Category: The Conversation – Global Perspectives

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Margaret Murray, Senior Lecturer, Nutrition, Swinburne University of Technology

At the end of a long day, who has time to check the detailed nutrition information on every single product they toss into their shopping basket?

To eat healthily, some people prefer to stick to a simple rule: choose products with a short ingredient list. The idea is foods with just a few ingredients are less processed, more “natural” and therefore healthy.

But is this always the case? Here’s what the length of an ingredient list can and can’t tell you about nutrition – and what else to look for.

How ingredient lists work

You can find an ingredient list on most packaged food labels, telling you the number and type of ingredients involved in making that food.

In Australia, packaged food products must follow certain rules set by the Australian and New Zealand Food Standards Code.

Ingredients must be listed in order of ingoing weight. This means items at the beginning of the list are those that make up the bulk of the product. Those at the end make up the least.

Food labels also include a nutrition information panel, which tells you the quantity of key nutrients (energy, protein, total carbohydrates, sugars, total fat, saturated fat and sodium) per serving.

This panel also tells you the content per 100 grams or millilitres, which allows you to work out the percentage.

Whole foods can be packaged, too

Products with just one, two or three items in their ingredient list are generally in a form that closely reflects the food when it was taken from the farm. So even though they come in packaging, they could be considered whole foods.

“Whole foods” are those that have undergone zero to minimal processing, such as fresh fruit and vegetables, lentils, legumes, whole grains such as oats or brown rice, seeds, nuts and unprocessed meat and fish.

To support overall health, the Australian Dietary Guidelines recommend eating whole foods and limiting those that are highly processed.

Many whole foods, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, don’t have an ingredient list because they don’t come in a packet. But some do, including:

• canned or frozen vegetables, such as a tin of black beans or frozen peas

• canned fish, for example, tuna in springwater

• plain Greek yoghurt.

These sorts of food items can contribute every day to a healthy balanced diet.

What is an ultra-processed food?

A shorter ingredient list also means the product is less likely to be an ultra-processed food.

This describes products made using industrial processes that combine multiple ingredients, often including colours, flavours and other additives. They are hyperpalatable, packaged and designed for convenience.

Ultra-processed foods often have long ingredient lists, due to added sugars (such as dextrose), modified oils, protein sources (for example, soya protein isolate) and cosmetic additives – such as colours, flavours and thickeners.

Some examples of ultra-processed foods with long ingredient lists include:

• meal-replacement drinks

• plant-based meat imitations

• some commercial bakery items, including cookies or cakes

• instant noodle snacks

• energy or performance drinks.

If a food is heavily branded and marketed it’s more likely to be an ultra-processed food – a created product, rather than a whole food that hasn’t changed much since the farm.

Nutrition is more than a number

Choosing products with a shorter ingredient list can work as a general rule of thumb. But other factors matter too.

The length of an ingredient list doesn’t tell us anything about the food’s nutritional content, so it’s important to consider the type of ingredients as well.

Remember that items are listed in order of their ingoing weight, so if sugar is second or third on the list, there is probably a fair bit of added sugar.

For instance, a food product may have only a few ingredients, but if the first, second or third is a type of fat, oil or sugar, then it may not be an ideal choice for every day.

You can also check the nutrition information panel. Use the “per serve” column to check the nutrients you’d get from eating one serve of the food. If you want to compare the amount of a nutrient in two different foods, it’s best to look at the per 100g/mL column.

Some examples of foods with relatively short ingredient lists but high amounts of added fats and sugars include:

• potato crisps

• chocolate

• soft drink.

Alcoholic beverages such as beer or wine may also have only a few ingredients, but this does not mean that they should be consumed every day.

---

Read more:
Even a day off alcohol makes a difference – our timeline maps the health benefits when you stop drinking

---

Non-food ingredients

You can also keep an eye out for cosmetic ingredients, which don’t have any nutritional value. These include colours, flavours, emulsifiers, thickeners, sweeteners, bulking agents and gelling agents.

It sometimes takes a bit of detective work to spot cosmetic ingredients in the list, as they can come under many different names (for example, stabiliser, malted barley extract, methylcellulose). But they are usually always recognisable as non-food items.

If there are multiple non-food items included in an ingredient list, there is a good chance the food is ultra-processed and not ideal as an everyday choice.

The bottom line? Choosing foods with a shorter ingredient list can help guide you choose less processed foods. But you should also consider what type of ingredients are being used and maintain a varied diet.

Margaret Murray does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Is it true foods with a short ingredient list are healthier? A nutrition expert explains – https://theconversation.com/is-it-true-foods-with-a-short-ingredient-list-are-healthier-a-nutrition-expert-explains-257712

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steffen A. Herff, Leader of the Sydney Music, Mind, & Body Lab, University of Sydney

Earlier this year, we asked a group of older adults what music they listened to when feeling lonely, and why. We discovered music was a powerful coping mechanism and source of escapism.

Other studies have also found listeners use music “to keep them company”. Such reports suggest music might be able shape listeners thoughts and imagination to provide social solace.

But can we establish scientifically how music affects imagination? In short, can music really be good company? Our latest research tried to find out.

Music and mental images

It’s common to experience mental imagery – that is a mental simulation or imagining something that is not there – while listening to music. Studies have found 77% of music listeners online, 73% of participants in the lab, and 83% of concert-goers report experiences of mental imagery during music listening.

