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/facial-hair-influences-trust-and-attractiveness-but-only-among-a-specific-group-of-men/) Facial hair influences trust and attractiveness—but only among a specific group of men
Apr 19th 2025, 10:00

Facial hair can influence how much people trust you—but the effects depend on age and beard style. A new study published in (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691825000551) Acta Psychologica found that young men with light stubble were perceived as more attractive, and as a result, they were trusted with more money in a trust-based economic game. However, these effects were not seen for older men or those with full beards.. The research adds nuance to popular beliefs about the so-called “beauty premium,” showing that physical appearance only enhances trust under specific conditions.
The “beauty premium” refers to the idea that attractive individuals tend to receive more favorable treatment in a range of social and economic situations. Studies have found that attractive people are more likely to be hired, earn higher wages, and receive more lenient treatment in court. These advantages may also extend to interpersonal trust. 
Since facial hair can shape perceptions of masculinity, dominance, and attractiveness, the researchers at the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná in Brazil and Seton Hall University in the United States set out to test whether different beard styles influenced how much people trusted others, and whether age modified this relationship.
“Although the ‘beauty premium’ is well established in the literature, we noticed a scarcity of studies investigating whether individuals could manipulate this ‘premium’ to their advantage,” Angela Cristiane Santos Póvoa and her colleagues told PsyPost. “In 2020, we published a paper in the Journal of Economic Psychology titled ‘Is the Beauty Premium accessible to all?’, which explored the effects of makeup on trust, and found that the application of makeup increased trust levels. This new paper complements the previous one by focusing on men, specifically examining the role of facial hair—particularly beards—and its impact on trust.”
The researchers designed a laboratory experiment based on a standard trust game. A total of 171 university students from Brazil played the role of the trustor—the person deciding how much money to entrust to another player, the trustee. Trustees were not real participants but instead represented by standardized photos of men with different facial hair and age appearances. These images were digitally altered using photo-editing software to create six variations: clean-shaven, light stubble, and full beard, each depicted with either a younger or older appearance.
Participants played the trust game three times, each time paired with a new trustee photo. After each decision, they rated the trustee’s attractiveness and noted any features that stood out. Trustees’ photos were displayed with neutral expressions, and participants had no other information about them. The amount of money transferred from trustor to trustee served as the measure of trust.
The researchers verified that their photo manipulations were realistic. In a separate task, 43 people attempted to identify which version of a given photo was unaltered. On average, they correctly identified the original image only 11.6% of the time, well below the 16.7% expected by chance. This suggested that the age and facial hair edits were convincingly lifelike.
The results showed no overall effect of beard type on trust. However, older-looking trustees received more money than younger-looking ones, regardless of their facial hair. This supported the idea that age on its own boosts perceived trustworthiness. 
But when breaking down the results further, a more complex pattern emerged. Among younger trustees, those with light stubble received significantly more money than their clean-shaven or fully bearded peers. This effect was not present for older trustees.
“Initially, we hypothesized that any type of beard would enhance trust perception,” the researchers said. “However, the results revealed that only light stubble increased trust levels. The effect was not universal, however, as it was present only among younger individuals with light stubble. These findings challenge previous literature that suggests all forms of facial hair uniformly enhance both trust and attractiveness in men.”
Attractiveness ratings followed a similar pattern. Trustees with light stubble were rated as more attractive than clean-shaven ones, and slightly more attractive than those with full beards. Again, these effects were only seen in younger faces. Among older-looking trustees, beard style did not influence perceived attractiveness.
To explore whether attractiveness explained the boost in trust for younger men with stubble, the researchers conducted a statistical mediation analysis. They found that the increase in trust was indirectly driven by increased attractiveness. In other words, the light stubble made young men appear more attractive, and this attractiveness led participants to trust them with more money. No such mediation effect was observed for older men or for other beard styles.
These findings offer partial support for the idea that facial hair enhances trust, but they suggest that this effect is highly dependent on age and beard type. Contrary to previous studies suggesting that all types of facial hair signal trustworthiness, this experiment found that only young men with light stubble benefited from a trust advantage. This aligns with earlier research indicating that light stubble is often considered the most attractive level of facial hair, particularly in short-term social judgments.
