#neuroimaging — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #neuroimaging, aggregated by home.social.
-
DATE: September 21, 2026 at 09:00AM
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: Brain structure, function, and behavior show independent patterns of sex differences
Men and women show distinct biological differences in how their brains activate during various tasks, the physical size of specific brain regions, and their behavioral traits. A new study published in Nature Communications reveals that while each of these factors can accurately predict a person’s sex, an individual’s degree of sex typicality in one domain is entirely unrelated to the others. These results suggest that sex differences in the human brain are highly context-dependent and operate independently across structure, function, and behavior.
Biological sex differences appear in the prevalence of various neuropsychiatric conditions, such as autism and mood disorders. They also manifest in specific aspects of cognition and physical behavior. Past neuroimaging research has attempted to map out how male and female brains differ in their physical structure and functional activity.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe which brain regions activate when a person performs specific mental tasks. Structural MRI measures the physical volume and shape of brain tissue. Many previous fMRI studies on sex differences have relied on small numbers of participants completing single tasks. This reliance on limited data has led to intense debate about the true extent and relevance of sex differences in human brain function.
To address this gap, researchers Siyuan Liu and Armin Raznahan at the National Institute of Mental Health led a comprehensive analysis of brain activity, anatomy, and behavior. The research team aimed to determine if sex differences in brain function are tied to specific tasks, if they align with physical brain volume, and how they relate to behavior.
The researchers analyzed data from nearly 1,000 healthy young adults. The participants underwent fMRI scans while completing seven different tasks. These tasks were designed to measure emotion processing, gambling, relational reasoning, social cognition, language processing, working memory, and motor skills. By scanning participants during this wide array of activities, the team could observe both task-specific brain activation and general activation patterns.
The analysis revealed widespread sex differences in brain activation across 85 percent of the outer layer of the brain, known as the cerebral cortex. These differences were highly reproducible but mostly specific to individual tasks. For instance, certain brain regions showed more activation in females during a language task but more activation in males during a gambling task.
A small number of regions, particularly those involved in motor control and physical sensation, showed a general tendency for higher activation in females across all seven tasks. Across the board, the effect sizes for these functional differences were small to moderate.
Next, the researchers examined whether these functional differences matched up with anatomical differences. They used structural MRI scans from the same participants to measure the volume of gray matter, which is the tissue containing the main bodies of nerve cells. The team found reproducible sex differences in gray matter volume across various regions of the cerebral cortex.
They then mapped the areas with functional activation differences over the areas with physical volume differences. The spatial patterns did not overlap in a coordinated way. Brain regions that exhibited sex differences in volume were generally not the same regions that showed sex differences in task activation. This lack of alignment suggests that sex differences in brain structure and brain function represent distinct biological phenomena.
The team then incorporated behavioral data, analyzing participant scores across 86 different behavioral traits. These traits ranged from physical grip strength and visual judgment to tendencies toward anxiety and psychological distress. Using a machine learning framework, the researchers tested whether an individual’s combined profile of brain activity, brain volume, or behavior could predict their biological sex.
The machine learning models accurately predicted a participant’s sex based on any of the three categories alone. Task-specific brain activation predicted sex with 88 percent accuracy, regional brain volume with 86 percent accuracy, and behavior with 91 percent accuracy. The models also generated a sex typicality score for each person within each category, rating how closely their data matched the average male or female profile.
Despite the high predictive accuracy of all three categories, a participant’s sex typicality score in one domain did not correlate with their score in another. An individual might have a highly male-typical brain volume, but a strongly female-typical pattern of brain activation during a language task. Only a tiny fraction of individuals exhibited consistently male-typical or female-typical profiles across all measurements of brain and behavior.
In their final analysis, the researchers looked for interactions between sex, brain activation, and behavior. They conducted a brain-wide association study to see if variations in brain activation between individuals correlated with variations in behavior. They first confirmed that measurable links exist between task-induced brain activation and specific behavioral traits within each sex group.
When the team compared these brain-behavior associations between men and women, they found striking similarities. The overall topography of how brain activity relates to behavior is broadly consistent across both sexes. The researchers detected a few isolated instances where the relationship between brain activity and behavior diverged between males and females. However, these rare differences did not preferentially involve behaviors that were themselves heavily sex-biased.
The study relies on observational data, meaning it can only identify associations rather than establish direct biological causes. Finding a sex difference in brain activation or structure does not mean that sex directly dictates how the brain operates, nor does it guarantee that the physical difference has a functional consequence. The research is focused exclusively on the biological construct of sex based on self-identification as male or female, rather than the psychosocial concept of gender.
The findings are also limited to specific types of neuroimaging. Functional MRI during tasks and structural gray matter measurements capture only a portion of the brain’s complex organization. Other techniques, such as resting-state fMRI or imaging that tracks the brain’s white matter connections, could reveal different patterns of sex-based variation. Future research will need to explore how these independent traits develop over a person’s lifespan and whether they fluctuate during different stages of brain development and aging.
The study, “Robust but independent sex differences in human brain function, structure, and behavior,” was authored by Siyuan Liu, Bridget W. Mahony, Ethan T. Whitman, Stephen J. Gotts, Dustin Moraczewski, Adam Thomas, Alex Martin, and Armin Raznahan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #BrainSexDifferences #SexDifferencesInBrain #fMRI activation #StructuralMRI #GrayMatterVolume #Neuroimaging #Sextypicality #BrainBehaviorLinks #CortexActivation #NatureCommunicationsStudy
-
DATE: September 21, 2026 at 09:00AM
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: Brain structure, function, and behavior show independent patterns of sex differences
Men and women show distinct biological differences in how their brains activate during various tasks, the physical size of specific brain regions, and their behavioral traits. A new study published in Nature Communications reveals that while each of these factors can accurately predict a person’s sex, an individual’s degree of sex typicality in one domain is entirely unrelated to the others. These results suggest that sex differences in the human brain are highly context-dependent and operate independently across structure, function, and behavior.
Biological sex differences appear in the prevalence of various neuropsychiatric conditions, such as autism and mood disorders. They also manifest in specific aspects of cognition and physical behavior. Past neuroimaging research has attempted to map out how male and female brains differ in their physical structure and functional activity.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe which brain regions activate when a person performs specific mental tasks. Structural MRI measures the physical volume and shape of brain tissue. Many previous fMRI studies on sex differences have relied on small numbers of participants completing single tasks. This reliance on limited data has led to intense debate about the true extent and relevance of sex differences in human brain function.
To address this gap, researchers Siyuan Liu and Armin Raznahan at the National Institute of Mental Health led a comprehensive analysis of brain activity, anatomy, and behavior. The research team aimed to determine if sex differences in brain function are tied to specific tasks, if they align with physical brain volume, and how they relate to behavior.
The researchers analyzed data from nearly 1,000 healthy young adults. The participants underwent fMRI scans while completing seven different tasks. These tasks were designed to measure emotion processing, gambling, relational reasoning, social cognition, language processing, working memory, and motor skills. By scanning participants during this wide array of activities, the team could observe both task-specific brain activation and general activation patterns.
The analysis revealed widespread sex differences in brain activation across 85 percent of the outer layer of the brain, known as the cerebral cortex. These differences were highly reproducible but mostly specific to individual tasks. For instance, certain brain regions showed more activation in females during a language task but more activation in males during a gambling task.
A small number of regions, particularly those involved in motor control and physical sensation, showed a general tendency for higher activation in females across all seven tasks. Across the board, the effect sizes for these functional differences were small to moderate.
Next, the researchers examined whether these functional differences matched up with anatomical differences. They used structural MRI scans from the same participants to measure the volume of gray matter, which is the tissue containing the main bodies of nerve cells. The team found reproducible sex differences in gray matter volume across various regions of the cerebral cortex.
They then mapped the areas with functional activation differences over the areas with physical volume differences. The spatial patterns did not overlap in a coordinated way. Brain regions that exhibited sex differences in volume were generally not the same regions that showed sex differences in task activation. This lack of alignment suggests that sex differences in brain structure and brain function represent distinct biological phenomena.
The team then incorporated behavioral data, analyzing participant scores across 86 different behavioral traits. These traits ranged from physical grip strength and visual judgment to tendencies toward anxiety and psychological distress. Using a machine learning framework, the researchers tested whether an individual’s combined profile of brain activity, brain volume, or behavior could predict their biological sex.
The machine learning models accurately predicted a participant’s sex based on any of the three categories alone. Task-specific brain activation predicted sex with 88 percent accuracy, regional brain volume with 86 percent accuracy, and behavior with 91 percent accuracy. The models also generated a sex typicality score for each person within each category, rating how closely their data matched the average male or female profile.
Despite the high predictive accuracy of all three categories, a participant’s sex typicality score in one domain did not correlate with their score in another. An individual might have a highly male-typical brain volume, but a strongly female-typical pattern of brain activation during a language task. Only a tiny fraction of individuals exhibited consistently male-typical or female-typical profiles across all measurements of brain and behavior.
In their final analysis, the researchers looked for interactions between sex, brain activation, and behavior. They conducted a brain-wide association study to see if variations in brain activation between individuals correlated with variations in behavior. They first confirmed that measurable links exist between task-induced brain activation and specific behavioral traits within each sex group.
When the team compared these brain-behavior associations between men and women, they found striking similarities. The overall topography of how brain activity relates to behavior is broadly consistent across both sexes. The researchers detected a few isolated instances where the relationship between brain activity and behavior diverged between males and females. However, these rare differences did not preferentially involve behaviors that were themselves heavily sex-biased.
The study relies on observational data, meaning it can only identify associations rather than establish direct biological causes. Finding a sex difference in brain activation or structure does not mean that sex directly dictates how the brain operates, nor does it guarantee that the physical difference has a functional consequence. The research is focused exclusively on the biological construct of sex based on self-identification as male or female, rather than the psychosocial concept of gender.
The findings are also limited to specific types of neuroimaging. Functional MRI during tasks and structural gray matter measurements capture only a portion of the brain’s complex organization. Other techniques, such as resting-state fMRI or imaging that tracks the brain’s white matter connections, could reveal different patterns of sex-based variation. Future research will need to explore how these independent traits develop over a person’s lifespan and whether they fluctuate during different stages of brain development and aging.
The study, “Robust but independent sex differences in human brain function, structure, and behavior,” was authored by Siyuan Liu, Bridget W. Mahony, Ethan T. Whitman, Stephen J. Gotts, Dustin Moraczewski, Adam Thomas, Alex Martin, and Armin Raznahan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #BrainSexDifferences #SexDifferencesInBrain #fMRI activation #StructuralMRI #GrayMatterVolume #Neuroimaging #Sextypicality #BrainBehaviorLinks #CortexActivation #NatureCommunicationsStudy
-
DATE: September 21, 2026 at 09:00AM
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: Brain structure, function, and behavior show independent patterns of sex differences
Men and women show distinct biological differences in how their brains activate during various tasks, the physical size of specific brain regions, and their behavioral traits. A new study published in Nature Communications reveals that while each of these factors can accurately predict a person’s sex, an individual’s degree of sex typicality in one domain is entirely unrelated to the others. These results suggest that sex differences in the human brain are highly context-dependent and operate independently across structure, function, and behavior.
Biological sex differences appear in the prevalence of various neuropsychiatric conditions, such as autism and mood disorders. They also manifest in specific aspects of cognition and physical behavior. Past neuroimaging research has attempted to map out how male and female brains differ in their physical structure and functional activity.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe which brain regions activate when a person performs specific mental tasks. Structural MRI measures the physical volume and shape of brain tissue. Many previous fMRI studies on sex differences have relied on small numbers of participants completing single tasks. This reliance on limited data has led to intense debate about the true extent and relevance of sex differences in human brain function.
To address this gap, researchers Siyuan Liu and Armin Raznahan at the National Institute of Mental Health led a comprehensive analysis of brain activity, anatomy, and behavior. The research team aimed to determine if sex differences in brain function are tied to specific tasks, if they align with physical brain volume, and how they relate to behavior.
The researchers analyzed data from nearly 1,000 healthy young adults. The participants underwent fMRI scans while completing seven different tasks. These tasks were designed to measure emotion processing, gambling, relational reasoning, social cognition, language processing, working memory, and motor skills. By scanning participants during this wide array of activities, the team could observe both task-specific brain activation and general activation patterns.
The analysis revealed widespread sex differences in brain activation across 85 percent of the outer layer of the brain, known as the cerebral cortex. These differences were highly reproducible but mostly specific to individual tasks. For instance, certain brain regions showed more activation in females during a language task but more activation in males during a gambling task.
A small number of regions, particularly those involved in motor control and physical sensation, showed a general tendency for higher activation in females across all seven tasks. Across the board, the effect sizes for these functional differences were small to moderate.
Next, the researchers examined whether these functional differences matched up with anatomical differences. They used structural MRI scans from the same participants to measure the volume of gray matter, which is the tissue containing the main bodies of nerve cells. The team found reproducible sex differences in gray matter volume across various regions of the cerebral cortex.
They then mapped the areas with functional activation differences over the areas with physical volume differences. The spatial patterns did not overlap in a coordinated way. Brain regions that exhibited sex differences in volume were generally not the same regions that showed sex differences in task activation. This lack of alignment suggests that sex differences in brain structure and brain function represent distinct biological phenomena.
The team then incorporated behavioral data, analyzing participant scores across 86 different behavioral traits. These traits ranged from physical grip strength and visual judgment to tendencies toward anxiety and psychological distress. Using a machine learning framework, the researchers tested whether an individual’s combined profile of brain activity, brain volume, or behavior could predict their biological sex.
The machine learning models accurately predicted a participant’s sex based on any of the three categories alone. Task-specific brain activation predicted sex with 88 percent accuracy, regional brain volume with 86 percent accuracy, and behavior with 91 percent accuracy. The models also generated a sex typicality score for each person within each category, rating how closely their data matched the average male or female profile.
Despite the high predictive accuracy of all three categories, a participant’s sex typicality score in one domain did not correlate with their score in another. An individual might have a highly male-typical brain volume, but a strongly female-typical pattern of brain activation during a language task. Only a tiny fraction of individuals exhibited consistently male-typical or female-typical profiles across all measurements of brain and behavior.
In their final analysis, the researchers looked for interactions between sex, brain activation, and behavior. They conducted a brain-wide association study to see if variations in brain activation between individuals correlated with variations in behavior. They first confirmed that measurable links exist between task-induced brain activation and specific behavioral traits within each sex group.
When the team compared these brain-behavior associations between men and women, they found striking similarities. The overall topography of how brain activity relates to behavior is broadly consistent across both sexes. The researchers detected a few isolated instances where the relationship between brain activity and behavior diverged between males and females. However, these rare differences did not preferentially involve behaviors that were themselves heavily sex-biased.
The study relies on observational data, meaning it can only identify associations rather than establish direct biological causes. Finding a sex difference in brain activation or structure does not mean that sex directly dictates how the brain operates, nor does it guarantee that the physical difference has a functional consequence. The research is focused exclusively on the biological construct of sex based on self-identification as male or female, rather than the psychosocial concept of gender.
The findings are also limited to specific types of neuroimaging. Functional MRI during tasks and structural gray matter measurements capture only a portion of the brain’s complex organization. Other techniques, such as resting-state fMRI or imaging that tracks the brain’s white matter connections, could reveal different patterns of sex-based variation. Future research will need to explore how these independent traits develop over a person’s lifespan and whether they fluctuate during different stages of brain development and aging.
The study, “Robust but independent sex differences in human brain function, structure, and behavior,” was authored by Siyuan Liu, Bridget W. Mahony, Ethan T. Whitman, Stephen J. Gotts, Dustin Moraczewski, Adam Thomas, Alex Martin, and Armin Raznahan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #BrainSexDifferences #SexDifferencesInBrain #fMRI activation #StructuralMRI #GrayMatterVolume #Neuroimaging #Sextypicality #BrainBehaviorLinks #CortexActivation #NatureCommunicationsStudy
-
DATE: September 18, 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: Do antidepressants actually alter brain structure? A massive neuroscience study weighs in
A massive brain imaging study has found that subtle differences in the brain structure of people taking antidepressants are largely explained by the severity of their depression, rather than the medications themselves. The research also suggests that the relationship between depression, medication use, and brain anatomy changes across a person’s lifespan, with younger patients showing distinct structural patterns. The findings were published in Molecular Psychiatry.
Major depressive disorder is a severe and persistent form of depression that ranks among the leading causes of disability worldwide. To treat it, doctors frequently prescribe antidepressant medications, yet the exact biological mechanisms by which these drugs alter the brain remain somewhat elusive.
A 2006 theoretical framework proposed that chronic stress and depression might damage brain cells, and that antidepressants could stimulate the growth of new cells in deep brain regions. Supporting this idea, a study covered by PsyPost in 2026 indicated that treatments like duloxetine could help normalize the microscopic structure of brain tissue in depressed patients, whereas those given a placebo saw their brain tissue drift further from healthy levels.
