Search
1000 results for “mose”
-
https://www.europesays.com/africa/230869/ Cycling vs motorists clash deepens in KZN after M4 hit-and-run incident #Cycle #cyclists #durban #DurbanNorth #IolNews #KwaZuluNatal #KwazuluNatalCycling #m17 #m4 #m7 #MosesMabhida #N2 #n3 #NdabeSibiya #OwenBotha #Road #SouthAfrica
-
Exodus 34:30 is a powerful testament to the transformative effect of encountering God. Moses’ glowing face serves as a symbol of divine glory, intimacy with God, and the unique role he played as mediator between God and Israel.
#Exodus #wolink #freebiblestudyhub
https://www.freebiblestudyhub.com/archives/28856 -
https://www.europesays.com/be-fr/?p=100146 La Meurthe-et-Moselle et le Grand Nancy – La carte aux trésors le mercredi 13 mai à 1h25 sur France 3 #BE #BEFr #Belgique #Belgium #Divertissement #Entertainment #France3 #jeu #LaCarteAuxTru00e9sors #programme #Television
-
Meurthe-et-Moselle: un homme tue son fils de 7 ans puis se suicide : Actualités
Un homme a tiré sur ses deux fils, tuant le plus jeune âgé de 7 ans et blessant…
#Nancy #FR #France #Actu #News #Europe #EU #actu #Actualités #Enfants #enquête #europe #GrandEst #Homicide #Police #Républiquefrançaise #suicide
https://www.europesays.com/fr/923922/ -
Happy anniversary to Wynonna Judd and Cactus Moser! They tied the knot at her home in Leiper's Fork, Tennessee thirteen years ago today. #MusicIsLove
-
Happy anniversary to Wynonna Judd and Cactus Moser! They tied the knot at her home in Leiper's Fork, Tennessee thirteen years ago today. #MusicIsLove
-
Happy anniversary to Wynonna Judd and Cactus Moser! They tied the knot at her home in Leiper's Fork, Tennessee thirteen years ago today. #MusicIsLove
-
-
-
-
-
-
Kotaku: Baldur’s Gate 2’s Characters Were ‘Cardboard Cutouts’ Until Devs Played Final Fantasy VII https://kotaku.com/baldurs-gate-2-3-final-fantasy-7-bioware-cloud-tifa-1850918340 #gaming #tech #kotaku #roleplayingvideogames #roleplayingvideogame #finalfantasyvii #dungeonsdragons #finalfantasy #baldursgate #jamesohlen #fantasy #mosey #bg2 #rpg
-
Kotaku: Baldur’s Gate 2’s Characters Were ‘Cardboard Cutouts’ Until Devs Played Final Fantasy VII https://kotaku.com/baldurs-gate-2-3-final-fantasy-7-bioware-cloud-tifa-1850918340 #gaming #tech #kotaku #roleplayingvideogames #roleplayingvideogame #finalfantasyvii #dungeonsdragons #finalfantasy #baldursgate #jamesohlen #fantasy #mosey #bg2 #rpg
-
Kotaku: Baldur’s Gate 2’s Characters Were ‘Cardboard Cutouts’ Until Devs Played Final Fantasy VII https://kotaku.com/baldurs-gate-2-3-final-fantasy-7-bioware-cloud-tifa-1850918340 #gaming #tech #kotaku #roleplayingvideogames #roleplayingvideogame #finalfantasyvii #dungeonsdragons #finalfantasy #baldursgate #jamesohlen #fantasy #mosey #bg2 #rpg
-
an incredible video analysis on a video game that grapples with themes like taking responsibility, the absurdity of life, and standing up to the mistreatment of yourself and those around you.
#sexualabuse
#mouthwashing
#latestagecapitalism -
an incredible video analysis on a video game that grapples with themes like taking responsibility, the absurdity of life, and standing up to the mistreatment of yourself and those around you.
#sexualabuse
#mouthwashing
#latestagecapitalism -
an incredible video analysis on a video game that grapples with themes like taking responsibility, the absurdity of life, and standing up to the mistreatment of yourself and those around you.
#sexualabuse
#mouthwashing
#latestagecapitalism -
The Unknown God
A Sermon about the Idols of Yesterday and Today
Acts 17:16–31
(Note: Sermons can be heard in audio format at https://millersburgmennonite.org/worship/sermon-audio/)
In our scripture this morning, Paul walks into Athens, a city overflowing with religion, beauty, ideas, temples, shrines, altars, arguments, and gods.
Athens is not empty.
Athens is crowded.
And Paul is deeply troubled.
Paul is not troubled because Athens is secular. He is troubled because Athens is religious in all the wrong ways. The city is full of worship, but empty of surrender. Full of gods, but not the living God. Full of altars but still haunted by absence.
For among all those altars, Paul notices one inscription:
To an unknown god.
What a haunting phrase.
In the middle of all the Athenians’ certainty, there is still this admission: we may have missed something. We may not know as much as we think. There may still be a God we have not recognized.
And I wonder if that is not where many people are right now.
Not atheists necessarily. Not even irreligious. But uncertain. Searching. Guarded. Spiritual, yet suspicious of certainty. Curious yet afraid of being closed off or closed in. Open and yet not really able to surrender to truth. Religious and yet still missing God.
La Atenas de Pablo no es solamente historia antigua; también describe nuestro mundo de hoy.
So Athens is not just ancient history.
Athens is now.
Let us pray.
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in your sight, O God, our Rock and our Redeemer. Amen.
Homily
Like the Athens of Paul’s day, our world today is full of altars too.
Altars to nation. Altars to wealth. Altars to image. Altars to safety. Altars to tribe. Altars to ideology. Altars to the market. Altars to the screen. Altars to the self.
We, like the Athenians, have all kinds of gods.
One reason I think our public discourse feels so fractured is that we are not just arguing about small things. We are bringing completely different belief systems into the room.
In Athens there were Jews who worshiped the one living God; God-fearing Greeks drawn toward that God but not fully committed; Epicureans who sought calm and freedom from fear; Stoics who valued reason, virtue, order, and discipline; and this strange altar to an unknown god, an altar that says, “We do not want to miss the divine. We know there is more than we can name.”
Paul proclaims a God who is not vague, not distant, not merely a principle, not one more option in the marketplace of ideas. Paul proclaims the God who made the world and everything in it, the God who gives life and breath to all, the God who cannot be reduced to shrines or captured in gold or silver or stone or circuitry, the God who is near to all, the God who now calls all people everywhere to repent because God has raised Jesus from the dead.
Pablo anuncia que Dios no es una idea vaga ni un ídolo más, sino el Creador que da vida, aliento y resurrección.
