home.social

Search

590 results for “journal”

  1. Brauchen wir ein anderes Geld? Oder andere Gelder?

    Erste Folge unserer neuen -Staffel

    Geld gilt vielen als Inbegriff von Gier und Kommerz. Wer sich im Digitalgelddickicht umsieht, findet allerdings nicht das Geld, sondern Zahlungsinfrastrukturen, Dienste, Akteure und Regulierungsansätze aller Art. Und Utopien: Entwürfe für ein besseres Geld oder gleich eine ganz neue Geldordnung.

    Die vierte Staffel des zum Thema „Geldentwürfe“ geht diesen Utopien nach: Wie lässt sich Geld anders denken? Wer tut das bereits? Welche Rolle spielen digitale Technologien dabei? Folge 1 setzt grundsätzlich an: Wie lässt sich Geld aktiv mitgestalten, von wem und warum?

    Darüber denken wir mit der interventionistischen Forscherin Ester Barinaga, der Rechtswissenschaftlerin Katharina Pistor, dem Journalisten Friedemann Brenneis sowie dem Ökonomen Martijn van der Linden nach.

    Audio anhören und Shownotes lesen via Website oder auf diversen Plattformen.

    👉 zevedi.de/4-1-ein-anderes-geld

  2. DATE: October 27, 2026 at 07:00AM
    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: We’ll pay to get revenge on an algorithm, even though it can’t feel a thing

    URL: psypost.org/well-pay-to-get-re

    When a computer algorithm treats people unfairly, they tend to get just as angry and retaliate just as often as they would against a human wrongdoer. A new series of experiments published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General provides mixed evidence on whether punishing a machine brings the same sense of closure as punishing a person, but it suggests that a machine’s response to being punished, such as sounding hurt or promising to make fairer offers, can strengthen people’s sense that justice was done. The findings suggest that as artificial intelligence takes on more decision-making roles in society, organizations may need to design systems that can communicate accountability when things go wrong.

    Automated systems are increasingly tasked with consequential choices, from screening job applicants to steering vehicles and prioritizing medical care. To understand how people react when these systems cause harm, psychologists study a concept known as mind perception, which is the everyday process of judging what kind of mental life another entity possesses. People generally evaluate minds along two separate dimensions: agency, meaning the ability to think, plan, and act intentionally, and experience, meaning the capacity to feel physical pain, pleasure, fear, and emotions.

    In human interactions, the capacity to commit a moral wrong and the capacity to experience punishment usually go together, since a sane adult can both plan a harmful act and feel the sting of a penalty. Artificial intelligence splits these two qualities apart because people often view machines as having enough agency to cause deliberate harm, yet almost no ability to feel pain or remorse. For instance, research covered by PsyPost in 2023 found that people judged AI agents as more deserving of blame than humans in one classic life-and-death dilemma. Similarly, another 2023 study covered by PsyPost showed that people hold automated driving assistants responsible for road outcomes while simultaneously categorizing the software as a mere tool rather than a true moral being.

    This mental divide raises questions about whether punishing an algorithm can produce justice satisfaction, which is the feeling of closure, fairness, and resolution a victim experiences after an offender is penalized. Psychological theories generally propose two reasons why punishment feels satisfying: either it fulfills a desire for retribution by making the wrongdoer suffer for their actions, or it serves a communicative role by teaching the wrongdoer a moral lesson.

    Because people tend to see machines as unable to genuinely suffer or feel guilt, study author Alexander Eng, an associate professor of organizational behavior in the Department of Management at the Asia School of Business in Kuala Lumpur, and co-author Kai Chi Yam of the National University of Singapore examined how people emotionally and behaviorally respond during and after they penalize an unfair algorithm.

    “Research on punishment usually assumes that anyone capable of doing wrong can also be punished,” Eng told PsyPost. “We tend to see a young child as unable to truly commit a wrong, and so also as unfit for punishment. Machines break that link: people see AI as able to make decisions that hurt them, yet unable to feel pain, regret, or learn a moral lesson. As AI takes on decisions like medical triage and firing employees, we wanted to know how people respond when they try to hold it accountable, and whether punishing it gives them any sense that justice was done.”

    The researchers began with a pilot study of 380 English-speaking adults in the United States, recruited through the online platform Prolific, to verify whether people actually punish algorithms. Participants played a single round of an economic exercise called the ultimatum game, in which a partner was given £0.50 and proposed how to split it. If the participant accepted the split, both parties kept their share, but if the participant rejected it, neither party received anything, making rejection a form of costly punishment.

    Participants were told their partner was either another human participant or an algorithm, and they received either a fair offer of £0.25 each or an unfair offer where the partner kept £0.45 and left the participant just £0.05. In reality, the researchers preset all offers. Receiving a stingy offer from an algorithm provoked much higher anger (an average of 3.12 on a 5-point scale) than receiving a fair offer from an algorithm (1.31). When given the unfair deal, participants felt comparable anger toward algorithms (3.12) and humans (2.91), and they punished the unfair algorithm by rejecting its offer 57.8 percent of the time, which was not statistically different from the 62.2 percent rejection rate for unfair humans.

    In their first main experiment, the authors examined what happens after punishment is delivered using a final sample of 123 Prolific participants. Every participant received the unfair £0.05 offer in the ultimatum game from either a human or an algorithm, decided whether to accept or reject it, and then answered five questions measuring their justice satisfaction, such as whether they felt everyone got what they deserved. Afterward, participants played a second exercise called the dictator game, where they were given £0.50 and could unilaterally share any amount in £0.05 increments with their partner, while also having the option to switch to a new human partner first.

    As in the pilot study, participants rejected unfair offers from algorithms (38 out of 62) and humans (40 out of 61) at similar rates. Overall, the 78 participants who punished their partner by rejecting the offer reported higher justice satisfaction (3.57 out of 5) than the 45 who accepted it (2.63). Controlling for whether participants switched partners, the satisfaction gap between those who punished and those who did not was larger when the offender was a human than when it was an algorithm, and higher justice satisfaction in turn predicted greater generosity in the second game.

    Because the option to switch partners or the belief that computers have no use for money might have influenced the first experiment, the researchers conducted a second study with a stricter setup among 739 participants, preregistered along with the third and fourth experiments through the journal’s registered-report review process. Participants were told that five algorithms and five human research assistants were competing across multiple negotiations, and that while neither kept the money personally, the lowest-earning algorithm and human would be eliminated from the competition.

    Participants were not allowed to switch partners between the ultimatum game and the dictator game, and they also completed scales measuring their partner’s perceived agency and emotional experience, along with their own baseline tendency to attribute human-like consciousness to technology, a trait known as anthropomorphism.

    Participants rated human partners higher on agency (3.30 versus 2.79 out of 5) and much higher on the capacity for emotional experience (3.20 versus 1.86) than algorithmic partners. Even so, participants rejected the unfair offer at comparable rates for algorithms (71.0 percent, or 262 of 369) and humans (65.4 percent, or 242 of 370), and those who punished their partner felt much greater justice satisfaction (3.53) than those who accepted the unfair split (2.71). In contrast to the first study, after controlling for baseline anthropomorphism, the link between punishing and justice satisfaction, and in turn generosity, was equally strong whether the partner was an algorithm or a human.

