Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Spear, Professor of Anatomy, University of Bristol

Many households will recognise this familiar exchange. One person insists an object simply isn’t there: impossible to find despite what they describe as a thorough and highly competent search. Another walks in, glances briefly at the same spot and points to it almost immediately.

“It’s right under your nose!”

This frustrating (for both sides) situation reflects something real about how the brain works. Finding objects in everyday environments relies on a process called visual search, and our brains are surprisingly imperfect at it. Even when something is directly in front of us, the brain can fail to register its presence. In other words, we are looking without seeing.

At first glance, searching for something seems simple. You scan a surface – a kitchen counter, a desk, the “everything” drawer – until the missing item appears.

But the brain cannot analyse every object in a scene simultaneously. Instead, it relies on attention, selecting certain features while filtering out the rest.

Psychologists often describe attention as a kind of spotlight sweeping across the visual field. Wherever that spotlight lands, information is processed in detail. Everything outside it receives far less scrutiny.

There is a practical anatomical reason the brain must constantly shift its gaze. The centre of the retina – the fovea – provides our sharpest vision. But it covers only a tiny part of the visual field, roughly the size of your thumbnail held at arm’s length. To inspect a scene properly, our eyes must repeatedly jump so that different parts of the environment fall onto this small, high-resolution patch.

Those jumps are called saccades, and they happen constantly. Even when you think you are staring steadily at something, your eyes are quietly darting from point to point.

Most of the time, this system works remarkably well. It allows us to navigate visually complex environments without becoming overwhelmed by information.

Looking without seeing

Seeing, it turns out, is not just about what reaches the eyes. It is also about what the brain expects to find. This phenomenon is known as inattentional blindness.

One of the most famous demonstrations of this involves a video in which participants watch a group of people passing a basketball and are asked to count the number of passes. While viewers concentrate on the task, a person in a gorilla suit strolls casually through the scene.

Roughly half the viewers never notice the gorilla at all.

The gorilla is not hidden. It walks directly across the centre of the screen. But the brain, focused on counting basketball passes, simply fails to register it.

If you have ever searched a kitchen counter for your keys only to have someone else pick them up instantly, you have experienced the same phenomenon.

Once visual information reaches the brain, it is processed along different pathways. One of these – often called the dorsal stream – runs toward the parietal lobe of the brain, an area that plays a crucial role in spatial awareness and directing attention. This helps the brain determine where objects are in space. This system plays a crucial role in guiding attention during visual search.

Do men and women search differently?

In describing this familiar household moment, I avoided invoking a particular stereotype. The one where it is my husband who cannot find the object sitting directly in front of him.

Studies of visual search tasks have found small differences in how men and women scan complex scenes. On average, women tend to perform slightly better at locating objects in cluttered environments, while men often perform better on tasks involving large-scale spatial navigation or mentally rotating objects in three dimensions.

The reasons for this are still debated, but part of the answer may lie in how we move our eyes while searching.

Visual search relies on shifting our gaze from one point to another – the previously mentioned “saccades”. Eye-tracking studies show that some people tend to scan a scene methodically, moving their gaze in a more systematic pattern. Others make larger jumps across the visual field.

A systematic scan is more likely to cover every part of a cluttered surface, increasing the chances of spotting something small, such as a pair of keys or the elusive kitchen scissors. Larger jumps, by contrast, can skip over areas entirely, leaving an object sitting in plain sight but never quite falling under the brain’s attentional spotlight.

Some evolutionary psychologists have suggested these tendencies may have deep historical roots in hunter-gatherer societies. However, there is limited evidence for this. Experience, familiarity with an environment, and simple differences in attention probably matter far more than gender alone.

Ultimately, visual search is less like scanning a photograph and more like running a prediction algorithm. The brain constantly guesses where something is likely to be and directs attention accordingly.

Most of the time those predictions are correct. Occasionally, they are not, and an object sitting in plain sight fails to match the brain’s expectations.

Which means the next time someone insists they have looked everywhere, they may well be telling the truth. They just haven’t looked in quite the right way.

Michelle Spear 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. It’s right under your nose – why some people can’t find things in plain sight – https://theconversation.com/its-right-under-your-nose-why-some-people-cant-find-things-in-plain-sight-277845

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mal James, Personal Chair of Fashion Design, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh

Fashion shows can often feel exclusive, reserved for the very rich, the very famous or the very well-connected. This perception has been aided by depictions of the catwalk in film and TV – think The Devil Wears Prada, Zoolander, Absolutely Fabulous – which simply confirm the widely held view of fashion as synonymous with artifice and superficiality.

Yet, while the catwalk is undoubtedly a stage for pomp and social peacocking, it is also a serious business. It can make or break a collection’s success, and launch designers and models into the fashion stratosphere. Catwalk: The Art of the Fashion Show at the V&A in Dundee unveils this reality, offering an access-all-areas glimpse into the intricate world of fashion, revealing great complexity beyond the perceived superficiality.

This exhibition is superbly co-curated by the museum’s Kirsty Hassard and Svetlana Panova, along with Jochen Eisenbrand and Katharina Krawcyzck of the Vitra Design Museum in Germany, where the show originated. It chronicles fashion’s 125-year catwalk journey, exploring its rich history and enduring cultural significance.

It was an Englishman, Charles Frederick Worth, who pioneered the catwalk in mid 19th-century Paris, where he revolutionised fashion presentations by using live models instead of static mannequins. Runway shows allowed models to showcase complete outfits and provided wealthy clients with a more immersive view of Worth’s designs.

By the early 1900s, these fashion parades held in Parisian ballrooms started to evolve into more theatrical events. This trend continued into the 1920s, when shows grew increasingly spectacular and decadent, with Gabrielle Chanel famously presenting models descending the mirrored staircase in her iconic atelier at 31 rue Cambon, Paris.

