But if to provide recommendations to a tourist is complex, to provide them to a group is even more. The emergence of personality computing and personality-aware recommender systems (RS) brought a new solution for the cold-start problem inherent to the conventional RS and can be the leverage needed to solve conflicting preferences in heterogenous groups and to make more precise and personalized recommendations to tourists, as it has been evidenced that personality is strongly related to preferences in many domains, including tourism. Although many studies on psychology of tourism can be found, not many predict the tourists’ preferences based on the Big Five personality dimensions. This work aims to find how personality relates to the choice of a wide range of tourist attractions, traveling motivations, and travel-related preferences and concerns, hoping to provide a solid base for researchers in the tourism RS area to automatically model tourists in the system without the need for tedious configurations, and solve the cold-start problem and conflicting preferences. By performing Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis on the data gathered from an online questionnaire, sent to Portuguese individuals from different areas of formation and age groups ( The last two decades have shown that personalization is the key to deliver the best recommendations in Recommender Systems (RS) RS for tourism, solving the cold-start problem and eliminating the need for users to fill long and tedious questionnaires and configurations , and help tourism GRS researchers automatically model the tourists profile based on their personality without the need for long initial configurations or the users continuous interaction, and therefore help in the cold-start problem, and how those travel aspects, along with personality, can be used to solve conflicting preferences in groups.n = 1035 viable responses. The Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for extracting and confirming the proposed tourist attractions categories were improved, corroborating the preliminary work  groups of tourists bring and to provide a satisfactory list of recommendations are the main concerns of GRS for tourism. Some prototypes of GRS for tourism can be found in literature, like the chat-based GRS of Nguyen and Ricci  where thThe consideration of GDM techniques can be the leverage needed to reach a consensus on the final recommendations list, and will be further studied in future works. Predicting the users’ preferences based on their personality is the beginning of that path.The increased interest on psychology of tourism is undeniable, since it is evidenced that psychological aspects are related to the choice of specific destinations Jafari . But whiMany tourist typologies/roles can be found in literature and represent the role played by tourists while experiencing a destination  Educational—correlates organized mass tourist and educational tourist with agreeableness; (3) Independent—combines independent mass tourists I and II and seeker; (4) Culture loving—correlates archeologist and high-class tourist with extraversion; (5) Open minded and sportive—combines anthropologist and sport tourist with extraversion; (6) Risk seeking—results from the correlation of action seeker, explorer and jetsetter; (7) Nature and silence loving—correlates escapist I and II.Although many studies on psychology of tourism for different tourism sectors can be found, many are about typologies of tourists Addison , which aKvasova  studied Jani  and DeliAll these studies show that the travel behavior and preferences are related to the tourists’ personality. However, none, to the best of our knowledge, correlates the Big Five personality factors to the choice of raw categories of tourist attractions, but instead, to tourist typologies. With this work, we intend to fill that gap by proposing a model to predict the preference for a wide range of tourist attractions, adapted from the “Thesaurus on Tourism and Leisure Activities” of the World Tourism Organization RS and thus provide better recommendations. And, if, for instance, personality could be related to the motives behind traveling, it would be easier to propose certain attractions or destinations by just knowing the tourist’s personality. As Heitmann  points oAs mentioned in Sect. Not many works that study the relationship between (Big Five) personality and traveling motivations were found, and the ones existing, to the best of our knowledge, aim to relate personality and the motivations for specific tourism niches or destinations, such as religious tourism and cruise ship tourists  and personality of religious travelers versus cruise ship tourists. Regarding religious travelers, the authors found openness to experience positively predicted Curiosity and discovery motivation and agreeableness negatively. Agreeableness and conscientiousness negatively predicted Out-of-routine motivation. Self and sociality was predicted by negative scores in openness to experience. A different pattern was found in cruise tourists, where openness to experience and agreeableness both positively influenced the curiosity motivation, and conscientiousness negatively. Out-of-routine motivation was negatively predicted by conscientiousness and neuroticism. Finally, openness to experience, extraversion (energy) and conscientiousness positively predicted Self and sociality motivation.A recent study of Scaffidi Abbate et al.  comparedThe findings in literature show that certain motivations for traveling in specific contexts can be predicted by personality dimensions. With this work, we intend to verify if that applies to a greater range of travel motivations, including the most common ones, abstracted from specific niches or destinations, and to propose a model to predict tourism motivations based on the tourists’ Big Five personality dimensions.To choose a travel destination is part of a process that starts with the need/desire for traveling RS recommendations. But how does personality fit in these all? Is it an influencing factor for those preferences and/or concerns?Many studies that relate tourist typologies or personality to travel-related preferences and/or concerns, especially concerns, could be found.Sandra Lee Basala ; Sandra Beside relating demographics, Jackson and Inbakaran  studied Considering three personality dimensions ), Maritz et al.  studied Using Plog’s psychographic model Plog , MorakabCarvalho et al.  studied Another study on COVID-19 pandemic RS recommended a tourist to visit the Eiffel Tower if she was afraid of heights, or to play an escape game with a dark and confined spaces theme. And where is personality in the middle of all those phobias? Mellstrom et al.  argued iAs pointed by Morar et al. , “it is n = 1063 responses (summed up to the 518 responses obtained in the previous study), collected from January to September 2020.This work continues the work presented in Alves et al. , 2020. Tn = 1035. Boxplots were also drawn in SPSS for each variable, but as the sample was not very large, the outliers found by this method were not removed. Inconsistent open responses were uniformized , for example, some respondents answered in “country of birth” variants of “Portugal”, like “Portuga” or “Portuguesa”, and so, all inconsistent situations were converted to Portugal. There were no missing values in the questionnaire, except for the sensitive questions, which were not mandatory.The aggregated sample was then cleaned for inconsistent responses and several univariate outliers were removed Pyle , using bUsing SPSS, several runs of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)  and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) methodologies Byrne  were conThe resulting BFI scale was then used to predict the preference for the (I) proposed tourist attractions, (II) travel-related preferences and concerns and (III) travel motivations, again using Structural Equation Modeling and CFA, applying the maximum likelihood method for estimation. To improve the models’ fit, the same adjustment process used in the previous CFA was applied. This resulted in the final proposed models: “Personality vs Tourist Attractions Preference” Fig. , “PersonAll the obtained results are detailed in Sect. During the questionnaire dissemination, it was very hard to find the needed respondents, and we can say it was not related to the questionnaire’s size, as we performed other type of questionnaires in other works, much smaller, and the same difficulty was found. Persons are not so available to help and probably they find boring to fill questionnaires, independently of their size.We noticed respondents had some difficulties in filling the formation area question, as it was an open question due to the heterogeneity inherent to the possible responses. Many respondents did not know what to answer and responded areas that did not correspond to the intended. Extra work was needed to clean the data and make the right correspondence.As can be seen in Table Compared to the previous study  was used, which is one of the most widely used personality inventories. The BFI assesses an individual on the Goldberg’s Big Five dimension of personality Goldberg , using aClearly, there are 3 dimensions with responses above the mid-point, revealing a slight negative skewness, i.e., participants situated themselves more between “3-Neither agree nor disagree” and “5-Agree strongly”: agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness, confirming the results found in our previous study , taste typical local dishes and visit monuments. The opposite can also be said for attending gyms, playing at the casino, hunting/fishing, (decidedly) watching bullfights and going to the circus, which are definitely not a choice when on vacation. What relationship exist between those preferences and the participants’ personality? Section The participants’ traveling motivations were measured using Pearce and Lee  proposedClearly, except for questions M8 and M22, participants are on the same side regarding motivations for traveling in leisure, confirming most motives proposed by Pearce and Lee . To