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/a-20-minute-game-of-tetris-reduced-traumatic-memories-in-pandemic-frontline-workers/) A 20-minute game of Tetris reduced traumatic memories in pandemic frontline workers
Apr 21st 2025, 10:00

A recent study found that an imagery-competing task intervention reduced the frequency of intrusive memories in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The intervention involved recalling an intrusive memory and then playing Tetris for 20 minutes. The study was published in (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03569-8) BMC Medicine.
Intrusive memories are unwanted, involuntary recollections of distressing events that suddenly enter a person’s mind. They typically arise from traumatic experiences and tend to be vivid, emotionally intense, and difficult to control. These memories can be triggered by reminders of the original event or may appear without any obvious cause.
They are especially common in individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder. Intrusive memories may involve visual images, sounds, or even bodily sensations from the traumatic event. They can interfere with concentration, sleep, and daily functioning. Unlike ordinary memories, intrusive memories often feel as if the event is happening again in the present moment and are typically accompanied by strong emotions such as fear, shame, or helplessness.
Study author Marie Kanstrup and her colleagues aimed to test the effectiveness of a brief imagery-competing task intervention in reducing intrusive memories among healthcare workers in Sweden who were exposed to work-related trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022). They hypothesized that participants who received the intervention would report fewer intrusive memories five weeks later, compared to those in a control group.
The study included 144 Swedish healthcare workers who were active during the pandemic. A total of 130 participants completed the full study. Of these, 82% were women, 71% were employed full-time, and 58% worked as nurses. The average participant age was 41 years.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Both groups were told they would be completing a cognitive task. One group received the imagery-competing task, while the other listened to a podcast and answered brief quizzes about it. In the imagery-competing task, participants were instructed to recall one of their intrusive memories and then play the video game Tetris on their smartphones for 20 minutes. They were also encouraged to repeat the intervention later on their own to target additional intrusive memories.
Both interventions were delivered via smartphone and took approximately 25 minutes to complete. Participants kept a daily diary for five weeks, recording the number of intrusive memories they experienced each day. They also completed assessments measuring post-traumatic stress symptoms and other psychological variables.
The results showed that the imagery-competing task significantly reduced the frequency of intrusive memories compared to the control condition. It also led to fewer post-traumatic stress symptoms at one, three, and six months after the intervention.
“In summary, healthcare workers were exposed to work-related trauma during the pandemic. We observed the need for brief, flexible, remotely delivered, and repeatable interventions as an urgent public health priority, including a subclinical-to-clinical sample for a preventing-to-treating approach. This study provided controlled evidence that this population benefited from the single guided session, digitally delivered imagery-competing task intervention to reduce intrusive memories after trauma,” the authors concluded.
The study offers insight into how an imagery-competing task can affect intrusive memories. However, it is important to note that participants were exclusively healthcare workers, and the intrusive memories they reported were likely related to vicarious trauma—that is, witnessing the suffering of others. The results may not generalize to individuals who have directly experienced traumatic events themselves.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03569-8) A guided single session intervention to reduce intrusive memories of work-related trauma: a randomised controlled trial with healthcare workers in the COVID-19 pandemic,” was authored by Marie Kanstrup, Laura Singh, Elisabeth Johanna Leehr, Katarina E. Göransson, Sara Ahmed Pihlgren, Lalitha Iyadurai, Oili Dahl, Ann‑Charlotte Falk, Veronica Lindström, Nermin Hadziosmanovic, Katja Gabrysch, Michelle L. Moulds, and Emily A. Holmes.

(https://www.psypost.org/authoritarian-minds-may-be-primed-for-conspiracy-beliefs-study-suggests/) Authoritarian minds may be primed for conspiracy beliefs, study suggests
Apr 21st 2025, 08:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13075) Political Psychology challenges a widely held assumption about the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and democracy. The researchers found that, rather than conspiracy beliefs leading to criticism of democratic institutions or support for authoritarianism, it may be that people who already favor authoritarian forms of government are more likely to adopt conspiracy beliefs—especially during elections.
