Your Daily digest for PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

[Article Digests for Psychology & Social Work]

PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

 

(https://www.psypost.org/researchers-test-machine-learnings-potential-to-reveal-personality-traits-through-eye-tracking/) Researchers test machine learning’s potential to reveal personality traits through eye tracking
Nov 1st 2024, 10:00

A study in Russia has shown that machine-learning systems can predict certain personality traits in adolescents using eye-movement data with accuracy slightly better than chance. The research identified Machiavellianism and Extraversion as the most predictable traits. The study was published in (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308631) PLOS ONE.
Personality is a set of enduring traits, behaviors, and patterns of thinking that shape how individuals perceive, respond to, and interact with their environment and others. While there are many theories of human personality, the Big Five model is probably the most widely accepted.
This model describes an individual’s personality through five broad traits: Openness to Experience, which reflects curiosity, imagination, and a willingness to explore new ideas; Conscientiousness, involving self-discipline, organization, and responsibility toward achieving goals; Extraversion, capturing sociability, assertiveness, and a preference for stimulating environments; Agreeableness, indicating compassion, cooperation, and concern for others’ well-being; and Neuroticism, which describes emotional instability, including tendencies toward anxiety and mood swings.
More recently, scientists have proposed an additional set of three traits that describe the “darker” aspects of human personality. These traits, known as the Dark Triad, include Narcissism, characterized by grandiosity, a need for admiration, and entitlement; Machiavellianism, involving manipulativeness, deceit, and a focus on personal gain; and Psychopathy, marked by a lack of empathy, impulsivity, and antisocial behavior.
Study author Elina Tsigeman and her colleagues note that personality traits are most often assessed using self-reports, which are highly vulnerable to various forms of bias and even outright faking. Studies consistently show that individuals are generally able to manipulate their personality assessments when motivated to do so. Because of this, finding alternative ways to assess personality could help overcome these limitations.
These researchers wanted to know whether personality could be predicted using eye movement data. Eye-movement data refers to recorded eye patterns, such as fixations (where one’s gaze remains fixed on a point) and saccades (quick shifts between points of focus). These patterns reveal how individuals visually perceive their environment, what they pay attention to, and their overall observational behavior. Typically, this data is collected using specialized eye-tracking equipment, and recent technological advancements are making it easier and less invasive to capture.
The researchers recruited 35 Russian adolescents (average age of 14, with 30 participants ultimately included in the final analysis). The sample was predominantly male, with 20 males participating. Participants were required to have normal vision, as correction devices like glasses and contacts can interfere with eye-tracking accuracy.
To assess the participants’ personality traits, the researchers used the Big Five Inventory and the Short Dark Triad Questionnaire, two well-established self-report tools. After completing these questionnaires, each participant put on a head-mounted eye-tracker and, after calibration, was led by a researcher down a hallway to a museum filled with modern gadget exhibits. During the 10-minute museum visit, participants explored the displays freely, without specific instructions or guidance from the researcher, who waited nearby. The same hallway was used to return participants to the lab, with the researcher accompanying them on both legs of the journey.
Eye-movement data was collected throughout this process, with an average of 15–16 minutes recorded per participant (approximately 10.75 minutes in the museum and 4.86 minutes in the hallway). This data was then divided into three segments for analysis: hallway (or “Way”) data, museum data, and combined hallway + museum data.
To test the predictability of personality traits, the researchers applied multiple machine learning algorithms to the eye-movement data from each segment, using techniques like cross-validation to ensure reliable results. They assessed the performance of each algorithm on predicting both Big Five and Dark Triad traits. The results showed that some algorithms could make personality trait predictions that were statistically better than random chance. Notably, Machiavellianism and Extraversion emerged as the most accurately predicted traits, with other traits like Conscientiousness and Narcissism being less reliably predicted.
Interestingly, the data collected in the hallway had the highest predictive accuracy, followed by the museum data, with the combined data proving the least effective. The hallway environment might have enhanced prediction accuracy due to the presence of social cues and the participants’ interactions with the researcher. In contrast, in the museum setting, participants were left to interact with exhibits independently, possibly leading to more variable eye movements that were less influenced by consistent social stimuli.
Certain machine learning algorithms, such as Naive Bayes, Adaboost, and k-Nearest Neighbors, performed especially well, with accuracy up to 48% for some traits (compared to a random chance baseline of 33%). Other algorithms, like Logistic Regression and Random Forest, were less effective, possibly due to differences in how these models handle non-linear data—a common challenge in personality prediction research.
The study’s findings highlight the potential of eye-tracking as a tool for personality assessment, particularly in naturalistic settings, which may offer a more ecologically valid way to assess personality than traditional lab settings. However, it remains unclear how well these findings can be generalized to eye movement data collected in settings other than the specific hallway and museum used in the study, to other populations, or to different types of eye movement data. It is likely they cannot be fully generalized, and if so, the scientific and practical value of these findings may be limited.
Additionally, while cross-validation helps to ensure consistency, machine learning results can vary with changes in parameters or with new data, highlighting the need for standardized procedures in future studies.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308631) AI can see you: Machiavellianism and extraversion are reflected in eye-movements,” was authored by Elina Tsigeman, Viktoria Zemliak, Maxim Likhanov , Kostas A. Papageorgiou, and Yulia Kovas.