What’s going on here? To get a better understanding, we previously carried out a series of experiments with mental imagery and music.

We showed participants a small clip from a video game called Journey, which featured a small figure travelling towards a mountain. We then asked them to imagine the continuation of the journey.

Participants reported how vivid or life-like their imagination was. In addition, they provided details on distance and time travelled in their mind and shared detailed descriptions of their imagined journeys.

Across multiple studies, we asked hundreds of participants to do the task in silence or while listening to various types of music. We observed much more vivid and emotionally positive imagination when listening to music. In addition, listeners’ imagined longer distances and time travelled when listening to music compared to silence.

Music shapes listeners’ imagination

Previous research has also found that what people imagine while listening to music often forms elaborate imagined stories. These share greater similarity among listeners with a shared cultural background.

Thoughts and themes in the imagined stories are shaped by the music. For example, heroic-sounding music induces empowering themes into imagined content.

Occurrences of new events in these imagined stories also tend to be similar between listeners, and are related to the pattern of musical tension and relief.

So there is strong scientific support for the idea that music can indeed affect what is imagined. But can it specifically induce imagined social interactions?

Our latest study is the first to explicitly investigate this question.

Does music make imagination more social?

We asked 600 participants to perform the imaginary journey task, either in silence or while listening to Italian, Spanish or Swedish folk music. To understand the potential effect of vocals and the meaning of lyrics on imagined content, the music was presented with or without lyrics to the participants, half of whom were native speakers and the other half non-speakers of the respective languages.

We then used tools from natural language processing – a set of computational methods for analysing language – to find underlying topics across participants’ reports of their imagined journeys.

One topic stood out: social interaction. Not only was it the predominant topic in participants’ reports of what they imagined, but it was also much stronger while listening to music compared to silence.

This suggests music can indeed affect social thought. The effect was stable regardless of whether listeners’ understood the lyrics or whether there even were lyrics in the first place.

But we can go one step further.

We used a generative AI system which produces images from text prompts (Stable Diffusion) to visualise participants’ descriptions of their imagined journeys.

By combining the natural language processing model with the image generator, we could visualise what the language processing model had learned to be a “stereotypical” representation of content imagined during silence and music listening.

The results of the computational model were further supported with manual annotations that showed three times more social interactions in journeys imagined during music listening compared to silence.

A shared imagination of music

Finally, we showed the images created from the descriptions to another group of people.

These people were able to pick out which images showed content imagined during music listening, and which showed content imagined while in silence – but they were only able to do it when listening to the same music that inspired the image.

This shows there is a shared understanding, or “theory of mind” of what another person might imagine while listening to a piece of music.

Taken together, our results suggest music can indeed be good company.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Can music be good company? Research shows it makes our imagination more social – https://theconversation.com/can-music-be-good-company-research-shows-it-makes-our-imagination-more-social-262348

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

The military junta that overthrew Myanmar’s democratically elected government in 2021 is preparing the ground for national elections in December and January.

The junta’s hope is these deeply flawed elections would consolidate its power and provide it with a fig leaf of legitimacy.

Helping its cause are moves by the Trump administration indicating it may be looking to bring the Myanmar junta in from the cold.

A week ago, US President Donald Trump removed sanctions on some allies of Myanmar’s generals and their military-linked companies, a move condemned by the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar.

Then came reports the Trump administration was exploring opportunities to access Myanmar’s rare earth minerals in an effort to sideline its strategic rival, China.

An election charade

On July 31, Myanmar’s military regime cancelled the nationwide state of emergency it had kept in place since the coup, a necessary precondition from 2008 for holding elections under the military-authored constitution.

Hours later, however, it reimposed a state of emergency in dozens of townships where opposition forces are either in control or gaining ground. It then declared martial law in these areas.

This underlined the junta’s lack of control over much of the country, which would make holding a free and fair election virtually impossible.

Last year, the military was unable to conduct a full census to be used to compile voter rolls. It was only able to count 32 million people in just over half the country’s townships; it had to estimate another 19 million people in areas outside its control.

This week’s order also handed power from the commander-in-chief of the military to a head of state, which was presented as a return to civilian governance. However, power didn’t actually change hands – Min Aung Hlaing, the leader of the coup and military, remains in control as acting president.

Opposition groups have said they will boycott the election, which the UN special rapporteur for Myanmar called a “fraud”.

Myanmar’s rare earths bonanza

Myanmar’s generals may also try to use Trump’s apparent interest in the country’s rare earths as leverage in their attempt to normalise relations with the United States ahead of a poll.

China is not only a large miner of rare earths, it dominates the processing required to use them, accounting for around 90% of global refining.

In recent years, China has begun reducing its own mining and increasing its extractions from neighbouring Myanmar, the third-largest producer in the world.

Rare earth mining has exploded in northern Kachin State since the coup, much of which is controlled by the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), an ethnic armed group that opposes the junta.

Late last year, it seized two important rare earth mining towns from the military and demanded a greater role in taxing exports to China, which initially closed the border in response.

However, trade soon resumed after the two sides reached a deal on export taxes.

No path forward for Trump

Two different proposals have reportedly been put to Trump for ways to access Myanmar’s rare earth deposits. One would entail opening talks with the junta; the other talking directly with the KIO.

Part of this effort could entail Trump reducing the punitive 40% tariffs his administration imposed on Myanmar to sweeten the deal.