Some may believe truth is revealed and binding. Others are spiritual, but indefinite. Others have been wounded by the church and do not know whether the word “God” is invitation or threat.
And into all of that, Christian witness says: the world belongs to its Creator, and history has turned in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
When Paul is brought to the Areopagus, we might imagine a cozy invitation. Maybe there is curiosity there, but there is also something more serious. Paul is being examined. Tested. Weighed. Asked to explain himself in public.
Paul is heard, but under suspicion.
And how does he respond?
Not with coercion. Not with panic. Not with silence. Not with flattery. Not with domination.
He responds with witness.
Paul pays attention. He listens. He observes. He starts where the people are.
Pablo no responde con poder o miedo, sino con atención, humildad y testimonio.
Paul does not begin by quoting Moses. He does not begin where he is most comfortable. He begins with what his hearers can recognize: their altar, their poets, their longing, their language of divine nearness.
My friends, that is not compromise. That is faithful witness.
And this matters for us, because our witness cannot always sound exactly the same in every place, in every room, in every forum.
The gospel does not change. “Jesus Christ is Lord” – that doesn’t change either. The call to repentance, reconciliation, mercy, justice, truth, and abundant life this side of the resurrection does not change.
But the way we bear witness may depend on where we are and who is in front of us.
El evangelio no cambia, pero la manera de dar testimonio puede cambiar según el lugar y las personas.
When Paul is in the synagogue, he reasons from the scriptures. But when Paul is in Athens, among philosophers, idolaters, seekers, and skeptics, he begins somewhere else. He begins with creation. He begins with breath. He begins with longing. He begins with the altar they already have. He begins with the poetry they already know.
Paul does not start by asking them to enter his world. He first enters theirs.
That is not watering down the faith. That is speaking the truth in love. That is incarnation-shaped witness.
Pablo entra en el mundo de sus oyentes para poder anunciarles fielmente al Dios vivo.
Paul does not introduce Athens to a God who was absent until Paul arrived. Paul reveals the presence of a God they have already been brushing up against.
The God they called unknown has been waiting to be revealed.
Paul says this God gives to all mortals life and breath and all things. Paul says this God is not far from each one of us. Paul says, “In him we live and move and have our being.”
So maybe the question is not simply, “Will God show up?”
Maybe the deeper question is, “Will we recognize how God is already showing up?”
Which brings us to a question worth asking every day:
God, how are you going to show up today?
Not, “God, are you going to show up?”
But, “God, how are you going to show up?”
La pregunta no es solo si Dios aparecerá, sino si tendremos ojos para reconocer cómo Dios ya está presente.
Because Acts 17 reveals to us that God may already be present before people have the right language. God may already be at work before someone has the right doctrine. God may already be stirring longing before anyone knows how to name that longing.
God may already be there in the question. God may already be there in the difference. God may already be there in the ache. God may already be there in the crack in someone’s certainty.
Paul sees an altar to an unknown god, and he does not only see idolatry. He also sees longing. He sees an opening. He sees a place where witness can begin.
Dios puede estar obrando en la pregunta, en el dolor, en el anhelo, aun antes de que sepamos nombrarlo.
And then Paul does something just as important:
He does not stay there.
He builds a bridge, yes. But he also tells the truth.
He says, in effect, “The God you do not know is the God who made you. The God you have not recognized is the God who gives you breath. The God you have left unnamed is not contained in your temples. The God you seek cannot be reduced to your idols.”
Because idolatry is not just about statues.
Idolatry is whenever we try to bind God to our own systems of power and belief.
Idolatry is when nation becomes ultimate. Idolatry is when wealth becomes sacred. Idolatry is when violence is blessed. Idolatry is when “they” usurps “us.” Idolatry is when “my people” become more important than “humanity.” Idolatry is when our beliefs matter more than relationships. Idolatry is when our politics, grievances, fears, and identities begin to function as gods.
And let us be honest: the church is not exempt.
Athens is not only out there.
Athens is in here.
Athens is in us whenever we want a manageable god. Athens is in us whenever we want a useful god. Athens is in us whenever we want a god who blesses our side, confirms our assumptions, secures our system, and God forbid, never ever, disrupts our loyalties.
But Paul says the living God does not dwell in temples made by human hands.
That means God is not mine, yours, ours to manage.
Dios no pertenece a nuestros sistemas; nosotros pertenecemos al Dios vivo.
Which begs the question:
God, how are you going to show up?
Because we often want God to show up in familiar ways. Predictable ways. Comfortable ways. Worshipful, yes, but also manageable.
But what if the living God shows up in ways that unsettle us?
What if God shows up in the person we dismissed? What if God shows up in the hard conversation? What if God shows up in the exposure of an idol? What if God shows up in a call to repentance? What if God shows up not to decorate our little altars, but to overturn them?
There are some places where our witness begins with Scripture. Some where it begins with service. Some with silence. Some with apology. Some with saying, “Tell me more.”
There are some places where our witness begins not by answering a question no one is asking, but by noticing the altar in the room, the longing in the room, the wound in the room, the fear in the room, the unknown god in the room.
And yet, Christian witness does not end with vague spirituality.
Paul does not say, “Well, you have your gods, and I have mine, and maybe underneath it all we mean the same thing.”
No.
He moves to repentance.
He moves to judgment.
He moves to resurrection.
Because resurrection means God has shown up in Jesus Christ.
The unknown God is unknown no longer.
Not because we figured God out, but because God has acted. Because Christ has been raised.
El Dios desconocido se ha dado a conocer en Jesucristo, crucificado y resucitado.
Because death is not lord. Caesar is not lord. The economy is not lord. Violence is not lord. Fear is not lord. (Fill in the blank) is not lord. Like we say down South, those dogs don’t hunt.
Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus Christ is Lord!
The Cosmic Christ is more than just our own personal Jesus. And that means resurrection is not just good news for me, or my private soul. Or you and your private soul. It is the announcement of a new humanity under a new Lord. A new community. A new allegiance. A new public witness.
La resurrección anuncia una nueva humanidad bajo el señorío de Cristo.
That is who the church is meant to be.
Not simply a chaplain to the culture. Not another little religious booth in the marketplace of ideas. Not a baptizer of empire. Not a slave to ideology.
The church is the gathering of a resurrection people.
A people who do not only say, “God, show up.”
But a people who say,
God, help us recognize how you are showing up.
La iglesia existe para reconocer y encarnar la presencia del Cristo resucitado en el mundo.
So ask the question.
Ask it every morning. Ask it before worship. Ask it before the meeting. Ask it before the conversation. Ask it before you enter the room.