Over the past decade, conspiracy theories have become a prominent concern in political discourse. From election denial to vaccine misinformation, many commentators argue that such beliefs undermine the foundations of democracy. But while conspiracy theories are often seen as a threat to democratic norms, it’s less clear whether they are actually causing political disillusionment or are simply a symptom of it.
“Like many others, we became aware of the growing spread of false or misleading information, alongside increasing concerns about weakening support for democratic norms in many Western countries—a phenomenon often referred to as democratic backsliding,” said study author (https://www.flinders.edu.au/people/emma.thomas) Emma Thomas, a Matthew Flinders Professor of Psychology and ARC Future Fellow at Flinders University.
“Some observers speculated that these trends might be connected: that conspiracy theories alleging wrongdoing by corrupt elites could be fueling criticism of democracy itself. However, when we began our research, there was little evidence directly linking belief in conspiracy theories to support for different forms of government, such as democracy or autocracy.”
“One particularly relevant context was the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, during which President Trump claimed the election had been rigged,” Thomas explained. “Since free and fair elections are fundamental to representative democracy, we hypothesized that endorsing election-related conspiracy theories might be especially closely tied to broader skepticism about democracy. But we also wanted to explore the alternative—that more anti-democratic people are more likely to endorse conspiracy beliefs.”
The research took place during the 2020 presidential election in the United States and the 2020 general election in New Zealand. The study followed over 1,200 participants—609 from the U.S. and 603 from New Zealand—across three waves of data collection: two weeks before the election, at the time of the election result, and two weeks afterward.
Participants answered questions measuring their belief in election-related conspiracy theories, such as whether mail-in ballots were being tampered with or whether powerful elites were influencing the outcome. They also rated their general trust in democracy and their support for different forms of government, including representative democracy, direct democracy, and authoritarianism.
To examine how views changed over time, the researchers used a statistical method known as a random intercept cross-lagged panel model. This approach allowed them to separate stable, trait-like tendencies from short-term shifts in belief during the election period.
In the United States, the study found no strong evidence that belief in election conspiracy theories led to later increases in criticism of democracy or support for authoritarianism. Instead, the results suggested the opposite pattern: individuals who showed increased support for authoritarian government were more likely to adopt conspiracy beliefs later on.
In New Zealand, where election conspiracies were less widespread and the political climate was less polarized, the results were similarly revealing. There, people who generally supported authoritarianism or were critical of democracy also tended to endorse conspiracy theories about the election.
“Believing election conspiracy theories and being critical of democracy are connected—but perhaps not in the way you’d expect,” Thomas told PsyPost. “We found that individuals who more strongly believed the election had been illegitimately interfered with were also more likely to express stronger criticism of democracy. However, we found no evidence that changes in conspiracy beliefs caused changes in attitudes toward democracy.”
“Instead, our models indicated the opposite: people who already supported authoritarianism were more likely to adopt conspiracy beliefs over time. Strikingly, this pattern emerged in both the United States and New Zealand. In other words, in our data, it was those with pre-existing authoritarian leanings who became more receptive to conspiracy theories—not the other way around.”
Interestingly, across both countries, conspiracy beliefs were associated with both support for authoritarianism and support for direct democracy. While these two systems are quite different—one centralizing power in a strong leader, the other distributing it among the people—the common thread appears to be dissatisfaction with the current representative system. People critical of the status quo may be drawn to alternative forms of governance, even if those alternatives are ideologically opposed.
This study was preregistered, meaning the researchers publicly documented their hypotheses and planned analyses before analyzing the data. Preregistration helps prevent questionable research practices such as cherry-picking results or changing hypotheses after the fact. It also increases transparency and credibility, especially in politically sensitive research areas like this one.
Although the study used robust methods and tracked participants over time, it has some limitations. The researchers relied on self-report measures, and some constructs—like support for authoritarianism—were measured using single items. Future studies could improve on this by using more comprehensive scales.
Another limitation is that the findings are based on two democratic countries with relatively stable institutions. It remains unclear whether the same patterns would hold in countries with weaker democratic norms or in more authoritarian contexts.
The study also could not examine whether belief changes during earlier periods—such as the buildup to the election—had already set the stage for later attitudes. More granular timeframes or longer-term longitudinal data could help capture when and how these beliefs take shape.
