<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/psilocybin-assisted-neurofeedback-shows-promise-in-preliminary-research/" 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;">Psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback shows promise in preliminary research</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 3rd 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Can psychedelics help train the brain? Scientists have begun to explore whether pairing psilocybin microdosing with neurofeedback training can improve cognitive function. A new study offers early signs that the approach is safe, tolerable, and feasible—but it remains unclear whether it actually enhances thinking skills. The research has been published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0095" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B</a></em>.</p>
<p>Psilocybin is the active compound found in certain psychedelic mushrooms. At higher doses, it can cause altered states of consciousness, but at very low “microdoses,” it does not produce hallucinations. Growing research suggests microdosing may subtly enhance mood and cognition, possibly by promoting the brain’s ability to change and adapt.</p>
<p>Neurofeedback, on the other hand, is a technique that uses real-time displays of brain activity—usually via electroencephalography (EEG)—to teach people how to control specific patterns of neural activity.</p>
<p>The researchers from the University of Groningen wanted to explore whether psilocybin could enhance neurofeedback training by increasing the brain’s plasticity, making it more receptive to learning. Their goal was to examine whether this combined approach could improve executive functions, which include skills like working memory, flexible thinking, and self-control.</p>
<p>To test this, the team conducted a small, early-phase study involving 37 participants. These volunteers were recruited from a microdosing workshop in the Netherlands and were not new to the idea of using psychedelics to support mental functioning. Eighteen were randomly assigned to the experimental group, and 19 to a passive control group. The control group did not receive any training during the core part of the study.</p>
<p>The experimental group first completed a week-long period to adjust to microdosing, using low amounts of <em>Psilocybe mexicana</em> truffles. They then participated in three sessions of neurofeedback training, spaced across one week. Before each neurofeedback session, they took a microdose of psilocybin. During the sessions, participants sat in a lab and received visual feedback based on the level of a specific brain rhythm called frontal-midline theta, which is linked to executive function. The goal was to increase this rhythm over time. Participants used self-chosen mental strategies to try to “turn the feedback square red,” which indicated successful upregulation of the target brain activity.</p>
<p>Both before and after the training period, participants completed a battery of cognitive tests and questionnaires. The researchers looked at both lab-based executive function tasks and self-reported assessments of how well participants managed these skills in daily life. Participants also set personalized goals—such as improving focus, reducing anxiety, or feeling more present—and rated their progress.</p>
<p>The study’s main goal was to test whether this kind of training was practical and safe. On that front, the results were promising. No one dropped out, no one reported negative psychological effects, and participants generally rated the sessions as engaging and meaningful. Most reported a strong sense of connection to the study and were motivated to complete the training, despite finding the neurofeedback somewhat difficult.</p>
<p>In terms of brain activity, the researchers observed a trend toward increased frontal-midline theta across sessions, with a large effect size, although the result was just shy of statistical significance. Within individual sessions, changes were more modest. The findings suggest that participants may have started to learn how to self-regulate the target brain rhythm, but three sessions may have been too few to produce consistent changes.</p>
<p>When it came to standard lab tests of executive function, such as tasks that measure memory updating or response inhibition, the results were mixed. There were no clear improvements in reaction times or accuracy that could be attributed to the training. However, participants in the experimental group reported improvements on questionnaires that asked about real-world executive functioning. These self-reported gains were seen across all four areas measured: working memory, mental flexibility, self-monitoring, and inhibition.</p>
<p>Despite these encouraging findings, the study was focused on determining whether psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback is safe and feasible. Because of this, there are several limitations. Most notably, the study lacked an active control group, which makes it difficult to determine whether the observed improvements were truly due to the neurofeedback and psilocybin, or simply the result of participating in an engaging new experience. Participants also knew they were receiving the active intervention, which could have influenced their expectations and self-reports. Although the study included measures of suggestibility and optimism, which were similar between groups, the researchers acknowledge that subtle placebo effects cannot be ruled out.</p>
<p>Moving forward, the research team recommends that future studies include an active control condition, a longer training period, and a larger sample size to test the durability and specificity of the effects. They also suggest exploring the best timing between psilocybin intake and training, as the acute effects of the substance may temporarily reduce the very brain activity participants are trying to increase.</p>
