About Poll-Vaulter

Rare white buffalo at Yellowstone National Park fulfills Native American prophecy

June 13, 2024

A rare white buffalo has been born in Yellowstone National Parkfulfilling a prophecy of one of the largest Native American tribes, reports The Express.

The white calf was spotted on June 4 in the Lamar Valley in the northeastern corner of the park.  of Kalispell, Montana, who was visiting the park with her family, took several shots of the calf after spotting it among a herd of bison across the Lamar River.

Traffic was brought to a standstill while the herd crossed the road, which prompted Braaten to take out her camera and photograph it.

“It was pretty amazing,” Braateen told USA Today. “It just seemed really odd for it to be there and we got stuck in traffic. And so I took my camera out and looked back and saw that it was actually a white bison calf that had just been born.”

After the bison left the roadway, Braaten and her family turned their vehicle around and found a spot to watch the calf and its mother for more than half an hour.

Bratten told the Associated Press that, while she could not find the white calf after coming back to the same spot in the next two days, she was “totally floored” to bear witness to the arrival.

While the birth of the calf has not been confirmed by Yellowstone National Park officials, a naming ceremony is set to be held by members of the Lakota Sioux tribe to celebrate the calf’s birth at Buffalo Field Campaign headquarters in West Yellowstone.

Research contact: @theexpress

Kim Kardashian’s Skims to open five stores nationwide

June 13, 2024

Kim Kardashian is bringing Skims out from behind the screen—launching five brick-and mortar stores nationwide, reports the Independent UK.

The soft clothing and intimates brand—founded in 2019 by the reality star and entrepreneur Jens Gredewill open five shopping locations in Georgetown, DC; Aventura, Florida; Austin and Houston, Texas; and Atlanta, Georgia. Georgetown will be the first store to open, welcoming customers inside its 3,300-square-foot space starting June 13.

According to Women’s Wear Daily, the Skims store will offer its women’s collection before their men’s line comes in during the third quarter.

The Georgetown store opening gathered a mass of eager shoppers before the doors opened at 10 a.m. “A group of people lined up outside the store shortly before its opening at 10am. The Skims location is 3300 M St. NW,” DC News Now reported.

The interior of the stores will mimic the brand’s app for minimalism, utilizing neutral tones and sleek furniture.

Fashion media mogul and industry expert, Bernard Garby, took to TikTok to break the news to his thousands of followers. Being well-versed in the business of luxury goods, Garby talked about what this meant for Kardashian’s company and predicted the business tycoon’s next move.

“We’re not talking about a pop-up or some sort of new concession as part of a department store,” Garby said. “No, we are talking about real permanent stores, which is a big step for Kim Kardashian’s business, especially for business that started from e-commerce only.”

“If you’re asking me what’s next,” Garby continued. “Well, obviously it must be an IPO, which means listing the business on the stock exchange and perhaps even selling the whole business to some other investor. I wouldn’t be surprised.”

The fashion news expert pointed out how Kardashian has slowly been removing herself from the brand, specifically the “marketing campaigns.” In Garby’s opinion, this is the “right thing to do.”

“Personal celebrity association works in the beginning to you know, as I say, spark the fire, raise awareness, accelerate growth,” he explained. “But if it becomes as big as Skims, you need to start removing yourself from the brand because one day when you’re gone, you don’t want the brand to be gone too.

“You want the brand to stay, and that’s what Kim Kardashian is doing at the moment,” Garby added.

As of now, it’s not known whether the company plans to expand their retail locations into other areas of the United States.

Research contact: @Independent

Supreme Court upholds access to mifepristone abortion pill in unanimous decision

June 13, 2024

On Thursday, June 13, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that a group of anti-abortion doctors does not have any legal basis to challenge access to mifepristone, one of the two common drugs used in medication abortion.

As a result, access to mifepristone won’t change, reports The Hill.

The opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, sided with the Biden Administration and Danco, the manufacturer of the branded version of mifepristone. It reversed a lower court decision that would have made it more difficult to obtain the drug, which is used in about two-thirds of U.S. abortions.

The ruling didn’t address the underlying regulatory or safety issues the plaintiffs raised, instead deciding the case only on standing. The justices found the conservative doctors in the lawsuit did not show they had personally been harmed by the government’s actions regulating mifepristone.

