<table style="border:1px solid #adadad; background-color: #F3F1EC; color: #666666; padding:8px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; line-height:16px; margin-bottom:6px;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:20px;font-weight:bold;">PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/can-your-personality-predict-depression-across-your-lifespan/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Can your personality predict depression across your lifespan?</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 2024, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Personality traits like neuroticism and introversion are significant predictors of depression across the lifespan, according to research published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.03.073"><em>Journal of Affective Disorders</em></a>.</p>
<p>Depression remains one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. While depression is often characterized by a range of symptoms that vary widely among individuals, one consistent factor appears to be the role of personality traits. Previous research has established that certain personality traits, such as high neuroticism and low conscientiousness, are associated with increased risk for both depression and anxiety. However, many studies have either focused solely on one personality dimension at a time or have not considered the potential changes in these relationships across different stages of life.</p>
<p>Zhen Yang and colleagues sought to build on this body of work by examining the connections between personality traits and depressive and anxiety symptoms across the lifespan.</p>
<p>The researchers used data from the Nathan Kline Institute Rockland Sample (NKI-RS), a large, community-based dataset that includes individuals from diverse age groups, spanning from adolescence to older adulthood. The final sample included 1,494 participants aged 12 to 85 years. Participants were grouped into four categories: those with depression alone, those with anxiety alone, individuals with both depression and anxiety, and a healthy control group without any psychiatric conditions.</p>
<p>The psychiatric diagnoses for participants were determined using structured clinical interviews: the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS) for participants aged 6 to 17 and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I/NP) for those aged 18 to 85.</p>
<p>The study assessed personality traits using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), which evaluates five major dimensions of personality: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The researchers also collected a range of psychological and physical measures, including cognitive tasks, questionnaires on eating behavior, and physiological evaluations such as heart rate monitoring and body mass index (BMI).</p>
<p>Individuals with depression or anxiety were found to have higher levels of neuroticism and lower levels of extraversion compared to healthy controls. This pattern was particularly pronounced in individuals with comorbid depression and anxiety, who displayed an even more vulnerable personality profile characterized by high neuroticism and greater introversion. In adolescence, depression was associated with higher neuroticism and lower levels of extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Anxiety in adolescence, on the other hand, was linked to higher neuroticism and conscientiousness.</p>
<p>In adulthood, the relationship between personality traits and mental health symptoms appeared to change. Depression was no longer significantly associated with any personality traits after controlling for anxiety, suggesting that other factors, such as life stressors or biological changes, might play a more prominent role in influencing depression in adults.</p>
<p>However, anxiety remained strongly linked to neuroticism and was negatively associated with extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, indicating that more introverted, less agreeable, and less conscientious individuals are more likely to experience anxiety symptoms in adulthood.</p>
<p>In older adulthood, depression continued to show no significant correlation with personality traits, while anxiety remained associated with neuroticism and, uniquely in this age group, with agreeableness and openness to experience.</p>
<p>The machine learning model achieved a prediction accuracy of 70% for depression, with neuroticism and introversion emerging as the most significant predictors of depression. It further highlighted that a higher BMI, reduced heart rate variability during exercise, and certain eating behaviors, such as increased disinhibition and hunger perception, were also important factors contributing to the likelihood of depression. These findings suggest that a combination of personality traits, physical health indicators, and lifestyle behaviors can effectively predict depression risk.</p>
<p>Of note is that the cross-sectional design of the study limits the ability to draw causal inferences about the relationship between personality traits and depression.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.03.073">Personality traits as predictors of depression across the lifespan</a>”, was authored by Zhen Yang, Allison Li, Chloe Roske, Nolan Alexander, and Vilma Gabbay.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-infidelity-research-shows-being-cheated-on-is-linked-to-lasting-health-problems/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New infidelity research shows being cheated on is linked to lasting health problems</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 2024, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075241276713" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</a></em> has found that the negative effects of being cheated on by a romantic partner can extend beyond emotional pain to potentially harm your long-term health. Researchers found that individuals who have experienced partner infidelity are more likely to report worse chronic health, and this effect persists even when they are in other supportive relationships.</p>
<p>Infidelity, or the act of being cheated on by a partner, is a common and devastating form of romantic betrayal. A meta-analysis showed that about 34% of men and 24% of women have committed infidelity at some point in their lives. Given its prevalence, many researchers have explored its psychological effects, including increased anxiety, depression, and lowered self-esteem. However, the potential long-term health consequences of partner infidelity have received less attention.</p>
<p>The researchers behind this new study wanted to address the gaps in existing literature by focusing on chronic health outcomes. Chronic health refers to long-lasting conditions such as heart disease, arthritis, and migraines, which can be influenced by psychological stressors.</p>
<p>“Partner infidelity is fairly common, and anecdotally it’s clear that it can be a tremendously severe relationship stressor (especially given that romantic relationships are very central to the well-being of many individuals). Despite this, infidelity is a rarely-researched topic. It was hence practically important and meaningful to examine this topic empirically,” said study author Vincent Y. S. Oh, a lecturer at the Singapore University of Social Sciences.</p>
<p>To explore the long-term health effects of infidelity, the researchers used data from the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) study, a large and nationally representative survey. The MIDUS study includes information about individuals’ relationships, health, and demographic characteristics, making it a valuable resource for examining how personal experiences affect health over time.</p>
<p>The sample included 2,579 participants, ranging from 33 to 84 years old, who had completed two waves of the MIDUS survey, taken about nine years apart. Participants reported whether their partner had ever been unfaithful, and their chronic health was assessed by tracking the number of long-term health conditions they had, such as heart disease, diabetes, or migraines. The researchers also analyzed information on participants’ friendships, family relationships, employment status, education, income, and overall relationship satisfaction.</p>
