<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/men-are-more-distracted-by-sexual-images-than-women/" 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;">Men are more distracted by sexual images than women</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 6th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Two experiments conducted on young people in the United Kingdom found that men are more distracted by sexual images than women. In all conditions, participants were slower to make decisions when exposed to sexual images. The research was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/sexes5040050"><em>Sexes</em></a><em>.</em></p>
<p>Stimuli that evoke emotions tend to capture attention and trigger quicker reactions. For instance, forming a first impression of someone might take several seconds, but determining whether a person poses a threat takes less than a second. People generally respond more rapidly to threatening images than to non-threatening ones.</p>
<p>Similarly, sexual images can also trigger emotional reactions and alter attention and response times in a way comparable to threatening stimuli. Some studies have identified what is called a “sexual content-induced delay.” For example, in one study, participants were asked to decide whether a string of letters formed a real word. Results showed they took more time to classify sexual words than non-sexual ones. This delay likely occurs because sexual images capture cognitive priority, distracting individuals from other tasks.</p>
<p>Study author Robert J. Snowden and his colleagues aimed to examine how the presence of sexual images affects performance in a simple perceptual task—specifically, comparing the orientation of two lines. They hypothesized that sexual images would produce a delay in processing the task. The researchers also wanted to explore whether the magnitude of this effect differed between men and women, and whether it changed depending on whether the sexual image matched the participant’s preferred gender. Two experiments were conducted.</p>
<p>Participants in the first experiment included 43 young adults recruited via advertisements around the School of Psychology at Cardiff University in the United Kingdom. The average age was 22, and 22 participants were women.</p>
<p>Participants completed a line orientation perceptual task while being shown various images (which they were instructed to ignore). Ten of the images depicted heterosexual couples engaged in sexual activity, ten showed nude or partially dressed women who were not sexually active, ten showed nude or partially dressed men who were also not sexually active or aroused, ten contained people in neutral settings (e.g., people working or shopping), and ten depicted objects (e.g., clocks, boats, gardens). All images were converted to grayscale. Each participant completed 150 trials, with each image appearing three times. Participants also reported their sexual orientation.</p>
<p>The second experiment included 131 young adults, all students at Cardiff University; 58 were women. The overall setup was similar to the first experiment. However, this time, researchers used five images of nude or partially dressed men, five of nude or partially dressed women, and twenty neutral images. Unlike in the first experiment, where the image and task remained onscreen until the participant responded, the presentation time in the second experiment was limited to 150 milliseconds—short enough to prevent participants from shifting their gaze.</p>
<p>As expected, participants’ responses were slower when sexual images were shown. In Experiment 1, this slowing effect was more pronounced in men than in women. The delay was greatest when the image depicted a couple engaged in sexual activity.</p>
<p>In Experiment 2, the magnitude of the slowing effect in men depended on whether the sexual stimuli matched their gender preference. In other words, men’s responses were slowest when the image depicted a woman, faster when it depicted a man, and fastest when the image was neutral. Among women, the slowing effect was similar regardless of whether the image showed a man or a woman, although their responses to neutral images remained faster.</p>
<p>“The study demonstrates greater sexual distraction effects in men than women in a simple perceptual decision task. Furthermore, the distraction effects for men were shown to be category-specific (with a greater distraction from images of females), whereas those of women appeared to be category-non-specific,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The findings shed light on how sexual imagery affects cognitive processing. However, it’s important to note that all participants in the study were young university students. Results may differ in other age or demographic groups.</p>
<p>The paper “<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/sexes5040050">Automatic Distraction by Sexual Images: Gender Differences</a>” was authored by Robert J. Snowden, Poppy Midgley, and Nicola S. Gray.</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/lonely-individuals-are-more-likely-to-be-sick-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;">Lonely individuals are more likely to be sick, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 6th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Recent research found that individuals who were socially disconnected—lonely, socially isolated, or lacking social support—had a higher incidence of all 11 categories of medical conditions tracked in a large Danish study. The increased risk was highest for mental disorders, with socially disconnected individuals facing a 2.63-times higher risk. The study was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796024000829"><em>Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences</em></a>.</p>
<p>It is quite straightforward that individuals who are ill often rely more heavily on others for support. When someone lacks a support system, navigating illness—and even surviving it—can become significantly more difficult. However, research suggests that social disconnectedness is not just a consequence of illness but also a potential cause of it. People with diminished social connections are at increased risk of developing a wide range of medical conditions.</p>
