#depression — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #depression, aggregated by home.social.
-
LIVE, Dammit Bluesky Blog
LIVEdammit is an act of personal defiance against the dark.
To live fully, to care for ourselves & others, despite all the obstacles, all the temptations to numb out or despair, we must *choose* to LIVE, dammit. Find inspiring stories, resources, & e-course: livedammit.com #escapeyourthinkingtraps
https://www.livedammit.com
LINK: https://bsky.app/profile/livedammit.bsky.social/post/3mltwfnyum22s
---------
LIVEdammit is a mental health support site with stories, tools, free e-course, bookstore & inspiring wearables — for stubborn souls doing the work to stay here, stay human, & stay strong.
WEBSITE: https://LIVEdammit.com
This robot is not affiliated with LIVEdammit.
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
--------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #livedammit #suicide -
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:00PM
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: Making snap judgments on dating apps hurts your own perceived value as a mate
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
Making snap, gut-level judgments on dating apps might leave users feeling worse about themselves than evaluating profiles methodically based on set criteria. A recent study published in Media Psychology found that while seeing a high number of potential partners increases feelings of being overwhelmed, it is the intuitive swiping strategy that actually harms users’ self-esteem and perceived value as a mate. These results suggest that the fast-paced design of modern dating platforms carries hidden psychological costs depending on how individuals choose to engage with the app.
Traditional online matchmaking agencies typically rely on lengthy questionnaires and deliberate algorithms to pair users. Modern mobile dating platforms take a vastly different approach, exposing users to a massive pool of seemingly available partners within a single session. Users are invited to evaluate these profiles rapidly with a simple swipe of their thumb. Platform designs, which offer positive social feedback in the form of matches, heavily incentivize this continuous browsing behavior.
Prior research into consumer behavior suggests that having an abundance of options can make decisions harder and leave people feeling dissatisfied. Psychologists often refer to this phenomenon as a tyranny of choice. Under this theory, an optimal environment filled with endless choices increases the pressure to succeed. If a user fails to find a partner or makes a bad choice, they have no excuses left and might blame their own personal shortcomings.
Marina F. Thomas, a researcher at the Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences in Austria, led the investigation alongside Alice Binder and Jörg Matthes from the University of Vienna. They set out to test how the sheer number of viewed profiles and the user’s personal decision-making style jointly affect psychological well-being. The investigators wanted to test whether dating apps provide the self-validation users often seek or if the apps simply overwhelm them.
To frame their experiment, the researchers utilized regulatory mode theory. This psychological concept explains that people usually make decisions using one of two primary modes. The assessment mode involves methodically judging options, comparing specific attributes, and trying to make the right, defensible choice. The locomotion mode is action-oriented. People using this mode make quick, intuitive decisions based on gut feelings, primarily trying to keep moving forward rather than overthinking.
To test these dynamics, the researchers recruited 401 undergraduate students for an online experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to view varying pools of dating app profiles. One group viewed a low number of 11 profiles, a second group viewed a medium number of 31 profiles, and a third group viewed a high number of 91 profiles. The photos were presented in a mock dating application specially designed for the study.
The researchers used a two-part method to influence how participants made their decisions. First, participants completed a writing task to prime their mindset. They wrote down personal memories of times they acted as a quick decision maker to spark the action-oriented mode, or they wrote about times they critically compared themselves to others to spark the assessment mode. A control group skipped this writing exercise and received no special instructions.
Following the writing task, participants were given explicit instructions for evaluating the dating profiles. One group was told to evaluate profiles critically, looking at specific physical traits, clothing styles, and perceived social status to make highly justified decisions. The action-oriented group was instructed to swipe intuitively and dynamically, basing their choices purely on first impressions and gut feelings.
After sorting through the mock profiles, participants answered questions designed to measure several psychological outcomes. The researchers assessed their state self-esteem, their fear of being single, how highly they rated their own value as a potential romantic partner, and how overwhelmed they felt. The software also silently recorded the percentage of profiles each participant chose to accept.
The experiment revealed that looking at a higher number of options directly increased the feeling of being overwhelmed. Participants who looked at 91 profiles reported a heavier mental burden than those who viewed fewer profiles. Evaluating more options also resulted in lower overall acceptance rates. Participants became much pickier as the abundance of choices grew, accepting a smaller percentage of the people they saw.
Contrary to the tyranny of choice theory, the sheer volume of profiles did not negatively impact self-esteem or the participants’ fears regarding their relationship status. Instead, the specific way participants made their decisions produced the psychological shifts. The results showed that swiping intuitively based on gut feelings directly led to a drop in self-esteem.
Participants who followed the quick, action-oriented strategy reported lower self-esteem than those who swiped naturally without instructions, as well as those who used specific criteria to evaluate profiles. The intuitive group also rated their own personal value as a mate lower than the other groups did. The research team noted this was an unexpected outcome, as previous theories suggested that highly critical, criteria-based decision-making typically caused more stress and self-doubt in consumer settings.
The authors suspect that making intuitive choices places the entire burden of the decision on the user’s internal feelings rather than observable facts. Because romantic preferences are difficult to perfectly define, relying solely on unexplainable gut instincts might make users feel uneasy. As a result, they might misdirect that unease inward, causing them to doubt their own self-worth. By contrast, relying on concrete traits provides an external buffer that protects the ego from the weight of the decision.
Another possible explanation involves cognitive friction regarding the format of the dating app. A static dating profile primarily displays unmoving photos and brief text, which naturally lends itself to critical evaluation. Pushing users to react quickly and intuitively to static photos might create a mismatch between the task and the mental mode. Users might misinterpret this subtle mental mismatch as a personal inadequacy.
The chosen swiping strategy also influenced when participants started to feel mentally overloaded. For people using strict criteria or swiping naturally, looking at 31 profiles felt about as manageable as looking at 11 profiles. For those swiping based on gut instincts, the feeling of being overwhelmed spiked much earlier, hitting just as hard at 31 profiles as it did when evaluating 91 profiles.
While the experiment provides a detailed window into dating app use, the study has practical limitations depending on its simulated nature. The decisions made during the experiment carried no actual social consequences, meaning participants knew they would not go on real dates with the people they evaluated. In a functioning dating app, users might put varying levels of effort into their choices because real rejections or connections are at stake.
The study also relied on a sample composed largely of young college students evaluating portraits tailored specifically to their demographic. The authors noted that college students often work in environments that reward critical assessment, which might have made the intuitive swiping task feel unusually foreign. Future research should involve more diverse populations encompassing different age groups and educational backgrounds.
Future investigations could also track actual dating app behaviors over time to see how self-reported decision styles hold up outside a laboratory environment. Implementing technology like eye-tracking software could help researchers observe what kind of profile information users focus on naturally. This approach would allow scientists to study natural swiping mechanisms accurately without relying on explicit behavioral instructions.
The study, “Decision-Making on Dating Apps: Is Swiping More Less and Swiping Right Wrong?,” was authored by Marina F. Thomas, Alice Binder, and Jörg Matthes.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #DatingApps #SwipeRight #SelfEsteem #TyrannyOfChoice #IntuitiveSwipe #DecisionMaking #RomanticRelationships #ProfileEvaluation #PsychologyOfDating #DatingAppTips
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:00PM
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: Making snap judgments on dating apps hurts your own perceived value as a mate
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
Making snap, gut-level judgments on dating apps might leave users feeling worse about themselves than evaluating profiles methodically based on set criteria. A recent study published in Media Psychology found that while seeing a high number of potential partners increases feelings of being overwhelmed, it is the intuitive swiping strategy that actually harms users’ self-esteem and perceived value as a mate. These results suggest that the fast-paced design of modern dating platforms carries hidden psychological costs depending on how individuals choose to engage with the app.
Traditional online matchmaking agencies typically rely on lengthy questionnaires and deliberate algorithms to pair users. Modern mobile dating platforms take a vastly different approach, exposing users to a massive pool of seemingly available partners within a single session. Users are invited to evaluate these profiles rapidly with a simple swipe of their thumb. Platform designs, which offer positive social feedback in the form of matches, heavily incentivize this continuous browsing behavior.
Prior research into consumer behavior suggests that having an abundance of options can make decisions harder and leave people feeling dissatisfied. Psychologists often refer to this phenomenon as a tyranny of choice. Under this theory, an optimal environment filled with endless choices increases the pressure to succeed. If a user fails to find a partner or makes a bad choice, they have no excuses left and might blame their own personal shortcomings.
Marina F. Thomas, a researcher at the Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences in Austria, led the investigation alongside Alice Binder and Jörg Matthes from the University of Vienna. They set out to test how the sheer number of viewed profiles and the user’s personal decision-making style jointly affect psychological well-being. The investigators wanted to test whether dating apps provide the self-validation users often seek or if the apps simply overwhelm them.
To frame their experiment, the researchers utilized regulatory mode theory. This psychological concept explains that people usually make decisions using one of two primary modes. The assessment mode involves methodically judging options, comparing specific attributes, and trying to make the right, defensible choice. The locomotion mode is action-oriented. People using this mode make quick, intuitive decisions based on gut feelings, primarily trying to keep moving forward rather than overthinking.
To test these dynamics, the researchers recruited 401 undergraduate students for an online experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to view varying pools of dating app profiles. One group viewed a low number of 11 profiles, a second group viewed a medium number of 31 profiles, and a third group viewed a high number of 91 profiles. The photos were presented in a mock dating application specially designed for the study.
The researchers used a two-part method to influence how participants made their decisions. First, participants completed a writing task to prime their mindset. They wrote down personal memories of times they acted as a quick decision maker to spark the action-oriented mode, or they wrote about times they critically compared themselves to others to spark the assessment mode. A control group skipped this writing exercise and received no special instructions.
Following the writing task, participants were given explicit instructions for evaluating the dating profiles. One group was told to evaluate profiles critically, looking at specific physical traits, clothing styles, and perceived social status to make highly justified decisions. The action-oriented group was instructed to swipe intuitively and dynamically, basing their choices purely on first impressions and gut feelings.
After sorting through the mock profiles, participants answered questions designed to measure several psychological outcomes. The researchers assessed their state self-esteem, their fear of being single, how highly they rated their own value as a potential romantic partner, and how overwhelmed they felt. The software also silently recorded the percentage of profiles each participant chose to accept.
The experiment revealed that looking at a higher number of options directly increased the feeling of being overwhelmed. Participants who looked at 91 profiles reported a heavier mental burden than those who viewed fewer profiles. Evaluating more options also resulted in lower overall acceptance rates. Participants became much pickier as the abundance of choices grew, accepting a smaller percentage of the people they saw.
Contrary to the tyranny of choice theory, the sheer volume of profiles did not negatively impact self-esteem or the participants’ fears regarding their relationship status. Instead, the specific way participants made their decisions produced the psychological shifts. The results showed that swiping intuitively based on gut feelings directly led to a drop in self-esteem.
Participants who followed the quick, action-oriented strategy reported lower self-esteem than those who swiped naturally without instructions, as well as those who used specific criteria to evaluate profiles. The intuitive group also rated their own personal value as a mate lower than the other groups did. The research team noted this was an unexpected outcome, as previous theories suggested that highly critical, criteria-based decision-making typically caused more stress and self-doubt in consumer settings.
The authors suspect that making intuitive choices places the entire burden of the decision on the user’s internal feelings rather than observable facts. Because romantic preferences are difficult to perfectly define, relying solely on unexplainable gut instincts might make users feel uneasy. As a result, they might misdirect that unease inward, causing them to doubt their own self-worth. By contrast, relying on concrete traits provides an external buffer that protects the ego from the weight of the decision.
Another possible explanation involves cognitive friction regarding the format of the dating app. A static dating profile primarily displays unmoving photos and brief text, which naturally lends itself to critical evaluation. Pushing users to react quickly and intuitively to static photos might create a mismatch between the task and the mental mode. Users might misinterpret this subtle mental mismatch as a personal inadequacy.
The chosen swiping strategy also influenced when participants started to feel mentally overloaded. For people using strict criteria or swiping naturally, looking at 31 profiles felt about as manageable as looking at 11 profiles. For those swiping based on gut instincts, the feeling of being overwhelmed spiked much earlier, hitting just as hard at 31 profiles as it did when evaluating 91 profiles.
While the experiment provides a detailed window into dating app use, the study has practical limitations depending on its simulated nature. The decisions made during the experiment carried no actual social consequences, meaning participants knew they would not go on real dates with the people they evaluated. In a functioning dating app, users might put varying levels of effort into their choices because real rejections or connections are at stake.
