<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/research-suggests-people-are-getting-more-bored/" 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;">Research suggests people are getting more bored</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 13th 2024, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A perspective piece published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00155-9"><em>Communications Psychology</em></a> by Katy Y.Y. Tam and Michael Inzlicht suggests that digital media use may actually contribute to higher levels of boredom.</p>
<p>Despite the growing accessibility of entertainment, people are reporting more frequent experiences of boredom, with potential adverse effects on mental health, learning, and behavior.</p>
<p>In today’s world, where entertainment is readily accessible at our fingertips, reports of boredom are paradoxically on the rise, especially among younger generations. We can instantly stream movies, interact with friends online, and consume an endless supply of content. Yet, data from national surveys and studies indicate that people today report feeling bored more frequently than ever before, with boredom rates significantly increasing among adolescents and college students since 2009.</p>
<p>Given that chronic boredom is associated with issues like anxiety, depression, and even aggressive behaviors, understanding what drives this increase is important. Tam and Inzlicht propose that our reliance on digital devices and the constant accessibility of entertainment could be making us more susceptible to boredom rather than relieving it.</p>
<p>The authors argue that the structure and nature of digital media may heighten feelings of boredom. Drawing on existing empirical research, they explore how digital media might be shaping people’s expectations for engagement, fragmenting attention, and reducing a sense of meaning in daily activities. Each of these mechanisms could create a cycle where people increasingly turn to digital devices to alleviate boredom, only to find themselves feeling less satisfied and more prone to boredom over time.</p>
<p>First, they argue that digital media sets a high bar for engagement, as it provides a stream of constantly rewarding stimuli. This pattern encourages users to seek greater stimulation, raising their expectations for what is “sufficiently engaging.” For instance, the evolution of social media content—moving from text to images to short-form videos—reflects an increased need for quicker and more intense engagement to capture users’ attention.</p>
<p>As a result, activities that don’t match this level of stimulation, like reading a book or attending a lecture, may feel boring by comparison. Evidence from experience-sampling studies, which track individuals’ boredom levels in real time, supports this notion; people often report heightened boredom after engaging with digital content, especially in social media and smartphone use.</p>
<p>Another core issue is that digital media fragments attention, making it difficult to focus on a single activity. Devices like smartphones offer an array of distractions—notifications, multiple apps, and the ability to quickly switch between activities—that disrupt sustained focus. Studies show that frequent interruptions decrease satisfaction and lower users’ ability to fully engage in one task, leading to a greater likelihood of boredom.</p>
<p>For example, research has found that merely having a smartphone nearby can decrease attention and enjoyment in face-to-face social interactions, intensifying boredom. Digital multitasking, such as browsing on a phone while watching TV, also undermines people’s ability to stay present and engaged, further contributing to feelings of dissatisfaction and restlessness.</p>
<p>A third key mechanism involves the sense of meaning, which the authors describe as essential for sustained engagement. Digital media, particularly social media and online browsing, often delivers fragmented and disconnected information. This disjointed experience can reduce the sense of coherence and meaning, leading individuals to feel that their time spent online is unfulfilling.</p>
<p>Experimental studies show that people frequently feel an underlying sense of meaninglessness after consuming quick, unrelated pieces of information, which can drive a cycle of switching between content in search of something more meaningful. However, this search rarely satisfies, as digital content is often designed for quick consumption rather than deep engagement, which may leave users feeling hollow and, ultimately, bored.</p>
<p>While Tam and Inzlicht’s synthesis is comprehensive, they note that most referenced studies focus primarily on adolescents and young adults. This raises questions about whether the findings apply broadly across age groups or within different cultural contexts.</p>