be cAs previously mentioned, the participants responded quite differently to two questions measuring Pearce and Lee  NostalgiOne section of the questionnaire was related to travel-related preferences and concerns .Probably not all preferences and concerns were chosen by the same type of participants. Do personality dimensions predict travel-related preferences and concerns? If so, which ones? In Sect. In this section, we present the results of the EFA and CFA performed on the questionnaire items for each studied travel aspect, except for personality, where we present only the CFA results.The EFA of the BFI responses confirmed the Big Five personality dimensions, aggregating the items into the expected personality dimensions. CFA confirmed the EFA results Table , but somα = 0.685), confirming the items in the scale were related to the same concepts, as expected. The model fit has a χ2/df value of 3.590 (acceptable), a CFI of 0.928, GFI of 0.945, PCFI of 0.769 and PGFI of 0.712, revealing a good goodness-of-fit, and the RMSEA = 0.050 and p(RMSEA <  = 0.05) = 0.485 a very good adjustment , confirming the items in the scale are all related to the same concept, and can therefore be used as a reference. The obtained factors were then named to meaningful descriptions representing the concepts we believe they symbolized.As a result of performing the EFA on the 68 items representing the tourist attractions, several items were eliminatedp < 0.001*** (two-tailed). The model revealed an overall acceptable goodness-of-fit  = 0.000), meaning the model is valid and that the items provide an acceptable fit for the proposed model, confirming the proposed “Tourism Categories” model.The CFA of the extracted factors showed the observed variables (attractions items) saturated the latent variables , confirming the items were correctly related to the proposed tourism categories Fig. . The iteBy calculating the mean value each participant scored for the Tourism Categories (factor scores), it was possible to find that there are kinds of tourist attractions that participants always like to include in their vacations, independently of their personality, as is the case of Wild Nature Activities (F2), Sun, Water & Sand (F4), Museums, Boat trips & Viewpoints (F5), Cultural heritage (F7), Gastronomy events (F9) and Natural phenomena (F11). The opposite can be said for Sports & Games (F8), where most of the respondents did not consider important to include them in their leisure vacations. This is in line with the results found in Sect. 6In order to answer one of this study’s research questions, the Personality dimensions were related to the Tourism Categories obtained, using CFA. As shown in Fig. χ2/df = 4.409, CFI = 0.771, GFI = 0.767, PCFI = 0.721, PGFI = 0.696, RMSEA = 0.057, p(RMSEA ≤ 0.05) = 0.000), suggesting the items provide a satisfactory fit, confirming the proposed “Personality vs Tourist Attractions Preference” model.The model’s fit indicators show an overall acceptable goodness-of-fit , slightly neurotic , with negative agreeableness, openness  and conscientiousness . With the new data, we observed a twist in the impact of agreeableness, which now is negative.Monuments and historic cities/villages are the type of attractions preferred by highly agreeable persons, probably the ones that easily accompany family and friends just to make them happy, confirming the results found by Neidhardt et al.  and JaniSports & Games, like to enjoy sporting competitions, play at the casino, and hunt/fish, are preferences predicted by high extraversion values, which can derive from the energy, excitement and gregariousness inherent to this type of activities, but also to the need of competitiveness and dominating/be the best, confirming the findings of Schneider and Vogt  and NeidGastronomy tours/festivals are positively sought by extraverted and agreeable individuals with some negative openness and conscientiousness. This is in line with the results we previously found that who enjoys wine and food are generally high-spirited and cheerful persons. A low conscientiousness and openness can be due to less awareness or not caring for health issues persons, generally having a great pleasure in food/wine tasting and/or “addicted” in consuming more than needed allied to a low intellect, as this category is not directed for fine dining activities.All personality dimensions are related to Health & Wellbeing , with a clear prediction by highly extraverted (are not worried about exhibiting their body/intimacy), slightly conscientious  and neurotic individuals , with low openness and agreeableness .Finally, a new tourism category related to observing Natural Phenomena  arose. A positive agreeableness is the most weighting dimension, followed by extraversion, and a negative conscientiousness, which is the same profile as for Wild Nature Activities.Although some personality dimensions did not have a significant correlation to the choice of certain tourist attractions, it does not mean those correlations do not exist, but that a greater and more representative sample for each type of profile is needed. Also, it is important to note that the results found show that only some characteristics from each personality dimension explain the preferences for tourist attractions, indicating that the preferences could be finer predicted by using a questionnaire to evaluate each dimension’s six traits more precisely, supporting the issues reported by Yee et al. . For exaAll the different tourism categorizations and personality dimensions fall short when compared to the individual experience that a specific destination/attraction can offer, for example, the medieval fair in Sines, Portugal, is one of the greatest fairs, recreating historical moments, but there are others that are simple and are more commercially oriented.α = 0.875), confirming the items in the scale are all related to traveling motivations, and can therefore be used as a reference. The obtained factors were named to meaningful descriptions representing the concepts we believe they symbolized.As a result of performing the EFA on the 28 items representing the traveling motivations, four items were eliminatedAs can be seen in Table p < 0.001*** (two-tailed). The model revealed an overall good goodness-of-fit  = 0.000), meaning the model is valid for the study and the items provide a good fit, confirming the proposed “Traveling Motivations” model. We can also observe the model includes the most common traveling motives found in literature: Novelty & Excitement (Exploration), Nature enjoyment (Nature experiences), and Bond & Relax (Relaxation/Escapism).When performing the CFA, items M9 and M23, both related to romance, were removed from the Connectedness & Recognition factor due to a regression weight < 0.50. We also decided to remove the Escape Obligations factor, not only for having a low reliability, but because it had two items with a regression weight < 0.50, resulting in the model presented in Fig. χ2/df = 6.379, CFI = 0.822, GFI = 0.849, PCFI = 0.721, PGFI = 0.695, RMSEA = 0.072, p(RMSEA ≤ 0.05) = 0.000), confirming the model is valid for the study and the items provide an acceptable fit, confirming the proposed “Personality vs Traveling Motivations” model.The SEM to confirm what personality dimensions were predicting which travel motivations Fig.  revealedAt a first impression, it might seem difficult to explain the observed correlations. We believe the statistically significant positive influence of neuroticism on Self-development & Reliance, Connectedness & Recognition, and Novelty & Excitement motivations Table  is relatWe can say openness to experience is somehow related to all tourism motivations, being associated with experiencing different things, curiosity, having a greater weight on Self-development & Reliance and Bond & Relax, motivations strongly related to individuals with a higher intellect, that need to be stimulated, prone to wander the mind off, and empathetic to self and others’ feelings. The motivations related to openness are supported by Abbate and Di Nuovo ; ScaffidCuriously, the agreeableness, extraversion and conscientiousness personality dimensions could not predict the proposed traveling motivations; actually they had to be removed from the model due to very low regression weights in the corresponding items. As motivations to travel depend on many factors, such as the context, destination, traveler’s mood, time of year, companions, etc., it can explain why not all dimensions could be related to the motivations for traveling Table .Table 10α = 0.682), confirming the items in the scale are all related to the same concept, and can therefore be used as a reference. The obtained factors were then named to meaningful descriptions representing the concepts we believe they symbolized.As a result of performing the EFA on the 29 items representing the relevant travel-related preferences and concerns for this study, several items were eliminatedThe EFA on the items for the travel-related preferences and concerns revealed interesting and not so obvious aggregations, showing many items were measuring the same concepts or somehow related. Regarding concerns, the participants consider important to feel safe and comfortable, are not willing to take risks regarding the physical integrity and want to have some sort of previsibility to avoid uncomfortable or risky events, preferring the familiar to the unknown, which is easier when traveling with familiars or friends, instead of strangers in a group. As for travel-related preferences, to have cultural experiences, like visiting the most famous monuments, learn about the destination’s history, see things different from their culture, and visit unusual/exotic places, are the most important for the respondents. All these outcomes support the results found in literature, previously detailed in Sect. p < 0.001*** (two-tailed). The model revealed an overall very good goodness-of-fit  = 0.982), meaning the model is valid for the study and the items provide a very good fit, confirming the proposed “Travel-related Preferences and Concerns” model.The CFA on the proposed factors led to the