The study also relied on a sample composed largely of young college students evaluating portraits tailored specifically to their demographic. The authors noted that college students often work in environments that reward critical assessment, which might have made the intuitive swiping task feel unusually foreign. Future research should involve more diverse populations encompassing different age groups and educational backgrounds.
Future investigations could also track actual dating app behaviors over time to see how self-reported decision styles hold up outside a laboratory environment. Implementing technology like eye-tracking software could help researchers observe what kind of profile information users focus on naturally. This approach would allow scientists to study natural swiping mechanisms accurately without relying on explicit behavioral instructions.
The study, “Decision-Making on Dating Apps: Is Swiping More Less and Swiping Right Wrong?,” was authored by Marina F. Thomas, Alice Binder, and Jörg Matthes.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #DatingApps #SwipeRight #SelfEsteem #TyrannyOfChoice #IntuitiveSwipe #DecisionMaking #RomanticRelationships #ProfileEvaluation #PsychologyOfDating #DatingAppTips
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:00PM
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: Making snap judgments on dating apps hurts your own perceived value as a mate
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
Making snap, gut-level judgments on dating apps might leave users feeling worse about themselves than evaluating profiles methodically based on set criteria. A recent study published in Media Psychology found that while seeing a high number of potential partners increases feelings of being overwhelmed, it is the intuitive swiping strategy that actually harms users’ self-esteem and perceived value as a mate. These results suggest that the fast-paced design of modern dating platforms carries hidden psychological costs depending on how individuals choose to engage with the app.
Traditional online matchmaking agencies typically rely on lengthy questionnaires and deliberate algorithms to pair users. Modern mobile dating platforms take a vastly different approach, exposing users to a massive pool of seemingly available partners within a single session. Users are invited to evaluate these profiles rapidly with a simple swipe of their thumb. Platform designs, which offer positive social feedback in the form of matches, heavily incentivize this continuous browsing behavior.
Prior research into consumer behavior suggests that having an abundance of options can make decisions harder and leave people feeling dissatisfied. Psychologists often refer to this phenomenon as a tyranny of choice. Under this theory, an optimal environment filled with endless choices increases the pressure to succeed. If a user fails to find a partner or makes a bad choice, they have no excuses left and might blame their own personal shortcomings.
Marina F. Thomas, a researcher at the Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences in Austria, led the investigation alongside Alice Binder and Jörg Matthes from the University of Vienna. They set out to test how the sheer number of viewed profiles and the user’s personal decision-making style jointly affect psychological well-being. The investigators wanted to test whether dating apps provide the self-validation users often seek or if the apps simply overwhelm them.
To frame their experiment, the researchers utilized regulatory mode theory. This psychological concept explains that people usually make decisions using one of two primary modes. The assessment mode involves methodically judging options, comparing specific attributes, and trying to make the right, defensible choice. The locomotion mode is action-oriented. People using this mode make quick, intuitive decisions based on gut feelings, primarily trying to keep moving forward rather than overthinking.
To test these dynamics, the researchers recruited 401 undergraduate students for an online experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to view varying pools of dating app profiles. One group viewed a low number of 11 profiles, a second group viewed a medium number of 31 profiles, and a third group viewed a high number of 91 profiles. The photos were presented in a mock dating application specially designed for the study.
The researchers used a two-part method to influence how participants made their decisions. First, participants completed a writing task to prime their mindset. They wrote down personal memories of times they acted as a quick decision maker to spark the action-oriented mode, or they wrote about times they critically compared themselves to others to spark the assessment mode. A control group skipped this writing exercise and received no special instructions.
Following the writing task, participants were given explicit instructions for evaluating the dating profiles. One group was told to evaluate profiles critically, looking at specific physical traits, clothing styles, and perceived social status to make highly justified decisions. The action-oriented group was instructed to swipe intuitively and dynamically, basing their choices purely on first impressions and gut feelings.
After sorting through the mock profiles, participants answered questions designed to measure several psychological outcomes. The researchers assessed their state self-esteem, their fear of being single, how highly they rated their own value as a potential romantic partner, and how overwhelmed they felt. The software also silently recorded the percentage of profiles each participant chose to accept.
The experiment revealed that looking at a higher number of options directly increased the feeling of being overwhelmed. Participants who looked at 91 profiles reported a heavier mental burden than those who viewed fewer profiles. Evaluating more options also resulted in lower overall acceptance rates. Participants became much pickier as the abundance of choices grew, accepting a smaller percentage of the people they saw.
Contrary to the tyranny of choice theory, the sheer volume of profiles did not negatively impact self-esteem or the participants’ fears regarding their relationship status. Instead, the specific way participants made their decisions produced the psychological shifts. The results showed that swiping intuitively based on gut feelings directly led to a drop in self-esteem.
Participants who followed the quick, action-oriented strategy reported lower self-esteem than those who swiped naturally without instructions, as well as those who used specific criteria to evaluate profiles. The intuitive group also rated their own personal value as a mate lower than the other groups did. The research team noted this was an unexpected outcome, as previous theories suggested that highly critical, criteria-based decision-making typically caused more stress and self-doubt in consumer settings.
The authors suspect that making intuitive choices places the entire burden of the decision on the user’s internal feelings rather than observable facts. Because romantic preferences are difficult to perfectly define, relying solely on unexplainable gut instincts might make users feel uneasy. As a result, they might misdirect that unease inward, causing them to doubt their own self-worth. By contrast, relying on concrete traits provides an external buffer that protects the ego from the weight of the decision.
Another possible explanation involves cognitive friction regarding the format of the dating app. A static dating profile primarily displays unmoving photos and brief text, which naturally lends itself to critical evaluation. Pushing users to react quickly and intuitively to static photos might create a mismatch between the task and the mental mode. Users might misinterpret this subtle mental mismatch as a personal inadequacy.
The chosen swiping strategy also influenced when participants started to feel mentally overloaded. For people using strict criteria or swiping naturally, looking at 31 profiles felt about as manageable as looking at 11 profiles. For those swiping based on gut instincts, the feeling of being overwhelmed spiked much earlier, hitting just as hard at 31 profiles as it did when evaluating 91 profiles.
While the experiment provides a detailed window into dating app use, the study has practical limitations depending on its simulated nature. The decisions made during the experiment carried no actual social consequences, meaning participants knew they would not go on real dates with the people they evaluated. In a functioning dating app, users might put varying levels of effort into their choices because real rejections or connections are at stake.
The study also relied on a sample composed largely of young college students evaluating portraits tailored specifically to their demographic. The authors noted that college students often work in environments that reward critical assessment, which might have made the intuitive swiping task feel unusually foreign. Future research should involve more diverse populations encompassing different age groups and educational backgrounds.
Future investigations could also track actual dating app behaviors over time to see how self-reported decision styles hold up outside a laboratory environment. Implementing technology like eye-tracking software could help researchers observe what kind of profile information users focus on naturally. This approach would allow scientists to study natural swiping mechanisms accurately without relying on explicit behavioral instructions.
The study, “Decision-Making on Dating Apps: Is Swiping More Less and Swiping Right Wrong?,” was authored by Marina F. Thomas, Alice Binder, and Jörg Matthes.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/why-swiping-by-gut-feeling-on-dating-apps-might-lower-your-self-esteem/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #DatingApps #SwipeRight #SelfEsteem #TyrannyOfChoice #IntuitiveSwipe #DecisionMaking #RomanticRelationships #ProfileEvaluation #PsychologyOfDating #DatingAppTips
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:05AM
SOURCE: SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY.ORGTITLE: Your "Um" and Pauses Could Reveal Early Dementia Risk
Source: Science Daily - Top Health
The little pauses, "ums," and moments when you struggle to find the right word may reveal far more about your brain than anyone realized. New research suggests they are tied to mental systems powering memory, planning, and attention. By using AI to analyze conversations, it's possible to predict cognitive performance with surprising accuracy, potentially allowing simple speech-based tools to detect early signs of dementia long before traditional...
-------------------------------------------------
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 #DementiaRisk #SpeechAnalysis #CognitiveHealth #MildCognitiveImpairment #BrainHealth #UmsAndPauses #EarlyDetection #AIForHealth #MemoryPlanningAttention #VoiceBiomarkers
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:05AM
SOURCE: SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY.ORGTITLE: Poland Registers First Same-Sex Marriage After Court's Ruling
Source: PBS News Hour
Poland's capital, Warsaw, registered its first same-sex marriage on Thursday, implementing court rulings that require the country to recognize same-sex marriages registered abroad. The European Union's highest court in November ordered Poland to register same-sex marriages from other EU countries even if Polish law doesn't permit them. "This morning we issued the first transcription of a marriage certificate for a same-sex couple," Warsaw's...
-------------------------------------------------
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 #Poland #SameSexMarriage #LGBTQRights #EU ruling #Warsaw #MarriageEquality #PolandNews #LGBTQNews #EUlaw #CivilRights
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:05AM
SOURCE: SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY.ORGTITLE: Backlash As Utah Approves Data Center Twice the Size of Manhattan
Source: The Guardian - Climate Crisis
A plan to create one of the world's largest data centers—a gargantuan project spanning an area more than twice the size of Manhattan—has provoked a furious public backlash in Utah amid concerns over its vast energy use and impact upon the state's stressed water supplies. The Stratos artificial intelligence data center footprint will cover more than 62 square miles and was approved last week despite thousands of objections lodged by Utah...
-------------------------------------------------
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 #UtahDataCenter #DataCenterExpansion #EnergyConsumption #WaterResources #ManhattanSize #StratosAI #TechInfrastructure #PublicBacklash #ClimateImpact #SustainableEnergy
-
There is a reason this is #MentalHealthMonth
While people assume that winter is when suicides take place the most, it is actually April, May, and June.One interesting correlation is how Springtime allergens and inflammation exacerbate mental health issues.
Add energy shifts overcoming lethargy, and I can see how this is such a dangerous time.
It is classically when my depression is overwhelming.
#Depression #anxiety #mentalhealth #mentalillness #cPTSD #Suicide #988crisisline
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 03:25AM
SOURCE: SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY.ORGTITLE: Medical AI Transcriber "Hallucinated," Generating Errors
Source: Canadian Broadcasting Company - Health News
Artificial intelligence note-taking tools intended for use by Ontario doctors provided incorrect and incomplete information or demonstrated AI "hallucinations," a new audit report shows. During a provincial procurement process for AI medical systems that transcribe conversations between doctors and patients, government evaluators found serious errors in transcripts generated by 20 programs, said Ontario Auditor General Shelley Spence.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #MedicalAI #AIErrors #AIFraud #HealthcareTech #MedicalTranscription #AIHallucinations #OntarioHealth #AuditorGeneral #HealthTechAudit #TranscriptionMistakes
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 02:00PM
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: Women score higher than men on fluid intelligence tests when allowed to express uncertainty
Traditional tests of intelligence and literacy may be fundamentally flawed because they force test-takers to choose a single answer rather than allowing them to express their level of confidence in different options. When people are given financial incentives and allowed to distribute their answers based on how sure they are, women actually score higher than men. The research was published in the Journal of Political Economy.
For decades, psychologists and economists have measured cognitive ability using multiple-choice tests. These assessments score responses as strictly right or wrong. Glenn W. Harrison of Georgia State University, Don Ross of University College Cork, and J. Todd Swarthout of Georgia State University suspected this format misses a vital component of human cognition. Knowing how strongly to believe in an answer is a skill in itself.
The researchers note that the standard format forces people to mask their thought processes. If someone is somewhat confident in an answer but still perceives some risk of being wrong, the rigid format does not capture that nuance. The test format demands absolute certainty even when a person possesses healthy skepticism.
To address this, the team examined the Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices test. This assessment presents a grid of shapes with one missing piece and asks the test-taker to identify the pattern. It is widely used to measure fluid intelligence, which is the ability to solve new logic problems without relying on prior knowledge.
The researchers wrote that, “The measurement of intelligence should identify and measure an individual’s subjective confidence that a response to a test question is correct.” They noted that existing tests completely fail to achieve this goal.
The standard version of this puzzle allows test-takers unlimited time and offers no financial motivation. The researchers created a computerized version that offered monetary rewards for correct answers. They divided participants into different groups to test how the structure of the task changed their performance.