Yet, challenges remain to making this a reality. The mines are located in the contested war-torn mountains of northern Myanmar bordering China, which are controlled by the KIO. There is no real infrastructure capable of transporting exports to India’s remote northeastern states in the opposite direction. The only other export route is south through territory controlled by the junta or other ethnic armed groups.

In addition, any attempt by the US and its allies to extract thousands of tons of rare earth material away from China’s borders would likely anger Beijing. It could
pressure the KIO by reducing fuel and food imports coming from China.

The group’s independence and ability to fight the junta relies on trade with China. It would not take long for such an agreement to fall apart.

Finally, rare earths mining is extremely polluting and dangerous. Even under Trump, it is unlikely US companies would gamble on the inevitable reputational and legal risks that would accompany such a project, especially in a war zone.

No reasons for warming relations

In essence, any attempt by the Trump administration to secure rare earths from Myanmar through any intermediary will not go anywhere.

There is therefore no justification, on any grounds, for the Trump administration to reduce sanctions on Myanmar’s generals or their cronies.

Likewise, although the junta is attempting to legitimise its brutal rule by offering a patina of constitutional processes, its elections will not bring real change to the country.

Myanmar’s people have repeatedly demonstrated over the past four decades, in every remotely free and fair election, that they do not want the military involved in the governance on their country.

If the junta does go ahead with this election, the world’s governments should call it out for the farcical charade of democracy it will represent. This includes the administration in Washington.

Adam Simpson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. As Trump lifts sanctions on Myanmar elites, is he eyeing the country’s rare earth reserves? – https://theconversation.com/as-trump-lifts-sanctions-on-myanmar-elites-is-he-eyeing-the-countrys-rare-earth-reserves-262594

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Nisa Salim, Director, Swinburne-CSIRO National Testlab for Composite Additive Manufacturing, Swinburne University of Technology

When your favourite dress or shirt shrinks in the wash, it can be devastating, especially if you followed the instructions closely. Unfortunately, some fabrics just seem to be more prone to shrinking than others – but why?

Understanding more about the science of textile fibres can not only help you prevent the shrinkage of clothing, but also might help you “rescue” the occasional garment after a laundry accident.

It’s all down to the fibres

To know more about clothing shrinkage, we first need to understand a little about how textiles are made.

Common textile fibres, such as cotton and linen, are made from plants. These fibres are irregular and crinkled in their natural form. If you zoom deeper inside them, you’ll see millions of tiny, long-chain cellulose molecules that naturally exist in coiled or convoluted shapes.

During textile manufacturing, these fibres are mechanically pulled, stretched and twisted to straighten and align these cellulose chains together. This creates smooth, long threads.

On a chemical level, there are also links between the chains called hydrogen bonds. These strengthen the fibre and the thread and make it more cohesive.

Threads are woven or knitted into fabrics, which locks in the tension that holds those fibres side by side.

However, these fibres have good “memory”. Whenever they’re exposed to heat, moisture or mechanical action (such as agitation in your washing machine), they tend to relax and return to their original crinkled state.

This fibre memory is why some fabrics wrinkle so easily and why some of them may even shrink after washing.

How does washing shrink the fabric?

To understand shrinkage, we again need to zoom down to the molecular level. During laundering, hot water helps to increase the energy level of fibres – this means they shake more rapidly which disrupts the hydrogen bonds holding them in place.

The way a fabric is knitted or woven also plays a role. Loosely knitted fabrics have more open spaces and loops, making them more susceptible to shrinkage. Tightly woven fabrics are more resistant because the threads are locked into place with less room to move.

Additionally, cellulose is hydrophilic – it attracts water. Water molecules penetrate inside the fibres, causing swelling and making them more flexible and mobile. Adding to all this is the tumble and twist action inside the washing machine.

The whole process makes the fibres relax and recoil back to their natural, less stretched, crinkled state. As a result, the garment shrinks.

It’s not just hot water – here’s why

This doesn’t just happen with hot water, as you may have experienced yourself with clothes made of rayon, for example.

Cold water can still penetrate into fibres, making them swell, along with the mechanical action of the tumbling in the washing machine. The effect is less dramatic with cold water, but it can happen.

To minimise shrinkage, you may use cold water, the lowest spin speed or the gentlest cycle available, especially for cotton and rayon. Machine labels don’t always fully explain the impact of spin speed and agitation. When in doubt, choose a “delicate” setting.

What about wool?

Different fibres shrink in different ways; there is no single mechanism that fits all.

While cellulose-based fabrics shrink as described above, wool is an animal-derived fibre made of keratin proteins. Its surface is covered in tiny, overlapping scales called cuticle cells.

During washing, these cuticles open up and interlock with neighbouring fibres causing fibre entanglement or “felting”. This makes the clothing feel denser and smaller – in other words, it shrinks.

Why don’t synthetics shrink as much?

Synthetic fibres such as polyester or nylon are made from petroleum-based polymers, engineered for stability and durability.

These polymers contain more crystalline regions that are highly ordered and act as an internal “skeleton”, preventing the fibres from crinkling.

Textile scientists and engineers are also working on fabrics that resist shrinkage through advanced material design. Among promising innovations are blended yarns that combine natural and synthetic fibres.

Some researchers are working on shape-memory polymers that can change shape – or return to a previous shape – in response to temperature or water, for example. This is different to stretch fabrics (such as those used in activewear) that are made up of highly elastic fibres which “bounce back” to their original state after stretching.

How can I unshrink a piece of clothing?