“The main message from our paper is that the results indicate that when strangers interact with each other, the probability that someone will trust another individual is also a function of visual cues,” Póvoa and her colleagues said. “Specifically, it seems like people use the presence or absence of beard as one of these visual cues, and the presence of a light stubble increases trust levels.”
While the study provides valuable insights, it also has several limitations. The sample included only Brazilian university students as trustors, limiting generalizability to other cultural contexts or age groups. Trustees were depicted as white men only, and only two broad age groups were represented. 
The study also tested only three beard types, leaving out variations like mustaches, goatees, or patchy growth. Cultural associations with facial hair styles, such as the hipster image attached to full beards in Brazilian youth culture, may also influence perceptions in ways not fully accounted for.
“Future research should broaden the age range, cultural settings, and types of facial hair, and consider dynamic stimuli to capture real-world complexity in appearance-based trust decisions,” the researchers said.
“The overarching goal of this research trajectory is to deepen our understanding of how physical appearance influences economic decision-making, particularly in contexts that involve trust, cooperation, and credibility assessments. Building on foundational findings related to the ‘beauty premium’ and appearance-based biases, this line of inquiry aims to contribute to uncover the psychological and social mechanisms that mediate the effects of facial features, such as facial hair, age, and perceived attractiveness, on trust and financial decisions.”
“We believe it would be highly valuable for this research to be replicated in other countries and cultural contexts,” the researchers concluded. “Expanding the cross-cultural scope is one of our key goals, and we are actively seeking new collaborators interested in joining forces to conduct comparative studies. We warmly invite researchers and institutions who share an interest in this topic to connect with us and explore potential partnerships.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.104742) Is beard the male makeup? An experimental study on trust perception based on appearance,” was authored by Angela Cristiane Santos Póvoa, Wesley Pech, Juan José Camou Viacava, Hendrigo Bernardi Korndorfer, and Lucas Casonato Jacinto.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-study-reveals-striking-political-divide-in-who-trusts-their-doctor/) New study reveals “striking” political divide in who trusts their doctor
Apr 19th 2025, 08:00

Trust in one’s personal doctor used to be politically neutral in the United States. But according to new research published in the (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123424000607) British Journal of Political Science, that has changed. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, Democrats have become significantly more likely than Republicans to trust their doctors and follow medical advice—even on issues unrelated to the pandemic. The study suggests that this growing partisan divide in health-related trust may have consequences for how Americans access and engage with medical care.
“During the COVID-19 crisis, I, like many others, watched as the medical community’s response to the pandemic—and various pandemic-related interventions—became interpreted through a partisan lens,” said study author (https://neilobrian.com/) Neil O’Brian, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Oregon and a 2024 Carnegie Fellow.
“I wondered whether the problem was deeper than just the pandemic: did people’s politics predict trust in their own personal doctor, and did this extend beyond COVID-related matters?”
While earlier research examined political divisions in health policy attitudes and pandemic behaviors, there was little evidence about whether someone’s political alignment shaped their feelings toward their individual healthcare provider. The authors set out to fill that gap.
To answer this question, the researchers analyzed public opinion data collected both before and after the pandemic. They used a nationally representative survey conducted in 2022 and compared it to earlier surveys from 2011, 2013, and 2019. These earlier surveys measured Americans’ trust in medicine as an institution, trust in their personal doctor, and how closely they followed their doctor’s advice. In addition to comparing these trends over time, the team ran several experiments to test whether political messaging could influence trust in doctors and whether people preferred doctors who shared their political beliefs.
The data showed that in 2013, trust in one’s personal doctor did not differ by political affiliation—if anything, Republicans were slightly more trusting. But by 2022, this pattern had reversed. Democrats were significantly more likely to say they had “a great deal” of trust in their personal doctor.
The same pattern appeared in adherence to doctors’ recommendations. Among Americans aged 50 and older, Democrats in 2022 were more likely than Republicans to say they followed their doctor’s advice “very closely” or “extremely closely.” The gap was especially wide between Biden and Trump voters. These shifts were not apparent in the early 2010s, suggesting the divide formed relatively recently.