(https://www.psypost.org/neuroscience-research-sheds-light-on-ketamines-strange-effect-on-our-sense-of-touch/) Neuroscience research sheds light on ketamine’s strange effect on our sense of touch
Nov 1st 2024, 08:00

A new study published in (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-024-01906-2) Neuropsychopharmacology has revealed how the drug ketamine changes the way our brains process touch, especially the difference between touch from ourselves versus someone else. Researchers found that under ketamine, the brain struggles to make this distinction, suggesting that ketamine may blur the boundaries of self-perception. These findings offer new insights into how certain psychiatric symptoms related to self-awareness could be mirrored in the brain.
Ketamine is a medication originally developed as an anesthetic, but it has gained attention for its ability to produce rapid antidepressant effects, even in people who haven’t responded to traditional treatments. Ketamine is a dissociative drug that can create an altered state of consciousness, where individuals experience a separation from their usual sense of self.
At lower doses, ketamine is used in treating depression and chronic pain, while higher doses are used in medical anesthesia. Because it temporarily disrupts the brain’s usual processing, ketamine offers a unique way to study how certain psychiatric symptoms, especially those related to self-awareness and perception, might be simulated.
The motivation behind this new study comes from the fact that many psychiatric conditions, such as schizophrenia and dissociative disorders, involve disturbances in self-perception or self-boundaries. Such disruptions can significantly impact a person’s social functioning and mental well-being, yet they are challenging to study in a controlled setting. By using ketamine to induce a temporary change in self-awareness, researchers hoped to gain insight into how our brains normally distinguish between self-generated sensations and those coming from outside.
“In our lab, we are very interested in the ‘sense of self’ — the feeling of ‘being you.’ We know that this sense of self is likely anchored in the fact that we can perceive our own bodies,” said study author Reinoud Kaldewaij, a postdoctoral fellow at the (https://liu.se/en/research/csan) Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience at Linköping University.
“Touch, which reminds of us in a way of the border between our own body and the outside world, seems to play an important role in this. We also know that ketamine alters our general sense of self. Therefore, we expected that ketamine would also alter the way we perceive touch, especially the difference between touch generated by ourselves compared to touch from others.”
The study included 30 healthy participants between the ages of 19 and 39 who each underwent two separate sessions. In one session, participants received an intravenous infusion of ketamine, and in the other, they received a placebo (a saline solution), with the sessions occurring in a randomized and double-blind manner. This design ensured that neither the participants nor the researchers knew which infusion was being administered, minimizing biases and expectations. After each infusion, participants underwent a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan, which allowed researchers to observe and measure brain activity in real time as participants experienced different types of touch.