<p>This paper underscores that digital media, while providing endless stimulation, paradoxically contributes to rising boredom by heightening engagement demands and decreasing attention.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00155-9">People Are Increasingly Bored in Our Digital Age</a>”, was authored by Katy Y.Y. Tam and Michael Inzlicht.</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/neurotransmitter-switching-in-early-development-predicts-autism-related-behaviors/" 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;">Neurotransmitter switching in early development predicts autism-related behaviors</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 13th 2024, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Neurobiologists have made a breakthrough in understanding how environmental factors might contribute to autism spectrum disorders. A recent study shows that early neurotransmitter switching—where neurons change their chemical messengers—may lead to lasting autism-like behaviors in mice. These findings provide new insights into how early disruptions in brain development could affect social and behavioral traits. The findings have been published in the <em><a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2406928121" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a>.</em></p>
<p>Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a developmental condition affecting social communication and behavior, which can vary widely from person to person. Some individuals with autism may face challenges in social interactions, while others may engage in repetitive or highly focused behaviors. The exact causes of autism are complex, involving a combination of genetic and environmental factors.</p>
<p>Certain genetic mutations are known to increase the risk of autism, while environmental factors—like maternal infections or exposure to certain medications during pregnancy—are also linked to the condition. Researchers aim to understand how genetic and environmental factors shape brain development, leading to the unique patterns of behavior seen in autism.</p>
<p>This new study builds on the idea that early environmental factors can disrupt brain chemistry in ways that have lasting effects. In particular, the researchers focused on neurotransmitters, the brain’s chemical messengers that help neurons communicate.</p>
<p>Past research has shown that autism is often associated with an imbalance in two key neurotransmitters: GABA, which inhibits brain activity, and glutamate, which excites it. The balance between inhibition and excitation is essential for healthy brain function, and disruptions in this balance can impact the development of neural circuits involved in social and behavioral processes.</p>
<p>“We are interested in a recently discovered form of plasticity – change in the brain in response to experience – called neurotransmitter switching. It occurs when neurons lose the transmitter they were making and make a new one instead,” explained study authors <a href="https://www.neuroscience.pitt.edu/people/swetha-godavarthi-phd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Swetha K. Godavarthi</a> (a research assistant professor in the Department of Neuroscience at University of Pittsburgh) and <a href="https://biology.ucsd.edu/research/faculty/nspitzer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nicholas C. Spitzer</a> (the Atkinson Family Distinguished Professor of Neurobiology at UC San Diego).</p>
<p>“This can be a switch from inhibitory GABA to excitatory glutamate, or vice versa, and can change the behavioral state of the animal as a result. It occurs in response to a period of sustained change in electrical activity (action potentials).”</p>
<p>“We became interested in ASD because it can arise as the result of environmental stimuli, as well as from genetic mutations. We knew that the environmental stimuli that cause pregnant mothers to give birth to children with increased incidence of ASD could generate a period of increased electrical activity in the brains of their infants.</p>
<p>“Accordingly, we investigated what the consequences of these environmental stimuli would be when they were applied to pregnant mice, and whether neurotransmitter switching was involved in producing behaviors in the progeny mice that resembled autistic behaviors in humans.”</p>
<p>To explore this, the researchers used mouse models of autism, exposing pregnant mice to substances that simulate environmental risks for autism. One group of mice was exposed to valproic acid, an anti-seizure medication, while another group experienced a simulated immune response, which is known to potentially affect brain development in offspring. These exposures occurred around the middle of the pregnancy, mirroring the critical developmental periods in humans when similar environmental factors could impact brain development.</p>
<p>After birth, the researchers monitored the neurotransmitter levels in the brains of the young mice, specifically focusing on GABA and glutamate in the medial prefrontal cortex. This area of the brain is heavily involved in social behavior and is often affected in individuals with autism. They observed a temporary shift in these neurotransmitters in a specific group of neurons: neurons that normally produced GABA began to produce glutamate instead. This switch disrupted the typical balance between inhibition and excitation, potentially leading to changes in brain circuitry.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the neurotransmitter switch appeared to be temporary, as the neurons returned to producing GABA a few weeks later. However, the adult mice still exhibited autism-like behaviors, including excessive grooming and reduced interest in interacting with other mice.</p>
