Howard, M. C., & Kasprzyk, M. (2025). Integrating modern research on social courage via psychological contract theory: direct and interactive effects of work engagement and moral disengagement. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 12(3), 459-478.

 What They Did

The researchers recruited several hundred participants online to complete questionnaires about workplace engagement and moral disengagement. A week later, the same participants were contacted to complete questionnaires about workplace social courage (e.g. activities such as giving unwelcome feedback or taking on difficult projects) and unethical pro-organization behaviors (i.e. taking unethical actions that the employee believes would benefit the organization). Only the data from participants who completed both sets of questionnaires was analyzed.

The researchers found that people who were engaged with their work were more likely to display workplace social courage, while those who were morally disengaged were somewhat less likely to act bravely at work. People who scored higher on workplace engagement where also slightly more likely to participate in unethical pro-organization behaviors, but moral disengagement was notably more important as a factor.  In fact, the effect of workplace engagement on unethical behavior is only statistically significant among participants who had high scores on moral disengagement.

The researchers interpret their data through psychological contract theory, which proposes that employees have expectations of reciprocity beyond their legal employment terms. Employee desire to benefit the organization then depends partly on whether those expectations have been met. The researchers note that while interventions to increase workplace engagement have generally been considered to have only positive effects, such interventions could lead to unethical behavior in employees who are morally disengaged. Therefore, it is important for decision makers to address any possibility of moral disengagement among employees before focusing on improvements in workplace engagement.

Further Exploration

Based on psychological contract theory, more engaged employees in the study were expected to feel a greater obligation towards their employer and therefore a desire to reciprocate by benefiting the organization – ideally with social courage, non-ideally with unethical pro-organization behaviors. Those who were morally disengaged were of course expected to be more willing to behave unethically but also less inclined to show social courage because they would not have as strong a desire to uphold their end of the psychological contract.

 Some employer actions that can lead to the perception of a psychological contract on the employee’s part include verbal assurances, consistent decisions, and unwritten customs. The overall culture of the organization at the time the employee joins can also set their expectations for the future, and perceived breaches of the contract can reduce productivity. (See https://www.aihr.com/blog/psychological-contract/). Some commentators suggest that the conflict over return-to-office policies is rooted in changes to the psychological contract: employees who have demonstrated that they’re productive working remotely often perceive requirements to work in the office as unfair. (See https://www.physicianleaders.org/articles/the-workplace-psychological-contract-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it).

Neurodivergent people often miss unspoken information (see https://www.simplypsychology.org/autism-and-social-cues.html), so they may experience workplace psychological contracts differently. It’s well documented that neurodivergent people may miss unspoken expectations, even those they’re happy to meet. I haven’t seen much information about the possibility of quiet neurodivergent resentment if unspoken flexibility is missed, but it seems plausible. I wonder what communication would best support employees who need more explicit information to understand social situations, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day!

 

Image credit: Yves Guillou
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Simple_illustration_of_a_business_meeting.png 

 

Papini, Giulia, and Arnold Rakaj. "Microplastic retention in European flat oyster Ostrea edulis cultured in two Mediterranean basins." npj Emerging Contaminants 1, no. 1 (2025): 7.

New post - not going to try to keep to a schedule, but will post as I find the time and energy.

What They Did

The researchers compared the concentration and type of microplastics in European flat oysters (Ostrea edulis) grown in the Adriatic Sea to the northwest of Italy and the Tyrrhenian Sea to its southeast. They found that oysters from the Tyrrhenian Sea had a larger concentration of microplastics. Furthermore, the most common microplastic items in the Adriatic oysters were fibers, while the most common in the Tyrrhenian oysters were fragments.

Fibers generally come from synthetic materials, while fragments form when larger plastic objects break down in the environment. Although fragments were the most common type of microplastic in the Tyrrhenian oysters and the second most common in the Adriatic oysters, the percentages were not significantly different. Instead, the Tyrrhenian oysters had a significantly higher concentration of microplastic spheres, though spheres were the least common shape in both locations. Unlike fibers and fragments, microplastic spheres are manufactured to be small; they’re used in body care products, detergents, and coatings.

The researchers hypothesize that the difference between the microplastics in the two locations results from their river networks. The rivers draining into the Tyrrhenian location flow through urban and industrial areas where they’re likely to accumulate more total microplastics and a higher proportion of fragments from plastic waste and spheres from household and industrial products. The rivers flowing into the Adriatic are in more rural and agricultural areas with less total microplastic waste and a higher percentage of it taking the form of fibers from the degradation of items such as ropes and textiles.