<p>The findings showed a clear link between experiencing partner infidelity and poorer chronic health outcomes. Even after controlling for factors such as age, gender, income, and education level, participants who had been cheated on were more likely to report chronic health problems, such as persistent migraines or heart issues, than those who had not experienced infidelity.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the study also explored whether having strong support from friends and family could buffer the health effects of infidelity. The researchers found no evidence that supportive relationships outside of the romantic partnership could protect against the long-term health consequences of being cheated on. While family and friends play a significant role in helping individuals cope with emotional stress, they were not enough to completely counteract the chronic health issues linked to infidelity.</p>
<p>“The good news is that effect sizes between infidelity and chronic health were in the ‘small’ range,” Oh told PsyPost. “Such effect sizes do still suggest the potential for lasting harm with practical implications, but at the very least, the effects are not extremely large.”</p>
<p>“The bad news is that having supportive relationships with one’s family or friends did not seem to alleviate the negative associations between being cheated on with chronic health. We hoped to find that, perhaps, other sources of social support would at least reduce the chronic health associations of being cheated on. This was unfortunately not the case based on our findings.”</p>
<p>Additionally, the study found that demographic factors such as income and ethnicity appeared to influence the relationship between infidelity and health. Specifically, lower-income individuals and ethnic minorities who had experienced infidelity were more likely to suffer from poorer chronic health than their wealthier or white counterparts. This suggests that individuals who already face social and economic disadvantages may be more vulnerable to the negative health effects of romantic betrayal.</p>
<p>“Being cheated on by one’s partner can have lasting consequences for one’s chronic health, and these consequences may be especially severe among the vulnerable, such as minorities and those who face socioeconomic challenges,” Oh explained. “Individuals who have suffered partner infidelity and are finding it difficult to manage should thus consider seeking professional assistance.”</p>
<p>The study is one of the first to provide clear evidence that partner infidelity can have lasting consequences for chronic health, emphasizing that the impact of romantic betrayal goes beyond emotional distress. But as with all studies, the research had some limitations.</p>
<p>The study relied on self-reported data, meaning that participants were asked to recall whether they had ever been cheated on by a partner. This method introduces the possibility of memory bias, as participants may not accurately remember or may choose not to disclose their experiences with infidelity. Additionally, the study did not account for the timing or context of the infidelity.</p>
<p>“The measures used are imperfect,” Oh said. “Infidelity was measured purely by asking participants if they have ever been cheated on by their partner. There was no other information detailing how long ago this was, and the context of the cheating (e.g., whether it was physical, emotional, and so on). This limits the information that can be derived from the study – the conclusion is solely about whether an individual has been cheated on before, and whether this is associated with poorer chronic health.”</p>
<p>“Please be faithful to your partners!” Oh added.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/02654075241276713" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The consequences of spousal infidelity for long-term chronic health: A two-wave longitudinal analysis</a>,” was authored by Eunicia Q. W. Hoy and Vincent Y. S. Oh.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-links-donald-trumps-rhetoric-to-surge-in-hate-on-twitter/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New study links Donald Trump’s rhetoric to surge in hate on Twitter</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 2024, 07:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13387"><em>Social Science Quarterly</em></a> has found evidence linking former President Donald Trump’s rhetoric about COVID-19 to a surge in anti-Asian sentiment on social media. The study suggests that Trump’s repeated references to the coronavirus as the “Chinese virus” or “Kung flu” had a significant effect, increasing the number of anti-Asian hate tweets posted during the early months of the pandemic.</p>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic saw a sharp rise in anti-Asian sentiment, particularly in the United States, where many people of Asian descent faced verbal harassment and even physical assaults. But researchers wanted to understand why this happened. Historical patterns suggest that minority groups are often blamed during public health crises. However, not all such crises lead to widespread discrimination, so what made the COVID-19 pandemic different?</p>
<p>Previous research has identified several possible reasons for this phenomenon, which scholars refer to as “othering”—the process of scapegoating marginalized groups for broader societal issues. For example, in past epidemics like smallpox or Ebola, immigrants or ethnic minorities were often blamed for the spread of disease.</p>
<p>Some researchers attribute this behavior to psychological reactions, like fear and disgust, which lead people to avoid or blame those they perceive as carriers of disease. Another explanation involves political leaders who, when facing criticism during a crisis, may shift blame onto an external group to divert attention from their own failures.</p>
<p>To test these ideas, the researchers gathered a large data set of COVID-19-related tweets posted between February and April 2020. They focused on tweets that included anti-Asian sentiments, collecting over 1.6 million tweets with geographic information that allowed them to track where and when these messages were posted. By analyzing these tweets, the researchers were able to measure how the volume of anti-Asian hate speech varied across different parts of the United States during the early months of the pandemic.</p>
<p>The study explored several possible explanations for the rise in anti-Asian hate speech. The first hypothesis, known as the <em>vulnerability hypothesis</em>, proposed that people who felt more vulnerable to the virus, such as the elderly or those with low incomes, would be more likely to express anti-Asian sentiments. The second, the <em>threat hypothesis</em>, suggested that areas with higher rates of COVID-19 infections would see more anti-Asian hate speech, as people in those regions might perceive a greater threat and seek to blame others.</p>
<p>The third hypothesis, the <em>elite cueing hypothesis</em>, focused on the role of political leaders, predicting that Trump’s “Chinese virus” rhetoric would lead to a significant increase in anti-Asian hate speech, particularly in areas where Trump had strong political support.</p>
<p>The researchers also considered the potential role of public health measures, such as stay-at-home orders and restrictions on public gatherings. The <em>grievance hypothesis</em> suggested that stricter or longer-lasting containment policies might lead people to express their frustrations by targeting marginalized groups, especially if they believed these groups were responsible for the crisis.</p>
<p>The results of the study provided strong support for the elite cueing hypothesis. The researchers found that, following Trump’s use of the term “Chinese virus” on March 16, 2020, there was a noticeable increase in anti-Asian hate tweets. This spike occurred across many parts of the country, including areas where there had been little or no such hate speech prior to Trump’s comments.</p>