To investigate these effects on a larger scale, researchers needed massive datasets. In prior work, the ENIGMA consortium, an international network of brain researchers, mapped how depression physically alters the brain. For instance, a 2015 study from the group found that people with major depression tend to have a smaller hippocampus, which is a seahorse-shaped structure deep in the brain that plays a primary role in memory and emotion.
Building on this lineage, researchers analyzed data from this same international network to see if antidepressant use actually counteracts these structural brain changes, and whether those effects differ depending on a patient’s age and sex.
“In several of our previous large international ENIGMA studies of depression, we kept seeing an intriguing pattern: the most widespread brain differences were often found in people with depression who were taking antidepressants at the time of their brain scan,” Lianne Schmaal, head of Mood & Anxiety Disorders Research and chair of the ENIGMA MDD consortium at Orygen and the Centre for Youth Mental Health at The University of Melbourne, told PsyPost.
“We wanted to understand that pattern better,” Schmaal explained. “Our earlier studies did not have sufficiently detailed information about how long people had been taking antidepressants or which type they were taking, and they could not tell us whether the differences we observed were related to the medication itself or to the reasons people were taking medication in the first place.”
To answer these questions, Schmaal, lead author Chaira Serrarens, and their colleagues pooled data from 32 different international cohorts, yielding a total sample of 8,696 individuals. This massive group was divided into three categories: 2,076 people with major depressive disorder who were currently taking antidepressants, 1,495 people with the disorder who were not taking antidepressants, and 5,125 healthy controls with no history of the condition.
“One of the strengths of this study is its scale,” Schmaal said. “By bringing together almost 8,700 people from 32 research cohorts around the world and analyzing their brain scans using harmonized methods, we could identify subtle patterns that smaller studies would struggle to detect reliably.”
All participants underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a technique that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to create highly detailed, three-dimensional pictures of brain anatomy. The researchers processed these brain scans using automated software to measure three main things. First, they measured the thickness of the cerebral cortex, which is the wrinkled outer layer of the brain responsible for higher-level thinking and processing. Second, they measured the total surface area of this outer layer. Third, they measured the volume of subcortical structures, which are the specialized hubs located deep beneath the outer cortex.
To ensure a fair comparison, the statistical models accounted for the participants’ age, sex, and total head size. The researchers also gathered clinical data from the depressed patients, including the severity of their current symptoms based on standard psychological questionnaires, their number of past depressive episodes, and, for a smaller subset, the specific type of antidepressant they were taking.
The brain scans revealed a complex relationship between age, medication status, and brain structure. For example, younger individuals in the medicated group (those under 50 years old) showed a thinner middle temporal gyrus compared to both the unmedicated patients and the healthy controls. The middle temporal gyrus is a ridge on the side of the brain involved in processing sensory information and emotional cues. In older individuals, this difference between the groups disappeared, with the lines crossing over around age 50.
“One of the most interesting findings was that age seemed to matter,” Schmaal noted. “Some of the differences associated with antidepressant use were most apparent in younger people and were not seen in the same way in older adults. That suggests we should not necessarily assume that the relationship between antidepressant treatment and the brain is the same across the lifespan.”
When looking at the overall effects of medication regardless of age, the researchers found that patients currently taking antidepressants had a smaller hippocampus and a thinner inferior temporal gyrus compared to patients who were not taking the drugs. The researchers ran extra tests to see if these differences were simply due to the medicated patients having a longer or more stubborn history of depression. The structural differences held true even when adjusting for the number of past depressive episodes or whether the patient was currently in remission.
However, the researchers caution that these alterations are not glaringly obvious on an individual level. “The differences were small,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “They are detectable because we were able to combine data from thousands of people, but they are nowhere near large enough to look at an individual person’s brain scan and determine whether they have taken antidepressants, or to use these measures in clinical decision-making.”
The differences between the medicated and unmedicated groups also vanished when the researchers accounted for the severity of current depressive symptoms. The people in the medicated group generally reported feeling worse at the time of the scan than the unmedicated group. This indicates that the structural differences in the temporal lobe and hippocampus might be tied more to how severely depressed a person is currently feeling, rather than being a direct physical result of the medication itself.
“We tried to account for factors such as current symptoms, number of previous depressive episodes and whether someone had recurrent depression, but it is impossible to completely separate medication use from illness severity in this kind of study,” Schmaal explained.
“Despite exploring every possible difference between those taking and those not taking antidepressants, there were only very small differences in very few brain areas which disappeared when taking into account other important differences between these groups,” Roland Zahn, a professor of Mood Disorders and Cognitive Neuroscience at King’s College London’s Centre for Affective Disorders who was not involved in the research, told PsyPost.
Zahn, who also serves as co-programme lead for the MSc Affective Disorders and shares research updates via his lab blog, added: “One important difference between the groups was that people taking antidepressants had much higher levels of depressive symptoms as measured on a gold standard observer-rated scale known to correlate with subtle changes in brain structure from other studies. When accounting for this crucial difference between the groups, the subtle differences in thickness of some of the brain areas in those taking antidepressants disappeared.”
The study also highlighted brain changes that seem driven by the depression diagnosis itself rather than the medication. Younger patients with depression, regardless of whether they took medication, had a smaller thalamus compared to healthy controls. The thalamus acts as a central relay station for sensory and motor signals in the brain. These younger patients also exhibited a thinner cortex in several regions across the frontal, occipital, and parietal lobes when compared to healthy individuals, a gap that was not present in the older participants.
In a smaller exploratory analysis, the researchers looked at specific types of antidepressants, comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and mirtazapine. They found an age-specific pattern here as well. Older adults (over the age of 40) taking mirtazapine had a thicker rostral anterior cingulate cortex compared to older adults taking SSRIs or SNRIs.
This brain region sits in the frontal lobe and is heavily involved in emotional regulation and reward processing. The authors suggest that mirtazapine might trigger a distinct neuroplastic response in this area, though they also note that mirtazapine is often prescribed for specific symptoms like insomnia or after other drugs have failed, which might influence the results.
“The authors acknowledge that they cannot establish causal relationships and particularly their comparison of different antidepressants is exploratory and based on a much smaller group, based on a single time point,” Zahn noted. “The problem is that there are several factors influencing the reason why someone is taking one antidepressant rather than another and the authors acknowledge, they were not able to account for that as this is a large study with limited clinical background information.”
The researchers also investigated how long patients had been on their current medication, finding no clear association between duration of use and structural changes. “We also did not find evidence that a longer duration of current antidepressant use was associated with greater brain differences,” Schmaal said. “That is reassuring in one sense, but it needs to be interpreted cautiously because detailed information on duration was available for only a subset of participants, and importantly we did not have people’s complete lifetime history of antidepressant exposure.”
The findings are in tension with research covered by PsyPost earlier this year, which found that patients taking the antidepressant escitalopram experienced increases in right hippocampal volume during their treatment. Both studies measure hippocampal volume via MRI in depressed patients taking antidepressants, but that earlier study tracked longitudinal within-person volume changes over weeks of treatment, whereas the new study assessed cross-sectional volume differences between different groups of medicated and unmedicated patients at a single point in time.
However, the ENIGMA study’s immense size adds significant weight to its findings. “This is a very important study in that it was able to merge data from thousands of people and therefore had the ability to detect very small differences,” Zahn said. “It thereby challenged findings from non-human animals as well as findings in smaller studies.”
As with all research, there are a few things to keep in mind. The study relies on a cross-sectional design, meaning the participants were only scanned once. Because the researchers did not track the same individuals over time, they cannot definitively say whether the antidepressants caused the observed brain differences, or if people with certain brain shapes and symptom severities are simply more likely to be prescribed antidepressants.
“The main misinterpretation I would want to avoid is that this study shows antidepressants cause the brain to shrink or cause brain damage. It does not,” Schmaal said. “Imagine taking a photograph of two groups of people today: one group taking antidepressants and another group not taking them. Even if their brains differ on average, that photograph cannot tell you what caused the difference or what their brains looked like before treatment.”
Zahn echoed this caution, emphasizing that brain anatomy is highly variable. “It is also important to note that the structure of our brains constantly changes and the biggest driver of such change is age,” he said. “It is also important to note that large individual differences in brain structure exist with little impact on functioning.”
Because of this limitation, the findings should not alter how patients currently manage their condition. “That is why these results should not be used to make decisions about starting or stopping antidepressants,” Schmaal added. “Those decisions need to be based on the balance of benefits and risks for an individual person and discussed with their treating clinician.”
The researchers also lacked data on the participants’ lifetime history of medication use, meaning some people in the “unmedicated” group might have taken antidepressants in the past. Other factors that shape brain anatomy over a lifespan, such as education, lifestyle habits, or early signs of neurodegenerative diseases in older adults, could not be fully accounted for across all 32 international sites.
“The next critical step is longitudinal research,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “Ideally, we need to follow people from before, or very soon after, they first start an antidepressant and repeatedly assess both their mental health and their brain over several years.”
“The next step as the authors acknowledge is to investigate multiple time points in datasets which contain more detail about other relevant factors, such as other conditions, and response to previous treatments,” Zahn added.
“Ultimately, the goal is not simply to ask whether antidepressants affect the brain,” Schmaal concluded. “We want to understand how they affect the developing and adult brain, whether those effects differ between individuals and across different ages, and whether any brain changes relate to treatment benefit, side effects or longer-term outcomes.”
The study, “Regional brain morphology and current antidepressant use: findings from 32 international cohorts from the ENIGMA major depressive disorder working group,” was authored by Chaira Serrarens, Yara J. Toenders, Elena Pozzi, André Aleman, Nina Alexander, Zeynep Başgöze, Vladimir Belov, Klaus Berger, Katharina Brosch, Robin Bülow, Geraldo Filho Busatto, Liliana P. Capitão, Colm G. Connolly, Baptiste Couvy-Duchesne, Kathryn R. Cullen, Udo Dannlowski, Christopher G. Davey, Greig I. de Zubicaray, Danai Dima, Katharina Dohm, Verena Enneking, Tracy Erwin-Grabner, Ulrika Evermann, Cynthia H. Y. Fu, Paola Fuentes-Claramonte, Beata R. Godlewska, Ali Saffet Gonul, Ian H. Gotlib, Roberto Goya-Maldonado, Hans J. Grabe, Nynke A. Groenewold, Dominik Grotegerd, Oliver Gruber, Tim Hahn, Geoffrey Hall, Ben J. Harrison, Walter Heindel, Marco Hermesdorf, Tiffany C. Ho, Naho Ichikawa, Eri Itai, Neda Jahanshad, Hamidreza Jamalabadi, Alec J. Jamieson, Andreas Jansen, Tilo Kircher, Bonnie Klimes-Dougan, Bernd Krämer, Axel Krug, Thomas M. Lancaster, Elisabeth J. Leehr, Meng Li, David E. J. Linden, Frank MacMaster, Katie L. McMahon, Sarah E. Medland, David M. A. Mehler, Susanne Meinert, Benson Mwangi, Igor Nenadić, Go Okada, Yasumasa Okamoto, Nils Opel, Julia-Katharina Pfarr, Edith Pomarol-Clotet, Maria J. Portella, Ronny Redlich, Liesbeth Reneman, Jonathan Repple, Kai Ringwald, Elena Rodriguez-Cano, Pedro G. P. Rosa, Matthew D. Sacchet, Philipp G. Sämann, Raymond Salvador, Anouk Schrantee, Hotaka Shinzato, Kang Sim, Egle Simulionyte, Jair C. Soares, Dan J. Stein, Frederike Stein, Benjamin Straube, Lachlan T. Strike, Florian Thomas-Odenthal, Sophia I. Thomopoulos, Paul M. Thompson, Marie-Jose van Tol, Paula Usemann, Aslihan Uyar, Nic van der Wee, Steven van der Werff, Yolanda Vives-Gilabert, Henry Völzke, Martin Walter, Sarah Whittle, Katharina Wittfeld, Adrian Wroblewski, Mon-Ju Wu, Tony T. Yang, Giovana B. Zunta-Soares, Dick J. Veltman, Lianne Schmaal, and Laura S. van Velzen.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #antidepressants #brainstructure #ENIGMA #MDD #hippocampus #neuroimaging #MolecularPsychiatry #depressionresearch #lifespan #neuroplasticity
-
DATE: September 18, 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: Do antidepressants actually alter brain structure? A massive neuroscience study weighs in
A massive brain imaging study has found that subtle differences in the brain structure of people taking antidepressants are largely explained by the severity of their depression, rather than the medications themselves. The research also suggests that the relationship between depression, medication use, and brain anatomy changes across a person’s lifespan, with younger patients showing distinct structural patterns. The findings were published in Molecular Psychiatry.
Major depressive disorder is a severe and persistent form of depression that ranks among the leading causes of disability worldwide. To treat it, doctors frequently prescribe antidepressant medications, yet the exact biological mechanisms by which these drugs alter the brain remain somewhat elusive.
A 2006 theoretical framework proposed that chronic stress and depression might damage brain cells, and that antidepressants could stimulate the growth of new cells in deep brain regions. Supporting this idea, a study covered by PsyPost in 2026 indicated that treatments like duloxetine could help normalize the microscopic structure of brain tissue in depressed patients, whereas those given a placebo saw their brain tissue drift further from healthy levels.
To investigate these effects on a larger scale, researchers needed massive datasets. In prior work, the ENIGMA consortium, an international network of brain researchers, mapped how depression physically alters the brain. For instance, a 2015 study from the group found that people with major depression tend to have a smaller hippocampus, which is a seahorse-shaped structure deep in the brain that plays a primary role in memory and emotion.
Building on this lineage, researchers analyzed data from this same international network to see if antidepressant use actually counteracts these structural brain changes, and whether those effects differ depending on a patient’s age and sex.
“In several of our previous large international ENIGMA studies of depression, we kept seeing an intriguing pattern: the most widespread brain differences were often found in people with depression who were taking antidepressants at the time of their brain scan,” Lianne Schmaal, head of Mood & Anxiety Disorders Research and chair of the ENIGMA MDD consortium at Orygen and the Centre for Youth Mental Health at The University of Melbourne, told PsyPost.
“We wanted to understand that pattern better,” Schmaal explained. “Our earlier studies did not have sufficiently detailed information about how long people had been taking antidepressants or which type they were taking, and they could not tell us whether the differences we observed were related to the medication itself or to the reasons people were taking medication in the first place.”
To answer these questions, Schmaal, lead author Chaira Serrarens, and their colleagues pooled data from 32 different international cohorts, yielding a total sample of 8,696 individuals. This massive group was divided into three categories: 2,076 people with major depressive disorder who were currently taking antidepressants, 1,495 people with the disorder who were not taking antidepressants, and 5,125 healthy controls with no history of the condition.
“One of the strengths of this study is its scale,” Schmaal said. “By bringing together almost 8,700 people from 32 research cohorts around the world and analyzing their brain scans using harmonized methods, we could identify subtle patterns that smaller studies would struggle to detect reliably.”
All participants underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a technique that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to create highly detailed, three-dimensional pictures of brain anatomy. The researchers processed these brain scans using automated software to measure three main things. First, they measured the thickness of the cerebral cortex, which is the wrinkled outer layer of the brain responsible for higher-level thinking and processing. Second, they measured the total surface area of this outer layer. Third, they measured the volume of subcortical structures, which are the specialized hubs located deep beneath the outer cortex.
To ensure a fair comparison, the statistical models accounted for the participants’ age, sex, and total head size. The researchers also gathered clinical data from the depressed patients, including the severity of their current symptoms based on standard psychological questionnaires, their number of past depressive episodes, and, for a smaller subset, the specific type of antidepressant they were taking.
The brain scans revealed a complex relationship between age, medication status, and brain structure. For example, younger individuals in the medicated group (those under 50 years old) showed a thinner middle temporal gyrus compared to both the unmedicated patients and the healthy controls. The middle temporal gyrus is a ridge on the side of the brain involved in processing sensory information and emotional cues. In older individuals, this difference between the groups disappeared, with the lines crossing over around age 50.
“One of the most interesting findings was that age seemed to matter,” Schmaal noted. “Some of the differences associated with antidepressant use were most apparent in younger people and were not seen in the same way in older adults. That suggests we should not necessarily assume that the relationship between antidepressant treatment and the brain is the same across the lifespan.”
When looking at the overall effects of medication regardless of age, the researchers found that patients currently taking antidepressants had a smaller hippocampus and a thinner inferior temporal gyrus compared to patients who were not taking the drugs. The researchers ran extra tests to see if these differences were simply due to the medicated patients having a longer or more stubborn history of depression. The structural differences held true even when adjusting for the number of past depressive episodes or whether the patient was currently in remission.
However, the researchers caution that these alterations are not glaringly obvious on an individual level. “The differences were small,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “They are detectable because we were able to combine data from thousands of people, but they are nowhere near large enough to look at an individual person’s brain scan and determine whether they have taken antidepressants, or to use these measures in clinical decision-making.”