Fashion and history

On loan from the Balenciaga archive, and seen for the first time in the UK, there is an exquisite array of outfits presented on miniature wire mannequins. This display describes how, in 1945, as Paris emerged from Nazi occupation, the city faced a shortage of materials, making conventional fashion shows impossible. Titled “théâtre de la mode”, this ingenious solution presented haute couture at micro scale to buyers, press and clients, allowing Paris to reclaim its status as the fashion capital of the world.

The exhibition shows how post second world war, catwalk shows expanded in scale, ambition and location, with designers keen to make a lasting impression. André Courrèges and Paco Rabanne were pioneers in the 1960s, while from the 1980s onwards, Thierry Mugler and Jean Paul Gaultier helped to modernise presentations, connecting them with pop culture and mass audiences.

The emergence of the “supermodels” in the late 1980s and 1990s helped to turn catwalks into cultural phenomena. Groundbreaking shows, such as Versace’s spring/summer 1991, where models who were stars in their own right walked to George Michael’s Freedom, highlighted a dynamic synergy between fashion and pop culture.

By the late 20th century, designers including Alexander McQueen were creating unforgettable fashion moments, such as the No. 13 collection (spring/summer 1999), where model Shalom Harlow wore a white dress that was sprayed by two robots.

Notably, the exhibit dedicated to Hussein Chalayan showcases his contribution towards the transformation of fashion shows into more artistic and cerebral experiences. His 2000 After Words collection, featuring wearable furniture, challenged traditional norms and paved the way for more artistic presentations.

Spectacle, innovation, commerce

There is plenty of fashion spectacle throughout, the exhibition excelling with a curated selection of iconic pieces from the likes of Viktor & Rolf, Maison Martin Margiela, Vivienne Westwood, Loewe, Chanel, Prada, Louis Vuitton, Yohji Yamamoto and Iris van Herpen – the range is dazzling.

I was captivated by the voluminous but solemn blue Balenciaga velvet dress from the spring/summer 2020 collection by Georgian designer Demna Gvasalia. Evoking a Victorian silhouette, yet with no decoration and a tailored bodice, it reflects fashion’s historical roots in contrast with unfussy modern design.

The powerful silhouette and electric blue tone bring a seriousness to an otherwise radical or performative aesthetic. Positioned in the exhibition, it reminds us how modernity is always tethered to historical influences.

The exhibition showcases how catwalks have become crucial for brand marketing, merging art, commerce and entertainment, while engaging global audiences through digital channels. It includes invitations and artwork from key designers, along with miniature models of Chanel’s 2014 Supermarket and 2017 Space Rocket shows, offering insights into the intricate yet monumental scale of catwalk productions.

The curators have seamlessly integrated Scotland’s contribution to catwalk history too, charting the influence of fabrics like tweed and tartan, and featuring photographs from Glasgow’s Empire Exhibition in 1938, possibly Scotland’s earliest fashion show. There are also fascinating images from Dior’s inaugural Scottish shows in 1955 in Glasgow and at Gleneagles, echoed almost 70 years later with a 2024 Dior show (under designer Maria Grazia Chuiri) where models walked the exquisite topiaried gardens of Drummond Castle in Perthshire.

The exhibition includes the coveted label Le Kilt, featuring
an outfit from the 2024 show, created in collaboration with Dior, further highlighting the the fashion house’s Scotland connection. Prominent Scottish designers are also featured, such as Christopher Kane, Charles Jeffrey and the poignant inclusion of an outfit by the late Pam Hogg who died last November.

The exhibition highlights how catwalks can mirror societal changes and evolving beauty standards. I was thrilled to see the inclusion of Rick Owens’ spring/summer 2016 presentation, where a 40-strong group of female “steppers” stomped down the runway in poses and expressions that defied typical beauty expectations.

The show caters to diverse audiences and ages, featuring dynamic catwalk and backstage photography by British photographer Robert Fairer, who has captured the energy and spirit of the fashion industry since the early 1990s. Engaging and interactive exhibits also let audiences in on the inner workings of fashion shows, including hairstyling and make-up.

Fun selfie opportunities allow visitors to engage with fashion’s more flamboyant side which make you feel like part of the exhibition, rather than merely an observer. This excellent V&A show truly challenges and expands our perception of the catwalk, leading audiences towards a lasting and deeper respect for the art of fashion and its important and enduring influence.

Mal James 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. Catwalk: The Art of the Fashion Show reveals a spectacular 125 years of runway history – https://theconversation.com/catwalk-the-art-of-the-fashion-show-reveals-a-spectacular-125-years-of-runway-history-280286

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Taylor, Professor of Anatomy, Lancaster University

When missiles and drones strike populated areas, the images that follow tend to show destroyed buildings and burning streets. What they rarely capture is what happens inside the bodies of those nearby, including people who walk away apparently unharmed.

The injuries caused by modern explosive munitions are wide-ranging, often hidden, and can develop hours or days after the initial blast. Understanding them matters, not least because many of those affected in conflict zones are civilians, without the protective equipment that gives soldiers some defence against the worst effects.

The blast wave

The first thing to hit the body is invisible. Every explosion sends out a pressure wave travelling at enormous speed – up to 9,000 metres per second – that passes through tissue, organs and bone in an instant.

The body’s air-filled structures are most vulnerable. In the lungs, the wave compresses and then rapidly decompresses delicate tissue, causing bruising, tearing and internal bleeding. This “blast lung” can fatally disrupt the lungs’ ability to exchange oxygen and may kill within minutes.