<p>However, the expected interaction between Trump’s rhetoric and political support for Trump in different counties was not as clear. The researchers did not find strong evidence that counties with higher levels of Trump voters reacted differently than others.</p>
<p>The findings regarding the other hypotheses were more mixed. The researchers found some support for the threat hypothesis, as areas with higher COVID-19 infection rates tended to have more anti-Asian hate speech. However, this effect was not consistent over time within the same counties. In other words, while places with more cases generally had more hate speech, an increase in COVID-19 cases within a county did not always lead to a corresponding rise in anti-Asian tweets.</p>
<p>The vulnerability hypothesis, which suggested that economically disadvantaged or elderly populations might be more likely to express anti-Asian sentiments, received no support from the data.</p>
<p>The researchers also found mixed results for the grievance hypothesis. While counties with stricter public health measures did not generally experience more hate speech, the researchers did observe an increase in anti-Asian tweets in counties that implemented new containment policies during the study period. This suggests that changes in restrictions might have fueled some frustrations that manifested as discriminatory speech, but the effect was not universal.</p>
<p>Despite the study’s strengths, it has some limitations to consider. First, the researchers focused solely on hate speech posted on Twitter, which may not fully represent the broader public’s attitudes. Twitter users tend to be younger and more educated than the general population, and the platform’s demographic biases might limit the generalizability of the findings.</p>
<p>Another limitation is that the study only examined hate speech during the early months of the pandemic. As the crisis evolved, public attitudes and behaviors may have changed in ways that were not captured by this analysis. Future research could explore whether these trends persisted or whether other factors, such as shifts in political leadership or changes in public health messaging, affected anti-Asian sentiments over time.</p>
<p>“Nonetheless, our study complements the existing studies on othering, mostly survey-based, that demonstrate that a public health crisis does not necessarily lead to discrimination against minority groups, while elite framing and cueing have the strongest positive effects on anti-Asian hate speech,” the researchers concluded.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.13387">From fear to hate: Sources of anti-Asian sentiment during COVID-19</a>,” was authored by Yaoyao Dai, Jingjing Gao, and Benjamin J. Radford.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/sars-cov-2-evolves-faster-in-the-brain-shedding-light-on-long-covid/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">SARS-CoV-2 evolves faster in the brain, shedding light on long COVID</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 2024, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-024-01786-8"><em>Nature Microbiology</em></a> has revealed that SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, evolves more rapidly in the brain than in the lungs, possibly explaining some of the neurological symptoms associated with the disease. This finding may provide insight into the mysterious phenomenon of long COVID and might eventually lead to targeted treatments that specifically address the virus in the central nervous system.</p>
<p>COVID-19 is primarily known for attacking the respiratory system, but it has also been linked to a wide range of other symptoms, including neurological effects such as loss of smell, memory issues, and what has come to be known as “brain fog.” These symptoms are part of a broader set of long-term effects that some patients experience, collectively referred to as long COVID. Despite the widespread neurological impact, the mechanisms behind how the virus affects the brain remain unclear.</p>
<p>SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to spread to other parts of the body, including the heart, gastrointestinal tract, and central nervous system. However, the factors that enable the virus to infect these distant tissues are not fully understood. The new study aimed to explore whether the virus mutates differently in various parts of the body, particularly in the brain and lungs, and to understand the role these mutations play in the virus’s ability to infect different tissues.</p>
<p>“COVID-19 has long been associated with a number of neurological symptoms, including loss of taste/smell and ‘brain fog.’ In addition, a subset of people experience post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), otherwise known as ‘long COVID’, which also has a number of neurological symptoms,” said co-corresponding author Judd Hultquist, an assistant professor of medicine and microbiology-immunology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.</p>
<p>“It is still unknown if these symptoms are caused by infection of cells in the central nervous system and brain, by immune dysfunction following infection, or by some combination of both. We started this study to understand how we might prevent infection of brain and hopefully then prevent some of these neurological symptoms.”</p>
<p>The study was conducted using mouse models infected with SARS-CoV-2. Mice were vaccinated with different types of vaccines, or not vaccinated at all, before being exposed to the virus. Five days after infection, the researchers collected samples from both the lungs and the brain. They used a technique called whole-genome sequencing to analyze the viral RNA in these samples, which allowed them to track how the virus evolved in different parts of the body.</p>
<p>In addition to examining the virus in vaccinated versus unvaccinated mice, the researchers also looked specifically at changes in the spike protein. This protein is critical because it allows the virus to bind to and enter human cells, and mutations here have been shown to affect how easily the virus spreads. The researchers paid particular attention to a region of the spike protein called the furin cleavage site, which plays a key role in the virus’s ability to infect different types of cells.</p>
<p>The researchers found that SARS-CoV-2 evolved differently in the brain compared to the lungs. In the lungs, the virus looked similar to the original strain used to infect the mice. However, in the brain, the virus had accumulated more mutations, particularly in the spike protein. These mutations often disrupted the furin cleavage site.</p>
<p>One of the key findings was that viruses with these spike protein mutations were better at infecting the brain. When the researchers used these brain-adapted viruses to directly infect the brains of other mice, the mutations persisted. Interestingly, when the brain-adapted virus spread back to the lungs, it tended to revert to its original form. This suggests that different parts of the body create different selective pressures on the virus, influencing how it evolves.</p>
<p>“In brief, we discovered that SARS-CoV-2 was much better at infecting cells in the brain if it mutated a specific region of its outer spike protein,” Hultquist told PsyPost. “The spike protein determines how the virus enters a cell and these mutations forced the virus to enter cells using one particular pathway. This suggests that we can prevent infection of the brain by targeting this pathway, which may help alleviate some neurological symptoms of COVID-19.”</p>
<p>The researchers also found that vaccination did not significantly alter how the virus evolved in the brain compared to the lungs. Whether the mice were vaccinated or not, the virus displayed greater genetic diversity in the brain. This was a surprising discovery, as the researchers initially hypothesized that vaccination would limit viral mutations across all tissues. Instead, it appears that immune-privileged areas of the body, like the brain, may allow the virus to evolve in ways that wouldn’t be possible in the lungs, where immune responses are stronger.</p>