The differences between the medicated and unmedicated groups also vanished when the researchers accounted for the severity of current depressive symptoms. The people in the medicated group generally reported feeling worse at the time of the scan than the unmedicated group. This indicates that the structural differences in the temporal lobe and hippocampus might be tied more to how severely depressed a person is currently feeling, rather than being a direct physical result of the medication itself.
“We tried to account for factors such as current symptoms, number of previous depressive episodes and whether someone had recurrent depression, but it is impossible to completely separate medication use from illness severity in this kind of study,” Schmaal explained.
“Despite exploring every possible difference between those taking and those not taking antidepressants, there were only very small differences in very few brain areas which disappeared when taking into account other important differences between these groups,” Roland Zahn, a professor of Mood Disorders and Cognitive Neuroscience at King’s College London’s Centre for Affective Disorders who was not involved in the research, told PsyPost.
Zahn, who also serves as co-programme lead for the MSc Affective Disorders and shares research updates via his lab blog, added: “One important difference between the groups was that people taking antidepressants had much higher levels of depressive symptoms as measured on a gold standard observer-rated scale known to correlate with subtle changes in brain structure from other studies. When accounting for this crucial difference between the groups, the subtle differences in thickness of some of the brain areas in those taking antidepressants disappeared.”
The study also highlighted brain changes that seem driven by the depression diagnosis itself rather than the medication. Younger patients with depression, regardless of whether they took medication, had a smaller thalamus compared to healthy controls. The thalamus acts as a central relay station for sensory and motor signals in the brain. These younger patients also exhibited a thinner cortex in several regions across the frontal, occipital, and parietal lobes when compared to healthy individuals, a gap that was not present in the older participants.
In a smaller exploratory analysis, the researchers looked at specific types of antidepressants, comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and mirtazapine. They found an age-specific pattern here as well. Older adults (over the age of 40) taking mirtazapine had a thicker rostral anterior cingulate cortex compared to older adults taking SSRIs or SNRIs.
This brain region sits in the frontal lobe and is heavily involved in emotional regulation and reward processing. The authors suggest that mirtazapine might trigger a distinct neuroplastic response in this area, though they also note that mirtazapine is often prescribed for specific symptoms like insomnia or after other drugs have failed, which might influence the results.
“The authors acknowledge that they cannot establish causal relationships and particularly their comparison of different antidepressants is exploratory and based on a much smaller group, based on a single time point,” Zahn noted. “The problem is that there are several factors influencing the reason why someone is taking one antidepressant rather than another and the authors acknowledge, they were not able to account for that as this is a large study with limited clinical background information.”
The researchers also investigated how long patients had been on their current medication, finding no clear association between duration of use and structural changes. “We also did not find evidence that a longer duration of current antidepressant use was associated with greater brain differences,” Schmaal said. “That is reassuring in one sense, but it needs to be interpreted cautiously because detailed information on duration was available for only a subset of participants, and importantly we did not have people’s complete lifetime history of antidepressant exposure.”
The findings are in tension with research covered by PsyPost earlier this year, which found that patients taking the antidepressant escitalopram experienced increases in right hippocampal volume during their treatment. Both studies measure hippocampal volume via MRI in depressed patients taking antidepressants, but that earlier study tracked longitudinal within-person volume changes over weeks of treatment, whereas the new study assessed cross-sectional volume differences between different groups of medicated and unmedicated patients at a single point in time.
However, the ENIGMA study’s immense size adds significant weight to its findings. “This is a very important study in that it was able to merge data from thousands of people and therefore had the ability to detect very small differences,” Zahn said. “It thereby challenged findings from non-human animals as well as findings in smaller studies.”
As with all research, there are a few things to keep in mind. The study relies on a cross-sectional design, meaning the participants were only scanned once. Because the researchers did not track the same individuals over time, they cannot definitively say whether the antidepressants caused the observed brain differences, or if people with certain brain shapes and symptom severities are simply more likely to be prescribed antidepressants.
“The main misinterpretation I would want to avoid is that this study shows antidepressants cause the brain to shrink or cause brain damage. It does not,” Schmaal said. “Imagine taking a photograph of two groups of people today: one group taking antidepressants and another group not taking them. Even if their brains differ on average, that photograph cannot tell you what caused the difference or what their brains looked like before treatment.”
Zahn echoed this caution, emphasizing that brain anatomy is highly variable. “It is also important to note that the structure of our brains constantly changes and the biggest driver of such change is age,” he said. “It is also important to note that large individual differences in brain structure exist with little impact on functioning.”
Because of this limitation, the findings should not alter how patients currently manage their condition. “That is why these results should not be used to make decisions about starting or stopping antidepressants,” Schmaal added. “Those decisions need to be based on the balance of benefits and risks for an individual person and discussed with their treating clinician.”
The researchers also lacked data on the participants’ lifetime history of medication use, meaning some people in the “unmedicated” group might have taken antidepressants in the past. Other factors that shape brain anatomy over a lifespan, such as education, lifestyle habits, or early signs of neurodegenerative diseases in older adults, could not be fully accounted for across all 32 international sites.
“The next critical step is longitudinal research,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “Ideally, we need to follow people from before, or very soon after, they first start an antidepressant and repeatedly assess both their mental health and their brain over several years.”
“The next step as the authors acknowledge is to investigate multiple time points in datasets which contain more detail about other relevant factors, such as other conditions, and response to previous treatments,” Zahn added.
“Ultimately, the goal is not simply to ask whether antidepressants affect the brain,” Schmaal concluded. “We want to understand how they affect the developing and adult brain, whether those effects differ between individuals and across different ages, and whether any brain changes relate to treatment benefit, side effects or longer-term outcomes.”
The study, “Regional brain morphology and current antidepressant use: findings from 32 international cohorts from the ENIGMA major depressive disorder working group,” was authored by Chaira Serrarens, Yara J. Toenders, Elena Pozzi, André Aleman, Nina Alexander, Zeynep Başgöze, Vladimir Belov, Klaus Berger, Katharina Brosch, Robin Bülow, Geraldo Filho Busatto, Liliana P. Capitão, Colm G. Connolly, Baptiste Couvy-Duchesne, Kathryn R. Cullen, Udo Dannlowski, Christopher G. Davey, Greig I. de Zubicaray, Danai Dima, Katharina Dohm, Verena Enneking, Tracy Erwin-Grabner, Ulrika Evermann, Cynthia H. Y. Fu, Paola Fuentes-Claramonte, Beata R. Godlewska, Ali Saffet Gonul, Ian H. Gotlib, Roberto Goya-Maldonado, Hans J. Grabe, Nynke A. Groenewold, Dominik Grotegerd, Oliver Gruber, Tim Hahn, Geoffrey Hall, Ben J. Harrison, Walter Heindel, Marco Hermesdorf, Tiffany C. Ho, Naho Ichikawa, Eri Itai, Neda Jahanshad, Hamidreza Jamalabadi, Alec J. Jamieson, Andreas Jansen, Tilo Kircher, Bonnie Klimes-Dougan, Bernd Krämer, Axel Krug, Thomas M. Lancaster, Elisabeth J. Leehr, Meng Li, David E. J. Linden, Frank MacMaster, Katie L. McMahon, Sarah E. Medland, David M. A. Mehler, Susanne Meinert, Benson Mwangi, Igor Nenadić, Go Okada, Yasumasa Okamoto, Nils Opel, Julia-Katharina Pfarr, Edith Pomarol-Clotet, Maria J. Portella, Ronny Redlich, Liesbeth Reneman, Jonathan Repple, Kai Ringwald, Elena Rodriguez-Cano, Pedro G. P. Rosa, Matthew D. Sacchet, Philipp G. Sämann, Raymond Salvador, Anouk Schrantee, Hotaka Shinzato, Kang Sim, Egle Simulionyte, Jair C. Soares, Dan J. Stein, Frederike Stein, Benjamin Straube, Lachlan T. Strike, Florian Thomas-Odenthal, Sophia I. Thomopoulos, Paul M. Thompson, Marie-Jose van Tol, Paula Usemann, Aslihan Uyar, Nic van der Wee, Steven van der Werff, Yolanda Vives-Gilabert, Henry Völzke, Martin Walter, Sarah Whittle, Katharina Wittfeld, Adrian Wroblewski, Mon-Ju Wu, Tony T. Yang, Giovana B. Zunta-Soares, Dick J. Veltman, Lianne Schmaal, and Laura S. van Velzen.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #antidepressants #brainstructure #ENIGMA #MDD #hippocampus #neuroimaging #MolecularPsychiatry #depressionresearch #lifespan #neuroplasticity
-
DATE: September 18, 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: Do antidepressants actually alter brain structure? A massive neuroscience study weighs in
A massive brain imaging study has found that subtle differences in the brain structure of people taking antidepressants are largely explained by the severity of their depression, rather than the medications themselves. The research also suggests that the relationship between depression, medication use, and brain anatomy changes across a person’s lifespan, with younger patients showing distinct structural patterns. The findings were published in Molecular Psychiatry.
Major depressive disorder is a severe and persistent form of depression that ranks among the leading causes of disability worldwide. To treat it, doctors frequently prescribe antidepressant medications, yet the exact biological mechanisms by which these drugs alter the brain remain somewhat elusive.
A 2006 theoretical framework proposed that chronic stress and depression might damage brain cells, and that antidepressants could stimulate the growth of new cells in deep brain regions. Supporting this idea, a study covered by PsyPost in 2026 indicated that treatments like duloxetine could help normalize the microscopic structure of brain tissue in depressed patients, whereas those given a placebo saw their brain tissue drift further from healthy levels.
To investigate these effects on a larger scale, researchers needed massive datasets. In prior work, the ENIGMA consortium, an international network of brain researchers, mapped how depression physically alters the brain. For instance, a 2015 study from the group found that people with major depression tend to have a smaller hippocampus, which is a seahorse-shaped structure deep in the brain that plays a primary role in memory and emotion.
Building on this lineage, researchers analyzed data from this same international network to see if antidepressant use actually counteracts these structural brain changes, and whether those effects differ depending on a patient’s age and sex.
“In several of our previous large international ENIGMA studies of depression, we kept seeing an intriguing pattern: the most widespread brain differences were often found in people with depression who were taking antidepressants at the time of their brain scan,” Lianne Schmaal, head of Mood & Anxiety Disorders Research and chair of the ENIGMA MDD consortium at Orygen and the Centre for Youth Mental Health at The University of Melbourne, told PsyPost.
“We wanted to understand that pattern better,” Schmaal explained. “Our earlier studies did not have sufficiently detailed information about how long people had been taking antidepressants or which type they were taking, and they could not tell us whether the differences we observed were related to the medication itself or to the reasons people were taking medication in the first place.”
To answer these questions, Schmaal, lead author Chaira Serrarens, and their colleagues pooled data from 32 different international cohorts, yielding a total sample of 8,696 individuals. This massive group was divided into three categories: 2,076 people with major depressive disorder who were currently taking antidepressants, 1,495 people with the disorder who were not taking antidepressants, and 5,125 healthy controls with no history of the condition.
“One of the strengths of this study is its scale,” Schmaal said. “By bringing together almost 8,700 people from 32 research cohorts around the world and analyzing their brain scans using harmonized methods, we could identify subtle patterns that smaller studies would struggle to detect reliably.”
All participants underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a technique that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to create highly detailed, three-dimensional pictures of brain anatomy. The researchers processed these brain scans using automated software to measure three main things. First, they measured the thickness of the cerebral cortex, which is the wrinkled outer layer of the brain responsible for higher-level thinking and processing. Second, they measured the total surface area of this outer layer. Third, they measured the volume of subcortical structures, which are the specialized hubs located deep beneath the outer cortex.
To ensure a fair comparison, the statistical models accounted for the participants’ age, sex, and total head size. The researchers also gathered clinical data from the depressed patients, including the severity of their current symptoms based on standard psychological questionnaires, their number of past depressive episodes, and, for a smaller subset, the specific type of antidepressant they were taking.
The brain scans revealed a complex relationship between age, medication status, and brain structure. For example, younger individuals in the medicated group (those under 50 years old) showed a thinner middle temporal gyrus compared to both the unmedicated patients and the healthy controls. The middle temporal gyrus is a ridge on the side of the brain involved in processing sensory information and emotional cues. In older individuals, this difference between the groups disappeared, with the lines crossing over around age 50.
“One of the most interesting findings was that age seemed to matter,” Schmaal noted. “Some of the differences associated with antidepressant use were most apparent in younger people and were not seen in the same way in older adults. That suggests we should not necessarily assume that the relationship between antidepressant treatment and the brain is the same across the lifespan.”
When looking at the overall effects of medication regardless of age, the researchers found that patients currently taking antidepressants had a smaller hippocampus and a thinner inferior temporal gyrus compared to patients who were not taking the drugs. The researchers ran extra tests to see if these differences were simply due to the medicated patients having a longer or more stubborn history of depression. The structural differences held true even when adjusting for the number of past depressive episodes or whether the patient was currently in remission.
However, the researchers caution that these alterations are not glaringly obvious on an individual level. “The differences were small,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “They are detectable because we were able to combine data from thousands of people, but they are nowhere near large enough to look at an individual person’s brain scan and determine whether they have taken antidepressants, or to use these measures in clinical decision-making.”
The differences between the medicated and unmedicated groups also vanished when the researchers accounted for the severity of current depressive symptoms. The people in the medicated group generally reported feeling worse at the time of the scan than the unmedicated group. This indicates that the structural differences in the temporal lobe and hippocampus might be tied more to how severely depressed a person is currently feeling, rather than being a direct physical result of the medication itself.
“We tried to account for factors such as current symptoms, number of previous depressive episodes and whether someone had recurrent depression, but it is impossible to completely separate medication use from illness severity in this kind of study,” Schmaal explained.
“Despite exploring every possible difference between those taking and those not taking antidepressants, there were only very small differences in very few brain areas which disappeared when taking into account other important differences between these groups,” Roland Zahn, a professor of Mood Disorders and Cognitive Neuroscience at King’s College London’s Centre for Affective Disorders who was not involved in the research, told PsyPost.
Zahn, who also serves as co-programme lead for the MSc Affective Disorders and shares research updates via his lab blog, added: “One important difference between the groups was that people taking antidepressants had much higher levels of depressive symptoms as measured on a gold standard observer-rated scale known to correlate with subtle changes in brain structure from other studies. When accounting for this crucial difference between the groups, the subtle differences in thickness of some of the brain areas in those taking antidepressants disappeared.”
The study also highlighted brain changes that seem driven by the depression diagnosis itself rather than the medication. Younger patients with depression, regardless of whether they took medication, had a smaller thalamus compared to healthy controls. The thalamus acts as a central relay station for sensory and motor signals in the brain. These younger patients also exhibited a thinner cortex in several regions across the frontal, occipital, and parietal lobes when compared to healthy individuals, a gap that was not present in the older participants.
In a smaller exploratory analysis, the researchers looked at specific types of antidepressants, comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and mirtazapine. They found an age-specific pattern here as well. Older adults (over the age of 40) taking mirtazapine had a thicker rostral anterior cingulate cortex compared to older adults taking SSRIs or SNRIs.
This brain region sits in the frontal lobe and is heavily involved in emotional regulation and reward processing. The authors suggest that mirtazapine might trigger a distinct neuroplastic response in this area, though they also note that mirtazapine is often prescribed for specific symptoms like insomnia or after other drugs have failed, which might influence the results.
“The authors acknowledge that they cannot establish causal relationships and particularly their comparison of different antidepressants is exploratory and based on a much smaller group, based on a single time point,” Zahn noted. “The problem is that there are several factors influencing the reason why someone is taking one antidepressant rather than another and the authors acknowledge, they were not able to account for that as this is a large study with limited clinical background information.”
The researchers also investigated how long patients had been on their current medication, finding no clear association between duration of use and structural changes. “We also did not find evidence that a longer duration of current antidepressant use was associated with greater brain differences,” Schmaal said. “That is reassuring in one sense, but it needs to be interpreted cautiously because detailed information on duration was available for only a subset of participants, and importantly we did not have people’s complete lifetime history of antidepressant exposure.”
The findings are in tension with research covered by PsyPost earlier this year, which found that patients taking the antidepressant escitalopram experienced increases in right hippocampal volume during their treatment. Both studies measure hippocampal volume via MRI in depressed patients taking antidepressants, but that earlier study tracked longitudinal within-person volume changes over weeks of treatment, whereas the new study assessed cross-sectional volume differences between different groups of medicated and unmedicated patients at a single point in time.
However, the ENIGMA study’s immense size adds significant weight to its findings. “This is a very important study in that it was able to merge data from thousands of people and therefore had the ability to detect very small differences,” Zahn said. “It thereby challenged findings from non-human animals as well as findings in smaller studies.”