If a favourite garment has shrunk in the wash, you can try to rescue it with this simple method.

Gently soak the item in lukewarm water mixed with hair conditioner or baby shampoo (approximately one tablespoon per litre). Then, carefully stretch the fabric back into shape and dry it flat or under gentle tension – for example, by pegging the garment to a drying rack.

The reason this works is because conditioners have chemicals known as cationic surfactants. These will temporarily lubricate the fibres, making them more flexible and allowing you to gently pull everything back into place.

This process can’t completely reverse extreme shrinkage but it can help recover some of the lost size, making the clothes wearable again.

Nisa Salim does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why do some clothes shrink in the wash? A textile scientist explains how to ‘unshrink’ them – https://theconversation.com/why-do-some-clothes-shrink-in-the-wash-a-textile-scientist-explains-how-to-unshrink-them-259388

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Meena Jha, Head Technology and Pedagogy Cluster CML-NET, CQUniversity Australia

We wash our hands, sanitise shopping trolleys and wipe down cafe tables. But what about our phones? We touch these devices dozens of times a day, and take them everywhere from the kitchen to the dining table, and even the bathroom.

Phones can be contaminated with many kinds of potential germs. When was the last time you wiped down yours – and with what?

If you use the wrong cleaning agents or tools, you could strip your phone’s protective coatings, degrade waterproof seals, or even affect its touch sensitivity.

Do phones really need cleaning?

Touchscreens get covered in fingerprints and smudges, so there are aesthetic and functional reasons to wipe down your screen.

Another reason comes down to potential health concerns. Whenever mobile phones are swabbed for microorganisms, scientists inevitably find hundreds of species of bacteria and viruses.

While not all of these cause sickness, the potential for transmission is there. We use phones while in the bathroom and then put them near our mouths, touch them while eating, and pass them between people in meetings, cafes, parties and classrooms.

Unlike hands, which can be washed many times a day, phones are rarely cleaned properly – if at all.

If you do want to sanitise your phone, it’s also important to not damage it in the process.

Some cleaning products will damage your phone

You might think a quick swipe with a household cleaner or hand sanitiser is a clever shortcut to keeping your phone clean. However, many of these products can actually degrade your device’s surface and internal components over time.

For example, both Apple and Samsung advise against using bleach, hydrogen peroxide, vinegar, aerosol sprays, window cleaners or high-concentration alcohol wipes (above 70%) on their devices.

Most smartphones are coated with an oleophobic layer – a thin film that helps resist fingerprints and smudges. Harsh chemicals such as alcohols, acetone or ammonia-based cleaners can strip this coating, making your screen more vulnerable to smudging, and diminished touch responsiveness.

Vinegar, a common DIY disinfectant, can corrode aluminium or plastic edges due to its high acidity. Bleach and hydrogen peroxide, though highly effective as disinfectants, are also too aggressive for the delicate materials used in consumer electronics.

High-alcohol content wipes may dry out plastics and make them brittle with repeated use.

In short: if the cleaner is tough enough to disinfect your kitchen bench, it is probably too harsh for your phone.

How should I clean my phone then?

The good news is that cleaning your phone properly is simple and inexpensive. You just need to follow the guidelines backed by major manufacturers. You should also unplug and remove any protective cases or accessories when cleaning your phone.

Most tech companies recommend using 70% isopropyl alcohol wipes (not higher), soft microfibre cloths, and anti-static soft-bristled brushes made of nylon, horsehair or goat hair to clean delicate areas like speaker grills and charging ports.

During the COVID pandemic, Apple revised its cleaning guidelines to permit the use of Clorox disinfecting wipes and 70% isopropyl alcohol on iPhones, provided they are used gently to avoid damaging screen coatings or allowing moisture to seep into the device.

Samsung offers similar advice, recommending users wipe down their phones with a microfibre cloth lightly dampened with a 70% alcohol solution, while steering clear of direct application to ports and openings.

Prevent accidental damage when using these tips

Never spray liquid directly onto the phone, as moisture can seep into ports and internal components, leading to short circuits or corrosion.

Submerging your phone in any cleaning solution is also risky, even for water-resistant models: the seals that prevent water from getting in, such as rubber gaskets, adhesives, nano-coatings and silicone layers, can degrade over time.

Avoid using paper towels, tissues, or rough cloths which may leave scratches on the screen or shed lint that clogs openings.

Finally, be cautious about over-cleaning. Excessive wiping or scrubbing can wear down protective coatings, making your phone more susceptible to fingerprints, smudges, and long-term surface damage.

How often should I clean my phone?

While there is no strict rule for how often you should clean your phone, giving it a proper wipe-down at least once a week under normal use would make sense.

If you regularly take your phone into high-risk environments such as public transport, hospitals, gyms, or bathrooms it is wise to clean it more frequently.

If you’re serious about hygiene, cleaning not just your hands but one of the things you touch most every single day makes sense.

Doing it wrong can slowly damage your device. But doing it right is simple, affordable, and doesn’t take much time.

Meena Jha does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Your phone is covered in germs: a tech expert explains how to clean it without doing damage – https://theconversation.com/your-phone-is-covered-in-germs-a-tech-expert-explains-how-to-clean-it-without-doing-damage-259908

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Niven Winchester, Professor of Economics, Auckland University of Technology

The global rollercoaster ride of United States trade tariffs has now entered its latest phase.

