Listen and Subscribe
Podcast Transcript
Scientific research is usually associated with serious people asking serious questions.
However, some of the most fascinating discoveries come from investigating things that seem completely ridiculous.
Every year, a special set of awards honors researchers whose work makes people laugh, then think.
This year’s winners explored subjects ranging from the bizarre to the downright disgusting.
Learn more about the strange and surprising research honored by the 2026 Ig Nobel Prizes on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.
To all of the listeners of Everything Everywhere Daily, I owe you an apology.
For the entire time this podcast has been published, I haven’t covered the Ig Nobel Prizes. I could have been covering some of the world’s most….interesting….research for six years, but I haven’t.
So, if the best time to start was six years ago, the second best time is today.
As I have never covered the Ig Nobel Prizes before, I should give a bit of background on the awards themselves.
The Ig Nobel Prizes are a humorous counterpart to the Nobel Prizes, recognizing scientific research and other achievements that first make people laugh and then make them think. Although the subjects can seem absurd, much of the winning research is legitimate scientific work that explores unusual questions or uses unconventional methods.
Marc Abrahams, the editor and co-founder of Annals of Improbable Research, established the awards in 1991, and the organization now administers the prizes.
The name plays on the word ignoble, meaning dishonorable or lacking dignity, and the Nobel Prizes. The awards were originally presented at MIT before moving to Harvard University for many years.
Each year, the committee awards ten prizes in categories that include traditional scientific fields, as well as special categories chosen to suit the winning research. Candidates can be nominated by anyone, including themselves.
A selection committee reviews the nominations, privately contacts winners, and gives them the option to decline. Genuine Nobel laureates traditionally present the prizes at a ceremony featuring short acceptance speeches and intentionally ridiculous entertainment.
I should note that one person has won both an Ig Nobel Prize and a Nobel Prize. Andre Geim won a 2000 Ig Nobel Prize for levitating a frog with a magnet, and a 2010 Nobel Prize for research on the electromagnetic properties of graphene.
With that, let’s move on to the 2026 award winners.
The Biomechanics Prize was awarded to Matilda Brindle, Catherine Talbot, and Stuart West for a scientific definition of kissing.
The researchers tackled a deceptively complicated question: What exactly constitutes a kiss?
Although kissing seems distinctly human, scientists have observed mouth-to-mouth contact among many other animals. The challenge was creating a definition precise enough to compare behaviors across species without confusing kissing with fighting, feeding, or grooming.
The researchers proposed defining kissing as nonaggressive mouth-to-mouth contact between members of the same species, involving some movement of the lips or mouthparts and without transferring food.
Their comparative research considered behaviors in animals ranging from insects to mammals, including birds and polar bears.
So, Romance writers finally have research to back up their novels.
The Economics Prize was awarded to Paul Piff, Daniel Stancato, Stéphane Côté, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, and Dacher Keltner for wealthy people taking candy from children.
The researchers investigated whether socioeconomic status influences ethical behavior.
In a series of experiments published in 2012, they explored whether wealthier individuals were more likely to violate social norms or prioritize their own interests at the expense of others.
One particularly memorable experiment involved a bowl of candy that participants were told was intended for children. Participants could take some, but doing so would reduce the amount available to the children.
The researchers found that participants who ranked higher in socioeconomic status tended to take more candy.
Other experiments investigated behavior at road intersections, willingness to cheat, and attitudes toward unethical conduct. In several of these experiments, people with higher socioeconomic status broke rules more often.
Reportedly, the study was very easy to conduct. The researchers said it was like taking candy from a baby.
The Chemistry Prize was awarded to a group of 11 researchers for investigating the nutritional density of cockroach milk.
Most cockroaches lay eggs, but the Pacific beetle cockroach is unusual because it gives birth to live young.
The developing embryos receive nourishment from a milk-like secretion produced inside their mother’s body. This secretion contains proteins that crystallize in the embryos’ digestive systems.
In a 2016 study, scientists examined these protein crystals at the atomic level.
They found the crystals were exceptionally energy-dense, containing roughly three times the energy density of an equivalent mass of dairy milk.
The crystals contain proteins, fats, and sugars, making them unusually concentrated packages of nutrition.
The discovery attracted attention because such densely packed biological nutrients might inspire new approaches to food science.
The cockroach milk producers board is currently working on a new ad campaign.
The Medicine Prize was awarded posthumously to Tokuji Unno for the proper way to blow your nose.
Japanese physician Tokuji Unno received the prize for research published in 1977 that investigated the aerodynamics of blowing your nose.
Blowing your nose seems simple, but it involves complicated interactions between air pressure, mucus, and the narrow passages inside the nasal cavity.
His research on nasal airflow investigated how pressure builds up during nose blowing and how the structure of the nasal passages affects airflow.
His colleague, Dr. Miki Takahara, accepted the award and was reportedly acting very snotty at the ceremony.
The Biology Prize was awarded to a team of six researchers from Brazil and Australia for stepping on venomous snakes to see when they bite.