<p>These individuals appear to be more vulnerable to developing conditions such as depression, dementia, coronary heart disease, stroke, sarcopenia, and other chronic illnesses. Despite growing evidence, data on the full scope of this connection has been limited, partly because socially disconnected individuals are often harder to reach in large-scale studies.</p>
<p>To address this gap, study author Lisbeth Mølgaard Laustsen and her colleagues set out to provide a comprehensive analysis of both relative and absolute differences in the incidence of 11 broad categories of medical conditions, using three distinct measures of social disconnectedness: loneliness, social isolation, and low social support.</p>
<p>Loneliness refers to the subjective feeling of being alone or emotionally distanced from others—a distressing experience where one’s social relationships are perceived as lacking in quantity or quality. Social isolation, by contrast, is more objective, defined by a lack of social interactions or close contacts. Low social support involves having fewer people to rely on for emotional, informational, or practical help. This lack of support can significantly impair a person’s ability to cope with life’s challenges and health issues.</p>
<p>The researchers analyzed data from the Danish National Health Survey, linking survey responses to national health registers. The final analysis included 162,604 participants. Of these, 129,319 responded to the 2017 survey from four Danish regions (Central Denmark Region, North Denmark Region, Region Zealand, and the Capital Region of Denmark), while 33,285 participated in the 2013 survey from the Central Denmark Region. The average participant age was 48 years, and 51% were women.</p>
<p>As part of the survey, participants completed brief assessments of their social connections: the Three-Item Loneliness Scale for loneliness, a four-item scale for social isolation, and a single question about emotional support: “Do you have someone to talk to if you have problems or need support?” The researchers used these assessments to construct a composite measure that captured overall social disconnectedness.</p>
<p>These data were then linked to medical records tracking diagnoses across hospitals and outpatient, inpatient, and emergency settings. The researchers focused on 11 categories of medical conditions:</p>
<ul>
<li>Mental disorders</li>
<li>All-cause dementia</li>
<li>Circulatory conditions</li>
<li>Endocrine conditions</li>
<li>Pulmonary conditions</li>
<li>Gastrointestinal conditions</li>
<li>Urogenital conditions</li>
<li>Musculoskeletal conditions</li>
<li>Hematologic conditions</li>
<li>Neurologic conditions</li>
<li>Cancer</li>
</ul>
<p>The results showed that lonely individuals were more likely to develop conditions in all 11 categories, compared to those who were not lonely. The strongest association was with mental disorders, where loneliness was linked to more than a threefold increase in risk.</p>
<p>Similarly, individuals classified as socially disconnected—based on the composite measure—had a 2.63-times higher risk of developing a mental disorder. While all other medical conditions also showed elevated risk, the magnitude was generally lower. The weakest associations were seen with cancer, where the results were more ambiguous and in some cases consistent with lower incidence rates.</p>
<p>When examining social isolation on its own, the picture became more complex. While isolated individuals were still at significantly higher risk for mental health conditions, they were at a slightly lower risk for neurologic conditions, and did not show increased risk for several categories, including musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, and circulatory conditions.</p>
<p>“Our results expand existing evidence linking social disconnectedness to elevated risks of mental disorders, dementia, circulatory conditions and musculoskeletal conditions. Notably, we additionally found higher incidence rates of endocrine, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, urogenital, hematologic, and neurologic conditions and cancer although the estimates for cancer were also consistent with lower rates. Contrary to previous evidence, our findings suggest that loneliness is a stronger determinant for subsequent medical conditions than social isolation and low social support,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the links between social disconnectedness and health. However, it should be noted that the design of the study does not allow any causal inferences to be derived from the results. While it is possible that loneliness contributes to the development of medical conditions, it is also possible that people suffering from these medical conditions are less able to participate in social activities leading to loneliness and social disconnectedness.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796024000829">Social disconnectedness, subsequent medical conditions, and, the role of pre-existing mental disorders: a population-based cohort study,</a>” was authored by L. M. Laustsen, M. Lasgaard, N. C. Momen, D. Chen, J. L. Gradus, M. S. Grønkjær, M. M. Jensen, and O. Plana-Ripol.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-demonstrates-the-problem-with-uncritical-patriotism/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New study demonstrates the problem with uncritical patriotism</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 6th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2025.2470774"><em>Self & Identity</em></a> suggests that not all forms of patriotism carry the same moral implications. Those who express uncritical, nationalistic forms of love for country often prioritize group loyalty and authority over fairness and harm prevention.</p>
<p>While patriotism is generally celebrated across societies, its ethical dimensions are complex. Critics suggest that patriotic sentiment can foster favoritism that privileges in-group loyalty over fair treatment of outsiders or even fellow citizens.</p>
<p>Maryna Kołeczek and colleagues investigated this tension through Moral Foundations Theory, which distinguishes between values promoting individual welfare (harm and fairness) and those binding groups together (loyalty, authority, and purity). Their research examined how three distinct forms of patriotism—glorification, conventional patriotism, and constructive patriotism—relate to these fundamental moral values.</p>