The ears are similarly exposed. Even relatively small explosions – involving less than 80kg of explosive material – can damage the eardrum and the sensory nerves responsible for hearing. One study found that being within ten metres of a detonation makes hearing loss eight times more likely. In around one in three blast-related ear injuries in military personnel, the nerve damage is permanent.

The brain is particularly susceptible. Consisting of around 80% water, it is highly sensitive to pressure changes, and in built environments the blast wave bounces off walls and surfaces, converging from multiple directions at once. Evidence from Iraq and Afghanistan suggests that almost half of military personnel exposed to blasts suffered some form of brain injury – the leading cause of disability and death in those conflicts. Civilians face even greater risk, lacking helmets and body armour.

Symptoms range from concussion and disorientation – the “shell shock” of earlier wars – through to diffuse axonal injury, where the brain’s internal wiring is stretched and torn, and bleeding or swelling within the skull. Some effects are immediate; others emerge over hours or days as blood vessels in the brain narrow in response to the pressure, restricting blood flow to critical areas.

The eyes – fluid-filled and exposed – are also at risk. Blast injuries to the eye frequently have poor outcomes and can include ruptured globes, traumatic cataracts and a range of other serious damage. The heart and aorta can also be affected, in some cases causing a fatal cardiac event, while changes in heart rate, breathing and blood pressure may follow even in those not directly struck.

Abdominal organs are not spared. The small intestine, spleen and liver are the most commonly injured, though symptoms may not appear until well after the explosion.

Flying debris and the blast wind

Those who survive the initial pressure wave face further hazards almost immediately. Fragments of building materials, glass and metal become high-velocity projectiles, causing lacerations and penetrating injuries. This is followed by the blast wind – a powerful rush of air that can exceed hurricane force and hurl people against walls, vehicles and rubble.

The resulting injuries are similar to those seen in high-speed road traffic collisions: fractures, bruising, traumatic brain injury and, in severe cases, traumatic amputation.

Those who are then buried under collapsed structures face crush injuries, asphyxiation, and the risk that muscle breakdown from sustained compression will damage the kidneys or trigger cardiac complications.

The hidden toll

What makes explosive injuries particularly difficult to assess, and to treat, is that their full extent is often not immediately apparent. A person who appears to have escaped serious harm may be carrying internal injuries that only become life-threatening hours later.

In conflict zones, where hospitals are frequently overwhelmed and access to care is limited, this delay can be fatal. The visible destruction captured in satellite images and news footage represents only part of the picture. For many survivors, the damage is invisible, and the consequences can last a lifetime.

Adam Taylor 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. Beyond the rubble: the hidden, lasting damage that explosions cause inside human bodies – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-rubble-the-hidden-lasting-damage-that-explosions-cause-inside-human-bodies-279233

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adi Imsirovic, Lecturer in Energy Systems, University of Oxford

The world economy survived the shocks of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, which has had limited impact on economic growth. But the escalation of hostilities in the Middle East has transformed what had been, until early 2026, a surprisingly benign outlook into a far more uncertain one. It has created the ultimate test for how resilient the world economy really is.

Amid stalled ceasefire negotiations, the US president, Donald Trump, has threatened a blockade of vessels transiting through Iranian ports in the strait of Hormuz. This sent oil prices back up over US$100 (£74) a barrel. Meanwhile the current ceasefire is looking very shaky.

The key economic factor in this conflict is straightforward: the near-halting of shipments through the strait and the closure of energy infrastructure.

These elements have disrupted roughly one-fifth of global oil production and nearly another 20% of the world’s trade in liquefied natural gas (LNG). With little spare capacity elsewhere, the result has been a sharp and rapid surge in energy prices.

Forecasts of price surges for benchmark oils

This is a classic energy price shock. The consequences for the world economy are predictable in direction but uncertain in magnitude. The latest interim economic outlook from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) projects global GDP growth at 2.9% in 2026. This is almost unchanged from its forecast before the war started.

But the OECD report also highlights the conflict’s expected consequences: energy exporters gain from improved terms of trade, while importers – including most of Europe, Japan, Korea, and much of emerging Asia – face a squeeze on real incomes.

For example, US growth has been revised up by 0.3 percentage points (to 2%) while growth in the euro area and the UK have been revised down by 0.4 and 0.5 percentage points respectively.

When it comes to inflation, exporters and importers face similar cost increases. Inflation is expected to increase everywhere, with headline inflation in the group of G20 countries predicted to rise by 1.2 percentage points to 4%. The European Central Bank (ECB) has made similar predictions for growth and inflation.

But these estimates are based on specific (and possibly optimistic) assumptions about energy prices. In their baseline scenarios, energy prices are expected to peak below US$100 per barrel this quarter and begin falling gradually from the middle of the year – as priced in by oil futures markets.

And what about less benign scenarios such as a resumption of the conflict or Trump’s threatened blockade limiting traffic in the strait of Hormuz? Energy prices could stay higher for longer and would be unlikely to be eased by a temporary ceasefire.

The here and now

The most immediate impact of the war on the global economy has been a sharp shortage of distillate fuels, particularly gasoil and jet fuel. This disruption comes at a time of seasonally high demand, driven by agricultural planting and the approach of peak holiday travel, when air traffic typically rises.

Gulf oil producers are key suppliers of these fuels to Asian markets, leaving countries such as South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Australia especially vulnerable to supply constraints.

Compounding the problem, crude oil from the Gulf is particularly suited to producing jet fuel and diesel, and cannot easily be replaced by refining alternative grades of oil. As a result, distillate prices in affected markets have surged dramatically, in some cases rising by as much as 200%.

Further blockage of the strait will starve the global market of at least 10% of its demand. This would result in a “demand destruction” (the curtailment of demand for road and air travel in particular) that can only be achieved through raised prices.