“We sampled people a few weeks before election day in both the United States and New Zealand, and our data can therefore only capture change in a window immediately before, during, and shortly after elections,” Thomas noted. “However, it’s possible that people had changed outside of this window of time and our methodology simply didn’t detect those changes.”
“I am very concerned by how the information environment is affecting support for democratic norms and institutions in many Western countries,” she added. “These relationships are complex and comprised of interactions within and between people, communities, and institutions—I’d like to build up a multi-level picture of these processes so that they can be better understood and countered.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13075) Conspiracy beliefs and democratic backsliding: Longitudinal effects of election conspiracy beliefs on criticism of democracy and support for authoritarianism during political contests,” was authored by Emma F. Thomas, Alexander O’Donnell, Danny Osborne, Lucy Bird, Lisette Yip, Eliana Buonaiuto, Morgana Lizzio-Wilson, Linda Skitka, and Michael Wenzel.

(https://www.psypost.org/sadness-leaks-into-social-behavior-and-physiology-and-men-may-overcompensate/) Sadness “leaks” into social behavior and physiology—and men may overcompensate
Apr 21st 2025, 06:00

When someone experiences sadness before a social interaction, the effects may linger—even if they try to hide it. A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001490) Emotion suggests that these subtle emotional residues can influence both behavior and physiological responses in social interactions. Interestingly, the study also found that men and women may express sadness differently when meeting new people. Men who had just recalled a sad event appeared more engaged during the interaction, while women tended to withdraw.
The researchers wanted to understand whether sadness experienced privately could still affect how someone behaves and connects with another person during a subsequent interaction. They also sought to explore whether gender influences how sadness is expressed and perceived. 
Most past studies in this area have focused on high-energy emotions like stress or anger and have largely involved women. This study expanded the scope to include sadness—a quieter, lower-arousal emotion that may be harder to detect—and examined how both men and women respond to it during interactions with strangers.
“We’ve long known that high-arousal emotions, like anxiety, tend to spill over into our interactions. However, anxiety tends to be pretty visible—you might notice an anxious person tense up or stutter,” said study author Kareena del Rosario, a PhD candidate at New York University and member of (https://tessawestlab.com/) the West Interpersonal Perception Lab.
“This made us wonder whether more subtle, low-arousal emotions like sadness also leak out into our social interactions and affect how we behave, even if we’re not consciously aware of it. In other words, when we try to bury our emotions to get through a social situation, are we really keeping them hidden or do they end up seeping out?”
The researchers recruited 230 adults who were randomly paired into same-gender dyads with someone they had never met. Before meeting each other, participants were placed into one of two conditions. 
In the “sad dyad” condition, one member of the pair recalled a personal experience of deep sadness, while their partner recalled a neutral, routine experience. In the “control dyad” condition, both members recalled neutral experiences. Participants then engaged in a series of cooperative activities together, including conversation and a team-based word game.
Throughout the interaction, the researchers measured several indicators of emotional expression and social engagement. This included how much participants smiled or gestured, how sad they appeared to trained observers, and how their physiological responses changed over time. 
One key measure was “physiologic linkage,” or how closely one person’s body responses predicted changes in their partner’s physiology. This was assessed using sensors that tracked heart function, specifically looking at a measure called preejection period, which is sensitive to emotional engagement and effort.
The researchers found that sadness did not disappear during the interaction—it showed up in subtle but measurable ways. “One of the main takeaways is that even a brief moment of sadness (e.g., reflecting on a personal experience for a few minutes) can have a lingering effect on behavior, and in turn, affect how others respond to you,” del Rosario told PsyPost. “However, people don’t always respond in the ways you might expect.”
These effects, however, were shaped by gender. Men who had recalled a sad event smiled and gestured more during the interaction than men in the control group. 
Men’s behavior appeared to signal increased engagement, and their partners showed stronger physiological linkage to them. This suggests that even though the men may have tried to conceal their sadness, their behavior drew their partner in and shaped how connected the pair became.
