The vicious cycle of status insecurity.

The current research presents and tests a new model: The Vicious Cycle of Status Insecurity. We define status insecurity as doubting whether one is respected and admired by others. Status insecurity leads people to view status as a limited and zero-sum resource, where a boost in the status of one individual inherently decreases that of other individuals.

Unified Shape and External Load State Estimation for Continuum Robots.

Continuum robots navigate narrow, winding passageways while safely and compliantly interacting with their environments. Sensing the robot's shape under these conditions is often done indirectly, using a few coarsely distributed (e.g.

St. Louis Enhancing Engagement and Retention in HIV/AIDS Care (STEER): a participatory intersectional needs assessment for intervention and implementation planning.

Background Missouri is one of seven priority states identified by the Ending the HIV Epidemic Initiative, and St. Louis contains almost half of the people living with HIV (PLWH) in Missouri. As St.

Are many sex/gender differences really power differences?

This research addresses the long-standing debate about the determinants of sex/gender differences. Evolutionary theorists trace many sex/gender differences back to natural selection and sex-specific adaptations. Sociocultural and biosocial theorists, in contrast, emphasize how societal roles and social power contribute to sex/gender differences beyond any biological distinctions.

The allure of consensus: People (over)seek consensus in selecting group persuasion strategies.

How do people select targets when tasked with persuading a group of people? One approach would be to prioritize getting people in support of the persuader's position to hold relatively extreme attitudes-an An alternative approach would be to prioritize getting as many people as possible to support the persuader's position, regardless of how extreme they are-a . Although some situations might allow persuaders to combine these strategies, the present work examines how people select targets and strategies when a natural trade-off exists between acquiring fewer people with more extreme attitudes versus more people with less extreme attitudes. Prior work suggests that potential advantages exist for both extremity and consensus strategies.