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/specific-narcissistic-traits-appear-to-heighten-veteran-ptsd-risk/) Specific narcissistic traits appear to heighten veteran PTSD risk
Mar 6th 2025, 08:00

A recent study published in the (https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.23142) Journal of Traumatic Stress has shed light on why some veterans develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after combat deployments while others do not. The research found that certain personality traits, specifically those related to a form of narcissism, may increase a veteran’s vulnerability to PTSD, even when considering their combat experiences. The study suggests that understanding personality could be important in helping veterans who struggle after returning from war.
Researchers became interested in this topic because, for a long time, the focus of PTSD research has been on the traumatic events themselves. It is widely accepted that PTSD can develop after someone experiences or witnesses something deeply disturbing, such as combat. However, not everyone who goes through trauma develops PTSD. This suggests that other factors, beyond just the event, are at play. Scientists have started to consider that individual differences, like personality, might influence how people react to trauma.
Narcissism, often thought of as excessive self-love, actually has a darker side called pathological narcissism. This is not just about being confident; it involves a deeply troubled sense of self. Researchers have observed in civilian populations that pathological narcissism is linked to the development and continuation of PTSD after trauma.
People with this form of narcissism may have fragile self-esteem and be overly concerned with themselves, which can make them more vulnerable to the negative effects of traumatic experiences. However, it was not clear if this connection between narcissism and PTSD also existed in veterans, a group highly exposed to trauma. The new study aimed to investigate if narcissistic personality features contribute to PTSD symptoms in veterans, and if so, how much this contribution is compared to the impact of their combat experiences alone.
“I came up with this project with my co-authors because of an interest in how personality, generally, can create risks for different mental illnesses in the face of adversity,” said study author Sterling Nenninger, a PhD student at Long Island University. “Some people might become depressed during a major life change, while others might become anxious, and some might have no symptoms at all. Some call this line of research putting the ‘person’ back into psychology, because we all have unique backgrounds and characteristics that shape our reactions to situations.”
To explore this, the researchers recruited 179 veterans who had been deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. These veterans were from various military branches and ranks. The participants were contacted through veteran student offices at a university in New York City, online forums, and social media. They completed questionnaires either online or using paper and pencil.
The questionnaires measured several things. First, to assess combat experience, veterans completed a questionnaire called the Combat Experiences scale. This asked about their direct experiences in combat, like witnessing deaths or being in firefights. Second, to measure narcissistic personality features, they used the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. This tool assesses different aspects of pathological narcissism, including both grandiose narcissism (characterized by arrogance and a sense of superiority) and vulnerable narcissism (characterized by insecurity and sensitivity to criticism). Finally, to gauge PTSD symptoms, the veterans completed the PTSD Checklist. This questionnaire asks about common PTSD symptoms like intrusive thoughts, avoidance behaviors, and feeling constantly on edge, specifically in relation to stressful military experiences.
After collecting the data, the researchers used a statistical method called regression analysis. This helped them determine if narcissistic personality features predicted PTSD symptoms, even after accounting for the level of combat experience each veteran reported. They first looked at whether overall pathological narcissism was linked to PTSD symptoms beyond combat exposure. Then, they examined whether the two different types of narcissism, grandiose and vulnerable, had different relationships with PTSD.
The study revealed that higher levels of pathological narcissism were indeed associated with more severe PTSD symptoms in veterans, even when considering their combat experiences. In fact, narcissistic features explained a significant additional portion of the variation in PTSD symptoms beyond what combat experience alone could explain.
“I was surprised at the strength of the relationship between narcissism and PTSD,” Nenninger told PsyPost.
When the researchers separated narcissism into its two types, they found that vulnerable narcissism was strongly linked to PTSD symptoms. Veterans with more vulnerable narcissistic features reported significantly higher levels of PTSD. However, grandiose narcissism was not related to PTSD symptoms. This suggests that the insecure, sensitive, and shame-prone aspects of narcissism, rather than the arrogant and entitled aspects, are what might increase a veteran’s risk for PTSD after combat.
“People may see narcissism and think only of grandiosity, which is a the classic egotistical presentation of narcissism,” Nenninger explained. “Our study actually found vulnerable narcissism, which is a much more insecure and self-doubting form of narcissism, was the main driver of the narcissism and PTSD relationship. This distinction between forms of narcissism needs to be researched much more thoroughly to see why this was the case.”