In the baseline group, participants took a traditional version for a flat fee of five dollars. In another group, participants were paid based on their accuracy but were still forced to pick just one answer. A third group experienced a radically different test structure.
These participants were given eighty digital tokens to allocate across eight possible answers. If they were completely sure, they could place all eighty tokens on a single choice for a maximum reward of two dollars per puzzle. If they were unsure, they could spread their tokens out over multiple likely answers to guarantee a smaller payout.
This token system measures what the researchers refer to as confidence. In this context, confidence does not mean optimism. It refers to the precision of a person’s belief. A person who places ten tokens on every single answer is safely guarding against risk because they have no idea which shape is correct.
When financial incentives were combined with the ability to express varying degrees of confidence, the results shifted dramatically. In the traditional format, female participants scored lower than male participants. When participants could assign tokens based on their confidence, women outperformed men.
The data showed that female participants were better at calculating the risk of their answers and distributing their tokens efficiently. Knowing when you are unsure is a core part of cognition. The researchers consider this risk assessment to be a fundamental element of fluid intelligence.
The researchers also altered the order of the puzzles. The standard test starts with easy puzzles and gradually progresses to difficult ones. The researchers call this sequence a structured progression, meaning it is an environmental clue that helps a person think.
When the researchers scrambled the order of the puzzles so that difficulty varied randomly, overall performance dropped. The gap in performance between the group forced to pick one answer and the group allowed to use tokens widened even further. This confirmed that the ability to express uncertainty is a distinct cognitive advantage when facing unpredictable problems.
This discovery regarding gender prompted the researchers to revisit other areas where men possess a supposed advantage. They looked at studies regarding competitiveness. Past behavioral studies suggest that women back away from competitive environments, such as workplace tournaments, in favor of flat payment schedules.
The researchers recreated these experiments using the token system and discovered that women were making the mathematically correct risk management choices. Participants had to solve logic problems under a time limit, choosing either a guaranteed payment per correct answer or a tournament style where only the top performer received a large payout.
Men tended to choose the competitive tournament even when it resulted in a monetary loss for them. Men proved to be overly optimistic about their chances of winning. Women evaluated the risk accurately and chose the safer compensation structure, which resulted in better financial outcomes.
The team also looked at financial literacy tests. Standard surveys report that women choose the “do not know” option much more often than men when asked financial questions. This has led to the assumption that women possess lower financial literacy.
The researchers presented participants with a standard question about calculating purchasing power based on interest and inflation rates. When the researchers allowed subjects to use tokens to answer the question, they found that women were just more open about their lack of complete certainty. The bias in their actual knowledge was tiny and not statistically significant.
Many women distributed their tokens broadly, meaning they were aware that they lacked the exact knowledge and guarded their bets accordingly. This behavior signals an intellectual awareness of uncertainty. Someone who knows they are guessing is more likely to seek out a financial advisor or a textbook to learn the correct answer.
Individuals who place all their tokens on a highly incorrect answer represent a much larger danger. The researchers noted that these individuals are completely confident in their incorrect knowledge. These are the people most likely to make catastrophic financial decisions without consulting outside help.
The authors specify that their findings on motivation might involve variables that are difficult to isolate. Participants might bring personal motivations into the laboratory that interact with the monetary incentives offered by the experimenters.
Future studies could attempt to separate these personal drives from the financial rewards to see how they impact token distribution. The research team also plans to further investigate data suggesting that Black participants similarly perform drastically better when allowed to express their confidence through the token system.
The study, “Gender, Confidence, and the Mismeasure of Intelligence, Competitiveness, and Literacy,” was authored by Glenn W. Harrison, Don Ross, and J. Todd Swarthout.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #FluidIntelligence #ConfidenceInAssessment #TokenBasedTesting #GenderDifferences #RiskAssessment #UncertaintyExpression #CognitiveMeasurement #EconomicIncentives #FinancialLiteracy #RavenMatrices
-
LIVE, Dammit Bluesky Blog
#Reasonsforhope...
https://www.meditationsinanemergency.com/we-are-crashing-into-the-future/?ref=meditations-in-an-emergency-newsletter
LINK: https://bsky.app/profile/livedammit.bsky.social/post/3mltdmba73s2s
---------
LIVEdammit is a mental health support site with stories, tools, free e-course, bookstore & inspiring wearables — for stubborn souls doing the work to stay here, stay human, & stay strong.
WEBSITE: https://LIVEdammit.com
This robot is not affiliated with LIVEdammit.
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
--------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #livedammit #suicide -
DATE: May 14, 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: Brain cells store competing memories that drive or suppress alcohol relapse
URL: https://www.psypost.org/brain-cells-store-competing-memories-that-drive-or-suppress-alcohol-relapse/
A new study published in the journal Neuron provides evidence that the brain stores competing memories of alcohol use and the recovery from it within distinct networks of the same type of brain cell. The research suggests that the memory driving a return to drinking and the memory suppressing it exist side by side, competing for control over a person’s behavior. These findings offer a nuanced understanding of how addiction persists and point toward potential new ways to improve treatments for alcohol use disorder.
Addiction occurs when addictive substances hijack normal learning processes, leading to the formation of powerful memories that link certain actions and environments with the drug. Behavioral therapies, such as extinction training, attempt to reduce the urge to seek alcohol by repeatedly exposing individuals to drug-related cues without providing the alcohol reward. However, the clinical impact of these therapies tends to be limited because scientists do not fully understand the physical cellular structures that hold these opposing memories.
“Relapse is one of the most difficult challenges in alcohol use disorder, even after long periods of abstinence or treatment,” said Jun Wang, a professor in the Department of Neuroscience and Experimental Therapeutics at the Texas AM University Health Science Center’s College of Medicine. “Alcohol-associated cues and contexts can trigger powerful memories that drive renewed alcohol seeking. We wanted to understand where relapse-related memories are stored in the brain, and how extinction training reduces alcohol-seeking behavior by erasing the original alcohol memory or by creating a competing memory that suppresses relapse.”
Memories are thought to be physically stored in the brain through specific groups of cells called engrams. An engram is a physical change in the brain that represents a memory. It consists of a specific network of brain cells that activate together when an experience happens, and when the brain recalls that memory, the same group of cells fires again. Past research on engrams has mostly focused on fear learning in other parts of the brain, meaning less is known about the engrams that store habits and voluntary actions related to addictive substances.
The researchers designed the study to test whether the memories for alcohol use and the memories for extinction are stored in separate areas or within the same cell populations. They focused on a brain region called the dorsomedial striatum, which helps control goal-directed behaviors. Within this region, they examined a specific type of cell known as direct-pathway medium spiny neurons.
“We were surprised to find that these opposing memories were encoded within the same genetically defined cell type, direct-pathway medium spiny neurons, rather than being separated simply by different neuron types,” Wang said. “Traditionally, many models emphasize broad distinctions between direct- and indirect-pathway neurons, but our findings show that even within one cell type, distinct neuronal ensembles can have very different, even opposite, behavioral functions.”
The scientists conducted a series of experiments using genetically modified mice. They placed the mice in specialized testing boxes equipped with levers and lights. The mice learned that pressing an active lever three times would deliver a small amount of a twenty percent alcohol solution, which was accompanied by a specific tone and a yellow light. After several weeks of this training, the mice underwent nine days of extinction training, where pressing the lever no longer provided the alcohol or the cues.
To track the memory cells, the researchers used a specialized genetic tagging technique. They injected a drug that allowed them to permanently label the specific brain cells that were active either during the initial alcohol learning or during the later extinction training. Following the training phases, the researchers tested groups of four to seven mice to see which memory cells were reactivated during a simulated relapse event.
They found that the brain cells tagged during the initial alcohol learning were highly reactivated when the mice experienced the cues associated with alcohol. The cells tagged during extinction training were not reactivated during this simulated relapse, which provides evidence that alcohol use and extinction training recruit different sets of the same type of brain cell.
The researchers then looked at where these specific cell groups were located within the dorsomedial striatum. This brain region is divided into two distinct areas: the matrix, which generally promotes action, and the striosome, which generally discourages action. By analyzing brain tissue samples, the scientists found that the cells linked to extinction memories were heavily clustered in the striosome areas. These extinction-related cells strongly inhibited dopamine-producing neurons, which helps suppress the urge to seek alcohol. In contrast, the cells linked to alcohol use were spread broadly across the matrix and promoted reward-seeking behavior.
To test whether these distinct groups of cells actively control behavior, the researchers used a technique that allows them to turn specific neurons on or off using custom-made chemicals. They injected viral vectors into the brains of the mice, which safely delivered genetic instructions causing the tagged memory cells to produce specialized receptors. The researchers then injected a chemical that binds to these receptors to either turn the cells on or off.
In tests involving groups of seven to sixteen mice, the authors found that turning off the alcohol-learning cells successfully suppressed the simulated relapse. Activating the extinction-learning cells also reduced the animals’ attempts to seek alcohol. The scientists repeated these tests using sucrose instead of alcohol and found no effect. This suggests these particular memory cells are specific to alcohol and do not generalize to natural rewards.
The authors also wanted to understand exactly how the brain physicalizes the memory of alcohol use. Learning changes the brain by strengthening the synapses, which are the connections between different brain cells. The researchers focused on the connections coming from the medial prefrontal cortex, a brain area involved in complex decision-making. By taking electrical recordings from dozens of individual neurons across multiple mice, they found that alcohol use caused a long-lasting strengthening of the synapses connecting the medial prefrontal cortex to the specific cells involved in alcohol learning.
To see if this strengthened connection was the actual memory, the scientists used a technique that controls brain cells with light. They introduced light-sensitive proteins into the brain cells of a new group of mice, numbering seven to eleven per group, that had never consumed alcohol. By shining a specific wavelength of light into the brain through tiny optical fibers, the scientists forced the neurons to fire and strengthened their connections artificially.
This artificial stimulation was paired with specific lights and sounds in the testing chamber. Later, when the researchers played the lights and sounds again, the mice began pressing the lever as if they were seeking alcohol. This suggests that the researchers successfully created an artificial memory of alcohol relapse simply by strengthening a specific brain connection. The authors also replicated these behavioral findings in a small group of rats to ensure the results were not unique to mice.
“One important aspect of the study is that we were able to identify not only the neurons associated with alcohol relapse and extinction, but also a synaptic mechanism that helps store relapse-related memory,” Wang said. “Specifically, we found that communication from the medial prefrontal cortex to striatal neurons was strengthened after alcohol self-administration, and experimentally mimicking this strengthening was sufficient to drive relapse-like behavior. This provides evidence that alcohol-related memories can be physically embedded in specific brain connections.”
“The main takeaway is that relapse and recovery-related learning are not only abstract psychological processes; they are represented by specific groups of neurons in the brain,” Wang explained. “We found that two opposing alcohol-related memories, one that promotes relapse and one that suppresses alcohol seeking after extinction, can be encoded within the same broad type of striatal neuron. This suggests that recovery may depend not only on weakening relapse-driving circuits, but also on strengthening the brain circuits that support extinction and behavioral control.”
While the study provides a detailed look at how the brain stores alcohol-related memories, there are some limitations to consider. The timeline of alcohol exposure in the study was relatively short compared to human addiction, which tends to develop over years. It is possible that the physical nature of these memories changes over longer periods of chronic alcohol use.
“An important caveat is that this study was conducted in mouse models of alcohol self-administration, extinction, and relapse-like behavior,” Wang noted. “These models capture important aspects of alcohol seeking and relapse, but they do not fully reproduce the complexity of human alcohol use disorder. We also do not want readers to interpret the findings as meaning that relapse is controlled by a single brain region or a simple ‘on/off switch.’ Rather, our study identifies one specific circuit and cellular mechanism that contributes to alcohol-related memory and relapse-like behavior.”
Current medical treatments cannot selectively erase or enhance specific memory cells in human patients. However, understanding that recovery involves strengthening a competing extinction memory gives researchers a new conceptual target. Future therapeutic strategies might focus on finding medications or brain stimulation techniques that specifically boost the extinction memory network to help prevent relapse.
“Our long-term goal is to understand how maladaptive alcohol memories are formed, stored, retrieved, and suppressed at the level of specific brain circuits,” Wang said. “We are particularly interested in identifying mechanisms that could selectively weaken relapse-promoting memory circuits or strengthen extinction-related circuits. In the long run, this type of work may help guide new strategies to improve the durability of behavioral therapies and reduce relapse risk.”