The researchers also examined changes in public confidence in medicine as an institution. In 2019, there was no significant difference between Democrats and Republicans in their confidence in medicine. But by 2022, that changed sharply. Democrats were far more likely than Republicans to say they had “a great deal of confidence” in the medical profession.
This pattern echoed broader trends, as trust in many American institutions—including science, education, and the media—has become more divided by political identity over the past two decades. Medicine had largely avoided this trend until recently.
“One of the most striking findings is that confidence in medicine as an institution was non-partisan up until 2020,” O’Brian told PsyPost. “It was effectively the only institution that Democrats and Republicans had similar levels of confidence in by the end of the 2010s—while, for example, Democrats were already more trusting of science and education than Republicans, and Republicans were more trusting of the military or business than Democrats. The COVID crisis upset this bipartisan consensus.”
To better understand what might be causing the new divide in doctor-patient trust, the researchers considered several explanations. One possibility is that the makeup of the political parties changed. Over the past decade, more college-educated voters moved toward the Democratic Party, while the Republican base became more heavily non-college educated—a group that tends to express less trust in institutions.
While this shift explained some of the difference, it did not fully account for the partisan gap. When comparing people with similar backgrounds, partisanship remained a strong predictor of trust in one’s doctor.
“In a survey we conducted in 2022 of people 18 years and older living in the United States, whether someone reported trusting their own personal doctor—with the exceptions of age and having health insurance—was best predicted by whether they voted for Biden or Trump in 2020,” O’Brian explained. “This is striking: in our data at least, vote choice is a stronger predictor of trust in your personal doctor compared to things like education, race, or gender, which are commonly thought of as social determinants of trust and health.”
Another explanation is that COVID-19 may have changed how people viewed the political identity of doctors. Public figures like Dr. Anthony Fauci became symbols of the medical response to the pandemic, and they were frequently portrayed in partisan terms. Donald Trump publicly called Fauci “a Democrat,” and some Republican politicians criticized him for siding with Democratic governors.
The researchers hypothesized that this framing may have caused some Republicans to view the medical profession more generally as aligned with the Democratic Party.
To test this idea, the team ran an experiment in which some respondents were shown a news headline describing Fauci as a Democrat and a friend of a Democratic governor. They then measured participants’ trust in their doctor, their confidence in medicine, and their willingness to follow medical advice.
Among Trump voters, seeing this headline led to a drop in trust and confidence. Among Biden voters, the opposite was true—they expressed more trust and confidence after reading the headline. This pattern suggests that partisan framing of medical figures can affect how people feel about the profession as a whole, including their own personal doctor.
The researchers also explored whether people prefer doctors who share their political views. In another experiment, participants were shown profiles of two hypothetical doctors and asked which one they would prefer to visit. The doctors varied by characteristics such as gender, race, education, and political party.
The results showed that people tended to prefer doctors who shared their own political background, even when controlling for other factors. Democrats were more likely to choose a Democratic doctor, while Republicans were more likely to choose a Republican one. For many participants, partisanship mattered as much as—or more than—race or gender in deciding which doctor they would trust.
In a final study, the team tested whether people would be more or less interested in seeking care through online platforms that were either politically neutral or explicitly conservative. They found that liberals were more likely to engage with a politically neutral platform, while conservatives were more interested in a platform that highlighted conservative values. Again, the pattern was strongest among those who identified as strongly liberal or strongly conservative.
These findings suggest that people increasingly see their personal doctor through a political lens, and that this affects both who they choose to see and whether they follow medical advice. The implications are significant. Trust in doctors is linked to better health outcomes, including greater adherence to treatment plans, better management of chronic conditions, and improved self-reported health. If trust in doctors becomes filtered through political identity, these divides may affect the quality of care people receive and how they respond to it.
The researchers caution that while their findings show strong associations between political identity and trust in doctors, they cannot prove that political views directly cause changes in trust or health behavior. Other factors—such as media consumption, personal experience, or broader distrust in institutions—may play a role.
“There are always multiple things to consider in social science research,” O’Brian noted. “Whether these patterns will hold after the pandemic recedes from memory is one caveat and avenue for future research.”