“The main takeaway is not narcissism specific, but that personality, that is, who you are and how you interact with the world, can interact with how you react to, and the meaning you make from, a traumatic event. The events that happen to us tend to impact us in highly personal ways and be filtered through our own way of viewing ourselves and the world.”
Like all research, the study has some limitations that should be considered.
“The major limitation of this study is that it’s cross-sectional (one time-point) instead of longitudinal (multiple-time points),” Nenninger noted. “This means that we can’t say that narcissism causes PTSD after a trauma, because we did not test for that. We can only say narcissism is correlated to PTSD in a robust way that has not been shown in research yet.”
Ultimately, a deeper understanding of the interplay between personality and trauma will be important for developing better ways to support veterans’ mental health and help prevent or treat PTSD.
“I want to continue this line of research on personality, but focus on methods beyond self-report questionnaires, which can be unreliable, to get a deeper understanding of individual personality,” Nenninger said.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.23142) Linking pathological narcissism to posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans,” was authored by Sterling Nenninger, Brian R. Van Buren, Ashley L. Greene, and Kevin B. Meehan.

(https://www.psypost.org/brain-scans-reveal-how-repeated-exposure-to-emotional-events-shapes-memory/) Brain scans reveal how repeated exposure to emotional events shapes memory
Mar 6th 2025, 06:00

Why do some memories, especially those tied to strong emotions, feel so much more vivid and persistent? A recent study published in The Journal of Neuroscience provides answers, revealing that repeated exposure to emotional events leads to the formation of exceptionally stable memory patterns in the brain. This process, initiated by the amygdala during the first encounter with the event, explains why emotional memories can be so powerful and long-lasting.
Emotional events tend to stick in our minds more vividly than everyday occurrences. This is generally a helpful ability, allowing us to learn from experiences that carry emotional weight. However, this strong emotional memory system can sometimes become problematic, particularly in conditions like posttraumatic stress disorder, where intrusive and distressing memories can be a hallmark of the disorder.
While scientists have learned a great deal about how we remember emotional events that happen just once, much less is understood about how our brains process and remember emotional events that we experience repeatedly. This is a significant gap in our knowledge because, in real life, many emotional experiences, whether positive or negative, tend to recur. To address this, researchers aimed to explore the brain mechanisms responsible for remembering repeated emotional events. They were particularly interested in testing two competing ideas about how repetition strengthens memory.
One idea suggests that each time we experience an event, it is encoded slightly differently in the brain due to changes in context or other factors, creating multiple pathways to access the memory. The other idea proposes that repetition reinforces the original memory trace, making it stronger each time it is reactivated. Previous studies focusing on neutral, non-emotional events have leaned towards the reinforcement idea, but it was unknown if this principle also applied to emotional memories.
“Most research so far examined memory for emotional events that were encountered just once and the brain mechanisms associated with the repeated exposure to the same emotional events were largely unknown,” explained study author (https://www.psy.uni-hamburg.de/en/arbeitsbereiche/kognitionspsychologie/personen/schwabe-lars.html) Lars Schwabe, the Head of Cognitive Psychology at the University of Hamburg. “We wanted to investigate whether the repeated exposure to an emotional event is linked to more robust/similar neural representations or to more variable/specific representations and which mechanisms would drive the robust vs. variable representations.”
To conduct their investigation, the research team recruited 103 healthy adults. These volunteers underwent brain scanning using magnetic resonance imaging while participating in a memory task. During the scan, participants viewed a series of images across three consecutive sessions. In each session, they were shown the exact same set of 30 emotionally negative images and 30 emotionally neutral images. The images, depicting a range of scenes, were selected from established image databases and online sources.
The researchers made sure that the negative and neutral images were comparable in terms of visual complexity and whether they featured people or animals. Within each session, the images were presented in a random order. Each image was displayed for three seconds, followed by a brief pause. Participants were instructed to pay close attention and try to memorize the images, as they were informed that their memory would be tested shortly after.