God, how are you going to show up?
And then ask the next question:
God, how are you calling me to show up?
To show up in worship, to show up in our community, to show up in the public square, to show up in the hard conversation, to show up in the awkward silence, and to show up in the uncomfortable moment when it would be easier to walk away.
My friends, we are the church of God. We are resurrection people, and resurrection people do not hide behind rose-colored stained-glass windows.
We show up because God first showed up.
We show up not because we are fearless, but because we are faithful. We show up not because every moment is easy, but because love is present. We show up not because we control the outcome, but because Christ is Lord. We show up not to dominate, not to coerce, not to win, but to bear witness.
Nos presentamos no para dominar, sino para dar testimonio con fidelidad, amor, humildad y paz.
And our witness may look different depending on where we are.
In worship, we show up with praise. In the neighborhood, with service. In conflict, with humility. In public life, with truth and peace. Among the wounded, with gentleness. Among the arrogant, with courage. Among the uncertain, with patience. Among the idols, with discernment.
Paul showed up in Athens.
He showed up in a city full of idols, in misunderstanding, under scrutiny, in the awkwardness of difference.
He showed up with a witness shaped by the place he was in.
He did not abandon the gospel.
He embodied it.
He trusted that God was already there ahead of him.
Pablo confió en que Dios ya estaba presente antes de que él hablara.
Maybe that is our calling too.
Not to have every answer. Not to control every room. Not to force belief.
But to show up with courage, humility, truth, and love, because the God who seemed unknown has already come near.
So this week, before you enter the room, begin the conversation, make the assumption, or speak the word, ask:
God, how are you going to show up here, in this moment, today?
And then ask:
Lord Jesus, how are you calling me to show up, here, in this moment, today, with you?
Because the God who was unknown has been made known, and the God who has been made known is still showing up, in us and in the people around us, in our homes and in the homes next door, in our neighborhood and in the communities down the road, in our nation and in all the nations of the world.
May God grant us open eyes and willing hearts to see and serve.
Let us pray.
#Acts17 #anabaptist #Areopagus #biblicalPreaching #ChristianArt #ChristianWitness #ChurchAndSociety #Cross #discernment #faithAndCulture #faithfulWitness #falseGods #GodShowingUp #Idolatry #JesusChristIsLord #modernIdols #PaulInAthens #publicWitness #Repentance #resurrection #SacredImagery #sermonIllustration #spiritualLonging #UnknownGod -
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Real-world evidence shows generative AI is making human creative output more uniform
Using artificial intelligence for creative tasks tends to make human output more uniform on a collective level. A recent preprint study provides evidence that while these tools might boost individual performance, they contribute to an overall reduction in the diversity of ideas across different users. This widespread reliance on automated assistance could lead to a narrower range of concepts in collaborative environments.
Generative artificial intelligence refers to computer programs capable of creating new text, images, or other media based on user instructions. The most common of these tools rely on large language models. Developers build these models by feeding them billions of sentences from the internet, allowing the software to recognize patterns and predict how words should follow one another.
Since many users interact with similar systems trained on overlapping data, scientists have raised concerns about how this technology shapes human thought. Researchers Alwin de Rooij, assistant professor in creativity research at Tilburg University and associate professor at Avans University of Applied Sciences, and Michael Mose Biskjaer, associate professor in design creativity and innovation at Aarhus University, designed a new study to assess these concerns. They noticed that previous research often focused on how these tools help individuals work faster or overcome temporary mental blocks.
They wanted to know if this individual assistance comes at a collective cost. “There are growing concerns that using Generative AI may lead people toward similar creative ideas,” the authors explained. “While AI can enhance creativity at the individual level, these benefits might come at a cost for creativity at a collective, or even societal, level.”
The authors sought to answer whether generative software makes people think alike. “We sought to address this by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 empirical studies,” they noted. “More concretely, we wanted to examine whether and to what extent generative AI use is associated with convergence at the level of creative output, such as people’s ideas, designs, and creative writing.”
A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines the results of multiple independent studies to find common patterns or overall trends. By pooling data from various experiments, scientists can draw more robust conclusions than they could from a single test. The authors searched academic databases for studies published between 2022 and early 2026.
This time frame covers the period following the public release of popular chatbots, capturing the first wave of empirical research on this topic. The researchers selected 18 eligible articles containing 19 distinct experimental studies. These studies provided a total of 61 individual effect sizes, which are mathematical values indicating the strength of a specific phenomenon.
To be included in the analysis, the original experiments had to compare humans working with generative software against humans working alone. The original studies measured homogenization using several techniques. Many relied on advanced text analysis tools that translate written responses into mathematical coordinates.
This process allows computers to measure the semantic distance between words, essentially calculating how closely related different ideas are to one another. Other studies used human experts to rate the variety of meanings produced by participants. The analysis revealed a statistically significant homogenization effect associated with the use of artificial intelligence.
When people co-created with these systems, their final products tended to be more similar to the work of other users. “The meta-analysis shows that using generative AI can indeed lead people to think alike,” the authors noted. “Across individuals, AI use tends to make ideas, designs, and creative texts more similar to one another.”
“This suggests that AI may contribute to a form of homogenization of creative thought at the collective level,” they continued. “Importantly, this does not necessarily reflect a failure of human-AI co-creation but may instead be an inherent feature of how these systems currently support creative work at scale.”
The scientists also evaluated whether the type of task influenced the degree of uniformity. They categorized the experiments into four groups, which included divergent thinking, idea generation, writing, and visual art. Divergent thinking tasks are highly open-ended exercises, such as asking someone to list creative uses for a paperclip.
Idea generation tasks provide more specific constraints, such as asking for solutions to improve public transportation. The analysis showed that the homogenization effect was strongest in the idea generation tasks. Because these exercises require specific solutions to defined problems, users likely rely more heavily on the predictable suggestions provided by the computer algorithms.
The researchers did not find strong statistical evidence for differences among the other three categories, suggesting that open-ended tasks lead to less convergence. They also checked if these patterns only happen in highly controlled laboratory settings. The authors compared traditional laboratory experiments with real-world scenarios, such as analyzing published essays and visual artworks created before and after the widespread adoption of automated writing tools.
The analysis of these real-world conditions showed a small but significant reduction in idea diversity. “In many ways, the findings resemble classic fixation effects from the psychology literature, where exposure to examples constrains later thinking, but here they appear amplified by the scale and synchronicity of generative AI model use,” the researchers stated. “This homogenization effect was observed not only in controlled lab studies but also in real-world quasi-experiments. This suggests that it is not merely a lab-based phenomenon, but a practical concern affecting concrete creative processes and practices.”