“Under Article III of the Constitution, a plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue,” Kavanaugh wrote.

The drug will remain available to people up to the tenth week of pregnancy and will still be available through the mail. The decision is a victory for the Biden Administration’s efforts to maintain access to abortion, but it also is a victory for the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to regulate drugs.

Leading up oral arguments, pharmaceutical companies and FDA law experts urged the court not to second-guess the agency’s expertise and side with the plaintiffs. A ruling against the administration could have undermined the entire drug approval process, they argued.

“We are pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision in this incredibly important case. By rejecting the Fifth Circuit’s radical, unprecedented and unsupportable interpretation of who has standing to sue, the justices reaffirmed longstanding basic principles of administrative law,” said Abigail Long, a spokesperson for Danco. “The decision also safeguards access to a drug that has decades of safe and effective use.”

Still, mifepristone remains illegal in the more than a dozen states that ban abortion.

The case centered on whether federal regulators overstepped their authority by loosening restrictions to make mifepristone easier to access. The FDA first approved mifepristone in 2000 for abortion up to seven weeks of pregnancy, but then made a series of changes in 2016 and 2021.

Those changes included increasing the gestational age at which mifepristone can be used to up to ten weeks of pregnancy, allowing the medication to be mailed to patients, lowering the dosage, allowing telehealth prescribing, and permitting providers other than physicians to prescribe the drug.

The FDA has repeatedly found that mifepristone is safe and that a medication abortion regimen that includes mifepristone and a second drug, misoprostol, is a safe and effective alternative to surgical abortions.

Research contact: @thehill

New mother refuses to change baby’s name when entreated by sister-in-law four months after birth

June 12, 2024

A woman who refused to change her four-month-old baby’s name after a request from her sister-in-law was not wrong to hold her ground, said Reddit users in response to a social media post—and an expert told Fox News that the sister-in-law was not entirely out of line for asking, either.

“AITA [Am I the a–hole?] for telling my SIL [sister-in-law] I won’t change my 4-month-old daughter’s name for her?” asked user “No_Leadership_2850” in a June 3 post on Reddit’s “Am I the A–hole” subreddit.

In the post, the woman said she and her husband had a four-month-old baby, whom they had named Ember.

“My husband and I both loved her name and that’s how it was chosen. We announced the [name on the] day she was born and nobody said anything negative or gave a reason for us not to use it then,” she wrote in her Reddit post.

That is, until just a few days ago.

Her sister-in-law, “who is married to my brother, sat me down and asked me to change the name because it’s the name of her stillborn daughter she had with her ex-husband seven years ago,” wrote the woman.

The sister-in-law “tried to keep it quiet,” she said, “but she couldn’t let me keep calling my daughter Ember because it’s such a painful reminder for her. She told me she really feels like we should change her name.”

The mother of the four-month-old baby balked at this idea.

“I gently told [her] that my daughter was four months old and her name is on the birth certificate and it would cost us to change it, so we will not,” she said.

Her sister-in-law “told me she tried so hard not to say anything and the fact she did eventually break and bring this up should show how hard this is for her and make me more willing to change the name for her sake.”

The mother wrote on Reddit that her husband agrees with her and does not want to change their daughter’s name either.

“He told me it seemed like a weak excuse to wait four, almost five months, to tell us, when she had the chance long before this,” she said.

Her brother—her sister-in-law’s husband—is also supportive of the woman’s refusal to change the name.

reached out and told me she mentioned it to him two months ago and that she was battling with asking us to change the name since,” she said. “But he understands why I said no and supports the decision.”

Her sister-in-law, however, is apparently not taking “no” for an answer.

“Yesterday she reached out to me again and asked me if we had decided on a new name yet, and I told her my answer is still no,” wrote No_Leadership_2850.

The sister-in-law “became very angry very quickly and told me if she had lost my niece my response would be different, and I should see this as her losing my niece because she would have been if she were alive.”

She continued, “She also told me my daughter is going to grow up always hearing about the cousin I gave her the same name as and that I should reconsider before burdening my daughter with that. She told me a good person with good morals would.”

No_Leadership_2850″ added that, while she knew her sister-in-law had experienced a pregnancy loss, she was unaware it was a stillbirth of a daughter named Ember.