During the fMRI scans, participants engaged in a task that involved three types of touch: touching their own arm, being touched on the arm by a researcher, and stroking a soft object. These different conditions allowed the researchers to compare brain responses to self-generated touch, externally generated touch, and non-human touch. The self-other distinction was of particular interest, as it’s a key component of our sense of self and personal boundaries. Additionally, participants completed various assessments to gauge their levels of dissociation (a sense of disconnection from one’s self), awareness of bodily sensations, and comfort with social touch.
The study’s findings revealed that ketamine had a notable effect on how participants’ brains processed touch, especially touch generated by another person. In a typical (placebo) state, the brain’s right temporoparietal cortex—an area involved in distinguishing self-generated sensations from external ones—showed higher activity during externally generated touch than self-touch, which aligns with previous research.
However, during the ketamine session, this difference in brain activity was reduced, indicating that the brain was less able to distinguish between self-produced and other-produced touch. This effect was especially evident during the externally generated touch, where the neural response more closely resembled the response seen during self-touch. These findings suggest that ketamine blurs the brain’s ability to differentiate between self and other, leading to a reduced sense of self-boundaries.
Beyond the neural changes, ketamine also affected participants’ attitudes toward touch. During the ketamine session, participants showed a stronger inclination toward social touch, a shift that was linked to their decreased awareness of bodily sensations (interoceptive awareness). This suggests that under ketamine, individuals may feel less certain about the boundaries of their own body, potentially leading to an increased comfort with touch from others.
Interestingly, while ketamine altered the subjective and neural experiences of touch, it did not appear to affect basic touch sensitivity, as measured by the tactile detection thresholds for self- and other-generated touch.
“Ketamine changes the way we process touch from others in the brain, especially when we compare it to touch generated by ourselves,” Kaldewaij told PsyPost. “The signal becomes a bit weaker, and therefore a bit more like the signal we see when we touch ourselves. This may be (one of) the underlying reason(s) why people under the influence of ketamine experience a blurring of the sense of the self and a stronger connection with the outside world.”
The findings suggest an exciting path for future studies to explore how alterations in self-perception, brought about by substances like ketamine, might help address self-related challenges in mental health disorders. This line of research could eventually inform therapeutic strategies that harness sensory experiences, such as touch, to improve well-being for people who struggle with self-perception issues, bridging the worlds of sensory processing and mental health.
The study, “(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-024-01906-2) Ketamine reduces the neural distinction between self- and other-produced affective touch: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study,” was authored by Reinoud Kaldewaij, Paula C. Salamone, Adam Enmalm, Lars Östman, Michal Pietrzak, Hanna Karlsson, Andreas Löfberg, Emelie Gauffin, Martin Samuelsson, Sarah Gustavson, Andrea J. Capusan, Håkan Olausson, Markus Heilig, and Rebecca Boehme.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-study-links-social-network-size-to-support-for-political-violence/) New study links social network size to support for political violence
Nov 1st 2024, 06:00

