Extra Credit: Our pick of stories from around the web that bridge the gap between news and scholarship. Brought to you each Tuesday from the editors of JSTOR Daily.

Who gets to study sex? (Wired)
by Adam Rogers
What can academic research tell us about women’s sexual pleasure? And are researchers willing and able to ask the right questions? One startup says it’s studying a subject that gets short shrift at university labs—and presenting the results in ways that are distinctly unlike a peer-reviewed journal.

Your horse knows just how you’re feeling (Pacific Standard)
by Tom Jacobs
A new paper finds that seeing an angry human face changes the way horses behave, and makes their hearts race.

The crazily complicated, ultimately successful search for gravitational waves (The New Yorker)
by Nicola Twilley
Scientists have found Einstein’s elusive gravitational waves. The experiment they used to do it involved mind-boggling equipment and obsessive researchers all over the world.

How the candidates speak—and think (The Washington Post)
by Kayla N. Jordan and James W. Pennebaker
If you want to know how someone thinks, research has found that a good place to start is looking at their word choices. Breaking down the Republican and Democratic presidential debates this season reveals striking differences among the candidates.

To be smart about money, it can help to have less of it (The New York Times)
Would you spend an extra half hour shopping to get a $50 pair of headphones for $40? What about to get $400 speakers for $385? Behavioral economics research finds most of us make financial mistakes about relative versus absolute savings. But we’re less likely to mess up if we have less money to start with.

Have you seen a story online that does a good job of bridging the gap between the news and scholarship? Or something that seems particularly well-researched? Let us know and we may include it in next week’s roundup. Email us at jstordaily_submissions (at) jstor (dot) org.

Print