whether I should just wear socks. My local arcade bans people who play without shoes
• Bought an eco-friendly pair of sneakers from an EU company and paid close to 20€ (non-refundable) to have it shipped here... while completely ignoring the fact that most shoes don't suit me. Sent it back the next day for a refund after almost hurting my feet wearing that

... Anyway I was like "screw it" and found a local store that sells Crocs. I never liked their looks, went around the shoe store and tried to find anything else lightweight but didn't find any... Tried a pair of Crocs today and took it directly to the arcade, works surprisingly well: flat, lightweight, and even sufficiently not-sock-looking enough that it won't get me into trouble. Only downside is that I might have gotten one size too big, so may need a second pair in the future...

I'm not sure how this became my life now, but this is how I spent the last 4 months looking for an oddly specific pair of shoes. Ask me anything

People are increasingly using video calls for high-stakes interactions that once required face-to-face contact... But video calling introduces a new communication issue: minor glitches, or intermittent errors in the transmission of audiovisual information during a virtual interaction.

Here, through five experiments and three supplementary studies using both live and recorded interactions, we show that minor audiovisual glitches during video calls harm interpersonal judgements in consequential life domains (for example, hiring decisions after a virtual interview, or trust in a medical provider after a telehealth visit). In addition, two archival datasets from real-world video calls reveal that glitches are associated with both reduced social connection and a lower likelihood of being granted criminal parole.

We find that audiovisual glitches damage interpersonal judgements because they break the illusion of face-to-face contact (for example, by distorting faces, misaligning audio and visual cues or making movements appear ‘choppy’), evoking ‘uncanniness’—a strange, creepy or eerie feeling. As the uncanniness of a glitch increases, so does its negative effect on interpersonal judgements. Furthermore, audiovisual glitches undermine interpersonal judgements only in video calls that simulate face-to-face interaction, showing that the negative effect produced by glitches goes beyond mere disruptiveness, comprehension difficulties and negative attributions...

Despite being considered a boon to access, virtual communication might unintentionally perpetuate inequality. Because disadvantaged groups often have poorer internet connections, they are likely to encounter more glitches, and, in turn, to experience worse outcomes in consequential contexts such as health, careers, justice and social connection.

Paper (linked in post) is paywalled; try this direct link to the PDF if you can't access it (let me know if this doesn't work)

Also see their data and code source on ResearchBox

Associated Nature News report: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-03820-z.

Additional context:

Native speakers of my mother tongue do not all understand each other due to some pretty extreme dialects. Now that I'm in Europe, I've noticed multiple instances of people sometimes not understand the dialect of someone from a village 10-20 km away...

In contrast, for example most American, British, and Australian people can just... understand each other like that?? I never thought much about it before but it's pretty incredible

Edit: thanks everyone, and clearly I didn't think of certain parts of the UK when I was in the shower and thought of this...

Excerpts in case of paywall; the archive.org link isn't working:

Generative conversational artificial-intelligence systems, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, are being used to optimize tasks, plan holidays and seek advice on matters ranging from the trivial to the existential... Against this backdrop, the urgent question is: can the same conversational skills that make AI into helpful assistants also turn them into powerful political actors? In a pair of studies in Nature and Science, researchers show that dialogues with large language models (LLMs) can shift people’s attitudes towards political candidates and policy issues. The researchers also identify which features of conversational AI systems make them persuasive, and what risks they might pose for democracy.

The effects were striking. Conversations favouring one candidate increased support for that candidate by around 2–3 points on a scale of 0–100, which is larger than the average effect of political advertising. Persuasion was stronger when the chat focused on policy issues rather than the candidate’s personality, and when the AI provided specific evidence or examples. Importantly, roughly one-third of the effect persisted when participants were contacted a month later, going against the intuitive critique that the initial shifts were probably volatile and ultimately inconsequential.

The persuasive influence was also asymmetric: AI chatbots were more successful at persuading ‘out-party’ participants (that is, those who initially opposed the targeted candidate) than at mobilizing existing supporters. In the state-level ballot-measure experiment in Massachusetts, persuasion effects were even larger, reaching double digits on the 0–100 scale.

Analysing 27 rhetorical strategies used by the AI models to persuade voters who engaged with them, the team found that supplying factual information was one of the strongest predictors of success... Yet ‘facts’ were not always factual. When the team fact-checked thousands of statements produced by the AI models, they found that most were accurate, but not all. Across countries and language models, claims made by AI chatbots that promoted right-leaning candidates were substantially more inaccurate than claims advocating for left-leaning ones. These findings carry the uncomfortable implication that political persuasion by AI tools can exploit imbalances in what the models ‘know’, spreading uneven inaccuracies even under explicit instructions to remain truthful.

It is important to note that these findings come from controlled online experiments. It is unclear how such persuasive effects would play out in real political environments in which exposure to persuasive AI agents is (often) voluntary and conscious. Such environments also contain a myriad of contrasting messages competing for attention, and users can ultimately decide to avoid or ignore specific information sources.

The Nature paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09771-9

Somehow I can't find or access the Science paper mentioned by the news article. If someone can find it please comment

See title. I realized that trash collection systems sometimes differ between streets... so this is just about where you live, whether it is one specific street/building or an entire country. No need to mention exactly where if you don't feel comfortable.

For where I currently live. Government makes colored trash bags (plastics/metals, papers, organic, general waste, etc) that people can buy at local supermarkets, and these bags are required for trash collection. On collection day we just... place the bags outside of the houses/apartments. Some places buy their own trash bins too, but they are rare.

The place I live in seem to take recycling very seriously. I've heard from colleagues that putting the wrong things in a bag sometimes result in the "trash police" sending a fine to where you live. Allegedly the police do that by looking at where your last letter/Amazon/random delivery address (in your paper recycling bag) was sent to...

My understanding is that it is a surprisingly effective recycling system... but with the downside that 1) the city doesn't look particularly great on/after trash collection day, and 2) sometimes the local wildlife will rip open the trash bags

Edit: some more details regarding where I live if anyone is interested. Most people only use four colored bags that are collected per week: blue (plastic, metal, something else...), yellow (paper-based recyclables), white ("residual", essentially non-recyclable items), and orange (kitchen waste). There are also bags for garden waste and heavy waste, but they are not picked up from residential addresses. Glass is either returned to the supermarket (beer bottles) or disposed of at specific dropoff bins. Things like batteries/electronics are specific, I just take them back to the store. There are also pink bags, but they are only used by businesses

This is something I'm curious about that is tied to housing shortages... As in, say a hypothetical government want to encourage real-estate develpers to build more housing to solve housing shortages. But said government still wants to make most of its citizens happy, instead of just cramming everyone in the smallest accommodations possible

As extreme examples:

• A shoebox studio (<= 10 m^2) is probably too small for almost any family
• On the contrary... a massive estate (>= 10,000 m^2) is probably too big for almost any family. At that point, upkeep of the house may need several full-time housekeepers, so you literally won't have time to do it yourself

I'd imagine there might be some cultural differences regarding this as well...?

See title. I've been to quite a few local language meetups and saw lots of people IRL who are learning languages: wondering how are y'all doing too

For myself... learning French due to necessity. I am making progress, just veeery slow. I underestimated how difficult it would be (a lot of vocabs between English/French are similar... but the languages themselves are not!)