If the war in Iran were to go on just for another couple of months, prices for Brent could reach US$120 per barrel. Six months of conflict could see prices exceed US$200 a barrel. This is because supply losses are cumulative – as commercial and strategic reserves are depleted, the supply risk increases.

Oil price projections if the hostilities continue

The ECB’s March 2026 projections for the euro area incorporate some of these scenarios. For example, in what it calls an adverse scenario where oil prices peak at US$120 and decline slowly, economic growth in the euro area becomes negative for 2026.

And in its most pessimistic scenario, oil prices shoot even higher (US$140), which results in a deeper recession and inflation reaching more than 6%.

The last two scenarios are the perfect example of the stagflationary world that policymakers dread: contracting output and high inflation. In this environment, the levers that they have at their disposal are severely constrained.

Central banks face a classic dilemma: raising interest rates to contain inflation risks slowing growth even more. But cutting them to encourage spending and faster growth risks increasing prices at precisely the wrong moment. The ECB’s data-dependent, meeting-by-meeting approach is the right posture, but it offers no easy exits.

Fiscal policy faces its own challenges. Governments will be tempted to protect households and firms from higher energy costs, as they did after the 2022 energy crisis. Some targeted support for the most vulnerable would be legitimate and necessary, but broad subsidies that suppress energy prices send the wrong signal.

Countries that import energy have become poorer, and policies that negate this fact will only sustain energy demand at a time when the opposite approach is required. Put simply, everyone needs to be more efficient or use less energy. And let’s not forget that governments, because of high levels of debt, now have even less fiscal room to support the economy through this crisis. With no clear path out of the hostilities, the resilience of the global economy is facing a very tough test.

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. The conflict in the Middle East has provided a true test of the resilience of the global economy – https://theconversation.com/the-conflict-in-the-middle-east-has-provided-a-true-test-of-the-resilience-of-the-global-economy-280385

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amy Pearson, Assistant Professor in Psychology, Durham University

Labels like autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and dyslexia are not new. But the way we understand them is changing.

In recent years, researchers have increasingly worked with neurodivergent people rather than simply studying them from the outside. That change has brought better access to diagnosis, more inclusive approaches in schools and workplaces and a growing challenge to the idea that neurological difference is something to be fixed.

Language sits at the heart of that change. But getting it right can feel daunting. Should we say “a person with autism” or “an autistic person”? Are medical terms respectful, or do they quietly reinforce stigma? And who gets to decide these things anyway?

For years, professionals were encouraged to use person-first language – phrases such as “person with autism” – to emphasise humanity over diagnosis. But research published in 2016 upended that assumption. Autistic people themselves, it turned out, largely preferred identity-first language: “autistic person”.

That finding has been repeated many times since. Until our recent study, however, very little was known about whether the same preferences applied across the wider neurodivergent community. So, our research team – all neurodivergent – set out to discover just that.

---

Read more:
What autistic people – and those with ADHD and dyslexia – really think about the word ‘neurodiversity’

---

In our new study, we surveyed more than 900 neurodivergent adults across the UK about their terminology preferences. Participants identified with a range of diagnoses, including autism, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, Tourette syndrome and stuttering. For each, we presented a list of commonly used terms.

Some were identity first, such as “dyslexic”. Others were person first, such as “person with dyslexia”. We asked people to rate how likeable and how offensive they found each term. Crucially, we also asked why. Those open-text responses revealed far more than a simple preference list.

What we found

Overall, most groups preferred identity-first language. Terms like “autistic people” or “dyslexic people” were seen as more likeable and less offensive. There were important exceptions. People with Tourette syndrome and people who stutter tended to prefer person-first terms.

And when we looked more closely, the picture became more complicated still. Some groups – particularly people with ADHD – felt that none of the available terms really fit. Many said existing labels were vague or failed to capture the full reality of their lives. “Attention deficit”, for example, was seen as too narrow. People described ADHD as affecting far more than focus, shaping energy, emotions, creativity and daily functioning in ways the term barely hints at.

In other words, the issue was not just how language was structured, but whether it worked at all.

Across diagnoses, people spoke powerfully about how certain words made them feel. Words such as “disorder” were widely disliked. Many felt they implied something broken or defective, rather than acknowledging that difficulties often arise because society is not designed with neurodivergent people in mind. Several participants said these terms reinforced stereotypes and shaped how others treated them.

Respect, identity and disagreement

Participants were also clear about one thing: people should be allowed to describe themselves in the way that feels right to them. Even among autistic participants – a group with a well-established preference for identity-first language – many stressed that others should be free to choose person-first terms if that reflected their own identity.

Community infighting over “correct” language was seen as unhelpful. Several people pointed out that neurodivergent communities face far bigger challenges than internal policing of words, including discrimination, exclusion and lack of support.

At the same time, participants drew a clear line between self-description and professional language. They felt that teachers, doctors, researchers and journalists should follow group-level community preferences when speaking in general terms – and be open to correction when they get it wrong. Who is using the language, and in what context, mattered enormously.

---

Read more:
Why it’s time to rethink the notion of an autism ‘spectrum’

---

What emerged most clearly from our study was that debates about language are rarely just about words. They are about power. About who gets to define whom. And about whether neurodivergent people are seen as fully human, with authority over their own lives and identities. Participants were often less concerned with perfect terminology than with intent, respect and action.

Terminology discussions are not just about language, but about the dehumanisation and associated stigma of people considered “disordered” or “abnormal”. Language shapes action. How we treat people is shaped by whether we see them as being worthy of the same dignity and respect that we afford to those we see as fully human. As such, self-determination, autonomy and respect sit at the centre of such language debates.