As with all research, there are a few things to keep in mind. The study relies on a cross-sectional design, meaning the participants were only scanned once. Because the researchers did not track the same individuals over time, they cannot definitively say whether the antidepressants caused the observed brain differences, or if people with certain brain shapes and symptom severities are simply more likely to be prescribed antidepressants.
“The main misinterpretation I would want to avoid is that this study shows antidepressants cause the brain to shrink or cause brain damage. It does not,” Schmaal said. “Imagine taking a photograph of two groups of people today: one group taking antidepressants and another group not taking them. Even if their brains differ on average, that photograph cannot tell you what caused the difference or what their brains looked like before treatment.”
Zahn echoed this caution, emphasizing that brain anatomy is highly variable. “It is also important to note that the structure of our brains constantly changes and the biggest driver of such change is age,” he said. “It is also important to note that large individual differences in brain structure exist with little impact on functioning.”
Because of this limitation, the findings should not alter how patients currently manage their condition. “That is why these results should not be used to make decisions about starting or stopping antidepressants,” Schmaal added. “Those decisions need to be based on the balance of benefits and risks for an individual person and discussed with their treating clinician.”
The researchers also lacked data on the participants’ lifetime history of medication use, meaning some people in the “unmedicated” group might have taken antidepressants in the past. Other factors that shape brain anatomy over a lifespan, such as education, lifestyle habits, or early signs of neurodegenerative diseases in older adults, could not be fully accounted for across all 32 international sites.
“The next critical step is longitudinal research,” Schmaal told PsyPost. “Ideally, we need to follow people from before, or very soon after, they first start an antidepressant and repeatedly assess both their mental health and their brain over several years.”
“The next step as the authors acknowledge is to investigate multiple time points in datasets which contain more detail about other relevant factors, such as other conditions, and response to previous treatments,” Zahn added.
“Ultimately, the goal is not simply to ask whether antidepressants affect the brain,” Schmaal concluded. “We want to understand how they affect the developing and adult brain, whether those effects differ between individuals and across different ages, and whether any brain changes relate to treatment benefit, side effects or longer-term outcomes.”
The study, “Regional brain morphology and current antidepressant use: findings from 32 international cohorts from the ENIGMA major depressive disorder working group,” was authored by Chaira Serrarens, Yara J. Toenders, Elena Pozzi, André Aleman, Nina Alexander, Zeynep Başgöze, Vladimir Belov, Klaus Berger, Katharina Brosch, Robin Bülow, Geraldo Filho Busatto, Liliana P. Capitão, Colm G. Connolly, Baptiste Couvy-Duchesne, Kathryn R. Cullen, Udo Dannlowski, Christopher G. Davey, Greig I. de Zubicaray, Danai Dima, Katharina Dohm, Verena Enneking, Tracy Erwin-Grabner, Ulrika Evermann, Cynthia H. Y. Fu, Paola Fuentes-Claramonte, Beata R. Godlewska, Ali Saffet Gonul, Ian H. Gotlib, Roberto Goya-Maldonado, Hans J. Grabe, Nynke A. Groenewold, Dominik Grotegerd, Oliver Gruber, Tim Hahn, Geoffrey Hall, Ben J. Harrison, Walter Heindel, Marco Hermesdorf, Tiffany C. Ho, Naho Ichikawa, Eri Itai, Neda Jahanshad, Hamidreza Jamalabadi, Alec J. Jamieson, Andreas Jansen, Tilo Kircher, Bonnie Klimes-Dougan, Bernd Krämer, Axel Krug, Thomas M. Lancaster, Elisabeth J. Leehr, Meng Li, David E. J. Linden, Frank MacMaster, Katie L. McMahon, Sarah E. Medland, David M. A. Mehler, Susanne Meinert, Benson Mwangi, Igor Nenadić, Go Okada, Yasumasa Okamoto, Nils Opel, Julia-Katharina Pfarr, Edith Pomarol-Clotet, Maria J. Portella, Ronny Redlich, Liesbeth Reneman, Jonathan Repple, Kai Ringwald, Elena Rodriguez-Cano, Pedro G. P. Rosa, Matthew D. Sacchet, Philipp G. Sämann, Raymond Salvador, Anouk Schrantee, Hotaka Shinzato, Kang Sim, Egle Simulionyte, Jair C. Soares, Dan J. Stein, Frederike Stein, Benjamin Straube, Lachlan T. Strike, Florian Thomas-Odenthal, Sophia I. Thomopoulos, Paul M. Thompson, Marie-Jose van Tol, Paula Usemann, Aslihan Uyar, Nic van der Wee, Steven van der Werff, Yolanda Vives-Gilabert, Henry Völzke, Martin Walter, Sarah Whittle, Katharina Wittfeld, Adrian Wroblewski, Mon-Ju Wu, Tony T. Yang, Giovana B. Zunta-Soares, Dick J. Veltman, Lianne Schmaal, and Laura S. van Velzen.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #antidepressants #brainstructure #ENIGMA #MDD #hippocampus #neuroimaging #MolecularPsychiatry #depressionresearch #lifespan #neuroplasticity
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/692544/ New MRI measure maps blood flow and cellular organization #blood #BloodVessels #Brain #Cell #Cortex #Éire #Gene #GeneExpression #Health #IE #imaging #Ireland #medicine #Metabolism #Mitochondria #Nerve #Neuroimaging #neurology #Nutrients #Oxygen #Research #Vascular
-
DATE: September 12, 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: Tracking brain waves reveals a surprising twist in how different generations form social bonds
Getting to know someone across multiple encounters can ease feelings of loneliness, and new research indicates that these budding relationships physically synchronize brain activity in unexpected ways. A new study, published in PLOS Biology, suggests that when younger and older adults regularly participate in creative activities together, their brains coordinate differently over time compared to pairs of the same age. Over six weeks of collaborative drawing, people of different generations showed decreasing neural synchronization, while same-age peers showed increasing synchronization, even as both groups reported feeling closer to their partners.
People of all ages experience perceived social isolation, and community programs that mix generations are a popular way to combat these feelings of loneliness. These programs rely on the idea that repeated interactions foster meaningful social bonds. However, the physical brain changes that happen as these relationships form are mostly unknown to scientists.
“As the global population ages, and with social isolation acknowledged as a global health risk, it is critical to understand how social bonds form between people from the same and different generations,” Ryssa Moffat, a postdoctoral researcher at ETH Zurich’s Social Brain Sciences Lab, told PsyPost. “My motivation to study social interactions between seniors and young adults grew from positive experiences getting to know seniors around the world. The idea for this project really gained momentum when I read statistics about the growing proportion of older adults globally and learned about the risks of loneliness and social isolation.”
To study these physical changes in real time, scientists use a technique called functional near-infrared spectroscopy. This involves participants wearing a flexible cap embedded with sensors that shine safe levels of light through the scalp to measure changes in blood flow in specific brain areas. This tool allows researchers to track interpersonal neural synchrony, which is the extent to which two people’s brain activity aligns in time while they interact.
Researchers pay special attention to two specific brain regions during social tasks. The first is the temporoparietal junction, an area near the ears that helps people process social information and understand others’ perspectives. The second is the inferior frontal gyrus, an area near the temples involved in paying attention to the same thing as a partner.
A progression of recent research provides evidence that social bonds shift brain-to-brain dynamics as relationships unfold. For instance, a 2022 meta-analysis found that working together on a cooperative task consistently synchronizes the frontal and temporoparietal brain regions. This aligns with research covered by PsyPost in 2024, which found that brain synchronization between humans and dogs increases as they become more familiar with each other over several days.
In human relationships, a 2024 experiment indicated that brain synchrony between two people naturally shifts over the course of a conversation depending on whether they are friends or strangers. Building on this evidence, the authors of a 2024 review proposed that using mobile brain scanning to track neural alignment across repeated sessions is essential for understanding how social bonds develop across generations. The new research, led by Moffat and Emily S. Cross, put this concept into practice.
The researchers recruited 61 pairs of strangers from the community. They formed 31 intergenerational pairs, consisting of one younger adult and one adult aged 69 or older, and 30 same-generation pairs made up of two younger adults. The pairs met once a week for six weeks to complete a creative drawing program.
At the start of each session, the participants filled out surveys measuring their current feelings of loneliness, their sense of closeness to their drawing partner, and their attitudes toward people of different age groups. After completing the surveys, researchers fitted the participants with the sensor caps.
The pairs then completed three separate drawing tasks using oil pastels, lasting five minutes each. They were instructed not to talk during the drawing portion. For the first drawing, they worked independently, separated by a visual divider. For the next two drawings, the divider was removed and the pair worked together on a single piece of paper. The sessions concluded with a short puzzle or game.
“It is very exciting to have mapped how synchrony emerges among younger and older adults for the first time,” Moffat said. She noted that they were able “to show how patterns of synchrony change across repeated encounters with information from each encounter, instead of just the first and the last encounter.”
Over the six weeks, feelings of loneliness dropped by about 1 percent per session for both groups. Feelings of social closeness increased by about 4 percent per session, indicating that the program successfully fostered social bonds. “These small but robust changes were observed for same-generation pairs and intergenerational pairs alike,” Moffat noted. The intergenerational pairs generally reported feeling less lonely than the same-generation pairs, and they held more positive attitudes toward other generations.
When analyzing the brain data from all the sessions combined, the researchers found that interpersonal neural synchrony was greater when the pairs drew together compared to when they drew alone. This brain alignment was especially high in the temporoparietal junction and inferior frontal gyrus.
The findings are in line with research covered by PsyPost earlier in 2026, which found that engaging in shared activities together produces greater interpersonal neural synchrony than doing them alone, though that study measured brain alignment during shared music listening among friends rather than interactive drawing across different generations.
Tracking the brain alignment across the six weeks presented an unexpected pattern. For the same-generation pairs, neural synchrony in the right temporoparietal junction increased as the weeks went on. For the intergenerational pairs, neural synchrony in this same area actually decreased over the six weeks.
“I was initially surprised to see synchrony levels decrease for intergenerational dyads,” Moffat explained. “My assumption that we would see increases in synchrony was based on the existing studies comparing strangers, friends, and romantic partners who attend a single session. In these studies, the closer people are to one another, the more synchrony they tend to show.”
The authors suggest that this divergence might reflect how different age pairs integrate social information. “The main takeaway from our study is that the way in which people’s brains synchronize during cooperation depends on who they’re interacting with and the common ground shared by the interacting people,” Moffat said. Because synchrony is believed to reflect how fluently people can predict each other, it is amplified when prediction is less fluent.
Younger pairs might monitor each other’s attention more closely as they become familiar, leading to higher synchrony. As Moffat noted, “they may engage in unpredictable behaviors to keep the interactions interesting and engaging.” In contrast, mixed-generation pairs might require less active monitoring of their partner’s attention once they establish a comfortable routine. “As older and younger people become better acquainted and form more common ground, they can predict each other more fluently and we see reductions in synchrony between brains in certain brain regions,” she added.
The researchers also noticed relationships between the physical brain data and the survey responses. Across all the pairs, reporting higher social closeness predicted an increase in synchrony between the inferior frontal gyrus and the temporoparietal junction. Pairs with more similar levels of loneliness showed greater synchrony in the inferior frontal gyrus when drawing together, which might indicate that sharing a similar social mindset shapes how easily two people coordinate their attention.
One common misconception to avoid is the assumption that more synchrony is always better. “If we start from the standpoint that synchrony increases when predicting another person’s actions is more challenging, it’s probable that excessively high levels of synchrony indicate excessive challenge and that very low levels may indicate a lack of engagement,” Moffat explained. Instead, a “happy medium might be optimal,” where navigating different levels of predictability keeps people socially fit.
There are a few other things to keep in mind about this study. The brain scans targeted specific areas associated with social processing and attention, so the results do not capture activity across the entire brain. The experiment also specifically restricted verbal communication during the drawing tasks, meaning brain alignment might look different if the pairs were talking freely.
Additionally, the study only compared mixed-generation pairs to young-adult pairs. The researchers did not include a group of two older adults, which means some of the differences observed between the groups might relate to general age-related brain changes rather than the specific dynamic of mixing generations. Technical issues also caused a few sensors to fail during the experiment, slightly reducing the amount of data available for the right side of the brain.
Future studies could explore whether other types of common ground, such as shared cultural backgrounds or long-term hobbies, shape brain synchronization over time. Expanding this research into larger group settings could also provide a better understanding of how community arts programs physically benefit participants.
Moffat and her colleagues plan to expand on these findings by analyzing the other behavioral data they collected. “Alongside the recordings of brain activity, we also recorded a multitude of other signals including motion capture of body movements, performance on collaborative games and puzzles, the actual drawings that the participants co-created, as well as participants’ subjective experiences,” she said. “Our next steps are to analyze the other signals and to bring them together to understand how social connections form from a holistic perspective.”
The study, “Social interactions between people of same and different generations shape longitudinal changes in interpersonal neural synchrony, loneliness, and social connection,” was authored by Ryssa Moffat, Guillaume Dumas, and Emily S. Cross.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #IntergenerationalBonds #BrainSynchrony #SocialNeuroscience #LonelinessReduction #GenerationalBridge #Neuroimaging #InterpersonalNeuralSynchrony #CreativeCollaboration #DTMBrainResearch #PLOSBiology
-
DATE: September 12, 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: Tracking brain waves reveals a surprising twist in how different generations form social bonds
Getting to know someone across multiple encounters can ease feelings of loneliness, and new research indicates that these budding relationships physically synchronize brain activity in unexpected ways. A new study, published in PLOS Biology, suggests that when younger and older adults regularly participate in creative activities together, their brains coordinate differently over time compared to pairs of the same age. Over six weeks of collaborative drawing, people of different generations showed decreasing neural synchronization, while same-age peers showed increasing synchronization, even as both groups reported feeling closer to their partners.
People of all ages experience perceived social isolation, and community programs that mix generations are a popular way to combat these feelings of loneliness. These programs rely on the idea that repeated interactions foster meaningful social bonds. However, the physical brain changes that happen as these relationships form are mostly unknown to scientists.
“As the global population ages, and with social isolation acknowledged as a global health risk, it is critical to understand how social bonds form between people from the same and different generations,” Ryssa Moffat, a postdoctoral researcher at ETH Zurich’s Social Brain Sciences Lab, told PsyPost. “My motivation to study social interactions between seniors and young adults grew from positive experiences getting to know seniors around the world. The idea for this project really gained momentum when I read statistics about the growing proportion of older adults globally and learned about the risks of loneliness and social isolation.”
To study these physical changes in real time, scientists use a technique called functional near-infrared spectroscopy. This involves participants wearing a flexible cap embedded with sensors that shine safe levels of light through the scalp to measure changes in blood flow in specific brain areas. This tool allows researchers to track interpersonal neural synchrony, which is the extent to which two people’s brain activity aligns in time while they interact.
Researchers pay special attention to two specific brain regions during social tasks. The first is the temporoparietal junction, an area near the ears that helps people process social information and understand others’ perspectives. The second is the inferior frontal gyrus, an area near the temples involved in paying attention to the same thing as a partner.
A progression of recent research provides evidence that social bonds shift brain-to-brain dynamics as relationships unfold. For instance, a 2022 meta-analysis found that working together on a cooperative task consistently synchronizes the frontal and temporoparietal brain regions. This aligns with research covered by PsyPost in 2024, which found that brain synchronization between humans and dogs increases as they become more familiar with each other over several days.
In human relationships, a 2024 experiment indicated that brain synchrony between two people naturally shifts over the course of a conversation depending on whether they are friends or strangers. Building on this evidence, the authors of a 2024 review proposed that using mobile brain scanning to track neural alignment across repeated sessions is essential for understanding how social bonds develop across generations. The new research, led by Moffat and Emily S. Cross, put this concept into practice.
The researchers recruited 61 pairs of strangers from the community. They formed 31 intergenerational pairs, consisting of one younger adult and one adult aged 69 or older, and 30 same-generation pairs made up of two younger adults. The pairs met once a week for six weeks to complete a creative drawing program.
At the start of each session, the participants filled out surveys measuring their current feelings of loneliness, their sense of closeness to their drawing partner, and their attitudes toward people of different age groups. After completing the surveys, researchers fitted the participants with the sensor caps.
The pairs then completed three separate drawing tasks using oil pastels, lasting five minutes each. They were instructed not to talk during the drawing portion. For the first drawing, they worked independently, separated by a visual divider. For the next two drawings, the divider was removed and the pair worked together on a single piece of paper. The sessions concluded with a short puzzle or game.
“It is very exciting to have mapped how synchrony emerges among younger and older adults for the first time,” Moffat said. She noted that they were able “to show how patterns of synchrony change across repeated encounters with information from each encounter, instead of just the first and the last encounter.”
Over the six weeks, feelings of loneliness dropped by about 1 percent per session for both groups. Feelings of social closeness increased by about 4 percent per session, indicating that the program successfully fostered social bonds. “These small but robust changes were observed for same-generation pairs and intergenerational pairs alike,” Moffat noted. The intergenerational pairs generally reported feeling less lonely than the same-generation pairs, and they held more positive attitudes toward other generations.