    “People react to an unfair machine much as they react to an unfair person,” Eng said. “Participants got just as angry at an algorithm that made them a lowball offer as at a human who made the same offer, and they were just as willing to give up their own money to punish it. Whether punishing the machine felt as satisfying was less consistent across studies.”

    A third study tested these dynamics in a different scenario called the trust game with 735 participants who chose to invest £0.20 with a human research assistant or an algorithm. The investment was tripled to £0.60, and the partner broke the participant’s trust by returning just £0.10 instead of a fair £0.30 split. Participants could then penalize their partner by recommending on a 1-to-5 scale that the partner be removed from the player pool, before rating their justice satisfaction and playing a second round where the roles were reversed.

    Participants gave similar removal ratings to unfair algorithms (3.37 out of 5) and unfair humans (3.26). Unexpectedly, harsher removal ratings were associated with lower justice satisfaction rather than higher closure. The authors suspect this is because participants only submitted a recommendation and never saw a penalty take effect, so the ratings may have reflected anger more than punishment. In an exploratory analysis looking directly at anger, feeling angrier predicted lower justice satisfaction and less generosity toward both types of partners, with anger reducing justice satisfaction slightly more when the partner was human than when it was an algorithm.

    In a fourth study involving 3,684 participants who rejected the unfair £0.05 offer in the ultimatum game, the researchers tested whether a message from the penalized partner could increase justice satisfaction. Immediately after rejecting the offer from a human or an algorithm, participants received either no message at all, a message expressing emotional distress over repeated rejections, a message calmly acknowledging that the offer was too low and promising to be fair in the future, or a combined message expressing both distress and a moral lesson learned. A separate preliminary test with 305 people confirmed that these messages effectively conveyed emotional suffering and moral learning as intended.

    Across the entire sample, participants paired with an algorithm reported slightly lower justice satisfaction (3.56 out of 5) than those paired with a human (3.66), a small difference that accounted for about half a percent of the overall variation in satisfaction scores. However, receiving a message from an algorithm expressing emotional suffering (3.57) or moral learning (3.62) produced higher justice satisfaction than receiving no response from the algorithm (3.42).

    For human partners, the differences between receiving no message (3.57) and receiving a suffering (3.66) or moral learning (3.69) message were not statistically significant after adjusting for multiple comparisons. Still, the boost from a message was not statistically larger for algorithms than for humans, and combining both messages added no measurable benefit beyond either one alone. The results suggest that a response from a machine can help satisfy people’s need for redress, even though participants rated algorithms as far less capable of feeling than humans.

    “We expected an apology or a show of remorse from an algorithm to count for little, since people don’t believe algorithms feel anything,” Eng explained. “Yet those messages raised people’s sense of justice for algorithms at least as much as the same messages did for humans. It was also striking that people paid to punish an algorithm that couldn’t keep the money and couldn’t experience the loss.”

    A final supplemental experiment with 1,093 participants examined whether dissatisfaction after being wronged causes people to take out their frustration on an innocent bystander, a behavior known as displaced aggression. Participants received the unfair £0.05 offer in the ultimatum game from a human or an algorithm, decided whether to accept or reject it, and then played the dictator game paired with a brand-new human research assistant who had no involvement in the first round.

    Controlling for baseline anthropomorphism, participants who punished their initial partner by rejecting the unfair offer shared slightly more money with the innocent bystander (an aggression score of 6.75 versus 7.07 on an 11-point scale, where higher scores mean less money shared) than those who did not punish, regardless of whether the original wrongdoer was a person or a machine.

    “The anger and punishment results held up across more than 6,000 participants,” Eng noted. “The machine-versus-human differences in justice satisfaction were small where they appeared at all: in our largest study, of about 3,700 people, partner type explained roughly half a percent of the variance. I’d treat that as a modest pattern that needs more testing.”

    As with all research, there are some caveats to consider when interpreting these results. All of the experiments relied on brief online financial games where the harm consisted of being offered an unfair split of £0.50 by an anonymous text-based partner. How people think and feel when a simple computer program shortchanges them by a few cents may differ from how they react to high-stakes algorithmic harm in the real world, such as an automated system wrongfully denying a mortgage, firing an employee, or causing a traffic accident. In addition, participants chose for themselves whether to punish, so differences between those who punished and those who did not may partly reflect who chose to punish rather than the effect of punishing itself.

    “These were online economic games with small stakes, splitting 50 pence,” Eng pointed out. “Real harms from AI, like a denied loan or a wrong diagnosis, carry much more weight, so the effects could look different there. The justice satisfaction results were also mixed: one study found a clear gap between machines and humans and another found none, so I wouldn’t claim that punishing machines never satisfies people.”

    The evidence on whether punishing a machine feels less satisfying than punishing a person was mixed across the studies, appearing in the first and fourth experiments but not in the second, while the third experiment’s punishment measure did not work as intended. The clearest gap came from the smallest experiment, which included 123 participants after dozens of duplicate entries were removed and which had originally been preregistered to test different outcomes; the larger, preregistered second experiment did not replicate it.

    The authors also noted that their five-item survey measuring justice satisfaction showed relatively low internal consistency in the fourth study, indicating a need to develop more precise tools for measuring psychological closure after technological failures. Future research could explore how different types of real-world errors and corrective feedback shape public trust, helping engineers and policymakers design accountability measures, such as holding human creators rather than machines responsible, that satisfy human intuitions of fairness.

    “We want to test other kinds of wrongdoing and punishment beyond economic games, and develop a better measure of justice satisfaction,” Eng added. “In a related project, I’m studying the ‘AI disclosure penalty,’ where people value content less once they’re told AI made it.”

    The study, “Artificial Intelligence and Machines Are Capable of Harm, but Not of Experiencing Punishment,” was authored by Alexander Eng and Kai Chi Yam.

    URL: psypost.org/well-pay-to-get-re

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #Algorithms #MachineLearning #AIethics #Psychology #SocialPsychology #Justice #Accountability #HumanBehavior

  3. I read food researcher Jenny Dorsey say that Singapore’s hawker food culture and prices would not exist if eggs needed to be refrigerated there. If we needed to refrigerate eggs the way rhe US does, storage and operational costs would increase. Eggs play a big role at every meal (not jusf breakfast) and in many local dishes.

    This and other info will be in her paper ‘Who pays for heritage? Examining form-function tensions in Singapore’s hawker centre policies’ in the Food Policy journal

  4. Kansas City with Your Dog: An Unforgettable Urban Adventure - Explore Kansas City with your dog! Find pet-friendly hotels, top dog parks, and restaurants with welcoming patios. Discover KC's best metropolitan routes and make lasting memories with your canine companion..
    momvoyager.com/journal/kansas-
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  5. Please don't scroll past. This is important.

    I am being pressured by FreeBSD's reddit moderation team to censor the Omarchy #content_review or to remove it completely. They have began a harrasment campaign with the goal of removing me from this world.

    the review: merveilles.town/@prahou/117501

    The issue at hand is that a picture of a partial swastika appears in close proximity to the word FreeBSD, this they perceive as an attack on the FreeBSD project - if you've seen a newspaper before, you might understand the principle of two separate unrelated articles appearing next to each other. You might also understand that I am reporting on common associations with the Topic of the review. These are not my inventions, and I am not calling anyone anything. I am reporting on the news. Nevertheless, as much as I am a journalist, I am an artistè, and if my audience sees in my work something I didn't put there, I am not going to take that experience away from them. This probably says more about them than it does about me.