<p>“The vaccination status didn’t really determine the virus evolution, but we observed differences in the virus sequence in the brain versus the lung,” said Justin Richner, assistant professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Illinois Chicago and co-corresponding author of the paper. “That really set us on a totally unexpected trajectory.”</p>
<p>The mutations that accumulated in the brain also made the virus less virulent, meaning it caused less severe disease. This was a surprising discovery because it suggests that while the virus might be better suited to infecting the brain, it could become less dangerous in doing so. Despite this, the researchers were concerned that these mutations could eventually spread back to the respiratory system, where the virus could regain its ability to cause severe illness and potentially spread to others.</p>
<p>“Potentially, this could be a source of novel variants of concern,” Richner explained. “It could be that the virus is using these different tissue sites to evolve new mutations, and then those can traffic back into the respiratory tract and spread throughout the population.”</p>
<p>“This finding suggests that the vaccines are still important because the only way the virus reaches these distal tissues is if it establishes an infection and is able to replicate in the body,” he added. “The vaccines are important to prevent the virus from reaching some of those distal tissues and undergo diversification.”</p>
<p>Like all studies, this research had its limitations. First, it was conducted in mice, which, while useful for modeling human disease, do not perfectly mimic human infections. The researchers acknowledged that the way the virus mutates and behaves in human tissues might differ. Additionally, they only studied a few days’ worth of viral evolution in mice. While this was enough to detect significant changes in the virus, a longer study might reveal more about how these mutations affect disease progression over time.</p>
<p>“It is important to point out that all of our studies were conducted in mice,” Hultquist noted. “It is yet to be seen if SARS-CoV-2 has similar requirements for infecting cells in the human brain. If these requirements are the same, we are likely several years off from seeing this work translated into the clinic.”</p>
<p>Another limitation was the focus on just two organs—the lungs and the brain. While these are critical sites for understanding COVID-19, the virus can also affect other tissues, such as the heart and kidneys. Future studies could examine how SARS-CoV-2 evolves in these other tissues and whether similar patterns of mutation occur.</p>
<p>The study opens up several new avenues for research. One major question is how the virus travels from the lungs to the brain and back again. Understanding the pathways the virus uses to move between tissues could reveal new targets for therapies. Additionally, the researchers hope to explore whether the mutations found in the brain are linked to the neurological symptoms observed in COVID-19 patients, such as brain fog and memory loss. If so, this could lead to more targeted treatments for these symptoms.</p>
<p>“There are some small molecule inhibitors of the pathways that the SARS-CoV-2 uses to enter the brain,” Hultquist explained. “Our future work will be to determine if they are effective at preventing infection of the brain in mice and to see if they alter the presentation or outcome of disease.”</p>
<p>“This research was only made possible through a cross-institutional collaboration with the lab of Dr. Justin Richner at the University of Illinois-Chicago,” Hultquist added. “Breaking down barriers and bringing people together is what stimulates new ideas and research breakthroughs. We are really thankful for all of the efforts to unite scientists in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a measurable impact on patient care and saved lives.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-024-01786-8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 in the murine central nervous system drives viral diversification</a>,” was authored by Jacob Class, Lacy M. Simons, Ramon Lorenzo-Redondo, Jazmin Galván Achi, Laura Cooper, Tanushree Dangi, Pablo Penaloza-MacMaster, Egon A. Ozer, Sarah E. Lutz, Lijun Rong, Judd F. Hultquist, and Justin M. Richner.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/how-are-ideological-rigidity-and-political-conservatism-connected-to-death-anxiety/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">How are ideological rigidity and political conservatism connected to death anxiety?</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2024, 20:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study published in <em><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00332941241268564" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Psychological Reports</a></em> examined how individuals’ ideological rigidity and political conservatism influence their reactions to people with differing beliefs and their fears about death. The study found that people who hold rigid ideological beliefs tend to have more negative reactions toward others with different viewpoints, while political conservatism was associated with less death anxiety. However, the researchers did not find consistent evidence that ideological rigidity is linked to death anxiety.</p>
<p>The researchers aimed to explore a question central to Terror Management Theory (TMT). This psychological theory suggests that humans, aware of their inevitable mortality, adopt cultural belief systems to alleviate fears about death. These beliefs, whether religious or secular, give people a sense of purpose and hope for some form of immortality, either through an afterlife or through leaving a legacy.</p>
<p>However, these belief systems also require validation from others. When individuals encounter people with different worldviews, it threatens the validity of their own beliefs, often leading to negative reactions, including hostility and aggression. Terror Management Theory posits that the more rigid a person’s belief system, the more it protects them from death anxiety. However, this rigidity could make them less tolerant of others with differing opinions.</p>
<p>The researchers also wanted to test an additional hypothesis regarding political conservatism. There is debate over whether conservative ideologies, with their emphasis on tradition and order, are more effective at reducing death anxiety. Some previous research suggested that political conservatives may experience more fear of death due to their focus on threats and danger. Others, however, argue that conservatism offers more certainty and stability, potentially reducing existential fears.</p>
<p>The researchers recruited participants from two groups: students from a small state university in the southeastern United States and a sample of people from an online platform called Prolific. In total, the student sample consisted of 134 participants, mostly aged between 18 and 22, while the online sample included 199 participants aged 19 to 79.</p>
<p>Participants completed several questionnaires designed to measure different aspects of their personality, beliefs, and attitudes. The researchers assessed the participants’ political conservatism, dogmatism (or their tendency to hold rigid beliefs), and personal need for structure, which reflects a preference for clear rules and routines. They also measured participants’ reactions to people with different beliefs and their levels of death anxiety. To capture death anxiety, participants answered questions related to fears about death, such as fears of being forgotten or the loss of life’s pleasures. They also assessed specific fears about punishment in the afterlife.</p>