To ensure participants remained focused during the task, they were asked to press a button each time a fixation cross appeared on the screen. Immediately after the brain scanning session, participants completed a memory test outside of the scanner. They were given 15 minutes to verbally recall as many of the images as possible, describing them in detail. These verbal accounts were audio-recorded and subsequently evaluated by three independent raters who judged whether each recalled image was clearly identifiable from the participant’s description. The raters showed a very high level of agreement in their evaluations.
To validate that the images truly differed in emotional content, the participants, on a separate day, rated each image for how negative or positive and how emotionally arousing they found it. As expected, the negative images were rated as significantly more negative and emotionally arousing than the neutral images. The brain scan data collected during the image viewing task was then analyzed to examine both the overall level of brain activity and the patterns of activity in different brain regions known to be involved in emotion and memory, such as the amygdala, the hippocampus, and the neocortex.
The results of the study confirmed that participants remembered significantly more of the emotionally negative images compared to the neutral images, demonstrating the well-known emotional memory advantage. Analysis of the brain scans revealed that the amygdala and the anterior hippocampus showed greater activity when participants initially viewed negative images that they later remembered, compared to neutral images.
However, this heightened activity in these emotional memory regions for negative images diminished with repeated viewings. In contrast, for neutral images, activity in these areas remained relatively stable across repetitions. When examining the neocortex, the outer layer of the brain, researchers observed a distinct pattern. Brain regions in the front of the neocortex, including the inferior frontal gyrus and anterior temporal cortex, displayed an initial surge in activity for emotional memories, mirroring the amygdala and anterior hippocampus. This activity also decreased as the images were repeated.
Conversely, brain regions located in the back of the neocortex, such as the posterior temporal and parietal cortices, exhibited increasing activity over repetitions for neutral memories, but to a lesser extent for emotional memories. Beyond overall activity levels, the researchers investigated the stability of brain activity patterns. They discovered that for negative images that were successfully remembered, the patterns of brain activity in specific neocortical regions became more consistent across repetitions. These regions included parts of the prefrontal cortex, posterior parietal cortex, and posterior superior temporal sulcus. This indicates that the brain was essentially reinstating a similar pattern of activity each time a negative image was presented.
Further analysis indicated that this pattern stability in prefrontal cortex, superior parietal lobule, and posterior superior temporal sulcus was specifically linked to remembering individual emotional images, rather than just emotional images in general.
Finally, the researchers found that the initial activity of the amygdala when participants first saw a negative image played a key role in this process. A stronger initial amygdala response was associated with more stable brain activity patterns in the superior parietal lobule over repetitions, which in turn contributed to improved memory for those emotional images. This suggests that the amygdala’s initial emotional reaction triggers a mechanism that strengthens memory by enhancing the consistency of brain representations over time.
“The repeated exposure to emotional, compared to emotionally neutral, events leads to more robust and stable neocortical representations and this increase in pattern robustness is driven by the initial response of the brain’s major emotional processing center, the amygdala,” Schwabe told PsyPost.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2406-23.2025) Memory boost for recurring emotional events is driven by initial amygdala response promoting stable neocortical patterns across repetitions,” was authored by Valentina Krenz, Arjen Alink, Benno Roozendaal, Tobias Sommer, and Lars Schwabe.

(https://www.psypost.org/ignoring-others-for-your-phone-research-links-phubbing-to-lower-empathy/) Ignoring others for your phone? Research links phubbing to lower empathy
Mar 5th 2025, 16:00

A study conducted in Israel suggests that when people are ready to engage in phubbing, they experience a slight reduction in empathy. When empathy declines, individuals become somewhat less willing to act prosocially. The paper was published in (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00332941241284917) Psychological Reports.
The term “phubbing” is a blend of “phone” and “snubbing.” It describes the act of ignoring people in social situations by focusing on a smartphone instead. Phubbing commonly occurs during conversations, meals, or gatherings. Individuals who engage in phubbing are physically present in social settings but are not fully mentally engaged, as their attention is split between their smartphone and live interactions. This behavior can make others feel unimportant or excluded.
In this way, phubbing can harm relationships by reducing face-to-face communication and emotional connection. Studies suggest that phubbing is linked to lower relationship satisfaction and increased feelings of loneliness. It can also negatively impact mental health by reinforcing social isolation and diminishing meaningful interactions.