“I never knew the name or the sex,” she said, adding, “I never ever heard her use a name for her daughter.”

Fox News reached out to “No_Leadership_2850” for comment and updates.

A therapist told Fox News that she does not believe anyone in this scenario is “truly in the wrong,” so to speak.

“It’s likely true that the sister-in-law held back for four months to say something; the decision whether to speak up was probably very difficult as mentioned,” Rachel Goldberg, LMFT, founder of Rachel Goldberg Therapy in Los Angeles, told Fox News via email.

Once the sister-in-law decided to talk to the woman about her daughter’s name, “the issue probably felt much larger to her, especially since the response was a firm ‘no’ regarding changing the name,” said the marriage and family therapist.

The mother of the four-month-old, said Goldberg, “has every right to keep the name.”

She added, “She can navigate this by being very empathetic toward her sister-in-law. She should continually express her sorrow for what her sister-in-law went through and acknowledge that the name might be ‘triggering’ for now.”

But the young mother should also consider telling her sister-in-law that “changing the name doesn’t seem appropriate in this situation.”

She added, “The [mother] can hope that, in time, her sister-in-law will understand that these are two separate beings.”

Goldberg continued, “While the stillbirth was an extremely painful experience, which the author fully acknowledges, the situation with the new baby is distinct and separate—and this situation might be a catalyst that motivates the [sister-in-law] to seek help as there may still be some unresolved issues that can be worked out.”

Reddit users agreed with this sentiment—with many voicing their firm opinion that the woman should not change her baby’s name.

On the AITA subreddit, people can reply to posts and indicate the poster is “NTA” (“Not the A–hole”), “YTA” (“You’re the A–hole”), “NAH” (“No A–holes Here”) or “ESH” (“Everyone Sucks Here”). Users can “upvote” responses they think are helpful and “downvote” ones that are not. In the more than 3,000 responses to her post, most said that she was “NTA,” but that they felt bad for the sister-in-law.

“Everyone grieves differently, and at their own rate,” said Reddit user “CheeseMakingMom” in the top-upvoted comment.

The user continued, addressing the mother directly ,”However, seven years definitely warrants therapy, counseling and [some] coping mechanisms. I find it extremely difficult to believe that in seven years your [sister-in-law] has never met anyone, or even a pet, named Ember. Or has she, and she insists that person change the name also?”

Multiple users pointed out how it was strange that the sister-in-law said her daughter would be hearing about her cousin Ember—given that the Reddit writer, as a member of the family, had never once heard the name during the entire time she’s known her.

“It sounds like the sister is threatening to make a point to always tell her niece about the cousin she was ‘named after,’ making the aunt the AH,” said user “AbsurdDaisy.”

Said another user, “NotCreativeAtAll16,” The sister-in-law “can ask, I suppose, but has no right to demand you change your daughter’s name. If there was a time to change the name it was when she was born.”

Research contact: @FoxNews

Mets owner Steve Cohen acquires New York TGL team

June 12, 2024

New York Mets owner Steve Cohen has acquired the New York TGL team, Cohen Private Ventures announced on Thursday morning, June 6, reports The New York Times.

TGL is the new golf league from Tiger Woods’ and Rory McIlroy’s TMRW Sports venture. Six teams of three PGA Tour players will face off in head-to-head match play.

The previously announced teams include:Starting January The

  • Atlanta (led by Falcons owner Arthur M. Blank);
  • Boston (led by Fenway Sports Group); and
  • Los Angeles (led by Alexis Ohanian, Serena Williams and Venus Williams).

Twelve PGA Tour players have agreed to participate in the league: Tiger Woods, Rory Mcllroy, Jon Rahm, Justin Thomas, Collin Morikawa, Matt Fitzpatrick, Justin Rose, Adam Scott, Xander Schauffele, Max Homa, Rickie Fowler, and Billy Horschel.

Cohen bought the Mets for $2.4 billion in November 2020. The Wilpon family previously ran the club for 34 years.

“We’re excited to partner with TMRW Sports and represent New York as a founding TGL team,” Cohen said in a statement. “As golf continues to grow in popularity, there’s a demand for enhanced access to the sport and the world’s top players. TGL’s primetime schedule will offer an up-close, fast-paced, and innovative take on the sport that will appeal to traditional golf and new fans alike. We’re excited to be a part of TGL and build a team that makes New York proud.”

