It is currently commonplace for institutions of higher education to proclaim to embrace diversity and inclusion. Though there are numerous rationales available for doing so, US Supreme Court decisions have consistently favored rationales which assert that diversity provides compelling educational benefits and is thus instrumentally useful. Our research is a quantitative/experimental effort to examine how such instrumental rationales comport with the preferences of White and Black Americans, specifically contrasting them with previously dominant moral rationales that embrace diversity as a matter of intrinsic values (e.g., justice). Furthermore, we investigate the prevalence of instrumental diversity rationales in the American higher education landscape and the degree to which they correspond with educational outcomes. Across six experiments, we showed that instrumental rationales correspond to the preferences of White (but not Black) Americans, and both parents and admissions staff expect Black students to fare worse at universities that endorse them. We coded university websites and surveyed admissions staff to determine that, nevertheless, instrumental diversity rationales are more prevalent than moral ones are and that they are indeed associated with increasing White–Black graduation disparities, particularly among universities with low levels of moral rationale use. These findings indicate that the most common rationale for supporting diversity in American higher education accords with the preferences of, and better relative outcomes for, White Americans over low-status racial minorities. The rationales behind universities’ embrace of diversity have nonlegal consequences that should be considered in institutional decision making.

Incarceration is a pervasive issue in the United States that is enormously costly to families, communities, and society at large. The path from prison back to prison may depend on the relationship a person has with their probation or parole officer (PPO). If the relationship lacks appropriate care and trust, violations and recidivism (return to jail or prison) may be more likely to occur. Here, we test whether an “empathic supervision” intervention with PPOs—that aims to reduce collective blame against and promote empathy for the perspectives of adults on probation or parole (APPs)—can reduce rates of violations and recidivism. The intervention highlights the unreasonable expectation that all APPs will reoffend (collective blame) and the benefits of empathy—valuing APPs’ perspectives. Using both within-subject (monthly official records for 10 mo) and between-subject (treatment versus control) comparisons in a longitudinal study with PPOs in a large US city (N_PPOs = 216; N_APPs=∼20,478), we find that the empathic supervision intervention reduced collective blame against APPs 10 mo postintervention and reduced between-subject violations and recidivism, a 13% reduction that would translate to less taxpayer costs if scaled. Together, these findings illustrate that very low-cost psychological interventions that target empathy in relationships can be cost effective and combat important societal outcomes in a lasting manner.

Mammalian young are born with immature brain and rely on the mother’s body and caregiving behavior for maturation of neurobiological systems that sustain adult sociality. While research in animal models indicated the long-term effects of maternal contact and caregiving on the adult brain, little is known about the effects of maternal–newborn contact and parenting behavior on social brain functioning in human adults. We followed human neonates, including premature infants who initially lacked or received maternal–newborn skin-to-skin contact and full-term controls, from birth to adulthood, repeatedly observing mother–child social synchrony at key developmental nodes. We tested the brain basis of affect-specific empathy in young adulthood and utilized multivariate techniques to distinguish brain regions sensitive to others’ distinct emotions from those globally activated by the empathy task. The amygdala, insula, temporal pole (TP), and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) showed high sensitivity to others’ distinct emotions. Provision of maternal–newborn contact enhanced social synchrony across development from infancy and up until adulthood. The experience of synchrony, in turn, predicted the brain’s sensitivity to emotion-specific empathy in the amygdala and insula, core structures of the social brain. Social synchrony linked with greater empathic understanding in adolescence, which was longitudinally associated with higher neural sensitivity to emotion-specific empathy in TP and VMPFC. Findings demonstrate the centrality of synchronous caregiving, by which infants practice the detection and sharing of others’ affective states, for tuning the human social brain, particularly in regions implicated in salience detection, interoception, and mentalization that underpin affect sharing and human attachment.

An essential function of the human visual system is to locate objects in space and navigate the environment. Due to limited resources, the visual system achieves this by combining imperfect sensory information with a belief state about locations in a scene, resulting in systematic distortions and biases. These biases can be captured by a Bayesian model in which internal beliefs are expressed in a prior probability distribution over locations in a scene. We introduce a paradigm that enables us to measure these priors by iterating a simple memory task where the response of one participant becomes the stimulus for the next. This approach reveals an unprecedented richness and level of detail in these priors, suggesting a different way to think about biases in spatial memory. A prior distribution on locations in a visual scene can reflect the selective allocation of coding resources to different visual regions during encoding (“efficient encoding”). This selective allocation predicts that locations in the scene will be encoded with variable precision, in contrast to previous work that has assumed fixed encoding precision regardless of location. We demonstrate that perceptual biases covary with variations in discrimination accuracy, a finding that is aligned with simulations of our efficient encoding model but not the traditional fixed encoding view. This work demonstrates the promise of using nonparametric data-driven approaches that combine crowdsourcing with the careful curation of information transmission within social networks to reveal the hidden structure of shared visual representations.