A recent study published in (https://injepijournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40621-024-00540-2) Injury Epidemiology finds that the size of a person’s social network may be linked to their support for political violence in the United States. According to findings, people with either very few or very many close connections show a higher likelihood of endorsing violence as a means to achieve political goals. These findings suggest that both isolation and large social circles may play unexpected roles in political attitudes, particularly when paired with heavy social media use or distrust in government.
Previous studies have suggested that social networks can influence various types of violent behavior, but most research has focused outside the United States or on general violence rather than specifically politically motivated violence. The authors wanted to fill this knowledge gap by examining how social networks, which provide support, information, and a sense of belonging, might relate to political violence in a modern United States context.
“The threat of political violence is a growing concern in the United States, and we are still learning about salient risk factors,” said study author Julia P. Schleimer, a research data analyst at the (https://health.ucdavis.edu/vprp/) Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis Health.
“My colleagues and I were interested in studying social networks in relation to political violence risk because social networks are both theoretically and practically important. By that I mean, theory and prior research give us reason to expect that people with very few or very many strong social connections may be at greater risk for political violence, and, at the same time, social networks themselves are modifiable and can be the target of interventions to reduce risk.”
To investigate this, researchers conducted a cross-sectional survey with a representative sample of 8,620 adults from across the United States. The survey, administered in May and June 2022, sought to capture the range of strong social connections participants maintained and how this related to their attitudes toward various types of violence. Participants were recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, an online panel representative of the United States population, ensuring broad demographic diversity.
First, participants reported the number of strong social connections they maintained—defined as close relationships with personal or work-related individuals they communicated with regularly. These social networks ranged from zero strong connections to fifty or more. Next, participants were asked to reflect on their attitudes toward both general and political violence. Specifically, they were questioned about their support for violence in achieving political aims, their general justification of political violence, and their willingness to personally engage in political violence under certain conditions.
Participants also answered questions related to general non-political violence, which helped contextualize their stance on violence beyond strictly political motives. In addition to these primary questions, the researchers included factors that might influence the relationship between social network size and attitudes toward political violence, such as the use of social media as a major news source, perceptions of the government as a threat, and participants’ racial or ethnic backgrounds.
The results showed that both ends of the social network spectrum were linked to a higher likelihood of supporting or engaging in political violence. Those with no strong social connections were more than twice as likely to consider political violence justified compared to those with one to four strong connections. Participants with extensive social networks—defined as fifty or more connections—were also more likely than those with smaller networks to see political violence as justifiable in at least some situations. This group was also more likely to express personal willingness to use political violence.
These associations varied depending on participants’ use of social media for news, views on government, and racial or ethnic identity. For instance, participants with large social networks who relied heavily on social media as their primary news source showed higher support for and willingness to engage in political violence. Similarly, participants who lacked strong connections and identified as non-Hispanic white individuals tended to support political violence more than other demographic groups.
Additionally, the researchers found that participants who viewed the government as an adversary were more likely to endorse political violence, especially if they also had very large or no strong social connections. In contrast, participants who felt aligned with the government but reported low levels of social connection still tended to support political violence.
The study also highlighted the influence of social isolation and racial or ethnic marginalization, particularly among non-white participants, on views about political violence. Those with few connections but who identified as marginalized tended to express higher support for political violence, suggesting that social isolation and racial identity may compound feelings of resentment or alienation, potentially intensifying support for violent methods of political expression.
“Our findings, combined with a growing body of evidence, suggest that support for and personal willingness to engage in political violence are patterned by social conditions, including how many close connections we have, where we get our news and information, how we perceive the government, and our social identities,” Schleimer told PsyPost.
“All of this points towards opportunities for interventions to prevent political violence. For example, interventions to reduce loneliness and increase social connection range from direct individual-level interventions (e.g., social skills training and education) to those geared toward broader communities and the social and physical environment (e.g., community centers, parks, community mobilization, cultural activities, etc.).
“Further, because many individuals at heightened risk of political violence involvement may be (https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ca26f) open to change with the right message and messenger, those who reject political violence can engage with individuals experiencing social isolation, alienation, or outgroup contempt,” Schleimer said. “Messages—including from influential public figures and (https://muse.jhu.edu/article/937732) leaders—of anti-violence, peace, and humanization can also be spread through (https://www.hfg.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/We-Want-You-To-Be-A-Proud-Boy.pdf) social media and other channels.”
The study’s limitations include its reliance on self-reported data, which may be subject to personal bias. Additionally, the survey’s cross-sectional design does not allow for conclusions about cause and effect. Further research should examine how social connections evolve over time and impact an individual’s views, especially given that current social networks are rapidly shifting due to digital and political changes.
“We at the University of California, Davis are building out a research program focused on political violence from a public health perspective,” Schleimer said. “Our group has published (https://health.ucdavis.edu/vprp/pdf/vprp-political-violence-publications-list.pdf) a number of papers on the topic so far, and we are working on and planning many more.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-024-00540-2) Social network size and endorsement of political violence in the US,” was authored by Julia P. Schleimer, Paul M. Reeping, Sonia L. Robinson, and Garen J. Wintemute.