    While I am a man of principle, there is one thing I like more - money.

    I will delete it for $2,000. For $5,000 I will apologize. For $10,000 I will use daemonarchy exclusively for 6 months on all my computers. For $25,000 I will kill a small animal of your choice. For $75,000 I will not post anything for a month.

    liberapay.com/analognowhere
    ko-fi.com/analognowhere

    To everyone who likes my work, this message is for you (from said freebsd moderator) [cw ableist slur]: beige.party/@fuzzy/11751003293

    To everyone else who feels personally attacked by my art: send money, you can end this here and now.

    Thank you for your attention.

    ps: i did not post anything on reddit, i just know the same person who has been cyberbullying me on the fediverse is a moderator of the freebsd subreddit

    pls boost

    #runbsd #omarchy #fediverse #fediart #unix_surrealism #swastika #freebsd #news

  6. What would tell Drumpf, if he could read, that he's losing the ruling class ?

    If he's losing Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. of the Wall St Journal.

    I like it on weekends for the Arts-Culture -Living stuffs; also the FT.

    Usually just ever so, my dear, for Saturday he wrote:

    "Speaking of senility, it will be time to take away gramps's phone if he falls for the Putin telemarketer line "Donald, just get me a couple more small cities in the Donbas, I'll get you a Nobel Prize"
    Wow, man!

  7. "[A]s current laws dictate, the public can expect to almost never see the recordings."

    "Privacy laws in Canada are very strict and they're federal [...] and coast to coast, they largely prohibit the release of body-worn camera footage."
    ————————————————————
    Title: Montreal police rejected body cameras 7 years ago. Why do they want them now?
    Author(s): Ghazal Azizi
    Publication(s): Investigative Journalism Foundation
    Date: October 26, 2026
    ————————————————————
    #Quebec #Canada #AI #Policing #Technology #Surveillance
    theijf.org/article/spvm-uturns

  8. The campaign flyers in your mailbox, the texts on your phone, and the ads in your feed were paid for by someone. Maybe someone who is more interested in what's in it for them, and less about what's best for your community.

    Before you vote, find out who's spending big on the San Francisco election. Local journalists and good government experts break it down in the recording of our event about money in San Francisco politics.

    Watch at lwvsf.org/money-in-sf-politics

    #SanFrancisco #SFpol #SFelection

  9. Aspen to Dallas: A Gentle Journey Through Mountain & City - Experience a seamless, relaxed journey from Aspen, CO to Dallas, TX. Discover accessible trails, scenic train routes, and hidden gems for an inspiring, comfortable adventure. Plan your gentle escape now!.
    momvoyager.com/journal/aspen-t
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  10. CEDLA Film screening Un Día Soleado

    VOX-POP, Friday, November 20 at 03:30 PM GMT+1

    CEDLA and Humanities Venture Lab host a film screening of Un Día Soleado: A documentary about a young woman’s fight against an 80-year political machine in Paraguay.

    In the heart of South America, Un Día Soleado follows a woman vice-presidential candidate, Soledad Núñez, and her campaign team as they attempt to win Paraguay's 2023 election by breaking the conservative Colorado Party's near-80-year grip on power. The intimate, observational documentary captures a young generation's struggle to hold on to their faith in democracy while confronting corruption, sexism, populism, and the ghosts of South America's
    longest dictatorship.
    The screening of the film will be followed by a Q&A with its director Pamela Kalkman, a
    Dutch-Paraguayan documentary maker, researcher and journalist.

    Programme:

    15:30–17:10 Film screening (1h25m)
    17:10 - 17:30 Q&A with director Pamela Kalkman

    Speaker:

    offbeat.amsterdam/event/cedla-

  11. A quotation from Richard Steele

    In a word, the married state, with and without the affection suitable to it, is the completest image of heaven and hell we are capable of receiving in this life.

    Richard Steele (1672–1729) Anglo-Irish writer, journalist, playwright, politician
    Essay (1712-09-09), The Spectator, No. 479

    More about this quote: wist.info/steele-richard/86593…

    #quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #richardsteele #affection #damnation #heaven #hell #husband #joy #love #marriage #matrimony #salvation #spouses #torment #wife

  12. DATE: October 26, 2026 at 12:00PM
    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: Frequent cannabis use linked to higher odds of nighttime breathing problems

    URL: psypost.org/frequent-cannabis-

    Adults who use cannabis are more likely to report loud snoring and pauses in breathing during the night, according to new research published in Sleep Health: Journal of the National Sleep Foundation. The findings indicate that more frequent cannabis consumption corresponds with higher odds of experiencing these nocturnal breathing issues, even after accounting for factors like body weight and tobacco smoking. This relationship raises important questions for the growing number of people who turn to cannabis as a sleep aid.

    Sleep-disordered breathing is an umbrella term for medical conditions characterized by abnormal respiratory patterns or insufficient ventilation during rest. The most common form is obstructive sleep apnea, a disorder in which the muscles in the back of the throat relax too much, causing the upper airway to narrow or collapse entirely. People with this condition require extra physical effort to breathe, often resulting in loud snoring, gasping, or brief, repeated stops in breathing known as apneas. Standard treatments like continuous positive airway pressure machines, oral appliances, and surgery can be effective, yet many patients find the devices uncomfortable or difficult to tolerate over the long term.

    At the same time, cannabis has become increasingly accessible across the United States, and difficulty sleeping is one of the most common reasons people cite for using it. While users frequently report that the plant helps them rest, controlled clinical trials examining cannabinoids and sleep have produced mixed outcomes.

    For example, a 2023 clinical trial covered by PsyPost found that consuming medicinal cannabis oil improved sleep duration and increased midnight melatonin levels in adults with insomnia, whereas a study covered by PsyPost in 2024 indicated that a cannabis compound called cannabinol reduced nighttime awakenings when taken alone but showed no benefit when combined with cannabidiol, another cannabis compound. Observational tracking also points to potential drawbacks, such as a 2026 longitudinal study of military service members that linked current cannabis use to worse overall sleep quality and longer times needed to fall asleep.

    When it comes to breathing disorders specifically, tetrahydrocannabinol, the primary psychoactive compound in cannabis, has shown some potential to stabilize breathing in animal experiments and small human trials using oral pills. However, the broader clinical evidence remains inconsistent, leading the American Academy of Sleep Medicine to formally advise against using cannabis to treat obstructive sleep apnea. Most everyday consumers inhale cannabis rather than taking standardized pills, exposing their airways to smoke and heat that could inflame the tissues of the throat.

    The new research, led by Tyler J. Gallagher, a resident physician in the Caruso Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, and co-first author Matthew E. Lin of the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, sought to evaluate how everyday consumption relates to signs of breathing issues at night.

    “While some studies have explored cannabinoids as potential treatments for obstructive sleep apnea, there has been relatively little population-level research examining whether real-world cannabis use is associated with common signs of sleep-disordered breathing, such as loud snoring and pauses in breathing during sleep,” Gallagher told PsyPost. “We sought to better understand this relationship using a nationally representative sample of US adults.”

    To investigate this connection, the authors analyzed information from the 2017 to 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a state-based telephone survey coordinated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Although nearly 900,000 adults completed the main survey during those two years, only Minnesota and Tennessee included optional survey modules asking about both cannabis habits and sleep breathing symptoms. From the respondents in those two states who had complete data, the researchers selected a stratified random sample of 14,485 adults designed to match the demographic profile of the broader United States population.