We recommend listening to neurodivergent people to find out about their preferences and using the words that they prefer, instead of solely being led by traditions which have developed without the input of the communities we are referring to. When it comes to dignity and respect, actions speak louder than words. People want to feel respected and accepted for who they are, regardless of the labels people use to describe their differences.

Aimee Grant receives funding from the Wellcome Trust and UKRI.

Monique Botha receives funding from the Leverhulme trust, Royal Society of Edinburgh. The Carnegie trust, and the Economic and social research council. I am also an advisory member of the Donaldson’s Trust.

Amy Pearson 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. What neurodivergent people really think about the words used to describe them – https://theconversation.com/what-neurodivergent-people-really-think-about-the-words-used-to-describe-them-271784

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalia López-Hornickel, Postdoctoral researcher, Department of Education, University of Bath

In adolescence, beliefs about fairness, equality and social roles are still taking shape. This includes teens’ views about gender – whether they support gender equality and their beliefs about gender roles in society.

Someone’s “gender attitudes” are how disposed they are to support gender equality. When this support is negative, we refer to it as sexism. Sexism is connected with gender inequality across societies, creating imbalances in parliamentary seats, salary gaps, and lack of access to professional and managerial jobs for women. This means that young people’s beliefs about gender matter. More traditional views are linked to risky and sometimes violent behaviour among boys.

But my recent study with colleagues shows that research on teenagers’ views about gender may be missing a key aspect. We found that over 24 years of international research, few quantitative studies – meaning studies that analyse numerical data to identify patterns and associations across groups – have directly examined the impact of schools on young people’s views about gender. Instead, they focused on other factors, such as parents’ views and if they were passed to their children.

But during the teenage years, when young people are still figuring out who they are, the influence of peers – such as their classmates – becomes stronger. Schools are central spaces where everyday experiences, such as classroom discussions and conversations with friends, can shape how young people understand and evaluate gender roles. Young people spend a large part of their daily lives in school: learning, debating, forming friendships and imagining their futures.

Only 9% of the articles we analysed focused on school factors, such as peer or classmate influence, school climate and teacher interactions, and their influence on views of gender equality. An even smaller proportion of studies examined the role of peer relationships specifically in the formation of gender attitudes.

This imbalance limits our understanding of how gender attitudes form. If we overlook the institutional settings in which young people encounter ideas, norms and authority beyond the family, we risk missing an important part of how views on gender equality develop.

Family is the primary socialisation space for young people – where they learn, from the earliest age, about relationships and social norms. However, families often have very different educational backgrounds, finances and exposure to public affairs, especially in unequal societies. This makes schools one of the few places where young people encounter diverse perspectives.

Why school is important

Schools provide opportunities to learn about democracy and promote critical thinking among students. My colleagues and I have carried out research exploring education in Latin America, looking at how schools can counter authoritarian views – the support of a strong central government that suppresses individual freedoms. Support of authoritarianism is linked to negative views of gender equality.

When teachers encourage open discussion in the classroom, students are exposed to different perspectives, which can challenge their views, reduce tolerance for corruption and weaken support for authoritarian ideas. Similarly, when civic knowledge is actively taught, students are more likely to support egalitarian views about gender. These kind of views can include, for instance, that women and men should both be able to hold high positions in politics, and that they should be paid equally.

This means that schools are not neutral spaces. Classroom dynamics can promote critical thinking. Conversely, they can become a breeding ground for the spread of authoritarian ideas if they reinforce stereotypes and hierarchical views, often amplified by peer dynamics.

In that sense, classrooms are vital spaces for educational systems that want to promote equality and democratic values. Therefore, when they are not considered in research, we risk a lack of evidence to structure rigorous policy debates, ultimately relying on assumptions.

We’re currently seeing a a worldwide backlash against gender equality. Millennials and gen Z are more likely to agree than older generations that promoting women’s equality has gone so far that “we are discriminating against men”.

Education is frequently suggested as part of the solution. Yet the evidence on how schools shape gender attitudes remains limited. In that sense, strengthening research on institutional influences is necessary for informed policy.

Young people spend thousands of hours in classrooms during the years when their views about society take shape. Ignoring this environment means overlooking one of the few institutions that reaches nearly everyone. If education is to play a real role in advancing gender equality, schools must be studied as carefully as families.

Natalia López-Hornickel received funding from South West Doctoral Training Partnership (SWDTP) to develop her doctoral studies.

– ref. School is an important place for teens to learn about gender equality – but research overlooks it – https://theconversation.com/school-is-an-important-place-for-teens-to-learn-about-gender-equality-but-research-overlooks-it-276299

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Diana R. Andrade-Linares, Postdoctoral Fellow in Microbial Ecology, University of Limerick

Tiny organisms on the ground – bacteria and fungi – have a “superpower” that allows them to reach up into the atmosphere and pull down the rain, according to a recent study.

To understand how a microbe can control a storm, we first have to look at how clouds become rain. High up in the atmosphere, water doesn’t always freeze at 0°C. Temperatures are normally much lower at cloud level but pure water can stay liquid down to a bone-chilling -40°C.

Most rain starts as ice. In the atmosphere, clouds are full of “supercooled” water – liquid that is colder than freezing but hasn’t turned to ice yet because it has nothing to hold onto.

For a cloud to turn into rain or snow, it needs a “seed”– a tiny particle for water molecules to grab onto so they can crystallise into ice, then fall from the clouds as rain. Dust, soot and salt – swept into the clouds by wind – can do this, but they aren’t very good at it. They usually require the temperature to drop significantly before they start working. This is where biology enters the frame.

Meet the ice-makers

For decades, scientists have known about ice-nucleating proteins (INpros) found in certain bacteria like Pseudomonas syringae. Bacteria travel from plant leaves into the clouds to trigger rain. They use special proteins to force water to freeze at temperatures as high as -2°C.