De Rooij and Biskjaer also investigated whether this narrowing of ideas persists after a person stops using the software. They isolated a subset of studies that tested participants on new creative tasks after their initial interaction with the computer models. The results suggest that the homogenization effect carries over into these subsequent activities.
“The findings also provide preliminary evidence that homogenization effects may persist beyond moments of direct AI use,” the researchers told PsyPost. “In other words, interacting with these generative AI systems may shape how people think and generate ideas even after the interaction has ended. This potential ‘rub-off’ effect on creative cognition warrants further research and is something we would like to explore in more depth.”
These results closely align with another recent study published in the journal PNAS Nexus. Scientists Emily Wenger and Yoed N. Kenett tested how large language models affect human creativity by evaluating 22 different commercial chatbots. They recruited 102 human participants to complete a series of verbal creativity tests, including the alternative uses task, and then asked the chatbots to complete the exact same assignments.
Wenger and Kenett found that individual language models performed at or slightly above the level of the average human on most exercises. When viewed in isolation, a single chatbot provided highly original and creative responses. However, when the scientists compared all the responses from the different models, a stark pattern of similarity emerged.
Across all tasks, the computer programs produced answers that were significantly more alike than the answers provided by the human participants. Both sets of researchers point to similar underlying mechanisms for this phenomenon. Because the major technology companies train their models on massive, overlapping datasets scraped from the internet, the programs naturally gravitate toward the most statistically common word associations.
When thousands of people use these tools to generate ideas, the software acts as a semantic anchor. The models pull human users toward a shared set of typical concepts, reducing the overall variety of ideas. Wenger and Kenett attempted to fix this issue by adjusting the internal settings of the chatbots to force more random text generation, but this caused the models to produce nonsensical sentences.
Readers should avoid interpreting these findings as proof that human beings are becoming entirely uncreative. De Rooij and Biskjaer note that the reduction in collective diversity does not equal a total loss of individual ability. “A key point is that our findings do not show that using AI reduces creativity,” the researchers emphasized.
“Rather, they point to a shift in where and how creative diversity occurs, and where it may be constrained,” the authors said. “Individual output can improve in creative quality while becoming more similar across people. While these effects are often subtle in single instances, they may become meaningful when considered at the scale at which generative AI is now being used.”
The authors point out some limitations to their current analysis. The review primarily focuses on text-based tools and large language models, meaning the findings might not apply to other types of computer systems. For instance, adaptive machine learning programs or tools used for music composition were not adequately represented in the available data.
This restricts how broadly the scientific community can apply these conclusions across different artistic domains. Additionally, the analyses regarding long-term persistence and real-world applications relied on relatively small groups of studies. The limited data makes these specific conclusions tentative and open to revision.
Future research should explore different forms of human and machine collaboration over extended periods of time. “An important next step is rethinking how generative AI systems are designed and used in creative contexts to mitigate homogenization effects,” the authors noted. “This includes exploring alternative workflows, interaction designs, and creative strategies that sustain diversity rather than encourage early convergence.”
“One step in this direction has already been taken by mapping creative strategies for working with generative AI and machine learning, based on analyses of AI art practices,” they added, referencing a recently published article outlining this approach. “We believe these strategies can transfer to other creative domains.”
The preprint study, “Does Generative AI Make Us Think Alike? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Homogenization Effects in Human-AI Co-Creation,” was authored by Alwin de Rooij and Michael Mose Biskjaer.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #GenerativeAI #CreativityDiversity #AICoCreation #Homogenization #CreativeThinking #AIImpact #CreativeDiversity #LLMs #TechEthics #InnovationScience
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Real-world evidence shows generative AI is making human creative output more uniform
Using artificial intelligence for creative tasks tends to make human output more uniform on a collective level. A recent preprint study provides evidence that while these tools might boost individual performance, they contribute to an overall reduction in the diversity of ideas across different users. This widespread reliance on automated assistance could lead to a narrower range of concepts in collaborative environments.
Generative artificial intelligence refers to computer programs capable of creating new text, images, or other media based on user instructions. The most common of these tools rely on large language models. Developers build these models by feeding them billions of sentences from the internet, allowing the software to recognize patterns and predict how words should follow one another.
Since many users interact with similar systems trained on overlapping data, scientists have raised concerns about how this technology shapes human thought. Researchers Alwin de Rooij, assistant professor in creativity research at Tilburg University and associate professor at Avans University of Applied Sciences, and Michael Mose Biskjaer, associate professor in design creativity and innovation at Aarhus University, designed a new study to assess these concerns. They noticed that previous research often focused on how these tools help individuals work faster or overcome temporary mental blocks.
They wanted to know if this individual assistance comes at a collective cost. “There are growing concerns that using Generative AI may lead people toward similar creative ideas,” the authors explained. “While AI can enhance creativity at the individual level, these benefits might come at a cost for creativity at a collective, or even societal, level.”
The authors sought to answer whether generative software makes people think alike. “We sought to address this by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 empirical studies,” they noted. “More concretely, we wanted to examine whether and to what extent generative AI use is associated with convergence at the level of creative output, such as people’s ideas, designs, and creative writing.”
A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines the results of multiple independent studies to find common patterns or overall trends. By pooling data from various experiments, scientists can draw more robust conclusions than they could from a single test. The authors searched academic databases for studies published between 2022 and early 2026.
This time frame covers the period following the public release of popular chatbots, capturing the first wave of empirical research on this topic. The researchers selected 18 eligible articles containing 19 distinct experimental studies. These studies provided a total of 61 individual effect sizes, which are mathematical values indicating the strength of a specific phenomenon.
To be included in the analysis, the original experiments had to compare humans working with generative software against humans working alone. The original studies measured homogenization using several techniques. Many relied on advanced text analysis tools that translate written responses into mathematical coordinates.
This process allows computers to measure the semantic distance between words, essentially calculating how closely related different ideas are to one another. Other studies used human experts to rate the variety of meanings produced by participants. The analysis revealed a statistically significant homogenization effect associated with the use of artificial intelligence.
When people co-created with these systems, their final products tended to be more similar to the work of other users. “The meta-analysis shows that using generative AI can indeed lead people to think alike,” the authors noted. “Across individuals, AI use tends to make ideas, designs, and creative texts more similar to one another.”
“This suggests that AI may contribute to a form of homogenization of creative thought at the collective level,” they continued. “Importantly, this does not necessarily reflect a failure of human-AI co-creation but may instead be an inherent feature of how these systems currently support creative work at scale.”
