DKK 24.4 million for research into election defeat and our perception of drugs, time and quality of life

Margit Anne Petersen, Dorthe Kirkegaard Thomsen and Ali Amidi from the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences and Martin Bækgaard from the Department of Political Science at Aarhus BSS, Aarhus University have received DKK 24.4 million from the Danish Council for Independent Research.

The Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences and the Department of Political Science at Aarhus BSS Photo: Aarhus BSS
Researchers from the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences and the Department of Political Science have received grants from Independent Research Fund Denmark. Photo: Aarhus BSS

The four researchers from the Aarhus BSS at Aarhus University have each received a Research Project 2 grant of approximately DKK 6 million from Independent Research Fund Denmark.

Associate Professor Margit Anne Petersen from the Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research at the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences will investigate the use of prescription tranquilizers as a recreational drug among youth. She aims to analyse how the perception of these drugs has changed throughout history, particularly through American popular and music culture, and to explore young Danish users' perceptions, personal experiences, and potential addiction to these substances. Additionally, she will examine how the sale and promotion of these drugs occur on online markets and social media.

Psychology Professor Dorthe Kirkegaard Thomsen’s project focuses on personal recovery, i.e. experiencing quality of life, meaningfulness, control over one's life situation and hope while living with a mental illness.

Associate Professor Ali Amidi is exploring how people perceive and experience time. Can our biological clock, also known as the circadian rhythm, influence our perception of time? And can our perception of time change our biological clock?

Political science Professor Martin Bækgaard is to investigate party leaders’ explanations for their election defeats, and how these explanations affect voters' support and perceptions of the legitimacy of the election.