removal of the items P13, P15, P24R, and P28, as they had a regression weight < 0.50, resulting in the model presented in Fig. χ2/df = 4.488, CFI = 0.809, GFI = 0.877, PCFI = 0.716, PGFI = 0.733, RMSEA = 0.058, p(RMSEA ≤ 0.05) = 0.000), confirming the model is valid for the study and the items provide an acceptable fit, confirming the proposed “Prsonality vs Travel-related Preferences and Concerns” model.The SEM to confirm what personality dimensions were predicting which travel-related preferences and concerns Fig.  revealedAll personality dimensions are related to travel-related preferences and concerns, although with lower regression weights compared to the tourism categories and traveling motivations Table . IndividThe concern for traveling in groups of strangers (Familiarity) is predicted by a negative agreeableness , neurotic  and conscientious persons (careful and less spontaneous). To the best of our knowledge, we could not find works relating the Big Five to this type of concerns. The other dimensions were not statistically significant.Cultural & Learning Experiences are preferences positively sought by neurotic and conscientious persons, with a negative openness to experience. These predictions are easily explained, as neurotic are more anxious and therefore study the destination before traveling, and conscientious persons are more organized and inclined to plan their vacations in advance, which is in line with the negative openness.Uniqueness & Exoticness is pursued by extraverted , agreeable  and open to experience  persons.The last two type of preferences can be corresponded to the choice of certain attractions, namely from the Museums, Boat trips & Viewpoints, Cultural Heritage, and Wild Nature Activities tourism categories, having several personality dimensions in common Table .Table 12The questionnaire allowed to obtain very interesting and useful information. In this section, we correlated personality to fears and the type of weather preferred when on vacations, to explore if and how they were related.As can be observed in Table Weather conditions revealed to be correlated with personality, answering to another research question: yes, personality is an influencing factor in the preference for weather conditions and consequently, in the choice of the destination. The preference for hot weather conditions at the vacation destination is positively predicted by extraverted, agreeable and conscientious individuals. Slightly neurotic, with low extraversion and openness individuals prefer to go to destinations where the weather is warm. All personality dimensions seem to influence the choice of cold weather conditions, being sought by low extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness persons, but with positive neuroticism and openness values. However, it is important to notice that only 2.5% of the respondents preferred cold weather, meaning it is not a relevant choice for vacations. Open to experience individuals with low conscientiousness and neuroticism seem to not care about the weather conditions at the vacation destination.As can be seen, all different types of weather conditions revealed different combinations of personality dimensions, with different weights, meaning they can be used to model tourists in the (G)RS to predict what destinations can be recommended in what time of the year.We believe, to the best of our knowledge, to be the firsts to present those relationships, as no studies related to the prediction of personality in the choice of weather conditions for vacations were found.In this study, one of the problems we propose to mitigate is the cold-start problem in (G)RS by automatically modeling the tourists profile based on their personality, namely their tourist attractions preference, traveling motivations, and travel-related preferences and concerns. The proposed models showed the referred travel aspects are related to the tourists’ personality and that the five personality dimensions have different impacts on the choice of tourist attractions, travel motivations, preferences and concerns.To automatically model the tourists’ travel preferences, the global scoreLet the personality of a Tourist The following expressions represent the personality dimensions that significantly contribute for a tourist mentclass2pt{minimThe tourist The tourist The tourist The other problem we propose to mitigate is the conflicting preferences in groups of tourists. As the probability of heterogeneity is greater with larger groups of tourists, if we use the proposed models to create subgroups of tourists with similar interests, we can minimize the group’s heterogeneity and conflicts of interest, which in turn facilitates reaching a consensus in the recommendation process and the generation of more precise recommendations to the subgroups. This type of aggregation can be advantageous in promoting more socialization and the creation of bounds between the group members groups of 3 or more elements, let Let To find out how much a certain Following the same logic in a previous study  for tourism, aiming to provide personalized suggestions of places and attractions to visit. Personality computing came to leverage those systems by taking advantage of the psychology of tourism, leading to the creation of personality-aware RS, as it is evidenced that personality is related to the users’ preferences and solves the cold-start problem inherent to the classic RS.Many RS for tourism can be found in literature, but few use the raw dimensions of personality to predict the tourists’ preferences, especially if we talk of GRS. We believe GRS can be greatly improved by using raw psychological aspects, such as personality, to form groups of tourists with similar preferences, providing more personalized recommendations and solving conflicting preferences. Another advantage is that this logic can be extrapolated to other domains. Although several studies on the relationship between personality and travel aspects exist, most of them are based on tourist typologies/roles, which do not disclose the kind of personality traits the tourists have, and therefore, it is hard to predict how they influence those preferences and behaviors, and consequently, are not so accurate, as not all attractions in a typology are suitable for the same tourist and a combination of typologies might be needed. In this work, we proposed to solve those limitations by finding the relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions, and the preference for a wide range of tourism categories, traveling motives and travel-related preferences and concerns, aiming to provide a solid ground for tourism GRS researchers to automatically model more accurate tourist’s profiles and create groups with similar preferences, providing more accurate and pleasing recommendations, and consequently increase the tourists’ experience and satisfaction.Regarding the sample, this time we gathered the double of responses, with participants from more heterogenous ages and areas of formation, representing a “young” market . However, most respondents are females (74%), meaning there can be a bias toward female preferences. The sample represents the Portuguese culture, but it can be concluded that they have many similarities with the results found in literature for other cultures. The same social desirability bias from our previous work was observed in the BFI responses to the items of the same personality dimensions , confirming the typical phenomenon of self-reporting questionnaires, although the respondents had more diverse profiles.The “Tourism Categories” and “Personality vs Tourist Attraction Preferences” models improved their goodness-of-fit, but not as much as expected , and certain tourism categories were finer grained as we managed to obtain a more heterogenous sample, successfully predicting the tourists' preferences based on their personality.Relevant relationships between personality and traveling motivations were found, especially regarding high values of openness to experience, meaning personality can be a differentiating factor in predicting motivations, although needing more profound research, as motivations are highly dependent on the type of destination and context, which could be confirmed by relating motivations to tourism categories, which was not the scope of this study. Also, the “Personality vs Traveling Motivations” model needs to be improved, so all personality dimensions can be considered.The proposed travel-related preferences aggregated into two factors that could be easily corresponded to some tourism categories. On the one hand, it was a good outcome, as it could confirm the relationship found between personality and the corresponding tourism categories; on the other hand, it might mean the items used needed to be improved to better capture other type of travel-related preferences. The travel-related concerns also aggregated into two factors, representing the participants’ fears and preoccupations, successfully predicted by their personality.Although being predicted by personality, the proposed models need to be better tested, to determine if the personality dimensions are enough to make accurate predictions, or if other characteristics of the tourists need to be considered for better recommendations, being an ongoing study, where we are developing a mobile GRS prototype for tourism to test the models in real use-case scenarios RS for tourism to automatically model the tourists’ profile based on their raw personality, being, to the best of our knowledge, the firsts to do so, mitigating the cold-start problem. Especially in the case of occasional groups (promoted or not by a tourism agency), the tourists’ profile can then be used to match the group members and create subgroups of tourists with similar interests, minimizing the groups’ heterogeneity and conflicts of interest.To solve the problem related to filling tedious and long questionnaires on personality, we are also implementing gamification components in the GRS prototype as a proof of concept to test if we can implicitly acquire the tourists’ personality, which can then be adapted to any kind of system.