<p>In sum, this early research shows that psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback is feasible and well-tolerated. But it is still unclear whether it results in improved cognitive functioning. While the study cannot yet prove that the intervention improves brain function in an objective sense, it lays important groundwork for future trials. If confirmed, this novel approach could open new possibilities for treating cognitive symptoms that cut across many mental health conditions.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0095" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback for the improvement of executive functions: a randomized semi-naturalistic-lab feasibility study</a>,” was authored by S. Enriquez-Geppert, J. Krc, F. J. O’Higgins, and M. Lietz.</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/study-finds-liberals-show-less-empathy-to-political-opponents-than-conservatives-do/" 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;">Study finds liberals show less empathy to political opponents than conservatives do</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 3rd 2025, 09:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>In today’s polarized political landscape, the ability to understand and empathize with those across the aisle has reached concerning lows. New research published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231198001"><em>Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin</em></a> reveals an asymmetry in this empathy deficit: liberals consistently show less empathy toward their conservative peers than vice versa.</p>
<p>President Joe Biden’s inaugural call to “stand in the other person’s shoes” highlighted empathy as crucial for healing national divisions. Yet many people find it hard to feel for political opponents. Empathy—defined as sympathy for and understanding of another’s suffering with the aim of reducing it—is widely seen as essential for improving intergroup relations, but tends to diminish when directed toward those outside one’s political or social group.</p>
<p>James P. Casey and colleagues conducted four preregistered studies examining how political ideology shapes intergroup empathy bias and why such differences arise. The researchers recruited 4,737 participants, roughly evenly split between liberals and conservatives, from online platforms including Prolific, CloudResearch, and MTurk.</p>
<p>Study 1 involved 549 U.S. participants, while Study 2 included 958 U.K. participants. Study 3 and Study 4 sampled 1,372 and 1,874 U.S. participants, respectively, with recruitment spanning both conservative and liberal administrations to account for political context.</p>
<p>In each study, participants read a short scenario describing a person undergoing a mild hardship (e.g., a sprained ankle). The person was identified as politically conservative, liberal, or neutral. Participants then rated their emotional responses using several scales: empathic concern (e.g., sympathy), perspective-taking, empathic intentions (e.g., willingness to help), and empathic avoidance.</p>
<p>Mediating variables included perceptions of the target’s morality, likability, similarity to the self, and, in later studies, the perceived harm caused by the target’s political group. Ingroup political power was also measured to assess whether the party in power influenced empathic responses.</p>
<p>Across all four studies, participants consistently showed lower empathy for political outgroup members than for ingroup or neutral targets. However, this bias was not symmetrical. Liberals exhibited significantly less empathy for conservatives than conservatives showed for liberals. In Study 1, this asymmetry was driven by liberals’ stronger negative judgments of conservatives’ morality and likability. Conservatives’ empathic responses remained relatively stable regardless of the target’s political affiliation.</p>
<p>Study 2 confirmed these findings in the U.K. sample, where British liberals also exhibited stronger empathy bias against conservatives, mediated by perceptions of morality, likability, and similarity. Study 3 demonstrated that even after the shift to a Democratic administration in the U.S., liberals continued to judge conservatives as more harmful and immoral, leading to reduced empathy. Study 4 further validated this pattern with a larger sample, strengthening the evidence for the link between perceived group harm and diminished empathy.</p>
<p>One limitation is that findings rely on hypothetical scenarios rather than real-world interactions, which may limit generalizability of results to real-world political discourse or behavior.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231198001">Empathic Conservatives and Moralizing Liberals: Political Intergroup Empathy Varies by Political Ideology and Is Explained by Moral Judgment</a>,” was authored by James P. Casey, Eric J. Vanman, and Fiona Kate Barlow.</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/can-psychedelics-make-you-a-more-moral-person-new-study-explores-the-link/" 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 psychedelics make you a more moral person? New study explores the link</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 3rd 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Recent research has found that individuals who had meaningful psychedelic experiences tended to report increases in moral expansiveness. In other words, the scope of entities (humans, animals, the environment, etc.) that they considered worthy of moral consideration and protection expanded. The research was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2025.2478095"><em>Journal of Psychoactive Drugs</em></a>.</p>
<p>Psychedelics are a class of psychoactive substances that alter perception, mood, and various cognitive processes. Common psychedelics include LSD, psilocybin (found in magic mushrooms), and DMT, which are used both recreationally and increasingly in therapeutic settings to address mental health issues.</p>
<p>The use of these substances often leads to experiences that are considered out of the ordinary or transcendental. These experiences are characterized by profound changes in perception, emotion, and thought processes, often accompanied by visual and auditory hallucinations. Users frequently report a dissolution of the ego, leading to a sense of oneness with the universe or profound spiritual insights. The intensity and nature of these experiences can vary widely depending on the dose, environment, and individual psychology.</p>