When analyzing the brain data from all the sessions combined, the researchers found that interpersonal neural synchrony was greater when the pairs drew together compared to when they drew alone. This brain alignment was especially high in the temporoparietal junction and inferior frontal gyrus.
The findings are in line with research covered by PsyPost earlier in 2026, which found that engaging in shared activities together produces greater interpersonal neural synchrony than doing them alone, though that study measured brain alignment during shared music listening among friends rather than interactive drawing across different generations.
Tracking the brain alignment across the six weeks presented an unexpected pattern. For the same-generation pairs, neural synchrony in the right temporoparietal junction increased as the weeks went on. For the intergenerational pairs, neural synchrony in this same area actually decreased over the six weeks.
“I was initially surprised to see synchrony levels decrease for intergenerational dyads,” Moffat explained. “My assumption that we would see increases in synchrony was based on the existing studies comparing strangers, friends, and romantic partners who attend a single session. In these studies, the closer people are to one another, the more synchrony they tend to show.”
The authors suggest that this divergence might reflect how different age pairs integrate social information. “The main takeaway from our study is that the way in which people’s brains synchronize during cooperation depends on who they’re interacting with and the common ground shared by the interacting people,” Moffat said. Because synchrony is believed to reflect how fluently people can predict each other, it is amplified when prediction is less fluent.
Younger pairs might monitor each other’s attention more closely as they become familiar, leading to higher synchrony. As Moffat noted, “they may engage in unpredictable behaviors to keep the interactions interesting and engaging.” In contrast, mixed-generation pairs might require less active monitoring of their partner’s attention once they establish a comfortable routine. “As older and younger people become better acquainted and form more common ground, they can predict each other more fluently and we see reductions in synchrony between brains in certain brain regions,” she added.
The researchers also noticed relationships between the physical brain data and the survey responses. Across all the pairs, reporting higher social closeness predicted an increase in synchrony between the inferior frontal gyrus and the temporoparietal junction. Pairs with more similar levels of loneliness showed greater synchrony in the inferior frontal gyrus when drawing together, which might indicate that sharing a similar social mindset shapes how easily two people coordinate their attention.
One common misconception to avoid is the assumption that more synchrony is always better. “If we start from the standpoint that synchrony increases when predicting another person’s actions is more challenging, it’s probable that excessively high levels of synchrony indicate excessive challenge and that very low levels may indicate a lack of engagement,” Moffat explained. Instead, a “happy medium might be optimal,” where navigating different levels of predictability keeps people socially fit.
There are a few other things to keep in mind about this study. The brain scans targeted specific areas associated with social processing and attention, so the results do not capture activity across the entire brain. The experiment also specifically restricted verbal communication during the drawing tasks, meaning brain alignment might look different if the pairs were talking freely.
Additionally, the study only compared mixed-generation pairs to young-adult pairs. The researchers did not include a group of two older adults, which means some of the differences observed between the groups might relate to general age-related brain changes rather than the specific dynamic of mixing generations. Technical issues also caused a few sensors to fail during the experiment, slightly reducing the amount of data available for the right side of the brain.
Future studies could explore whether other types of common ground, such as shared cultural backgrounds or long-term hobbies, shape brain synchronization over time. Expanding this research into larger group settings could also provide a better understanding of how community arts programs physically benefit participants.
Moffat and her colleagues plan to expand on these findings by analyzing the other behavioral data they collected. “Alongside the recordings of brain activity, we also recorded a multitude of other signals including motion capture of body movements, performance on collaborative games and puzzles, the actual drawings that the participants co-created, as well as participants’ subjective experiences,” she said. “Our next steps are to analyze the other signals and to bring them together to understand how social connections form from a holistic perspective.”
The study, “Social interactions between people of same and different generations shape longitudinal changes in interpersonal neural synchrony, loneliness, and social connection,” was authored by Ryssa Moffat, Guillaume Dumas, and Emily S. Cross.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #IntergenerationalBonds #BrainSynchrony #SocialNeuroscience #LonelinessReduction #GenerationalBridge #Neuroimaging #InterpersonalNeuralSynchrony #CreativeCollaboration #DTMBrainResearch #PLOSBiology
-
DATE: September 12, 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: Tracking brain waves reveals a surprising twist in how different generations form social bonds
Getting to know someone across multiple encounters can ease feelings of loneliness, and new research indicates that these budding relationships physically synchronize brain activity in unexpected ways. A new study, published in PLOS Biology, suggests that when younger and older adults regularly participate in creative activities together, their brains coordinate differently over time compared to pairs of the same age. Over six weeks of collaborative drawing, people of different generations showed decreasing neural synchronization, while same-age peers showed increasing synchronization, even as both groups reported feeling closer to their partners.
People of all ages experience perceived social isolation, and community programs that mix generations are a popular way to combat these feelings of loneliness. These programs rely on the idea that repeated interactions foster meaningful social bonds. However, the physical brain changes that happen as these relationships form are mostly unknown to scientists.
“As the global population ages, and with social isolation acknowledged as a global health risk, it is critical to understand how social bonds form between people from the same and different generations,” Ryssa Moffat, a postdoctoral researcher at ETH Zurich’s Social Brain Sciences Lab, told PsyPost. “My motivation to study social interactions between seniors and young adults grew from positive experiences getting to know seniors around the world. The idea for this project really gained momentum when I read statistics about the growing proportion of older adults globally and learned about the risks of loneliness and social isolation.”
To study these physical changes in real time, scientists use a technique called functional near-infrared spectroscopy. This involves participants wearing a flexible cap embedded with sensors that shine safe levels of light through the scalp to measure changes in blood flow in specific brain areas. This tool allows researchers to track interpersonal neural synchrony, which is the extent to which two people’s brain activity aligns in time while they interact.
Researchers pay special attention to two specific brain regions during social tasks. The first is the temporoparietal junction, an area near the ears that helps people process social information and understand others’ perspectives. The second is the inferior frontal gyrus, an area near the temples involved in paying attention to the same thing as a partner.
A progression of recent research provides evidence that social bonds shift brain-to-brain dynamics as relationships unfold. For instance, a 2022 meta-analysis found that working together on a cooperative task consistently synchronizes the frontal and temporoparietal brain regions. This aligns with research covered by PsyPost in 2024, which found that brain synchronization between humans and dogs increases as they become more familiar with each other over several days.
In human relationships, a 2024 experiment indicated that brain synchrony between two people naturally shifts over the course of a conversation depending on whether they are friends or strangers. Building on this evidence, the authors of a 2024 review proposed that using mobile brain scanning to track neural alignment across repeated sessions is essential for understanding how social bonds develop across generations. The new research, led by Moffat and Emily S. Cross, put this concept into practice.
The researchers recruited 61 pairs of strangers from the community. They formed 31 intergenerational pairs, consisting of one younger adult and one adult aged 69 or older, and 30 same-generation pairs made up of two younger adults. The pairs met once a week for six weeks to complete a creative drawing program.
At the start of each session, the participants filled out surveys measuring their current feelings of loneliness, their sense of closeness to their drawing partner, and their attitudes toward people of different age groups. After completing the surveys, researchers fitted the participants with the sensor caps.
The pairs then completed three separate drawing tasks using oil pastels, lasting five minutes each. They were instructed not to talk during the drawing portion. For the first drawing, they worked independently, separated by a visual divider. For the next two drawings, the divider was removed and the pair worked together on a single piece of paper. The sessions concluded with a short puzzle or game.
“It is very exciting to have mapped how synchrony emerges among younger and older adults for the first time,” Moffat said. She noted that they were able “to show how patterns of synchrony change across repeated encounters with information from each encounter, instead of just the first and the last encounter.”
Over the six weeks, feelings of loneliness dropped by about 1 percent per session for both groups. Feelings of social closeness increased by about 4 percent per session, indicating that the program successfully fostered social bonds. “These small but robust changes were observed for same-generation pairs and intergenerational pairs alike,” Moffat noted. The intergenerational pairs generally reported feeling less lonely than the same-generation pairs, and they held more positive attitudes toward other generations.
When analyzing the brain data from all the sessions combined, the researchers found that interpersonal neural synchrony was greater when the pairs drew together compared to when they drew alone. This brain alignment was especially high in the temporoparietal junction and inferior frontal gyrus.
The findings are in line with research covered by PsyPost earlier in 2026, which found that engaging in shared activities together produces greater interpersonal neural synchrony than doing them alone, though that study measured brain alignment during shared music listening among friends rather than interactive drawing across different generations.
Tracking the brain alignment across the six weeks presented an unexpected pattern. For the same-generation pairs, neural synchrony in the right temporoparietal junction increased as the weeks went on. For the intergenerational pairs, neural synchrony in this same area actually decreased over the six weeks.
“I was initially surprised to see synchrony levels decrease for intergenerational dyads,” Moffat explained. “My assumption that we would see increases in synchrony was based on the existing studies comparing strangers, friends, and romantic partners who attend a single session. In these studies, the closer people are to one another, the more synchrony they tend to show.”
The authors suggest that this divergence might reflect how different age pairs integrate social information. “The main takeaway from our study is that the way in which people’s brains synchronize during cooperation depends on who they’re interacting with and the common ground shared by the interacting people,” Moffat said. Because synchrony is believed to reflect how fluently people can predict each other, it is amplified when prediction is less fluent.
Younger pairs might monitor each other’s attention more closely as they become familiar, leading to higher synchrony. As Moffat noted, “they may engage in unpredictable behaviors to keep the interactions interesting and engaging.” In contrast, mixed-generation pairs might require less active monitoring of their partner’s attention once they establish a comfortable routine. “As older and younger people become better acquainted and form more common ground, they can predict each other more fluently and we see reductions in synchrony between brains in certain brain regions,” she added.
The researchers also noticed relationships between the physical brain data and the survey responses. Across all the pairs, reporting higher social closeness predicted an increase in synchrony between the inferior frontal gyrus and the temporoparietal junction. Pairs with more similar levels of loneliness showed greater synchrony in the inferior frontal gyrus when drawing together, which might indicate that sharing a similar social mindset shapes how easily two people coordinate their attention.
One common misconception to avoid is the assumption that more synchrony is always better. “If we start from the standpoint that synchrony increases when predicting another person’s actions is more challenging, it’s probable that excessively high levels of synchrony indicate excessive challenge and that very low levels may indicate a lack of engagement,” Moffat explained. Instead, a “happy medium might be optimal,” where navigating different levels of predictability keeps people socially fit.
There are a few other things to keep in mind about this study. The brain scans targeted specific areas associated with social processing and attention, so the results do not capture activity across the entire brain. The experiment also specifically restricted verbal communication during the drawing tasks, meaning brain alignment might look different if the pairs were talking freely.
Additionally, the study only compared mixed-generation pairs to young-adult pairs. The researchers did not include a group of two older adults, which means some of the differences observed between the groups might relate to general age-related brain changes rather than the specific dynamic of mixing generations. Technical issues also caused a few sensors to fail during the experiment, slightly reducing the amount of data available for the right side of the brain.
Future studies could explore whether other types of common ground, such as shared cultural backgrounds or long-term hobbies, shape brain synchronization over time. Expanding this research into larger group settings could also provide a better understanding of how community arts programs physically benefit participants.
Moffat and her colleagues plan to expand on these findings by analyzing the other behavioral data they collected. “Alongside the recordings of brain activity, we also recorded a multitude of other signals including motion capture of body movements, performance on collaborative games and puzzles, the actual drawings that the participants co-created, as well as participants’ subjective experiences,” she said. “Our next steps are to analyze the other signals and to bring them together to understand how social connections form from a holistic perspective.”
The study, “Social interactions between people of same and different generations shape longitudinal changes in interpersonal neural synchrony, loneliness, and social connection,” was authored by Ryssa Moffat, Guillaume Dumas, and Emily S. Cross.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #IntergenerationalBonds #BrainSynchrony #SocialNeuroscience #LonelinessReduction #GenerationalBridge #Neuroimaging #InterpersonalNeuralSynchrony #CreativeCollaboration #DTMBrainResearch #PLOSBiology
-
DATE: September 11, 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 scans reveal how recurrent depression leaves a lasting mark on the amygdala
Brain scans reveal that elevated activity in the emotion-processing center is tied to a person’s history of recurrent depression, rather than their current mood. The large study, published in Psychological Medicine, suggests that each major depressive episode may leave a lasting biological mark that increases future vulnerability to the disease.
Major depressive disorder is a common psychiatric condition that affects millions of people worldwide. Currently, psychiatrists diagnose the condition based on clinical interviews and patient history. There are no biological markers, like a blood test or a brain scan, to guide treatment choices.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe the brain in action by tracking blood-oxygen levels. When a brain region becomes active, it requires more oxygen, leading to localized changes in blood flow. The scanner detects these magnetic differences to map out neural activity.
Scientists often use this technology to study the amygdala, an almond-shaped structure deep inside the brain that processes fear and negative emotions. Early brain imaging research suggested that people with clinical depression have hyperactive amygdalae when looking at negative images. But a recent analysis of a massive dataset called the UK Biobank found no association between amygdala activity and current depression symptoms.
Jerke J. van den Berg, a biomedical researcher at the University of Amsterdam, and his colleagues designed a new study to better understand this discrepancy. They suspected that previous research might have missed the broader picture by only looking at a patient’s current mood. The researchers focused on a concept called the kindling theory.
The kindling theory proposes that an initial depressive episode makes the brain more sensitive to stress. After the brain has been sensitized by that first experience, it takes progressively less trauma to trigger a relapse. To test if the amygdala reflects this effect, the research team decided to look at a person’s lifetime history of depression, known as a trait, rather than their current symptoms, known as a state.
The researchers utilized data from the UK Biobank, a long-term population health study. They analyzed functional MRI scans from a subset of participants, totaling more than 11,000 individuals. While inside the scanner, participants completed a visual exercise called the Hariri task.
During the task, participants were shown a target image of an angry or fearful face at the top of a screen. They were then asked to select the matching face from two options at the bottom. This specific visual matching exercise is known to reliably stimulate the amygdala.
Brain activity can vary widely from person to person based on age, gender, and head movement during a scan. To account for this natural variation, the research team used a statistical technique called normative modeling. They analyzed scans from over 6,400 healthy participants to establish a baseline of expected amygdala activity. This works much like a pediatric growth chart, which maps out normal ranges for a child’s height and weight.
Next, the researchers evaluated how much the brain activity of nearly 5,000 other participants deviated from this baseline model. They categorized these individuals based on their self-reported mental health histories. The groups included healthy controls, people who had experienced a single depressive episode, those with moderate recurrence involving two to five episodes, and those with a high recurrence of six or more episodes.
For this initial cross-sectional analysis, the team focused strictly on participants who were currently in remission from their depression. The initial results were not statistically significant when the team analyzed the unaltered brain scans. However, once they applied the normative modeling technique to account for age and gender variations, a distinct pattern emerged.
The analysis revealed a measurable association between an individual’s history of depression and their amygdala response. Participants with a high recurrence of depressive episodes showed a heightened amygdala reaction to negative faces compared to healthy controls.
When the researchers looked at individuals actively experiencing a depressive episode, they found no distinct increase in brain activity compared to controls. This suggested that amygdala reactivity represents a long-term biological trait, rather than a temporary state reflecting current mood.
The researchers also wanted to know how medication might influence these brain signals. They noticed that a higher percentage of people in the severe recurrence group were taking antidepressants compared to those with a single past episode. They repeated their cross-sectional analysis, this time removing any participants who were actively taking antidepressant medications.
Excluding medicated individuals strengthened the observed differences between the healthy controls and the recurrent depression groups. The findings indicated that antidepressants might dampen the hyperactive amygdala signal associated with a history of recurrent depression. Because the medication reduced amygdala reactivity, including these participants in the initial data pool slightly masked the true extent of the brain changes.
To see how the brain changes over time, the team conducted a longitudinal analysis. They focused on a smaller group of participants who returned for a second brain scan roughly two and a half years after their initial visit. The researchers categorized these individuals based on whether they had suffered new depressive episodes between the two scans.
For this longitudinal evaluation, the team specifically analyzed people who were in remission during both of their imaging sessions. Participants who began the study with a history of just one depressive episode, but then experienced multiple new episodes before their second scan, exhibited an increase in amygdala reactivity over time.
This brain change supported the kindling theory. It suggests that new depressive episodes incrementally alter how the brain processes negative emotional information, leaving a biological mark even after symptoms fade.
The study relied on a large dataset, but the researchers noted that the effect sizes were relatively small. These findings do not mean that a functional MRI scan can be used to diagnose depression in a clinical setting right now. The results are not robust enough to predict an individual’s exact risk of a relapse based on a single brain scan.
The data collection methods also presented certain limitations. The study depended on participants accurately recalling their own mental health histories, which can introduce memory biases. People might misremember exactly how many distinct depressive episodes they experienced over the course of their lives.