The rise of social media and smartphone addiction has made phubbing increasingly common in everyday life. In a 2015 survey, 90% of respondents reported using their phones while engaging with others socially, while 86% reported observing others doing the same.
Study authors Tomer Schmidt-Barad and Lily Chernyak-Hai sought to explore the relationships between proneness to phubbing, empathy, and prosociality. They were also interested in whether self-control might play a role in the connection between phubbing and prosociality. Prosociality refers to the tendency to engage in behaviors that benefit others, such as helping, sharing, or cooperating.
The researchers conducted two studies. The first was an online survey designed to examine the relationship between trait phubbing—i.e., the habitual tendency to engage in phubbing—and prosociality. The study included 220 adult English speakers recruited via Prolific, with an average age of 33 years. Participants completed assessments of phubbing habits (the Generic Scale of Phubbing), empathy (the Measure of State Empathy Scale), prosociality (the Prosocial Behavior Intentions Scale), and self-control (the Brief Trait Self-Control Scale).
The second study was an experiment involving 362 Hebrew-speaking participants, 199 of whom were female. Their average age was 47 years. Participants completed a phubbing priming task and were divided into two groups. One group was asked to recall an instance where they used their phone while engaged in a face-to-face interaction. The other group was asked to recall a situation where they refrained from using their phone during a face-to-face interaction. The goal of these tasks was to prime participants into a state of either high or low personal power, making them more or less likely to engage in phubbing throughout the rest of the study. The researchers conducted a pilot study to verify that this manipulation was effective, and the results confirmed that it was.
After the priming task, participants completed an online survey containing the same assessments of prosociality, empathy, and self-control used in the first study.
The results of the first study showed that individuals more prone to phubbing tended to have slightly lower self-control and prosocial intentions. However, phubbing was not associated with empathy. The researchers tested a statistical model suggesting that phubbing leads to lower self-control, which, in turn, leads to lower empathy. According to this model, lower empathy results in reduced prosociality. The findings supported the possibility of such a relationship between these psychological characteristics.
The results of the second study showed that individuals who recalled a situation in which they had phubbed someone reported feeling slightly less empathy on average than those who recalled a situation in which they had refrained from using their phone. Empathy was positively associated with greater self-control and higher prosociality.
The researchers also tested a statistical model proposing that engaging in phubbing leads to reduced empathy, which, in turn, results in fewer prosocial behavioral intentions. The results supported the plausibility of this relationship.
“Our results offer preliminary evidence that phubbing has a causal negative impact on pro-social intentions, and that empathy consistently mediates this effect. Our results also suggest a differential effect to habitual versus momentary phubbing, suggesting that the former predicts deficits in self-control, while the latter does not,” the study authors concluded.
The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the psychological underpinnings of phubbing. However, it is important to note that neither of the two studies was based on observations of actual phubbing behaviors. Additionally, the associations between phubbing assessments and the other psychological characteristics were all relatively weak.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241284917) Phubbing Makes the Heart Grow Callous: Effects of Phubbing on Pro-social Behavioral Intentions, Empathy and Self-Control,” was authored by Tomer Schmidt-Barad and Lily Chernyak-Hai.

(https://www.psypost.org/women-with-adhd-diagnosed-partners-report-lower-quality-of-life-and-higher-depression/) Women with ADHD-diagnosed partners report lower quality of life and higher depression
Mar 5th 2025, 14:00

A new study published in the (https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547241280607) Journal of Attention Disorders reveals that women in relationships with men diagnosed with ADHD experience higher levels of depression and a lower quality of life. However, engaging in health-promoting activities, such as exercise and self-care, may help mitigate these negative effects.
ADHD in adulthood can create significant challenges in romantic relationships, including poor communication, financial stress, and reduced intimacy. Women often bear the burden more heavily, with some describing their experiences as similar to caring for an “additional child.”
While many studies focus on individuals with ADHD, less research has explored how the condition affects their partners. To address this gap, Dana Zeides Taubin and her research team at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem examined the mental health consequences for women in these relationships and explored potential coping strategies.
The study involved 100 heterosexual couples, recruited primarily through social media, in which the male partner had a self-reported ADHD diagnosis. The men were between the ages of 20 and 60 and had been in a cohabiting relationship for at least two years.