<p>Scientific research suggests that psychedelic experiences can have lasting positive effects on mental health, including reductions in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder. However, they can also lead to distressing experiences, especially without proper guidance or in unsuitable settings.</p>
<p>Study authors Will Olteanu and Sam G. Moreton aimed to explore the relationship between psychedelic experiences and moral expansiveness. Moral expansiveness refers to the range of entities (humans, animals, the environment) that individuals consider worthy of moral consideration and protection. The researchers hypothesized that individuals who had meaningful psychedelic experiences would report increases in their moral expansiveness.</p>
<p>Study participants included 201 adults who reported consuming at least one dose of a classic psychedelic—such as LSD, N,N-DMT, psilocybin, or mescaline—within the past decade, but not within the two weeks prior to the survey. They completed the study online via Qualtrics and were entered into a raffle to win one of two AUD $100 gift vouchers.</p>
<p>The survey included assessments of ego dissolution (using the Ego-Dissolution Inventory), mystical experiences (using the revised Mystical Experiences Questionnaire), and self-transcendent positive emotions experienced during participants’ psychedelic trips. It also included an assessment of moral expansiveness using the Moral Expansiveness Scale. Participants completed the moral expansiveness assessment twice: once by recalling a time in their life before the meaningful psychedelic experience, and again referring to their current life.</p>
<p>Results showed that a large proportion of participants reported strong self-transcendent emotions during their psychedelic experience. On average, participants’ moral expansiveness scores were higher after their psychedelic experience compared to before. Those who reported more intense ego dissolution and mystical experiences tended to show greater increases in moral expansiveness.</p>
<p>“This study provides preliminary evidence that meaningful psychedelic experiences are associated with an increase in moral expansiveness. These findings underscore the transformative potential of psychedelic experiences on moral cognition, suggesting that specific experiences during and after psychedelic use play a crucial role in this process,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on individual experiences with psychedelics. However, it is important to note that the study’s design does not allow for causal conclusions to be drawn. Additionally, all data were based on participants’ recollections, including their assessments of moral expansiveness before and after the psychedelic experience. This introduces the potential for recall bias to have influenced the results.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2025.2478095">Meaningful Psychedelic Experiences Predict Increased Moral Expansiveness</a>,” was authored by Will Olteanu and Sam G. Moreton.</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/metacognitive-abilities-are-linked-to-physical-activity-diet-and-sleep-quality/" 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;">Metacognitive abilities are linked to physical activity, diet, and sleep quality</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 3rd 2025, 07:00</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://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317253" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PLOS One</a></em> has found that how young adults manage their mental resources—known as metacognition—is connected to their physical activity, diet, and sleep. The findings suggest that these everyday behaviors may not only influence how we think but also how we think about our thinking.</p>
<p>Metacognition refers to the ability to reflect on and control one’s own thought processes. This includes knowing what strategies to use when solving problems, keeping track of progress while completing tasks, and adjusting plans if something isn’t working.</p>
<p>While much research has already shown that physical activity, sleep, and diet can influence cognitive functions like memory or attention, fewer studies have examined whether these habits also affect metacognitive skills. The researchers behind this study wanted to find out whether the same lifestyle factors that shape basic thinking skills might also relate to the higher-level processes people use to guide and regulate their thinking.</p>
<p>“We have long recognized that lifestyle behaviors, particularly physical activity, diet, and sleep habits, are associated with our cognitive functioning,” said study author G. Kyle Gooderham, a postdoctoral research fellow in the School of Kinesiology at the University of British Columbia.</p>
<p>“However, it remains unclear whether lifestyle behaviors are linked to our abilities to monitor and control our cognitive resources and functioning. This fundamental cognitive ability, metacognition, supports cognitive functioning by enabling us to flexibly respond to cognitive demands. Therefore, an association between lifestyle behaviors and metacognition would suggest that lifestyle behaviors are linked to the regulation of cognitive functioning.”</p>
<p>This is especially relevant for young adults, who are generally at their peak in terms of cognitive performance. Despite this, even high-performing individuals may experience variation in how effectively they plan, monitor, and adjust their thinking, and these differences could be related to how they live. Because young adulthood is a period when long-term health habits are often established, understanding how lifestyle connects to metacognition could have lasting implications for both mental and physical well-being.</p>
<p>To investigate this, the researchers conducted two studies using large samples of undergraduate students at the University of British Columbia. In the first study, 1,702 students were recruited, and in the second, 564 students took part. All participants completed a set of online surveys assessing their physical activity levels, dietary habits, sleep quality, perceived stress, and various aspects of metacognitive function.</p>