Mike McCarley, CEO of TMRW Sports and TGL, said the addition of a New York team “not only continues the success of adding major markets to TGL, but also adds an ownership group with strong ties to other major league teams and fanbases.”

“Steve Cohen’s ability and willingness to operate, promote, and market this team to New York fans is a significant step as we build towards the launch of TGL in January,” McCarley said. “Steve’s passion for winning is undeniable and infectious, as he is a welcomed addition to our original six TGL owners.

“A Cohen-led TGL team representing New York—alongside strong ownership groups in Atlanta, Boston, and Los Angeles—will further elevate the profile of TGL on the global stage.”

Research contact: @nytimes

Lindsey Graham says he will block Democrats’ effort to pass Supreme Court ethics bill

June 12, 2024

Senator Lindsey Graham, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, plans to block an effort by Senate Democrats to unanimously pass a Supreme Court ethics billon Wednesday, June 12, on the Senate floor, reports NBC News.

“I will object,” Graham (R-South Carolina), told NBC News. Graham’s objection means the bill won’t be able to move forward, because any senator can block a request.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said earlier on Tuesday, June 11, that he would make a unanimous consent request to pass Supreme Court ethics legislation that the panel advanced last July. A unanimous consent is an agreement on any question or matter before the Senate that sets aside a rule of procedure to expedite proceedings.

It isn’t clear whether the measure will come up for a vote under the normal process, but Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) said he’s considering it.

Even before Graham made his comments, Democrats doubted the legislation would advance. “I think I know the outcome, but we’re going to go through the exercise to make sure that both parties are in the record,” Durbin told reporters Tuesday afternoon.

The Democratic-led Judiciary Committee advanced the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act on a party-line vote nearly a year ago, but it can’t break a filibuster on the Senate floor without 60 votes. Democrats have 51 members, and no Republican is on board with the bill.

In a news release, Democrats said the vote follows “a myriad of apparent ethical lapses by Supreme Court justices, which demonstrate the need for ethics reform.”

A spokesperson for the Supreme Court didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday night.

The bill would give the court 180 days to adopt and publish a code of conduct—allowing the public to submit ethics complaints that would then be reviewed by a randomly selected panel of lower-court judges. It would also establish new rules for disclosing gifts and travel.

In addition, the legislation would require justices to publicly explain any decisions to recuse from cases.

Research contact: @NBCNews

Hunter Biden guilty on all three felony gun charges

June 11, 2024

On Tuesday, June 11, a jury panel of 12 Delaware found President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, guilty of three federal gun charges—marking the first criminal conviction of a sitting president’s child, reports The Hill.

Biden was convicted after roughly three hours of deliberation of three felony counts alleging he lied about his use of illicit drugs when obtaining a gun in 2018, and then unlawfully possessed the firearm for 11 days.

Hunter Biden’s trial, which lasted just over a week, spotlighted his addiction to crack cocaine at the time he checked “no” on a federal gun purchase form questioning whether he unlawfully used or was addicted to narcotics or other drugs.

Several women from Hunter Biden’s past and present—including his ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle; his late brother’s widow, Hallie Biden, with whom he had a brief relationship; and an ex-girlfriend—took the stand to testify about his drug use.

Hallie Biden, who was married to Hunter Biden’s brother, Beau, before his 2015 death from brain cancer, testified that crack made Hunter Biden “agitated or high-strung, but at other times, functioning as well.”

She also described being “panicked” after discovering the firearm in question in Hunter Biden’s truck, deciding then to dump the gun outside a grocery store in Wilmington, Delaware—a choice that precipitated the case against her brother-in-law.

In the defense case, Hunter Biden’s daughter, Naomi Biden, testified that she knew her father was “struggling with addiction” months before the unlawful gun purchase but that he “still seemed good” in October, when the transaction was made. However, prosecutors showed a text she wrote to her father at the time: “I’m really sorry dad I can’t take this.”

During closing arguments on Monday, June 10, prosecutors contended that Hunter Biden’s drug use started “years before” the gun purchase and “continued for months after,” according to CNN.

“He had lost control,” prosecutor Leo Wise said.

Hunter Biden’s attorneys emphasized that no one had witnessed “actual drug use” in the month that the president’s son bought the gun, seeking to undercut testimony from the three ex-lovers who testified in the government’s case.