The women, who averaged 33 years old, did not have ADHD themselves. They completed surveys assessing their depressive symptoms, quality of life, and participation in health-promoting activities. Additionally, they rated their partners’ ADHD-related impairments, including difficulties with time management, impulsivity, and emotional regulation.
The researchers then used structural equation modeling (SEM) to analyze the relationships between ADHD-related impairment, depressive symptoms, and quality of life.
Several important patterns emerged. Women with partners who exhibited greater ADHD-related impairments were more likely to experience depression. They also reported a lower quality of life, particularly in social and psychological well-being.
However, women who frequently engaged in health-promoting activities—such as exercising, setting aside personal time, or socializing with close friends—reported fewer depressive symptoms and better overall well-being. Furthermore, those whose partners consistently took ADHD medication reported a higher quality of life than those whose partners were inconsistent with treatment.
Taubin and colleagues noted that women living with ADHD-diagnosed partners may experience more severe mental health challenges compared to caregivers of individuals with other chronic conditions: “notably, the depression rates in our study exceeded those reported for the broader Israeli female population. Additionally, [the women’s quality of life] scores were lower than those from comparable studies on partners of individuals with other health challenges such as schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, and stroke.”
Overall, the findings underscore that both medical treatment for ADHD and self-care strategies for partners may improve relationship satisfaction and mental well-being.
While this study provides valuable insights, it has some limitations. Notably, it focused solely on heterosexual couples, meaning its findings may not be generalizable to same-sex relationships or relationships where both partners have ADHD. Future research should explore a more diverse range of relationships and track couples over time to examine how these dynamics evolve.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547241280607) Depressive Symptoms and Quality of Life Among Women Living With a Partner Diagnosed With ADHD,” was authored by Dana Zeides Taubin, Haya Fogel-Grinvald, and Adina Maeir.

(https://www.psypost.org/partisan-tv-consumption-more-widespread-and-isolated-than-previously-thought/) Partisan TV consumption more widespread and isolated than previously thought
Mar 5th 2025, 12:00

A new study published in the (https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/D1NDLH) American Journal of Political Science has found that partisan television news consumption is more common than many might expect, with about 15% of Americans spending a significant amount of time each month watching channels that lean heavily to one side of the political spectrum. The research also challenges the common perception that partisan television audiences are made up solely of highly engaged partisans. Instead, a significant portion of viewers are weak partisans, independents, or even those whose political views do not align with the network they habitually watch.
There has been ongoing discussion for decades about how the news media affects what people think and believe about politics. The rise of television channels like Fox News, which present news from a distinctly partisan viewpoint, has intensified these discussions. Some experts worry that these channels could have a strong influence on public opinion because, unlike traditional news broadcasts that often try to present different sides of an issue, partisan channels offer a single perspective.
This could lead to “echo chambers” where people are only exposed to information that confirms their existing beliefs. Previous experiments have shown that when people are encouraged to watch partisan television, their political attitudes can shift. Given that Americans spend a lot of time watching television, these echo chambers could have a real impact.
However, some theories suggest that partisan television might not be as influential as some fear. One idea is that people mostly watch media that already agrees with their views. This is called “selective exposure.” If this is true, then people who choose to watch partisan television probably already have strong, aligned political opinions, leaving little room for the television to change their minds. According to this view, partisan media is more of a reflection of existing political divides than a cause of them.
Another perspective focuses on people’s desire to be accurate. It suggests that if people consume a variety of news sources, they can get a more complete picture and recognize the biases of each source. In this case, partisan television’s influence might be limited because viewers are also exposed to other viewpoints that help them understand and account for partisan bias.
The new study wanted to investigate whether partisan television might have a greater ability to shape public opinion than these theories suggest. The researchers proposed that people might watch partisan television for reasons beyond just wanting to confirm their beliefs or be accurate. They suggested that people might be drawn to these channels because of engaging hosts, attractive visuals, or dramatic storytelling, and that watching these channels could become a habit.
To conduct their study, the researchers utilized three unique sets of data that linked television viewing behavior with information about people’s political views and actions. The first data source came from Nielsen, a company that measures television viewership for the media industry. Nielsen uses a panel of households across the United States who have devices installed in their homes that record what television programs are being watched.