However, the recent discovery published in the journal Science Advances has revealed a new player in the climate game: fungal INpros. While bacteria keep their ice-making proteins tucked away on their “skin”, fungi (mainly Fusarium and Mortierella) secrete these proteins into the soil around them. Their structure makes these fungal proteins water soluble and smaller than the bacterial ones, and with a high ice seeding activity which makes them more effective cloud seeds.

Making it rain

This leads us to the bio-precipitation cycle. Imagine a forest floor covered in these fungi. As the wind kicks up, their microscopic ice-making proteins are launched into the clouds. Once there, they act as powerful “seeds”.

Even in relatively warm clouds (above -5°C), these fungal proteins can force water to crystallise into ice. As these ice crystals grow, they become heavy and fall. As they drop through warmer air, they melt and turn into rain.

This creates a loop:

• fungi grow in the damp soil of a forest

• proteins from the fungi are swept into the sky

• rain is triggered by these proteins, watering the forest below

• growth of more fungi is triggered by the rain, starting the cycle over again.

Unlike the Pseudomonas bacteria, which use ice to “attack” and damage crops to access their nutrients, these Mortierella fungi are peaceful plant partners. They aren’t looking to destroy. Instead, they secrete their ice-making proteins into the surrounding soil, which seems to create a protective shield from harsh conditions and a nutrient-rich environment that helps both the fungus and the plant flourish.

The new discovery about fungi is exciting because it shows that even organisms buried in the soil can influence the atmosphere, adding a new dimension to this ancient partnership between life and the sky.

It’s a missing piece in the puzzle of how life and the global climate shape one another. This ice-making ability probably gives the fungi a survival edge. They use ice to pump moisture toward their mycelia (a vast, underground web of tiny fungal threads), shield themselves from jagged frost damage and hitchhike through the clouds to reach new homes.

The evolutionary heist

The new research also uncovered how fungi of the Mortierellaceae family gained the ability to create ice. When the researchers studied the fungi’s genetic code, they found that these fungi didn’t evolve this trait on their own. Millions of years ago, they “borrowed” the genetic code for it from bacteria, through a process called horizontal gene transfer.

Think of it as a biological “copy and paste”. While most animals only inherit DNA from their parents, microbes can swap snippets of genetic code with their neighbours, giving them an instant evolutionary upgrade.

However, these fungi are much more efficient at making ice than the bacteria because the fungus secretes (sweats out – meaning they exist outside the fungal cell) these proteins, they can coat the environment around it and stay active in the soil after the fungus has moved on. These proteins are incredibly hardy. They can wash into streams, dry up into dust, and get swept into the sky by the wind.

Why this matters

This discovery could change how researchers view conservation. If we clear-cut a forest – stripping every tree away and leaving the land bare, we aren’t just losing trees. We might be breaking the biological engine that triggers regional rainfall.

As we face a changing climate with more frequent droughts, understanding these fungal INpros could be vital. We might one day use these natural, biodegradable proteins for “cloud seeding” to create rain.

Many countries (like the UAE, China and parts of the US) already have cloud-seeding programs to protect crops from frost. But this kind of cloud seeding relies on silver iodide – a heavy metal that can linger in the environment.

The fungal proteins offer a natural, biodegradable alternative. They could also protect crops from frost. By forcing ice to form early and smoothly, they release a tiny burst of heat that acts like a thermal blanket for the plant.

We could use them to make snow on ski slopes with less energy, create better-tasting frozen foods by preventing large ice crystals from damaging food cells, or even develop eco-friendly cooling systems that don’t rely on harsh chemical refrigerants.

The next time you’re caught in a sudden downpour, take a deep breath. That “smell of rain” might just be the scent of the these little organisms telling the clouds it’s time to let go.

Diana R. Andrade-Linares 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. How hidden soil fungi ‘steal’ bacterial DNA to control the rain – https://theconversation.com/how-hidden-soil-fungi-steal-bacterial-dna-to-control-the-rain-279618

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alex Dryden, PhD Candidate in Economics, SOAS, University of London

In 2023, Ecuador struck an unusual deal. Instead of simply paying back its debts, it refinanced part of them on better terms and promised to spend the savings protecting the Galápagos Islands.

This type of transaction, known as a debt-for-nature swap, is often described as a “win-win”: lower debt costs for governments, and long-term funding for some of the world’s most fragile ecosystems.

Debt-for-nature swap transactions offer a range of benefits. Countries facing heavy debt burdens can reduce their liabilities, while bondholders are able to offload risky assets. At the same time, the financial saving is redirected into environmental projects, supporting vulnerable ecosystems.

These deals have been around since the late 1980s. Early swaps were typically small and led by environmental charities, which bought distressed debt cheaply and converted it into local funding for conservation. Through the late 1980s and early ’90s, there was a wave of enthusiasm for such deals, particularly in Latin America and Africa.

---

Read more:
Your essential guide to climate finance

---

That enthusiasm faded in the 2000s, as large-scale debt relief programmes reduced both the availability of distressed debt and the need for swaps. But in recent years, interest has returned. With banks now involved, today’s swaps can be far larger and more complex. Ecuador’s 2023 deal involved US$1.6 billion (£1.2 billion) of debt.

Since 1989, 169 debt-for-nature swap deals have been agreed, involving US$8 billion of debt being converted to fund environmental initiatives. But despite their appeal, they have not been universally popular.

Why Asia lags behind

Africa and Latin America have dominated these deals. By contrast, Asia has lagged behind, comprising just 13% of total global swaps. That’s surprising at first glance. Asia has an abundance of viable environmental projects, from vast biodiverse tropical forests in Malaysia to the carbon-storing mangroves of Indonesia and the threatened coral reefs in the Maldives.