<p>As the mice grew into adulthood, they continued to exhibit autism-like behaviors. These findings suggest that early neurotransmitter changes during development may have lasting effects on behavior, even after the initial chemical imbalance in the brain had resolved.</p>
<p>“We were surprised to discover that the transmitter switch was transitory (i.e. that it reversed spontaneously after several weeks),” Godavarthi and Spitzer told PsyPost. “The persistent impact of the relatively brief switch in our study is consistent with the findings of other investigators who have studied the impact of insults during early development on later behavior in adults.”</p>
<p>A particularly intriguing finding was that researchers could reverse these behaviors by intervening early in life. Using advanced viral techniques, they introduced a specific gene, called GAD1, into the neurons that had switched from GABA to glutamate production. This intervention effectively prevented the neurotransmitter switch and maintained a normal balance between GABA and glutamate. The mice that received this intervention did not display the autism-like behaviors observed in untreated mice, suggesting that correcting this imbalance early in life could mitigate these behaviors.</p>
<p>The results provide evidence for a strong connection between environmental triggers, changes in brain chemistry, and the emergence of autism-like behaviors. This finding adds to growing evidence that the brain’s wiring is highly sensitive to environmental influences during development.</p>
<p>“We found that the same stimuli that induce ASD in human subjects also do so in mice, and that this is the result of a change in neurotransmitter identity (a transmitter switch) from inhibitory GABA to excitatory glutamate very early in development,” the researchers explained. “Even though the switch is transitory, it has an enormous effect on the behavior of the mice because it occurs close to the beginning of the assembly of the nervous system, and it mis-directs later stages of assembly of the nervous system. As a metaphor, a faulty cornerstone, laid at the beginning of the construction of a building, leads to the later collapse of the building after it is completed.”</p>
<p>The new findings shed light on how environmental factors may impact early brain development and contribute to ASD. But there are some caveats to consider. Mouse models can only approximate aspects of human brain development and autism. The specific neurotransmitter changes and behavioral effects observed in this study may not directly translate to human autism, where the condition is much more complex.</p>
<p>“One cannot immediately extrapolate results from studies of mice to humans,” Godavarthi and Spitzer noted. “Mice are similar to humans in many ways, but not all. Further investigation will reveal whether the same transmitter switch is occurring in human infants when their pregnant mothers are exposed to the same environmental agents.”</p>
<p>The researchers plan to continue exploring how other environmental and genetic factors might lead to similar neurotransmitter shifts. They also aim to investigate ways to manipulate neurotransmitter levels safely and non-invasively during development, potentially opening new avenues for early interventions in autism spectrum disorder.</p>
<p>“We have also found that transmitter switching is responsible for the response to acute stress (PTSD) and to drugs of abuse (phencyclidine, methamphetamine),” the researchers said. “We want to understand the molecular basis of transmitter switching, with a view to developing therapies in the future. We are also keenly interested in developing non-invasive, low-cost ways to reverse transmitter switching, which could become highly beneficial.”</p>
<p>“Many forms of ASD that are caused by gene mutations exhibit the same decrease in the number of neurons expressing inhibitory GABA and increase in the number of neurons expressing excitatory glutamate that we reported in our study. Both the environmental- and the genetic mutation based-forms of ASD may arise in the same way.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2406928121" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Embryonic exposure to environmental factors drives transmitter switching in the neonatal mouse cortex causing autistic-like adult behavior</a>,” was authored by Swetha K. Godavarthi, Hui-quan Li, Marta Pratelli, and Nicholas C. Spitzer</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/lucid-dreaming-app-triples-users-awareness-in-dreams-study-finds/" 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;">Lucid dreaming app triples users’ awareness in dreams, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 12th 2024, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>In a recent study published in <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053810024001260"><em>Consciousness and Cognition</em></a>, researchers at Northwestern University showed that a smartphone app using sensory cues can significantly increase the frequency of lucid dreams—dreams in which a person is aware they are dreaming while still asleep. This study marks the first attempt to apply a lucid-dreaming method called Targeted Lucidity Reactivation outside of a lab environment, demonstrating that even a simple at-home approach can help users experience more lucid dreams.</p>