<p>These surveys had been validated in previous research and included measures like the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (which assesses how well someone understands and regulates their own learning), the Inventory of Metacognitive Self-Regulation (which focuses on problem-solving abilities), and the Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire (which captures patterns of worry and confidence about one’s own thoughts).</p>
<p>In both studies, physical activity stood out as a strong predictor of metacognitive functioning. Young adults who reported higher levels of physical activity were more likely to say they understood how their thinking worked, and that they used effective strategies to manage their mental performance. These relationships were especially clear for abilities like planning how to approach a task or evaluating how well a strategy was working—skills often used before or after completing a mentally challenging activity.</p>
<p>Interestingly, physical activity was not linked to metacognitive skills that happen during a task, such as adjusting one’s approach in the moment or staying mentally focused. Nor was it related to metacognitive worry—negative thoughts or anxiety about one’s own thinking. These findings suggest that physical activity may be most closely associated with metacognitive processes that happen before or after a task rather than in real time.</p>
<p>When it came to diet, the results pointed in a different direction. Healthy dietary patterns were related to better online regulation of cognition—the ability to monitor and adjust thinking as tasks unfold. Participants who reported more nutritious eating habits were more likely to indicate they could manage their mental focus and keep track of their progress while working through a problem.</p>
<p>However, diet was not strongly connected to overall knowledge about thinking or to pre- and post-task regulation. This implies that healthy eating might support the flexible mental engagement needed during ongoing cognitive efforts.</p>
<p>Sleep, meanwhile, was most closely linked with metacognitive worry. Participants who reported poor sleep quality also tended to express more anxiety about their thinking, including worries about losing control of thoughts or feeling mentally vulnerable.</p>
<p>However, sleep did not appear to relate to how well participants understood or regulated their thinking in practical terms. This pattern suggests that inadequate sleep may influence the emotional side of metacognition—such as self-doubt or mental discomfort—without necessarily impairing planning or problem-solving skills.</p>
<p>“Physical activity, diet, and sleep are modifiable lifestyle behaviors that impact how we monitor and control our cognitive functions,” Gooderham told PsyPost. “Engaging in healthful lifestyle behaviors may not only directly impact cognitive performance, but also how we use our limited cognitive resources.”</p>
<p>To better understand these patterns, the researchers grouped the different aspects of metacognition into four broader categories: knowledge of cognition, offline regulation of cognition (before or after a task), online regulation (during a task), and metacognitive worry. This allowed them to see more clearly how lifestyle habits matched up with specific types of thinking skills. The results were consistent across both studies: physical activity was related to knowledge and offline regulation, diet to online regulation, and sleep to metacognitive worry.</p>
<p>“Physical activity, diet, and sleep each impacted different aspects of metacognition,” Gooderham said. “This aligns with findings investigating the effect of lifestyle behaviors on cognitive performance, and reinforces the complex relationship between cognition and our lifestyles. Critically, these data offer convergent evidence for the different effects of lifestyle behaviors on cognitive processes and suggest that different interventions can be adopted to target specific cognitive functions.”</p>
<p>But as with all research, there are some limitations to consider.</p>
<p>“First, it would be inappropriate to infer a causal relationship from the data,” Gooderham explained.” The direction of the relationships cannot be determined from the research design, and it is entirely conceivable that cognitive variables are determinants of participation in lifestyle behaviors.</p>
<p>“Second, the study relied on self-report measures of lifestyle behaviors and metacognition. These self-reported variables, including measures of both cognition and lifestyle behaviors, are liable to deviations from objective indices.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317253" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Metacognitive function in young adults is impacted by physical activity, diet, and sleep patterns</a>,” was authored by G. Kyle Gooderham and Todd C. Handy.</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/americans-support-economic-redistribution-when-the-wealthy-pay-or-the-costs-are-hidden/" 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;">Americans support economic redistribution when the wealthy pay or the costs are hidden</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 3rd 2025, 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 <em><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10659129241260413" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Political Research Quarterly</a></em> sheds light on a longstanding puzzle in American politics: why voters often express strong support for government programs but hesitate when those programs come with visible costs. The findings indicate that Americans broadly support redistributive economic policies—but only when the costs are hidden or shifted to a small, wealthy minority. Support drops significantly when the burden of paying for these policies becomes more visible or widely shared.</p>
<p>Most prior surveys have asked people if they support increased government spending or if they favor higher taxes. But these questions are usually asked in isolation, without linking the benefits of a program to the costs of funding it. In real-world policymaking, however, spending decisions almost always involve trade-offs. Yale University political scientist Sam Zacher wanted to understand how Americans respond when those trade-offs are made explicit—when a policy benefit is directly tied to who would pay for it.</p>