The study, “Dual-engram architecture within a single striatal cell type distinctly controls alcohol relapse and extinction,” was authored by Xueyi Xie, Yufei Huang, Ruifeng Chen, Zhenbo Huang, Himanshu Gangal, Ziyi Li, Jiayi Lu, Adelis M. Cruz, Anita Chaiprasert, Emily Yu, Nicholas Hernandez, Valerie Vierkant, Runmin Wang, Xuehua Wang, Rachel J. Smith, and Jun Wang.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/brain-cells-store-competing-memories-that-drive-or-suppress-alcohol-relapse/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #AlcoholRelapse #ExtinctionMemory #EngramScience #NeuralCircuits #DorsomedialStriatum #DirectPathwayMSNs #AddictionResearch #BrainMemory #RelapsePrevention #NeuroscienceStudies
-
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
-
DATE: May 14, 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: Americans systematically overestimate how many social media users contribute to harmful online behavior
A set of three studies in the U.S. revealed that Americans believe that 43% of Reddit users post severely toxic comments, while 47% of Facebook users share false news online. However, in reality, such content is produced by only 3-8.5% of users. The paper was published in PNAS Nexus.
Social media contains many posts sharing misleading or completely untrue content. There are also users who post toxic comments to other people’s posts. These are comments that are insulting, hateful, or aggressive. These two types of behavior—sharing false news and posting toxic comments—are an important issue because they hurt real people, damage reputations, and create fear or anger.
False news can spread very quickly because people often share dramatic information before checking whether it is true. Toxic comments can make online spaces hostile and discourage reasonable discussion. This behavior can also deepen conflicts between groups, because people begin to see others as enemies rather than as human beings.
What is interesting is that studies indicate that both of these types of behaviors are produced by a very small minority of users who are highly active and post prolifically. A recent study found that 1% of conflict-seeking Reddit communities produced 74% of all conflict content across the platform. Similarly, another study found that 60% of hateful speech on Twitter came from a small community of users. These findings reflect what seems to be a broader pattern across social media platforms—the majority of problematic content is produced by a small, but vocal, minority of users.
Study author Angela Y. Lee and her colleagues investigated Americans’ beliefs about how many social media users contribute to harmful content and examined the consequences of such beliefs. They hypothesized that people would overestimate the prevalence of harmful users on social media. In turn, this misperception might foster excessive cynicism about their fellow citizens. These authors suggest that when people believe that many of their fellow Americans are posting harmful content, they may develop more negative views of society and perceive greater moral decline than actually exists.
To explore this further, study authors conducted three surveys of U.S.-American adults via CloudResearch Connect, matched to national quotas on age, gender, race, and ethnicity. The total number of participants across the three surveys was 1,090.
The first study asked participants to read about two research studies that identified how many Reddit accounts had posted toxic content and how many Facebook users had posted false news on the platform. Participants then provided their estimates regarding how many social media users produced such content.
In study 2, participants read about a Google system used to detect toxic language. They also viewed 20 comments from actual Reddit users, half of which were severely toxic, and half were not. They were then asked to identify the comments the Google system would classify as toxic.
Study 3 was an experiment where participants in one condition read a text explaining how scientists found that most people never share toxic content online. This was the misperception correction condition. The other experimental condition was a control condition, where they read about how Reddit was founded. The text the control group read did not mention online toxicity. After this, participants in both conditions completed measures of social media use, cynicism, generalized trust, perceptions of moral decline, and beliefs about the kinds of content that should go viral on social media.
Results showed that, on average, participants believed that 43% of all Reddit users posted severely toxic comments and that 47% of Facebook users shared false news online. In reality, platform-level data shows that most of these forms of harmful content come from 3-8.5% of users—a small, but highly active, group.
The experiment revealed that participants in the misperception correction condition tended to see their fellow U.S. citizens as being in less moral decline compared to participants in the control condition. They also felt more positive and were more likely to understand that others do not desire harmful online content. However, there were no differences between the two groups in cynicism and generalized trust in human nature.
“Our results reveal people do not realize that most harmful content on social media is produced by a small, prolific group of users. Instead, they believe that the amount of harmful content on social media is the result of many users participating in harmful behaviors,” study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific knowledge about Americans’ perceptions of social media and their users. However, it should be noted that the study only involved U.S. participants and focused on only two types of harmful behaviors on two platforms. Because of this, the findings may not fully generalize to other countries, other cultures, and other social media platforms.
The paper, “Americans overestimate how many social media users post harmful content,” was authored by Angela Y. Lee, Eric Neumann, Jamil Zaki, and Jeffrey Hancock.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #AmericansOverestimateSocialMedia #HarmfulContentPerception #ToxicComments #FalseNewsOnline #SmallProlificMinority #SocialMediaMyth #MisperceptionCorrection #CynicismAndTrust #OnlineDiscourse #RedditFacebookInsights
-
DATE: May 14, 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: Americans systematically overestimate how many social media users contribute to harmful online behavior
A set of three studies in the U.S. revealed that Americans believe that 43% of Reddit users post severely toxic comments, while 47% of Facebook users share false news online. However, in reality, such content is produced by only 3-8.5% of users. The paper was published in PNAS Nexus.
Social media contains many posts sharing misleading or completely untrue content. There are also users who post toxic comments to other people’s posts. These are comments that are insulting, hateful, or aggressive. These two types of behavior—sharing false news and posting toxic comments—are an important issue because they hurt real people, damage reputations, and create fear or anger.
False news can spread very quickly because people often share dramatic information before checking whether it is true. Toxic comments can make online spaces hostile and discourage reasonable discussion. This behavior can also deepen conflicts between groups, because people begin to see others as enemies rather than as human beings.
What is interesting is that studies indicate that both of these types of behaviors are produced by a very small minority of users who are highly active and post prolifically. A recent study found that 1% of conflict-seeking Reddit communities produced 74% of all conflict content across the platform. Similarly, another study found that 60% of hateful speech on Twitter came from a small community of users. These findings reflect what seems to be a broader pattern across social media platforms—the majority of problematic content is produced by a small, but vocal, minority of users.
Study author Angela Y. Lee and her colleagues investigated Americans’ beliefs about how many social media users contribute to harmful content and examined the consequences of such beliefs. They hypothesized that people would overestimate the prevalence of harmful users on social media. In turn, this misperception might foster excessive cynicism about their fellow citizens. These authors suggest that when people believe that many of their fellow Americans are posting harmful content, they may develop more negative views of society and perceive greater moral decline than actually exists.
To explore this further, study authors conducted three surveys of U.S.-American adults via CloudResearch Connect, matched to national quotas on age, gender, race, and ethnicity. The total number of participants across the three surveys was 1,090.
The first study asked participants to read about two research studies that identified how many Reddit accounts had posted toxic content and how many Facebook users had posted false news on the platform. Participants then provided their estimates regarding how many social media users produced such content.
In study 2, participants read about a Google system used to detect toxic language. They also viewed 20 comments from actual Reddit users, half of which were severely toxic, and half were not. They were then asked to identify the comments the Google system would classify as toxic.
Study 3 was an experiment where participants in one condition read a text explaining how scientists found that most people never share toxic content online. This was the misperception correction condition. The other experimental condition was a control condition, where they read about how Reddit was founded. The text the control group read did not mention online toxicity. After this, participants in both conditions completed measures of social media use, cynicism, generalized trust, perceptions of moral decline, and beliefs about the kinds of content that should go viral on social media.
Results showed that, on average, participants believed that 43% of all Reddit users posted severely toxic comments and that 47% of Facebook users shared false news online. In reality, platform-level data shows that most of these forms of harmful content come from 3-8.5% of users—a small, but highly active, group.
The experiment revealed that participants in the misperception correction condition tended to see their fellow U.S. citizens as being in less moral decline compared to participants in the control condition. They also felt more positive and were more likely to understand that others do not desire harmful online content. However, there were no differences between the two groups in cynicism and generalized trust in human nature.
“Our results reveal people do not realize that most harmful content on social media is produced by a small, prolific group of users. Instead, they believe that the amount of harmful content on social media is the result of many users participating in harmful behaviors,” study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific knowledge about Americans’ perceptions of social media and their users. However, it should be noted that the study only involved U.S. participants and focused on only two types of harmful behaviors on two platforms. Because of this, the findings may not fully generalize to other countries, other cultures, and other social media platforms.
The paper, “Americans overestimate how many social media users post harmful content,” was authored by Angela Y. Lee, Eric Neumann, Jamil Zaki, and Jeffrey Hancock.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #AmericansOverestimateSocialMedia #HarmfulContentPerception #ToxicComments #FalseNewsOnline #SmallProlificMinority #SocialMediaMyth #MisperceptionCorrection #CynicismAndTrust #OnlineDiscourse #RedditFacebookInsights
-
DATE: May 14, 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: Americans systematically overestimate how many social media users contribute to harmful online behavior
A set of three studies in the U.S. revealed that Americans believe that 43% of Reddit users post severely toxic comments, while 47% of Facebook users share false news online. However, in reality, such content is produced by only 3-8.5% of users. The paper was published in PNAS Nexus.
Social media contains many posts sharing misleading or completely untrue content. There are also users who post toxic comments to other people’s posts. These are comments that are insulting, hateful, or aggressive. These two types of behavior—sharing false news and posting toxic comments—are an important issue because they hurt real people, damage reputations, and create fear or anger.
False news can spread very quickly because people often share dramatic information before checking whether it is true. Toxic comments can make online spaces hostile and discourage reasonable discussion. This behavior can also deepen conflicts between groups, because people begin to see others as enemies rather than as human beings.
What is interesting is that studies indicate that both of these types of behaviors are produced by a very small minority of users who are highly active and post prolifically. A recent study found that 1% of conflict-seeking Reddit communities produced 74% of all conflict content across the platform. Similarly, another study found that 60% of hateful speech on Twitter came from a small community of users. These findings reflect what seems to be a broader pattern across social media platforms—the majority of problematic content is produced by a small, but vocal, minority of users.
Study author Angela Y. Lee and her colleagues investigated Americans’ beliefs about how many social media users contribute to harmful content and examined the consequences of such beliefs. They hypothesized that people would overestimate the prevalence of harmful users on social media. In turn, this misperception might foster excessive cynicism about their fellow citizens. These authors suggest that when people believe that many of their fellow Americans are posting harmful content, they may develop more negative views of society and perceive greater moral decline than actually exists.
To explore this further, study authors conducted three surveys of U.S.-American adults via CloudResearch Connect, matched to national quotas on age, gender, race, and ethnicity. The total number of participants across the three surveys was 1,090.
The first study asked participants to read about two research studies that identified how many Reddit accounts had posted toxic content and how many Facebook users had posted false news on the platform. Participants then provided their estimates regarding how many social media users produced such content.
In study 2, participants read about a Google system used to detect toxic language. They also viewed 20 comments from actual Reddit users, half of which were severely toxic, and half were not. They were then asked to identify the comments the Google system would classify as toxic.
Study 3 was an experiment where participants in one condition read a text explaining how scientists found that most people never share toxic content online. This was the misperception correction condition. The other experimental condition was a control condition, where they read about how Reddit was founded. The text the control group read did not mention online toxicity. After this, participants in both conditions completed measures of social media use, cynicism, generalized trust, perceptions of moral decline, and beliefs about the kinds of content that should go viral on social media.
Results showed that, on average, participants believed that 43% of all Reddit users posted severely toxic comments and that 47% of Facebook users shared false news online. In reality, platform-level data shows that most of these forms of harmful content come from 3-8.5% of users—a small, but highly active, group.
The experiment revealed that participants in the misperception correction condition tended to see their fellow U.S. citizens as being in less moral decline compared to participants in the control condition. They also felt more positive and were more likely to understand that others do not desire harmful online content. However, there were no differences between the two groups in cynicism and generalized trust in human nature.
“Our results reveal people do not realize that most harmful content on social media is produced by a small, prolific group of users. Instead, they believe that the amount of harmful content on social media is the result of many users participating in harmful behaviors,” study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific knowledge about Americans’ perceptions of social media and their users. However, it should be noted that the study only involved U.S. participants and focused on only two types of harmful behaviors on two platforms. Because of this, the findings may not fully generalize to other countries, other cultures, and other social media platforms.