The defense also purported that Hunter Biden, who had just completed a stint in rehab at the time he purchased the gun, did not believe he was lying when he answered “no” to the federal gun purchase form question asking if he presently was a drug user. The president’s son did not testify.

Hunter Biden faces a maximum of 25 years in prison and $750,000 in fines; however, first-time offenders are rarely given the maximum penalty. His father, the president, said recently he would not pardon his son if convicted.

In California, Hunter Biden faces separate charges for allegedly failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes and filing false returns, for which could go to trial in September.

Research contact: @thehill

Beauty brand Pretty Smart launches exclusively at Walmart

June 11, 2024

Startup beauty brand Pretty Smart launched exclusively in 2,800 Walmart stores; as well as on the retailer’s website and on its own site on Monday, June 10, reports Retail Dive.

Founded by beauty industry veteran Marissa Shipman, Pretty Smart is a price-sensitive, vertically integrated collection of makeup products; and is a subsidiary of Renfield Manufacturing, which is a family-owned business.

At launch, the brand offers 27 products with more than 145 shade variations. All products are priced from $7.50 to $10 each, and are aimed at providing luxury beauty products at an accessible price.

Many beauty brands launch first on their own websites and build a following before looking to expand through wholesale partnerships and brick-and-mortar locations. But Pretty Smart started working with Walmart even before its launch.

The beauty brand developed its products with the Walmart merchandising team “to make sure we are hitting the right formulas, shades and product identities for the customer” and said it’s $10-and-under price point is only possible because of the scale Walmart provides. A vertically-integrated model also helps keep costs low.

“Because we are vertically integrated, we are able to trim the fat in every step of the manufacturing process,” Shipman said in an email. “In [other] words, we concept, source our own packaging, own our own lab, own our own equipment, industrialize internally, fill packaging and then are able to move into our warehouse where we ship directly to Walmart. This enables us to keep our costs down significantly. We do not skimp on ingredients. We could charge three to four times more than what we currently are for these products.”

Shipman founded her first cosmetics company, theBalm, in 2004. TheBalm sells its products in over 111 countries. While some of the product categories are similar, Shipman says the way they are marketed is vastly different.

The decision to launch exclusively with Walmart comes as the retailer continues to expand its beauty and wellness offerings—opting to bring on a number of DTC brands over the past few years. Some of those include hair color company Madison Reed, LeBron James’ The Shop grooming line, and natural remedies brand Hilma.

“Helping our customers discover new brands that will both inspire and delight them is a priority for Walmart Beauty,” Creighton Kiper, vice president of Beauty Merchandising at Walmart U.S., said in a statement.

“Pretty Smart, which embodies a similar goal, is the perfect addition to our shelves and Walmart.com. While these accessibly priced, yet still luxurious beauty products will appeal to all Walmart beauty shoppers, we’re especially excited about the opportunity to reach Gen Z with this lineup,” Kiper added.

Research contact: @RetailDive

Alito says one side of political fight is ‘going to win,’ private event recordings reveal

June 11, 2024

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said that the political rift between America’s left and right would be extremely difficult to repair—and that one side was “going to win”—according to secretly recorded comments at a private event earlier this month, reports HuffPost.

Lauren Windsor, who describes herself as a documentarian and journalist, shared recordings of two encounters with Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts at an annual event held by the Supreme Court Historical Society on June 3. She said she posed as a religious conservative and held discussions with both men.

At one point, Windsor told Alito she didn’t believe conservatives could “negotiate with the left in the way that needs to happen for polarization to end.”

“I think you’re probably right,” Alito replied in the recorded conversation. “One side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised.”

Windsor went on to say that people who “believe in God have got to keep fighting … to return our country to a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you,” Alito said. “I agree with you.”

The recordings were released as the court faces new ethics questions raised by reports that two flags affiliated with the January 6, 2021, insurrectionists were flown outside Alito’s homes in recent years. The justice has refused calls to recuse himself from cases before the court related to the attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump and to the former president’s claims of absolute immunity from prosecution for his actions while in office.

Windsor’s conversations with Roberts were far more confrontational. As Windsor attempted to tell the chief justice the nation needs to be put on a more “moral path,” Roberts pushed back.