In contrast, women who had recalled a sad event smiled less than their partners, signaling disengagement. These women also did not elicit strong physiologic linkage in their partners. Female pairs in which one member had recalled a sad event appeared less attuned to each other than those in the control group. In short, sadness appeared to lead to greater social withdrawal for women and greater visible engagement for men.
The researchers interpret this difference in light of social norms. Sadness is often viewed as more socially acceptable for women than for men. Men may feel pressure to avoid appearing vulnerable, especially when interacting with other men. 
The increased smiling and gesturing observed in sad men may reflect an attempt to counteract their sadness and appear more engaged or upbeat—perhaps as a form of emotional regulation. This kind of compensatory behavior is consistent with previous findings that people sometimes try to mask uncomfortable emotions by overcorrecting in social situations.
Women, on the other hand, may feel less pressure to hide their sadness. Their reduced smiling and lack of strong physiologic connection with their partners may reflect a more authentic expression of the emotion. This withdrawal is consistent with how sadness is typically characterized: as a quiet emotion that leads people to pull back from others. Yet in a first-time social interaction, this can affect how connected two people become.
“We were really struck by the gender differences in our study,” del Rosario said. “Women tended to show more typical signs of sadness by being less expressive and engaged, whereas men seemed to amplify their engagement. We suspect that because men and women are socialized to express sadness differently, men’s heightened engagement may have been an effort to counteract their earlier sad feelings by overcompensating in their behavior.”
Interestingly, the participants themselves did not report feeling especially sad during the interaction. Self-reported emotions were low across the board after the activities, suggesting that the effects of the sadness recall were operating below conscious awareness. The influence of sadness seemed to show up more clearly in behavior and physiology than in how people described their own feelings.
The researchers also explored whether physiological coordination between partners was linked to their behaviors. They found some evidence that smiling was associated with stronger physiologic linkage, although this connection was modest. They also conducted a secondary analysis of another physiological signal, called respiratory sinus arrhythmia, which is linked to social bonding and responsiveness. Here too, differences emerged. Partners of sad participants showed more attunement, while the sad participants themselves showed less.
These results suggest that even when someone doesn’t talk about feeling sad, that emotion can affect how they interact with others—and how others respond to them. The effects are subtle, but they may play an important role in shaping first impressions, group dynamics, and even long-term relationships.
The study, like all research, has some caveats to consider. The study focused only on interactions between same-gender, cisgender individuals, meaning the findings may not generalize to interactions across gender lines or among people with more diverse gender identities. Also, the participants were strangers meeting for the first time, which may have amplified the effects of social norms. 
Future research could examine how sadness plays out in interactions between friends, romantic partners, or people of different genders. It would also be useful to investigate how people behave when they are explicitly aware that their partner is feeling sad, rather than relying on subtle cues.
“Going forward, I’m interested in expanding this work to explore how various negative states, such as those directed toward others (e.g., perceiving an interaction partner as immoral), can seep into and shape our social interactions,” del Rosario explained. 
“Additionally, while this study focused on how sadness affects how people engage with strangers when they have to work together, we’re also interested in its impact on other social contexts, such as in early dating relationships. Expanding the scope of this work will help us better understand how our inner experiences shape social connection.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001490) Working Through Emotions: Sadness Predicts Social Engagement and Physiologic Linkage for Men and Disengagement for Women in Dyadic Interactions,” was authored by Kareena S. del Rosario, Tessa V. West, Erika H. Siegel, and Wendy Berry Mendes.

(https://www.psypost.org/your-brain-doesnt-learn-the-way-we-thought-according-to-new-neuroscience-breakthrough/) Your brain doesn’t learn the way we thought, according to new neuroscience breakthrough
Apr 20th 2025, 16:00

Every day, people are constantly learning and forming new memories. When you pick up a new hobby, try a recipe a friend recommended or read the latest world news, your brain stores many of these memories (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/long-term-memory) for years or decades.
But how does your brain achieve this incredible feat?
In our newly published research in the journal Science, we have identified some of the (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ads4706) “rules” the brain uses to learn.
Learning in the brain
The human brain is made up of (https://www.brainfacts.org/core-concepts/your-complex-brain) billions of nerve cells. These neurons conduct electrical pulses that carry information, much like how computers use binary code to carry data.