(https://www.psypost.org/neuroscience-is-exploring-how-your-brain-lets-you-experience-two-opposite-feelings-at-once/) Neuroscience is exploring how your brain lets you experience two opposite feelings at once
Oct 31st 2024, 16:00

Countless parents across the country recently dropped their kids off at college for the first time. This transition can stir a whirlwind of feelings: the heartache of parting, sadness over a permanently changed family dynamic, the uncertainty of what lies ahead – but also the pride of seeing your child move toward independence. Some might describe the goodbye as bittersweet, or say that they’re feeling mixed emotions.
In that scenario, what would you do if I asked you to rate how you felt on a scale from 1-9, with 1 being the most negative and 9 the most positive? This question seems silly given the circumstances – how should you rate this blend of bad and good? Yet, this scale is what psychology researchers often use to survey feelings in scientific studies, treating emotions as either positive or negative, but never both.
(https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ee2mE18AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao) I’m a neuroscientist who studies how mixed emotions are represented in the brain. Do people ever truly feel both positive and negative at the same time? Or do we just switch quickly back and forth?
What emotions do for you
Scientists sometimes define emotions as (https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806582) states of the brain and body that motivate you toward or away from things. People typically experience them as either positive or negative.
If you’re walking in the woods and see a bear, your heart rate and breathing accelerate, giving you the urge to flee – likely helping you make a decision that keeps you alive. Many scientists would label that reaction as the emotion of “fear.”
Similarly, warm feelings around loved ones make you want to stay around them and nurture those relationships, helping strengthen your social network and support system.
This approach-and-avoid view of emotions helps explain why emotions evolved and how they affect decision-making. (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22730-y) Scientists have used it as a guiding principle when (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2010.01.048) trying to figure out (https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09559) the biology (https://doi.org/10.1038/379449a0) behind emotions.
But mixed emotions do not fit into this framework. If opposite biological systems inhibit each other, and if emotions are biological, you can’t experience opposites in the same moment. This reasoning would mean it’s impossible to hold two opposite emotions at once; you must instead be flipping back and forth. Ever since scientists proposed the first theories on the biological foundations of emotion, this is how they’ve conceptualized mixed emotions.
Untangling the biology of mixed emotions
Mainstream methods for measuring feelings still treat (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00404-8) positive and negative as opposite sides of a spectrum. But researchers find that study participants commonly report mixed emotions.
For instance, people across cultures experience some feelings, such as (https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001521) nostalgia and (https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-024-00243-3) awe, as simultaneously positive and negative.
One research group found that volunteers’ physiological responses – such as heart rate and skin conductance – display unique patterns (https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12064) during experiences that are both disgusting and funny, compared with either category separately. This implies that disgusted and amused reactions are indeed occurring simultaneously to create something new.
In a seemingly contradictory finding, research that used functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, to study (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.119973) brain responses to disgusting humor did not find a pattern of brain activity that was distinct from plain disgust. The brain states of people reporting being both disgusted and amused seemed to reflect only disgust – not a unique pattern for a new mixed emotion.
