Theories proposing that how one thinks and feels is influenced by feedback from the body remain controversial. A central but untested prediction of many of these proposals is that how well individuals can perceive subtle bodily changes (interoception) determines the strength of the relationship between bodily reactions and cognitive-affective processing. In Study 1, we demonstrated that the more accurately participants could track their heartbeat, the stronger the observed link between their heart rate reactions and their subjective arousal (but not valence) ratings of emotional images. In Study 2, we found that increasing interoception ability either helped or hindered adaptive intuitive decision making, depending on whether the anticipatory bodily signals generated favored advantageous or disadvantageous choices. These findings identify both the generation and the perception of bodily responses as pivotal sources of variability in emotion experience and intuition, and offer strong supporting evidence for bodily feedback theories, suggesting that cognitive-affective processing does in significant part relate to "following the heart."

No abstract

No abstract

The rapidly expanding field of forensic geoscience derives its roots from 19 th and early 20 th Century scientists who both influence and are influenced by literature and fictional writing. Forensic geoscience borrows much, but not all, of its precepts from geological and geomorphological analytical techniques.Fundamental differences exist between forensic geoscience and its sister disciplines, fundamental enough to make the unwary geoscientist succumb to philosophical and practical pitfalls which will not only endanger the outline of their report, but may well indeed provide false-negative or false-positive results leading to contrary or wrongful conclusions. In the law, such outcomes have devastating and untenable consequences.Forensic geoscience requires techniques of exclusion rather than inclusion and an acknowledgement that analytical techniques may be diagnostic only in very specific situations. Whether analysis of the ubiquitous or the exotic component is chosen, acknowledgement of the need for samples to be representative is required.The presentation of false-positive results or the lack of identification of sample 'contamination' is prerequisite to the application of statistical tests which must be applied in the most careful manner. The realisation of the limitations of the technique requires, wherever possible, conjunctive analysis by other truly independent techniques. Whilst personal opinion derives from experience, there is no place for assumption. Research papers in forensic geoscience are not submitted to be speculative or challenging as may be the case in many fields of geomorphology and geology. There is no place for conjecture in forensic geoscience.

There is currently no published empirical evidence‐base demonstrating 3D printing to be an accurate and reliable tool in forensic anthropology, despite 3D printed replicas being exhibited as demonstrative evidence in court. In this study, human bones (n = 3) scanned using computed tomography were reconstructed as virtual 3D models (n = 6), and 3D printed using six commercially available printers, with osteometric data recorded at each stage. Virtual models and 3D prints were on average accurate to the source bones, with mean differences from −0.4 to 1.2 mm (−0.4% to 12.0%). Interobserver differences ranged from −5.1 to 0.7 mm (−5.3% to 0.7%). Reconstruction and modeling parameters influenced accuracy, and prints produced using selective laser sintering (SLS) were most consistently accurate. This preliminary investigation into virtual modeling and 3D printer capability provides a novel insight into the accuracy of 3D printing osteological samples and begins to establish an evidence‐base for validating 3D printed bones as demonstrative evidence.