<p>Participants were asked to rate their agreement with statements on a variety of topics, including their beliefs about knowledge (whether they thought knowledge was fixed or open to change), their political views on social and economic issues, and their tolerance of people with different perspectives. The researchers then analyzed the data to determine how these factors related to each other.</p>
<p>As expected, the researchers found that ideological rigidity was linked to more negative reactions toward people with different beliefs. Participants who scored high in dogmatism or who believed that knowledge was certain and unchangeable tended to be less tolerant and more hostile toward those with differing viewpoints. This supports the idea that people with rigid worldviews are more likely to view differing beliefs as threats to their own.</p>
<p>In terms of death anxiety, the researchers found that political conservatism, particularly on social issues, was associated with less fear of death. This relationship was stronger in the online sample from Prolific than in the student sample. This finding aligns with the idea that conservative worldviews, which often provide a sense of order and stability, may help individuals cope with fears about mortality.</p>
<p>“One possibility is that conservative worldviews offer greater hope of immortality and therefore better ameliorate concerns that death will mean the extinction of the self,” the researchers wrote. “In American politics, religiosity is typically associated with conservative stances on social issues like gay marriage and abortion. Consequently, the negative relation between social conservatism and death anxiety observed in the current study might be an artifact of religiosity, as religious people would tend to hold conservative positions on social issues and have less fears of extinction due to more confidence in literal immorality.”</p>
<p>However, the study did not find consistent evidence that ideological rigidity, as measured by dogmatism or a personal need for structure, were associated with reduced death anxiety. In fact, in the student sample, a higher need for structure was associated with more death anxiety, suggesting that the desire for order might not always offer protection from existential fears.</p>
<p>“It seems possible that a highly structured worldview might only offer protection from death concerns in circumstances where one encounters events and perspectives that are consistent with their established expectations and beliefs,” the researchers explained. “When people high in a desire for structure encounter experiences that do not conform to their expectations or when they are exposed to opinions and perspectives that undermine beliefs, their terror management systems may be disrupted.”</p>
<p>An additional, unexpected finding was that in the Prolific sample, political conservatism was associated with more fear of punishment in the afterlife. This suggests that while conservative ideologies might reduce fears about death as extinction, they could increase concerns about moral transgressions and divine punishment.</p>
<p>According to the researchers, “the failure to observe a consistent relationship between ideological rigidity and death anxiety in the present study suggests that increased dogmatism may not be the only type of cultural worldview defense capable of warding off existential concerns. Although the majority of work in TMT has focused on worldview defense in the forms of derogation and hostility towards outgroups, recent theoretical innovations have begun to explore more positive forms of terror management defenses, in which reminders of death can encourage pro-social values, enhance open-mindedness and tolerance, and promote intrinsic values and growth orientation (Horner et al., 2023). Additional research is needed to further elucidate the moderating circumstances in which more positive or negative defenses are elicited and to establish their relative anxiety buffering properties.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241268564" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ideological Rigidity and Political Conservatism in Relation to Death Anxiety and Reactions to Those With Different Beliefs</a>,” was authored by Jonathan F. Bassett, Emily Ineson, Dasia Rhodes, Kristin Thomas, and Jeremiah Rosenbrook.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/lack-of-sleep-appears-to-have-a-troubling-impact-on-kids-brain-development/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Lack of sleep appears to have a troubling impact on kids’ brain development</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2024, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Shorter sleep and later bedtimes are linked to potentially harmful <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1373546">functional changes</a> to parts of the brain important for coping with stress and controlling negative emotions, our recently published research found. And children in families with low economic resources are particularly at risk.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=5F3ofCsAAAAJ&hl=en">We are</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=W0GhlGoAAAAJ&hl=en">neuroscientists</a> who are passionate about reducing <a href="https://psychlabs.colostate.edu/learnlab/">socioeconomic disparities in child development</a>. To better understand how socioeconomic disadvantage affects sleep health and brain development in children, we recruited 94 5- to 9-year-old children from socioeconomically diverse families living in New York. About 30% of the participating families had incomes below the U.S. poverty threshold.</p>
<p></p>
<p>We asked parents to report on their child’s sleep environment, the consistency of their family routines, and their child’s bedtime and wake-up time. We also had children complete a magnetic resonance imaging scan of their brains to analyze the size of a brain region <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2859">called the amygdala</a> and the strength of its connections with other regions of the brain. The amygdala plays a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2005.09.025">critical role in processing emotions</a> and the amount of negative emotion a person experiences. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2015.181">Adversity experienced early in life</a> can affect how the amygdala works.</p>
<p>We found that children in families with low economic resources were getting less sleep at night and going to sleep later compared with children in families with higher economic resources. In turn, shorter sleep and going to sleep later were associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2859">reduced amygdala size</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1373546">weaker connections</a> between the amygdala and other emotion-processing brain regions. This link between socioeconomic disadvantage, sleep duration and timing, and amygdala size and connectivity was found in children as young as 5.</p>
<p>Our results suggest that both amount and timing of sleep matter for the functioning of these brain regions involved in emotion processing.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Not getting enough sleep increases the risk of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.55">developing mental health problems</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028204">interferes with academic achievement</a>. Reduced sleep may make it harder for children to cope with stress and manage their emotions. Children from families or neighborhoods with low socioeconomic resources may be at increased risk for stress-related mental health problems due in part to the negative effects of their environment on sleep health.</p>
<p>During childhood, the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2018.1">brain develops at a fast pace</a>. Because of this, childhood experiences can have effects on brain function that last a lifetime. Problems from childhood can continue throughout life.</p>