These electrical pulses are communicated with other neurons through connections between them called (https://www.brainfacts.org/core-concepts/how-neurons-communicate) synapses. Individual neurons have branching extensions known as dendrites that can receive thousands of electrical inputs from other cells. Dendrites transmit these inputs to the main body of the neuron, where it then (https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2286) integrates all these signals to generate its own electrical pulses.
It is the (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-092619-094115) collective activity of these electrical pulses across specific groups of neurons that form the representations of different information and experiences within the brain.
[Neurons are the basic units of the brain. (https://openstax.org/books/biology-2e/pages/35-1-neurons-and-glial-cells) OpenStax, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) CC BY-SA]For decades, neuroscientists have thought that the brain learns by changing how neurons are connected to one another. As new information and experiences alter how neurons communicate with each other and change their collective activity patterns, some synaptic connections are made stronger while others are made weaker. This process of (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-090919-022842) synaptic plasticity is what produces representations of new information and experiences within your brain.
In order for your brain to produce the correct representations during learning, however, the right synaptic connections must undergo the right changes at the right time. The “rules” that your brain uses to select which synapses to change during learning – what neuroscientists call the (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2018.08.003) credit assignment problem – have remained largely unclear.
Defining the rules
We decided to monitor the activity of individual synaptic connections within the brain during learning to see whether we could identify activity patterns that determine which connections would get stronger or weaker.
To do this, we genetically encoded biosensors in the neurons of mice that would light up in response to synaptic and neural activity. We monitored this activity in real time as the mice learned a task that involved pressing a lever to a certain position after a sound cue in order to receive water.
We were surprised to find that the synapses on a neuron don’t all follow the same rule. For example, scientists have often thought that neurons follow what are called (https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0175) Hebbian rules, where neurons that consistently fire together, wire together. Instead, we saw that synapses on different locations of dendrites of the same neuron (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ads4706) followed different rules to determine whether connections got stronger or weaker. Some synapses adhered to the traditional Hebbian rule where neurons that consistently fire together strengthen their connections. Other synapses did something different and completely independent of the neuron’s activity.
Our findings suggest that neurons, by simultaneously using two different sets of rules for learning across different groups of synapses, rather than a single uniform rule, can more precisely tune the different types of inputs they receive to appropriately represent new information in the brain.
In other words, by following different rules in the process of learning, neurons can multitask and perform multiple functions in parallel.
Future applications
This discovery provides a clearer understanding of how the connections between neurons change during learning. Given that most brain disorders, including (https://doi.org/10.2174/1871527316666170113120853) degenerative and (https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2018.16) psychiatric conditions, involve some form of malfunctioning synapses, this has potentially important implications for human health and society.
For example, (https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.4050) depression may develop from an excessive weakening of the synaptic connections within certain areas of the brain that make it harder to experience pleasure. By understanding how synaptic plasticity normally operates, scientists may be able to better understand what goes wrong in depression and then develop therapies to more effectively treat it.
[Changes to connections in the amygdala – colored green – are implicated in depression. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/nihgov/43505070124/) William J. Giardino/Luis de Lecea Lab/Stanford University via NIH/Flickr, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) CC BY-NC]These findings may also have implications for artificial intelligence. The artificial neural networks underlying AI have largely been inspired by (https://news.mit.edu/2017/explained-neural-networks-deep-learning-0414) how the brain works. However, the learning rules researchers use to update the connections within the networks and train the models are usually uniform and also (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.12.005) not biologically plausible. Our research may provide insights into how to develop more biologically realistic AI models that are more efficient, have better performance, or both.
There is still a long way to go before we can use this information to develop new therapies for human brain disorders. While we found that synaptic connections on different groups of dendrites use different learning rules, we don’t know exactly why or how. In addition, while the ability of neurons to simultaneously use multiple learning methods increases their capacity to encode information, what other properties this may give them isn’t yet clear.
Future research will hopefully answer these questions and further our understanding of how the brain learns.
 
This article is republished from (https://theconversation.com) The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the (https://theconversation.com/how-does-your-brain-create-new-memories-neuroscientists-discover-rules-for-how-neurons-encode-new-information-254558) original article.

