In Journal Club, students and professors talk together about exciting new psychology research. By reading and discussing a short, current article, students learn necessary skills about understanding and interpreting psychological research.
Schedule for Spring 2026
Wednesday, March 4, 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Mae MacIntire (PSY372 Sport Psychology)
Postinjury Anxiety and Social Support Among Collegiate Athletes: A Comparison Between Orthopaedic Injuries and Concussions
Tracey Covassin, Bryan Crutcher, Alisha Bleecker, Erin O. Heiden, Alexander Dailey, Jingzhen Yang
Context: When an athlete is injured, the primary focus of the sports medicine team is to treat the physical effects of the injury. However, many injured athletes experience negative psychological responses, including anxiety, regarding their injury. Objective: To compare the anxiety and social support of athletes with concussions and a matched group of athletes with orthopaedic injuries.
Wednesday, March 18, 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Jessica Alexander (PSY317 Sensation & Perception)
Matching Sounds to Shapes: Evidence of the Bouba-Kiki Effect in Naïve Baby Chicks
Maria Loconsole, Silvia Benavides- Varela & Lucia Regolin
+ a brief response by Marcus Perlman & Bodo Winter
Humans across multiple languages spontaneously associate the nonwords “kiki” and “bouba” with spiky and round shapes, respectively, a phenomenon named the bouba-kiki effect. To explore the origin of this association, and whether it is unique to humans, we tested the bouba-kiki effect in baby domestic chickens (Gallus gallus). As a precocial species, chicks can be tested shortly after hatching, allowing us to control their pretest experiences. Similar to humans, both 3- day- old [Experiment 1 (Exp. 1)] and 1- day- old (Exp. 2) chicks spontaneously choose a spiky shape when hearing the “kiki” sound and a round shape when hearing the “bouba” sound. Results from naïve young animals suggest a predisposed mechanism for matching the dimensions of shape and sound, which may be widespread across species.
Monday, March 30, 4:30-5:30pm Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Amy Hammond (PSY369 Human Sexuality)
Exploring Sexual Attraction to Animals: A Qualitative Analysis of Zoophile Experiences
Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Payton McPhee, & Mark Olver
This study explored the psychological dimensions of sexual attraction to non-human animals through qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses from individuals with zoophilic interests (N = 960). Using inductive thematic analysis, we identified three interconnected themes: Parallels with Sexual Attraction to Humans, Animal Welfare Ethics, and Species-Specific Appeal, with a subtheme of Anatomical Attraction. Participants (Mage 25.05 years [SD = 9.75], 67% men) described attraction mechanisms that both mirrored human relationship dynamics and diverged into uniquely animal-specific domains. Many participants emphasized ethical frameworks centered on perceived consent and animal welfare while displaying limited understanding of species-specific behavioral indicators. Species-specific attractions were frequently characterized by preferences for wolf-like features, intelligence, and anatomical uniqueness. These results have implications for clinical approaches to individuals with zoophilic attractions, animal welfare practices, and theoretical frameworks of human sexuality. Future research should employ longitudinal methods to investigate the development and stability of these attractions and interdisciplinary approaches to address complex questions regarding consent and animal welfare.
Thursday, April 16, 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Pete Zunick (PSY359 Theories of Personality)
The Ego’s Bodyguard: The Role of Personality in Self-Protective Reactions
Christoph Heine, Stefan C. Schmukle, & Michael Dufner
When faced with self-threat, people often engage in self-protective reactions. Yet not everyone does. The extent to which self protection occurs, is thought to depend on people’s personality. We put this claim to test by considering multiple personality traits from different content domains. In an experiment, participants (N = 1744) performed a bogus performance test and received negative versus positive feedback. As an indicator of self-protective reactions, we assessed participants’ tendency to question the validity of the test. We found that high self-esteem and high narcissism predicted stronger self-protective reactions, particularly when these traits were assessed in the content domain targeted by the negative feedback. Contrary to our hypotheses, the self-insight motive and mindfulness also predicted stronger (and not weaker) self-protective reactions. These findings provide better understanding of the role that personality plays in motivated reasoning.
If you have questions, please contact Dr. Amy Hammond in the Psychology Department.