    Participants were asked how many days they had used marijuana or cannabis during the past 30 days, as well as their primary method of consumption and whether they used it for medical or recreational purposes. The researchers grouped the respondents into three categories: non-users (zero days in the past month), non-regular users (1 to 15 days), and regular users (16 to 30 days). Signs of sleep-disordered breathing were assessed using two yes-or-no questions asking if anyone had ever observed the respondent stop breathing during sleep, and if the respondent had ever been told that they snore loudly.

    Of the participants, 13,461 reported no current cannabis use, 438 were classified as non-regular users, and 364 were regular users, meaning about 5.5 percent of the sample currently used cannabis. Smoking was by far the most common consumption method, reported by about 87 percent of both non-regular and regular consumers, followed by vaporizing and eating. Among non-regular users, 61.6 percent used cannabis strictly for recreational reasons, whereas 37.6 percent of regular users reported using it strictly for medical reasons and another 24.7 percent used it for both medical and recreational purposes.

    Overall, signs of sleep-disordered breathing were common across the entire cohort, with 44.7 percent reporting either loud snoring or witnessed apneas. In the unadjusted raw numbers, 44.3 percent of non-users reported at least one of the two breathing signs, compared to 48.4 percent of non-regular users and 55.2 percent of regular users. Specifically, witnessed breathing pauses were reported by 15.3 percent of non-users, 17.1 percent of non-regular users, and 19.8 percent of regular users. Loud snoring was reported by 41.3 percent of non-users, 44.5 percent of non-regular users, and 50.0 percent of regular users.

    To account for other differences between users and non-users, the researchers ran statistical models that applied national survey weights (statistical adjustments that make a sample better mirror the U.S. adult population) and controlled for a wide range of potentially confounding factors. These adjustments accounted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, income, health insurance status, diabetes, body mass index, alcohol consumption, traditional cigarette smoking, and electronic cigarette use. Even after factoring out the influence of tobacco smoking and body weight, cannabis use remained independently associated with higher odds of sleep-disordered breathing symptoms.

    Compared to non-users, non-regular cannabis users had 41 percent higher odds of reporting witnessed apneas, 26 percent higher odds of reporting loud snoring, and 33 percent higher odds of experiencing either symptom. The association was more pronounced among regular consumers. Those who used cannabis 16 to 30 days per month had 73 percent higher odds of witnessed apneas, 68 percent higher odds of loud snoring, and 82 percent higher odds of reporting either sign compared to non-users. These figures describe odds rather than probabilities, so the absolute differences are smaller than the percentages might suggest; in the raw numbers, about 55 percent of regular users reported at least one sign, compared with about 44 percent of non-users.

    “While the impact of infrequent use is relatively small, the odds of irregular breathing during sleep almost double with more frequent cannabis use, making this a strong association worthy of consideration before frequent cannabis utilization,” Gallagher explained.

    The researchers also analyzed cannabis consumption as a continuous spectrum from zero to 30 days. In the weighted models, each additional day of cannabis use per month was associated with an approximate 2 percent increase in the odds of reporting witnessed apneas, loud snoring, or either sign, an estimate the authors note is clinically small and serves as a general summary across use levels rather than a strict per-day effect. When the authors repeated the analysis without the national survey weights, regular cannabis use remained linked to both breathing signs, though the estimates were smaller (for example, 36 percent higher odds of either sign rather than 82 percent). In that analysis, non-regular use was no longer linked to loud snoring or to either sign, and its link with witnessed breathing pauses sat right at the threshold of statistical significance.

    “The strength of the association and its greater magnitude among more frequent users were notable, particularly given that some studies have investigated cannabinoids as potential treatments for sleep apnea,” Gallagher said. “These findings may reflect differences between isolated cannabinoids studied in clinical settings and real-world cannabis use, including differences in composition and method of consumption.”

    The authors proposed two primary biological mechanisms that might explain why cannabis consumers report more signs of airway obstruction at night. Because roughly 87 percent of the consumers in the sample smoked their cannabis, physical irritation from smoke is one possible contributor. Unlike tobacco, cannabis smoke is typically inhaled through deeper breaths without a filter, and it burns at a higher temperature, which can cause thermal injury and inflammation in the throat tissues that narrow the upper airway.

    A second potential mechanism involves the way cannabis interacts with the autonomic nervous system, which regulates involuntary body functions. While small doses of cannabis tend to stimulate the sympathetic nervous system, the body’s “fight or flight” system, higher doses activate the parasympathetic nervous system, which promotes physical relaxation. Frequent users may develop tolerance and consume larger quantities, and the resulting parasympathetic activity may cause the muscles that hold the upper airway open to relax excessively during sleep, making the throat more likely to collapse.

    There are a few things to keep in mind when interpreting these findings. Because the survey captured information at a single point in time, the study cannot establish whether cannabis use causes sleep-disordered breathing or if the relationship works in the opposite direction. People who suffer from undiagnosed sleep apnea often experience fragmented, unrefreshing sleep, and it is possible that some of these individuals turn to cannabis in an attempt to self-medicate their exhaustion or insomnia. The researchers also could not account for factors such as sleeping pill or sedative use, heavy drinking, or psychiatric conditions, any of which might influence both cannabis use and nighttime breathing.

    The reliance on self-reported telephone survey data also introduces constraints. Asking participants if they have been told they snore or stop breathing is less reliable than conducting an overnight medical sleep study, and people who sleep alone may be unaware of their nighttime breathing habits. Additionally, the survey only tracked how many days a person used cannabis over the past month, without measuring the exact dosage, potency, or ratio of specific compounds like tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol.

    The data came from just two states, Minnesota and Tennessee, because they were the only ones to include both sets of questions, and roughly 98 percent of the original survey respondents were excluded for that reason or because of missing information. Survey weights help align the sample with national demographics, but the authors note that applying them to such a small subset is debated among statisticians. In addition, the breathing questions asked whether these symptoms had ever been observed, while the cannabis question covered only the past month, so some symptoms may have predated participants’ current cannabis habits.

    Gallagher emphasized that reporting these symptoms is not the same as receiving a formal medical diagnosis. “While obstructive sleep apnea – a clinically defined and hazardous intermittent airway obstruction during sleep – is a type of sleep-disordered breathing, this study cannot make conclusions about the association between cannabis use and sleep apnea or other associated long-term risks,” he noted.

    Future research will need to incorporate objective sleep testing, such as polysomnography, an overnight sleep study that monitors breathing, oxygen levels, and brain activity, to verify whether cannabis habits correspond with clinically diagnosed sleep apnea. Scientists also need to compare different delivery methods, such as edibles versus inhalation, to separate the chemical effects of cannabinoids on throat muscles from possible damage from inhaling hot smoke.

    “Further research is required to examine the long-term effects of cannabis use on sleep and to determine the effects of cannabis dosage, different cannabis compositions, and different methods of consumption on sleep-disordered breathing,” Gallagher said. “Additionally, the long-term consequences of these impacts must be studied.”

    Until those relationships are clarified, the authors suggest that physicians should counsel patients about the potential respiratory risks of using cannabis, particularly for individuals who already show signs of sleep-disordered breathing. “People experiencing persistent snoring, pauses in breathing, or other symptoms of sleep apnea should seek medical evaluation rather than trying to utilize cannabis to manage their sleep,” Gallagher advised.