So why have Asian economies not embraced debt-for-nature swaps?

During the peak of these swaps, many Asian economies had relatively little debt held in international markets, leaving less available to restructure. Borrowing was also comparatively cheap, reducing the incentive to pursue swaps.

Without a large amount of distressed, tradable debt, the financial mechanics that made swaps attractive and logistically viable in other regions were largely absent in Asia.

There were also political and institutional factors. Debt-for-nature swaps often involve foreign charities, foreign governments or international investors that influence how environmental funds are used within the country in question. In parts of Asia, concerns about sovereignty and external interference have made governments more cautious about such arrangements.

But today, that picture is changing. Across Asia, debt levels have risen sharply, particularly after the COVID pandemic. At the same time, more governments are borrowing through international bond markets, meaning a larger share of their debt is now held by private investors – and can, in principle, be bought back or restructured.

Potential candidates include Indonesia, Laos, Mongolia and the Maldives, where growing debt pressures combined with significant environmental assets provide the core ingredients required to justify effective swaps.

A tool gaining traction

Despite the resurgence in interest in debt-for-nature swaps, even the largest deals often only address a small share of total debt.

The latest structures can be complex and costly to arrange. There are also concerns about both national sovereignty and impinging on the rights of local communities, whose lives are often most affected by the transaction.

By trying to explicitly link debt relief to environmental outcomes, well-designed swaps can create dedicated, long-term funding streams for conservation. This can help protect ecosystems that support livelihoods, store carbon and buffer communities against climate-related consequences such as storms and rising sea levels.

As climate change accelerates and debt burdens rise, countries – including across Asia – are being squeezed between repaying creditors and protecting their future. Debt-for-nature swaps won’t solve either problem alone, but they can offer one of the few ways to tackle both issues at once.

Alex Dryden 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. Turning debt into forests: the finance tool making a comeback – https://theconversation.com/turning-debt-into-forests-the-finance-tool-making-a-comeback-278582

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anja Shortland, Professor in Political Economy, King’s College London

The art market is riddled with fakes and forgeries. Yet in most countries, those trading in genuine masterpieces are left to their own devices when it comes to monitoring art sales – creating their own ways to flag problematic objects and verify the authenticity of others.

New art laws in Greece, however, suggest the country is taking the business of art legislation more seriously.

In-depth scrutiny can be extremely lucrative for sellers of art. A reputation for selling only the highest-quality art attracts both moneyed collectors and art investors, with competitive bidding driving prices into the stratosphere.

High commissions pay for entire departments of specialists in major auction houses, as well as connoisseurs, academic researchers and companies offering forensic, art historic and legal advice.

Online marketplaces often adopt a radically different approach to selling art: little or no scrutiny, vague claims of authenticity, and a clear norm of “caveat emptor” (buyer beware).

Anyone buying in this market benefits from low prices for attractive objects, but buyers should not expect them to pass scrutiny in terms of authenticity or legitimacy.

Once you start looking closely, the art market turns out to be segmented into several distinct sub-markets, each with its own rules of play that assure a certain minimum quality. Each institutionalised level of due diligence generates greater buyer trust, and justifies a price premium over the lightly monitored cheap and cheerful objects traded as “collectibles” on internet platforms.

---

Read more:
Selling stolen art is tricky, so why even bother heisting it? An expert explains

---

The new art laws in Greece suggest the state may be interested in tidying up the unregulated chaos of this market. It has specifically criminalised the creation and intended distribution of fakes and forgeries for the art and collectibles market, and their misrepresentation as higher value objects to potential buyers.

For those convicted, there is a sliding scale of penalties, depending on the volume and value of the intended fraud. Objects deemed fakes or forgeries may be impounded and destroyed.

Forgeries are big business in the mid-market, which deals in artworks priced from a few hundred to tens of thousands of pounds. In 2024, Italian police forces dismantled a trans-European network producing and distributing sophisticated replicas of the works of Banksy, Gustav Klimt, Andy Warhol and Picasso with an estimated market value of €200 million (£174 million).

In 2025, German police seized forged Rembrandt, Frida Kahlo and Picasso paintings intended for sale for millions of Euros. They arrested ten people including an elderly man who provided the seller with fake authentication services.

Given the depth of knowledge in the art market, the reliance on a single “expert” report in many cases suggests there could be a degree of cooperation between forgers, buyers and the distributors of their works.

The new Greek law names and targets all aspects of this value chain. It allows the police to intervene and seize objects even before a sale has taken place. Intended fraud – for example, advertising a forged painting as a genuine masterpiece – is sufficient to merit an investigation.

It is, though, highly unlikely that the Greek police will proactively search for fakes and forgeries. The expertise to identify fraud is held in the art world, and police will continue to rely on tip-offs from experts.

Forgeries mostly come to the attention of genuine experts when a fraud victim tries to resell or donate an artwork to a museum – usually many years after acquiring it. For the scammed collector, the best way forward is to return the object to the seller for a refund. As they have a reputation to protect, dealers are often surprisingly amenable to hushing up the problem.

However, the art world is a close and gossipy community, so information of several suspicious objects from the same source spreads. The re-examination of other artworks connected to that seller sometimes turns up more problems. If the seller is unresponsive to peer pressure, a consensus may emerge that they should be put out of business. It is often only at this point that the police are approached.

The new laws in Greece establish a sound basis for the trial and conviction of egregious fraudsters. They have already been used against the business of a well-known art dealer in Athens, whose stock is alleged to have included hundreds of fakes and forgeries. The dealer now faces charges on multiple offences – including embezzlement, fraud and money laundering, all of which are denied.