This perspective focuses on the need for researchers and practitioners to carefully consider the clarity and consistency of their language in the context of athlete development. Evidence supporting a lack of congruency in the way certain terms and expressions are defined, understood, and operationalized continues to accumulate, highlighting the importance of this area for sport stakeholders and the potential looming crises. In systems that regularly rely on precision and accuracy, it will be critical that all involved in the co-creation of knowledge generation and application carefully consider terms that may further complicate athlete development practices. We highlight some potentially blurry terms and draw attention to potential avenues for future research. He .The field of athlete development, which pertains to the identification, development, and selection processes of sporting populations, is not immune to these language challenges. Various undefined or vaguely defined terminologies have been recognized for causing confusion and contradiction in both research and practice. These “blurry”  words are believed to be one of the main limitations of research and knowledge translation . At a tiAmong other things, the message is that we need to command a clear view of the use of our concepts, [and] be aware of the danger  of words…” (p. 90)“ words…”  (p. 90)In some disciplines of sport science, such as sport psychology and sport sociology, it may be unrealistic to expect the same level of specificity and exactness we see in other domains. This is most likely a result of how “open” a system becomes  when considering a person's “performance” which encapsulates the interaction of social, genetic, environmental, cultural, spiritual, and psychological components, compared to disciplines like physiology and biomechanics, which are considered more “closed” systems . It is also likely that some degree of blurriness could be seen as advantageous for athlete selection and development reasons. Take for example a coach whose career hinges on the selection of a successful cohort of athletes. With more vague and blurry selection criteria, this may create more “degrees of freedom” for him/her/them to defend the selection decisions they make. This notion also speaks to the art and science of coaching—where both scientific rigor coupled with creative and dynamic liberties are believed to be critical for coaching excellence , 18. Howwhich terms require greater focus, delineation, and precision is difficult; however, it could be argued that any term involving measurement requires precision. For example, “talent” is a blurry term, and incredibly hard to define , 21whichPerhaps it would be beneficial to even consider some terms on a scale or continuum instead of being binary and absolute . It is hIt is also important to acknowledge that organizational alignment, may be more critical than universal agreement. For example, player scouts  should have alignment in how they define certain aspects of sport . If two The reality is, language affects all stakeholders—the person who uses the language, the sport system he/she/they operates within, the athletes hearing the language, along with parents, other colleagues, and the list goes on. What we have learned from work conducted in the fields of psychology, language, and education , this wElite. Telling athletes they are “elite” could have important effects on feelings of competence and motivation (tivation . In thisCharacter. The term “character” has been used as a selection criterion in sport for many years (ny years . In thisny years ) see behny years , these sny years . Based ony years –44, concTraining load. The term “training load” term is generally used in reference to the physiological demand placed on an athlete, typically measured in terms of time , energy expenditure , and/or stress  (see (te) (see  for morete) (see . Arguablte)  and accepted  by multiple stakeholders in the field. As with the case of a language dictionary , the goal would be to create a “go-to” list of terms so that researchers and practitioners could utilize and reference such terms for consistency and clarity.who” could/would contribute to such a tool would come with biases. Moreover, decisions on “what” definition(s) are included would likely be biased as well. To help reduce the impact of the “who” bias, ultimately, multiple stakeholders  from different perspectives  would contribute to create the most appropriate definition for that point in time based on the current state of knowledge. One approach could include using a consensus statement. The most popular of the consensus statement approaches includes the Delphi and “modified Delphi” designs  reporting the criteria for the selection of “experts”, b) reporting the selected panel's participant details (including their expertise on the topic in question), c) defining “a priori” what level of agreement is allowed and whether discordance will be reported, d) acknowledging opposing opinions, and e) externally validating results.That said, approaches to create such a tool would undoubtedly come with challenges and obstacles. For example, decisions on “ designs , where g designs   for resIn this perspective, we acknowledged frequent use of “blurry” terms may be limiting the quality of evidence due to measurement imprecision. Amongst a growing field of research and practice in athlete development, it will be paramount for the sake of all stakeholders to remain attentive to the language they use. We believe the field is at a critical juncture where striking a balance between vagueness and conceptual clarity will be a necessity to advance the field forward in the right direction.


During childhood we begin to develop values, including valuing the natural environment . Although biospheric values are believed to provide the foundation for pro-environmental behavior throughout the course of one’s life, little research has investigated these values in children. The present study aimed to investigate the relationships between children’s endorsement of biospheric values, their pro-environmental behaviors, and their perception of their friends’ and peers’ endorsement of biospheric values. Moreover, we investigated whether these values and behaviors, as well as the hypothesized relationships, were affected by educational programmes that were already implemented at schools. The results showed that children generally strongly endorse biospheric values, and that biospheric values were positively related to some personal and group pro-environmental behaviors. The study also found that, as in previous research with adults, the participants believed that their friends and peers endorsed biospheric values significantly less than they themselves did. Environmental educational programs were partially effective in reducing the participants’ underestimation of their friends’ biospheric values and increased the likelihood of some group pro-environmental behaviors. Our findings highlight the need for further research to investigate the effects of group pro-environmental behaviors and the perception of group values. The pro-environmental behavior of individuals makes an important contribution to global environmental sustainability . As a reBasic human values, including biospheric values, are broad, stable, and desirable goals that function as guiding principles on which people evaluate their actions and decisions . The morValuing the natural environment  is a significant predictor of environmental behaviors . The morAlthough a small number of studies have examined the influence of perceived peer values on adult’s biospheric values , we are Although children are likely to be influenced by their friends’ and peers’ values, their perception of what their friends and peers value may not be accurate. This has already been shown to be the case for childhood environmental behavior: people tend to underestimate or overestimate their peers’ behavior  and a stOur fourth hypothesis (H4) is that participation in group environmental educational programmes will increase the individual’s perception of their peers’ biospheric values. Interventions that correct the potential underestimation of friends’ and peers’ biospheric values may be a useful way to change environmental behavior. In this regard, if school children are placed in contexts that cause them to engage in environmental dialog and behaviors with each other, or to observe each other’s biospheric values in action, this may enable them to develop a clearer understanding of their peers’ biospheric values, which may cause them to endorse biospheric values more strongly themselves, since it is widely accepted by their peer group . ContextAS90813: Demonstrate understanding of how different personal values have implications for a sustainable future.” The learning content for this intervention was developed by the researchers as part of a separate study and used by all participating schools. The intervention was preceded by a survey and followed by surveys immediately after the intervention and 3 months after the intervention. The intervention was delivered by teachers in five different schools of varying socio-economic status across New Zealand, and typically took between 16 to 20 h to deliver. Four of the schools were rural, and one was urban.In New Zealand we collected data from children who were participating in a group environmental education intervention based on the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) learning standard titled “The learning materials for this education course required participants to explore Schwartz’s value system , 2017 anThe surveys were administered online via the Qualtrics platform. After completing each survey, the respondents were immediately returned a summary of their key survey findings  so that they could better understand their own values and behaviors and refer to these in their subsequent learning.Ethics approval for the New Zealand investigation was obtained from . Consent to be surveyed was required from the participants, their parents/guardians, their teacher, and their school. Students were required to provide their name and email address on the survey so that (a) we could return to them a summary of their individual results after each survey, and (b) so that individuals’ data from surveys could be paired to examine the intervention effect. By analyzing standard deviations across individual constructs, and by examining responses to reverse coded variables, twelve disengaged cases were identified and removed from the study. As a result of this process and the loss of some participants over the course of the investigation, different numbers of responses were collected at each survey point. A criterium for inclusion in the investigation was that the first survey be completed, along with either the second or third survey. The final number of cases analyzed were 77 (T1: pre-intervention), 75 (T2: post-intervention), and 63 (T3: 3 months post-intervention). We also attempted to collect data from control schools/classes, but the completion rates at each timepoint were insufficient for analysis. The average age of participants was 14.7 years, with an age range of 14 to 16 years. In the first sample, thirty-four of these participants were female and forty-four were male.The measures were presented in the survey in the following order:rs > 0.76) and can thus be considered valid indicators of basic human values for this purpose. For the sake of consistency, and to be able to compare personal values with perceived values of peers and parents, only the findings from the short value scales are presented in this article.The full basic human values scale was followed by a short personal values scale. Further in the survey, the participants were asked to also rate their peers’ and parents’ values’, so it was necessary to incorporate a short scale for this, to avoid making the survey too arduous for school children. The short values scale was titled “How important are these things to you?” and consisted of a single indicator representing each of biospheric , altruistic (“It is important to me to help