President Donald Trump’s April 2 “Liberation Day” announcement placed
reciprocal tariffs on all countries. A week later, amid financial market turmoil, these tariffs were paused and replaced by a 10% baseline tariff on most goods.

On July 31, however, the Trump Administration reinstated and expanded the reciprocal tariff policy. Most of these updated tariffs are scheduled to take effect on August 7.

To evaluate the impact of these latest tariffs, we also need to take into account recently negotiated free trade agreements (such as the US-European Union deal), the 50% tariffs imposed on steel and aluminium imports, and tariff exemptions for imports of smartphones, computers and other electronics.

For selected countries, the reciprocal tariffs announced on April 2 and the revised values of these tariffs are shown in the table below. The revised additional tariffs are highest for Brazil (50%) and Switzerland (39%), and lowest for Australia and the United Kingdom (10%).

For most countries, the revised tariffs are lower than the original ones. But Brazil, Switzerland and New Zealand are subject to higher tariffs than those announced in April.

In addition to the tariffs displayed above, Canadian and Mexican goods not registered as compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement are subject to tariffs of 35% and 25% respectively.

Economic impacts

The economic impacts of the revised tariffs are examined using a global model of goods and services markets, covering production, trade and consumption.

A similar model was used to assess the impacts of the original reciprocal tariffs and the outcome of a US-China trade war.

GDP impacts of the tariffs are displayed in the table below. The impacts of the additional tariffs are evaluated relative to trade measures in place before Trump’s second term. Retaliatory tariffs are not considered in the analysis.

An economic own goal

The tariffs reduce US annual GDP by 0.36%. This equates to US$108.2 billion or $861 per household per year (all amounts in this article are in US dollars).

The change in US GDP is an aggregate of impacts involving several factors.

The tariffs will compel foreign producers to lower their prices. But these price decreases only partially offset the cost of the tariffs, so US consumers pay higher prices.

Businesses also pay more for parts and materials. Ultimately, these higher prices hurt the US economy.

The tariffs decrease US merchandise imports by $486.7 billion. But as they drive up the cost of US supply chains and shift more workers and resources into industries that compete with imports, away from other parts of the economy, they also decrease US merchandise exports by $451.1 billion.

Global impacts

For most other countries, the additional tariffs reduce GDP. Switzerland’s GDP decreases by 0.47%, equivalent to $1,215 per household per year. Proportional GDP decreases are also relatively large for Thailand (0.44%) and Taiwan (0.38%).

In dollar terms, GDP decreases are relatively large for China ($66.9 billion) and the European Union ($26.6 billion).

Australia and the United Kingdom gain from the tariffs ($0.1 billion and $0.07 billion respectively), primarily due to the relatively low tariffs levied on these countries.

Despite facing relatively low additional tariffs, New Zealand’s GDP decreases by 0.15% ($204 per household) as many of its agricultural exports compete with Australian commodities, which are subject to an even lower tariff.

Although the revised reciprocal tariffs are, on average, lower than those announced on April 2, they are still a substantial shock to the global trading system.

Financial markets have been buoyant since Trump paused reciprocal tariffs on April 9, partly on the hope that the tariffs would never be imposed. US tariffs of at least 10% to 15% now appear to be the new norm.

As US warehouses run down inventories and stockpiles, there could be a rocky road ahead.

Niven Winchester has previously received funding from the Productivity Commission and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to estimate the impacts of potential trade policies. He is affiliated with Motu Economic & Public Policy Research.

– ref. New Trump tariffs: early modelling shows most economies lose – the US more than many – https://theconversation.com/new-trump-tariffs-early-modelling-shows-most-economies-lose-the-us-more-than-many-262491

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Andrew J. Martin, Scientia Professor and Professor of Educational Psychology, UNSW Sydney

If you had to do a test, how would you respond? Would you relish the chance to demonstrate your knowledge? Or worry you were about to fall short of the mark and embarrass yourself?

Research tells us students’ attitudes towards taking tests or doing exams can have an impact on their performance. This is because what they think about themselves, the test questions, and the consequences of the test can impact their motivation and focus during the test.

To date, this research has largely grouped students into two main types of test-takers. One group sees tests as a challenge they can cope with. Another sees tests as a threat they will not be able to handle.

But some studies have suggested these groupings may be too broad to give useful support to students.

In our new study, the largest of its kind, we explored Australian high school students taking a science test. By capturing diverse psychological data, such as students’ brainwaves and stress responses, we found there are four types of test-takers.

Our study

We studied 244 male and female students from three Sydney schools in years 8 to 10 as they did a science test.

It is the largest study of its kind to collate diverse information on students’ brain wave activity, physiological responses and self-reported attitudes while they are doing a test.

This is significant because this kind of research is usually done in labs with large functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machines, a setting quite different from a real classroom. Our approach allowed us to get a well-rounded look at the different psychological indicators at play when students do a test.

The students were part of a larger research project looking at science engagement. The test was developed by our research team, with guidance from science teachers.

How we set up our research

Students wore an electroencephalogram (EEG) headset during the test to capture their brain activity, via alpha and theta waves.

The alpha waves measured how much students were focusing on the test and the theta waves looked at the strain on their working memory (which students need to use to solve problems in a test). Both these capacities can be disrupted if a person feels threatened or stressed.

Students also wore a biometric wristband that measured their sweat glands. In our study, lower “electrodermal activity” scores indicated a calmer and more positive state, and higher scores indicated stress.