<p>Lucid dreaming has drawn increasing public interest for its potential benefits, including enhancing creativity, overcoming nightmares, and providing a space for personal growth and skill practice. Traditional techniques for inducing lucid dreams involve cognitive exercises, such as keeping a dream journal, performing reality checks, and practicing intention-setting before sleep.</p>
<p>Although these techniques can be effective, they require significant dedication and consistency. A streamlined, at-home approach could make lucid dreaming more accessible to the general public. The researchers wanted to explore whether a simplified, app-based approach using Targeted Lucidity Reactivation—a method previously successful in a controlled lab setting—could be adapted for use outside the lab with minimal technical requirements.</p>
<p>In Targeted Lucidity Reactivation, participants undergo training to associate a sound cue—such as a tone or melody—with becoming aware that they are dreaming. This same sound is then played during sleep to prompt lucidity within a dream, leveraging the brain’s ability to recognize the cue and reawaken a state of self-awareness while dreaming.</p>
<p>“I have always been fascinated in lucid dreaming because it provides a space to experience yourself in an entirely new way,” said study author Karen Konkoly, a postdoctoral psychology fellow and member of <a href="https://pallerlab.psych.northwestern.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ken Paller’s Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory</a>.</p>
<p>“Looking around in a lucid dream, you realize that everything before you is generated by your mind, including your sense of self. Moreover, lucid dreaming is a fascinating model for studying consciousness. Since we’ve been developing more effective ways to induce lucid dreams in the sleep laboratory, we wanted to take a step towards making these advances available for individuals to use on their own.”</p>
<p>The study consisted of two experiments to test whether a smartphone-based Targeted Lucidity Reactivation method could increase lucid dreaming frequency. The first experiment involved 19 participants, all Android users with a history of dream recall, who completed a one-week protocol involving nightly training with a specialized app. In the second experiment, the researchers recruited a larger sample of 416 participants who used the app for multiple nights, allowing for a more comprehensive look at the effectiveness of Targeted Lucidity Reactivation cues in a diverse group.</p>
<p>In Experiment 1, participants used an app that played specific sounds—a sequence of beeps or a violin tone—to create an association between these sounds and a lucid state of awareness. Each night before sleep, participants completed a 20-minute training exercise where the app’s sound cues prompted them to enter a “lucid mindset.”</p>
<p>Once asleep, the app replayed these cues intermittently after a six-hour delay, using a gradual volume increase to avoid sudden awakenings. Participants reported any dreams they remembered each morning, noting if they experienced lucid awareness or incorporated the sound cue into their dream.</p>
<p>This first experiment found that using the app increased lucid dreaming frequency from an average of 0.74 dreams per week (prior to the study) to 2.11 during the week of app use. Many participants credited the app’s cues with prompting lucidity directly or indirectly.</p>
<p>Experiment 2 built on these results with a more complex design. This time, participants were divided into three groups to clarify the effect of the Targeted Lucidity Reactivation cues. The first group, receiving cues every night, served as the main experimental group. The second and third groups were control conditions: one received “untrained” cues—sounds not used in the pre-sleep training—and the other received no sound cues on alternate nights. This design helped distinguish increases in lucid dreaming due specifically to Targeted Lucidity Reactivation and those possibly caused by arousal from sound cues in general.</p>
<p>With 50 participants completing the full seven-night protocol, the study provided insight into the distinct impact of Targeted Lucidity Reactivation cues compared to other sounds. Participants receiving these cues reported significantly more lucid dreams on training nights than those receiving untrained or no cues, reinforcing that pairing cues with lucidity training was essential for effective lucid dreaming.</p>