<p>Our findings reinforce the importance of ensuring all families have sufficient economic resources to provide for their children. Research suggests that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2115649119">income supplements</a> for families in need can help support children’s brain function, along with their <a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044224">mental health and academic outcomes</a>.</p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>Why do socioeconomically disadvantaged environments make it hard for children to sleep?</p>
<p>Our research suggests that parents who were struggling to make ends meet had a harder time maintaining consistent family routines, possibly leading to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1262-6">less consistent bedtime routines</a>, which may have contributed to children getting less sleep.</p>
<p>However, there are likely <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.77">multiple factors</a> connecting socioeconomic disadvantage and poor sleep quality, such as not being able to afford a comfortable bed, overcrowding, neighborhood noise, excessive light and heat.</p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>Most sleep research has focused on teens, who are <a href="https://www.thensf.org/sleep-in-america-polls/">especially at risk for poor sleep</a>. However, our results suggest that environmental effects on sleep patterns and habits start a lot earlier.</p>
<p>Interventions to improve sleep may need to start earlier than adolescence to be optimally effective. Bolstering economic resources for families in need may also be key to supporting children’s sleep health, brain development and emotional well-being.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/late-bedtimes-and-not-enough-sleep-can-harm-developing-brains-and-poorer-kids-are-more-at-risk-230933">original article</a>.</em></p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/decision-speed-a-new-window-into-hidden-social-preferences/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Decision speed: A new window into hidden social preferences</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2024, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Researchers have discovered that people can infer the preferences of others by observing how quickly they make decisions in social scenarios. The study, published in <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002686"><em>PLOS Biology</em></a>, reveals that decision-making speed can provide key insights into a person’s social preferences, even when the actual options being considered are unknown.</p>
<p>Humans constantly observe the decisions of others, whether in social settings, professional environments, or everyday life. These observations allow us to infer what other people value, helping to navigate interactions and relationships. Previous studies have shown that we can learn about someone’s preferences based on their decisions. But there’s a missing link in understanding how we gauge not just the choice someone makes, but how strongly they prefer one option over another.</p>
<p>“The study of how people learn from each other has been explored extensively in the past few decades of scientific research: obviously, observing the decisions of other people will give us information about their preferences,” explained <a href="https://sophiebavard.wixsite.com/research">Sophie Bavard</a>, a postdoctoral researcher at the <span class="color_42 wixui-rich-text__text">Motivation, Brain and Behavior lab </span>at the Paris Brain Institute. (She conducted the research while at the University of Hamburg<i>.)</i></p>
<p>“Yet, while most of the literature so far focused only on observing choices, we also know that choices alone are not the sole output of a decision: the decision speed, for example, will convey additional information. Therefore, we aimed at filling this gap and investigated whether people can learn others’ preferences from observing their decision speed instead of their final choice — and if yes, to which extent.”</p>
<p>To investigate this, the researchers used a version of a well-known psychological experiment called the Dictator Game. This game involves two participants: one, the “dictator,” is given a sum of money and must decide how much to keep and how much to give to another anonymous participant. This setup creates a situation where the dictator’s decisions reflect their social preferences—whether they are selfish and keep more for themselves, or more prosocial, choosing to share fairly.</p>
<p>The research team recruited 16 participants to act as dictators. Each dictator completed a series of trials in which they had to choose between two different ways of splitting the money. These options varied in how much they favored the dictator versus the other person. Importantly, the time it took for each dictator to make their decisions was recorded, providing a measure of their decision-making speed.</p>
<p>A second group of 46 participants, referred to as observers, was then recruited. These observers were tasked with watching the decision-making of the dictators. However, in a twist, they were sometimes only shown how long the dictators took to decide, without seeing the actual decisions they made.</p>
<p>The researchers used a design that manipulated the information available to the observers in four different conditions:</p>
<ul>
<li>In one condition, observers saw both the choices and the decision times.</li>
<li>In another, they saw only the decision times.</li>
<li>A third condition revealed only the choices.</li>
<li>In the final condition, neither choice nor time was shown.</li>
</ul>
<p>The observers were asked to estimate the dictator’s social preferences—whether they leaned more toward selfish or prosocial behavior.</p>
<p>Observers performed best when they could see both the choices and the decision times together. In these cases, decision time seemed to reinforce the meaning of the dictator’s choice, allowing observers to make more refined judgments. For example, a fast decision combined with a selfish choice signaled a strong preference for self-interest, while a slower decision suggested that the dictator might have been considering a more balanced or prosocial option. This shows that decision time serves as a useful complementary cue when available alongside the actual choices.</p>
<p>However, when observers were shown only the decision time, they still managed to make accurate judgments. Short decision times were interpreted as a sign of strong preferences, either selfish or prosocial, while long decision times indicated that the dictator was more conflicted or undecided. Even without seeing the choices, observers could gauge the dictator’s likely preferences based on how long they deliberated.</p>
<p>The study also indicated that observers were able to predict the dictators’ future choices after learning about their preferences through decision time or choice observation. Interestingly, when observers predicted future decisions, their response times mirrored the decision times of the dictators they had observed. This suggests that observers internalized the decision-making difficulty of the dictators, effectively putting themselves in the other person’s shoes.</p>
<p>“Imagine a friend having to choose between pizza or pasta, or between a cocktail or a soda: you can predict what they prefer by knowing how long it takes them to make a choice,” Bavard told PsyPost. “The social advantage humans gain from taking others’ decision time into account on top of their choice has been established in the literature already, but here we go a step further by showing that decision time alone is <em>sufficient</em> to learn about others’ preferences. This key result highlights the relevance of considering decision times, for example in tabletop games, where people can strategically manipulate their decision time without disclosing their choices or strategies.”</p>