<p>To do this, Zacher designed a survey that went beyond standard public opinion polls. The survey, fielded in late 2022 and early 2023, included 1,201 participants, with an intentional oversample of high-income respondents. About 382 of the participants had household incomes above $200,000. The survey was designed to measure support for a wide range of economic policy proposals, both in isolation and when paired with specific tax increases. Participants were asked to rate their support on a scale from 0 to 100, with labels indicating levels of support or opposition.</p>
<p>Each respondent was randomly assigned to one of two groups of policy “benefits,” such as increased funding for K–12 education, public pre-kindergarten, housing, health care, and renewable energy. Some proposals were more moderate (like raising the minimum wage to $11), while others were more ambitious (like transitioning to single-payer health care). All respondents saw the same set of “cost” options: five types of tax increases, including higher income taxes on those earning over $200,000 or $1 million, increased capital gains taxes, and an across-the-board tax increase on all incomes. Each policy benefit was also paired with a specific tax cost, forming a “bundle.” For example, one bundled proposal asked whether participants supported raising taxes on households earning over $1 million to fund public K–12 schools.</p>
<p>Zacher’s findings reveal just how sensitive Americans are to these policy trade-offs. Across the board, support for policy benefits was much higher when the cost was not mentioned. But when a tax increase was included—especially one affecting a broad swath of the public—support fell sharply. For example, a majority of Americans expressed support for public pre-kindergarten programs when asked in isolation. But when the proposal required raising taxes on all income levels, support dropped by nearly 30 percentage points.</p>
<p>The public was most supportive of redistributive policy bundles that placed the financial burden on the very wealthy. Proposals that paired tax hikes on incomes above $1 million with increased spending on popular services like renewable energy or public education consistently received majority or even supermajority support. On the other hand, proposals that required tax increases on all income levels—regardless of the benefit—never crossed the 50% support threshold.</p>
<p>Interestingly, support for raising taxes on the wealthy was sometimes even higher than support for the policy bundle itself. This suggests that while Americans may support “soaking the rich,” they can become more skeptical when the tax increase is linked to a particular government program. This effect may reflect general hesitation about complex policy changes or a lack of trust in government implementation.</p>
<p>Zacher also found that Americans’ preferences are shaped not just by their overall ideology or partisan identity, but also by their economic self-interest. Affluent respondents were much more sensitive to the potential costs of redistribution. When a policy proposal would impose direct tax increases on high-income households, support among affluent participants dropped significantly, even when the benefit was widely popular.</p>
<p>This pattern held even within political parties. Among Republicans, the gap between low-income and high-income voters was especially large. Wealthier Republicans were far more likely to oppose redistributive policy bundles than their less affluent counterparts. Among Democrats, the divisions were smaller but still present, especially when policy bundles included progressive tax increases.</p>
<p>The study also explored whether political donors—who often have outsize influence in the policy process—differed in their preferences. Among Democrats, donors and non-donors held similar views overall, though there were some differences on specific policies. For Republicans, donor preferences appeared more moderate than expected, though the small sample size made it difficult to draw firm conclusions.</p>
<p>But as with any study, there are limitations to consider. Zacher’s survey included a specific set of policy combinations, meaning that not all possible trade-offs were tested. The study also focused primarily on economic policies and did not explore issues like immigration or social policy, which can also have redistributive effects. Additionally, because the survey was conducted online, it may have excluded some populations who are less likely to participate in web-based surveys.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129241260413" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What Forms of Redistribution Do Americans Want? Understanding Preferences for Policy Benefit-Cost Tradeoffs</a>,” was published online on June 14, 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>
<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/cognitive-deficits-in-depression-often-persist-after-ssri-treatment-research-shows/" 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;">Cognitive deficits in depression often persist after SSRI treatment, research shows</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 2nd 2025, 14:00</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/10.1016/j.jad.2025.02.115" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Journal of Affective Disorders</a></em> has found that adults with major depression show specific cognitive impairments. While many participants experienced mood improvements after taking antidepressants for eight weeks, their cognitive abilities did not improve to the same degree. These findings highlight an important gap in current depression treatment: antidepressants can help with emotional symptoms but may not fully address problems with memory, attention, and mental speed, at least after two months of treatment.</p>
<p>Depression is not just about feeling sad. It often comes with difficulties in thinking clearly, remembering things, or staying focused. These mental challenges—sometimes described as “brain fog”—can interfere with daily functioning, even when mood symptoms begin to lift.</p>