Further Exploration

Microplastics are a major form of pollution; in this study, 100% of the individual oysters showed microplastic contamination. It’s effectively impossible to avoid ingesting these tiny fragments, though avoiding plastics as much as possible can reduce exposure. They get into various organs, and several studies suggest that they’re harmful (see https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2025/01/what-s-the-deal-with-microplastics-the-material-that-never-goes-away).  

One study found that microplastics added to the drinking water of lab mice passed into the mice’s brains and caused cognitive problems. The microplastics used in the study did not include any known toxins, and they were free from microbes, but they still harmed the mice. (see https://www.aamc.org/news/microplastics-are-inside-us-all-what-does-mean-our-health). Microplastics in the environment, however, can also absorb and concentrate toxins that then enter the body. They may also contribute to chronic inflammation because the body recognizes them as foreign objects but can’t break them down (see https://fortune.com/well/article/microplastics-health-effects/).

Microplastics can affect photosynthesis in phytoplankton and can be directly consumed by zooplankton; these organisms form the base of the oceanic food web, so all other species are at least indirectly affected. Right now, we have no way to clean up the microplastics in the environment. The only things we know to do are reducing plastic use and urging our governments to regulate plastic production (see https://news.mongabay.com/2023/10/microplastics-pose-risk-to-ocean-plankton-climate-other-key-earth-systems/). Unfortunately, eliminating plastics is difficult. To give just one example, meat is almost always sold wrapped in plastic. It would be interesting to find out what alternatives might be on the horizon, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day!

Image credit: Olivier Dugornay
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hu%C3%AEtre_plate_(Ostrea_edulis)_en_rade_de_Brest_(Ifremer_00565-67729_-_24689).jpg 

Taking a Break

I'm going to take a break from this blog for a while. I honestly don't know whether or not I'll come back to it, but I think it's done its job for me for now. The articles I've explored so far give a pretty good idea of the breadth of my interest and comprehension, at least along the lines of empirical research. 

The most challenging aspect is finding articles I want to approach this way, especially for the more human-centered fields. I think maybe with natural science I'm perfectly happy looking at how this or that specific organism reacts to this or that specific situation, but with human-centered fields, I'm more interested in theories with broader strokes that don't lend themselves so well to this kind of blog. At the same time, I do feel like more research is needed, but maybe the kind of research I'm interested in isn't being done. 

This could be a demand-avoidance thing, but I feel like much of the research on humans carries a bit of prescriptivism - a sense of let's see how to make people have the outcomes we want. Sort of along the lines of if people aren't prioritizing what we think they should prioritize, how do we change that, instead of how do we help people do what they themselves want, even if that's something that changes? And I'm not necessarily saying that kind of research doesn't exist, but it's hard to find. 

I'm trying to make a career change, and part of my idea was that this blog would be good practice and would showcase some of what I can do. That's true as far as it goes, but I think my intrinsic motivation has run out for now - I think I'd be happy to do this kind of work for pay, but as a hobby, it's starting to feel too much like an obligation. Thanks to everyone that's taken the time to read over the past several months! 

Liu, Jing, Yun‐Heng Miao, Hong‐Xia Hou, Da‐Wei Huang, and Jin‐Hua Xiao. "Ecological Niche Adaptations Influence Transposable Element Dynamics in Pollinating and Non‐Pollinating Fig Wasps." Ecology and Evolution 15, no. 6 (2025): e71553.

 

What They Did

The researchers examined the DNA of 11 species of fig wasps, 6 fig pollinators and 5 non-pollinators. The pollinating species enter the synocium (the structure that completely encloses the flowers and, later, the tiny multiple fruits), while the non-pollinating species pierce the synocium with their ovipositors to lay eggs. The researchers particularly looked at the transposable elements, segments of DNA that can move from one area of the genome to another. They found that the non-pollinating wasps had significantly more transposable content in their genomes and that the individual transposable elements of the pollinating wasps were shorter.

They compared the genetics of the different species to develop a phylogeny, which shows that the pollinating wasps form a clade that diverged from the non-pollinating wasps. Based on the differences among transposable elements and the background mutation rate, they determined that the transposable elements in the pollinating wasps were 10 to 30 million years old, while the those of the non-pollinating wasps were less than 5 million years old.

In addition, the pollinator wasp species have smaller effective population sizes: a less varied population has a smaller effective population size than a more varied population with the same number of individuals. The researchers suggest that since the pollinating wasps spend most of their lives in the stable, enclosed environment of the fig synocium, the selection pressures tend towards conservation of the well-adapted phenotype. The non-pollinating wasps, in contrast, encounter more varied environments, such that more genetic variability is likely to be adaptive.