The sliding scale of penalties – including lengthy prison terms and significant fines – will probably change the behaviour of dealers and auctioneers who may have laughed off previous sanctions, tempted by excellent profit margins.

In Greece, at least, it is now less attractive to sell fishy objects, and riskier to do so repeatedly. The threat of destroying identified forgeries may backfire, however.

While withdrawing forgeries from circulation protects subsequent buyers, it can also make it less likely that owners choose to investigate or report issues of authenticity. So, the positive short-term effects of this well-intended package of laws may eventually turn negative, as it discourages information about fraud to come to light.

Anja Shortland 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. Greece’s new laws crack down on art fakes and forgeries – an expert in the market for shady art explains why they might backfire – https://theconversation.com/greeces-new-laws-crack-down-on-art-fakes-and-forgeries-an-expert-in-the-market-for-shady-art-explains-why-they-might-backfire-280386

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matilde Rosina, Assistant Professor in Global Challenges, Brunel University of London

The UK government is planning to make it significantly harder for migrants to obtain permanent residence. If the proposals go ahead, the UK would become more restrictive than most other high-income democracies. In the case of refugees it would create a situation that is arguably without precedent among peer countries.

The UK’s home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, intends to double the qualifying period for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) (the UK’s form of permanent residence) from five to ten years for most migrants, and increase it up to 20 for some.

Eligibility requirements would also tighten. Migrants would need a clean criminal record (removing the previous 12-month sentence threshold), a higher English language standard and earnings above £12,570 per year for at least three years. This will disproportionately affect those least likely to be in full-time employment, including dependants of people on work visas, family visa holders and refugees.

The ten-year baseline for settlement would then be adjusted up or down based on individual circumstances. High-skilled workers, including NHS nurses and doctors, or those earning above £125,140, for instance, could qualify after five or three years respectively. Those on family visas (such as those married to a British citizen) or who are judged to be making efforts at “integration” such as by volunteering in the community could qualify after five to seven years. Those who have claimed benefits would have to wait up to 20 years, while for those who have entered the country illegally or overstayed their visa would have to wait up to 30 years to settle.

---

Read more:
Labour’s plan for migrants to ‘earn’ permanent residency turns belonging into an endless exam

---

For low-skilled workers, the qualifying period would start at 15 years. For refugees it would be 20, with no reductions available unless the person works or studies. In this case, their status would convert to a Protection Work and Study visa, subject to review every 30 months.

The government has cited the increasing number of people granted settlement as one of the drivers behind the reforms. This figure has been rising since 2017, reaching 163,000 in the year ending June 2025. The Home Office projects this figure will increase significantly over the next five years.

The reforms are also framed as a response to irregular migration. The government has cited the Danish model as inspiration, arguing that the longer timeframe will “strongly discourage” entry without documents and reduce the “pull factors” attracting people to the UK. However, research suggests that deterrence-based policies like this are a weak tool for reducing immigration: decisions to migrate are driven primarily by conditions in countries of origin, not by entitlements in destination countries.

---

Read more:
Is the Rwanda plan acting as a deterrent? Here’s what the evidence says about this approach

---

The Home Office has claimed these amendments do not require legislation, meaning they do not need to be put to a parliamentary vote. But opponents have signalled the intention to force a symbolic vote to make their views clear. Much of the concern has to do with the plans to apply the changes retrospectively.

An international outlier

These proposals would make the UK an outlier compared to other major economies. In the EU, the closest equivalent to ILR is the long-term resident status for third country nationals. This requires people to live in the EU on a valid visa for at least five years, and confers long-term residence with limited conditions. This exists alongside national schemes, such as Italy’s Permesso di Soggiorno UE per soggiornanti di lungo periodo and Germany’s Niederlassungserlaubnis that follow a similar approach.

Denmark and Ireland are the only two EU member states that opted out of the EU-level scheme. These countries have special arrangements for immigration and asylum policy (just like the UK did, before Brexit). They set their thresholds at eight and five years respectively, with Denmark’s reducible to four in some cases.

The UK government claims that making refugee status temporary and increasing the time for permanent residency contributed to asylum applications reaching a 40-year low in Denmark in 2025. However, this drop coincided with broader EU-wide trends in asylum flows, making it difficult to attribute the decline to domestic policy changes alone.

Among Anglophone countries, the picture is similar. The US green card confers permanent residence without a formal minimum years requirement. Though in practice, the vast majority of employment-based applicants previously held a temporary visa. Canada has no blanket time requirements, and refugees admitted through resettlement schemes can obtain permanent residency immediately.

Raising the standard qualifying period for permanent residence to ten years would make the UK more restrictive than most other comparable democracies in Europe and North America, and one of the strictest globally. Extending it to 20 years for refugees would make the UK’s approach unprecedented among peer countries.

These new requirements are closer to those of some of the hardest countries to achieve permanent residency such as Qatar and Japan, which require 20 and ten years respectively, for most cases.

Research suggests that migration policies which make migrants’ status temporary make them less likely to integrate. In particular, a study on Denmark found that making permanent residence harder to obtain for refugees reduced the chances of them being employed. People who believed they could not meet the new requirements became discouraged and disengaged from the labour market – the opposite of what the government wanted.

The UK’s proposed changes risk producing a similar dynamic, trapping people into what has been described as an “extended limbo”. Given these risks, the government should be careful in treating this approach as an end in itself when it comes to increased immigration.

Matilde Rosina 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. The UK could make migrants wait up to 20 years before becoming settled – making it one of the longest waits in the world – https://theconversation.com/the-uk-could-make-migrants-wait-up-to-20-years-before-becoming-settled-making-it-one-of-the-longest-waits-in-the-world-279036