<p>“More broadly, decision times have an impact in many real-life situations where a friend of ours must choose between two options (e.g., food, entertainment, political candidates…). Before we see their final choice (and, indeed, even if we do not know their final choice), their decision time alone will be quite revealing, as seeing them hesitating would probably signal that they don’t have a strong preference (e.g., they are not picky with their fast-food and pizza is not much more appealing than pasta), or aren’t familiar enough with the available options to have a clear ranking (e.g., they simply don’t consume fast-food very often).”</p>
<p>“Ultimately, by observing people make choices across multiple situations and domains, we may even make inferences about their general personality or decision-style, for instance that a particular friend is generally an indecisive person,” Bavard explained. “Such inferences are crucial for daily social interactions and our results highlight a possible way in which they can happen.”</p>
<p>Interestingly, even when neither the choice nor decision time was visible, observers still performed slightly better than chance at estimating preferences. This suggests that people often rely on general assumptions about how others might behave, even in the absence of concrete information.</p>
<p>While the study provides evidence that people can infer social preferences based on decision time, there are some limitations to consider. First, the study was conducted in a controlled lab environment using a simplified decision-making game. In real-world settings, decisions are often more complex, influenced by a wider range of factors, and may not follow the same patterns as those observed in the lab.</p>
<p>“To the best of our knowledge, we are the first group to empirically test whether or not humans could learn other people’s social preferences from observing their decision times alone,” Bavard said. “With this successful result in hand, the story does not end here: an interesting follow-up experiment would be to test whether the same effect would hold in different social games settings, outside the dictator game.”</p>
<p>“We are now working on replicating the results of this study in a more difficult (and, perhaps more ecologically valid) setting. In the long term, now that we know that people can learn from decision times alone, we are interested in uncovering the finer details and perhaps even the biological underpinnings of this learning. We are currently developing an imaging study with brain recordings, to dig deeper into the underlying mechanisms of this fascinating learning process.”</p>
<p>The findings have broad implications for understanding social cognition and decision-making. They suggest that decision speed is not just a byproduct of decision-making but an integral part of how people infer preferences and predict future behavior.</p>
<p>“In this study, we also propose a novel observational learning model that closely matches participants’ behavior,” Bavard added. “In contrast to previous literature suggesting that people should be able to learn equally well from choices and decision times, we formally show that observers’ behavior substantially deviates from this prediction, since people learned less efficiently than an optimal learning model would.”</p>
<p>“Thus, our study provides a mechanistic account for people’s ability to learn from others’ decision times, while at the same time illustrating that this ability has certain limitations. Naturally, these findings are relevant for future modelling efforts of how people learn from each other. By incorporating decision times into models, we can make more accurate predictions of human behavior, as decision times provide a continuous measure that reveals the strength of these preferences, offering a more detailed perspective.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002686">Humans can infer social preferences from decision speed alone</a>,” was authored by Sophie Bavard, Erik Stuchlý, Arkady Konovalov, and Sebastian Gluth.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/does-conforming-to-feminine-norms-affect-college-womens-mental-health/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Does conforming to feminine norms affect college women’s mental health?</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2024, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Conforming to certain feminine norms, such as modesty, thinness, and appearance, is associated with increased psychological distress among college women, according to research published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05023-z"><em>Current Psychology</em></a>.</p>
<p>College women face unique stressors, including adapting to a new environment, developing new social networks, and managing academic pressures, which can increase their vulnerability to psychological distress. Previous studies have highlighted the role of gender norms—expectations of behavior for men and women—as a critical factor that can exacerbate mental health issues in this population. To better understand these associations, Derek Kenji Iwamoto and colleagues examined the impact of conformity to feminine norms on psychological distress among college women.</p>
<p>While much of the previous research has predominantly focused on White women, the present study fills a gap by exploring how these norms affect a diverse group of college women, including a large sample of Asian American participants. The researchers were motivated by findings that gender norms are not monolithic but multidimensional, with different norms potentially exerting varying effects on psychological well-being.</p>
<p>The study recruited 1,700 female undergraduate students from a large public university in Southern California, with an average age of ~20 years. The sample was predominantly Asian American (76.8%), with the remaining participants identifying as White (23.2%).</p>
<p>Participants completed two key measures: the Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory-45 (CFNI-45) and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). The CFNI-45 is a 45-item questionnaire designed to assess adherence to nine distinct feminine norms, including Sweet and Nice, Relationship, Thinness, Modesty, Domestic, Care for Children, Romantic Relationship, Sexual Fidelity, and Invest in Appearance.</p>
<p>Participants indicated their level of agreement with statements related to these norms on a 4-point scale. The K10 is a 10-item scale that measures psychological distress by assessing symptoms such as fatigue, anxiety, depression, and hopelessness experienced over the past month. Participants rated the frequency of these symptoms on a scale from “none of the time” to “all of the time.”</p>
<p>The researchers found that women who felt compelled to maintain a modest demeanor, strive for a thin physique, and focus on their physical appearance (i.e., conformity to Modesty, Thinness, and Invest in Appearance), reported experiencing more psychological distress. Conversely, women who endorsed norms that emphasize the importance of building relationships and caring for others (i.e., Relationship and Care for Children) tended to report lower levels of psychological distress.</p>
<p>Other feminine norms, such as Domestic, Romantic Relationship, Sexual Fidelity, and Sweet and Nice, did not show a significant relationship with psychological distress. This suggests that not all feminine norms have a direct impact on mental health outcomes. Additionally, older students tended to report less psychological distress than their younger counterparts, which may reflect the possibility that older students have developed more effective coping strategies or have adapted better to the college environment.</p>
<p>Overall, the results of this study underscore the importance of understanding the multifaceted nature of feminine norms and their distinct roles in shaping psychological distress among college women. It appears that while some norms may contribute to increased distress, others may serve as protective factors.</p>