The paper, “Americans overestimate how many social media users post harmful content,” was authored by Angela Y. Lee, Eric Neumann, Jamil Zaki, and Jeffrey Hancock.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #AmericansOverestimateSocialMedia #HarmfulContentPerception #ToxicComments #FalseNewsOnline #SmallProlificMinority #SocialMediaMyth #MisperceptionCorrection #CynicismAndTrust #OnlineDiscourse #RedditFacebookInsights
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 06:00AM
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: Scientists discover a new gut-brain-heart connection that regulates blood pressure
Recent research published in Circulation Research provides evidence that a specific molecule produced by gut bacteria can protect the heart from stiffness and dysfunction by communicating directly with the brain. The study suggests that restoring this bacterial by-product might offer a new way to approach high blood pressure and related heart conditions.
Hypertension and related cardiovascular conditions involve a complex interaction among the digestive, nervous, and cardiovascular systems. High blood pressure tends to force the heart muscle to become stiff and lose its ability to relax properly between beats, a condition known as diastolic dysfunction. This stiffness represents a major physiological cause of heart failure, but the biological signals that initiate this structural change remain poorly understood.
To understand this process, researchers aimed to identify the chemical messengers that link these physiological systems. “Hypertension is a systemic condition driven by complex interactions between the gut, brain, kidneys, and cardiovascular system,” said study author Suphansa Sawamiphak, a principal investigator at the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association in Berlin, Germany.
“While we knew that high blood pressure is associated with gut dysbiosis and often compromises the heart’s ability to relax, the precise molecular signals linking these systems were missing. We wanted to bridge this gap and identify the specific microbial metabolites that mediate this interorgan communication during hypertensive stress.”
To study this biological connection, the scientists used a specialized zebrafish model. Zebrafish larvae are largely transparent, allowing researchers to observe their beating hearts and circulating blood in real time using high-speed microscopes. The team induced high blood pressure in the larvae by rearing them in water with progressively lower salt concentrations over five days. This low-ion environment forced the fish to activate internal hormonal mechanisms to retain sodium, which in turn increased their blood pressure and caused their heart muscles to stiffen.
The researchers first analyzed the gut bacteria of the zebrafish after the five-day hypertensive challenge. By sequencing the genetic material of the bacteria in the digestive tracts of ten treated groups and eleven control groups, they found a marked decrease in overall bacterial diversity. The stressed fish lost specific bacteria responsible for breaking down tryptophan, an amino acid found in food, into indole molecules.
The team then tested whether the presence of gut bacteria was necessary to protect the heart. They raised groups of eight to twelve germ-free zebrafish, meaning the fish completely lacked any gut microbes. When exposed to the same low-salt stress, these germ-free fish exhibited more severe blood pressure spikes and worsened heart stiffness compared to fish with normal gut bacteria. This finding provides evidence that a healthy microbial community helps shield the cardiovascular system from damage.
Next, the researchers examined the specific chemical by-products produced by the gut bacteria. Using mass spectrometry, a specialized laboratory technique that measures the mass and concentration of different molecules, they analyzed the intestines of the fish. They found that the stressed fish had significantly lower levels of indole-3 acetic acid, a specific byproduct of tryptophan metabolism, compared to healthy fish.
This depletion of beneficial molecules has a cascading effect on the body’s stress response. “Our gut microbiome actively protects the heart during hypertensive challenges by producing specific molecules, notably Indole-3 Acetic Acid (IAA), derived from dietary tryptophan,” Sawamiphak explained. “When high blood pressure disrupts the microbiome, the resulting loss of IAA removes a brake on the brain’s stress signaling, specifically within hypocretin-producing neurons. This missing brake leads to sympathetic overdrive, compromising the heart muscle’s ability to properly relax between beats (diastolic dysfunction).”
To see if replacing this missing molecule could help, the scientists administered indole-3 acetic acid directly into the digestive tracts of the fish. Fish that received this supplement maintained normal blood pressure and healthy heart function, even when exposed to the low-salt stress. The treatment prevented the individual heart muscle cells from enlarging and kept the main pumping chambers of the heart relaxing normally between beats.
The researchers then looked at the brain to understand how a gut molecule could protect the heart. They focused on hypocretin neurons, a specialized group of brain cells in the hypothalamus that help regulate involuntary functions like heart rate and blood vessel constriction. Using special fluorescent markers that light up when neurons are active, they observed that the hypocretin neurons became highly overactive during the hypertensive stress. Giving the fish indole-3 acetic acid quieted these brain cells back to normal baseline levels.
Further experiments revealed exactly how the molecule influenced the brain. The scientists found that hypocretin neurons possess a specific chemical sensor called the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. When they injected indole-3 acetic acid directly into the brain cavities of the fish, it activated this receptor and protected the heart from stiffening. If they blocked the receptor with a chemical inhibitor, the protective effects completely disappeared.
By preventing the hypocretin neurons from becoming overactive, the indole-3 acetic acid stopped an excessive cascade of nervous system signals from reaching the heart. Using a technique called calcium imaging to monitor nerve activity in live fish, the team saw that the treatment calmed the sympathetic nervous system, which is the network responsible for the body’s physical responses to stress. The treatment also lowered the systemic levels of hormones that constrict blood vessels, acting on multiple fronts to protect the cardiovascular system.
To determine if these findings translate to humans, the researchers analyzed blood samples from a cohort of 194 individuals under the age of fifty. This group included 97 patients with high blood pressure and 97 healthy individuals, matched for age, sex, and body mass index. The scientists found that the patients with hypertension had significantly lower levels of indole-3 acetic acid in their blood.
This clinical data strongly mirrored the physiological changes observed in the animal models. “We were struck by how potently a single microbial metabolite, IAA, could act centrally in the brain to simultaneously prevent both neurogenic (sympathetic overdrive) and hormonal (renin-angiotensin system) drivers of hypertension,” Sawamiphak said. “Furthermore, finding that this specific depletion of circulating IAA is strongly conserved in a human hypertensive cohort, with a particularly pronounced sex-specific reduction in female patients, was a remarkable validation of our zebrafish model.”
While the study provides substantial evidence for a gut-brain-heart connection, it has some limitations. Zebrafish models offer a simplified view of biology and do not capture the full complexity of human aging or metabolic diseases that often accompany heart problems. The human data used in the study is observational, meaning it shows a link between low indole-3 acetic acid and high blood pressure but does not prove that one causes the other in people.
The authors caution against viewing these results as an immediate clinical treatment. “It is important not to misinterpret these findings as evidence that simply taking an over-the-counter IAA or tryptophan supplement is a standalone cure for high blood pressure,” Sawamiphak noted. “While we established a direct cause-and-effect mechanism in our animal models, the human data we analyzed is currently correlational. Hypertension is a highly complex, multifactorial disease, and IAA deficiency represents one component of a much broader systemic dysregulation.”
Future studies are needed to determine if restoring this molecule can safely and effectively treat or prevent heart disease in human patients. “Our immediate next step is to understand exactly how microbial metabolites like IAA regulate neuronal activity at a molecular level,” Sawamiphak said. “Beyond IAA, we are also examining a broader range of microbial metabolites that shift during disease states, particularly those known to regulate the immune system.”
The long-term objective is to map out these complex biological interactions to pave the way for medical advancements. “Ultimately, our overarching goal is to decode this complex, system-wide communication network between the gut, the brain, the immune system, and the heart,” Sawamiphak explained.
“While our laboratory focuses on fundamental biological discovery rather than conducting human clinical trials, pinpointing these precise disease mechanisms and molecular targets provides the essential foundation. It allows clinical researchers to eventually develop targeted therapies, such as postbiotics that deliver the exact missing beneficial molecules, to restore balance in cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.”
The study, “Indole-3 Acetate Limits Dysbiosis-Driven Diastolic Failure via Hcrt Neurons,” was authored by Bhakti I. Zakarauskas-Seth, Giovanni Forcari, Harithaa Anandakumar, Ilan Kotlar-Goldaper, Clara M. Barraud, Nina Jovanovic, Ulrike Brüning, Jennifer A. Kirwan, Nicola Wilck, Sofia K. Forslund, Dominik N. Müller, Alessandro Filosa, and Suphansa Sawamiphak.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #GutBrainHeart #Indole3AceticAcid #IAA #HypertensionResearch #DiastolicDysfunction #GutMicrobiome #HeartHealth #Hypocretin #GutBrainAxis #Postbiotics
-
DATE: May 14, 2026 at 04:30AM
SOURCE: STAT NEWS MENTAL HEALTHTITLE: STAT+: Treatment for alcohol addiction is undergoing a seismic shift. Many say it’s overdue
All Jillian wanted was to regain control of her drinking.
At 38, she knew alcohol had already cost her a marriage and begun to threaten her career. What had started as typical college-age shenanigans had morphed into regularly overindulging at professional happy hours, and eventually into an all-day urge to drink. Most days, a bottle of vodka journeyed from standing full in a cabinet to laying empty in a recycling bin.
“I got to the point where I said: Holy shit, I can’t stop on my own,” Jillian said.
Her boyfriend was at a loss. Her therapist’s harm-reduction tactics helped at times, but the relapses kept coming. And while her family doctor encouraged her attempts to cut back, he never prescribed medication that might help. In the end, Jillian took the only path she knew: She sought a local Alcoholics Anonymous meeting.
But the mutual help group didn’t do the trick, either. She found the programming too God-centric and the messaging about achieving sudden, permanent abstinence unrealistic. At several points, men aggressively pursued her and other women there, offering rides home or seeking their phone numbers under the guise of mentorship. When she did find camaraderie, it was with other attendees who met up after meetings to drink at a nearby bar.
Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…
-------------------------------------------------
STAT News reports "from the frontiers of health and medicine".
Learn more at https://www.statnews.com/topic/mental-health/ .
See also their complete Mastodon account at @STAT .
This robot is NOT affiliated with STAT news and merely rebroadcasts from their site. Responses posted here are not monitored.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #AlcoholUseDisorder #AlcoholismTreatment # AddictionRecovery #SoberLiving #MedicationsForAlcoholUseDisorder #HarmReduction #MentalHealthAwareness #AlcoholAwareness #SeismicShiftInTreatment #STATPlus
-
I... can't disagree with any of that, admittedly.
-
I... can't disagree with any of that, admittedly.
-
I... can't disagree with any of that, admittedly.
-
I... can't disagree with any of that, admittedly.
-
The words we use: Mental health literacy is expanding but not always improving
https://healthydebate.ca/2026/05/topic/words-mental-health-literacy/
#mentalhealth #psychology #psychiatry #healthcare #media #Socialmedia #depression #trauma #burnout #stress #labels #semantics #language
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 09:07PM
SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY PSYCHOLOGY FEEDTITLE: New psychedelic-like drugs could treat depression without making you trip
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
UC Davis researchers created brand-new psychedelic-like compounds by shining UV light on amino acid-based molecules. These compounds activated key serotonin receptors tied to brain plasticity and mental health benefits, but surprisingly did not cause hallucination-like behavior in animal tests. Scientists say the discovery could lead to future treatments for depression, PTSD, and addiction without the intense psychedelic experience.
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
-------------------------------------------------
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 #PsychedelicLikeDrugs #DepressionTreatment #SerotoninReceptors #BrainPlasticity #MentalHealthResearch #NonPsychedelicTherapy #UC DavisScience #NovelTherapies #PTSDTreatment #AddictionRecovery
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 09:07PM
SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY PSYCHOLOGY FEEDTITLE: New psychedelic-like drugs could treat depression without making you trip
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
UC Davis researchers created brand-new psychedelic-like compounds by shining UV light on amino acid-based molecules. These compounds activated key serotonin receptors tied to brain plasticity and mental health benefits, but surprisingly did not cause hallucination-like behavior in animal tests. Scientists say the discovery could lead to future treatments for depression, PTSD, and addiction without the intense psychedelic experience.
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
-------------------------------------------------
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 #PsychedelicLikeDrugs #DepressionTreatment #SerotoninReceptors #BrainPlasticity #MentalHealthResearch #NonPsychedelicTherapy #UC DavisScience #NovelTherapies #PTSDTreatment #AddictionRecovery
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 09:07PM
SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY PSYCHOLOGY FEEDTITLE: New psychedelic-like drugs could treat depression without making you trip
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
UC Davis researchers created brand-new psychedelic-like compounds by shining UV light on amino acid-based molecules. These compounds activated key serotonin receptors tied to brain plasticity and mental health benefits, but surprisingly did not cause hallucination-like behavior in animal tests. Scientists say the discovery could lead to future treatments for depression, PTSD, and addiction without the intense psychedelic experience.
