Your search
Results 3 resources
-
The fear of missing out (FoMO)—the apprehension that others are having rewarding experiences in one's absence—has been linked to diminished well-being and maladaptive behaviors. While research has primarily focused on neurotypical populations, little is known about how FoMO associates with and manifests in neurodiverse cognitive profiles. The present study examined associations between general and workplace FoMO and individual differences in ADHD symptoms, autistic traits, and internal cognitive representation styles (visual imagery, internal verbalization, representational manipulation) in a U.S. sample of full-time employees ( N = 302). Across both regression and machine learning analyses, ADHD symptoms emerged as the most robust and consistent predictor of FoMO in both domains. Visual imagery significantly predicted general FoMO, whereas internal verbalization and representational manipulation showed stronger associations with workplace FoMO. Autistic traits, as measured by the AQ-10, were not significantly related to FoMO. Classification models (e.g., logistic regression, SVM) distinguished high versus low FoMO participants with moderate-to-high accuracy, with ADHD symptoms consistently ranked as the most influential feature. These findings extend the literature by highlighting domain-specific predictors of FoMO and the potential of neurodiversity-informed approaches for understanding and addressing FoMO in both social and occupational settings. © 2026 Elsevier Ltd.
-
Philosophers have long speculated that individual differences in temperament influence philosophical thinking, yet empirical research has rarely explored the role of neurodivergent traits in this domain. In this large online study (N = 1,254), we investigated whether participants with training in philosophy differ from the general population when it comes to six psychological traits–autism, ADHD, aphantasia, anendophasia, anauralia, and representational manipulation–and also whether these traits correlate with responses to two widely studied philosophical thought experiments: the “trolley problem” and the “rollback deterministic universe.” Compared to the general population, participants with training in philosophy had higher scores on measures of ADHD, internal verbalization, and representational manipulation, but lower scores on measures of visual imagery. These cognitive traits were also correlated with participants’ moral and metaphysical judgments (independent of their level of philosophical training)–e.g. participants who scored higher in visualization were less likely to judge that hitting the switch in the trolley problem is permissible but not obligatory, and also less likely to attribute free will and moral responsibility to agents in the rollback universe. Finally, we employed machine learning to develop predictive models that classify a randomly selected participant as either a philosopher or a non-philosopher. Models trained solely on responses to measures for neurodivergent traits achieved better performance than models trained solely on responses to philosophical thought experiments. This suggests that stable, trait-level neurodivergent characteristics may be more diagnostic of philosophical interest, aptitude, or training than judgments philosophers make on domain-relevant problems. © 2026 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
-
The same dataset can be analysed in different justifiable ways to answer the same research question, potentially challenging the robustness of empirical science1-3. In this crowd initiative, we investigated the degree to which research findings in the social and behavioural sciences are contingent on analysts' choices. We examined a stratified random sample of 100 studies published between 2009 and 2018, in which, for one claim per study, at least five reanalysts independently reanalysed the original data. The statistical appropriateness of the reanalyses was assessed in peer evaluations, and the robustness indicators were inspected along a range of research characteristics and study designs. We found that 34% of the independent reanalyses yielded the same result (within a tolerance region of ±0.05 Cohen's d) as the original report; with a four times broader tolerance region, this indicator increased to 57%. Of the reanalyses conducted, 74% reached the same conclusion as the original investigation, 24% yielded no effects or inconclusive results and 2% reported the opposite effect. This exploratory study indicates that the common single-path analyses in social and behavioural research should not be simply assumed to be robust to alternative analyses4. Therefore, we recommend the development and use of practices to explore and communicate this neglected source of uncertainty. © 2026. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Explore
Department
- Psychology (3)
Resource type
- Journal Article (3)
Publication year
Resource language
- English (3)