But fMRI studies generally rely on averaging brain activity across people and time. The heart of the question – experiencing truly mixed emotions versus fluctuating between positive and negative states – concerns what the brain is doing over time. It is possible that by looking at the average brain activity across time, scientists end up with a pattern that looks a lot like one emotion – in this case, disgust – but are missing important information about how activity changes or stays the same second-to-second.
Mixed emotions in the brain
To dig in to that possibility, I ran a study to see whether mixed emotions were related to a (https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhae122) unique brain state that held steady over time.
While in the MRI machine, participants watched a bittersweet animated short film about a young girl’s lifelong pursuit, with her father’s support, to become an astronaut. Spoiler alert: Her dad dies. After scanning, those same subjects rewatched the video and labeled the exact times they had felt positive, negative and mixed emotions.
Researchers looked for brain areas with above average (red) or below average (blue) activity during moments in Taiko Studio’s ‘One Small Step’ that elicited mixed emotions. (Taiko Studios and University of Southern California Dornsife Office of Communications)
My colleagues and I discovered that mixed emotions didn’t show unique, consistent patterns in deeper brain areas like the amygdala, which plays an important role in (https://doi.org/10.1038/35077083) quick responses to emotionally important items. Strikingly, the insular cortex, a part of the brain that connects deeper brain regions with the cortex, had consistent and unique patterns for both positive and negative emotions, but not for mixed ones. We took this finding to mean that regions such as the amygdala and insular cortex were processing positive and negative emotions as mutually exclusive.
But we did see unique, consistent patterns in cortical regions such as the anterior cingulate, which plays an important role in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.10.009) processing conflict and uncertainty, and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, which is important for (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2017.10.030) self-regulation and complex thinking.
These brain regions in the cortex that carry out more advanced functions appear to represent much more complex states, allowing someone to truly feel a mixed emotion. Brain regions such as the anterior cingulate and ventromedial prefrontal cortex integrate many sources of information – essential for being able to form a mixed emotion.
Our findings also fit with what scientists know about brain and emotional development. Interestingly, kids do not begin to (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01870.x) understand or report mixed emotions until later in childhood. This timeline matches up with what researchers know about how (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17332-6_4) development of these brain regions leads to more advanced emotional regulation and understanding.
What happens next
This study revealed something new about how complex feelings are formed in the brain, but there is much more to learn.
Mixed emotions are so interesting, in part, because of their potential role during important life events. Sometimes, mixed emotions help you cope with big changes and turn into cherished memories. For example, you may experience both positive and negative feelings when your friends throw a big going away party before you move to another city for your dream job.
Other times, mixed emotions are an ongoing source of distress. Even if you know you should break up with a romantic partner, that doesn’t mean all the positive feelings you have about them automatically go away, or that a split won’t bring some pain.
What leads to this difference in outcome? Might these differences have to do with how the brain represents these mixed emotional states over time? A better understanding of mixed emotions might help people make sure these kinds of strong feelings become cherished memories that help them grow, instead of a distressing goodbye they fail to get over.
 