<p>Past studies have shown that people with depression tend to perform worse than others on tests of memory, attention, and mental flexibility. However, most of those studies included people who had other medical or psychiatric conditions, or who were already taking medications that could influence thinking. The current study aimed to isolate the effects of depression itself by focusing on people who were otherwise healthy and unmedicated.</p>
<p>“We want to better understand what specific cognitive functions are impaired in major depressive disorder and whether current antidepressant treatments address these deficits,” said study author Gwyneth W.Y Wu, a research scientist at the University of California, San Francisco.</p>
<p>“By identifying potential treatment gaps, we hope to contribute to more comprehensive and targeted therapeutic strategies. Additionally, most studies comparing cognitive impairments in individuals with depression to controls do not specifically focus on medically healthy, unmedicated individuals. Our study aimed to identify cognitive performance specifically associated with depression, rather than medication or other underlying illnesses.”</p>
<p>For their study, the researchers recruited 113 adults diagnosed with major depressive disorder and 88 adults without depression to serve as a comparison group. Everyone in the study was physically healthy and free of other psychiatric conditions, such as substance use disorders, bipolar disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder. None of the participants were taking medications known to affect brain function including antidepressant, anti-anxiety, or mood stabilizing medication.</p>
<p>Depression diagnoses were confirmed through structured interviews, and participants completed a series of well-known cognitive tests that measured areas like processing speed, executive function, and both visual and verbal memory. These tests were given to everyone at the start of the study. A subgroup of 69 people with depression went on to complete eight weeks of treatment with a commonly prescribed selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs). At the end of those eight weeks, they repeated the cognitive tests.</p>
<p>At the beginning of the study, people with depression performed worse than those without depression on several key measures. They scored significantly lower on a test called the Symbol Digit Modalities Test, which measures how quickly someone can process information and match symbols to numbers. They also struggled more on parts of the Stroop Test, which assesses how well someone can focus attention and ignore distracting information, as well as on the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test, which measures how well people can remember visual patterns. Interestingly, differences between the groups were not seen on all tasks—especially those involving verbal memory or simpler forms of attention.</p>
<p>The researchers also looked at whether some people were more severely impaired than others. They defined clinical impairment as scoring more than 1.5 standard deviations below the population average. Compared to the healthy group, a larger portion of depressed participants showed this level of impairment in processing speed and visual memory.</p>
<p>“Our findings reinforce existing research, highlighting the link between cognitive deficits and major depressive disorder,” Wu told PsyPost. “We identified impairments in processing speed, visuospatial memory, and learning in unmedicated individuals with major depression. Additionally, we observed higher rates of clinical impairment in processing speed and both verbal and visual learning.”</p>
<p>“Our findings of impaired processing speed and visuospatial memory—without significant deficits in verbal memory or executive functioning—suggest that these cognitive abnormalities may be linked to dysfunction in specific structural or functional brain regions, but this requires further study. This highlights the possibility that depression-related cognitive impairment may affect certain domains more than others.”</p>
<p>After eight weeks of antidepressant treatment, the researchers reassessed cognitive function among the 69 treated participants. On the surface, the results seemed encouraging: people performed better on six of the thirteen cognitive tests, including measures of processing speed and visual memory. However, when the researchers dug deeper, they found that these improvements were not clearly linked to whether or not someone responded to antidepressants.</p>
<p>In fact, only one test—the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, which assesses verbal memory—showed a meaningful difference between people whose depression symptoms improved and those whose symptoms did not. On that test, those who responded to medication showed improved verbal learning over time, while non-responders actually did slightly worse.</p>
<p>“While participants generally showed improved cognitive performance over the 8-week period, antidepressant response to SSRI treatment was not associated with cognitive gains,” Wu explained. “This underscores the need to consider cognition as an independent therapeutic target in the treatment of depression.”</p>
<p>The researchers also tested whether baseline cognitive scores could predict who would respond to antidepressants. They found no differences in initial cognitive performance between those who later responded to medication and those who did not. This means that measuring cognitive ability at the start of treatment was not helpful in predicting which patients would benefit from medication. Although earlier studies have suggested that slower thinking or poor memory might signal a lower chance of improvement, this study—using a carefully selected sample—did not support that idea.</p>
<p>Like all research, this study had limitations. The sample size was relatively large for this type of study, but it may still have been too small to detect subtle differences between responders and non-responders. The study also excluded people with other medical or psychiatric conditions, so the results may not apply to all patients with depression, especially those with more complex health profiles.</p>