“Would you want me to be in charge of putting the nation on a more moral path?” he asked. “That’s for people we elect. That’s not for lawyers.”

When Windsor again tried to say that America is a “Christian nation,” Roberts took umbrage.

“I don’t know that we live in a Christian nation,” he said. “I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not, and it’s not our job to do that.”

The chief justice went on to say the court’s role in trying times is “nothing new,” pointing to the fractured political landscape after the Vietnam War.

Windsor belongs to the society and bought a ticket to the event using her real name, but she did not identify herself as a journalist or tell the justices she was recording them. She told The New York Times that she thought keeping the recording secret was the only way to get the justices to share their honest thoughts and provide proof, “otherwise, it’s just my word against theirs.”

“We have a court that has refused to submit to any accountability whatsoever—they are shrouded in secrecy” she told the Times on Monday. “I don’t know how, other than going undercover, I would have been able to get answers to these questions.”

The nonprofit society is billed as a nonpartisan group focused on preserving and collecting the history of the Supreme Court and raising public awareness about its work.

However, the body, whose honorary chair is Justice Roberts—and which counts Harlan Crow, Justice Clarence Thomas’ controversial benefactor, among its board of trustees—has faced controversy in the past few years.

The New York Times in 2022 reported that it had become a conduit of influence-peddling by “corporations, special interest groups, or lawyers and firms that argued cases before the court,” accounting for 60% of its contributions since 2003.

Research contact: @HuffPost

‘Malevolent’ traits may be key to athletic success, study finds

June 10, 2024

With the Olympic Games due to start next month, the world’s attention will once again turn to the physical performance of elite athletes—but some of the personality traits that could be key for success may not be what you expect. New research suggests that being self-centered, ruthless, and manipulative may help elite athletes achieve glory, reports The Telegraph.

In other words, characteristics that might be considered malevolent in social settings could be important in performance sport. However, these attributes are not all good, and could be having a negative impact on relationships with coaches.

Athlete and coach relationships could also suffer when coaches have these traits, sports scientists at Nottingham Trent University (NTU) have found.

Joseph Stanford, a researcher at NTU’s School of Science and Technology and the lead author, said: “Specific characteristics considered malevolent in social settings are highly relevant in performance sport.”

He added: “High-performance environments can often attract people who feel superior, are ruthless in the pursuit of winning. and have a heightened belief they can influence others for their own success.

“It is important to have a positive coach-athlete relationship in order to achieve success. To win, athletes and coaches must perform together under high pressure, often in demanding and stressful situations. “Our findings suggest we need to consider how personalities are likely to interact together in the sporting arena.

“Additional support for coaches would also allow them to understand how to create effective high-performance relationships.”

Researchers investigated the personalities and relationship quality of more than 300 elite athletes—swimmers, triathletes and cyclists—and their coaches using a series of established measures.

They looked specifically at a group of personalities known as the Dark Triad, which consists of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism (strategic exploitation and deceit).

And although these traits are perceived negatively in the general population, they may offer advantages within high-performance settings such as elite sport. But, until now, it has not been known how these traits might have an impact on the important relationship between athletes and coaches.

Dr Laura Healy of NTU, the senior author of the study, said: “Our research shows why some coaches and athletes may struggle to work together: Their unique personality traits make it hard to build a positive coach-athlete relationship.

Healy adds, “Helping coaches and athletes to understand who their partner is and how to work with them could lead to better-quality coach-athlete relationships within elite sport contexts, ultimately benefiting performance and sporting experience.”

The study, which was published in the journal, Personality and Individual Differences, found that the more self-centered a coach is—or the higher this or her level of narcissism—the less responsive that coach was to an athlete’s needs. At the same time, a coach and athlete would feel less trusting of one another if they were similarly self-centered.

Coaches liked athletes less, were less committed to them and less willing to do their best for them when they reported high levels of ruthlessness—or psychopathy—the researchers found.

Athletes with high levels of ruthlessness, meanwhile, felt less at ease when working with their coach and respected them less.

And when coaches reported a higher ability to manipulate—or greater levels of Machiavellianism—they were less complimentary towards their athletes/.

What’s more, according to the findings, athletes high in this trait became more uncommitted, distant, and unco-operative.

Research contact: @Telegraph