“A primary goal of this research is to point out that politics predicts trust in doctors and medicine beyond COVID and vaccine-related matters. This is an important piece of knowledge, we think, for medical providers to know. We are also working on understanding if the political schism in trust creates a divide in health outcomes. If those on the left are more trusting and adherent to medical advice, does this lead to better health outcomes—such as lower blood pressure, lower prevalence of diabetes, and lower mortality?”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123424000607) Partisanship and Trust in Personal Doctors: Causes and Consequences,” was authored by Neil A. O’Brian and Thomas Bradley Kent.

(https://www.psypost.org/authoritarian-attitudes-linked-to-altered-brain-anatomy-neuroscientists-reveal/) Authoritarian attitudes linked to altered brain anatomy, neuroscientists reveal
Apr 19th 2025, 06:00

A new brain imaging study published in the journal (https://www.ibroneuroscience.org/article/S0306-4522(25)00304-5/fulltext) Neuroscience has found that authoritarian attitudes on both the political left and right are linked to specific structural differences in the brain. Young adults who scored higher on right-wing authoritarianism had less gray matter volume in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, a region involved in social reasoning. Meanwhile, those who endorsed more extreme forms of left-wing authoritarianism showed reduced cortical thickness in the right anterior insula, a brain area tied to empathy and emotion regulation.
The research aimed to better understand the brain-based traits that might underlie authoritarian thinking. Previous studies have documented the psychological characteristics associated with authoritarianism—such as impulsivity, dogmatism, and heightened sensitivity to threat—but few have examined whether these traits are reflected in brain structure. The authors were particularly interested in both left- and right-wing authoritarianism, as research has increasingly recognized that rigid, anti-democratic attitudes can be found at both ends of the political spectrum.
“Research on ideological authoritarianism and other forms of radical political attitudes has been attracting growing attention,” said study author Jesús Adrián-Ventura, a professor at University of Zaragoza and member of (https://sites.google.com/view/pseudo-lab/home?authuser=0) the Pseudo-Lab Research Group.
“However, despite increasing reports on its psychological correlates, its integration with neurobiological data remains very limited, in particular regarding left-wing authoritarianism, which remains poorly represented in the current psychological literature. This led us to undertake a study on authoritarianism from a neuroscientific perspective.”
To investigate these questions, the researchers recruited 100 young adults in Spain, mostly university students between the ages of 18 and 30. Each participant completed a series of psychological questionnaires that measured political orientation, authoritarian beliefs, impulsivity, anxiety, and emotional regulation.
Importantly, the researchers used updated scales that assess both (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianism) traditional right-wing authoritarianism and a recently developed (https://www.psypost.org/large-study-indicates-left-wing-authoritarianism-exists-and-is-a-key-predictor-of-psychological-and-behavioral-outcomes/) measure of left-wing authoritarianism, which includes dimensions like anti-hierarchical aggression and top-down censorship.
Participants also underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans using a high-resolution 3T scanner. The researchers focused on two structural features of the brain: gray matter volume, which reflects the density of neurons and connections in different brain regions, and cortical thickness, a measure of the depth of the brain’s outer layer. They used whole-brain statistical analyses to identify whether either of these features was associated with authoritarian beliefs.
Behaviorally, the results supported previous findings that people with authoritarian attitudes, regardless of political orientation, tend to act impulsively in emotionally charged situations. Both left-wing and right-wing authoritarians scored higher on “negative urgency,” a trait linked to impulsive actions under distress. However, left-wing authoritarianism—especially the tendency toward aggressive anti-establishment views—was also linked to higher levels of trait anxiety.
“Both left-wing and right-wing authoritarians act impulsively in emotionally negative situations, while the former tend to be more anxious,” Adrián-Ventura told PsyPost.
At the neural level, the researchers found two key structural associations. First, higher scores on right-wing authoritarianism were related to smaller gray matter volume in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. This region is known to be involved in understanding others’ perspectives, making moral judgments, and navigating complex social situations.
“Right-wing authoritarianism is associated with a lower dorsomedial prefrontal cortex gray matter volume, a region involved in understanding others’ thoughts and perspectives,” Adrián-Ventura said.