The scientists also evaluated whether the type of task influenced the degree of uniformity. They categorized the experiments into four groups, which included divergent thinking, idea generation, writing, and visual art. Divergent thinking tasks are highly open-ended exercises, such as asking someone to list creative uses for a paperclip.
Idea generation tasks provide more specific constraints, such as asking for solutions to improve public transportation. The analysis showed that the homogenization effect was strongest in the idea generation tasks. Because these exercises require specific solutions to defined problems, users likely rely more heavily on the predictable suggestions provided by the computer algorithms.
The researchers did not find strong statistical evidence for differences among the other three categories, suggesting that open-ended tasks lead to less convergence. They also checked if these patterns only happen in highly controlled laboratory settings. The authors compared traditional laboratory experiments with real-world scenarios, such as analyzing published essays and visual artworks created before and after the widespread adoption of automated writing tools.
The analysis of these real-world conditions showed a small but significant reduction in idea diversity. “In many ways, the findings resemble classic fixation effects from the psychology literature, where exposure to examples constrains later thinking, but here they appear amplified by the scale and synchronicity of generative AI model use,” the researchers stated. “This homogenization effect was observed not only in controlled lab studies but also in real-world quasi-experiments. This suggests that it is not merely a lab-based phenomenon, but a practical concern affecting concrete creative processes and practices.”
De Rooij and Biskjaer also investigated whether this narrowing of ideas persists after a person stops using the software. They isolated a subset of studies that tested participants on new creative tasks after their initial interaction with the computer models. The results suggest that the homogenization effect carries over into these subsequent activities.
“The findings also provide preliminary evidence that homogenization effects may persist beyond moments of direct AI use,” the researchers told PsyPost. “In other words, interacting with these generative AI systems may shape how people think and generate ideas even after the interaction has ended. This potential ‘rub-off’ effect on creative cognition warrants further research and is something we would like to explore in more depth.”
These results closely align with another recent study published in the journal PNAS Nexus. Scientists Emily Wenger and Yoed N. Kenett tested how large language models affect human creativity by evaluating 22 different commercial chatbots. They recruited 102 human participants to complete a series of verbal creativity tests, including the alternative uses task, and then asked the chatbots to complete the exact same assignments.
Wenger and Kenett found that individual language models performed at or slightly above the level of the average human on most exercises. When viewed in isolation, a single chatbot provided highly original and creative responses. However, when the scientists compared all the responses from the different models, a stark pattern of similarity emerged.
Across all tasks, the computer programs produced answers that were significantly more alike than the answers provided by the human participants. Both sets of researchers point to similar underlying mechanisms for this phenomenon. Because the major technology companies train their models on massive, overlapping datasets scraped from the internet, the programs naturally gravitate toward the most statistically common word associations.
When thousands of people use these tools to generate ideas, the software acts as a semantic anchor. The models pull human users toward a shared set of typical concepts, reducing the overall variety of ideas. Wenger and Kenett attempted to fix this issue by adjusting the internal settings of the chatbots to force more random text generation, but this caused the models to produce nonsensical sentences.
Readers should avoid interpreting these findings as proof that human beings are becoming entirely uncreative. De Rooij and Biskjaer note that the reduction in collective diversity does not equal a total loss of individual ability. “A key point is that our findings do not show that using AI reduces creativity,” the researchers emphasized.
“Rather, they point to a shift in where and how creative diversity occurs, and where it may be constrained,” the authors said. “Individual output can improve in creative quality while becoming more similar across people. While these effects are often subtle in single instances, they may become meaningful when considered at the scale at which generative AI is now being used.”
The authors point out some limitations to their current analysis. The review primarily focuses on text-based tools and large language models, meaning the findings might not apply to other types of computer systems. For instance, adaptive machine learning programs or tools used for music composition were not adequately represented in the available data.
This restricts how broadly the scientific community can apply these conclusions across different artistic domains. Additionally, the analyses regarding long-term persistence and real-world applications relied on relatively small groups of studies. The limited data makes these specific conclusions tentative and open to revision.
Future research should explore different forms of human and machine collaboration over extended periods of time. “An important next step is rethinking how generative AI systems are designed and used in creative contexts to mitigate homogenization effects,” the authors noted. “This includes exploring alternative workflows, interaction designs, and creative strategies that sustain diversity rather than encourage early convergence.”
“One step in this direction has already been taken by mapping creative strategies for working with generative AI and machine learning, based on analyses of AI art practices,” they added, referencing a recently published article outlining this approach. “We believe these strategies can transfer to other creative domains.”
The preprint study, “Does Generative AI Make Us Think Alike? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Homogenization Effects in Human-AI Co-Creation,” was authored by Alwin de Rooij and Michael Mose Biskjaer.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #GenerativeAI #CreativityDiversity #AICoCreation #Homogenization #CreativeThinking #AIImpact #CreativeDiversity #LLMs #TechEthics #InnovationScience
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Real-world evidence shows generative AI is making human creative output more uniform
Using artificial intelligence for creative tasks tends to make human output more uniform on a collective level. A recent preprint study provides evidence that while these tools might boost individual performance, they contribute to an overall reduction in the diversity of ideas across different users. This widespread reliance on automated assistance could lead to a narrower range of concepts in collaborative environments.
Generative artificial intelligence refers to computer programs capable of creating new text, images, or other media based on user instructions. The most common of these tools rely on large language models. Developers build these models by feeding them billions of sentences from the internet, allowing the software to recognize patterns and predict how words should follow one another.
Since many users interact with similar systems trained on overlapping data, scientists have raised concerns about how this technology shapes human thought. Researchers Alwin de Rooij, assistant professor in creativity research at Tilburg University and associate professor at Avans University of Applied Sciences, and Michael Mose Biskjaer, associate professor in design creativity and innovation at Aarhus University, designed a new study to assess these concerns. They noticed that previous research often focused on how these tools help individuals work faster or overcome temporary mental blocks.
They wanted to know if this individual assistance comes at a collective cost. “There are growing concerns that using Generative AI may lead people toward similar creative ideas,” the authors explained. “While AI can enhance creativity at the individual level, these benefits might come at a cost for creativity at a collective, or even societal, level.”
The authors sought to answer whether generative software makes people think alike. “We sought to address this by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 empirical studies,” they noted. “More concretely, we wanted to examine whether and to what extent generative AI use is associated with convergence at the level of creative output, such as people’s ideas, designs, and creative writing.”
A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines the results of multiple independent studies to find common patterns or overall trends. By pooling data from various experiments, scientists can draw more robust conclusions than they could from a single test. The authors searched academic databases for studies published between 2022 and early 2026.