Midway through the test, students reported how confident they were about meeting the demands of the test and how anxious they felt about not meeting the demands.

We then used a statistical technique called latent profile analysis to help us identify different types of test-takers. This technique enables researchers to identify subgroups based on certain variables.

4 types of test-takers

We were able to identify four groups of students who had distinct patterns on these different measures.

1. Confident striders: these students took the test “in their stride”. They reported high confidence and low anxiety, and recorded an optimal balance of attention and working memory. Their wristband readings indicated they were calm. They made up 27% of the group.

2. Confident battlers: also reported they were confident and low in anxiety, but other data suggested they were battling behind the scenes. Their wristband readings suggested their “fight or flight” system was aroused. Their brain waves also showed their working memory did not have as much capacity to problem-solve as the confident striders, which also indicates a level of stress. They made up 8% of the group.

3. Ambivalents: these students were average across all of the indicators, reflecting that they didn’t see the test as a challenge or a threat. They made up 38% of the group.

4. Fearers: reported low confidence and high anxiety. Their wristband readings indicated they were stressed, and their brain wave readings showed they were not directing much direction to the actual test. They made up 27% of the group.

How did these test-takers perform on the test?

We then looked at the test performance for each of these four test-takers. Not surprisingly, confident striders were the highest achievers. Confident battlers also did well on the test, but not as well as striders. Ambivalents scored lower on the test, but not as low as fearers.

These results were measured against students’ previous science results (in school tests and assignments), because we wanted to know whether students performed above or below their usual level. This was to ensure we were measuring the impact of students’ psychological approach to the test, rather than just how good they are at science.

Taken together, our findings suggest that believing in themselves, confronting any fearful thoughts, and having a clear mind to concentrate on the task, puts students in the strongest position to perform well.

What can teachers do?

Our findings also provide guidance for teachers to target the factors that defined the test-takers.

• To help build confidence, students can be taught how to challenge doubts about themselves. This can include reminding students of their strengths as they approach the test. For example, students could reflect on how well they conducted the experiments in their science lessons if the test includes questions about those experiments.

• To ease anxiety, students can be taught constructive ways to think about challenging schoolwork. For example, students can remind themselves of the knowledge they have learned that will be helpful. Students can also be taught to use breathing and mindfulness exercises to ease stress. This can reduce a physical stress response and help focus their attention on the task at hand.

• To optimise working memory, for in-class assessments teachers can match the test to students’ abilities and prior learning. This means the test is challenging enough, but not so overwhelming that it excessively burdens working memory while they are problem solving. This can also help build confidence ahead of other, higher-stakes exams.

Andrew J. Martin received funding from the Australian Research Council and The King’s School for this research. He also receives funding from Commonwealth and state departments of education.

Emma Burns receives funding from the Australian Research Council, is an associate editor for the Australian Educational Researcher and is on the board of the Australian Educational Research Organisation.

Joel Pearson receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

Rebecca J. Collie receives funding from Commonwealth and State Departments of Education. She has also received funding from the Australian Research Council.

Roger Kennett received funding from the Australian Research Council and The King’s School for this research.

– ref. How do you feel about doing exams? Our research unearthed 4 types of test-takers – https://theconversation.com/how-do-you-feel-about-doing-exams-our-research-unearthed-4-types-of-test-takers-261552

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Bradley Smith, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, CQUniversity Australia

She’s six years old, lives in Brisbane and might just be one of the best resilience coaches on television.

We’re talking about Bluey, the animated Aussie pup whose adventures have captured the hearts of families around the world.

But as our new study reveals, Bluey isn’t just entertaining kids, she’s modelling how to to deal with life’s ups and downs.

Why is resilience so important?

Resilience isn’t just about “toughing it out”. It’s the ability to cope with challenges, adapt to setbacks and recover from difficulties. It’s a vital part of healthy child development.

Research shows resilience helps children manage stress, regulate their emotions, build better relationships, and even perform better at school. Without it, children may be more vulnerable to anxiety, depression and poor coping skills later in life.

Children today face growing mental health challenges, including around anxiety and emotional dysregulation. For example, a 2023 national resilience survey of almost 140,000 students found more than one in four primary and one in three secondary students reported high levels of psychological distress.

Research shows the earlier we support resilience-building, the better. Early interventions help build healthy coping skills before negative patterns take hold.

How TV can help

Storytelling in films, books and TV can show children how to navigate challenges – not through lectures, but by modelling behaviours like emotional regulation, problem-solving and empathy.

Animal characters in storytelling also offer valuable learning opportunities for children, who are naturally drawn to animals.

Bluey first aired in 2018. It has since become Australia’s most successful children’s program, with billions of views worldwide.

It is known for its realistic portrayal of young family life. Yet until now, no one had systematically examined how it – or any kid’s TV show – presents resilience on screen.

So we watched all 150 Bluey episodes

In our study, we analysed every episode of Bluey from seasons one to three. The 150 episodes added up to 18 hours of Bluey, Bingo, Chilli, Bandit and their friends.

For each episode, we looked closely at the storyline, characters and themes, identifying moments where a character faced a challenge and showed a resilient response.

To guide our analysis, we used the Grotberg Resilience Framework. This is a widely recognised model in psychology that breaks resilience into three key elements.

1. I have: involving the support systems around a child, such as family, friends, and community role models they can rely on.