Previous studies have linked activity in this region to political decision-making and reactions to conflicting information. The authors suggest that reduced volume in this area might reflect more rigid thinking styles or difficulties with cognitive flexibility among right-wing authoritarians.
Second, individuals who scored high on the anti-hierarchical aggression component of left-wing authoritarianism showed lower cortical thickness in the right anterior insula. Interestingly, the same region has been implicated in studies examining reactions to political disagreement and emotional responses to moral violations.
“Reduced cortical thickness in the right anterior insula—a region associated with emotional empathy and behavioral inhibition—is linked to increased anti-hierarchical aggressive attitudes (i.e., the preference for violent actions and punishment against perceived authority structures) in the context of left-wing authoritarianism,” Adrián-Ventura explained.
“These neurobiological results were very surprising. Due to the lack of prior studies, our approach was mainly exploratory and data-driven. Still, it is quite difficult to obtain significant results in MR studies when strict statistical thresholds are applied. The obtained medium-to-large effect sizes are therefore striking and demand further scrutiny.”
To further validate their findings, the researchers examined whether these brain differences were also associated with related political ideologies. The gray matter reductions in the prefrontal cortex correlated with higher scores on social dominance orientation, a belief system often linked to right-wing authoritarianism. Likewise, the thinning in the anterior insula was related to endorsement of radical feminist views, which share ideological ground with the anti-authority stance of left-wing authoritarianism.
Although the study breaks new ground by identifying distinct neural correlates for both left-wing and right-wing authoritarianism, it is not without limitations. The sample was relatively homogenous, consisting mainly of young, educated individuals from a single European country. The findings may not generalize to older populations or to people in different cultural and political environments.
“So, new research would be needed to confirm and expand our results in different populations,” Adrián-Ventura noted. “This is particularly relevant in the domain of authoritarianism as this construct tends to manifest within a range of context-dependent determinants (i.e., salient forms of authoritarian attitudes in post-communist or Hispanic American countries, among others, often exhibit specific traits).”
In addition, because the study was cross-sectional, it cannot determine whether the brain differences cause authoritarian attitudes or result from them.
The researchers emphasized that authoritarian beliefs are not solely determined by brain anatomy. Instead, the structural differences may reflect long-standing cognitive and emotional patterns that interact with social and cultural influences. For example, people with a tendency to experience anxiety or act rashly under stress may be more drawn to authoritarian ideologies when they perceive the world as threatening or unstable.
Future research could build on these findings by examining how these brain structures function during political decision-making or when people are confronted with opposing views. Longitudinal studies may also help clarify whether changes in political ideology are associated with structural or functional shifts in the brain over time. Experimental studies could test whether interventions targeting emotion regulation or perspective-taking influence authoritarian attitudes and their neural underpinnings.
“We are dedicated to the scientific study of radical beliefs (e.g., authoritarianism, pseudoscientific doctrines, conspiracy theories, and interventions such as empathetic refutation),” Adrián-Ventura told PsyPost. “In the context of authoritarianism, our goal is to delineate a precise network of psychological associations and its neurocognitive profile. To this end, we will integrate novel behavioral and neuroimaging data—by means of structural and functional MRI—together with new experimental designs.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2025.04.027) Authoritarianism and the brain: Structural MR correlates associated with polarized left- and right-wing ideology traits,” was authored by Jesús Adrián-Ventura, Diego Avendaño, Anna Miró-Padilla, Anastasia Cherednichenko, César Ávila, Angelo Fasce.

(https://www.psypost.org/scientists-unlock-the-hidden-workings-of-memory-using-neurofeedback-in-rats/) Scientists unlock the hidden workings of memory using neurofeedback in rats
Apr 18th 2025, 14:00

A new study published in (https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(24)00923-1) Neuron has shown that rats, like humans, can intentionally recall specific memories without being prompted by external cues or needing to act on those memories. Researchers developed a neurofeedback system that trained rats to mentally “jump” to remembered locations in a maze, revealing that memory retrieval can be studied as an internal brain process distinct from cues or behaviors. This breakthrough allows scientists to investigate how the brain recalls information without relying on physical movement or sensory triggers.