This time frame covers the period following the public release of popular chatbots, capturing the first wave of empirical research on this topic. The researchers selected 18 eligible articles containing 19 distinct experimental studies. These studies provided a total of 61 individual effect sizes, which are mathematical values indicating the strength of a specific phenomenon.
To be included in the analysis, the original experiments had to compare humans working with generative software against humans working alone. The original studies measured homogenization using several techniques. Many relied on advanced text analysis tools that translate written responses into mathematical coordinates.
This process allows computers to measure the semantic distance between words, essentially calculating how closely related different ideas are to one another. Other studies used human experts to rate the variety of meanings produced by participants. The analysis revealed a statistically significant homogenization effect associated with the use of artificial intelligence.
When people co-created with these systems, their final products tended to be more similar to the work of other users. “The meta-analysis shows that using generative AI can indeed lead people to think alike,” the authors noted. “Across individuals, AI use tends to make ideas, designs, and creative texts more similar to one another.”
“This suggests that AI may contribute to a form of homogenization of creative thought at the collective level,” they continued. “Importantly, this does not necessarily reflect a failure of human-AI co-creation but may instead be an inherent feature of how these systems currently support creative work at scale.”
The scientists also evaluated whether the type of task influenced the degree of uniformity. They categorized the experiments into four groups, which included divergent thinking, idea generation, writing, and visual art. Divergent thinking tasks are highly open-ended exercises, such as asking someone to list creative uses for a paperclip.
Idea generation tasks provide more specific constraints, such as asking for solutions to improve public transportation. The analysis showed that the homogenization effect was strongest in the idea generation tasks. Because these exercises require specific solutions to defined problems, users likely rely more heavily on the predictable suggestions provided by the computer algorithms.
The researchers did not find strong statistical evidence for differences among the other three categories, suggesting that open-ended tasks lead to less convergence. They also checked if these patterns only happen in highly controlled laboratory settings. The authors compared traditional laboratory experiments with real-world scenarios, such as analyzing published essays and visual artworks created before and after the widespread adoption of automated writing tools.
The analysis of these real-world conditions showed a small but significant reduction in idea diversity. “In many ways, the findings resemble classic fixation effects from the psychology literature, where exposure to examples constrains later thinking, but here they appear amplified by the scale and synchronicity of generative AI model use,” the researchers stated. “This homogenization effect was observed not only in controlled lab studies but also in real-world quasi-experiments. This suggests that it is not merely a lab-based phenomenon, but a practical concern affecting concrete creative processes and practices.”
De Rooij and Biskjaer also investigated whether this narrowing of ideas persists after a person stops using the software. They isolated a subset of studies that tested participants on new creative tasks after their initial interaction with the computer models. The results suggest that the homogenization effect carries over into these subsequent activities.
“The findings also provide preliminary evidence that homogenization effects may persist beyond moments of direct AI use,” the researchers told PsyPost. “In other words, interacting with these generative AI systems may shape how people think and generate ideas even after the interaction has ended. This potential ‘rub-off’ effect on creative cognition warrants further research and is something we would like to explore in more depth.”
These results closely align with another recent study published in the journal PNAS Nexus. Scientists Emily Wenger and Yoed N. Kenett tested how large language models affect human creativity by evaluating 22 different commercial chatbots. They recruited 102 human participants to complete a series of verbal creativity tests, including the alternative uses task, and then asked the chatbots to complete the exact same assignments.
Wenger and Kenett found that individual language models performed at or slightly above the level of the average human on most exercises. When viewed in isolation, a single chatbot provided highly original and creative responses. However, when the scientists compared all the responses from the different models, a stark pattern of similarity emerged.
Across all tasks, the computer programs produced answers that were significantly more alike than the answers provided by the human participants. Both sets of researchers point to similar underlying mechanisms for this phenomenon. Because the major technology companies train their models on massive, overlapping datasets scraped from the internet, the programs naturally gravitate toward the most statistically common word associations.
When thousands of people use these tools to generate ideas, the software acts as a semantic anchor. The models pull human users toward a shared set of typical concepts, reducing the overall variety of ideas. Wenger and Kenett attempted to fix this issue by adjusting the internal settings of the chatbots to force more random text generation, but this caused the models to produce nonsensical sentences.
Readers should avoid interpreting these findings as proof that human beings are becoming entirely uncreative. De Rooij and Biskjaer note that the reduction in collective diversity does not equal a total loss of individual ability. “A key point is that our findings do not show that using AI reduces creativity,” the researchers emphasized.
“Rather, they point to a shift in where and how creative diversity occurs, and where it may be constrained,” the authors said. “Individual output can improve in creative quality while becoming more similar across people. While these effects are often subtle in single instances, they may become meaningful when considered at the scale at which generative AI is now being used.”
The authors point out some limitations to their current analysis. The review primarily focuses on text-based tools and large language models, meaning the findings might not apply to other types of computer systems. For instance, adaptive machine learning programs or tools used for music composition were not adequately represented in the available data.
This restricts how broadly the scientific community can apply these conclusions across different artistic domains. Additionally, the analyses regarding long-term persistence and real-world applications relied on relatively small groups of studies. The limited data makes these specific conclusions tentative and open to revision.
Future research should explore different forms of human and machine collaboration over extended periods of time. “An important next step is rethinking how generative AI systems are designed and used in creative contexts to mitigate homogenization effects,” the authors noted. “This includes exploring alternative workflows, interaction designs, and creative strategies that sustain diversity rather than encourage early convergence.”
“One step in this direction has already been taken by mapping creative strategies for working with generative AI and machine learning, based on analyses of AI art practices,” they added, referencing a recently published article outlining this approach. “We believe these strategies can transfer to other creative domains.”
The preprint study, “Does Generative AI Make Us Think Alike? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Homogenization Effects in Human-AI Co-Creation,” was authored by Alwin de Rooij and Michael Mose Biskjaer.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #GenerativeAI #CreativityDiversity #AICoCreation #Homogenization #CreativeThinking #AIImpact #CreativeDiversity #LLMs #TechEthics #InnovationScience
-
Author Spotlight: Black Sapphic Vampire Romance author Liza Wemakor
Liza Wemakor (she/they) is a writer and a Ph.D. candidate in UC Riverside’s English Department. Her fiction has been published in Strange Horizons, Anathema Magazine, Baffling Magazine, and elsewhere. Her debut novella, Loving Safoa, was published by Neon Hemlock Press in February 2024.
AUTHOR LINKS:
Website: www.lizawemakor.com
Instagram: @lizawemakor
Bluesky: @lizawemakor.bsky.socialBook Link: Loving Safoa (Neon Hemlock)
Book Elevator Pitch for readers/book clubs
If you enjoy paranormal romance with literary stylings, you will enjoy Loving Safoa!