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
-------------------------------------------------
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 #PsychedelicLikeDrugs #DepressionTreatment #SerotoninReceptors #BrainPlasticity #MentalHealthResearch #NonPsychedelicTherapy #UC DavisScience #NovelTherapies #PTSDTreatment #AddictionRecovery
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 09:07PM
SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY MIND-BRAIN FEEDTITLE: New psychedelic-like drugs could treat depression without making you trip
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
UC Davis researchers created brand-new psychedelic-like compounds by shining UV light on amino acid-based molecules. These compounds activated key serotonin receptors tied to brain plasticity and mental health benefits, but surprisingly did not cause hallucination-like behavior in animal tests. Scientists say the discovery could lead to future treatments for depression, PTSD, and addiction without the intense psychedelic experience.
URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260512202325.htm
-------------------------------------------------
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 #psychedeliclike #depressiontreatment #serotoninreceptors #brainplasticity #mentalhealthresearch #UCdavishalogen #noveltherapies #PTSDtreatment #addictionrecovery #depressionwithouttrip
-
Have you ever noticed that when you are anxious, your stomach hurts? Or that deep grief can make it hard to breathe? That is not coincidence. The body holds what the mind has not yet processed. Understanding this connection is one of the first steps toward real healing. #mentalhealth #depression #grief #trauma #KnowYourBody
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 08:00PM
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: Study reveals the key ingredients for successful social media mental health interventions
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials testing the effects of social-media-based mental health interventions found that they lead to moderate-high reductions in stress symptoms and low-moderate reductions in depression and anxiety symptom severity. The interventions were more effective when participants were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided, social-oriented, and when effects were compared to groups that received care as usual. The paper was published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
More than 1 in 8 adults and adolescents worldwide live with a mental disorder. The two most common types of mental health disorders are anxiety disorders and depression. However, estimates state that only a small fraction of individuals suffering from mental health disorders receive a treatment that results in the remission of symptoms. That is why scientists are looking for new ways to provide mental health treatments at scale to people who need them.
One prospective type of treatment that can be delivered at scale are online mental health interventions, particularly interventions delivered through social-media-based programs. These interventions represent organized efforts to provide psychological support, education, coping skills, or behavior-change strategies through platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, Reddit, or other online communities.
They include therapist-led groups, peer-support communities, psychoeducational posts, chat-based guidance, mood tracking, crisis resources, or structured activities based on approaches such as cognitive-behavioral therapy or mindfulness. These programs can make support more accessible because many people already use social media regularly and may find it easier to engage online than in traditional services. However, their quality, privacy protections, safety procedures, and effectiveness vary, with studies reporting inconsistent results about their effectiveness.
Study author Qiyang Zhang and her colleagues wanted to integrate the findings of rigorously designed randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of social-media-based mental health interventions in reducing mental health symptoms. They were interested in the overall impact of these treatments on symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. These researchers also wanted to know how much these effects depend on the methodological specificities of studies and programs, such as program duration, program focus, or the control group the treatment was compared with.
They conducted a meta-analysis. The first author of this study conducted a search of databases of published scientific reports that included the Education Resources Information Center, PsychINFO, Scopus, PsychArticles, Communication and Mass Media Complete, PubMed, and Proquest databases. She also searched for studies through Paperfetcher across journals in the field the study authors considered reputable, and examined the reference lists of the papers they found.
Study authors looked for studies that reported results of randomized controlled trials with at least 30 participants per experimental condition. The intervention examined in the study needed to be delivered through social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and WeChat), and the difference in mental health symptoms between groups undergoing different treatments needed to be small at the start. Additionally, the interventions needed to be delivered by nonresearchers to better reflect how these programs would function in the real world.
They also required the difference between the number of participants who did not finish the study (the attrition rate) in the compared treatment conditions to be less than 15%. In this way, they wanted to reduce the risk that the observed treatment differences were caused by different dropout rates. For example, if participants who benefited least, or those who experienced the strongest effects or adverse experiences, left one condition more often than the other, the remaining participants could become systematically different, biasing the results.
In the end, after screening over 11,000 published studies, 17 studies met all the criteria the study authors defined. These studies reported the effects of 22 distinct intervention programs, comprising 5,624 total participants. Of these programs, 7 were conducted on adolescents, 7 on people in early adulthood, 7 included middle adulthood participants, while 1 study was of older individuals.
Twelve studies had more than 70% female participants. In 9 studies, participants were recruited based on a specific clinical condition.
Overall, the results showed that the examined studies had a low-moderate beneficial effect on mental health symptoms. The symptom reduction was the strongest for stress symptoms and it was moderate-high in size. Effects on reducing anxiety and depression symptoms were low-moderate.
Further analyses found that the examined social-media-based interventions tended to be more effective when the studies were conducted on groups that were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided (i.e., guided by humans including therapists, coaches, or research assistants), social-oriented (i.e., programs that provide mainly social interaction, emotional support, or companionship), and when control groups were people who received care as usual (i.e., where control group participants received standard care as opposed to waitlist groups). Interestingly, the researchers found that a participant’s age did not significantly affect the outcomes of the intervention.
“This meta-analysis synthesized the best evidence on this topic and found that, overall, high-quality social-media-based RCTs [randomized controlled trials] were effective in reducing depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. Given the benefits of scalability and cost-effectiveness of social-media-based approaches, mental health services should consider integrating online interventions into routine practice,” the study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the mental health effects of social-media-based mental health interventions. However, the study authors note that the statistical power of their review was limited by the small sample size of available, high-quality studies. Furthermore, the reported effects are not generalizable to all social-media-based mental health interventions. In each case, the effects of a specific intervention depend on its particular characteristics and on its appropriateness for the mental health condition or difficulties that individuals undergoing the intervention are experiencing.
The paper, “Social-Media-Based Mental Health Interventions: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” was authored by Qiyang Zhang, Zixuan Huang, Yuan Sui, Fu-Hung Lin, Hongjie Guan, Li Li, Ke Wang, and Amanda Neitzel.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #SocialMediaMentalHealth #MentalHealthInterventions #OnlineTherapy #SocialSupportOnline #CBT #Mindfulness #DigitalHealth #StressReduction #AnxietyHelp #DepressionSupport
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 08:00PM
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: Study reveals the key ingredients for successful social media mental health interventions
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials testing the effects of social-media-based mental health interventions found that they lead to moderate-high reductions in stress symptoms and low-moderate reductions in depression and anxiety symptom severity. The interventions were more effective when participants were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided, social-oriented, and when effects were compared to groups that received care as usual. The paper was published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
More than 1 in 8 adults and adolescents worldwide live with a mental disorder. The two most common types of mental health disorders are anxiety disorders and depression. However, estimates state that only a small fraction of individuals suffering from mental health disorders receive a treatment that results in the remission of symptoms. That is why scientists are looking for new ways to provide mental health treatments at scale to people who need them.
One prospective type of treatment that can be delivered at scale are online mental health interventions, particularly interventions delivered through social-media-based programs. These interventions represent organized efforts to provide psychological support, education, coping skills, or behavior-change strategies through platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, Reddit, or other online communities.
They include therapist-led groups, peer-support communities, psychoeducational posts, chat-based guidance, mood tracking, crisis resources, or structured activities based on approaches such as cognitive-behavioral therapy or mindfulness. These programs can make support more accessible because many people already use social media regularly and may find it easier to engage online than in traditional services. However, their quality, privacy protections, safety procedures, and effectiveness vary, with studies reporting inconsistent results about their effectiveness.
Study author Qiyang Zhang and her colleagues wanted to integrate the findings of rigorously designed randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of social-media-based mental health interventions in reducing mental health symptoms. They were interested in the overall impact of these treatments on symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. These researchers also wanted to know how much these effects depend on the methodological specificities of studies and programs, such as program duration, program focus, or the control group the treatment was compared with.
They conducted a meta-analysis. The first author of this study conducted a search of databases of published scientific reports that included the Education Resources Information Center, PsychINFO, Scopus, PsychArticles, Communication and Mass Media Complete, PubMed, and Proquest databases. She also searched for studies through Paperfetcher across journals in the field the study authors considered reputable, and examined the reference lists of the papers they found.
Study authors looked for studies that reported results of randomized controlled trials with at least 30 participants per experimental condition. The intervention examined in the study needed to be delivered through social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and WeChat), and the difference in mental health symptoms between groups undergoing different treatments needed to be small at the start. Additionally, the interventions needed to be delivered by nonresearchers to better reflect how these programs would function in the real world.
They also required the difference between the number of participants who did not finish the study (the attrition rate) in the compared treatment conditions to be less than 15%. In this way, they wanted to reduce the risk that the observed treatment differences were caused by different dropout rates. For example, if participants who benefited least, or those who experienced the strongest effects or adverse experiences, left one condition more often than the other, the remaining participants could become systematically different, biasing the results.
In the end, after screening over 11,000 published studies, 17 studies met all the criteria the study authors defined. These studies reported the effects of 22 distinct intervention programs, comprising 5,624 total participants. Of these programs, 7 were conducted on adolescents, 7 on people in early adulthood, 7 included middle adulthood participants, while 1 study was of older individuals.
Twelve studies had more than 70% female participants. In 9 studies, participants were recruited based on a specific clinical condition.
Overall, the results showed that the examined studies had a low-moderate beneficial effect on mental health symptoms. The symptom reduction was the strongest for stress symptoms and it was moderate-high in size. Effects on reducing anxiety and depression symptoms were low-moderate.
Further analyses found that the examined social-media-based interventions tended to be more effective when the studies were conducted on groups that were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided (i.e., guided by humans including therapists, coaches, or research assistants), social-oriented (i.e., programs that provide mainly social interaction, emotional support, or companionship), and when control groups were people who received care as usual (i.e., where control group participants received standard care as opposed to waitlist groups). Interestingly, the researchers found that a participant’s age did not significantly affect the outcomes of the intervention.
“This meta-analysis synthesized the best evidence on this topic and found that, overall, high-quality social-media-based RCTs [randomized controlled trials] were effective in reducing depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. Given the benefits of scalability and cost-effectiveness of social-media-based approaches, mental health services should consider integrating online interventions into routine practice,” the study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the mental health effects of social-media-based mental health interventions. However, the study authors note that the statistical power of their review was limited by the small sample size of available, high-quality studies. Furthermore, the reported effects are not generalizable to all social-media-based mental health interventions. In each case, the effects of a specific intervention depend on its particular characteristics and on its appropriateness for the mental health condition or difficulties that individuals undergoing the intervention are experiencing.
The paper, “Social-Media-Based Mental Health Interventions: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” was authored by Qiyang Zhang, Zixuan Huang, Yuan Sui, Fu-Hung Lin, Hongjie Guan, Li Li, Ke Wang, and Amanda Neitzel.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #SocialMediaMentalHealth #MentalHealthInterventions #OnlineTherapy #SocialSupportOnline #CBT #Mindfulness #DigitalHealth #StressReduction #AnxietyHelp #DepressionSupport
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 08:00PM
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: Study reveals the key ingredients for successful social media mental health interventions
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials testing the effects of social-media-based mental health interventions found that they lead to moderate-high reductions in stress symptoms and low-moderate reductions in depression and anxiety symptom severity. The interventions were more effective when participants were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided, social-oriented, and when effects were compared to groups that received care as usual. The paper was published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
More than 1 in 8 adults and adolescents worldwide live with a mental disorder. The two most common types of mental health disorders are anxiety disorders and depression. However, estimates state that only a small fraction of individuals suffering from mental health disorders receive a treatment that results in the remission of symptoms. That is why scientists are looking for new ways to provide mental health treatments at scale to people who need them.
One prospective type of treatment that can be delivered at scale are online mental health interventions, particularly interventions delivered through social-media-based programs. These interventions represent organized efforts to provide psychological support, education, coping skills, or behavior-change strategies through platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, Reddit, or other online communities.
They include therapist-led groups, peer-support communities, psychoeducational posts, chat-based guidance, mood tracking, crisis resources, or structured activities based on approaches such as cognitive-behavioral therapy or mindfulness. These programs can make support more accessible because many people already use social media regularly and may find it easier to engage online than in traditional services. However, their quality, privacy protections, safety procedures, and effectiveness vary, with studies reporting inconsistent results about their effectiveness.