2. I can: involving practical coping skills, like solving problems, managing emotions and asking for help when needed.

3. I am: involving a child’s inner strengths like confidence, optimism, emotional regulation and a sense of self worth.

‘It’s out of our hands’

Our research found nearly half of all episodes (73 out of 150) included a clear resilience message as either a primary or secondary theme.

Nearly two-thirds of the resilience moments were facilitated by a parent — most often Bluey’s mum. This fits with the “I have” category of resilience, which highlights how children draw strength from caring adults when things get tough.

For example in The Show (season two episode 19), Bingo accidentally drops a breakfast tray and bursts into tears. Mum gently models emotional coaching explaining her coping process: “I have a little cry, I pick myself up, dust myself off, and keep going.” Research shows that when caregivers model how to acknowledge distress, express feelings, and then recover with calm, children gradually learn to manage negative emotions effectively.

Later in the episode, Bingo repeats those exact words when things go wrong again.

‘Well, that was fun’

Bluey and her sister also frequently demonstrate practical coping skills on their own.

In Keepy Uppy (season one, episode three), the final balloon in a game pops. The kids pause, take it in, and smile. “Well, that was fun,” they say.

In a single moment, we see disappointment, emotional regulation, and reframing – the core of the “I can” category.

Everyday moments, powerful messages

We also see characters overcoming challenges with their own inner strength. In Seesaw (season two, episode 26) Pom Pom shows determination and self-confidence to get to the top of the seesaw and save her friends, in an example of “I am”. As she declares, “Pomeranians are a small but hardy breed”.

We found Bluey touches on almost all of the core elements of resilience: trusting relationships, emotional communication, problem-solving, self-regulation, empathy and more.

In Sheepdog (season three, episode 11), mum Chilli tells her family she needs “20 minutes” of alone time. Bluey is worried she’s done something wrong. Later, during play, Bluey gently echoes her mum’s words to a toy: “It’s hard work looking after you. I just need 20 minutes.”

That simple moment models self-care and perspective-taking as well as empathy. For kids, learning that grown-ups need rest too is a powerful message.

How to watch Bluey with your kids

Of course, no screen can replace real relationships. But when parents watch shows like Bluey with their kids, they become powerful teaching tools.

So the next time your child wants to watch an episode for the tenth time, don’t feel guilty – join them. When parents watch too, those moments become conversation starters. For example, “What do you think Bluey felt then?”, “Have you ever felt like that?” or “What would you do in that situation?”

Talking about what kids see on screen can help them reflect, process, and build the skills they need to cope, adapt and grow.

---

CQUniversity student Kelly Bohl and co-host of Bluey podcast Gotta Be Done Mary Bolling contributed to the original research on which this article is based.

Bradley Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Researchers watched 150 episodes of Bluey – they found it can teach kids about resilience for real life – https://theconversation.com/researchers-watched-150-episodes-of-bluey-they-found-it-can-teach-kids-about-resilience-for-real-life-262202

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sandra Garrido, NHMRC-ARC Dementia Research Development Fellow, Western Sydney University

Deep in your memory, your brain has created a playlist of music from your teenage years. Even though life has moved on, hearing that music now likely still brings up some really powerful emotions.

Why?

Well, as with anything to do with the brain and with emotions, it’s hard to say for sure. But it’s likely a bit to do with evolution, and a bit to do with some key neurological changes that occur in the teenage years.

Imagine the world of a prehistoric teenager

Changing hormones supercharge the limbic system, which is the emotional centre of the brain. Teens become emotionally sensitive and susceptible to intense mood swings.

At the same time, we start to become less reliant on our parents.

This increasing independence accelerates the need to forge close relationships with peers. We need to learn very quickly how to interpret the emotions of others, and develop strong memories of things that are safe or unsafe.

Imagine the world of a prehistoric teenager. No longer a child wholly dependent on their parents, the adolescent feels an instinctive drive to explore new territory and strike out on their own.

Away from their family’s protection, survival now hinges on bonds with peers.

Going it alone is fraught with danger. Belonging to a group becomes a matter of life or death.

The teen finds a new pack, which communicates crucial information to each other using body language or non-linguistic verbalisations. Variations in the voice pitch or the speed of speech signal urgency or excitement.

Strong emotional reactions – the fear of danger, the thrill of a successful hunt, an intense connection with a potential mate – ensure memories about what to fear and what to seek are deeply carved into this teenage brain.

The stronger the emotion, the deeper the memory.

The brains of modern teens aren’t much different

In today’s world, we seldom need to hunt for food or protect ourselves from predators trying to eat us. But modern teenage brains are still wired to react quickly and instinctively.

Modern teens will still strike out away from the safety of the family circle, learning to navigate the treacherous world of adolescent relationships.

As we all know – often from searingly painful personal experience – teenage brains are keenly attuned to non-linguistic social cues that signal acceptance or rejection by the pack.

We are evolutionarily wired to lay down deep memories in our brains of events that have had a strong emotional impact on us.

So what’s this got to do with teen music tastes?

Music can convey linguistic and non-linguistic emotion.

Lyrics can tell a story that makes us feel heard and understood. They might signal we belong and are connected – with the artist, with other fans, and with broader human experiences such as love, lust or loneliness.

The melody and beat communicate emotion too.

In fact, some scholars believe the very reason music exists is related to the non-linguistic elements of speech that our prehistoric ancestors may have used to communicate before spoken language developed.