others and that others are treated fairly”), egoistic , and hedonic (“It is important to me to have fun and have a good time”) values, which we deemed to encompass the conceptual breadth of each value. Scoring was on a similar seven-point scale to the full scale and, as for the full scale, the participants were instructed to vary their scoring for each indicator as much as possible. At each survey point we found that the short scales measuring the participants’ own values were highly correlated with the corresponding long scales  of the construct was above 0.92 at each survey point (see t-tests. Bivariate (Pearson’s) correlations between the measured variables were determined. The significance of differences between correlations was determined using a Fisher r-to-z transformation. The significance of the hypotheses was confirmed using a Bonferroni-Holm correction. Other statistical analyses were performed using SPSSv27.Analyses of the significance of the differences between surveys, and between participants’ behavior with peers and with parents/caregivers, was determined using paired t(62) = 0.145, p = 0.885]. The self-reported frequency of personal pro-environmental behavior was also consistent during this time .In the New Zealand study , biospheThe participants’ biospheric values were moderately positively correlated with their personal pro-environmental behaviors, both pre-intervention  and postt(76) = 5.10, p > 0.001], and this finding remained stable post-intervention  and 3 months post-intervention  (t(62) = 5.98, p = 0.552] , “environmental dialog with peers” , and “helping the environment when with peers” , but not significantly different in the case of “challenging peers who are harming the environment” .Pre-intervention, the participants’ perception of their peers’ biospheric values was not correlated with either their personal pro-environmental behavior nor their group pro-environmental behaviors . Howevert(61) = 2.91, p = 0.005]. In tandem, we observed no change over time for the control variable “environmental dialog with parents” , a finding which supports the likelihood that the observed increase in environmental dialog with peers was a result of the intervention rather than chance. We observed no significant change over the course of the study in the other measured group behaviors, those being challenging peers who are harming the environment  and helping the environment when with peers .We observed a significant increase in the likelihood that participants would engage in environmental dialog with their peers between pre-intervention and 3 months post-intervention . Significantly, the indicators in the Netherlands study pertained to “friends,” whereas the indicators in the New Zealand study pertained to “peers.” Friends are likely to be more influential than peers , and thuWhereas in the New Zealand study environmental dialog with peers was measured by asking the participants about the likelihood that they would engage in discussion about environmental issues and environmental behaviors with their peers, in the Netherlands study this was measured by asking participants “How likely is it that you would invite a friend to an environmental event?” As in the New Zealand study, less passive group environmental behavior was measured, in this case by asking “How likely is it that you would correct one of your peers who is dropping litter?” Participants were also asked “Would you attend an environmental event?,” which may be considered a group behavior. Responses to these behavior indicators were measured on a ten-point Likert scale, with 1 being “never” and 10 “always.”not at all” to 10 “of utmost importance”): “How important is it to protect the  in our region?” .The participants’ concern for nature protection was determined by three indicators on a scale of one to ten (1 “t-tests. Bivariate (Pearson’s) correlations between the measured variables were determined. The significance of differences between correlations was determined using a Fisher r-to-z transformation. The significance of the hypotheses was confirmed using a Bonferroni-Holm correction. Other statistical analyses were performed using SPSSv27.Differences at each survey point were determined using paired t(196) = 0.836, p = 0.404]. Personal pro-environmental behavior, as indicated by the likelihood that participants would turn out the light when leaving a room, was high pre-intervention (t(192) = 1.07, p = 0.287]. The likelihood of picking up other people’s litter was less common (t(190) = 0.055, p = 0.957]. Although the participants’ concern for nature protection was high pre-intervention (t(195) = 4.55, p < 0.001]. The participants’ personal biospheric values were positively correlated with their pro-environmental behaviors  = 4.00, p < 0.001] and after  the intervention (t(76) = 5.10, p > 0.001], thus supporting Hypothesis 4.Supporting Hypothesis 2, the participants’ personal biospheric values were positively correlated with their perception of their friends’ biospheric values . Supportrvention . Howevert(190) = 2.67, p = 0.008], and more likely to invite a friend to such an event . The intervention had no significant impact on whether the participants would be likely to challenge friends who were littering .As regards group behavior, the participants indicated post-intervention that they would be more likely to want to attend a similar group environmental education event [Our research found that children generally care about protecting the environment and value the natural world, as demonstrated by their strong endorsement of biospheric values. These values were positively related to pro-environmental behaviors that are particularly relevant for children, such as turning off lights and not littering. Children often undertake behaviors not of their own volition, so it is useful to confirm that their personal pro-environmental behaviors are related to valuing the natural environment, and not just governed by external motives such as school rules and parental expectations.Group pro-environmental behaviors, such as discussing environmentalism with peers or challenging those who harm the environment, were also positively related to children’s personal biospheric values. Since children’s personal values are in part shaped by the behaviors and values of their friends and peers , these gThe perception of what friends and peers value may be a significant factor in strengthening or weakening children’s biospheric values. As found previously with adults , there wThe perception of friends’/peers’ biospheric values was in addition positively related to the participants’ pro-environmental behaviors, although in the New Zealand study this correlation only developed after the intervention. This correlation suggests that exposure to peers’ values in an environmental education setting can help develop connections that may influence both personal and group environmental behavior.We found that, like adults , childreOur study of Dutch children found that group environmental education programmes may be effective in partially correcting the underestimation of the group’s biospheric values. Although the study with New Zealand children did not demonstrate a significant change in the perception of their peers’ biospheric values after the education programme, there was a significant increase in environmental interactions between peers after the intervention, which may help children better understand their friends’ and peers’ biospheric values over time.It is important to note that the interventions we investigated were not designed to influence the participants’ perception of their peers’ biospheric values. Rather, the interventions were designed to influence the participants’ own biospheric values directly, but in situations wherein the presence of peers could have an influence on these values. Accordingly, our studies and analyses could be regarded conservative tests of our Hypothesis 4 and potentially larger effects could have been obtained with educational programs that more directly address the observed value underestimations.The significance of our findings is limited by the relatively small sample sizes employed in these studies. The small sample size in the New Zealand study was somewhat alleviated by comparing the participants’ perceptions of their parents to their peers, as their perception of their parents should not change significantly as a result of the intervention, as found.The self-reported nature of the data is a limitation, insomuch as self-reported behavior is not considered to be a good indicator of actual behavior , althougWith datasets from two different countries it is tempting to investigate cultural differences. However, since our samples were not representative, and different interventions were investigated in each country, we do not feel it is appropriate to make cultural comparisons. That said, it is important to note that we did find similar results across countries and educational programs, which suggest the universality and generalisability of the studied relationships.There is a lack of research in general that has addressed the development of biospheric values in children, and future research is needed to determine the influence of different factors from childhood through to early adulthood. Our research has found that children underestimate the extent to which their peers endorse biospheric values, and therefore it would be useful to further investigate why this occurs, and the long-term impacts of rectifying this underestimation. This is particularly salient given that exposure to the values of those people who are closest to us has been found to have a significant effect on our values and pro-environmental behaviors later in life . In addiIt would be useful for future research to examine the cause-and-effect relationship between group biospheric values and group environmental dialog, and to determine the effect of each on children’s own biospheric values, and their perception of the group biospheric values, in the longer term. There are many different types of intervention that are employed to encourage environmentalism in children, and it would be beneficial to determine if those interventions that promote group dialog are more effective than those that do not.In conclusion, this study provides a deeper understanding of the relationship between children’s biospheric values and pro-environmental behaviors and how group environmental education interventions may affect these relationships. Our findings suggest that children’s biospheric values are positively related to their pro-environmental behaviors, and that their perception of their peers’ biospheric values may play an important role in the development and strength of their own values. The study also highlights the importance of addressing the underestimation of peers’ values, as this may reduce motivation to engage in pro-environmental behaviors. The results provide support for the idea that group environmental education interventions can be effective in increasing some group pro-environmental behaviors and in helping children better understand their peers’ values. Future research should continue to explore different types of interventions and study designs to further our understanding of how to effectively influence the development of children’s biospheric values and pro-environmental behaviors.tim.kelly@canterbury.ac.nz.The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because due to the age of the participants, the ethics approval for this study has restricted the sharing of data outside of the immediate research group. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to TK, The studies involving humans were approved by the University of Canterbury’s Educational Research Human Ethics Committee and Ethical Committee Psychology, University of Groningen. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin.TK: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft. TB: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft. SK: Writing – review and editing. FW: Writing – review and editing, Data curation, Investigation. RG: Writing – review and editing.