<p>“Tweaking sleep opens the door for people to change their dreaming,” Paller said. “We are taking a sleep-engineering approach to using sleep for personal benefits, for practicing skills, solving problems, and for spiritual and personal growth.”</p>
<p>The combined results from both experiments support Targeted Lucidity Reactivation’s potential as an accessible, smartphone-based method for promoting lucid dreaming. While the cues showed a clear benefit, the study also highlighted challenges, such as the potential for cues to disrupt sleep if mistimed, since the app could not detect when participants entered rapid eye movement (REM) sleep.</p>
<p>To improve the precision of Targeted Lucidity Reactivation in the future, researchers are considering incorporating wearable technology capable of detecting REM sleep, allowing cues to play at the optimal time for triggering lucidity without disturbing sleep. The Northwestern team has already begun collaborating with InteraXon, the company behind the Muse-S headband, which could allow for more precise sleep-stage detection and improve the effectiveness of the Targeted Lucidity Reactivation method.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2024.103759" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Provoking lucid dreams at home with sensory cues paired with pre-sleep cognitive training</a>,” was authored by Karen R. Konkoly, Nathan W. Whitmore, Remington Mallett, Christopher Y. Mazurek, and Ken A. Paller.</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/sex-specific-brain-pathways-influence-threat-processing/" 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;">Sex-specific brain pathways influence threat processing</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 12th 2024, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <em><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-024-01748-7" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nature Neuroscience</a></em> reveals that male and female mice process threats differently in the brain, even though their behavioral responses are similar. By studying neural activity in two key brain regions, researchers discovered sex-specific pathways that influence how male and female mice distinguish between threatening and non-threatening cues.</p>
<p>Previous research has shown that males and females can experience psychiatric disorders differently, with distinct symptoms or rates of development. The researchers, led by McGill University’s Associate Professor Rosemary Bagot, were particularly interested in how the brain tells apart cues that signal danger from those that indicate safety. These cues are vital for survival, as they help animals, including humans, decide whether it’s safe to focus on other needs or if they should prepare for potential threats.</p>
<p>“My lab has a long-standing interest in understanding how glutamatergic inputs to the nucleus accumbens are altered by chronic stress and how this might be involved in stress-related disorders like depression and anxiety,” explained Bagot, the head of <a href="https://www.bagotlab.org/">the Bagot Lab for Behavioural Neurogenomics</a>.</p>
<p>“In earlier work we found that chronic stress changes neural activity in these circuits, and we wanted to understand more about why this might be important. This drove us to examine how these neural circuits encode information about threat and how this information is then used to guide ongoing behavior. We didn’t set out to find sex differences; we just routinely do all our experiments in both male and female animals and stumbled across this. We were really surprised to find this effect and very curious to understand more about it.”</p>
<p>To explore this, the researchers worked with laboratory mice and focused on two brain pathways: one connecting the medial prefrontal cortex, a region involved in decision-making, to the nucleus accumbens, which plays a role in reward processing and behavior, and another linking the ventral hippocampus to the nucleus accumbens. Both of these brain circuits process information related to reward and threat, but it wasn’t known if these pathways work differently in males and females.</p>
<p>The mice were trained to recognize two distinct signals: one that warned of a mild electric shock and another that meant safety. Over time, they learned to associate the threat signal with a reason to feel fear, while the safety signal indicated that they could relax.</p>
<p>The researchers used a technique that allowed them to observe changes in neural activity as the mice were exposed to the cues. This method enabled them to see how each brain circuit responded to both the threat signal and the safety signal in real-time. In addition to observing natural brain responses, the team used a procedure to temporarily turn off each brain circuit independently, which allowed them to test how disrupting these connections impacted the mice’s behavioral response to threat cues.</p>