This article is republished from (https://theconversation.com) The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the (https://theconversation.com/mixed-emotions-neuroscience-is-exploring-how-your-brain-lets-you-experience-two-opposite-feelings-at-once-234994) original article.

(https://www.psypost.org/better-pre-treatment-response-inhibition-predicts-positive-treatment-outcomes-in-trichotillomania/) Better pre-treatment response inhibition predicts positive treatment outcomes in trichotillomania
Oct 31st 2024, 14:00

A recent study published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2024.104556) Behaviour Research & Therapy shows that better pre-treatment response inhibition in individuals with trichotillomania predicts more positive treatment outcomes, irrespective of treatment type.
Trichotillomania (TTM), a psychiatric condition characterized by repetitive hair pulling, often leads to significant psychological and functional impairments. Research has suggested that individuals with TTM exhibit neurocognitive deficits, particularly in response inhibition and cognitive flexibility. However, it remains unclear how these deficits influence treatment outcomes.
Kathryn E. Barber and colleagues investigated whether neurocognitive functioning—specifically, response inhibition and cognitive flexibility—could predict treatment response and symptom severity in individuals undergoing behavior therapy for TTM.
While behavior therapy is the standard for TTM, acceptance-enhanced behavior therapy (AEBT), which incorporates acceptance and commitment therapy, addresses internal experiences associated with hair-pulling. However, the predictive role of neurocognitive impairments in treatment outcomes remains underexplored, motivating this study.
 The study involved 88 adults (ages 18-65). Eligibility was determined based on several criteria, including a diagnosis of TTM according to the DSM-IV-TR and a minimum score of 12 on the Massachusetts General Hospital Hairpulling Scale (MGH-HS). Exclusion criteria ruled out individuals with severe psychiatric conditions, like bipolar disorder or psychosis, and those with current substance dependence. Participants were randomized into two groups: one receiving acceptance-enhanced behavior therapy (AEBT), which combines behavior therapy with principles from acceptance and commitment therapy, and the other receiving psychoeducation and supportive therapy (PST).
Both groups attended 10 weekly therapy sessions over 12 weeks. The AEBT group’s treatment involved techniques such as habit reversal training, stimulus control, and acceptance-focused exercises to improve psychological flexibility. The PST group focused on educational topics and supportive discussions. Participants’ neurocognitive performance was measured at two points: pre-treatment and post-treatment.
The Stop-Signal Task (SST) was used to assess response inhibition, where participants had to suppress motor responses to certain visual cues. Cognitive flexibility was measured using the Object Alternation Task (OAT), which required participants to adjust their responses after receiving feedback, testing their ability to shift cognitive strategies. Of the 88 initial participants, 68 completed the entire treatment and post-treatment assessments.
Barber and colleagues found that individuals with better pre-treatment response inhibition, as measured by the SST, were more likely to respond positively to treatment, regardless of whether they received AEBT or PST. Specifically, participants with faster stop-signal reaction times at the outset of the study exhibited lower hair-pulling severity at the end of treatment. This relationship held true for both self-reported measures, such as the MGH-HS, and clinician-rated measures like the National Institute of Mental Health Trichotillomania Severity Scale. Interestingly, cognitive flexibility, measured by performance on the OAT, did not predict treatment outcomes. Perseverative errors on this task—indicating poor cognitive flexibility—were not linked to treatment success or failure.
Neither response inhibition nor cognitive flexibility significantly improved during the course of treatment. This finding suggests that while individuals with stronger baseline response inhibition were better equipped to benefit from therapy, the therapy itself did not enhance these cognitive functions. Notably, in the AEBT group, non-responders actually exhibited a decline in response inhibition, which the researchers hypothesize may be related to the older age of these participants, rather than an effect of the treatment itself.
There was also a weak but significant relationship between cognitive flexibility and clinician-rated hair-pulling severity, suggesting that individuals with poorer cognitive flexibility tended to have more severe symptoms. However, this association was not strong enough to influence overall treatment outcomes.
One limitation of the study is the lack of a healthy control group, which limits the ability to generalize changes in neurocognitive performance during treatment.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2024.104556) Neurocognitive functioning in adults with trichotillomania: Predictors of treatment response and symptom severity in a randomized control trial”, was authored by Kathryn E. Barber, Douglas W. Woods, Thilo Deckersbach, Christopher C. Bauer, Scott N. Compton, Michael P. Twohig, Emily J. Ricketts, Jordan Robinson, Stephen M. Saunders, Martin E. Franklin.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-study-reveals-varied-links-between-dark-personality-traits-and-mental-health/) New study reveals varied links between dark personality traits and mental health
Oct 31st 2024, 12:00