Further Exploration

Transposable elements (also called transposons) are fascinating and difficult to understand. There are two major types: one type (Type I) gets copied and pasted elsewhere in the genome, but the original copy remains. The other type (Type II) gets cut and pasted, moving from one location to another.

In Type I, the transposon DNA is transcribed into RNA and then reverse transcribed back into DNA. Repeating sequences of bases determine where the new DNA can be integrated into the genome with the help of enzymes. The Type II transposons, meanwhile, are not copied into RNA. Instead, both strands of DNA are enzymatically cut and held together, then moved elsewhere in the genome (see https://www.integra-biosciences.com/united-states/en/blog/article/transposons-jumping-genes-revolutionizing-genetics).

Of course, no discussion of transposons is complete without a mention of Barbara McClintock. By observing the variegated color patterns of corn, she realized that something other than mutation or Mendelian genetics must be responsible for the changes from one generation to the next. Her ideas were dismissed for decades, but she won the Nobel Prize for her work in 1983. (see https://www.nobelprize.org/stories/women-who-changed-science/barbara-mcclintock/). If a particular transposon is near the gene that codes for pigment in a corn cell, it stops pigmentation from occurring, but if it’s farther away, it has no effect. Since the location of the transposon can vary among cells within a kernel, the kernel ends up with a mottled pattern (see https://www.waynesword.net/transpos.htm). It would be interesting to learn how transposons may have evolved in the first place, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day! 

 

Image credit: Alandmanson

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Philotrypesis_2019_06_29_4560.jpg 

Price, A., Sumner, P., & Powell, G. (2025). The subtypes of visual hypersensitivity are transdiagnostic across neurodivergence, neurology and mental health. Vision Research, 234, 108640.

What They Did

The researchers recruited participants to complete an online questionnaire about four areas of visual hypersensitivity: brightness, strobing, pattern (such as stripes), and intense visual environments (such as supermarkets). Participants were also asked to indicate any neurodivergent, medical, or mental health conditions. Nearly 2600 participants were included in the final data set.

Using the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology, some conditions were combined for analysis: binge eating disorder, anorexia, and bulimia were combined into eating pathologies; social anxiety, OCD, panic disorder, and agoraphobia were considered as fear-based conditions; and depression, generalized anxiety disorder, PTSD, and borderline personality disorder were combined into distress-based conditions. ADHD, autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia, fibromyalgia, migraine, persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD), and synesthesia were also included. The researchers found that all 11 conditions or categories of conditions were associated with all for types of visual hypersensitivity.

Sensitivity to intense visual environments (IVE) was the most increased factor for people with ADHD, autism, dyslexia, fibromyalgia, and PPPD. People with dyspraxia also showed the largest increase in IVE sensitivity, as well as a greater sensitivity to pattern compared to brightness or strobing. People with migraines, synesthesia, eating pathologies, and conditions based on fear or distress had relatively little difference in the four types of sensitivity. Of these, people with migraines or synesthesia were most sensitive to pattern and the others were most sensitive to IVE. The researchers note that the lack of distinctive patterns may indicate that all these conditions share a broad visual hypersensitivity in addition to their widely varying symptoms.

Further Exploration

Since comorbidities are common, many of the participants had more than one condition and were included in the analysis for each. The researchers also statistically isolated the conditions to determine which visual hypersensitivities were the most predictive of each condition. For example, none of the hypersensitivities were significantly predictive of dyspraxia, while all four were predictive of autism. Therefore, the sensitivities to IVE and pattern among people with dyspraxia might result from the fact that many of those people are also autistic.

The researchers caution, however, that while isolating the conditions in this way may have benefits for better understanding the effect of each condition, it also risks erasing the lived experience of people with comorbidities. The point I found particularly interesting is that the researchers can only isolate the collections of symptoms that have their own names. Our understanding of many of these conditions is still very new, and we don’t really know how well our current conceptualizations actually reflect the underlying physiology.

Less than 100 years ago, autism was understood as a form of schizophrenia that manifested in childhood (see https://azaunited.org/blog/how-the-autism-diagnosis-has-evolved-over-time). By contrast, insulin for management of diabetes has been known since the 1920s (see https://origins.osu.edu/read/first-insulin-injection-treatment-diabetes). Fibromyalgia, meanwhile, was only officially recognized as a distinct medical condition in 1981 (see https://www.swing.care/blog/what-is-fibromyalgia/). It’s easy sometimes to forget how little we actually know. It would be really interesting to do a factor analysis on neurodivergence like the one used to develop the five-factor personality model, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day!

 

 Image credit: Frankie Fouganthin

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Supermarket_shelves.jpg