<p>The findings revealed a surprising difference in how male and female mice processed the cues. Despite the fact that both males and females showed similar outward behavior by freezing in response to the threat, their brains used different circuits to process the information. For female mice, the pathway between the medial prefrontal cortex and the nucleus accumbens was more involved in managing their response to threat cues.</p>
<p>When this pathway was disrupted, females showed a noticeable change in their ability to react appropriately to the threat signal, suggesting that this brain circuit was essential for their threat-processing mechanism. In contrast, male mice relied more heavily on the connection between the ventral hippocampus and the nucleus accumbens. When this second pathway was interrupted, male mice’s reactions to the threat cue were affected more significantly than those of females.</p>
<p>“We were initially really surprised that the effects of turning off one brain circuit or the other were so specific to each sex,” Bagot told PsyPost. “This really confirmed that male and female mice were relying on different brain circuits to produce the same behavior.”</p>
<p>Another notable finding was the apparent difference in how each sex used the safety signal. Female mice appeared to use the safety cue as a signal that allowed them to relax, reducing their response to potential danger. This pattern suggested that the safety signal served as a “safety” marker in their brains, helping to distinguish times when it was safe to pursue other activities from times when they should remain alert.</p>
<p>On the other hand, male mice seemed to interpret the safety cue as neutral, giving it no special significance in terms of relaxation or caution. This difference could indicate distinct risk-management strategies between males and females, possibly reflecting underlying evolutionary or biological influences.</p>
<p>“One key takeaway is that the brain can produce similar behavior using different neural circuits,” Bagot explained. “We need to understand these differences in diverse populations to fully understand how the brain works. We see it here comparing male and female mice, but this is just one source of individual differences. It’s also important to remember that we see these effects at the level of group averages and that there is also a lot of variability within sex, and of course, there are many other ways that individuals can differ.”</p>
<p>The study underscores the importance of including both sexes in neuroscience research. Without a clear understanding of how sex influences brain function, researchers risk overlooking factors that could improve health outcomes for both males and females.</p>
<p>“As with any research in preclinical models, it is important to remember that humans are more complex than mice, and we need to be cautious in how we extrapolate the findings to human health,” Bagot noted. “Preclinical models are essential in being able to untangle complex brain mechanisms, but mice are not humans. One major consideration is that, in mice, we only examine the effects of biological sex (male/female) as a binary. Mice do not have gender, but when we think about humans, this becomes an important consideration.”</p>
<p>Future research could explore how hormones and other biological factors influence these sex-specific brain circuits.</p>
<p>“We want to understand the mechanism underlying this sex difference in neural circuit function,” Bagot said. “We’ve shown that there are no major differences in how the circuits are wired in male and female mice. We are curious to understand more about how hormonal mechanisms might influence how each circuit is recruited to encode threat and control behavior.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-024-01748-7" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sex-biased neural encoding of threat discrimination in nucleus accumbens afferents drives suppression of reward behavior</a>,” was authored by Jessie Muir, Eshaan S. Iyer, Yiu-Chung Tse, Julian Sorensen, Serena Wu, Rand S. Eid, Vedrana Cvetkovska, Karen Wassef, Sarah Gostlin, Peter Vitaro, Nick J. Spencer, and Rosemary C. Bagot.</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/congress-members-less-outspoken-against-covid-19-policies-after-personal-infections-study-finds/" 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;">Congress members less outspoken against COVID-19 policies after personal infections, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 12th 2024, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>An analysis of health data and social media posts of U.S. Congress members found that after being personally infected with COVID-19, these individuals tended to decrease their opposition to COVID-19-related government policies on social media by approximately 30% on average. The research was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2024.2364072"><em>Political Communication</em></a>.</p>
<p>In late 2019, the COVID-19 epidemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged and quickly spread globally. In response, governments worldwide implemented measures to curb the virus’s spread, including lockdowns, mandatory mask-wearing, and physical distancing requirements in social settings. In many parts of the world, hospitals were overwhelmed with patients, straining healthcare systems and sometimes leading to shortages of critical supplies.</p>