A recent study published in the (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jopy.12974) Journal of Personality explores the dynamic relationship between certain dark personality traits and mental health symptoms over time. Researchers found that traits like narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy interact with depression, anxiety, and stress in unique ways. For instance, increases in narcissism appeared to coincide with a decrease in mental health symptoms, while elevated levels of psychopathy and Machiavellianism were associated with concurrent increases in symptoms.
The Dark Triad refers to three personality traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—often associated with manipulative, self-serving, and, at times, socially antagonistic behaviors. Narcissism involves a strong sense of self-importance, entitlement, and a need for admiration, while Machiavellianism is characterized by a cynical view of others, strategic manipulation, and a focus on self-advantage. Psychopathy, in this context, reflects a lack of empathy, impulsiveness, and a tendency toward antisocial behavior.
While earlier studies had shown connections between these traits and mental health symptoms, the nature of this relationship—whether one precedes and possibly influences the other—was still unclear. Most prior research only captured a snapshot at one point in time, making it challenging to determine whether these personality traits contribute to worsening mental health or whether individuals with certain mental health challenges might develop more narcissistic, Machiavellian, or psychopathic tendencies.
“Recently, many studies have demonstrated a link between the Dark Triad and poor mental health,” said study author Yu L. L. Luo, an associate professor at the Institute of Psychology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. “However, most of the studies were cross-sectional, and cannot inform which is the cause and which is the consequence. We wondered whether the Dark Triad would make people distressful in a long term, or whether emotional distress would turn people malevolent. So, we conducted this study.”
The study’s methodology involved tracking over 1,800 Chinese university students over three years, collecting data annually on their levels of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and mental health symptoms. The participants, ranging in age from 15 to 24, completed a series of self-reported questionnaires.
To assess the Dark Triad traits, researchers used the Short Dark Triad (SD3) measure, a validated questionnaire designed to capture tendencies toward manipulative, self-centered, and impulsive behavior. For mental health symptoms, they used the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS-21), which gauges various forms of emotional distress commonly associated with mental health challenges.
By repeating these assessments over three time points, the researchers could analyze both individual and group changes in personality traits and mental health symptoms over time, allowing them to explore not only if but also how these constructs influenced one another.
One of the study’s key findings was a reciprocal relationship between narcissism and mental health symptoms. Individuals with higher-than-average levels of narcissism in one year often saw a reduction in depression, anxiety, or stress symptoms in the following year, while those with elevated mental health symptoms showed a tendency for reduced narcissism later on.
This finding suggests a complex interaction, where narcissistic traits may act as a buffer against psychological distress by boosting self-esteem and mental resilience. However, worsening mental health symptoms might decrease narcissistic tendencies over time, possibly by diminishing self-confidence and resilience.
This effect was not observed for Machiavellianism or psychopathy, suggesting that narcissism might uniquely influence, and be influenced by, mental health in a way that is less applicable to the other two traits.
“Narcissism and symptoms of psychological distress seem to influence each other in interesting ways,” Luo told PsyPost. “When someone’s narcissism increases, their depressive and/or anxious symptoms often decrease later, but when those symptoms get worse, their narcissism tends to go down at a later time point. In contrast, Machiavellianism and psychopathy do not show such a reciprocal connection with emotional distress over time. Instead, higher levels of psychopathy and Machiavellianism are linked to a rise in emotional distress at the same time.”
Higher levels of psychopathy and Machiavellianism correlated with greater distress, not only across different individuals but also within each person at specific points in time. For instance, students who reported higher levels of Machiavellianism or psychopathy tended to experience heightened depression, anxiety, and stress. However, these associations were concurrent rather than predictive over time.
“Interestingly, the study found that neither Machiavellianism nor psychopathy predicts future emotional distress,” Luo explained. “Likewise, experiencing distress didn’t lead to an increase in these traits over time. This suggests that, unlike narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy might not influence—or be influenced by—emotional distress in the long term.”
Although this study offers new insights into the Dark Triad’s effects on mental health, it is not without limitations. One issue is that the study relied solely on self-reported questionnaires, which can introduce biases like social desirability.
“The major limitation concerns the measurement of the Dark Triad,” Luo explained. “We used a concise measure, the Short Dark Triad (SD3), which is easy and quick to administer in a large-scale, multi-wave study like ours. However, such a concise measure may not capture every nuance of the Dark Triad, as each dark trait is constituted of multiple facets or dimensions.”
Additionally, while the sample size was large, the participants were all university students, limiting the findings’ generalizability to broader populations or different age groups. Future research could expand on these findings by incorporating more diverse methods, such as physiological measurements or reports from people close to the participants, to further explore these relationships.
“We aim to understand how socially aversive personality, like the Dark Triad, interact with mental health,” Luo said. “We hope to search for the mechanisms that can account for their connection, as well as ways to reduce the link.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12974) Will the Dark Triad Engender Psychopathological Symptoms or Vice Versa? A Three-Wave Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Analysis,” was authored by Mengpei Wei, Jingguang Li, Xingbo Wang, Zhenglian Su, and Yu L. L. Luo.

Forwarded by:
Michael Reeder LCPC
Baltimore, MD

This information is taken from free public RSS feeds published by each organization for the purpose of public distribution. Readers are linked back to the article content on each organization's website. This email is an unaffiliated unofficial redistribution of this freely provided content from the publishers. 

 

(#) unsubscribe from this feed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clinicians-exchange.org/pipermail/article-digests-clinicians-exchange.org/attachments/20241101/9acec626/attachment.htm>