This article aims to diversify STS perspectives on populism by addressing a sequence of episodes of Mexican science policy in terms of clashes between populism and scientific communities. The article describes a reorientation of Mexican science policy that has destabilized the academic system during the present administration. Specifically, it looks at the legislative project initiated by Mexico’s National Science and Technology Council (Conacyt) to overhaul the national regulatory framework on science, technology and innovation, and controversial political actions taken by Conacyt against the scientific community. Contextualizing these grievances, the article concludes that at stake is a form of ‘trickle-down populism’ that, through systematic authoritarianism, seeks to impose on the academic community a model of ‘populist science governance’. L. Guzmán, Confrontations between science and populism have recently garnered considerable attention from Science and Technology Studies (STS) focusing on the consequences of a ‘post-truth’ political turn in the Global North , which sought to overhaul the national regulatory framework on science, technology, and innovation (STI).3 I use the term ‘scientific community’ mainly to refer to Mexican natural scientists, but with keen awareness that the term encompasses a diverse collectivity of both research- and education-focused academics who, despite this diversity, have been increasingly unified by their dissatisfaction with Conacyt policy.To clarify, while there are voices in Mexican science that support Conacyt policies, there are marked differences between the overwhelmingly antagonistic members of the natural sciences and pro-Conacyt sections of the humanities and the social sciences. At the same time, prominent academic voices supporting Conacyt, particularly in the humanities, come in two distinct flavors. On the one hand, there is a documented rise of academics-turned-political figures within the ruling party who have become mouthpieces of government policy, but despite their academic origin can hardly be taken to represent wider academic sentiment . In contTo understand how Conacyt’s actions can be conceptualized as an offshoot of the federal government’s populist ‘style’ , I make populist science governance.The core contribution of this article is to illustrate how such authoritarian tactics have been serially enacted by Conacyt authorities to affect critics of the government’s projected science policy, being furthermore accompanied by unilateral governance decisions that ignored community sentiment and have already negatively affected scientific communities. The populist attitude is found not only at the federal level but has now also become the primary style to implement science policy in and of itself. Thus, while the conjugation of political discourse that vindicates legitimate ‘popular’ demands, and also institutional violence against political enemies, has been a structuring feature of Latin American populisms, I argue that they can also, as in the case of Conacyt, ‘trickle down’ into a form of The article focuses on a set of new guiding ‘principles’ that are claimed to anchor STI policy interventions, these being consistently repeated in preambles to Conacyt legal documents, briefs and official communications since 2019, when the recent administration took over. Institutional documents are thus used as resource material for an initial ‘natural system’ organizational analysis . This in4 The second week-long discussion forums were organized by Conacyt itself, with a more prominent inclusion of humanities and social science academics and Conacyt political sympathizers.5 In this second forum, legal scholars defended the changes as improvements on the organizational aspects of the new STI Law, while various social sciences and humanities academics praised the inclusion of epistemic equality and related values into policy. Members of the natural sciences, while less prominent in this second forum, largely echoed the same sentiments as in first previous event. The forums thus confirmed a clear division between a Conacyt-critical natural sciences community and the more Conacyt-supporting, but divided, humanities and social sciences communities.In addition to the documentary analysis, to better understand both ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ Conacyt positions, in the early stages of this research I carried out a full monitoring of two independent forums – held over two weeks in 2021 and totaling over 50 hours of live discussions – both of them focused on Conacyt’s legal framework initiatives, and on the general state of STI and higher education in the country. During the first week, in an event with an explicitly critical undertone organized by Mexico’s most important higher education institutions, natural scientists and others clearly expressed their most pressing concerns: the centralization of power and the unrepresentativeness of scientific voices in policy decisions, funding woes and the elimination of specific funding instruments, and changes to ‘traditional’ scientific drivers and values. The positions expressed were, unsurprisingly given the choice of participants and the organizers’ outlook, overwhelmingly negative towards Conacyt, though participants admitted that reforms to the scientific governance system could be beneficial if direct state interference were avoided.Other sources include a review of email discussions lists of Mexican academic networks, over two years of monitoring Twitter material related to Mexican STI and Conacyt, a review of national and international news coverage, analysis of online videos and documents compiled by Conacyt as support for the initial drafts of the law, a limited number of interviews with early career scholars on their outlook of the STI system, and finally, Conacyt official statements and press bulletins.contents of policy. Instead of a pluralist law, critics perceive Conacyt as promoting a vertical and centralized governance framework that excludes outside input. Following the pattern that While preambles to Conacyt’s official statements frame science as a tool for the state to consolidate its electorally mandated project of increasing social justice through the new ‘principles’ – mainly, (epistemic) equity and non-discrimination, inclusion, plurality, solidarity, social good, and precaution – independent analyses argue that these have done little to inform the st July 2018, Conacyt has begun a concentrated effort to be rid of the weights left behind by the neoliberal regime.We consider it is not only unacceptable, but indeed dangerous, to make of science a merchandise or a superfluous luxury good. It is now the time to turn it to public service, which can only acquire its maximal value as a tool for transformations oriented towards social wellbeing and environmental care. … Despite the many crises our country has suffered through, mainly through the adoption of the neoliberal credo by the political establishment that usurped popular representativity, there is a consolidated scientific community in Mexico with more than 70,000 members from across all social strata. … In the context of transformation that the Mexican people mandated with their vote on 1I argue that populism, as enacted by Conacyt, has visibly eroded and negatively affected Mexican academic life, particularly for more vulnerable scholars and early career researchers, despite the discursive shroud of social advancement. Framed as a fight against ‘neoliberal science’, following the federal governments’ agenda of organic change against the previous administrations, Conacyt director While this stance against ‘neoliberal’ science at first glance appears to resonate with well-known STS and social critiques of commercialized science , we shouIndeed, as described in numerous journalistic and scientific outlets e.g. , Mexico’Mexico is a country at the margins of the highly developed scientific world, its relationship to the Anglo-European scientific establishment mainly one of coloniality  and depeAnother remarkable difference between Latin American and Anglo-European scientific systems is the lack of cohesion between state, private and public interests in science and technology , so thatFinally, one must also consider the larger instability characteristic of Latin American democracies. Given regional histories of totalitarianism (both militarized and non-military one-party systems were the norm until a few decades ago), autonomy and academic freedom are, unsurprisingly, political values strongly orienting Latin American science. On the one hand, both are understood as a means for protection from government abuse, interference and censorship . On the Morena political party in the 2018 Mexican federal elections. Led by current president Andrés Manuel López Obrador (widely known as AMLO), Morena also established a majority alliance in both legislative chambers. Morena’s political power is thus only curbed, within the division of powers, by the judiciary, and a weakened opposition in the hands of the outgoing centrist PRI , the arch-nemesis right PAN  party, and the tattered remains of the nearly defunct left PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática). Despite often painting itself as an entirely new political force, Morena’s core is built on the 2010s PRD’s disintegration into rival