Feedback is New Scientist’s a popular side view of the latest science and technology news. Items you think readers might find interesting can be submitted to Feedback by email at feedback@newscientist.com
Caped Crusaders
It’s been a while since Ms Feedback was pregnant, but she still remembers trying to get on public transport with a belly the size and shape of a volleyball. Other passengers could not always be counted on to give up their seats.
But what if Feedback sneaked onto the bus dressed as Batman? To our surprise and confusion, it could make all the difference. Researchers led by Francesco Pagnini tried this experiment on the Milan metro system in a study published in npj Mental Health Research in November 2025.
On 138 occasions, a team member wore a prosthesis and boarded the train accompanied by an observer. In some of these trials, a third experimenter in a Batman costume took part. The event featured a “distinctive cape, logo and pointy cover to make it easily recognizable”, although the mask was left out “to avoid potentially scaring passengers”.
Feedback looked at the photo of the costume in the newspaper, and we can say for sure: no one will be afraid. It looks like a costume George Clooney wore Batman and Robinand that wouldn’t scare anyone.
However, passengers offered their seats to a “pregnant” woman 67 percent of the time when Batman was present, compared to 38 percent when he was absent. The implication, the team says, is that “unexpected events can promote prosociality.” Passengers often didn’t consciously notice Batman: 44 percent of those who gave up their seats in the presence of the Caped Crusader said they didn’t see him.
Feedback suggested that Batman, who is a long-time champion of social justice, made passengers think about concepts such as fairness and decency. Researchers have thought so, too, but point out that social priming experiments have often failed to replicate, with priming being one of the phenomena that has run afoul of a “replication crisis” in the social sciences. Therefore, they focus on the unexpectedness of Batman.
Extrapolating, the team suggests that “psychologists may consider ways to incorporate ‘positive disruption’ into everyday life,” such as “artistic or theatrical interventions in public space” that would “momentarily disrupt routine and engage individuals more deeply with their environment and community.” All of this reminds Feedback of the concept of “nudging” people into better behavior, which, like social priming, has generally failed to replicate. In any case, it would seem like it would take an awful lot of costumes.
Maybe it says something about the places where Feedback lived, but we’d hardly look twice if someone dressed as Batman got on the train. We’d just assume they went to a local comic convention. Maybe the cosplay scene in Milan is less lively than elsewhere.
read me
Feedback has previously noted the phenomenon of academics using pop culture references in paper headlines or otherwise writing whimsical titles in the hope of persuading us to read their work. It’s a delicate line to walk, but when it hits, it hits. So full marks to Rebecca White and Anna Remington for their 2018 study titled “Object Personification in Autism: This document will be very sad if you don’t read it“.
It examines how often autistic and non-autistic individuals personify inanimate objects and how this affects their emotional lives. At first, Feedback thought we hadn’t – our vacuum remains decidedly nameless – but then we remembered that we tend to name our cars (we’re currently driving Kitty because we sold Carol because she was a piece of crap) and our bikes.
Clearly, we are not alone. When there was paper shared on social networks recently one user replied: “Well, we’ve just had a serious discussion about whether the robot vacuum cleaner is a boy or a girl and what it might be called.” Feedback can answer this: put a brown hat and big black eyebrows on it and name it after an iconic Mario the villain, the Goomba. This will rhyme with at least one brand.
Another said: “me always grab one more croissant or bun from the counter if it’s the last one left after I’ve taken the required amount. Otherwise, the poor guy will be afraid and angry that no one needs it…” Feedback does this too, but for different reasons.
Reviewer 2 strikes again
Before an academic can have a paper published, they must first conduct a peer review in which other researchers critique their work (often anonymously). That’s why academics talk about “Reviewer 2” the way the rest of us talk about Satan, Pol Pot, or people talking in a silent train car.
Historian Andre Pagliarini took to social media news a particularly egregious case of peer review: “first: in rejecting an article I submitted to a journal, reviewer 2 remarked that I failed to include the work of one Andre Pagliarini”.
As others have been quick to point out, this is a “damned if you will…” situation, because if Pagliarini had included more citations to his own work, he would either have been accused of self-promotion, or his work would have been dismissed for lack of novelty.
The feedback found us mentally saying the same sentence others had written in response: “But Doctor, I’m Pagliarini.” And if you don’t get the joke, bad luck, because Feedback ran out of room to explain it.
Do you have a story for feedback?
You can send stories to Feedback by email at feedback@newscientist.com. Please provide your home address. You can see feedback from this week and previous ones on our website.
Leave a Reply