For this study, the researchers worked with Nielsen to connect this viewership data with public records of voter registration, which include information on people’s party affiliation and voting history. This allowed them to see how much partisan television different types of voters were watching.
The second data source was from FourthWall, a company that collects data from cable television boxes. Similar to the Nielsen data, this data was linked to voter registration records. However, this data was limited to a few specific geographic areas.
The final data source was from smart televisions. Many modern smart TVs can track what is being watched and send this information back to the television manufacturer. The researchers obtained this anonymous viewing data from a media analytics company called Bully Pulpit Interactive. This data was then linked to a large survey conducted by the researchers, which asked people about their political attitudes, as well as to voter registration records. This provided a rich dataset combining actual viewing behavior with detailed information about people’s political beliefs.
Across all three datasets, the researchers focused on viewership of Fox News as a right-leaning channel and CNN and MSNBC combined as left-leaning channels. They also looked at viewership of traditional national broadcast news programs. To define a significant level of partisan television consumption, they used a threshold of watching at least eight hours per month, which is roughly equivalent to watching a half-hour of news four nights a week.
The researchers found that partisan television has a substantial audience. Across all data sources, they estimated that about 15% of Americans watch partisan television for more than eight hours per month. In fact, more people watch this much partisan television than watch traditional national broadcast news or local news. A smaller but still notable group, around 10% of Americans, watches over 16 hours of partisan television each month.
The study also shed light on who is watching partisan television. While it was true that people who identify with a political party were more likely to watch channels that aligned with their views, a considerable portion of the audience was not strongly partisan. In fact, across the different datasets, over half of the people who watched partisan channels were either weak partisans, independents, or even identified with the opposite political party. This suggests that directional motives alone do not fully explain partisan television consumption.
There was also evidence of “echo chambers.” Viewers of partisan channels very rarely watched channels from the opposite side of the political spectrum. There was also minimal overlap between partisan television viewership and traditional broadcast news viewership. Even independents and people who watched a partisan channel that did not align with their own views tended to watch only that single channel. In addition, the study showed that people’s partisan television viewing habits are very stable over time, meaning they tend to stick with the same channels, reinforcing the idea of habit formation and echo chambers.
Although this study provides a detailed understanding of partisan television consumption, it has some limitations. The data primarily focused on television viewing within households and did not capture viewing outside the home or consumption of news through other media like radio, online sources, or print. Also, some of the datasets were household-level, meaning they could not always pinpoint which individual in a household was watching. The reliance on commercial data also presents a limitation. Future research could explore the reasons why people, especially those not strongly partisan, choose to watch partisan television, perhaps through more in-depth interviews.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/D1NDLH) Selective exposure and echo chambers in partisan television consumption: Evidence from linked viewership, administrative, and survey data,” was authored by David E. Broockman and Joshua L. Kalla.

(https://www.psypost.org/is-drinking-together-more-fun-study-sheds-light-on-the-science-of-shared-intoxication/) Is drinking together more fun? Study sheds light on the science of shared intoxication
Mar 5th 2025, 10:00

Feeling more connected and enjoying conversations more is a common reason people drink alcohol in social settings. Now, research published in the journal Psychopharmacology provides scientific backing for this experience. The study found that alcohol enhances the enjoyment of social interactions and feelings of being connected to your conversation partner, regardless of whether they are also drinking. However, the positive experience of alcohol can be heightened when socializing with someone who is also under the influence.
Scientists have long known that people often use alcohol in social settings, possibly because it makes socializing easier and more pleasant. Alcohol is frequently consumed when people are together, yet most scientific studies on alcohol’s effects have been conducted with individuals in isolation. This means our understanding of how alcohol truly affects social interactions, and how social contexts alter our responses to alcohol, has been limited. It is important to understand how alcohol influences interactions between two people, especially when considering whether the other person has also been drinking, as this can help us understand why people use alcohol socially and potentially why misuse can occur in social situations.
Previous research has suggested that alcohol can make social interactions more positive when people are in groups. For example, studies have shown that in group settings, alcohol can increase social bonding, encourage smiling back and forth, make social experiences feel more positive, and even reduce the physical distance between strangers. However, many questions remained about how alcohol changes behavior in social situations.