factions, with AMLO’s group transforming itself into a separate political party, Morena. In this transition, Mexican politics has seen in AMLO  the establishment of ‘strongman’ politics coupled with a compliant legislature. Thus, although separation of powers is an organizing hallmark of the Mexican political system and its primary form of checks and balances, in reality the balance of power is currently tightly gripped across two of the three powers under a single party banner led by a clear party leader.The backdrop to the present situation is the sweeping, definitive electoral win by the recently created A marked difference between Morena and the two PAN (2000–2012) and PRI (2012–2018) post-transition presidencies is its socially progressive discourse, backed by targeted social aid programs, a significant rise of the minimum wage, and reforms to major national laws. Conversely, other government actions such as the full militarization of the national police force, a preference for mega-infrastructure projects tied to developmental agendas, the defunding of important social assistance programs, an insistence on fossil fuel development, radical austerity measures, and a rapprochement with oligarchs who choose to publicly support the government, have invited criticism that ‘AMLO can hardly be defined as a progressivist or leftist given, among other aspects, his disposition to follow the economic orthodoxy and his attitude toward social rights’ , p. 251 The political backdrop is thus, in important ways, also different from the populist episodes in the Americas previously mentioned, i.e., the infamous soft-coup impeachment process of ex-President Dilma Rousseff that was the entry point for Bolsonarism in Brazil, or the toxification of US politics that culminated in Trump’s election. The election of the Morena government was, without a doubt, a clear mandate from the Mexican electorate that change in Mexican politics at the highest level was desperately required and was certainly not delivered by either the PAN or post-transition PRI presidencies. In this sense, the Mexican government sits in a middle ground between what total organic change, particularly of institutional life. Meanwhile, as caudillo was an exception from the early post-Revolutionary period, growing increasingly rare as the PRI evolved. Rather, style of politics held together in discourse by ‘a Manichean division of the population into a valorized majority us – the people – and a demonized minority them …’ along with ‘a suspicion of high-flown expert discourse and cosmopolitan rootlessness; and a powerful impulse toward bypassing mediating and moderating institutions and procedures in pursuit of an immediate, redemptive and affect-intensive presencing of popular sovereignty’.Work in anthropology and political science has recently pointed out that populism’s expression encompasses a diverse family of political practices and discourses that escape any essentialist definition . Howeverel pueblo is to invoke the popular sectors, which include a mix of subaltern groups, most notably the urban masses and rural campesinos’  that forms an important protocolary element of indigenous power-transfer ceremonies. In contrast, months before he entered power, the Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN) – by no means representative of all indigenous communities in Mexico, but arguably the most vocal indigenous political actor – had already published several communiqués stating their strong opposition to the Morena project  has become one of the President’s catchphrases when confronted by external criticism, for example, in confronting the situation in the fight against corruption that is at the discursive vanguard of government actions, including many of the scientific defunding decisions. Corruption is persistently framed by the government as a moral sickness of the evil upper classes, including the intelligentsia that benefitted from the old oligarchies, and is addressed through the centralization of power into the hands of the ‘good government’. As a systemic problem of great historical complexity for the country  alludes both to the Mexican ‘mestizo’ ideology of post-Revolution Mexico (‘morena’ is a generic name for a dark-skinned woman), as much as to Mexico’s patroness, the Virgin of Guadalupe, or La Virgen Morena. This framing of transformation is critical for understanding the modifications to the Mexican scientific system.The federal government’s pledge of social transformation through the establishment of new moral principles mixes both nationalist sentiment and historical revisionism, and despite praising secularist heroes of the national pantheon, has religious overtones that additionally reference an unrealistically idyllic past . Morena It was as part of this political and moral overhaul that AMLO selected María Elena Álvarez-Buylla – an accoladed geneticist from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) – as Conacyt director, a post equivalent to Minister of Science. Though part of the scientific community saw her research credentials as a positive factor, there were also worries; Consejo General de Investigación Científica, Desarrollo Tecnológico e Innovación) headed by the President and resulting in an Executive order for Conacyt to draw up a blueprint (anteproyecto) for a General STI Law (Foro Consultivo Científico y Tecnológico (FCCyT), which vocally protested on Twitter. Since 2006, the FCCyT had operated as a civil association – as mandated by the still current National Science Law and Conacyt’s organic bylaws – acting as an autonomous consultancy group for top-level STI policymaking, for input on policy from the scientific community. The General Council meeting that had been held, on the other hand, had included exclusively political players, and only a handful of academic actors closely linked to the federal government’s intellectual circle. The hashtag with which the FCCyT ended its tweet included #GobernanzaIncluyente and #ComunidadCTI, alluding to the lack of representation of scientific opinion in the policy process (amparo (habeas corpus) order that mandated Conacyt to include the FCCyT in top policy meetings – a decision that Conacyt refused to follow, apparently without tangible consequences. What had begun as a discussion on the legality of the FCCyT’s exclusion quickly soured into the overtly political. In response to the court mandate, Conacyt instead financially crippled the FCCyT and created a ‘parallel’ Foro, discrediting the former’s members in public by claiming that the Foro had usurped Conacyt’s consultancy roles,8 and finally associating members of the FCCyT with acts of corruption.9Once entering power, the new Conacyt directorship quickly announced important institutional changes, announcing on Twitter a meeting of the General Council for Scientific Research, Technological Development and Innovation  pro-government newspaper La Jornada, nevertheless considered all anti-Conacyt reactions as racist, classist and ‘epistemically sexist’ commentary , widely used in large-project financing within the public sector. These were the heart of Conacyt’s sectoral funding programs, provided year-to-year funding stability, and allowed Mexican public institutions to capture and autonomously manage scientific funding from abroad. Required to do public reporting, they were also seen as assuring some measure of public accountability. Yet the fideicomisos’ dissolution, despite notable protests from the scientific, academic, and artistic communities they directly affected, gained fast-track approval from both chambers of the government-controlled legislature: 109 fideicomisos were ended, comprising US $3 billion in funding, including 65 Conacyt programs  so that those funds will benefit the people [El Pueblo].Developments in funding policy near the end of 2020 also influenced the scientific community’s concerns about the direction the national STI system was taking. The most politically charged was the breakneck dissolution of a set of important funding channels for science: programs . The govprograms , that prThey worry a lot about science and technology, because they will lose all support for these matters … they try to give the impression of being the people’s champions, but no, what they are doing is defending the corrupt regime that existed, and that we are trying to do away with.Then turning his guns to increasing criticism from the scientific community, AMLO further demonized them as examples of reactionary conservative sectors that had long-abused public funds and were afraid of losing their privileges:mañanera to support the cuts: Audits ‘revealed’ that 44% of Conacyt funding through fideicomisos and tax-break programs, totaling around US $2 billion, had been assigned to ‘unaccountable’ private companies, such as Volkswagen, Intel, Bayer, Monsanto and IBM. Such funds were hard to justify, according to Álvarez-Buylla, in ‘real, scientific terms’. However, given that only 24% of fideicomiso moneys were assigned to the private sector, the dissolution of fideicomisos also eliminated the country’s most important instrument for publicly funded science. Conacyt’s discursive focus nevertheless remained on the ‘opaque’ transfer to the private sector, including private universities, as well as increasingly harsh accusations of corruption against former Conacyt management. When later