One of the more unusual experiments recognized in 2026 involved researchers deliberately placing their boots on or near venomous snakes to determine what provokes them to bite.
The researchers studied the Bothrops jararaca snake, a venomous pit viper responsible for many snakebites in Brazil.
Wearing protective footwear, researchers conducted experiments with 116 snakes, applying controlled disturbances at different body locations.
They also investigated whether temperature and time of day influenced defensive behavior.
The study concluded that stepping directly on a snake increased the chances of being bitten. So, just in case you didn’t know, do not step on poisonous snakes. That is science talking.
The Physics Prize was awarded to Randy Hurd, Zhao Pan, Tadd Truscott, and Kaveeshan Thurairajah for designing a urinal that doesn’t splash.
This research addressed a problem familiar to anyone who has ever cleaned a public restroom: urine tends to splash when it strikes a urinal surface.
The researchers used fluid dynamics, mathematical modeling, and laboratory experiments to investigate how a liquid stream interacts with different surfaces.
When liquid strikes a surface, the impact angle and the surface shape determine whether droplets scatter or the liquid flows smoothly along it.
The researchers studied how modifying the geometry of a urinal could reduce splashing. Their work included alternative designs that guide the stream into the fixture at a more favorable angle.
The potential benefits go beyond cleanliness. Reducing splashing could improve hygiene, cut water and cleaning needs, and make restrooms more accessible.
Janitors and custodians worldwide are rejoicing.
The Technology Prize was awarded to an international team of 12 researchers for using dead mosquitoes as 3D printing nozzles.
Mosquitoes, as I covered on a previous episode, have specialized mouthparts, including a structure called the proboscis, that can access blood through a tiny puncture in the skin.
The researchers recognized that these natural structures could serve as highly precise channels for dispensing liquid materials.
The researchers called their technique necroprinting.
Rather than fabricating an extremely small printing nozzle from scratch, they explored repurposing biological structures already produced by nature.
In experimental demonstrations, they incorporated mosquito mouthparts into printing systems to deposit materials at very small scales.
The potential applications include microfabrication, biological engineering, and the development of miniature devices.
The research illustrates a broader engineering principle known as biomimicry, which involves adapting structures or mechanisms that evolved in living organisms.
What makes this particular approach unusual is that it uses an actual biological component rather than merely copying its design.
Personally, I support anything that provides an economic incentive for killing more mosquitoes, and I will do all I can to provide a bounty of corpses for this project.
The Olfaction Prize was awarded to a team from Poland, Germany, and Sweden for their work on why babies smell wonderful but teenagers don’t.
This research explored how parents perceive the smell of their children as those children grow older.
Many parents find newborn babies’ smell extremely pleasant. The researchers wanted to see whether this reaction changes as the child gets older.
In a 2017 questionnaire study, parents were asked to evaluate their children’s natural body odors.
The findings suggested that parents generally rated younger children’s smells more favorably than adolescents’.
The researchers were interested in the psychological significance of these changing perceptions, including the possible role of body odor in parent-child relationships.
The results also raise interesting evolutionary questions. Pleasant infant odors might support caregiving and bonding, while adolescent changes could accompany a shift toward greater independence.
It could also reflect not showering after a 48-hour video game marathon fueled by nothing but Doritos and Mountain Dew.
The Peace Prize was awarded to a five-person international team that studied why we like friends who are mean to our enemies.
People generally claim to value kindness and generosity in their friends. However, the researchers found that these preferences depend partly on whom the kindness is directed toward.
In research published in 2023, they examined how people evaluate friends who behave differently toward allies and adversaries.
The study found that people sometimes prefer friends who are supportive and kind toward them but hostile or aggressive toward individuals they dislike.
In other words, a person may be considered a particularly valuable friend not despite their willingness to be unpleasant, but partly because of it.
This is why I have a close-knit group of professional assassins who are all completionist club members that I keep near me at all times.
The final award is the Soil Science Prize, which was given to Franz Bender, Marcel van der Heijden, Atlant Bieri, and Pia Viviani for burying 1,000 pairs of underwear around the world.
They buried 1,000 identical pairs of cotton underpants in soil at locations across more than 25 countries.
After approximately two months, the underwear was dug up and examined to determine how much of the cotton had decomposed.
The underlying science is straightforward.
Healthy soils contain communities of microorganisms and other organisms that break down organic matter. Cotton consists primarily of cellulose, a plant-derived material that many soil microorganisms can decompose.
When cotton underwear is buried, these organisms gradually digest the fabric.
The researchers used the degree of decomposition as a rough indicator of biological activity in the soil.
Under favorable conditions, much of the cotton fabric can disappear, while synthetic components such as elastic waistbands remain.
The project involved citizen scientists and offered a simple way to encourage public participation in soil research.
Alternatively, they found a really good tax-deductible way for people to get rid of their old underwear.
That concludes the 2026 Ig Nobel Prizes.
Now, if you will excuse me, I’m going to go submit my grant proposal for my research on whether podcast listeners listen to more podcasts than non-podcast listeners.