(https://www.psypost.org/life-satisfaction-and-personality-share-strong-genetic-roots-new-findings-reveal/) Life satisfaction and personality share strong genetic roots, new findings reveal
Apr 20th 2025, 14:00

New research published in the (https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000550) Journal of Personality & Social Psychology shows that both personality traits and life satisfaction are significantly more heritable than previously thought.
How much of who we are is inherited from our family? For decades, psychologists have tried to provide a quantitative answer through estimates of heritability. Traditional studies, often based on self-reports from twins, have placed the heritability of the Big Five personality traits around 40-50%. However, these studies may provide only an upper limit, reflecting both genetic and shared environmental influences; they also tend to rely on a single method of measurement.
More recent evidence from studies of ordinary relatives, such as siblings or parents and children, suggests that personality trait similarities are much lower, typically around 15%. This has raised questions about whether twin studies overestimate heritability or whether single-method approaches fail to capture the full picture.
In this study, René Mõttus and colleagues grounded their research in the idea that self-reports often include biases that obscure the “true” familial resemblance. By integrating informant reports (evaluations from people who know the participant well), the researchers aimed to separate genuine trait similarity from methodological noise.
The study used data from the Estonian Biobank, a large-scale, population-based genetic and psychological research project. Participants included 32,004 Estonian-speaking adults (age 17-102, 71% female) who had completed a comprehensive self-report survey on personality and life satisfaction. Importantly, genetic data allowed the researchers to identify relationships among participants, including parent-child, siblings, and second-degree relatives, resulting in 24,118 relative pairs for the main self-report analysis.
A smaller subset of 2,258 participants (1,386 relative pairs) also had informant reports available, where each person was rated by someone close to them (mostly spouses or long-term partners). This dual-source design allowed the researchers to estimate trait similarity based on information shared across raters, what they called “true correlations.” All participants completed a 198-item measure called the 100-NP, which includes Big Five traits and additional dimensions. Life satisfaction was measured with three targeted items and validated against established well-being measures.
Advanced statistical models, including multigroup structural equation modeling, were used to estimate additive genetic influences (heritability) while controlling for biases in single-rater data.
Self-report data alone replicated previous findings. Correlations in Big Five traits between parents and children or siblings hovered around 0.13 to 0.15. For second-degree relatives, correlations were even smaller, around 0.07. This suggests that familial resemblance in personality is modest when relying solely on self-assessments.
However, when using the multimethod design, “true correlations” (based on shared variance across self- and informant reports) were considerably higher. Parent-offspring correlations averaged around 0.25, and sibling correlations about 0.20—roughly 35-50% higher than single-method estimates. These true correlations translated into narrow-sense heritability estimates of around 42% for personality traits and 47% for life satisfaction—substantially higher than the 26% estimated from self-reports alone.
Furthermore, life satisfaction was just as heritable as personality traits and shared about 80% of its genetic variance with neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness. Nearly half of life satisfaction’s correlation with these traits was genetically driven.
Notably, there was little evidence that shared family environments influenced these traits. Second-degree relatives who did not grow up together were just as similar as those who did, reinforcing the view that familial resemblance stems primarily from genetics, not upbringing.
The authors acknowledge that despite efforts to isolate true trait similarity, the generalizability of the findings may be constrained by sample composition (primarily Estonian participants) and reliance on informants who were not randomly assigned, which may introduce its own biases.
Overall, this study underscores that life satisfaction and personality are more strongly shaped by genetics than commonly reported, and highlights the value of multimethod designs for accurately estimating psychological heritability.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000550) Familial Similarity and Heritability of Personality Traits and Life Satisfaction Are Higher Than Shown in Typical Single-Method Studies,” was authored by René Mõttus, Christian Kandler, Michelle Luciano, Tõnu Esko, Uku Vainik, and the Estonian Biobank Research Team.