Humans often remember people, places, or events spontaneously and without needing to do anything in response. For instance, we might think about a past vacation or choose where to go for dinner based on past experiences. These kinds of memory retrievals happen without specific prompts or observable actions.
In contrast, memory studies in animals typically rely on external cues and physical behavior to assess whether a memory has been recalled. For example, rats may be tested on whether they can find a reward in a maze or react to a previously learned signal. The challenge with these methods is that it becomes hard to separate memory retrieval itself from the sensory information, decision-making, or behavior involved.
“We all know that memories can be retrieved without directly causing an action, as when we reminisce about the past. Despite that, virtually all studies in animals assess memory retrieval based on whether an action is triggered,” said study author (https://franklab.ucsf.edu/) Loren Frank, a professor at UC San Francisco and investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
“Similarly, most studies of memory use specific cues to cause memories to be retrieved, but we know that sometimes memories just bubble up without a clear cue. As a result, we did not have a way to directly investigate memories separate from the actions they cause or the cues that drive them. Our first goal was to see if animals could spontaneously retrieve specific memories.”
The research team focused on the hippocampus, a brain region known for storing spatial memories, and particularly on “place cells”—neurons that become active when an animal is in or thinks about a specific location. These cells not only represent where the animal currently is but can also reflect places the animal has been in the past.
The researchers developed a brain-machine interface that used real-time recordings from the rats’ hippocampal neurons. Six rats were implanted with devices that could detect and interpret the activity of these place cells. During training, the rats explored a Y-shaped maze with rewards at the end of two arms. Their brain activity was recorded to create a map linking neural patterns to specific locations.
In a later phase, the lights on the maze arms were turned off and the rats remained near a central reward port. At this point, the system would provide a reward only when the rat’s brain activity indicated it was mentally representing a remote target location—one of the maze arms—even though it was physically nowhere near it.
Importantly, the rats could not see the target location from where they were. Nor were they given any cues to remind them of it. Instead, they had to generate the representation of that place using only internal memory. When the system detected that their hippocampal activity matched the pattern associated with the target location, a tone played, and if the rat responded quickly, it received a reward. Over multiple sessions, the rats learned to reliably produce these remote memory representations, proving that they could intentionally recall specific places in their minds.
In most cases, the rats’ brain activity skipped directly from their current location to the target, rather than moving through intermediate points in space. This is similar to how people can mentally “teleport” to a memory without reliving every moment in between. The neural activity was specific: it typically reflected only the goal location and not the path to it. Moreover, the rats could switch between different target locations when the researchers changed the memory required for the reward, showing that the animals had flexible control over what they remembered.
Frank and his colleagues also found that these memory recall events involved groups of neurons working together. The researchers identified distinct “cell assemblies” that became active when a rat generated a remote memory. These coordinated patterns of firing mirrored the activity seen when the rat physically visited the location earlier. Even when the rats were not moving or not receiving a reward, these memory-linked assemblies were still active, suggesting a spontaneous and internal process of recall.
Interestingly, most of these remote memory events happened while the rats were still but not during a well-known brain state called a sharp wave ripple, which is often linked to memory consolidation. Instead, they occurred during quieter periods without strong external brain signals. This finding suggests that memory retrieval may operate through brain mechanisms that are different from those typically associated with storing or consolidating memories.
In some cases, the recalled representations occurred while the rats were moving, and in those instances, the activity aligned with a specific rhythm in the brain called the theta rhythm, which has been tied to memory-guided planning and decision-making.
“We expected to see that these events occurred during a specific hippocampal activity pattern called a sharp-wave ripple (SWR) where we and others had hypothesized that memory retrieval took place,” Frank told PsyPost. “This was not the case, and our results suggest that while reactivation of past experience can happen during SWRs, those are not the times of intentional memory retrieval in our animals.”
By training animals to retrieve memories without external prompts or visible cues, the study offers a powerful new approach to studying how the brain accesses past experiences. Unlike prior research where memory could only be studied indirectly through behavior or cue-based retrieval, this method allows researchers to observe memory recall as a distinct and intentional brain process.