Study author Qiyang Zhang and her colleagues wanted to integrate the findings of rigorously designed randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of social-media-based mental health interventions in reducing mental health symptoms. They were interested in the overall impact of these treatments on symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. These researchers also wanted to know how much these effects depend on the methodological specificities of studies and programs, such as program duration, program focus, or the control group the treatment was compared with.
They conducted a meta-analysis. The first author of this study conducted a search of databases of published scientific reports that included the Education Resources Information Center, PsychINFO, Scopus, PsychArticles, Communication and Mass Media Complete, PubMed, and Proquest databases. She also searched for studies through Paperfetcher across journals in the field the study authors considered reputable, and examined the reference lists of the papers they found.
Study authors looked for studies that reported results of randomized controlled trials with at least 30 participants per experimental condition. The intervention examined in the study needed to be delivered through social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and WeChat), and the difference in mental health symptoms between groups undergoing different treatments needed to be small at the start. Additionally, the interventions needed to be delivered by nonresearchers to better reflect how these programs would function in the real world.
They also required the difference between the number of participants who did not finish the study (the attrition rate) in the compared treatment conditions to be less than 15%. In this way, they wanted to reduce the risk that the observed treatment differences were caused by different dropout rates. For example, if participants who benefited least, or those who experienced the strongest effects or adverse experiences, left one condition more often than the other, the remaining participants could become systematically different, biasing the results.
In the end, after screening over 11,000 published studies, 17 studies met all the criteria the study authors defined. These studies reported the effects of 22 distinct intervention programs, comprising 5,624 total participants. Of these programs, 7 were conducted on adolescents, 7 on people in early adulthood, 7 included middle adulthood participants, while 1 study was of older individuals.
Twelve studies had more than 70% female participants. In 9 studies, participants were recruited based on a specific clinical condition.
Overall, the results showed that the examined studies had a low-moderate beneficial effect on mental health symptoms. The symptom reduction was the strongest for stress symptoms and it was moderate-high in size. Effects on reducing anxiety and depression symptoms were low-moderate.
Further analyses found that the examined social-media-based interventions tended to be more effective when the studies were conducted on groups that were more than 70% female, when the programs were human-guided (i.e., guided by humans including therapists, coaches, or research assistants), social-oriented (i.e., programs that provide mainly social interaction, emotional support, or companionship), and when control groups were people who received care as usual (i.e., where control group participants received standard care as opposed to waitlist groups). Interestingly, the researchers found that a participant’s age did not significantly affect the outcomes of the intervention.
“This meta-analysis synthesized the best evidence on this topic and found that, overall, high-quality social-media-based RCTs [randomized controlled trials] were effective in reducing depression, anxiety, stress, negative affect, and psychological distress. Given the benefits of scalability and cost-effectiveness of social-media-based approaches, mental health services should consider integrating online interventions into routine practice,” the study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the mental health effects of social-media-based mental health interventions. However, the study authors note that the statistical power of their review was limited by the small sample size of available, high-quality studies. Furthermore, the reported effects are not generalizable to all social-media-based mental health interventions. In each case, the effects of a specific intervention depend on its particular characteristics and on its appropriateness for the mental health condition or difficulties that individuals undergoing the intervention are experiencing.
The paper, “Social-Media-Based Mental Health Interventions: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” was authored by Qiyang Zhang, Zixuan Huang, Yuan Sui, Fu-Hung Lin, Hongjie Guan, Li Li, Ke Wang, and Amanda Neitzel.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #SocialMediaMentalHealth #MentalHealthInterventions #OnlineTherapy #SocialSupportOnline #CBT #Mindfulness #DigitalHealth #StressReduction #AnxietyHelp #DepressionSupport
-
Almost 2 weeks on #Lexapro. Noticed an interesting trend in my resting heart rate. It's going down. Screen shot is from my #Fitbit app. It shows this month, 71 (my average resting heart rate), bpm personal range (63-82) with a graph that shows the decrease.
I was taking 3/4 of a pill. I decreased it back to a 1/2 pill. Yesterday I was feeling flat, tired & a little numb, with a nagging light headache. Today I feel more Heidi-like. Like I'm feeling my feelings again. #mentalHealth #depression
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 06:00PM
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: Class background influences whether genetic predisposition for intelligence drives you left or right
URL: https://www.psypost.org/how-childhood-class-alters-the-genetic-pathways-of-political-ideology/
A person’s economic political views are shaped by their genetic predisposition for cognitive performance interacting with their childhood social class. People with a higher genetic likelihood for cognitive performance tend to adopt left-wing policies if they grew up poor, and right-wing policies if they grew up wealthy. The research was published in Political Psychology.
Understanding differences in economic policy preferences is a primary goal of political science. Traditional models in political economics assume that individuals will support policies that benefit them financially. In a strictly theoretical system where flat taxes are redistributed equally, anyone earning below the average income should want complete redistribution, while anyone earning above the average should oppose it. While real political systems are messier, the fundamental dynamic generally holds.
Low-income earners tend to benefit from proportional taxation and redistribution, while high-income earners bear the costs. In recent years, researchers have found that genetics also influence political behavior. Studies using various methods have documented genetic overlaps with political preferences. This overlap means that ideological preferences partially share the same genetic architecture as other measurable traits.
Since our distant ancestors did not have modern tax systems or mass political parties, evolutionary forces could not have shaped economic ideology directly. Genetic effects on these preferences must operate through intermediate traits, which scientists call endophenotypes. Some researchers proposed that cognitive performance might act as one of these intermediate traits.
The results of previous studies on cognitive performance and economic ideology, however, have been wildly inconsistent. Some studies showed a positive link between cognitive ability and economic conservatism. Other studies found a negative link, and some found no connection at all.
Rafael Ahlskog, a researcher at the Department of Government at Uppsala University in Sweden, thought these contradictory results could be reconciled. He proposed a gene-environment interaction. This occurs when a specific genetic factor behaves differently depending on the environment surrounding the individual.
Ahlskog theorized that cognitive performance does not push a person toward a specific political ideology on its own. Instead, cognitive capacity helps people analyze complicated policy packages and accurately deduce their own class interests. Modern economies feature vast arrays of diverse taxes, regulations, and benefit programs. Evaluating how these policies interact requires analytical effort.
By applying these conceptual frameworks, the study connects the theories of classical economics with modern genetics. People who find it easy to perform the mental calculations required to navigate tax proposals will optimize their policy preferences. Those who find it more difficult might answer policy questions more randomly, or they might rely on social cues not strictly tied to their personal class background.
In addition to this, political science maintains a long-standing theory regarding the impressionable years in human development. This theory states that environmental influences on attitudes are most potent during late adolescence and early adulthood. After this period, political preferences tend to stick. Based on this, Ahlskog suggested that the perception of one’s class interest is shaped primarily by the relative economic standing of their parents during these formative years.
To test these ideas, Ahlskog analyzed data from a large sample of fraternal twins from the Swedish Twin Registry born between 1943 and 1958. Fraternal twins are siblings born at the same time who share, on average, half of their genetic sequence. Using within-family differences among fraternal twins provides an excellent natural experiment for behavioral researchers.
Researchers value within-family sibling designs because comparing two people from the broader population introduces confounding variables. Between two random strangers, a genetic correlation might be skewed by regional ancestry differences or by the environmental impacts of their parents’ genes. Fraternal twins share the exact same family environment, and their genetic differences result purely from the random shuffling of DNA during conception.
Because of this randomization, systematic downstream differences in sibling behavior have a causal interpretation. Researchers can confidently conclude that the genetic difference caused the behavioral difference, rather than an unmeasured environmental factor.
To conduct the analysis, Ahlskog utilized variation in a genetic measure called a polygenic index. A polygenic index is an individual-level predictor of a specific trait that is based entirely on a person’s DNA. Geneticists build these indices by identifying thousands of tiny DNA variations known as single nucleotide polymorphisms that correlate with a target trait. The index used in this study summarized each twin’s genetic propensity for cognitive performance based on previous large-scale genomic discoveries.
He combined this genetic data with the twins’ responses to an extensive survey conducted by the Swedish Twin Registry between 2009 and 2010. The survey included a detailed battery of over thirty political preference questions. Participants rated policy proposals on a five-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Ahlskog isolated twelve items specifically dealing with economic ideology, such as opinions on taxation, welfare distribution, the public sector, and government regulation.
To measure family socioeconomic standing, Ahlskog utilized Swedish registry data covering the twins’ parents. He calculated a relative affluence score by comparing the parents’ income and education levels to other adults in their specific local parishes. This provided a localized measure of class background. Sociologists have found that people typically compare their economic status to their immediate neighbors rather than the national average.
When looking at the average effect across the entire sample, the genetic measure for cognitive performance had no impact on economic conservatism. The effect size appeared as practically zero. Without looking deeper, this might seem like a simple lack of an effect.
When Ahlskog factored in the family’s socioeconomic background, the average null effect broke apart to reveal two distinct, opposing trends. Among children raised in relatively poorer families, a higher genetic index for cognitive performance caused more left-wing economic views. These individuals favored higher taxation and wealth redistribution.
Among children from affluent backgrounds, the effect reversed entirely. A higher genetic index among these privileged individuals caused more right-wing views. They favored market reliance and reduced welfare spending. The genetic factor altered how individuals optimized their political views based entirely on their childhood class.
In the scientific taxonomy of gene-environment interactions, researchers often distinguish between dimmer effects and lens effects. A dimmer effect happens when a change in the environment alters the magnitude of a genetic influence, making it stronger or weaker. A lens effect happens when the environment actually changes the direction of the genetic influence. Ahlskog’s findings represent a rare, robust example of a lens effect for a socially relevant behavior.
The researcher also controlled for the twins’ adult income and education levels. The environmental interaction held up even when accounting for later-life resources. This suggests the genetic influence operates specifically on the early-life formation of class identity, not simply on a voter’s current bank account balance.
As a placebo test to verify his theory, Ahlskog applied the same analytical models to social ideology. Social ideology involves cultural and moral issues, such as immigration, criminal justice policy, and animal rights. Unlike economic ideology, there is no direct personal financial benefit to optimizing social preferences based on household class.
In this test, he found that a higher genetic index was naturally associated with lower social conservatism across the board. The effects operated in parallel for both the rich and the poor. There was no interaction based on socioeconomic background.
The study features a few limitations and caveats. The genetic predictor is a noisy measurement that only captures a fraction of the actual heritable traits for cognitive performance. Comparing genetic differences within local twin pairs amplifies this measurement noise even further. As a result, the reported effects are likely much smaller than the actual biological impact.
The geographical and historical realities of the respondent group also matter. The individuals in this sample grew up in Sweden during the middle of the twentieth century, a period defined by the rapid expansion of the modern welfare state. Class-based politics and labor movements were highly salient in their daily lives.
The findings might look completely different in populations where economic ideology is not the primary dividing line in public debate. In political environments where left-wing economic positions are championed by socially conservative populists, the class dynamics could manifest in alternate ways. Finding out which specific political relationships are affected by changing social cultures will require further study.
Ultimately, the findings demonstrate that genetic influences on political behavior are highly contingent on social environments. An effect that appears to be mathematically zero on average can obscure shifting dynamics beneath the surface. This heavy dependency on outside environmental factors functions as a strong argument against genetic determinism.
The study, “Class, genes, and rationality: A gene-environment interaction approach to ideology,” was authored by Rafael Ahlskog.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/how-childhood-class-alters-the-genetic-pathways-of-political-ideology/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #GeneticsAndPolitics #CognitivePerformance #GeneEnvironmentInteraction #ClassBackground #EconomicIdeology #LeftWingRightWing #TaxPolicy #WelfarePolicy #PoliticalPsychology #TwinStudy
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 03:28PM
SOURCE:
NEW YORK TIMES PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGISTS FEEDTITLE: Hantavirus Attacks Patients’ Bodies. This Doctor Tends to Their Minds.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
David Cates, a psychologist working with Americans exposed to the disease on the MV Hondius, said psychosocial supports are just as important as physical care.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
-------------------------------------------------
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 #Hantavirus #MentalHealthSupport #PsychologicalCare #PatientWellbeing #MedicalPsychology #MVHondius #PsychosocialSupport #HealthcareProfessionals #MindBodyCare #PublicHealthProtection
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 03:28PM
SOURCE:
NEW YORK TIMES PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGISTS FEEDTITLE: Hantavirus Attacks Patients’ Bodies. This Doctor Tends to Their Minds.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
David Cates, a psychologist working with Americans exposed to the disease on the MV Hondius, said psychosocial supports are just as important as physical care.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
-------------------------------------------------
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 #Hantavirus #MentalHealthSupport #PsychologicalCare #PatientWellbeing #MedicalPsychology #MVHondius #PsychosocialSupport #HealthcareProfessionals #MindBodyCare #PublicHealthProtection
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 03:28PM
SOURCE:
NEW YORK TIMES PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGISTS FEEDTITLE: Hantavirus Attacks Patients’ Bodies. This Doctor Tends to Their Minds.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
David Cates, a psychologist working with Americans exposed to the disease on the MV Hondius, said psychosocial supports are just as important as physical care.