<p>However, the reactions of political leaders were mixed. While some implemented and supported very stringent anti-COVID-19 policies, others opposed these measures, citing the disruptions they caused to the economy and daily life. Still, governments that implemented anti-COVID-19 measures generally received public support, though these measures also led to increased skepticism toward state interventions, the effectiveness of these measures, and even the existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, fueling polarization within societies.</p>
<p>Study author Zachary P. Dickson and his colleagues note that the United States is one country where the public debate around COVID-19 and its consequences has been extremely polarizing, with many key politicians propagating false and misleading assertions and attempting to downplay the threat posed by the virus. The authors conducted a study to examine how personally experiencing COVID-19 infection affected the intensity of opposition these politicians expressed toward anti-COVID-19 measures.</p>
<p>They began the study by collecting social media posts on Twitter and official press releases of U.S. Congress members from that period. They fine-tuned an AI language model to classify these texts according to whether the author expressed support or opposition to a given COVID-19-related policy or measure. Next, they used GovTrack data to obtain information on when different legislators (U.S. Congress members) were infected with COVID-19. They then compared the COVID-19-related sentiment of these individuals’ tweets before and after contracting the infection.</p>
<p>The study authors note that the GovTrack team used a variety of sources to compile an accurate list of when each member of the U.S. Congress contracted COVID-19. However, it is possible that the list is not perfectly accurate, as some members may have contracted the infection but showed no symptoms and remained unaware. Nevertheless, this inaccuracy, if it exists, may not be relevant to the current analysis, as the authors do not expect an asymptomatic COVID-19 infection to have affected their attitudes.</p>
<p>Results showed that by April 2021, more than 100 members of Congress had been infected with the virus. By April 2022, this number had risen to over 200. Interestingly, at the start of the pandemic, the level of opposition to COVID-19 policies was relatively low among both Democrats and Republicans, though somewhat higher among Republicans at certain points. From roughly April 2021, attitudes began to diverge sharply, with Republicans expressing increasing levels of opposition to COVID-19 policies, while Democrats maintained a low level of opposition.</p>
<p>As expected, a comparison of tweets from Congress members before and after they were infected showed that the level of opposition to COVID-19 policies expressed in tweets was significantly lower two weeks after infection compared to two and four weeks prior. The level of opposition increased somewhat, on average, one month after infection, indicating that personally contracting COVID-19 temporarily reduced lawmakers’ opposition to COVID-19 policies on social media.</p>
<p>In terms of tweets, on average, Congress members who were infected with COVID-19 sent approximately 0.3–0.4 fewer messages expressing opposition to COVID-19 policies in the four weeks after infection, compared to the four weeks before infection. This amounts to roughly a 30% reduction in legislators’ expressions of opposition to COVID-19 policies on Twitter.</p>
<p>However, after the treatment period ended, these lawmakers’ level of opposition gradually returned to pre-infection levels. Around three months after infection, the number of messages opposing COVID-19 policies had returned to their pre-infection frequency. During the four weeks after infection, lawmakers also tended to increase the total number of tweets they made.</p>
<p>“Employing a staggered difference-in-differences design and matrix completion methods, our analysis reveals that COVID-19 infections caused a reduction of approximately 30% in legislators’ expressions of opposition to COVID-19 policies on social media. These findings underscore that elites are indeed responsive to policy shocks – even in highly polarized contexts – when they are personally affected by an issue,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the effect of personally contracting COVID-19 on political attitudes expressed by U.S. Congress members. However, the authors note that it remains unclear to what extent social media messages reflect the true personal preferences of U.S. Congress members. It is entirely possible that members of the political elite say one thing publicly while personally believing another.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2024.2364072">The Effects of COVID-19 Infection on Opposition to COVID-19 Policies: Evidence from the U.S. Congress,</a>” was authored by Zachary P. Dickson and Tevfik Murat Yildirim.</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>