Our brains may respond to these signals in music the way our prehistoric ancestors responded to expressions of urgency, excitement or peace from other members of the tribe.

The way music communicates and evokes emotion is what makes it so important in life, particularly during the teenage years.

Teenagers may spend several hours per day listening to music, particularly when going through periods of psychological distress.

During this period – when emotional experiences and the learning that comes from them are so crucial to learning to survive – music becomes a powerful tool.

It can act as a simulator for practising emotional skills, a guide to navigating emotional ups and downs and a key to finding connection and belonging.

In other words, the music that we hear in our teenage years becomes closely intertwined with the strong emotions we experience at that time.

A time of many firsts

The music of your teens was likely the backdrop to your first kiss, the anthem you sang along to with friends, and a source of comfort when your heart was first broken.

Evolution has programmed you to feel every moment of your teenage years profoundly, so you can learn important lessons about how to survive, become independent and connect with others.

At the same time, music may be tapping into an ancient, pre-language part of our brains.

The music that accompanied high-stakes moments of your youth is forever linked to the powerful emotions you experienced then, and deeply embedded in the brain.

That is why, for the rest of our lives, those songs act as a kind of musical key to a neurological time capsule.

Sandra Garrido does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why do I feel so emotional when I listen to music from my teenage years? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-feel-so-emotional-when-i-listen-to-music-from-my-teenage-years-260819

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Andrew Sinclair, Deputy Director of the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

World Athletics president Sebastian Coe recently announced a new rule for women athletes, requiring mandatory genetic tests to verify their biological sex.

This test must be done if athletes wish to compete in September’s World Athletics Championships in Tokyo.

World Athletics has said all athletes competing as women must have an SRY gene test to identify whether a male Y chromosome is present.

Any athlete whose test shows the presence of the SRY gene will be banned from competing in the women’s category in elite events.

Coe said the decision was made to ensure “the integrity of women’s sport” with World Athletics asserting:

The SRY gene is a reliable proxy for determining biological sex.

I argue the science does not support this overly simplistic assertion.

I should know, because I discovered the SRY gene on the human Y chromosome in 1990. For 35 years I have been researching it and other genes required for testis development.

A brief primer on testes and ovary development

If a human embryo has XY chromosomes, then at six weeks of development the SRY gene on the Y chromosome triggers a cascade of events involving some 30 different genes that lead to the formation of testes.

In simplest terms, the testes then produce hormones including testosterone, leading to male development.

However, if an embryo has XX chromosomes, a whole different group of genes come into play, ovaries form and the hormones produced result in a female.

We know making testes or ovaries requires a complex network of many interacting genes and proteins.

Some genes promote testis development while others promote ovary development.

Other genes either suppress ovary formation or antagonise testis formation.

Even once ovaries or testes are fully formed, we require other genes to maintain them. These genes don’t always function as expected, affecting the development of these organs.

How does this relate to sex testing of elite women athletes?

Changes or variants in the many genes that regulate the development of a testis or ovary can result in sex reversal or a non-functioning testis or ovary.

What do I mean by this?

If there is a change in the SRY gene so it does not function as usual, then a person can fail to develop testes and be biologically female. Yet they carry XY chromosomes and under the World Athletics tests they would be excluded from competition.

Other XY individuals may have a functioning SRY gene but are female – with breasts and female genitalia, for example – but have internal testes.

Importantly, the cells of these people are physically unable to respond to the testosterone produced by these testes. Yet, they would receive positive SRY tests and be excluded from competition.

At the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, eight of 3,387 women athletes had positive test results for a Y chromosome. Of these, seven were resistant to testosterone.

The SRY test isn’t cut-and-dried

World Athletics asserts the SRY gene is a reliable proxy for determining biological sex. But biological sex is much more complex, with chromosomal, gonadal (testis/ovary), hormonal and secondary sex characteristics all playing a role.

Using SRY to establish biological sex is wrong because all it tells you is whether or not the gene is present.

It does not tell you how SRY is functioning, whether a testis has formed, whether testosterone is produced and, if so, whether it can be used by the body.

Other problems with the SRY testing process

World Athletics is recommending all women athletes take a cheek swab or blood sample to test for the presence of SRY.

Normally, the sample would be sent to a lab that would extract DNA and look for the presence of the SRY gene.

This may be easy enough in wealthy countries, but what is going to happen in poorer nations without these facilities?

It is worth noting these tests are sensitive. If a male lab technician conducts the test he can inadvertently contaminate it with a single skin cell and produce a false positive SRY result.

No guidance is given on how to conduct the test to reduce the risk of false results.

Nor does World Athletics recognise the impacts a positive test result would have on a person, which can be more profound than exclusion from sport alone.

There was no mention from World Athletics that appropriate genetic counselling should be provided, which is considered necessary prior to genetic testing and challenging to access in many lower- and middle-income countries.

I, along with many other experts, persuaded the International Olympic Committee to drop the use of SRY for sex testing for the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

It is therefore very surprising that, 25 years later, there is a misguided effort to bring this test back.

Given all the problems outlined above, the SRY gene should not be used to exclude women athletes from competition.

Andrew Sinclair receives funding from NHMRC

– ref. World Athletics’ mandatory genetic test for women athletes is misguided. I should know – I discovered the relevant gene in 1990 – https://theconversation.com/world-athletics-mandatory-genetic-test-for-women-athletes-is-misguided-i-should-know-i-discovered-the-relevant-gene-in-1990-262367