The mental health questionnaires also combined treatments for nerves, anxiety, and depression into a single metric. Because of this, the researchers could not strictly isolate the effects of anxiety disorders from the effects of clinical depression. Future studies will need to track larger groups of symptomatic individuals over extended periods of time to untangle these variables.
Scientists hope that advancing neuroimaging techniques will eventually reduce the normal fluctuations seen in brain scans. Over time, mapping the biology of recurrent depression could help psychiatrists tailor treatments to a patient’s individual history, moving away from the current trial-and-error approach to prescribing medication.
The study, “Normative amygdala fMRI response during emotional processing as a trait of depressive symptoms in the UK Biobank,” was authored by Jerke J. van den Berg, Henricus G. Ruhé, Henk A. Marquering, Liesbeth Reneman, and Matthan W. A. Caan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #DepressionResearch #Amygdala #fMRI #Neuroimaging #KindlingTheory #UKBiobank #MentalHealthAwareness #BiomarkersInDepression #LongitudinalStudy #NeuroscienceAdvances
-
DATE: September 11, 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 scans reveal how recurrent depression leaves a lasting mark on the amygdala
Brain scans reveal that elevated activity in the emotion-processing center is tied to a person’s history of recurrent depression, rather than their current mood. The large study, published in Psychological Medicine, suggests that each major depressive episode may leave a lasting biological mark that increases future vulnerability to the disease.
Major depressive disorder is a common psychiatric condition that affects millions of people worldwide. Currently, psychiatrists diagnose the condition based on clinical interviews and patient history. There are no biological markers, like a blood test or a brain scan, to guide treatment choices.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe the brain in action by tracking blood-oxygen levels. When a brain region becomes active, it requires more oxygen, leading to localized changes in blood flow. The scanner detects these magnetic differences to map out neural activity.
Scientists often use this technology to study the amygdala, an almond-shaped structure deep inside the brain that processes fear and negative emotions. Early brain imaging research suggested that people with clinical depression have hyperactive amygdalae when looking at negative images. But a recent analysis of a massive dataset called the UK Biobank found no association between amygdala activity and current depression symptoms.
Jerke J. van den Berg, a biomedical researcher at the University of Amsterdam, and his colleagues designed a new study to better understand this discrepancy. They suspected that previous research might have missed the broader picture by only looking at a patient’s current mood. The researchers focused on a concept called the kindling theory.
The kindling theory proposes that an initial depressive episode makes the brain more sensitive to stress. After the brain has been sensitized by that first experience, it takes progressively less trauma to trigger a relapse. To test if the amygdala reflects this effect, the research team decided to look at a person’s lifetime history of depression, known as a trait, rather than their current symptoms, known as a state.
The researchers utilized data from the UK Biobank, a long-term population health study. They analyzed functional MRI scans from a subset of participants, totaling more than 11,000 individuals. While inside the scanner, participants completed a visual exercise called the Hariri task.
During the task, participants were shown a target image of an angry or fearful face at the top of a screen. They were then asked to select the matching face from two options at the bottom. This specific visual matching exercise is known to reliably stimulate the amygdala.
Brain activity can vary widely from person to person based on age, gender, and head movement during a scan. To account for this natural variation, the research team used a statistical technique called normative modeling. They analyzed scans from over 6,400 healthy participants to establish a baseline of expected amygdala activity. This works much like a pediatric growth chart, which maps out normal ranges for a child’s height and weight.
Next, the researchers evaluated how much the brain activity of nearly 5,000 other participants deviated from this baseline model. They categorized these individuals based on their self-reported mental health histories. The groups included healthy controls, people who had experienced a single depressive episode, those with moderate recurrence involving two to five episodes, and those with a high recurrence of six or more episodes.
For this initial cross-sectional analysis, the team focused strictly on participants who were currently in remission from their depression. The initial results were not statistically significant when the team analyzed the unaltered brain scans. However, once they applied the normative modeling technique to account for age and gender variations, a distinct pattern emerged.
The analysis revealed a measurable association between an individual’s history of depression and their amygdala response. Participants with a high recurrence of depressive episodes showed a heightened amygdala reaction to negative faces compared to healthy controls.
When the researchers looked at individuals actively experiencing a depressive episode, they found no distinct increase in brain activity compared to controls. This suggested that amygdala reactivity represents a long-term biological trait, rather than a temporary state reflecting current mood.
The researchers also wanted to know how medication might influence these brain signals. They noticed that a higher percentage of people in the severe recurrence group were taking antidepressants compared to those with a single past episode. They repeated their cross-sectional analysis, this time removing any participants who were actively taking antidepressant medications.
Excluding medicated individuals strengthened the observed differences between the healthy controls and the recurrent depression groups. The findings indicated that antidepressants might dampen the hyperactive amygdala signal associated with a history of recurrent depression. Because the medication reduced amygdala reactivity, including these participants in the initial data pool slightly masked the true extent of the brain changes.
To see how the brain changes over time, the team conducted a longitudinal analysis. They focused on a smaller group of participants who returned for a second brain scan roughly two and a half years after their initial visit. The researchers categorized these individuals based on whether they had suffered new depressive episodes between the two scans.
For this longitudinal evaluation, the team specifically analyzed people who were in remission during both of their imaging sessions. Participants who began the study with a history of just one depressive episode, but then experienced multiple new episodes before their second scan, exhibited an increase in amygdala reactivity over time.
This brain change supported the kindling theory. It suggests that new depressive episodes incrementally alter how the brain processes negative emotional information, leaving a biological mark even after symptoms fade.
The study relied on a large dataset, but the researchers noted that the effect sizes were relatively small. These findings do not mean that a functional MRI scan can be used to diagnose depression in a clinical setting right now. The results are not robust enough to predict an individual’s exact risk of a relapse based on a single brain scan.
The data collection methods also presented certain limitations. The study depended on participants accurately recalling their own mental health histories, which can introduce memory biases. People might misremember exactly how many distinct depressive episodes they experienced over the course of their lives.
The mental health questionnaires also combined treatments for nerves, anxiety, and depression into a single metric. Because of this, the researchers could not strictly isolate the effects of anxiety disorders from the effects of clinical depression. Future studies will need to track larger groups of symptomatic individuals over extended periods of time to untangle these variables.
Scientists hope that advancing neuroimaging techniques will eventually reduce the normal fluctuations seen in brain scans. Over time, mapping the biology of recurrent depression could help psychiatrists tailor treatments to a patient’s individual history, moving away from the current trial-and-error approach to prescribing medication.
The study, “Normative amygdala fMRI response during emotional processing as a trait of depressive symptoms in the UK Biobank,” was authored by Jerke J. van den Berg, Henricus G. Ruhé, Henk A. Marquering, Liesbeth Reneman, and Matthan W. A. Caan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #DepressionResearch #Amygdala #fMRI #Neuroimaging #KindlingTheory #UKBiobank #MentalHealthAwareness #BiomarkersInDepression #LongitudinalStudy #NeuroscienceAdvances
-
DATE: September 11, 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 scans reveal how recurrent depression leaves a lasting mark on the amygdala
Brain scans reveal that elevated activity in the emotion-processing center is tied to a person’s history of recurrent depression, rather than their current mood. The large study, published in Psychological Medicine, suggests that each major depressive episode may leave a lasting biological mark that increases future vulnerability to the disease.
Major depressive disorder is a common psychiatric condition that affects millions of people worldwide. Currently, psychiatrists diagnose the condition based on clinical interviews and patient history. There are no biological markers, like a blood test or a brain scan, to guide treatment choices.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, allows researchers to observe the brain in action by tracking blood-oxygen levels. When a brain region becomes active, it requires more oxygen, leading to localized changes in blood flow. The scanner detects these magnetic differences to map out neural activity.
Scientists often use this technology to study the amygdala, an almond-shaped structure deep inside the brain that processes fear and negative emotions. Early brain imaging research suggested that people with clinical depression have hyperactive amygdalae when looking at negative images. But a recent analysis of a massive dataset called the UK Biobank found no association between amygdala activity and current depression symptoms.
Jerke J. van den Berg, a biomedical researcher at the University of Amsterdam, and his colleagues designed a new study to better understand this discrepancy. They suspected that previous research might have missed the broader picture by only looking at a patient’s current mood. The researchers focused on a concept called the kindling theory.
The kindling theory proposes that an initial depressive episode makes the brain more sensitive to stress. After the brain has been sensitized by that first experience, it takes progressively less trauma to trigger a relapse. To test if the amygdala reflects this effect, the research team decided to look at a person’s lifetime history of depression, known as a trait, rather than their current symptoms, known as a state.
The researchers utilized data from the UK Biobank, a long-term population health study. They analyzed functional MRI scans from a subset of participants, totaling more than 11,000 individuals. While inside the scanner, participants completed a visual exercise called the Hariri task.
During the task, participants were shown a target image of an angry or fearful face at the top of a screen. They were then asked to select the matching face from two options at the bottom. This specific visual matching exercise is known to reliably stimulate the amygdala.
Brain activity can vary widely from person to person based on age, gender, and head movement during a scan. To account for this natural variation, the research team used a statistical technique called normative modeling. They analyzed scans from over 6,400 healthy participants to establish a baseline of expected amygdala activity. This works much like a pediatric growth chart, which maps out normal ranges for a child’s height and weight.
Next, the researchers evaluated how much the brain activity of nearly 5,000 other participants deviated from this baseline model. They categorized these individuals based on their self-reported mental health histories. The groups included healthy controls, people who had experienced a single depressive episode, those with moderate recurrence involving two to five episodes, and those with a high recurrence of six or more episodes.
For this initial cross-sectional analysis, the team focused strictly on participants who were currently in remission from their depression. The initial results were not statistically significant when the team analyzed the unaltered brain scans. However, once they applied the normative modeling technique to account for age and gender variations, a distinct pattern emerged.
The analysis revealed a measurable association between an individual’s history of depression and their amygdala response. Participants with a high recurrence of depressive episodes showed a heightened amygdala reaction to negative faces compared to healthy controls.
When the researchers looked at individuals actively experiencing a depressive episode, they found no distinct increase in brain activity compared to controls. This suggested that amygdala reactivity represents a long-term biological trait, rather than a temporary state reflecting current mood.
The researchers also wanted to know how medication might influence these brain signals. They noticed that a higher percentage of people in the severe recurrence group were taking antidepressants compared to those with a single past episode. They repeated their cross-sectional analysis, this time removing any participants who were actively taking antidepressant medications.
Excluding medicated individuals strengthened the observed differences between the healthy controls and the recurrent depression groups. The findings indicated that antidepressants might dampen the hyperactive amygdala signal associated with a history of recurrent depression. Because the medication reduced amygdala reactivity, including these participants in the initial data pool slightly masked the true extent of the brain changes.
To see how the brain changes over time, the team conducted a longitudinal analysis. They focused on a smaller group of participants who returned for a second brain scan roughly two and a half years after their initial visit. The researchers categorized these individuals based on whether they had suffered new depressive episodes between the two scans.
For this longitudinal evaluation, the team specifically analyzed people who were in remission during both of their imaging sessions. Participants who began the study with a history of just one depressive episode, but then experienced multiple new episodes before their second scan, exhibited an increase in amygdala reactivity over time.
This brain change supported the kindling theory. It suggests that new depressive episodes incrementally alter how the brain processes negative emotional information, leaving a biological mark even after symptoms fade.
The study relied on a large dataset, but the researchers noted that the effect sizes were relatively small. These findings do not mean that a functional MRI scan can be used to diagnose depression in a clinical setting right now. The results are not robust enough to predict an individual’s exact risk of a relapse based on a single brain scan.
The data collection methods also presented certain limitations. The study depended on participants accurately recalling their own mental health histories, which can introduce memory biases. People might misremember exactly how many distinct depressive episodes they experienced over the course of their lives.
The mental health questionnaires also combined treatments for nerves, anxiety, and depression into a single metric. Because of this, the researchers could not strictly isolate the effects of anxiety disorders from the effects of clinical depression. Future studies will need to track larger groups of symptomatic individuals over extended periods of time to untangle these variables.
Scientists hope that advancing neuroimaging techniques will eventually reduce the normal fluctuations seen in brain scans. Over time, mapping the biology of recurrent depression could help psychiatrists tailor treatments to a patient’s individual history, moving away from the current trial-and-error approach to prescribing medication.
The study, “Normative amygdala fMRI response during emotional processing as a trait of depressive symptoms in the UK Biobank,” was authored by Jerke J. van den Berg, Henricus G. Ruhé, Henk A. Marquering, Liesbeth Reneman, and Matthan W. A. Caan.
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #DepressionResearch #Amygdala #fMRI #Neuroimaging #KindlingTheory #UKBiobank #MentalHealthAwareness #BiomarkersInDepression #LongitudinalStudy #NeuroscienceAdvances
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/654296/ Researchers explore the link between tau levels and depressive symptoms in older people #Aging #Alzheimer'sDisease #Brain #Depression #Éire #Health #IE #imaging #Ireland #Neuroimaging #Neuroscience #Protein #Research
-
DATE: August 23, 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: Survival of the wittiest: How humor and cleverness shaped human evolution
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
A new theoretical paper suggests that human cognitive and linguistic evolution was driven by early humans’ ability to be clever and humorous, an idea dubbed the “survival of the wittiest.” The analysis argues that the earliest stages of grammar provided a platform for verbal competition and sexual selection, gradually replacing physical violence with verbal agility. The research was published in PNAS Nexus.
For decades, discussions of human evolution have revolved around two dominant ideas. The first is Charles Darwin’s original concept of the survival of the fittest, which is often narrowly interpreted as physical strength or health. The second is the more recent hypothesis of the survival of the friendliest. This newer idea proposes that humans evolved primarily through selection for prosocial behavior and cooperation, which allowed early humans to form alliances and outcompete other groups.
Wayne State University linguist Ljiljana Progovac authored the new paper to offer an alternative viewpoint. Progovac argues that physical fitness and friendliness fail to capture the unique role that language played in human development. Being physically strong or socially cooperative are traits shared with many other animals, including bonobos and other primates. These traits alone do not explain the rapid and unique expansion of human cognition.
According to Progovac, focusing entirely on friendliness misses the competitive nature of human interaction. Evolution involves both cooperation and ruthless competition. To fully understand how our ancestors evolved into modern humans, researchers must account for the biological advantage of eloquence, imagination, and the ability to outwit rivals. This perspective centers on sexual selection, where traits that make an individual attractive to mates are passed down through successive generations.
To build this argument, Progovac analyzed linguistic structures that represent the earliest stages of grammar. Language leaves no physical bones behind, so researchers must rely on a process called reverse engineering. By peeling back the complex layers of modern syntax, linguists can reconstruct the most foundational building blocks of language. These foundational structures are referred to as living fossils.
In modern languages, these fossils appear as simple two-word combinations consisting of one verb and one noun. Examples in English include words like “killjoy,” “crybaby,” “pickpocket,” and “scatterbrain.” These basic compounds do not rely on complex grammatical rules. They lack the structural layers required to distinguish between subjects and objects or to establish tense.
These simple word pairs are remarkably consistent across entirely different language families. Progovac notes that similar verb-noun compounds exist in languages ranging from Serbian to Berber to Twi. Historically, these basic constructions have been used to create highly vivid, metaphorical nicknames. Often, these nicknames are derogatory or humorous, describing a person based on a prominent action or physical trait.
Progovac proposes that as early humans developed these two-word abilities, a new form of social competition emerged. Individuals who could quickly invent clever, insulting, or amusing names had a distinct social advantage. They could demean rivals and impress potential mates without resorting to physical combat. This quick-wittedness represented an enormous cognitive leap, showing that early language was not just for sharing information but for social maneuvering.
The biological benefits of this verbal agility are still visible in human populations today. In many traditional oral societies across the globe, the most eloquent speakers hold the highest social status. Individuals who can manipulate words effectively gain access to political power and better reproductive success. The ability to charm a mate through humor and metaphorical language proved to be highly adaptive over time.
The paper also reviews experimental evidence from neuroimaging to support this evolutionary timeline. In a prior functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment, researchers tracked brain activity while participants read ancient verb-noun combinations compared to more modern, complex words. The older compounds evoked a more visceral reaction in the brain than modern words.
The experimenters found that processing the older, fossil-like compounds activated the right side of the fusiform gyrus in the brain. This specific brain region is directly involved in face perception and face recognition. Finding that the same brain area handles both face recognition and basic verb-noun processing supports the idea that the earliest grammar was closely tied to naming individuals and attaching linguistic labels to faces.
A related brain imaging experiment looked at how the brain processes simple sentences compared to hierarchical, modern sentences. The simpler sentences resulted in less activity in the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia. The basal ganglia are deep brain structures involved in motor control and learning.
Over the course of human evolution, the connections between the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia became much denser. The gradual mastery of more complex language likely drove the physical evolution of these brain networks. This aligns with genetic changes unique to humans and Neanderthals, including variations in the FOXP2 gene, which is associated with speech and language development.