One key question is whether the drug state of others involved in the interaction plays a role. Does being with someone who is also intoxicated make the positive experience of drinking alcohol stronger, or enhance the positive social effects of alcohol?
“My laboratory has studied the effects of psychoactive drugs in healthy volunteers for many years,” said study author Harriet de Wit, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral neuroscience at the University of Chicago. “The participants in these studies are typically tested under controlled double-blind conditions, under solitary conditions. Yet, these drugs are typically used in social settings, in the presence of others. This raises a question about whether, and how, the presence of others affects responses to drugs. In this study, we wanted to know whether the presence of an intoxicated partner would change responses to a moderate dose of alcohol.”
Specifically, the researchers examined the effects of alcohol compared to a non-alcoholic placebo drink during a 45-minute casual conversation with a partner who also received either alcohol or a placebo. Before each session, participants were asked to avoid alcohol and recreational drugs for a certain period. They were told they might receive alcohol, a sedative, a stimulant, a hallucinogen, or a placebo, to keep them unaware of what they were actually given.
Thirty-seven healthy adults, 17 men and 20 women, aged 21 to 35, participated in the study. They were recruited from the local community through advertisements. Participants met specific health and lifestyle requirements, including being fluent in English, having at least a high school education, having a body mass index in a healthy range, not taking regular medications (except for birth control for women), and consuming a moderate amount of alcohol weekly. People with major mental health conditions, severe substance use problems, or pregnant women were not included.
Before the conversation, participants consumed beverages containing either alcohol (0.8 grams per kilogram for men and 0.7 grams per kilogram for women) or a placebo, which was designed to taste similar but contained only a small amount of alcohol as a taste mask. After consuming their drink, participants waited 30 minutes before engaging in their assigned conversation.
During and after the conversations, researchers measured various psychological and physiological responses. Participants completed self-report questionnaires assessing their subjective experience, including how much they liked the effects of the drink and how connected they felt to their partner. The researchers also used a machine-learning facial expression analysis tool to assess emotional expressions throughout the conversation, allowing them to track changes in emotion intensity in real time.
The results showed that participants who received alcohol reported feeling drug effects and liking the drug effects more than those who received the placebo. Interestingly, people reported liking the effects of alcohol more when their conversation partner also received alcohol, regardless of what they themselves had received.
After the conversations, those who drank alcohol reported feeling more elated, friendly, and energetic compared to those who drank the placebo. Alcohol also increased feelings of anger and confusion, but did not affect anxiety, depression, or fatigue. Alcohol made participants feel both more stimulated and more sedated. Most participants were able to correctly guess whether they received alcohol or placebo.
Regarding feelings of connection, alcohol made the conversations feel more enjoyable, and participants felt that their partners liked them more, that they had more in common with their partners, and felt closer and more connected to them. These feelings of connection were not influenced by whether the conversation partner had also consumed alcohol. Alcohol did not significantly change blood pressure or heart rate.
“In general, participants reported feeling the alcohol effects to a similar extent regardless of what the partner received, but they liked the effects more when the partner also received alcohol,” de Wit told PsypPost. “The study shows some of the ways in which the drug state of companions can influence responses to alcohol.”
Analysis of facial expressions revealed that alcohol increased positive emotions and decreased negative emotions during the conversations. Specifically, alcohol increased facial expressions associated with amusement, joy, and excitement, and reduced expressions of awkwardness and contempt. For women, this effect was more pronounced when their conversation partners had also received alcohol.
“We were surprised at the sex difference in facial emotions when the partner received alcohol,” de Wit said. “It suggests that women may be more sensitive to the drug state of people around them.”
The researchers noted some limitations. The sample size was relatively small, which limited the ability to explore sex differences in facial expressions in more detail. The participants were mostly light social drinkers from a similar background, so the findings may not apply to heavier drinkers or more diverse populations. “The findings would need to be replicated in other samples,” de Wit said.
The study is part of a broader line of research examining “the interactions between drugs and social contexts,” de Wit explained. “Social contexts can influence responses to drugs, and drugs can influence responses to social situations.”
The study, “Alcohol increases social engagement in dyadic interactions: role of partner’s drug state,” was authored by Hanna Molla, Tyler O’Neill, Evan Hahn, Royce Lee, and Harriet de Wit.

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/20250306/870e9f98/attachment.htm>