<p>“Our study features a well-screened, relatively large cohort of unmedicated, physically healthy adults with major depressive disorder, free from substance use disorder or other comorbidities, along with a matched, never-depressed healthy control group,” Wu noted. “While these strict exclusion criteria strengthen the internal validity of our findings, they may limit the generalizability to broader populations, particularly those with comorbid physical or psychiatric conditions or those receiving pharmacological treatments.”</p>
<p>It’s also possible that different aspects of depression improve on different timelines, and that cognitive symptoms might take longer to respond to treatment. “It would be nice to retest after four or six months, in addition to the two months we did,” Wu said.</p>
<p>Still, the strengths of the study are notable. It is one of the few to examine cognitive function in unmedicated individuals with depression who are otherwise healthy. The researchers used a well-rounded set of cognitive tests and tracked changes over time, allowing them to compare baseline differences and treatment effects. They also confirmed that participants took their medication as prescribed by measuring drug levels in the blood.</p>
<p>The researchers hope their work can inform more targeted treatments in the future. Long-term, they aim to develop strategies that address both the emotional and cognitive symptoms of depression.</p>
<p>“While traditional depression treatments focus on alleviating mood symptoms, cognitive deficits often persist even after mood improvement,” Wu explained. “This dissociation between cognitive and depressive outcomes could have important clinical implications as even patients who respond symptomatically to SSRI treatment may still suffer from unaddressed cognitive deficits. Addressing this unmet need could lead to more comprehensive and functional patient outcomes.”</p>
<p>“Depression research is critical to advancing our understanding of this complex and pervasive condition. By exploring both the emotional and cognitive dimensions of depression, we can develop more effective and personalized treatments. Ongoing research not only improves clinical outcomes but also paves the way for innovative therapies that can enhance patients’ quality of life.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2025.02.115" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Cognitive function in physically healthy, unmedicated individuals with major depression: Relationship with depressive symptoms and antidepressant response</a>,” was authored by Anna Ou, Gwyneth W.Y Wu, Michelle T. Kassel, R. Scott Mackin, Ryan Rampersaud, Victor I. Reus, Synthia H. Mellon, and Owen M. Wolkowitz.</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/cognitive-flexibility-test-reveals-subtle-signs-of-alzheimers-in-healthy-older-adults/" 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;">Cognitive flexibility test reveals subtle signs of Alzheimer’s in healthy older adults</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 2nd 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-024-01619-0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy</a></em> suggests that small shifts in how the brain processes information could serve as early warning signs of Alzheimer’s disease, even in people who still appear cognitively healthy. In a group of older African American adults with no signs of dementia, the study found that higher levels of a blood-based biomarker were linked to both reduced flexibility in how memory-related brain regions work together and lower scores on a task measuring generalization—the ability to apply what one has learned to new situations. These results point to the potential of combining non-invasive brain imaging, cognitive testing, and blood tests to detect Alzheimer’s risk before traditional memory tests pick up a problem.</p>
<p>Alzheimer’s disease is a progressive condition that causes brain cells to die, gradually impairing memory and thinking. It is believed to start long before noticeable symptoms appear, with the accumulation of abnormal proteins like amyloid-beta plaques and tau tangles in areas of the brain such as the medial temporal lobe, which supports memory. These changes eventually lead to structural damage, functional disruptions, and cognitive decline.</p>
<p>Older African American adults face a disproportionately high risk of developing Alzheimer’s, yet they remain underrepresented in research and clinical trials. This underrepresentation stems in part from limited access to healthcare and the perception that some research tools—like brain scans that require radioactive tracers—are too invasive. Blood-based tests are far less burdensome and offer an appealing alternative for identifying individuals at risk.</p>
<p>“Alzheimer’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that begins affecting the brain years—if not decades—before clinical symptoms emerge,” said study author <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SBDAgdYAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Miray Budak</a>, a postdoctoral associate at the <a href="https://brainhealth.rutgers.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Aging & Brain Health Alliance</a> at Rutgers University–Newark.</p>
<p>“We are particularly interested in identifying early neural and blood-based biomarkers that could help detect Alzheimer’s in its preclinical stage, especially in African American individuals, who are at higher risk for the disease yet remain underrepresented in research. By combining novel cognitive assessments, neuroimaging, and blood biomarkers, our study provides a more comprehensive understanding of early Alzheimer ’s-related changes, which could inform prevention efforts and improve early detection.”</p>
<p>To better understand the early signs of Alzheimer’s in this underrepresented group, the researchers studied 148 African American adults over age 60 who showed no signs of dementia based on standard screenings. All participants had normal scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination and had not been diagnosed with a neurodegenerative condition. The researchers assessed each person’s memory using a traditional verbal recall task and evaluated their generalization ability using a specially designed video-based game.</p>
<p>Participants also gave blood samples that were analyzed for three Alzheimer’s-related biomarkers: p-tau231, p-tau181, and the ratio of two forms of amyloid-beta (Aβ42 and Aβ40). Within two weeks of testing, they underwent an MRI scan to examine how flexibly their medial temporal lobe networks changed over time.</p>