Perceptual stability is facilitated by a decrease in visual sensitivity during rapid eye movements, called saccadic suppression. While a large body of evidence demonstrates that saccadic programming is plastic, little is known about whether the perceptual consequences of saccades can be modified. Here, we demonstrate that saccadic suppression is attenuated during learning on a standard visual detection-in-noise task, to the point that it is effectively silenced. Across a period of 7 days, 44 participants were trained to detect brief, low-contrast stimuli embedded within dynamic noise, while eye position was tracked. Although instructed to fixate, participants regularly made small fixational saccades. Data were accumulated over a large number of trials, allowing us to assess changes in performance as a function of the temporal proximity of stimuli and saccades. This analysis revealed that improvements in sensitivity over the training period were accompanied by a systematic change in the impact of saccades on performance—robust saccadic suppression on day 1 declined gradually over subsequent days until its magnitude became indistinguishable from zero. This silencing of suppression was not explained by learning-related changes in saccade characteristics and generalized to an untrained retinal location and stimulus orientation. Suppression was restored when learned stimulus timing was perturbed, consistent with the operation of a mechanism that temporarily reduces or eliminates saccadic suppression, but only when it is behaviorally advantageous to do so. Our results indicate that learning can circumvent saccadic suppression to improve performance, without compromising its functional benefits in other viewing contexts.

Both liberals and conservatives believe that using facts in political discussions helps to foster mutual respect, but 15 studies—across multiple methodologies and issues—show that these beliefs are mistaken. Political opponents respect moral beliefs more when they are supported by personal experiences, not facts. The respect-inducing power of personal experiences is revealed by survey studies across various political topics, a field study of conversations about guns, an analysis of YouTube comments from abortion opinion videos, and an archival analysis of 137 interview transcripts from Fox News and CNN. The personal experiences most likely to encourage respect from opponents are issue-relevant and involve harm. Mediation analyses reveal that these harm-related personal experiences increase respect by increasing perceptions of rationality: everyone can appreciate that avoiding harm is rational, even in people who hold different beliefs about guns, taxes, immigration, and the environment. Studies show that people believe in the truth of both facts and personal experiences in nonmoral disagreement; however, in moral disagreements, subjective experiences seem truer (i.e., are doubted less) than objective facts. These results provide a concrete demonstration of how to bridge moral divides while also revealing how our intuitions can lead us astray. Stretching back to the Enlightenment, philosophers and scientists have privileged objective facts over experiences in the pursuit of truth. However, furnishing perceptions of truth within moral disagreements is better accomplished by sharing subjective experiences, not by providing facts.

Human cortex is patterned by a complex and interdigitated web of large-scale functional networks. Recent methodological breakthroughs reveal variation in the size, shape, and spatial topography of cortical networks across individuals. While spatial network organization emerges across development, is stable over time, and is predictive of behavior, it is not yet clear to what extent genetic factors underlie interindividual differences in network topography. Here, leveraging a nonlinear multidimensional estimation of heritability, we provide evidence that individual variability in the size and topographic organization of cortical networks are under genetic control. Using twin and family data from the Human Connectome Project (n = 1,023), we find increased variability and reduced heritability in the size of heteromodal association networks (h²: M = 0.34, SD = 0.070), relative to unimodal sensory/motor cortex (h²: M = 0.40, SD = 0.097). We then demonstrate that the spatial layout of cortical networks is influenced by genetics, using our multidimensional estimation of heritability (h²-multi; M = 0.14, SD = 0.015). However, topographic heritability did not differ between heteromodal and unimodal networks. Genetic factors had a regionally variable influence on brain organization, such that the heritability of network topography was greatest in prefrontal, precuneus, and posterior parietal cortex. Taken together, these data are consistent with relaxed genetic control of association cortices relative to primary sensory/motor regions and have implications for understanding population-level variability in brain functioning, guiding both individualized prediction and the interpretation of analyses that integrate genetics and neuroimaging.

Social media may limit the exposure to diverse perspectives and favor the formation of groups of like-minded users framing and reinforcing a shared narrative, that is, echo chambers. However, the interaction paradigms among users and feed algorithms greatly vary across social media platforms. This paper explores the key differences between the main social media platforms and how they are likely to influence information spreading and echo chambers’ formation. We perform a comparative analysis of more than 100 million pieces of content concerning several controversial topics (e.g., gun control, vaccination, abortion) from Gab, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter. We quantify echo chambers over social media by two main ingredients: 1) homophily in the interaction networks and 2) bias in the information diffusion toward like-minded peers. Our results show that the aggregation of users in homophilic clusters dominate online interactions on Facebook and Twitter. We conclude the paper by directly comparing news consumption on Facebook and Reddit, finding higher segregation on Facebook.