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/hantavirus-quarantine-psychology-omaha.html
-------------------------------------------------
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 #Hantavirus #MentalHealthSupport #PsychologicalCare #PatientWellbeing #MedicalPsychology #MVHondius #PsychosocialSupport #HealthcareProfessionals #MindBodyCare #PublicHealthProtection
-
Feeling lazy, unmotivated, and ashamed of it? Doctor says it could be undiagnosed ADHD.
-
Feeling lazy, unmotivated, and ashamed of it? Doctor says it could be undiagnosed ADHD.
-
Feeling lazy, unmotivated, and ashamed of it? Doctor says it could be undiagnosed ADHD.
-
Feeling lazy, unmotivated, and ashamed of it? Doctor says it could be undiagnosed ADHD.
-
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 02:00PM
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: Millions of adults in the US have seriously considered shooting someone
URL: https://www.psypost.org/millions-of-adults-in-the-us-have-seriously-considered-shooting-someone/
Millions of adults in the United States have seriously considered shooting another person at some point in their lives, representing a massive and previously unmeasured group at risk of committing armed violence. By understanding the characteristics and behaviors of these individuals, public health experts hope to develop better strategies to stop injuries before they happen. These conclusions come from a national study published recently in the journal JAMA Network Open.
The researchers initiated this project to fill a gap in our current understanding of firearm violence. Medical and law enforcement records routinely track the aftermath of shootings, such as emergency room visits and homicides. In 2023 alone, hospitals recorded over 116,000 emergency department visits for gun-related assaults.
Before any physical harm occurs, an individual must first conceptualize the act of shooting someone else. Until now, public health officials have lacked clear data on how frequently the general public experiences these thoughts. Identifying the number of people who fall into this category provides a new metric for evaluating the risk of interpersonal violence across the country.
Brian Hicks, a psychologist and psychiatry professor at the University of Michigan Medical School, led the research team. Mark Ilgen, a researcher with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the University of Michigan, coauthored the paper. Together, they sought to characterize this hidden population and find potential opportunities for intervention.
Their work stems from a need to shift violence prevention away from reacting to tragedies and toward proactive safety measures. By catching a dangerous idea before it becomes a physical reality, communities might be able to save lives. This requires knowing who is having these thoughts, who they intend to target, and what steps they have already taken to prepare.
To gather this information, the researchers conducted a large-scale poll called the National Firearms, Alcohol, Cannabis, and Suicide survey. Between May and September of 2025, they reached out to adults across the country using text messaging and mailing addresses. A total of 7,034 people opted into the study and completed the questionnaire.
Because an initial survey sample rarely matches the exact demographics of the entire country, the team used a statistical tool known as survey weighting. This mathematical adjustment ensures the final results accurately reflect the broader population based on age, sex, race, income, and political affiliation. With these mathematical adjustments in place, the responses provided a reliable snapshot of the national landscape.
The data revealed that 7.3% of adults in the United States have thought about shooting someone at some point in their lives. This percentage translates to roughly 19.4 million people nationwide. When asked about the past year specifically, 3.3% of respondents reported having these thoughts, which equates to more than 8.6 million individuals.
Owning a weapon did not make a person more likely to experience these violent ideas. The data showed that individuals who do not own guns reported thoughts of shooting someone at the same rates as those who already keep firearms in their homes. However, a desire to commit violence prompted some unarmed individuals to consider acquiring a weapon.
Among the survey respondents who had thought about shooting someone, 21.3% said they had considered getting a gun specifically to carry out the act. Translated to the broader population, this means roughly 4.1 million adults have thought about purchasing a firearm to harm another person. A smaller fraction, representing about 1.5 million people, reported actually bringing a weapon to a specific location with the intent to shoot someone.
The researchers also asked respondents who they had thought about shooting. Participants could select multiple answers to this question. Just over 50% of the people who reported these thoughts said they imagined shooting an enemy. About 25% pictured a stranger, such as someone they might have a conflict with in a public space.
Other targets reflected a mix of personal relationships and broader societal figures. Around 10% of those with thoughts of shooting someone identified a family member as the target, and similar percentages named current or former romantic partners. Some respondents reported thoughts consistent with politically motivated violence, with about 14% considering a government official and nearly 7% considering a police officer or military member.
Demographic analysis showed that certain groups were more likely to report thoughts of shooting others. Men reported these thoughts more often than women. Younger adults experienced them more frequently than older individuals.
Race and geography also played a role in the results. Black respondents reported these ideas at higher rates than white respondents. People living in urban areas and Midwestern states were also more likely to report having considered shooting someone. The researchers noted that these demographics closely mirror the populations most frequently victimized by interpersonal firearm violence.
Income and educational background showed distinct patterns as well. Those with household incomes under $50,000 and lower educational attainment were more likely to report thoughts of shooting someone in the previous year. Differences across political ideologies were not statistically significant, meaning Republicans, Democrats, and Independents reported these thoughts at similar rates.
The study highlighted several behaviors that could serve as warning signs or opportunities for help. About 1.5% of the total sample, or roughly 4 million people, said they had told someone else about their thoughts of shooting another person. Sharing this information creates a potential opening for family members or friends to intervene before the situation escalates.
Some individuals took proactive steps to prevent themselves from causing harm. Half of one percent of respondents said they had given their gun to someone else for safekeeping during a personal crisis. Another 1.5% said they would consider temporarily handing over their weapon in the future.
These findings support the use of specific legal and policy tools aimed at reducing firearm injuries. Extreme risk protection orders, commonly known as red flag laws, allow a judge to temporarily remove guns from a person who poses a danger to themselves or others. In the 21 states where these laws exist, family members or law enforcement can use the fact that someone spoke about shooting another person as grounds to request temporary disarmament.
Waiting periods for firearm purchases offer another layer of prevention. Since many unarmed people consider buying a gun to shoot someone, delaying the transaction gives them time to cool off. This delay might stop an impulsive thought from turning into a fatal encounter.
In a press release about the study, Hicks explained the gravity of the data. “While most people who these thoughts don’t act on them, the number is so high that the small proportion who do act turns into tens of thousands of fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries each year,” he said.
He also noted that preventing violence involves addressing both harm to others and harm to oneself. “That does not include the toll of self-harm with firearms, which accounts for over half of firearm-related deaths. The more we can understand factors that can reduce risk, the better.”
The researchers acknowledged several limitations in their work. The survey was conducted entirely online and only in English. This format likely excluded people who do not have reliable access to the internet or who speak other languages.
Additionally, survey questions rely on participants interpreting the wording correctly and answering honestly. Even with statistical weighting, the responses might contain unmeasured biases based on who chose to opt into the study and who decided to ignore the invitations.
Moving forward, the research team plans to look deeper into other factors connected to violent ideas. Future analyses will examine how substance use problems and mental health conditions relate to thoughts of shooting others. The scientists will also investigate whether these thoughts correlate with risky habits, such as carrying a weapon in public, storing guns unlocked, or firing a weapon after drinking alcohol. The research provides a new baseline for understanding violent ideation in the United States.
The study, “Prevalence of Thoughts of Shooting Others Among US Adults,” was authored by Brian M. Hicks and Mark A. Ilgen.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/millions-of-adults-in-the-us-have-seriously-considered-shooting-someone/
-------------------------------------------------
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 #ThoughtsOfShooting #ViolencePrevention #FirearmInjuryPrevention #PublicHealthStudy #MentalHealthAwareness #RedFlagLaws #GunSafety #ViolentIdeation #FirearmPolicy #JAMANetworkOpen
-
TRIGGER WARNING: Military Psychology
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 01:12PM
SOURCE: THE CENTER FOR DEPLOYMENT PSYCHOLOGYDirect article link at end of text block below.
From a young age, I’ve felt a deep calling to serve others. For me, that path is in behavioral health. Read the full blog, "Guest Perspective: My Experience with The Summer Institute" by Lianna Benjamin. https://t.co/yARSnIAkoP
Here are any URLs found in the article text:
Articles can be found by scrolling down the page at https://deploymentpsych.org/ under "Latest News".
-------------------------------------------------
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
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 #military #militarypsych #militarypsychology #militarycounseling #APA #Division19 #militaryhealth #DeploymentPsychology #UniformServicesUniversity
-
TRIGGER WARNING: Military Psychology
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 01:12PM
SOURCE: THE CENTER FOR DEPLOYMENT PSYCHOLOGYDirect article link at end of text block below.
From a young age, I’ve felt a deep calling to serve others. For me, that path is in behavioral health. Read the full blog, "Guest Perspective: My Experience with The Summer Institute" by Lianna Benjamin. https://t.co/yARSnIAkoP
Here are any URLs found in the article text:
Articles can be found by scrolling down the page at https://deploymentpsych.org/ under "Latest News".
-------------------------------------------------
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
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 #military #militarypsych #militarypsychology #militarycounseling #APA #Division19 #militaryhealth #DeploymentPsychology #UniformServicesUniversity
-
TRIGGER WARNING: Military Psychology
DATE: May 13, 2026 at 01:12PM
SOURCE: THE CENTER FOR DEPLOYMENT PSYCHOLOGYDirect article link at end of text block below.
From a young age, I’ve felt a deep calling to serve others. For me, that path is in behavioral health. Read the full blog, "Guest Perspective: My Experience with The Summer Institute" by Lianna Benjamin. https://t.co/yARSnIAkoP
Here are any URLs found in the article text:
Articles can be found by scrolling down the page at https://deploymentpsych.org/ under "Latest News".
-------------------------------------------------
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
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 #military #militarypsych #militarypsychology #militarycounseling #APA #Division19 #militaryhealth #DeploymentPsychology #UniformServicesUniversity
-
Wieder einen Tag verschwendet. Im eigenen Kopf gefangen, keinen Antrieb, keine Freude, aber tausende Gedanken die vorbei rauschen, manche lauter, manche leiser, einige wiederholen sich, andere bleiben einzigartig. Die meisten dieser Gedanken sind böse, lähmen mich. Frustrieren, beleidigen, machen wütend oder traurig.
Es macht mir Angst. Angst davor, dass die Dunkelheit wieder kommt. Habe ich überhaupt etwas gelernt oder verändert? Habe ich überhaupt die Macht darüber?
-
Wieder einen Tag verschwendet. Im eigenen Kopf gefangen, keinen Antrieb, keine Freude, aber tausende Gedanken die vorbei rauschen, manche lauter, manche leiser, einige wiederholen sich, andere bleiben einzigartig. Die meisten dieser Gedanken sind böse, lähmen mich. Frustrieren, beleidigen, machen wütend oder traurig.
Es macht mir Angst. Angst davor, dass die Dunkelheit wieder kommt. Habe ich überhaupt etwas gelernt oder verändert? Habe ich überhaupt die Macht darüber?
-
Wieder einen Tag verschwendet. Im eigenen Kopf gefangen, keinen Antrieb, keine Freude, aber tausende Gedanken die vorbei rauschen, manche lauter, manche leiser, einige wiederholen sich, andere bleiben einzigartig. Die meisten dieser Gedanken sind böse, lähmen mich. Frustrieren, beleidigen, machen wütend oder traurig.
Es macht mir Angst. Angst davor, dass die Dunkelheit wieder kommt. Habe ich überhaupt etwas gelernt oder verändert? Habe ich überhaupt die Macht darüber?
-
Wieder einen Tag verschwendet. Im eigenen Kopf gefangen, keinen Antrieb, keine Freude, aber tausende Gedanken die vorbei rauschen, manche lauter, manche leiser, einige wiederholen sich, andere bleiben einzigartig. Die meisten dieser Gedanken sind böse, lähmen mich. Frustrieren, beleidigen, machen wütend oder traurig.
Es macht mir Angst. Angst davor, dass die Dunkelheit wieder kommt. Habe ich überhaupt etwas gelernt oder verändert? Habe ich überhaupt die Macht darüber?