<p>Notably, this study was conducted at a single university with a unique demographic composition, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or educational contexts.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05023-z">Why conform?: The implications of conformity to feminine norms on psychological distress among college women</a>,” was authored by Derek Kenji Iwamoto, Thomas P. Le, Lauren Clinton, Margaux Grivel, and Elena Lucaine.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-psychology-research-untangles-the-links-between-valuing-happiness-and-well-being/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New psychology research untangles the links between valuing happiness and well-being</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2024, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study published in <em><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09567976241263784" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Psychological Science</a></em> explored the relationship between how much people value happiness and their overall well-being. The research found that those who placed a high value on happiness generally experienced greater well-being, as reflected in higher life satisfaction and more positive emotions. However, increases in prioritizing happiness over time did not lead to further improvements in life satisfaction.</p>
<p>Happiness has become a major life goal for many people, and public interest in the topic has surged over the past few decades. As the pursuit of happiness gains momentum, researchers have been keen to explore whether striving for happiness actually improves well-being. The intuitive assumption is that people who focus on being happy will naturally experience more happiness in their lives.</p>
<p>However, previous studies suggest this might not always be the case. Some research has found that placing too much emphasis on happiness can backfire, leading to greater disappointment when people fail to achieve their desired emotional state. This phenomenon may even reduce well-being.</p>
<p>Earlier studies on the relationship between valuing happiness and well-being have produced conflicting results, often using small samples or one-time surveys that make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions. In his new study, Kuan-Ju Huang aimed to address these limitations by using data from a large, population-based sample that followed participants over several years.</p>
<p>“We have witnessed substantial growth in the public discourse around happiness and well-being. As noted in the paper, there is mixed cross-sectional evidence on the association between valuing happiness and well-being. So I believe it is important to provide causal evidence of this effect,” explained Huang, a PhD candidate in social and cultural psychology at Kyoto University.</p>
<p>To investigate how valuing happiness affects well-being over time, Huang analyzed data from the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) panel, a longitudinal survey of 8,331 adults in the Netherlands. The survey ran from 2019 to 2023, gathering information on how much participants valued happiness as well as several indicators of well-being, including life satisfaction, positive emotions, and negative emotions.</p>
<p>Participants were asked to rate the importance of happiness “as a guiding principle” in their lives. They also completed standardized measures that assessed their life satisfaction and emotional experiences. Life satisfaction was measured using questions such as “I am satisfied with my life,” while positive and negative emotions were assessed using scales that asked participants to rate how often they felt emotions like pride, excitement, distress, or nervousness.</p>
<p>The results showed that people who valued happiness more highly tended to have better overall well-being. Specifically, participants who placed a greater emphasis on happiness reported higher life satisfaction, more frequent positive emotions, and fewer negative emotions. This finding aligns with the idea that setting happiness as a life goal can help people feel more content and experience more joy in their day-to-day lives.</p>
<p>However, the study also found that increasing one’s focus on happiness over time did not lead to corresponding increases in life satisfaction. In other words, while people who valued happiness were generally more satisfied with their lives, becoming more focused on happiness over the course of the study did not result in a significant boost to life satisfaction a year later.</p>
<p>The emotional effects of valuing happiness were more complex. While valuing happiness did lead to increases in positive emotions, such as excitement and pride, it also resulted in higher levels of negative emotions like distress and nervousness. This suggests that the pursuit of happiness may have a bittersweet quality: while it can help people experience more joy, it may also heighten their sensitivity to negative emotions, especially when they fall short of their happiness goals.</p>
<p>“My takeaway is that constantly thinking about happiness may not be beneficial,” Huang told PsyPost. “Happiness should be the end goal, not the means. If you want to live a happier life, focus on positive activities that have been proven to be beneficial, such as spending time with loved ones or friends, exercising, or engaging with nature.”</p>
<p>Huang also examined whether personality traits or demographic factors, such as gender or age, moderated the relationship between valuing happiness and well-being. Interestingly, they found little evidence that these factors influenced the overall pattern of results.</p>
<p>“It is interesting that the effects were robust across the Big Five personality traits,” Huang explained. “I expected that people who were more extroverted, more agreeable, and less neurotic would benefit more from valuing happiness, but this was not supported by the data. A possible explanation could be that it’s more about how, rather than who, tries to achieve happiness.”</p>
<p>While the findings are illuminating, the study also has some limitations. One limitation relates to the cultural context of the study. The research was conducted in the Netherlands, and while the findings may apply to many Western societies, they may not generalize to other cultures.</p>
<p>“We relied on high-quality longitudinal data from the Netherlands to make causal inferences,” Huang noted. “However, previous studies have shown divergent cross-sectional correlations between valuing happiness and well-being across cultures (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000108">Ford et al., 2015</a>). So, the findings may not be generalizable to other cultural contexts, such as in East Asia, where happiness may be pursued more through achieving balance and harmony rather than through hedonism.”</p>
<p>Additionally, the study’s findings raise important questions about the strategies people use to pursue happiness. It’s possible that not all happiness goals are created equal. Prior research suggests that people who seek happiness through social engagement, for instance, may fare better than those who chase happiness through solitary or material pursuits. Future research could investigate how different approaches to seeking happiness affect well-being and whether certain strategies are more likely to succeed in the long run.</p>
<p>“This study reported an overall causal effect, but the pursuit of happiness is a complicated process that may succeed in some situations but fail in others,” Huang said. “I think the next step is to clarify how people think about and pursue happiness differently, and to unravel the complexity of pursuing happiness goals.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241263784" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Does Valuing Happiness Lead to Well-Being?</a>“, was published online on August 20, 2024.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Forwarded by:<br />
Michael Reeder LCPC<br />
Baltimore, MD</strong></p>
<p><strong>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. </strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p><s><small><a href="#" style="color:#ffffff;"><a href="https://blogtrottr.com/unsubscribe/565/DY9DKf">unsubscribe from this feed</a></a></small></s></p>