Cheaper, brighter, and greener, perovskite LEDs could change lighting — if they last long enough.

Experimental observations and theoretical analysis provide evidence that the spin polarization of the spin-spiral type II multiferroic NiI2 exhibits p-wave magnetism and its spin chirality is related to ferroelectric polarization, which can be electrically controlled.

The Vera C. Rubin Observatory in Chile will image the southern sky using the largest digital camera ever built.

An optical cavity amplifies the signatures of specific nuclei in an atomic lattice.

Eclampsia is a serious pregnancy complication and is associated with cerebral edema and infarctions. However, the underlying pathophysiology of eclampsia remains poorly explored.

High-precision spectroscopy of weakly bound rubidium dimers pushes a theoretical model to its limits.

A new model captures how impurities affect jets formed when bubbles rise and pop at a liquid surface.

Contrary to the popular saying, rules aren’t meant to be broken, as they are foundational to society and exist to uphold safety, fairness and order in the face of chaos. The collective benefits of rule-following are well established, but individual incentives are often unclear. Yet, people still comply, and the reasons why are pieces of a puzzle that researchers of human behavior have been trying to piece together for years.

A recent study published in Nature Human Behavior explored the behavioral principles behind why people follow rules using a newly designed framework called CRISP. A series of four online experiments based on the framework involving 14,034 English-speaking participants, revealed that the majority (55%–70%) of participants chose to follow arbitrary rules—even when the compliance was costly, they were anonymous and violations had no adverse effects on others.

This proposed CRISP system explains rule conformity © as a function of four components: R—intrinsic respect for rules, independent of others’ behavior; I—extrinsic incentives, such as the threat of punishment for breaking rules; S—social expectations about whether others will follow the rule or believe one should; and P—social preferences, which matter when rule-following affects the well-being of others.