Accelerated epigenetic age is associated with whole-brain functional connectivity and impaired cognitive performance in older adults

While chronological age is a strong predictor for health-related risk factors, it is an incomplete metric that fails to fully characterize the unique aging process of individuals with different genetic makeup, neurodevelopment, and environmental experiences. Recent advances in epigenomic array technologies have made it possible to generate DNA methylation-based biomarkers of biological aging, which may be useful in predicting a myriad of cognitive abilities and functional brain network organization across older individuals. It is currently unclear which cognitive domains are negatively correlated with epigenetic age above and beyond chronological age, and it is unknown if functional brain organization is an important mechanism for explaining these associations. In this study, individuals with accelerated epigenetic age (i.e. AgeAccelGrim) performed worse on tasks that spanned a wide variety of cognitive faculties including both fluid and crystallized intelligence (N = 103, average age = 68.98 years, 73 females, 30 males). Additionally, fMRI connectome-based predictive models suggested a mediating mechanism of functional connectivity on epigenetic age acceleration-cognition associations primarily in medial temporal lobe and limbic structures. This research highlights the important role of epigenetic aging processes on the development and maintenance of healthy cognitive capacities and function of the aging brain.

The rich get richer? Children's reasoning about socioeconomic status predicts inclusion and resource bias

Children's socioeconomic status (SES) is linked to disparate access to resources and affects social behaviors such as inclusion and resource allocations. Yet it is unclear whether children's essentialized view of SES (i.e., believing SES is immutable) or subjective social status (SSS) influences behavioral biases toward high- versus low-SES peers. We measured 4- to 9-year-old children's SES essentialism and SSS to test whether these predict inclusion and resource allocations to high- versus low-SES peers (N = 127; from a midsize city in the Southeastern United States; 49.6% female; parent-reported 54.2% White, 2.8% Black, 8.3% Latine, 5.6% Asian, 1.4% another race, 27.8% multiracial, 43.3% not provided). We also compared children's SES beliefs to their parent's. Children's SES essentialism and SSS decreased across the ages tested, and children reported higher SSS than their parents. Parents' SES essentialism predicted younger (but not older) children's SES essentialism. Moreover, SES essentialism mediated the negative relationship between age and preference for including high-SES peers, while SSS mediated the negative relationship between age and preference for allocating more resources to high-SES peers. This suggests that beliefs about the nature of SES may influence sociorelational behavior like including or excluding others, while perceived social status (SSS) may influence resource allocations. Furthermore, older children and those with lower SES essentialism included low- versus high-SES peers more often while older and lower SSS children distributed more resources toward low- versus high-SES peers. Thus, children's SES essentialism and SSS may also influence their behaviors to either perpetuate or rectify inequality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Reframe policymaking dysfunction through bipartisan-inclusion leadership

Persistent policy failures have been examined in recent years with a focus on the role of political systems. We evaluate the growth of dysfunctional policymaking in the U.S. and propose a countering approach. Policy failures often reflect partisan policy stalemate, errors or unintended consequences, polarized extremism or imbalance, or partisan reversals with changes in power. Extremes in partisanship are not new historically, but growing policy failures due to negative partisanship have now severely damaged public trust. More "party blind" conditions in policy formulation may be able to renew a more productive social contract. We propose a disruptive presidential leadership approach of bipartisan inclusion to seek to reframe the partisan divides, counter negative partisanship and extremes, re-establish better policymaking interactions, and improve governance and policy outcomes. Dysfunctional policymaking has been attributed to Republicans and Democrats in a Prisoner's Dilemma. Iterated Prisoner's Dilemmas often lead to higher rates of cooperation, and similarly, historical policymaking included greater cooperation, but in recent decades the bipartisan norms of governance have substantially eroded. We describe three complementary explanations, which suggest that non-cooperative partisan policymaking has become self-reinforcing, and institutional changes to promote cooperation should focus on lowering the risk-adjusted cost-benefit ratio, making cooperation safer and more attractive for policymakers.

“Mixed” Drinking Motivations: A Comparison of Majority, Multiracial, and Minority College Students

Social exclusion is associated with substance use, but the specific link between majority and minority racial group membership and substance use is unknown. We examined how social exclusion among racial majority (White), Multiracial, and racial minority (Native American, Latino, Asian, and Black) college students relates to self-reported alcohol use and motivations. Using the AlcoholEdu for College™ survey, Study 1a reports five factors related to motives for initiating or inhibiting alcohol use. Study 1b analyzes majority, Multiracial, and minority college students’ comparative endorsement of these motivations. Study 2 compares these factors with established belonging scales using a separate undergraduate sample. White, Multiracial, Native American, and Latino students displayed the highest proportion of problematic alcohol use. White students endorsed belonging-based drinking motivations, while Multiracial and Asian students endorsed motivations similar to both majority and minority groups. Native American, Latino, and Black students endorsed abstaining motivations more than other groups.