<p>To measure generalization, the researchers used a computerized game called the Rutgers Acquired Equivalence Task. In this game, participants learn a series of face-to-fish pairings across several stages and are later asked to apply what they’ve learned to new, untrained pairings. This kind of flexible thinking, or generalization, is often supported by the medial temporal lobe.</p>
<p>In contrast, long-term memory was measured using a more traditional tool, the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, where participants are asked to recall a list of words after a delay. Resting-state brain scans were analyzed to measure dynamic network flexibility in the medial temporal lobe—a marker of how well that region adapts over time and supports learning.</p>
<p>The researchers found that participants who performed better on the generalization task had greater flexibility in their medial temporal lobe networks. This suggests that a brain that can shift and reorganize connections may better support flexible thinking. In contrast, performance on the verbal recall task did not show a link to network flexibility, highlighting the possibility that these tasks measure different cognitive processes.</p>
<p>Next, the team explored how blood biomarkers were related to these cognitive and brain measures. Higher levels of plasma p-tau231—a protein fragment associated with tau tangles in the brain—were strongly linked to worse generalization performance and reduced network flexibility in the medial temporal lobe. A second tau marker, p-tau181, was also associated with lower generalization scores, though the effect was weaker and not related to network flexibility.</p>
<p>“One of the most striking findings was that generalization performance, a relatively simple cognitive ability assessed via a video-based task, was linked to both medial temporal lobe network flexibility and plasma p-tau231 levels,” Budak told PsyPost. “This suggests that everyday cognitive processes, such as applying learned information to new situations, could be subtly impacted in individuals at risk for Alzheimer’s even before clinical symptoms develop. It also highlights the potential of using computerized cognitive tasks for early screening.”</p>
<p>None of the blood biomarkers were linked to performance on the verbal memory task, nor did levels of amyloid-beta (as measured by the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio) predict any of the cognitive or brain measures.</p>
<p>Together, these findings suggest that tau-related changes, particularly involving p-tau231, may interfere with how flexibly the memory system functions and how well people can apply past learning in new contexts—long before memory loss becomes obvious. These results build on earlier work showing that generalization ability declines with age and may be particularly sensitive to early Alzheimer’s-related changes in the brain.</p>
<p>“The key takeaway is that subtle changes in brain function and cognition can be detected long before noticeable memory problems emerge,” Budak explained. “We found that higher levels of plasma p-tau231—an emerging blood biomarker for Alzheimer’s—are associated with reduced medial temporal lobe network flexibility and difficulties in cognitive generalization (applying the learned information on new situations), even in cognitively healthy older adults.”</p>
<p>“This means that non-invasive tools, such as video-based cognitive tasks and MRI-based network measures, could complement blood-based biomarkers in identifying individuals at risk for Alzheimer’s much earlier than traditional cognitive tests.”</p>
<p>But as with all research, there are some limitations. While the study focused on a group at high risk, it did not follow participants over time, so it remains unclear whether the observed differences in brain function and cognition will lead to future memory decline. Longitudinal studies will be needed to determine how early these changes appear and whether they predict who eventually develops Alzheimer’s.</p>
<p>“One important consideration is that our study focused exclusively on cognitively unimpaired older African Americans,” Budak noted. “While this is a strength in terms of addressing disparities in Alzheimer’s research, future studies should examine whether these findings generalize to other racial and ethnic groups. Additionally, although we observed significant associations, this was a cross-sectional study, so we cannot yet determine causality.”</p>
<p>“Our long-term goal is to refine and integrate multi-modal biomarkers—spanning cognitive, neuroimaging, and blood-based measures—to improve early detection and intervention strategies for Alzheimer’s disease, particularly in at-risk populations. We aim to investigate how genetics and other blood-based biomarkers influence MTL network flexibility and cognitive function in preclinical Alzheimer’s. By understanding these early neural changes, we can develop more effective and accessible screening tools to guide personalized interventions.”</p>
<p>The study adds to a growing body of research showing that subtle disruptions in how the brain processes and adapts information—especially in the medial temporal lobe—may be one of the earliest signs of Alzheimer’s.</p>
<p>“Our study underscores the importance of early detection and highlights the potential of non-invasive screening methods, including cognitive assessments that do not rely on traditional memory tests,” Budak said. “As Alzheimer’s research progresses, integrating blood biomarkers with cognitive and imaging-based tools may provide a more accurate and comprehensive picture of who is at risk and when interventions should begin.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-024-01619-0">Elevated plasma p-tau231 is associated with reduced generalization and medial temporal lobe dynamic network flexibility among healthy older African Americans</a>,” was authored by Miray Budak, Bernadette A. Fausto, Zuzanna Osiecka, Mustafa Sheikh, Robert Perna, Nicholas Ashton, Kaj Blennow, Henrik Zetterberg, Patricia Fitzgerald-Bocarsly, and Mark A. Gluck.</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>