One of the most important implications of this work is that it creates a model for understanding memory in ways that are closer to human cognition. It shows that animals can recall past experiences based on internal motivation, not just sensory input or habit. This opens new doors for exploring how memory works in the brain, how memories are used to make decisions, and what goes wrong in disorders where memory is impaired.
“The main result is that our rats, like people, can intentionally activate representations of places they have visited (e.g., memories), which means we can study how it is that the brain retrieves memories and how they could be used to guide decisions, as when we deliberate over where to go to dinner based on past experiences,” Frank explained.
However, the study has some limitations. The findings are based on a small number of rats and a specific type of spatial memory. It remains to be seen whether similar patterns would emerge for other types of memories or in different brain regions. Additionally, while the researchers could infer that the rats were recalling a location, it’s impossible to fully know the subjective experience of the animal. Future research will likely explore how these findings relate to other forms of memory, including those that involve emotion, time, or complex associations.
By identifying the neural signatures of internally driven memory recall, the researchers hope to eventually understand how the brain supports imagination, planning, and decision-making—all of which rely on the ability to retrieve past experiences.
“Our long term goal is to understand how the brain can generate and use memories,” Frank told PsyPost. “More broadly, we want to understand how the brain can think, where internally generated patterns, typically based on past experience (e.g., memories) are used to understand the world and make decisions. By isolating the patterns of brain activity that support intentional memory retrieval, we are one step closer to that goal.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2024.12.023) Closed-loop modulation of remote hippocampal representations with neurofeedback,” was authored by Michael E. Coulter, Anna K. Gillespie, Joshua Chu, Eric L. Denovellis, Trevor Thai K. Nguyen, Daniel F. Liu, Katherine Wadhwani, Baibhav Sharma, Kevin Wang, Xinyi Deng ,Uri T. Eden ,Caleb Kemere, and Loren M. Frank.

(https://www.psypost.org/measles-is-back-and-anti-vaccine-sentiment-is-to-blame/) Measles is back and anti-vaccine sentiment is to blame
Apr 18th 2025, 12:00

Measles was supposedly (https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/measles/health-professionals-measles.html) eradicated in Canada more than a quarter century ago. But today, measles is surging.
Public Health Ontario recently announced that there have been (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/measles-outbreak-cases-ontario-1.7482761) 173 cases in the province in the past two weeks and 350 cases since autumn 2024. Many cases have required hospitalization. Last year, (https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/a-young-child-in-ontario-has-died-of-measles/article_3f5e6e14-13d1-11ef-bef6-2b5f14b1ee24.html) a child died.
The cause of this resurgence is declining vaccination rates.
Measles is extremely infectious. One person with the measles is likely to (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/measles) infect nine out of 10 of their unvaccinated close contacts. To prevent its spread, (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.04.011) we need 95 per cent of the population to be vaccinated.
Anti-vaccine sentiments
(https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/50/article/939279) Our research examines why parents have hesitated or refused to vaccinate their children. Anti-vaccine sentiment is often linked to (https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-3179) a now thoroughly discredited 1998 study that suggested a link between the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine and autism.
But our research on the anti-vaccine movement in Canada from the 1970s to the early 2000s suggests that parents’ concerns about vaccines started much earlier than that study, and that parents worry about far more than autism.
To address anti-vaccine sentiment, we need to listen to parents’ concerns and make it easy for them to get their children vaccinated. We also need to persuade them of the benefits of vaccination, not just for their own children, but for their family members, friends and fellow citizens.
The anti-vaccine literature (https://www.mayagoldenberg.ca/) is not anti-science. It is filled with statistics and references to scientific studies, although the facts are often wrong. Parents who read this literature need more than the simple reassurance of experts that vaccines are safe and effective. They need to be shown evidence and have confidence that their concerns are being taken seriously.
One argument that appeared frequently in the (https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/50/article/939279) anti-vaccine literature is that rates of infectious disease had fallen before the introduction of vaccines.
While mortality from infectious diseases declined well before vaccination, vaccines played a vital role in further (https://www.ubcpress.ca/be-wise-be-healthy) diminishing the toll of infectious disease. Diphtheria is largely unknown today, but before the introduction of widespread vaccination in the years between the First and Second World Wars, it (https://www.museumofhealthcare.ca/explore/exhibits/vaccinations/diphtheria.html) killed hundreds of Canadian children every year.