(https://www.psypost.org/incel-forum-users-arrive-angry-and-their-language-gets-more-extreme-over-time/) Incel forum users arrive angry—and their language gets more extreme over time
Apr 20th 2025, 12:00

A study of prolific users on incel forums found that these individuals express more anger in their comments than users on other comparable social media platforms. However, they did not express greater sadness. The researchers also found that many users were already using incel-specific vocabulary when they joined the forum, suggesting that their exposure to incel ideology likely occurred elsewhere on the internet. The study was published in the (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605241239451) Journal of Interpersonal Violence.
Incels, short for “involuntary celibates,” are members of an online subculture who describe themselves as unable to find a romantic or sexual partner despite wanting one. They refer to this condition as “inceldom.” This community is predominantly made up of men who express frustration and resentment toward those who are sexually active, particularly women and more sexually successful men.
Members of this group often describe feeling lonely and rejected. Conversations within incel communities tend to center on perceived personal unattractiveness, social disadvantages, and the belief that they will never find a romantic partner. Some incels attribute their difficulties to societal standards and gender norms, which they believe unfairly favor physically and socially attractive individuals.
The subculture has been associated with misogyny, with some incels promoting socially conservative ideas in which men control partner selection. The group has gained public attention in recent years due to violent acts committed by individuals identifying as incels or endorsing similar ideologies.
Study author Melissa S. de Roos and her colleagues set out to examine how prolonged interaction on an incel forum affects users’ language, particularly regarding expressions of anger, sadness, and violent extremist language. They hypothesized that the longer users participated in the forum, the more likely their language would reflect increased anger, sadness, and extremist sentiment.
To investigate this, the researchers collected data from the public section of one of the most active incel forums, https://www.incels.is. Using two Python libraries (BeautifulSoup and Requests), they scraped 100 pages of forum posts, each containing 100 posts, on the last day of March 2022.
They focused on comments made between January and March 2022, totaling 135,728 posts. From this dataset, they isolated comments made by users who had posted at least 100 times during the period. These 166 individuals were classified as prolific users. The researchers then analyzed their comments for expressions of sadness, anger, and violent extremist language.
To detect anger and sadness, they relied on dictionaries from the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) tool. The anger dictionary includes 181 words such as “hate,” “mad,” “angry,” and “frustrated,” while the sadness dictionary includes 134 words such as “sad,” “disappoint,” and “cry.” To assess violent extremism, they used a custom dictionary containing 174 words organized into three categories: verbs describing violence (e.g., “stab,” “kill,” “rape”), nouns for weapons (e.g., “gun,” “knife,” “acid”), and nouns used to dehumanize out-groups (e.g., “femoids,” “roasties,” “curries”).
The researchers then compared the frequency of these types of language on the incel forum to typical language use on Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit.
Their findings showed that prolific users on the incel forum expressed significantly more anger than users on the other platforms. However, they did not express greater sadness. In contrast, violent extremist language—while rare or absent on the other platforms—was frequently present on the incel forum.
To explore how language changed over time, the researchers examined posts from users when they first joined the forum. They found that new users already displayed high levels of anger in their initial posts. Although expressions of anger, sadness, and extremist language increased slightly over time, the rise plateaued, suggesting no ongoing escalation.
These findings suggest that many users arrive at the forum already immersed in the incel worldview. The increase in extreme or emotionally charged language appears to stabilize rather than intensify with continued participation. The researchers believe this points to exposure and alignment with incel ideology happening elsewhere online, prior to forum membership.
“Our findings revealed that incels exhibited elevated levels of anger compared to other social media platforms. Additionally, a correlation was found between anger and the use of violent and extremist language, suggesting that anger may serve as a precursor to adopting extremist rhetoric. Furthermore, the findings suggest the possibility that individuals who join the forum often bring with them preexisting emotional distress in the form of anger and sadness, which is reflected in their forum posts,” the study authors concluded.
The study sheds light on the expressions of anger, sadness, and extremist views on an incel online forum. However, it should be noted that the study analyzed comments made in a very specific time period on one specific platform. Language use can change over time and it can be different in other online communities.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241239451) The Angry Echo Chamber: A Study of Extremist and Emotional Language Changes in Incel Communities Over Time,” was authored by Melissa S. de Roos, Laura Veldhuizen-Ochodničanová, and Alexis Hanna.

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/20250421/b08c3474/attachment.htm>