By replacing physical fighting with verbal dueling, quick-wittedness played a direct role in reducing physical aggression among early humans. Humor and laughter act as natural stress antagonists, lowering cortisol levels in the body. This biological response connects the survival of the wittiest with the concept of human self-domestication. Over time, societies selected for individuals who could use words to defuse tension or assert dominance, leading to a species that prizes cognitive contests over lethal battles.
While this perspective offers a robust framework for understanding language origins, measuring the evolutionary impact of humor and wit relies heavily on reconstructing the past. Researchers must reverse-engineer modern languages and rely on brain imaging proxies, which cannot definitively prove how ancient ancestors behaved in their daily lives. Brain scans of modern humans only provide an approximation of ancient cognitive processes.
Future studies could test this hypothesis by examining how individual variations in cognitive conditions process these fossil grammars. By observing how brains with different neurological setups handle early grammatical structures, scientists can better map the exact neural pathways that allowed language to flourish.
The study, “Survival of the wittiest (not friendliest): The art and science behind human linguistic and cognitive evolution,” was authored by Ljiljana Progovac.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #SurvivaloftheWittiest #HumorEvolution #LanguageOrigins #EarlyGrammar #VerbalCompetition #SexualSelection #Neuroimaging # FOXP2 #SocialManeuvering #EvolutionOfCognition
-
DATE: August 23, 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: Survival of the wittiest: How humor and cleverness shaped human evolution
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
A new theoretical paper suggests that human cognitive and linguistic evolution was driven by early humans’ ability to be clever and humorous, an idea dubbed the “survival of the wittiest.” The analysis argues that the earliest stages of grammar provided a platform for verbal competition and sexual selection, gradually replacing physical violence with verbal agility. The research was published in PNAS Nexus.
For decades, discussions of human evolution have revolved around two dominant ideas. The first is Charles Darwin’s original concept of the survival of the fittest, which is often narrowly interpreted as physical strength or health. The second is the more recent hypothesis of the survival of the friendliest. This newer idea proposes that humans evolved primarily through selection for prosocial behavior and cooperation, which allowed early humans to form alliances and outcompete other groups.
Wayne State University linguist Ljiljana Progovac authored the new paper to offer an alternative viewpoint. Progovac argues that physical fitness and friendliness fail to capture the unique role that language played in human development. Being physically strong or socially cooperative are traits shared with many other animals, including bonobos and other primates. These traits alone do not explain the rapid and unique expansion of human cognition.
According to Progovac, focusing entirely on friendliness misses the competitive nature of human interaction. Evolution involves both cooperation and ruthless competition. To fully understand how our ancestors evolved into modern humans, researchers must account for the biological advantage of eloquence, imagination, and the ability to outwit rivals. This perspective centers on sexual selection, where traits that make an individual attractive to mates are passed down through successive generations.
To build this argument, Progovac analyzed linguistic structures that represent the earliest stages of grammar. Language leaves no physical bones behind, so researchers must rely on a process called reverse engineering. By peeling back the complex layers of modern syntax, linguists can reconstruct the most foundational building blocks of language. These foundational structures are referred to as living fossils.
In modern languages, these fossils appear as simple two-word combinations consisting of one verb and one noun. Examples in English include words like “killjoy,” “crybaby,” “pickpocket,” and “scatterbrain.” These basic compounds do not rely on complex grammatical rules. They lack the structural layers required to distinguish between subjects and objects or to establish tense.
These simple word pairs are remarkably consistent across entirely different language families. Progovac notes that similar verb-noun compounds exist in languages ranging from Serbian to Berber to Twi. Historically, these basic constructions have been used to create highly vivid, metaphorical nicknames. Often, these nicknames are derogatory or humorous, describing a person based on a prominent action or physical trait.
Progovac proposes that as early humans developed these two-word abilities, a new form of social competition emerged. Individuals who could quickly invent clever, insulting, or amusing names had a distinct social advantage. They could demean rivals and impress potential mates without resorting to physical combat. This quick-wittedness represented an enormous cognitive leap, showing that early language was not just for sharing information but for social maneuvering.
The biological benefits of this verbal agility are still visible in human populations today. In many traditional oral societies across the globe, the most eloquent speakers hold the highest social status. Individuals who can manipulate words effectively gain access to political power and better reproductive success. The ability to charm a mate through humor and metaphorical language proved to be highly adaptive over time.
The paper also reviews experimental evidence from neuroimaging to support this evolutionary timeline. In a prior functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment, researchers tracked brain activity while participants read ancient verb-noun combinations compared to more modern, complex words. The older compounds evoked a more visceral reaction in the brain than modern words.
The experimenters found that processing the older, fossil-like compounds activated the right side of the fusiform gyrus in the brain. This specific brain region is directly involved in face perception and face recognition. Finding that the same brain area handles both face recognition and basic verb-noun processing supports the idea that the earliest grammar was closely tied to naming individuals and attaching linguistic labels to faces.
A related brain imaging experiment looked at how the brain processes simple sentences compared to hierarchical, modern sentences. The simpler sentences resulted in less activity in the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia. The basal ganglia are deep brain structures involved in motor control and learning.
Over the course of human evolution, the connections between the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia became much denser. The gradual mastery of more complex language likely drove the physical evolution of these brain networks. This aligns with genetic changes unique to humans and Neanderthals, including variations in the FOXP2 gene, which is associated with speech and language development.
By replacing physical fighting with verbal dueling, quick-wittedness played a direct role in reducing physical aggression among early humans. Humor and laughter act as natural stress antagonists, lowering cortisol levels in the body. This biological response connects the survival of the wittiest with the concept of human self-domestication. Over time, societies selected for individuals who could use words to defuse tension or assert dominance, leading to a species that prizes cognitive contests over lethal battles.
While this perspective offers a robust framework for understanding language origins, measuring the evolutionary impact of humor and wit relies heavily on reconstructing the past. Researchers must reverse-engineer modern languages and rely on brain imaging proxies, which cannot definitively prove how ancient ancestors behaved in their daily lives. Brain scans of modern humans only provide an approximation of ancient cognitive processes.
Future studies could test this hypothesis by examining how individual variations in cognitive conditions process these fossil grammars. By observing how brains with different neurological setups handle early grammatical structures, scientists can better map the exact neural pathways that allowed language to flourish.
The study, “Survival of the wittiest (not friendliest): The art and science behind human linguistic and cognitive evolution,” was authored by Ljiljana Progovac.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #SurvivaloftheWittiest #HumorEvolution #LanguageOrigins #EarlyGrammar #VerbalCompetition #SexualSelection #Neuroimaging # FOXP2 #SocialManeuvering #EvolutionOfCognition
-
DATE: August 23, 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: Survival of the wittiest: How humor and cleverness shaped human evolution
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
A new theoretical paper suggests that human cognitive and linguistic evolution was driven by early humans’ ability to be clever and humorous, an idea dubbed the “survival of the wittiest.” The analysis argues that the earliest stages of grammar provided a platform for verbal competition and sexual selection, gradually replacing physical violence with verbal agility. The research was published in PNAS Nexus.
For decades, discussions of human evolution have revolved around two dominant ideas. The first is Charles Darwin’s original concept of the survival of the fittest, which is often narrowly interpreted as physical strength or health. The second is the more recent hypothesis of the survival of the friendliest. This newer idea proposes that humans evolved primarily through selection for prosocial behavior and cooperation, which allowed early humans to form alliances and outcompete other groups.
Wayne State University linguist Ljiljana Progovac authored the new paper to offer an alternative viewpoint. Progovac argues that physical fitness and friendliness fail to capture the unique role that language played in human development. Being physically strong or socially cooperative are traits shared with many other animals, including bonobos and other primates. These traits alone do not explain the rapid and unique expansion of human cognition.
According to Progovac, focusing entirely on friendliness misses the competitive nature of human interaction. Evolution involves both cooperation and ruthless competition. To fully understand how our ancestors evolved into modern humans, researchers must account for the biological advantage of eloquence, imagination, and the ability to outwit rivals. This perspective centers on sexual selection, where traits that make an individual attractive to mates are passed down through successive generations.
To build this argument, Progovac analyzed linguistic structures that represent the earliest stages of grammar. Language leaves no physical bones behind, so researchers must rely on a process called reverse engineering. By peeling back the complex layers of modern syntax, linguists can reconstruct the most foundational building blocks of language. These foundational structures are referred to as living fossils.
In modern languages, these fossils appear as simple two-word combinations consisting of one verb and one noun. Examples in English include words like “killjoy,” “crybaby,” “pickpocket,” and “scatterbrain.” These basic compounds do not rely on complex grammatical rules. They lack the structural layers required to distinguish between subjects and objects or to establish tense.
These simple word pairs are remarkably consistent across entirely different language families. Progovac notes that similar verb-noun compounds exist in languages ranging from Serbian to Berber to Twi. Historically, these basic constructions have been used to create highly vivid, metaphorical nicknames. Often, these nicknames are derogatory or humorous, describing a person based on a prominent action or physical trait.
Progovac proposes that as early humans developed these two-word abilities, a new form of social competition emerged. Individuals who could quickly invent clever, insulting, or amusing names had a distinct social advantage. They could demean rivals and impress potential mates without resorting to physical combat. This quick-wittedness represented an enormous cognitive leap, showing that early language was not just for sharing information but for social maneuvering.
The biological benefits of this verbal agility are still visible in human populations today. In many traditional oral societies across the globe, the most eloquent speakers hold the highest social status. Individuals who can manipulate words effectively gain access to political power and better reproductive success. The ability to charm a mate through humor and metaphorical language proved to be highly adaptive over time.
The paper also reviews experimental evidence from neuroimaging to support this evolutionary timeline. In a prior functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment, researchers tracked brain activity while participants read ancient verb-noun combinations compared to more modern, complex words. The older compounds evoked a more visceral reaction in the brain than modern words.
The experimenters found that processing the older, fossil-like compounds activated the right side of the fusiform gyrus in the brain. This specific brain region is directly involved in face perception and face recognition. Finding that the same brain area handles both face recognition and basic verb-noun processing supports the idea that the earliest grammar was closely tied to naming individuals and attaching linguistic labels to faces.
A related brain imaging experiment looked at how the brain processes simple sentences compared to hierarchical, modern sentences. The simpler sentences resulted in less activity in the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia. The basal ganglia are deep brain structures involved in motor control and learning.
Over the course of human evolution, the connections between the Broca’s area and the basal ganglia became much denser. The gradual mastery of more complex language likely drove the physical evolution of these brain networks. This aligns with genetic changes unique to humans and Neanderthals, including variations in the FOXP2 gene, which is associated with speech and language development.
By replacing physical fighting with verbal dueling, quick-wittedness played a direct role in reducing physical aggression among early humans. Humor and laughter act as natural stress antagonists, lowering cortisol levels in the body. This biological response connects the survival of the wittiest with the concept of human self-domestication. Over time, societies selected for individuals who could use words to defuse tension or assert dominance, leading to a species that prizes cognitive contests over lethal battles.
While this perspective offers a robust framework for understanding language origins, measuring the evolutionary impact of humor and wit relies heavily on reconstructing the past. Researchers must reverse-engineer modern languages and rely on brain imaging proxies, which cannot definitively prove how ancient ancestors behaved in their daily lives. Brain scans of modern humans only provide an approximation of ancient cognitive processes.
Future studies could test this hypothesis by examining how individual variations in cognitive conditions process these fossil grammars. By observing how brains with different neurological setups handle early grammatical structures, scientists can better map the exact neural pathways that allowed language to flourish.
The study, “Survival of the wittiest (not friendliest): The art and science behind human linguistic and cognitive evolution,” was authored by Ljiljana Progovac.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/survival-of-the-wittiest-how-humor-and-cleverness-shaped-human-evolution/
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #SurvivaloftheWittiest #HumorEvolution #LanguageOrigins #EarlyGrammar #VerbalCompetition #SexualSelection #Neuroimaging # FOXP2 #SocialManeuvering #EvolutionOfCognition
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/646720/ Two distinct types of brain tissue work together to support cognition in older adults #Aging #Brain #Cortex #dementia #Éire #Health #IE #inflammation #Ireland #Language #medicine #Nerve #Neuroimaging #Research
-
Automated MRI system improves improves evaluation of experimental stroke therapies
Researchers from the Mark and Mary Stevens Neuroimaging and Informatics Institute (Stevens INI) at the Keck School of…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #Artificialintelligence #AU #Australia #Blood #Brain #Imaging #IschemicStroke #medicine #Neuroimaging #Neuroscience #Preclinical #research #Software #Stroke
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/853420/ -
Automated MRI system improves improves evaluation of experimental stroke therapies
Researchers from the Mark and Mary Stevens Neuroimaging and Informatics Institute (Stevens INI) at the Keck School of…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #Artificialintelligence #AU #Australia #Blood #Brain #Imaging #IschemicStroke #medicine #Neuroimaging #Neuroscience #Preclinical #research #Software #Stroke
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/853420/ -
https://www.europesays.com/ie/619959/ Study connects late-life psychosis to abnormal tau protein buildup #Alzheimer'sDisease #Brain #dementia #Éire #Health #IE #Ireland #Neurodegeneration #Neuroimaging #Pathology #PositronEmissionTomography #Protein #Psychiatry #Psychosis #Research #Technology #Tomography
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/618812/ New AI model generates detailed maps of aging in brain regions #Aging #Alzheimer'sDisease #ArtificialIntelligence #Biomarker #Brain #CognitiveFunction #DeepLearning #dementia #Éire #Gerontology #Health #IE #imaging #Ireland #Laboratory #MagneticResonanceImaging #Neurodegeneration #Neuroimaging #Research
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/617476/ Persistent financial hardship tracks with poorer memory and processing speed by midlife #Aging #Brain #Chronic #CognitiveFunction #dementia #education #Éire #Genetic #Health #IE #imaging #Ireland #Neuroimaging #Research #Syndrome
-
NIH grant funds study on stroke-related urinary incontinence
Urinary incontinence is a common but frequently overlooked consequence of stroke. Now, researchers from the Mark and Mary…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #AU #Australia #Bladder #Brain #FunctionalMRI #Imaging #Incontinence #medicine #Nerve #Neuroimaging #Neurology #neuromodulation #research #SpinalCordStimulation #Stroke #Surgery #therapy #urinaryincontinence #Urology
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/827788/ -
NIH grant funds study on stroke-related urinary incontinence
Urinary incontinence is a common but frequently overlooked consequence of stroke. Now, researchers from the Mark and Mary…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #AU #Australia #Bladder #Brain #FunctionalMRI #Imaging #Incontinence #medicine #Nerve #Neuroimaging #Neurology #neuromodulation #research #SpinalCordStimulation #Stroke #Surgery #therapy #urinaryincontinence #Urology
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/827788/ -
https://www.europesays.com/ie/607059/ NIH grant funds study on stroke-related urinary incontinence #Bladder #Brain #Éire #FunctionalMRI #Health #IE #imaging #Incontinence #Ireland #medicine #Nerve #Neuroimaging #neurology #neuromodulation #Research #SpinalCordStimulation #Stroke #Surgery #therapy #UrinaryIncontinence #Urology
-
https://www.europesays.com/it/598087/ Depressione, ansia e altri disturbi: il cervello potrebbe leggere i sintomi meglio delle diagnosi #ansia #ApproccioTransdiagnostico #depressione #DisturboBipolare #Health #IT #Italia #Italy #neuroimaging #RetiCerebrali #RisonanzaMagneticaFunzionale #Salute #schizofrenia #SintomiEsternalizzanti #SintomiInternalizzanti
-
https://www.europesays.com/uk/1101166/ Fish oil supplementation during pregnancy changes two childhood brain metabolic markers #asthma #Blood #brain #Children #Diagnostic #FattyAcids #fish #FishOil #Health #Imaging #MagneticResonanceImaging #metabolism #neuroimaging #Nutrition #oxygen #Placebo #Pregnancy #prenatal #Psychiatry #QualityControl #Research #UK #UnitedKingdom
-
Fish oil supplementation during pregnancy changes two childhood brain metabolic markers
A decade after mothers received EPA- and DHA-rich fish oil, MRI scans revealed subtle metabolic differences in t…
#NewsBeep #News #Nutrition #Asthma #Blood #Brain #children #Diagnostic #FattyAcids #Fish #fishoil #Health #Imaging #MagneticResonanceImaging #Metabolism #Neuroimaging #Oxygen #Placebo #Pregnancy #prenatal #Psychiatry #QualityControl #research #UK #UnitedKingdom
https://www.newsbeep.com/uk/701694/ -
Fish oil supplementation during pregnancy changes two childhood brain metabolic markers
A decade after mothers received EPA- and DHA-rich fish oil, MRI scans revealed subtle metabolic differences in their…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #Asthma #AU #Australia #Blood #Brain #Children #Diagnostic #FattyAcids #Fish #fishoil #Imaging #MagneticResonanceImaging #Metabolism #Neuroimaging #Nutrition #oxygen #Placebo #pregnancy #Prenatal #psychiatry #QualityControl #research
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/811524/ -
Fish oil supplementation during pregnancy changes two childhood brain metabolic markers
A decade after mothers received EPA- and DHA-rich fish oil, MRI scans revealed subtle metabolic differences in their…
#NewsBeep #News #Health #Asthma #AU #Australia #Blood #Brain #Children #Diagnostic #FattyAcids #Fish #fishoil #Imaging #MagneticResonanceImaging #Metabolism #Neuroimaging #Nutrition #oxygen #Placebo #pregnancy #Prenatal #psychiatry #QualityControl #research
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/811524/ -
https://www.europesays.com/ie/594462/ Fish oil supplementation during pregnancy changes two childhood brain metabolic markers #Asthma #blood #Brain #children #Diagnostic #Éire #FattyAcids #fish #FishOil #Health #IE #imaging #Ireland #MagneticResonanceImaging #Metabolism #Neuroimaging #Nutrition #Oxygen #Placebo #Pregnancy #Prenatal #Psychiatry #QualityControl #Research
-
https://www.europesays.com/at/280627/ Diätfett und Hirnschwund: Studie zeigt gegenläufige Effekte je nach Kognition #AI #Alzheimer #Apoe #ARTIFICIALINTELLIGENCE #AT #Austria #Biomarker #Datenanalyse #Demenz #Ernährung #Fett #Gehirn #Geist #Gesundheit #Health #Hirn #Hirnschwund #KI #KünstlicheIntelligenz #Longitudinal #MRT #Neuroimaging #Neurologie #Neuroscience #Neurowissenschaften #Österreich #Temporal #Ventrikel
-
https://www.europesays.com/ie/590964/ Tau buildup in progressive supranuclear palsy alters brain networks linked to thinking and behavior #Brain #Cortex #dementia #Éire #eye #Health #IE #Ireland #NeurodegenerativeDisease #NeurodegenerativeDiseases #Neuroimaging #Pathology #ProgressiveSupranuclearPalsy #Protein #Research #TauProtein #Technology
-
DATE: July 16, 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: Genetic risk for cannabis use disorder linked to brain differences in youth
URL: https://www.psypost.org/genetic-risk-for-cannabis-use-disorder-linked-to-brain-differences-in-youth/
A person’s genetic risk for developing a cannabis addiction is associated with structural brain differences during adolescence, even in individuals who have never struggled with substance abuse. The finding indicates that some brain variations previously attributed to marijuana use might partly originate from an inherited biological predisposition. The study was published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology.