Another common argument was that (https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/50/article/939279) vaccines are ineffective. This argument was often used with respect to the measles vaccine. Because some people are inadequately vaccinated (receiving only one shot for example, instead of two), and because the vaccine is not perfect, (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/questions.html) there will be some cases of measles even in vaccinated people. Fortunately, these people tend to have milder cases.
Anti-vaccine texts frequently contain long lists of scary-sounding ingredients in vaccines, similar to what we see for highly processed foods. Thimerosal (ethyl mercury used as a preservative) attracted the most attention. (https://epe.bac-lac.gc.ca/100/202/301/maladies_chroniques_canada/html/2010/v30n04/im/q_a_thimerosal-eng.php) Thimerosal is no longer used in childhood vaccines in Canada.
The anti-vaccine literature is deeply skeptical about the profit-making motivations of pharmaceutical companies and often mentions past disasters such as the (https://doi.org/10.1177/2040620711413165) thalidomide scandal that saw thousands of children born with shortened limbs.
While this is not the only example of inadequate safety testing of new drugs, it is clear that the (https://dev-cms.who.int/news-room/spotlight/history-of-vaccination/history-of-measles-vaccination) MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine, used since the early 1970s, has a long safety record and has played a vital role in reducing deaths and illness from the measles in Canada and abroad.
Anti-vaccine literature also stressed that there were (https://muse.jhu.edu/article/939279) natural ways of building immunity that could take the place of vaccination. We see this today with claims by United States Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
(https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/10/health/measles-texas-kennedy-fox.html) Kennedy claims that poor eating habits are behind the spread of measles in the U.S. This is extremely dangerous. Even the healthiest, best-fed child can get extremely sick with the measles. Not all parents can afford nutritious food. And some (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/vaccines/index.html#cdc_vaccine_basics_who-who-should-get-vaccinated) children can’t be vaccinated because of medical conditions, leaving them extremely vulnerable.
Tragedies of the past
Anti-vaccine parents see vaccines as one of the dangers of our modern, polluted world, and worry that vaccines might have (https://muse.jhu.edu/article/939279) risks that have not yet been recognized. While there are risks with any medical technology, the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the possible dangers.
A century ago, parents mourned the (https://www.museumofhealthcare.ca/explore/exhibits/vaccinations/diphtheria.html) gruesome deaths of children with diphtheria, which caused a membrane to form across the child’s throat, slowly strangling them to death.
Mortality from the measles declined in the first half of the 20th century, but in 1945, (http://www.jstor.org/stable/41979778) there was still one measles death for every 100,000 people in Ontario.
Parents today have little memory of these tragedies, but sadly, they could return. Indeed, a powerful article recently published in the Atlantic Monthly profiled a (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2025/03/texas-measles-outbreak-death-family/681985/) father who had just lost his six-year-old child to the measles.
Along with scholars like sociologist (https://nyupress.org/9781479812790/calling-the-shots/) Jennifer Reich, who has studied contemporary anti-vaccine parents, we see anti-vaccination sentiment as part of a larger societal trend towards individualism. Parents think about what’s best for their own child, rather than thinking about what’s best for their community.
At a time when Canadians are bonding together to fight the (https://theconversation.com/canada-is-now-in-a-trade-war-with-the-u-s-heres-what-you-need-to-know-to-prepare-for-it-250989) tariff threat from the U.S., it would be wonderful if we could also come together to fight the scourge of infectious diseases, including measles. The best way to do this is vaccination.
This is a corrected version of a story originally published on March 18, 2025. The earlier story said “Public Health Ontario recently announced that there have been 195 cases in the province in the past two weeks and 372 cases since autumn 2024” instead of “Public Health Ontario recently announced that there have been 173 cases in the province in the past two weeks and 350 cases since autumn 2024.”
 
This article is republished from (https://theconversation.com) The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the (https://theconversation.com/combatting-the-measles-threat-means-examining-the-reasons-for-declining-vaccination-rates-252168) original article.

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/20250419/526fb93f/attachment.htm>