    “This study highlights the importance of evaluating the broader health effects of substances that people increasingly use for self-management,” Gallagher added. “Cannabis may have benefits for certain symptoms or conditions, but those potential benefits should be considered alongside possible risks. Sleep-disordered breathing is particularly important because it can go unrecognized for years while causing significantly worse quality-of-life. We hope these findings encourage further research and help clinicians have more informed conversations with patients who use cannabis for sleep-related concerns.”

    The study, “Cannabis use and associated sleep-disordered breathing among US adults,” was authored by Tyler J. Gallagher, Matthew E. Lin, Ian Kim, Ziva D. Cooper, Sebastian M. Jara, and Eric J. Kezirian.

    URL: psypost.org/frequent-cannabis-

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Cannabis #SleepHealth #SleepApnea #SleepDisorderedBreathing #LoudSnoring #NighttimeBreathing #RespiratoryHealth #HealthResearch #MedicalResearch #SleepAwareness

  13. Cross-Country Dreams: LA to NYC's Epic 10-Day Road Trip Revealed - Embark on an epic 10-day LA to NYC road trip! Discover panoramic overlooks, iconic national parks, and vibrant cities. Your ultimate guide to a seamless, unforgettable cross-country adventure awaits..
    momvoyager.com/journal/la-to-n
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  14. DATE: October 26, 2026 at 07:00AM
    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: Political endorsements by scientific journals reduce public trust in research

    URL: psypost.org/political-endorsem

    When scientific journals publicly endorse political candidates, they risk lowering public trust in the scientific community, particularly among moderate and conservative Americans. These endorsements cause measurable declines in how people view the impartiality and societal value of science, though they do not appear to change whether people are willing to follow practical scientific advice. The findings were recently published in the journal Group Processes & Intergroup Relations.

    Public trust in scientific institutions is an important factor in shaping how society responds to global challenges like pandemics and climate change. Historically, scientific organizations have sought to maintain an apolitical stance to preserve their reputation as objective arbiters of fact. In recent years, several high-profile scientific journals have broken from this precedent. Editors at these publications have published pieces endorsing Democratic presidential candidates or strongly criticizing Republican candidates, often framing these stances as necessary defenses of scientific integrity. Researchers wanted to understand how these explicit political stances affect how the American public views the scientific enterprise as a whole.

    Stylianos Syropoulos, Kyle Fiore Law, and their colleagues set out to examine this phenomenon through the psychological framework of motivated reasoning. Motivated reasoning is the human tendency to process information in a way that confirms existing beliefs and political identities. When individuals encounter statements that conflict with their political views, they often scrutinize or reject the source of that information.

    The research team suspected that political endorsements from scientific journals might trigger this psychological mechanism. They hypothesized that people who identify as moderate or conservative might question the objectivity of science after reading endorsements that clash with their political leanings.

    To capture a complete picture, the researchers evaluated trust not as a single concept, but as a collection of distinct dimensions. These dimensions include perceived ability, which is the competence of scientists to provide accurate information. They also looked at integrity, which involves the belief that science is impartial and objective. Benevolence measures the perception that science serves the public good and lacks hidden agendas. Finally, behavioral trust reflects whether people are actually willing to follow scientific recommendations in their daily lives, such as adhering to public health guidelines.

    In the first experiment, conducted shortly before the 2020 presidential election, researchers recruited a large sample of 3,081 participants online. They randomly assigned these participants to read one of two types of texts regarding prominent scientific publications, such as Science, The Lancet, or Scientific American. The control group read a brief, neutral description of the journal’s history and mission formatted like a news wire article.

    The treatment group read the same background information, but with an added excerpt from an actual editorial published by the journal that endorsed Joe Biden or criticized Donald Trump. Following the reading, participants answered a series of questions measuring their trust in science and their intentions to comply with health guidelines.

    The researchers found that reading the political endorsements caused a measurable drop in general trust in scientific institutions. Participants in the treatment group were more likely to report that science lacks impartiality, pointing to a decline in perceived integrity. This effect was largely driven by politically moderate and conservative individuals, who exhibited lower trust after exposure to the endorsements.

    Among conservatives, the treatment also increased belief in conspiracy theories about science and the origins of the coronavirus, indicating a drop in perceived benevolence. However, the endorsements did not yield a statistically significant effect on behavioral trust. Participants exposed to the political messaging remained just as willing to follow practical public health recommendations as those in the control group.

    To see if these results would hold up under different conditions, the researchers conducted a second experiment days before the November 2020 election. They recruited a sample of 1,056 participants, matched to national demographic quotas for age, gender, and ethnicity. The experimental setup mirrored the first study, with participants randomly assigned to read either neutral background text or a political endorsement from a scientific journal.

    The results replicated the core findings of the first experiment. Exposure to the political messaging reduced general trust in science and increased the belief that science is biased, again driven by moderate and conservative participants. In this iteration, the treatment group also reported a lower likelihood of using scientific sources for coronavirus updates, which suggests a decline in perceived scientific ability or competence.

    Just as in the first study, the political endorsements had no statistically significant impact on people’s willingness to comply with practical safety guidelines. The messaging also did not alter belief in conspiracy theories for this specific group.

    A third experiment took place four years later, surrounding the 2024 presidential election. The research team recruited a large sample of 2,144 participants to read material from Scientific American, Nature, or The Economist. The Economist was included because it frequently covers science and technology for a broad audience. As before, participants read either neutral background descriptions or actual published editorials endorsing Kamala Harris or criticizing Donald Trump.

    Because the pandemic was no longer a central issue during this later study, the researchers removed questions about the coronavirus. They added new measures to evaluate general perceptions of scientific objectivity and societal usefulness.

    The results from the 2024 election cycle aligned closely with the 2020 data. Reading the political endorsements decreased general trust in science and increased the belief that personal and political values govern scientific research. Participants in the treatment group also reported lower confidence in the idea that science is objective and useful for society. Once again, the declines in general trust and perceived integrity were most pronounced among moderate and conservative respondents.

    The study relies entirely on real-world editorials that endorsed Democratic candidates or criticized Republican ones. Because the researchers used actual published materials to ensure their experiment mirrored reality, they did not test how left-leaning individuals might react to a major scientific journal endorsing a conservative candidate. It remains unknown if political liberals would exhibit the same motivated reasoning and subsequent loss of trust if faced with scientific endorsements that opposed their own political identities.

    The researchers note that while explicit political endorsements carry reputational costs, complete silence from the scientific community on policy matters might also negatively affect public perception. Choosing not to address political rhetoric that directly targets scientific funding or spreads false information could be viewed as a failure to defend the scientific enterprise. Future research will need to explore how scientific organizations can correct falsehoods or advocate for evidence-based policies without appearing overly partisan. Finding the right balance will help institutions maintain their legitimacy across the entire political spectrum.

    The study, “Presidential candidate endorsements by scientific journals decrease trust in science especially for moderate and conservative Americans,” was authored by Stylianos Syropoulos, Kyle Fiore Law, Crystal Li, Bernhard Leidner, and Kevin L. Young.