Get a copy from Neon Hemlock.Your novella, Loving Safoa, is out now with Neon Hemlock. What were your main inspirations behind this sapphic vampire novella?
I wanted to write a vampire story that reflected underrepresented elements of my worldview. It seemed sensible to lean into Safoa’s experience of being an undocumented immigrant in the Western world across a long expanse of time, and to demonstrate how this extended period of uncertainty and precarity forces Safoa into survival mode. Meanwhile, she is also recovering from the trauma of being held captive by a sadistic colonizer for a number of years, as well as experiencing new kinds of freedom in New York, and eventually Maryland.
Cynthia, on the other hand, feels orphaned — she is navigating adulthood without her mother or any other parent, yet becoming a maternal figure to her students. She also feels a level of insecurity about her connection to her motherland, as a Ghanaian-American woman, and faces this head-on in her relationship with Safoa, who she imagines as a pure embodiment of African identity. Safoa and Cynthia’s lives are quite complex, and together they tell a story of diasporic reunification.
The novella features woven stories from different places and time periods, from 18th-19thC Ghana to a near-future Maryland. How did you decide what segments of these characters’ lives to include, and were there scenes and times that you played with but ultimately decided to cut?
I wanted to maintain a focus on Cynthia and Safoa’s romance, so I omitted some portions of their lives before they met; I may have explored more of those past moments in a longer project, like a novel, but a novella length felt right for this story. I wanted the passage of time to be a bit surreal, because it is surreal to have lives as long as Cynthia and Safoa’s. Time itself and the details of their lives are a blur.
I was seriously toying with showing glimpses of Safoa’s life in London — her lovers, and her brief skirmishes with other European predators. I would’ve emphasized how she was simultaneously powerful and vulnerable to exploitative people, which motivated her departure to the U.S. after a few decades. I didn’t include these scenes because Cynthia may have been lost in the larger narrative — there wouldn’t have been as much of a balanced representation of their lives, and Safoa would have taken over the story.
How does vampirism and the donor concept work in your novella, and is this based on any folklore?
I was very inspired by Jewelle Gomez’s approach to vampire networks in The Gilda Stories — vampire communities that are explicitly political, and whose politics have been informed by their previous experiences of being hurt, exploited, and truly loved.
I was also inspired by Octavia Butler’s approaches to both community and feeding in Fledgling. Shori depends upon a host of human companions and vampires while navigating a white supremacist vampire hierarchy. Shori’s companions also gain a lot from her presence, in a symbiotic fashion.
Tamara Jerée wrote beautifully about these dynamics in her Strange Horizons essay, “How to Make a Family: Queer Blood Bonds in Black Feminist Vampire Novels“.
There was a hint of Ghanaian folklore in the novella, though I took creative liberties. Safoa and a character named Yaba occasionally refer to the first vampire they met as ‘ɔbonsam’ — or a demonic entity. In some Ghanaian folklore, there are vampiric, humanoid creatures called ɔbonsam or sasabonsam that have very long hair, like Safoa does at some point, and live / feed on people in the forest. I didn’t opt to include other details like sharp teeth and bat-like features in my depiction of vampires. Tongue feeding was more fun for a smutty sapphic story.
At some point in my life I encountered myths related to the obayifo (another West African vampire) as well, and I took liberties with the factoid that they are phosphorescent, i.e. when Cynthia noticed a blue aura around Safoa’s body.
Can you tell us more about Cynthia – where did she come from, and what made you set her as a schoolteacher in the early 1990s at the start of this novella? How did you develop her character, her voice, and her desires (e.g. to be an “everlasting elder”)?
I am one of those people who insists on a vaguely-defined, somewhat secretive spirituality that undergirds my writing practices. In the spring of 2021, Cynthia and Safoa appeared to me almost effortlessly, and I was compelled to write about them. Not long before that, I’d gotten into the Ph.D. program I am at the end of now, and I started writing feverishly before my time and energy became more limited. Cynthia and Safoa were fascinating to me, and their chemistry was palpable; at times I blushed when writing and editing their sex scenes, because it felt like an intrusion upon their privacy.
Cynthia’s life resembles my life in some ways, but not all. I haven’t lost my mother, and she (Cynthia) has spent more of her life in New York City and Maryland than I have, but her anxieties about her authenticity as a Ghanaian diasporan and her interest in teaching certainly resonate with me. I am sure that some of my own subjectivity informed how I wrote Cynthia, though a lot of it was subconscious.
I had a moodboard for both Cynthia and Safoa, and Cynthia’s moodboard included images of the actresses Nicole Beharie and Moses Ingram, and the model Dede Mansro. I was interested in channeling not only the softness of their appearances, but the moodiness and subdued seductiveness they are able to convey.
Regarding the choice to begin in the 1990s: it was a perfect fit both aesthetically and politically. The 90s was a period of intense political maturation for educators, artists, and the general public. There was, especially for queer black people, queer people of color, a mingling of death and renewal — an increasing awareness of identity (and its constructedness) mingling with the optimism of entering a new millenium. The perfect setting for politically conscious vampires to come into themselves.
Can you tell us more about Safoa, the vampire, her Ghanaian roots, her relationship with tattoos and her place in her communities across time as a body artist, and how she came to be shaped on the page? What was the character development process like for her, and was there research involved to craft her journey from 1799 onwards – if so, what research did you do?
A pattern that is emerging in my answers to these questions is that I placed Cynthia and Safoa in historical moments that were hotbeds for social resistance. I wanted Safoa to live through multiple eras of Black and African resistance, and I wanted readers to see her putting in the work to pursue what she saw as her purpose in life, which was being a body artist from the beginning, and then evolved, through meeting Cynthia, to include more social pursuits.
In writing Safoa, I revisited a few books from a class I took in college about pre-colonial African history, and I read a few books and articles about West African empires and West African mythology. I also made an effort to research some of the geography (landscapes and flora) of West Africa, and brushed up my knowledge of some Twi terms and phrases, which I grew up hearing from my maternal family. Ultimately, only some of these details made it onto the page, because making the world feel lived in required me to look at these landscapes through Safoa’s eyes.
What research did you do for the different settings in the novella, and what sociopolitical/ideological projections were you going with for the development of your near-future Maryland setting to avoid it being a utopia/dystopia?
I wanted each of the major settings of the novella, 19th century West Africa, 1990s New York City, and 1990s / 21st century Maryland, to reflect major political movements of their time. Safoa’s time in the part of West Africa we now know as Ghana was inflected with rising anticolonial sentiments. New York City is and was sensational for the community organizing within its boroughs, though it was not without the risk of violence (see: the 2003 murder of Sakia Gunn in the nearby Newark, New Jersey). Like New York City, the DMV is and was a major locus of queer arts organizing (especially literary arts) and queer political organizing, which I aimed to reflect in Cynthia and Safoa’s commune involvements.