Bipolar disorder is a severe mental health condition characterized by dramatic shifts in mood, energy, and activity levels. People with the condition experience intense emotional states known as mood episodes, which can include periods of extreme elation or irritability, known as mania, and periods of deep sadness, known as depression. The condition often emerges during the teenage years and is a leading cause of functional disability among youth globally.
Teenagers with bipolar disorder frequently face additional psychiatric challenges throughout their schooling and home lives. Research shows that about 30 percent of youth diagnosed with bipolar disorder also have a co-occurring substance use disorder. Cannabis use disorder ranks as the most common addiction in this specific clinical group. Youth with bipolar disorder use cannabis at higher rates than the general population and face an elevated risk of developing a long-term dependency on the drug.
Heavy cannabis use has been repeatedly linked to worse outcomes for individuals with bipolar disorder. These negative impacts include a higher risk of suicide, a delayed recovery process, and an increased likelihood of experiencing psychosis. Past brain imaging studies have also noted structural differences in the brains of teenagers who regularly consume cannabis, both with and without mood disorders. The exact nature of these differences has varied across different observational reports.
Some research points to larger gray matter volume in certain brain regions among users, while other reports document smaller volumes in those same areas. Because most of these studies observe people at a single point in time, it is difficult to determine whether cannabis changes the brain or if people with preexisting brain differences are simply more likely to use the drug. To separate cause from effect in these brain measurements, scientists sometimes examine genetics. Addiction involves inherited physical traits, and modern genetic testing allows researchers to measure a person’s underlying vulnerability to an addiction before it ever develops.
Scientists do this using an advanced mathematical tool called a polygenic risk score. Unlike older tests that look for a single faulty gene, a polygenic risk score tallies up thousands of tiny genetic variations across a person’s entire DNA sequence. By comparing these variations against data from people who have a condition, researchers can calculate a customized score that estimates an individual’s overall genetic likelihood of developing that specific problem. Alysha Sultan, a researcher at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, recognized an opportunity to apply this genetics tool to brain imaging.
Sultan and her colleagues set out to discover if a high polygenic risk score for cannabis use disorder correlated with brain structure in youths, regardless of their developmental history of drug use. The researchers recruited 114 teenagers and young adults between the ages of 13 and 20. The sample included 67 youths who had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder at a specialty psychiatric clinic. The remaining 47 participants were healthy controls randomly recruited from the community who had no personal or family history of major psychiatric disorders.
The team asked all participants to provide a saliva sample. From this saliva, the scientists extracted DNA and scanned the genetic sequences to calculate a specific polygenic risk score for cannabis use disorder for every participant. To create the scoring baseline, they relied on data from a preexisting study of adults that mapped the genetic profiles of tens of thousands of people with a diagnosed cannabis dependency.
After collecting the genetic data, the researchers brought the participants in for brain imaging. They used a magnetic resonance imaging machine, commonly known as an MRI, to capture high-resolution pictures of the participants’ brains. The team focused on the cerebral cortex, the folded outer layer of the brain that manages complex thought, memory, and perception.
The researchers measured three specific physical traits of the cerebral cortex: volume, surface area, and thickness. Volume refers to the total amount of space a specific brain region takes up, while surface area measures the expanse of the folded outer layer. Thickness gauges the physical depth of the gray matter on that layer. The scientists wrote statistical models to compare these structural measurements against the participants’ genetic risk scores, accounting for variables like age, sex, and overall head size.
The neuroimaging data revealed a consistent physical pattern. Across the entire group of youths, a higher genetic risk score for cannabis use disorder matched up with localized reductions in brain size. The researchers observed lower total volume and lower surface area in a brain region called the right superior frontal gyrus. Located near the very top and front of the brain, the superior frontal gyrus is involved in higher cognitive functions such as spatial processing and working memory, which is the ability to hold and manipulate information in the mind over short periods.
The researchers also noticed a smaller surface area in a region called the left paracentral lobule. This area rests near the top center of the brain and helps process sensory information from the body. These results were evident regardless of whether the youths had bipolar disorder or whether they had ever tried cannabis. The researchers ran specialized tests that completely excluded the participants who currently or previously had a cannabis use disorder, and the structural differences remained.
When the team split the participants by diagnosis, they found similar patterns among the healthy volunteers. Healthy teenagers with a higher genetic risk for the addiction exhibited lower brain volume and surface area in both the left and the right superior frontal gyrus.
The results among the participants diagnosed with bipolar disorder were not statistically significant when analyzed on their own. The researchers suspect this outcome relates to the vast biological complexities associated with bipolar disorder itself. The youths with the condition had high rates of anxiety and attention difficulties, took various psychiatric medications, and reported different medical histories. These competing factors may alter brain structure in their own localized ways, creating statistical noise in the data that masks the subtler differences linked strictly to the cannabis risk genes.
Sultan and her colleagues pointed out a few constraints to their investigation. Addiction involves similar genetic pathways across different types of substances, meaning people with a genetic liability for cannabis use disorder often share a generalized genetic vulnerability to alcohol or nicotine. The risk scores used in the study might reflect a broader tendency toward behavioral disinhibition rather than a strict vulnerability to cannabis alone. The genetic baselines used in the study also relied on data from individuals of European ancestry, meaning the relationships might differ for people of other ethnic backgrounds.
The initial findings offer a new way to interpret past neuroimaging research. Because a genetic predisposition alone corresponds with smaller frontal brain regions, some of the brain differences previously blamed on teen marijuana use might have existed before the drug use began. The scientists suggest that longer studies following the same teenagers into adulthood could help explain how inherited vulnerabilities shape the growing brain over time.
The study, “Association of polygenic risk for cannabis use disorder with brain structure among youth with and without bipolar disorder,” was authored by Alysha A. Sultan, Clement C. Zai, Kody G. Kennedy, L. Trevor Young, Bradley J. MacIntosh, and Benjamin I. Goldstein.
URL: https://www.psypost.org/genetic-risk-for-cannabis-use-disorder-linked-to-brain-differences-in-youth/
-------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #CannabisUseDisorder #GeneticRisk #BrainStructure #AdolescentBrain #PolygenicRiskScore #BipolarDisorder #Neuroimaging #FrontalGyrus #CerebralCortex #YouthMentalHealth
-
On the Emergence of Neuroforecasting
Knowledge in the neurosciences, theory and methodology, is increasingly applied to improve and deepen our understanding of consumer decision processes, affect and cognition, and behaviours, in a young field known as consumer neuroscience; practical implementation of this knowledge on consumers in marketing management is known as neuromarketing. Relevant specialisitations in the neurosciences include neuropsychology, neuroeconomics, and neurobiology. The research has largely focused on […]https://consumergateway.org/2026/07/13/on-the-emergence-of-neuroforecasting/
-
On the Emergence of Neuroforecasting
Knowledge in the neurosciences, theory and methodology, is increasingly applied to improve and deepen our understanding of consumer decision processes, affect and cognition, and behaviours, in a young field known as consumer neuroscience; practical implementation of this knowledge on consumers in marketing management is known as neuromarketing. Relevant specialisitations in the neurosciences include neuropsychology, neuroeconomics, and neurobiology. The research has largely focused on […]https://consumergateway.org/2026/07/13/on-the-emergence-of-neuroforecasting/
-
On the Emergence of Neuroforecasting
Knowledge in the neurosciences, theory and methodology, is increasingly applied to improve and deepen our understanding of consumer decision processes, affect and cognition, and behaviours, in a young field known as consumer neuroscience; practical implementation of this knowledge on consumers in marketing management is known as neuromarketing. Relevant specialisitations in the neurosciences include neuropsychology, neuroeconomics, and neurobiology. The research has largely focused on […]https://consumergateway.org/2026/07/13/on-the-emergence-of-neuroforecasting/
-
On the Emergence of Neuroforecasting
Knowledge in the neurosciences, theory and methodology, is increasingly applied to improve and deepen our understanding of consumer decision processes, affect and cognition, and behaviours, in a young field known as consumer neuroscience; practical implementation of this knowledge on consumers in marketing management is known as neuromarketing. Relevant specialisitations in the neurosciences include neuropsychology, neuroeconomics, and neurobiology. The research has largely focused on […]https://consumergateway.org/2026/07/13/on-the-emergence-of-neuroforecasting/
-
On the Emergence of Neuroforecasting
Knowledge in the neurosciences, theory and methodology, is increasingly applied to improve and deepen our understanding of consumer decision processes, affect and cognition, and behaviours, in a young field known as consumer neuroscience; practical implementation of this knowledge on consumers in marketing management is known as neuromarketing. Relevant specialisitations in the neurosciences include neuropsychology, neuroeconomics, and neurobiology. The research has largely focused on […]https://consumergateway.org/2026/07/13/on-the-emergence-of-neuroforecasting/
-
NeuroVFM trains a medical AI on 5 million uncurated brain scans without human labels
https://1ban.news/neurovfm-neuroimaging-foundation-model-vol-jepa/
#1ban #neurovfm #neuroimaging #foundation #model #tech -
A neuroimaging study revealed that a small subpopulation of individuals with schizophrenia who have a history of severe physical violence display heightened brain activity when anticipating punishment, rather than when receiving a reward or an actual punishment.
#Neuroscience #Psychiatry #Neuroimaging #Schizophrenia #sflorg
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/07/ns07062601.html -
A neuroimaging study revealed that a small subpopulation of individuals with schizophrenia who have a history of severe physical violence display heightened brain activity when anticipating punishment, rather than when receiving a reward or an actual punishment.
#Neuroscience #Psychiatry #Neuroimaging #Schizophrenia #sflorg
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/07/ns07062601.html -
A neuroimaging study revealed that a small subpopulation of individuals with schizophrenia who have a history of severe physical violence display heightened brain activity when anticipating punishment, rather than when receiving a reward or an actual punishment.
#Neuroscience #Psychiatry #Neuroimaging #Schizophrenia #sflorg
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/07/ns07062601.html -
A neuroimaging study revealed that a small subpopulation of individuals with schizophrenia who have a history of severe physical violence display heightened brain activity when anticipating punishment, rather than when receiving a reward or an actual punishment.
#Neuroscience #Psychiatry #Neuroimaging #Schizophrenia #sflorg
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/07/ns07062601.html -
A neuroimaging study revealed that a small subpopulation of individuals with schizophrenia who have a history of severe physical violence display heightened brain activity when anticipating punishment, rather than when receiving a reward or an actual punishment.
#Neuroscience #Psychiatry #Neuroimaging #Schizophrenia #sflorg
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/07/ns07062601.html -
Neuroimaging-derived biotypes of self-reported insomnia symptoms are differentially associated with affective symptoms
https://1ban.news/neuroimaging-biotypes-insomnia-affective-risk/
#1ban #neuroimaging #biotypes #insomnia #affective #sleep -
ggseg now draws brains without sf.
It installs without needing compiled GDAL, GEOS, or PROJ — so it runs on locked-down laptops, HPC clusters, and in the browser (webR/shinylive). Same geom_brain(), identical figures.
How & why 👉
-
ggseg now draws brains without sf.
It installs without needing compiled GDAL, GEOS, or PROJ — so it runs on locked-down laptops, HPC clusters, and in the browser (webR/shinylive). Same geom_brain(), identical figures.
How & why 👉
-
ggseg now draws brains without sf.
It installs without needing compiled GDAL, GEOS, or PROJ — so it runs on locked-down laptops, HPC clusters, and in the browser (webR/shinylive). Same geom_brain(), identical figures.
How & why 👉
-
ggseg now draws brains without sf.
It installs without needing compiled GDAL, GEOS, or PROJ — so it runs on locked-down laptops, HPC clusters, and in the browser (webR/shinylive). Same geom_brain(), identical figures.
How & why 👉
-
ggseg now draws brains without sf.
It installs without needing compiled GDAL, GEOS, or PROJ — so it runs on locked-down laptops, HPC clusters, and in the browser (webR/shinylive). Same geom_brain(), identical figures.
How & why 👉
-
Study finds no detectable short-term brain harm after one youth soccer season https://www.rawchili.com/5029387/ #Adolescents #Biochemistry #blood #brain #Neuroimaging #Soccer
-
Study finds no detectable short-term brain harm after one youth soccer season https://www.rawchili.com/5029387/ #Adolescents #Biochemistry #blood #brain #Neuroimaging #Soccer
-
At booth #39-40 today, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are demoing #fNIRS + #TMS, a powerful combination for brain stimulation research that gives you both the trigger and the response. Come, join us at 1 PM!
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!https://www.artinis-nirx.com/ohbm-2026-bordeaux #🧠 #OHBM2026 #BrainStimulation #Neuroscience #Neuroimaging
-
At booth #39-40 today, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are demoing #fNIRS + #TMS, a powerful combination for brain stimulation research that gives you both the trigger and the response. Come, join us at 1 PM!
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!https://www.artinis-nirx.com/ohbm-2026-bordeaux #🧠 #OHBM2026 #BrainStimulation #Neuroscience #Neuroimaging
-
At booth #39-40 today, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are demoing #fNIRS + #TMS, a powerful combination for brain stimulation research that gives you both the trigger and the response. Come, join us at 1 PM!
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!https://www.artinis-nirx.com/ohbm-2026-bordeaux #🧠 #OHBM2026 #BrainStimulation #Neuroscience #Neuroimaging
-
At booth #39-40 today, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are demoing #fNIRS + #TMS, a powerful combination for brain stimulation research that gives you both the trigger and the response. Come, join us at 1 PM!
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!https://www.artinis-nirx.com/ohbm-2026-bordeaux #🧠 #OHBM2026 #BrainStimulation #Neuroscience #Neuroimaging
-
At booth #39-40 today, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are demoing #fNIRS + #TMS, a powerful combination for brain stimulation research that gives you both the trigger and the response. Come, join us at 1 PM!
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!https://www.artinis-nirx.com/ohbm-2026-bordeaux #🧠 #OHBM2026 #BrainStimulation #Neuroscience #Neuroimaging
-
Today at booth #39-40, Artinis & @NIRx Medical Technologies are showing you live how #fNIRS and #fMRI complement each other in multimodal brain research, combining the precision of fMRI with the flexibility of fNIRS for a fuller picture of brain activity.
Visit booth #44 for:
🔹 APEX EEG + Brite fNIRS
🔹 SAGA EEG + NIRSport2 demos!Come say hi in Bordeaux! #🧠 #OHBM2026 #Neuroimaging #BrainResearch