    URL: psypost.org/political-endorsem

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Science #ScientificResearch #PublicTrust #PoliticalEndorsements #ScienceCommunication #Research #Politics #MediaLiteracy #EvidenceBased #PublicHealth

  15. All the trustworthy news & analysis on #Israel’s ongoing #PalestinianGenocide in Gaza & the West Bank - and the heroic #Palestinian #resistance - that you won’t get from the corrupt genocide-enabling #Vichy #LegacyMedia - especially the #Zionist-run #BBC state propaganda ‘service’! Now also including Trump’s renewed attacks on Iran following the #US/ Israel surrender after #OperationEpsteinFury & Netanyahu’s ongoing “Greater Israel” desecration of #Lebanon!

    palestinechronicle.com/#

    @[email protected]
    @[email protected]
    @[email protected]
    @iran
    @iraq
    @palestinenews
    @Yemen

    #Press #SocialMedia #Journalism #Gaza #PalestinianGenocide #Zionism #SettlerColonialism #Resistance #EradicateZionism #DecolonizePalestine #GlobaliseTheIntifada #Iran #War #Trump #Israel #Lebanon #Hezbollah

  16. SF Feast: A Weekend of Iconic & Hidden Culinary Gems - Embark on an epicurean adventure through San Francisco! This guide reveals iconic eateries, secret dining spots, and must-try dishes for a perfect weekend feast..
    momvoyager.com/journal/sf-feas
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  17. Coastal Charm to Bayou Soul: A Journey of Unforgettable Stays - Embark on an epic cross-country adventure from Chula Vista to New Orleans. Discover exclusive stays, hidden gems, and local insights for an unforgettable journey..
    momvoyager.com/journal/chula-v
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  18. cc Recherche @ZDF

    ☝️ #EU - Freie #Markt #Wirtschaft
    (GEHT ANDERS !)

    Will mein #Auto #ONLINE verkaufen u. sehe mich einem überschaubaren, ziemlich gleichgesinnten #NETZWERK an PlattformBetreibern gegenüber, die die SICHTBARKEIT meiner #Anzeige offensichtlich auf zwielichtige Zwischhändler begrenzen. Denn wenn ich nach meinem Auto/Typ/Region suche gibts keinen Treffer aber 20 komische Interesse #Nachrichten.

    #gutenmorgen #it #zukunft #ki #medien #software #demokratie #noafd #kommunikation #kultur #antifa #kapitalismus #satire #apple #deutschland #gesundheit #kaffee #journalismus #ndr #swr #wdr #zdf #werbung

  19. FARSTRAND for the Amiga — free demo out now. 🚀

    Sci-fi metroidvania rebuilt for the A1200. Demo is Halm (world 1) start to end — Quench, Kindle, Bob the drone, map and journal.

    Stock + fast-RAM Amiga builds, plus Win/macOS/Linux with FS-UAE (no ROMs). Full game later $3.99; demo stays free.

    coze.itch.io/farstrand-amiga?u

    #Amiga #A1200 #metroidvania #indiedev #GANDGAMES

  20. Day One has released a beta, open-source CLI with JSON-first access to journals, entries, Daily Chat and context items, plus local sync and optional AI skills.
    alternativeto.net/news/2026/10

  21. DATE: October 25, 2026 at 07:18AM
    SOURCE: SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY.ORG

    TITLE: The Psychology Behind Taylor Swift's Billion-Dollar Media Empire

    URL: socialpsychology.org/client/re

    Source: PsyPost

    The intense, one-sided connections that fans feel toward pop star Taylor Swift—known as a "parasocial relationship"—and their fear of missing out on shared cultural moments strongly predict whether they will attend her concerts and watch her films. These predictive links highlight how the psychological need for social belonging drives large-scale consumer behavior, according to a recent study published in the journal Psychology of Popular Media.

    URL: socialpsychology.org/client/re

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #TaylorSwift #TaylorSwiftPsychology #ParasocialRelationships #FanCulture #PopCulture #SocialPsychology #FOMO #Swifties #Concerts #MediaEmpire

  22. Ha, het is grappig hoe extreem vooringenomen media kan zijn.

    Specifiek in de regio's waar Lula sterk is, waren er problemen met het openbaar vervoer, een heel oude truc van de rijke eigenaars van de bussen.

    De journalisten van de live show van CNN Brasil (yep, USA CNN in Portugees) werden gek omdat het gerecht bevoegd voor verkiezingen besloot om de stembussen 2 uur langer open te houden. Echt next-level gek.

    Oh, in het Zuiden, waar Bolsonaro sterk staat is er veel regen en zijn campagne vroeg *ook* om de stembussen open te houden. Dat was absoluut geen probleem voor de CNN Brasil journalisten.

  23. Aurora's Culinary Journey: A Day of Flavors, Dawn to Dusk - Embark on a delicious adventure through Aurora, CO's diverse dining scene. Explore local favorites, global flavors, and hidden eateries, crafting your perfect foodie itinerary..
    momvoyager.com/journal/aurora-
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  24. Amazon's Bee wearables grew this month, with the 74.99 USD Bee Frontier and the 99.99 USD Bee Eclipse joining the original 49.99 USD pendant. Limitless sells a 99 USD recording pendant, Friend charges 129 USD for emotional support, and Nirva turns speech into a personal journal. Meta and OpenAI are both building compact AI companions. techcrunch.com/2026/10/25/the- #Tech #Startup #News #AI

  25. DATE: October 25, 2026 at 12:00PM
    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: How the menstrual cycle might alter ADHD symptoms in women taking stimulant medication

    URL: psypost.org/how-the-menstrual-

    The menstrual cycle appears to modulate the severity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) traits in women taking common stimulant medications. A new small study suggests that these traits peak in severity during menstruation and ease soon after, pointing toward a need for hormone-aware treatment plans. The research was published in the Journal of Attention Disorders.

    ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by distraction, impulsivity, and hyperactive behavior. Medical professionals historically viewed the condition as something that primarily affected young boys. That diagnostic gap is rapidly closing, and women now make up nearly half of the adult ADHD population in the United States. Women often present with different behavioral patterns than men, leaning toward severe inattention and internalizing behaviors rather than disruptive hyperactivity.

    Despite facing daily impairments in their careers and social lives, women remain largely underrepresented in ADHD research. One distinct biological variable separating women from men is the constant fluctuation of ovarian hormones. During the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle, estrogen levels rise and peak near ovulation. The subsequent luteal phase features elevated estrogen and progesterone, which then drop rapidly shortly before menstruation begins.

    Researchers suspect these hormones play a direct role in brain chemistry. Low estrogen levels are thought to decrease dopamine signaling in the brain. Because dopamine is the primary neurotransmitter involved in focus and attention, these natural hormonal drops could theoretically worsen ADHD symptoms.

    Researchers Rebecca Zaritsky, Stephanie C. Reed, and Suzette M. Evans wanted to understand how these hormonal variations interact with ADHD treatments. Prior laboratory work demonstrated that amphetamines, the most commonly prescribed class of ADHD medications, can be less effective during the luteal phase of the cycle. Case reports from clinical settings also hinted that some women experience worsening moods and fading concentration right before their periods.

    The research team designed a study to track these daily changes prospectively. The investigators recruited participants through online advertisements to monitor their daily experiences. They screened for individuals between the ages of 18 and 40 who experienced regular menstrual cycles lasting between 21 and 35 days.