I wouldn’t say I was consciously avoiding the story being classified as a utopia or dystopia, and this defiance of categories came about because I had naturalistic inclinations in the writing of this novella. I wanted my writing to reflect how deeply traumatic and how stunningly gorgeous people can be. For the Maryland commune in particular, I wanted to hint at the fact that there were conflicts commune members had already worked through before Cynthia and Safoa arrived, and working through these conflicts laid the groundwork for Cynthia and Safoa to soar, as cooperative leaders in their new community.
Would you ever consider expanding upon the story of Cynthia and Safoa, perhaps in a connected story, and/or are you moving on to other projects (if so, what’s next?!)
I would love to write a short story or novelette focused on Safoa’s time in London / Europe, when the time seems right to do so. I’ve written several short stories that I’m proud of since Loving Safoa came out in 2024, and it’s just been a matter of finding the right magazine at the right time for the stories that haven’t been published yet. I also have a few short stories that are in partial states, that I am slowly finishing as my dissertation takes priority.
I also have a novel project that is half-drafted! The novel project follows a polarizing, and potentially revolutionary, celebrity musician.
Beyond my own fiction, I am a nonfiction editor and finance manager for Anathema Magazine, a venue dedicated to speculation fiction by and for queer people of color that is relaunching after a 3-year hiatus — yay!
Add Loving Safoa to GoodreadsLike This? Try These:
Author Spotlight: Vampire Fiction Author Lucius Valiant
Meet Lucius Valiant, a Danish-British author, and learn more about his series, The Thornhill Vampire Chronicles.
by cmrosensOctober 29, 2025February 3, 2026Author Spotlight: Vampire Fiction Author Talia Wall
Meet Talia Wall and her dystopian vampire series, ‘Until Equinox’ trilogy! Books 1&2 are out now, and Book 3 is coming soon.
by cmrosensOctober 8, 2025January 7, 2026Author Spotlight: Vampire Fiction Author Eule Grey
Meet Eule Grey (she/they), a Sculpture artist, disability activist, and disabled author of queer, sparkly books. We talk about disability and sapphic elements in their work.
by cmrosensJune 27, 2025January 7, 2026Author Spotlight: Horror & Vampire Fiction Author C. Lenz
C. Lenz is a Canadian author and scientist who lives with her wife Zoey in Hamilton, Ontario. In this spotlight interview, she discusses her monster-vampire slasher, Thyrst Festival.
by cmrosensApril 18, 2025February 3, 2026Author Spotlight: Vampire Fiction Author Frankie Sutton
Frankie Sutton writes paranormal and urban fantasy, and talks to us about her novel, Vampiric Crush.
by cmrosensFebruary 28, 2025January 7, 2026Author Spotlight: Queer SFF and Vampire Fiction Author H.S. Kallinger
Meet one of the authors from the Authors for Palestine event, H.S. Kallinger (he/they). Kallinger discusses his work, vampires, and what’s next for their queer Sci-Fi series.
by cmrosensJuly 31, 2024January 7, 2026 Subscribe to my newsletter to stay updated! I send newsletters around once a month. You can also subscribe to my site so you don't miss a post, but I also do a post round-up in my monthly newsletters, along with what I've been working on, what I've been reading, and what I've been watching. I will often update newsletter subscribers first with news, so stay ahead of the game with my announcements and discount codes, etc! #AuthorInterview #AuthorSpotlight #BlackAuthor #paranormalRomance #queerAuthor #sapphicBooks #vampireBooks -
Die Woche war ich an der Mosel und habe die Burg Eltz besucht. Man kann dort schön wandern und auch eine Burgführung machen, in die 900 Jahre Geschichte der Burg eintauchen.
#burgeltz #burg #castle #mosel #wandern #hiking #rheinlandpfalz #eifel #geschichte #fotografie #photography
-
Es ist nicht das, was Du denkst!
Es ist schön wenn meine Cartoons Dich zum lächeln bringen. Deine Unterstützung bringt mich zum lächeln. :-)
Vielen Dank🤝 www.mosescartoons.de
Käffchen-Kasse ☕️ paypal.me/mosescartoons#mosescartoons #cartoonist #karikatur #witzig #lustig #humor #freunde
-
Charles Simeon, co-founder of the Church Missionary Society, says the saved are marked by a settled hatred of what is sordid and unjust. He notes usury was barred under Moses, and that its moral force still binds under the Gospel—not as crude economics, but as a warning against cruelty and indifference to need. He is describing evidence of salvation, not its price.
Would such a man be trusted with a missionary society now?
#christian #missions #biblicalmanhood #speakup #love #wealth -
Warriors’ playoff push begins in earnest tonight against Kings https://www.rawchili.com/nba/707613/ #AlHorford #Basketball #BrandinPodziemski #BuddyHield #Celtics #CharlesBassey #GettyImages #KevonLooney #Kings #KristapsPorzingis #Lakers #MosesMoody #NBA #RegularSeasonGames #Sacramento #SacramentoKings #SacramentoKings #StephCurry #SteveKerr #TheWarriors #Warriors
-
Warriors vs. Pistons player grades: Brandin Podziemski leads a lackluster loss https://www.rawchili.com/nba/670309/ #AlHorford #AtlantaHawks #Basketball #BrandinPodziemski #BuddyHield #Detroit #DetroitPistons #DetroitPistons #DraymondGreen #GoldenStateWarriors #GuiSantos #JalenDuren #JimmyButlerIII #KristapsPorzingis #LJCryer #MalevyLeons #MosesMoody #NateWilliams #NBA #PatSpencer #Pistons #QuintenPost #SethCurry #StephCurry #WillRichard #Yurtseven #ZazaPachulia
-
NBA rumors: Warriors’ final Jaren Jackson Jr. trade offer to Grizzlies before Jazz blockbuster https://www.rawchili.com/nba/595601/ #AtlantaHawks #Basketball #BuddyHield #GeorgesNiang #GiannisAntetokounmpo #GoldenStateWarriors #Grizzlies #JacksonJr #JarenJackson #JarenJacksonJr #JockLandale #JohnKonchar #KristapsPorzingis #Kuminga #Memphis #MemphisGrizzlies #MemphisGrizzlies #MosesMoody #NBA #TaylorHendricks #TheGrizzlies #trade #UtahJazz #VinceWilliamsJr #WalterClaytonJr