questioned about allegations that she herself had received over US $800,000 of funding through fideicomisos, Álvarez-Buylla replied that these funds had been obtained through open call grants, not through ‘neoliberal’ funding:Neoliberalism installed a funding system for science and other areas and, amongst the instruments that enabled this failed distribution, were fideicomisos, which deposited vast amounts of the people’s resources, instead of assigning them directly to beneficiaries. … Today we are living through a transformation … which privileges the people of Mexico and environmental care in favor of all, and firstly the poorest.Despite the enormous impact on Conacyt funding, days later Álvarez-Buylla made an appearance during the mañanera slides, alongside fideicomisos proper. Other prominent academics who were part of AMLO’s inner circle would also be pointed out, through FOI requests and journalist leaks, as gaining advantage from funding favoritism  program, including dozens of ERC dismissals that have led to accusations of gender discrimination and more than a hundred lawsuits for wrongful termination, with female researchers denouncing ‘a lack of humanity that is completely impregnated in Conacyt’  became another source of bitterness between academics and Conacyt . InitialIn mid-2020, the Mexican academic community would be further rocked by press reports that Mexico’s Attorney General, Alejandro Gertz Manero, had been awarded the Tier 3 SNI distinction. Academic uproar was followed by journalistic scrutiny of the career politician’s academic production, which was perceived by most academics as definitively lacking enough quality for SNI membership – let alone a Tier 3 award. Adding fuel to the fire, leaked documents showed that the SNI distinction had been awarded by a fit-for-purpose ‘special commission’. After the leaks, the head of the special commission countered that Gertz Manero’s scientific production of ‘five books as sole author’ was of ‘national and international transcendence’, with the motley collection of secondhand biographies infamously described by Álvarez-Buylla as ‘notable works’. FOI journalism also revealed that Gertz Manero had attempted and failed to be accepted into the SNI since 2010, having been rejected on four separate occasions by large peer-review committees, with two of these re-evaluations only forced upon past SNI administrations by court challenges promoted by Gertz Manero. A fifth re-assessment had then been ordered by the National Commission for the Prevention of Discrimination (Conapred), after which the ‘ad hoc’ commission (unprecedented in SNI history), finally awarded the SNI 3 distinction – also in disregard of SNI rules, which state new members must progress through all the ranks to reach the higher tiers.telenovela, however, did not fail to impress: only a few weeks later, public intellectual and literary critic The coda to the SNI 3 Holding to the principles of Republican Austerity, ethics, transparency, and accountability, Conacyt offered [the FCCyT] modest resources, but enough for substantial activities, which were rejected … In 2019, Conacyt handed in evidence of misappropriation of funds, and that was the end of its involvement. Without denouncing any persons. Take note, without pointing out names, or suggesting crimes. … The legal process is not directed against scientists in their role as scientists. … Conacyt does not persecute scientists, on the contrary, it supports them.  were a late 19th century group of European-educated, positivist technocrats who had, indeed, been deeply influential in supporting the Diaz dictatorship, while some had also been instrumental in the establishment of Mexican public education , so that science is illegitimate ‘because scientific approaches to knowledge production do not prioritize the everyday experiences and opinions of ordinary people’  politically profitable infrastructure projects. Younger and less established researchers are being affected in the short term by unprecedented levels of precarity. The reforms recall


Plastic pollution is now so widespread that microplastics are regularly detected in biological samples surveyed for their presence. Despite their pervasiveness, very little is known about the effects of microplastics on the health of terrestrial vertebrates. While emerging studies are showing that microplastics represent a potentially serious threat to animal health, data have been limited to in vivo studies on laboratory rodents that were force fed plastics. The extent to which these studies are representative of the conditions that animals and humans might actually experience in the real world is largely unknown. Here, we review 114 papers from the peer-reviewed literature in order to understand how the concentrations and types of microplastics being administered to rodents in lab studies compare to those found in terrestrial soils. From 73 in vivo lab studies, and 41 soil studies, we found that lab studies have heretofore fed rodents microplastics at concentrations that were hundreds of thousands of times greater than they would be exposed to in nature. Furthermore, health effects have been studied for only 20% of the microplastic polymers that are known to occur in soils. Plastic pollution is arguably one of the most pressing ecological and public health issues of our time, yet existing lab-based research on the health effects of terrestrial microplastics does not reflect the conditions that free-ranging vertebrates are actually experiencing. Going forward, performing more true-to-life research will be of the utmost importance to fully understand the impacts of microplastics and maintain the public’s faith in the scientific process.The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43591-023-00059-1. The invention of plastics in the early 1900s revolutionized human societies , 3. PlasThough evidence is still extremely limited, emerging studies are attempting to identify the predicted no-effect concentrations (PNEC) of soil microplastics for different taxa , 10. ForWe first identified studies from the peer-reviewed literature that were focused on the health effects  of microplastics on terrestrial rodents, or on microplastics in terrestrial soil environments. As our goal was to identify as many peer-reviewed articles as possible, we conducted a search for the terms “microplastics”, “microplastics” and “mice”, “microplastics” and “rats”, “microplastics” and “rodents”, “microplastics in lab”, and “microplastics in soil” on both Google Scholar and Scopus. We focused on microplastics in rodents as they are important model species for human and animal health research. Any in vivo lab studies not directly relating to the ingestion of microplastics were excluded as they were beyond the scope of our effort. Similarly, studies where soil samples were taken from lakes or river beds were excluded as our focus was on describing the conditions being experienced by terrestrial vertebrates. Through this initial search, 150 reviewed studies were compiled. For in vivo studies we extracted information on the polymer type, concentrations fed to laboratory rodents, and diameter, volume, and density of the microplastic particles. The microplastic type and final concentrations found in the soil environment were extracted from soil studies. There was very little consistency in the units across studies, and so to standardize microplastic measurements, all concentrations were converted to items/kg. To do this, polymer type was required to identify the density of the plastic, while diameter was required to calculate the volume. The known volume, density, and concentrations were then used in conjunction to calculate the number of particles and convert the data to items/kg. If any information required to make this conversion was absent from a study, it was excluded from subsequent analyses. Similarly, soil studies were excluded if information on the concentrations of microplastic were absent, or if they were experimental studies. This further narrowed the number of studies down to a total of 73 in vivo studies describing 183 experimental concentrations, and 41 soil studies with data on 93 sites. While it is possible that our literature search missed some relevant studies, the number of identified studies are in line with other recent reviews , 21 and Year = 0.25, 95% CI = -0.34–0.84; Fig. The median concentration of microplastics fed to laboratory rodents in in vivo studies was 39,051,103 items/kg. This was close to 42,000 times greater than the median concentration of 930 items/kg found in soil (Fig. Notably, and in light of this disconnect, a common trend across lab studies was the lack of any rationale for the concentrations of microplastic that were administered. The 31 studies that did provide justification chose concentrations that were based either on the concentrations of microplastic found in rivers –26, or oPlastic pollution is arguably one of the most pressing ecological and public health issues of our time, yet existing research on the health effects of terrestrial microplastics does not accurately reflect the conditions that humans and animals are actually experiencing. This is in line with earlier findings from toxicology work on microplastics in aquatic environments –56, and Additional file 1. Compiled microplastics dataset.Additional file 2. PRISMA 2020 Main Checklist.