    To join the study, participants had to report an ADHD diagnosis and currently use amphetamine salts (commonly known by brand names like Adderall) for treatment on at least five days of the week. The team excluded anyone taking hormonal birth control, as well as individuals using other psychiatric medications. After exclusions and dropouts, the researchers ended up with a small study of 30 participants who completed the required long-term tracking.

    Each individual filled out an initial survey detailing their medical history, baseline mood, and general impulsive behaviors. Following this baseline assessment, participants completed a daily online survey for 35 consecutive days. This extended timeline ensured the researchers could capture data from one full menstrual cycle for every participant.

    The daily questionnaires asked participants to rate their current ADHD symptoms on a standardized four-point scale. They evaluated 18 distinct symptoms, splitting them equally between inattentive traits and hyperactive-impulsive traits. Participants also rated their daily mood variations on a six-point scale measuring 17 distinct emotional states, and reported their exact medication dosage for the day. Finally, they noted whether they were actively menstruating or spotting.

    The researchers averaged the daily survey responses and grouped them into three specific biological windows. These windows included the first five days of menstruation, the mid-follicular phase shortly after bleeding ends, and the late luteal phase just before the next period begins. Participants reported their most severe ADHD symptoms during the active menstruation phase. In contrast, they experienced comparatively milder symptoms during the mid-follicular phase.

    When researchers separated the specific types of ADHD traits, hyperactive and impulsive behaviors showed variation across the cycle phases, but after adjusting for multiple comparisons this amounted only to a trend rather than a statistically significant difference. Inattentive symptoms also fluctuated, but the differences were not statistically significant. Participants did not report any differences in how much their symptoms generally impaired their daily lives across the different phases.

    Mood tracking revealed a correlation between negative emotions and ADHD symptoms. Participants reported elevated negative moods during both the late luteal and menstruation phases compared to the mid-follicular phase. The individuals who experienced the largest drops in mood during menstruation also reported the greatest increases in ADHD symptoms. This correlation held true for both inattentive and hyperactive traits.

    Daily amphetamine doses remained remarkably steady across the entire cycle. Participants did not instinctively take more medication to compensate for feeling more distracted or hyperactive during their periods. The research team had hypothesized that some participants using flexible dosing regimens might attempt to counteract their worsening symptoms with higher doses. This lack of adjustment might reflect strict prescribing practices, as many doctors do not encourage patients to alter their daily stimulant intake based on their menstrual cycles.

    This research relied entirely on self-reported surveys. The investigators did not measure hormone levels in a laboratory to perfectly confirm each biological phase, opting instead to estimate phases based on reported bleeding days. The small sample size also limited the statistical power of the analysis, meaning the results require verification in larger populations. Because participants taking other psychiatric medications were excluded, the results might not represent individuals managing ADHD alongside conditions such as mood disorders or premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

    The study design carried a few distinct demographic and methodological limitations. The researchers did not explicitly gather information on gender identity, meaning the relationship between gender identity, hormone cycles, and ADHD remains untested in this specific context. The standardized survey tool used to track daily symptoms was also based on older diagnostic criteria. This older framework lacks recent diagnostic updates designed to capture how ADHD presents in adults.

    The research team also looked at baseline mental health using standardized questionnaires for depression and anxiety. They found a trend suggesting that individuals with higher baseline depression and anxiety scores might experience slightly smaller shifts in ADHD symptoms across their cycles. However, having a higher overall symptom count on average consistently predicted a lower ADHD-related quality of life.

    Future studies will need to incorporate direct hormone sampling to precisely map biological changes to behavioral shifts. Researchers might also explore how oral contraceptives or specific antidepressants impact this hormonal cycle in neurodivergent populations. Some clinics have already begun testing symptom-based dosing regimens, where patients take slightly more medication during the specific weeks when their natural hormones work against them. Tracking these targeted interventions could eventually help doctors provide highly individualized care for women navigating adult ADHD.

    The study, “Changes in ADHD Symptoms and Mood Across the Menstrual Cycle in Females Treated With Stimulants: A Pilot Study,” was authored by Rebecca Zaritsky, Stephanie C. Reed, and Suzette M. Evans.

    URL: psypost.org/how-the-menstrual-

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #ADHD #WomensHealth #MenstrualCycle #ADHDWomen #MentalHealth #Neurodiversity #HormonalHealth #ADHDAwareness #StimulantMedication #HealthResearch

  26. San Bernardino's Secret Charms: Unearthing Hidden Gems - Unlock San Bernardino's best-kept secrets! Explore hidden waterfalls, historic architecture, and local culinary gems. This guide reveals 21 must-see spots for an unforgettable adventure..
    momvoyager.com/journal/san-ber
    #FlipboardUserGroup #blog #writing

  27. So yeah I spent a week redesigning my website. I merged my personal website into it - so my photos, and lists of my favorite games / shows / movies and albums, are now here as well. One website for everything.

    Light mode is now the default, but dark mode is still available. Some of the more personal articles are split into a new journal section.

  28. Le Pouvoir Secret d’Être Sous-Estimé

    Laissez-vous guider par la vision taoïste de la vie, où il ne s'agit pas d'être vu, mais d'être véritablement libre. Si cette réflexion résonne en vous, abonnez-vous au Journal Taoïste et poursuivez votre voyage vers la connaissance de soi et la philosophie orientale. Préparez-vous à transformer votre manière de penser et d'agir, en vous libérant des attentes extérieures et en embrassant le pouvoir de l'invisibilité silencieuse. Le Pouvoir Secret d'Être Sous-Estimé : […]

    dandanjean.com/2026/10/25/le-p

  29. New paper out: Amyloid PET Quantitation and Centiloid Thresholds in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.: Blazhenets, Ganna; Soleimani-Meigooni, David N; Chiotis, Konstantinos; et al.
    The journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 336, no. 13, p. 1135 -
    Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) is increasingly used in research and clinical settings to determine the etiology of cognitive… dlvr.it/TW3Lz6 | Please share #dzne #papers

  30. DATE: October 25, 2026 at 08:00AM
    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: Neuroscientists are digging into a worrying link between polluted air and children’s brain wiring

    URL: psypost.org/neuroscientists-ar

    Different sources of fine particle air pollution show distinct, subtle links to how the developing brains of children communicate, according to new nationwide research published in Journal of Environmental Psychology. Particles from traffic, coal burning, and agricultural fertilizers were each tied to their own patterns of connectivity in networks involved in sensory processing and higher-order thinking. The findings offer early evidence that where air pollution comes from may matter, not just how much of it children breathe.

    Outdoor air pollution contains fine particulate matter, commonly known as PM2.5, which consists of airborne particles smaller than 2.5 micrometers across. Because these specks are tiny enough to inhale deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, they may reach the brain.

    The brain coordinates its activities through large-scale functional networks, which are collections of brain regions in different locations whose activity tends to rise and fall together. Researchers can measure this synchrony with brain scans that track changes in blood flow while a person lies still and rests. During childhood and the transition into adolescence, these communication channels continue to reorganize as youth develop adult reasoning, sensory integration, and emotional control.

    Past research has linked outdoor air pollution to differences in these communication patterns. In a 2023 longitudinal study, members of the team behind the new research used data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, a large national project following thousands of American youth. They found that children with higher exposure to fine particles and other pollutants showed differences in how their resting brain networks matured across early adolescence. Additionally, a study covered by PsyPost in 2023 found that briefly breathing diesel exhaust in a controlled experiment temporarily weakened connectivity within the default mode network, a set of regions most active during mind-wandering and self-reflection, in adults.

    Fine particulate matter is not a single chemical substance, but rather a complex blend created by both natural processes and human activities. Addressing this complexity, a 2024 study by members of the same team, using data from the same national project, found that specific chemical ingredients and pollution sources had varying relationships with children’s memory and thinking skills. The new study uses the six pollution sources identified in that work. The investigation was led by Katherine L. Bottenhorn of the University of Southern California and Florida International University and Megan M. Herting of the University of Southern California.

    For the new study, the authors again drew on data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, which spans 21 research sites across the country. Data from one site were dropped because of hardware problems, leaving 20 sites for the cross-sectional analysis; the longitudinal analysis was limited to the 12 sites that used the same brand of scanner. The researchers analyzed brain scans from 6,291 children who were between 9 and 11 years old, as well as a subset of 1,972 participants scanned on consistent magnetic resonance imaging equipment roughly two years later, between ages 11 and 13.

    The participants’ resting-state brain activity was recorded while they relaxed with their eyes open. The scientists mapped interactions among 12 functional networks, encompassing primary sensory networks like vision and hearing, attention circuits, and higher-order systems. The salience network helps flag important events and shift attention, while the cingulo-opercular network, described here as a cognitive-control network, helps keep attention on a task.

    The team used annual air quality models tied to each child’s home address to estimate their exposure to 15 chemical components of air pollution during 2016. By grouping these chemicals mathematically, the authors estimated exposure to six primary sources: crustal materials (such as soil and dust), ammonium sulfates (largely from coal combustion), biomass burning (such as wood smoke and wildfires), traffic emissions, ammonium nitrates (often linked to agricultural fertilizers), and industrial fuel combustion.

    The researchers applied a machine learning method called connectome-based predictive modeling to identify connectivity patterns related to each pollution source. To see if the results could generalize across the country, the scientists trained models using participants from all study sites except one, and then tested how well that model predicted pollution levels for children living at the held-out site. The analyses adjusted for several potential confounding variables, including household income, race and ethnicity, perceived neighborhood safety, neighborhood population density, distance to major roads, urbanicity, physical activity, screen time, scanner hardware, and head movement inside the scanner.

    The cross-sectional analysis at ages 9 to 11 identified consistent links between specific pollution sources and connectivity across sensory and motor networks. Greater exposure to traffic emissions related to weaker functional communication between visual and mouth-related motor networks, as well as between auditory and cognitive-control circuits. In contrast, higher exposure to ammonium sulfates was linked to stronger communication between sensory systems and higher-order cognitive networks, including the default mode network. Crustal materials, industrial fuel burning, and total particulate matter were each tied to a handful of sensory and attention-related connections, while biomass burning showed no consistent pattern at ages 9 to 11.

    Higher-order networks, which are involved in introspective thought, stimulus processing, and, according to some researchers, vulnerability to mental health problems, were also tied to specific pollution sources. Exposure to ammonium nitrates was associated with stronger communication between salience and cognitive-control networks, but weaker communication within memory networks and between attention networks and other networks.

    Over the following two years, the researchers found consistent patterns of change linked to three sources. Higher traffic exposure was tied to increasing connectivity over time between hand-movement networks and attention-related areas, but decreasing connectivity between auditory and cognitive-control networks. Higher biomass burning exposure was linked to increasing connectivity among attention-related networks, and higher ammonium sulfate exposure to weakening connectivity between an attention network and a hand-movement network, while crustal materials, ammonium nitrates, industrial fuel burning, and total particulate matter showed no consistent pattern of change.

    Despite identifying consistent connections in the training data, the connectivity patterns accounted for less than 1 percent of the variation in children’s exposure at ages 9 to 11, and no more than about 2 percent for changes over time. When tested on children from held-out study sites, the models performed no better, and often worse, than simply guessing the average exposure. Prediction errors were largest at sites in the western United States and at sites where exposure levels varied more from child to child.

    The authors concluded that, after accounting for other factors, these pollution sources likely play only a small role in differences in brain connectivity between children, and that the links may not apply to youth in other regions. They also note that the patterns for biomass burning and ammonium sulfates held up best across sites, while those for crustal materials and traffic emissions deserve more caution.

    The findings are in line with a study covered by PsyPost earlier this year, which found that young teenagers exposed to elevated particulate pollution showed less brain network maturation over two years, though that previous research evaluated an overall brain maturity score rather than connectivity across specific functional networks and distinct pollution sources.

    “This is an important and timely topic, and the paper complements a growing body of evidence that children’s physical environments in general, and air pollution exposure in particular, are associated with their neural and cognitive development,” said Monica Rosenberg, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Chicago, director of the Cognition, Attention, and Brain Lab, and a co-developer of the brain-modeling technique used in the study, who was not involved in the research.

    “The longitudinal aspect of this work is unique and is a major strength—the authors didn’t just show associations between brain networks and pollution at a single time point but found that pollution predicts developmental trajectories of networks,” Rosenberg told PsyPost.

    There are a few things to keep in mind when interpreting these findings. The study used observational data and statistical associations, meaning it cannot establish that breathing these specific particles directly caused the observed network differences. Because the research took place across many regions with varying environmental mixtures, local factors that were unmeasured might account for some of the geographic discrepancies.

    The authors also did not apply a statistical correction for the many connections they tested at once, so some of the identified links could be false positives, and the analysis was exploratory, with no advance predictions about which networks would be affected. Because each study site used scanners from a single manufacturer, differences between regions cannot be fully separated from differences in scanning equipment.

    Rosenberg noted that the geographic inconsistency represents an important caveat for understanding the results. “One caveat is that the primary predictive models did not successfully generalize across sites, meaning that associations between brain network patterns and air pollution were inconsistent across geographic locations,” she said. “In addition to the thorough analyses presented in the paper, it would be interesting to test whether the observed brain changes were associated with cognitive and/or attentional performance since the implications of neural changes alone aren’t always clear.”

    Another caveat involves how exposure was measured. The researchers assigned air pollution levels based on each child’s home address during a single year, which does not capture personal daily habits such as indoor air filtration, ventilation, daily travel routes, or time spent exercising outdoors. In addition, the participants in this nationwide study were somewhat more likely to come from higher-income and non-Hispanic white households than the national average, and average particulate exposures across the sample were below current federal limits. Future studies will need to follow youth through later adolescence to evaluate whether these source-specific network patterns correspond with tangible differences in sensory function, attention, or mental health outcomes.

    The study, “Sources of outdoor air pollution exposure and child brain network development across the United States,” was authored by Katherine L. Bottenhorn, Kirthana Sukumaran, Amanda C. Del Giacco, Hedyeh Ahmadi, Jordan D. Corbett, Alethea V. de Jesus, Carlos Cardenas-Iniguez, Rima Habre, Daniel A. Hackman, Joel Schwartz, Jiu-Chiuan Chen, and Megan M. Herting.

    URL: psypost.org/neuroscientists-ar

    -------------------------------------------------

    Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

    Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

    -------------------------------------------------

    #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #AirPollution #ChildrensHealth #BrainDevelopment #Neuroscience #ChildDevelopment #CleanAir #PM25 #EnvironmentalHealth #PublicHealth #ClimateAndHealth

Share on Mastodon

Enter the server where you have an account.