<p>The researchers conducted two studies in Poland. The first surveyed 1,062 participants via social media, measuring their patriotic attitudes using standardized scales.</p>
<p>Glorification was captured through statements like “It is disloyal to criticize your own country,” conventional patriotism through sentiments such as “I feel strongly connected with my nation,” and constructive patriotism through positions like “I oppose some of Poland’s policies because I care about my country and want to improve it.” Participants also completed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire to assess their moral priorities.</p>
<p>To isolate the specific moral profile of each patriotism type, the researchers controlled for demographics, political orientation, and the natural overlap between patriotic attitudes.</p>
<p>The second study recruited 1,041 Polish adults through a stratified sample designed to represent the national population. Participants faced four political dilemmas where binding values (loyalty or authority) conflicted with individualizing ones (harm or fairness)—such as whether Poland should continue supporting refugees despite potential costs to citizens. After responding to these scenarios, participants completed the same patriotism measures used in the first study.</p>
<p>The results revealed distinct moral profiles across patriotism types. Glorification showed positive associations with authority and purity values but negative relationships with harm prevention and fairness. Interestingly, its connection to loyalty was only marginally significant. This suggests that those who glorify their nation tend to prioritize obedience to national symbols and traditional purity values while being less concerned with preventing harm or ensuring fairness.</p>
<p>Conventional patriotism demonstrated a more nuanced profile, positively connecting with both loyalty and harm prevention, without clearly favoring either individualizing or binding values overall. Constructive patriotism was uniquely associated with fairness but had no significant links with other values.</p>
<p>When facing concrete moral dilemmas in the second study, those high in glorification consistently preferred loyalty and authority over individual welfare and fairness. They more readily accepted decisions that might harm individuals or treat them unfairly if such choices benefited the nation or upheld its symbols.</p>
<p>Constructive patriots showed no systematic preference for either binding or individualizing values across the dilemmas, suggesting moral neutrality in their critical stance. Conventional patriots displayed a more complex pattern, prioritizing authority over individual welfare but also favoring individual well-being over loyalty in certain contexts.</p>
<p>Of note is that the correlational nature of these studies precludes causal claims.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2025.2470774">Patriotic morality: links between conventional patriotism, glorification, constructive patriotism, and moral values and decisions</a>,” was authored by Maryna Kołeczek, Maciej Sekerdej, Mirjana Rupar, and Katarzyna Jamróz-Dolińska.</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/adults-with-adhd-face-higher-risk-of-dementia-new-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;">Adults with ADHD face higher risk of dementia, new study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 6th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are nearly three times more likely to develop dementia than those without the condition, according to a large new study published in <em><a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2810766" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JAMA Network Open</a></em>. The study followed over 100,000 individuals for more than 17 years and found a significant link between adult ADHD and future dementia, even after accounting for a wide range of health and lifestyle factors.</p>
<p>Dementia is a growing public health concern worldwide. In the United States alone, about 6.5 million people aged 65 or older were living with dementia in 2022. That number is expected to more than double by 2060. With no cure currently available, identifying risk factors that might help delay or prevent dementia is a top priority.</p>
<p>ADHD is commonly diagnosed in childhood, but more recent evidence suggests that some people develop it in adulthood or continue to have symptoms later in life. Adult ADHD often presents differently than childhood ADHD, and it remains underdiagnosed—especially in older adults.</p>
<p>Previous research has hinted that ADHD and dementia may be connected. Both conditions involve problems with attention and memory, and some of the same risk factors—such as depression, low physical activity, and smoking—are common in both. Family studies also suggest that people with ADHD may be more likely to have relatives with dementia, raising the possibility of shared genetic or environmental causes. However, past studies have produced mixed results, and many questions remain, including whether ADHD medications affect this risk.</p>
<p>This study was designed to take a closer look at whether adults with ADHD are more likely to develop dementia, and to rule out other explanations like medication use or early dementia symptoms being mistaken for ADHD.</p>
<p>The researchers used a large national health database from Israel’s Meuhedet Healthcare Services, one of the country’s nonprofit health maintenance organizations. The database includes comprehensive medical records for about 14 percent of Israel’s population and is considered reliable for tracking chronic health conditions.</p>
<p>The study included 109,218 adults who were born between 1933 and 1952 and had no prior diagnosis of ADHD or dementia before the year 2003. The average age at the start of the study was about 58 years. Participants were followed from 2003 until they died, left the healthcare system, were diagnosed with dementia, or until the study ended in early 2020—an average of 17.2 years.</p>
<p>During this time, the researchers identified who developed adult ADHD and who went on to be diagnosed with dementia. ADHD diagnoses were made by trained professionals using standardized assessments. Dementia diagnoses were made by specialists like neurologists, geriatricians, or psychiatrists, using international diagnostic codes.</p>
<p>The researchers also collected detailed information on each participant’s age, sex, neighborhood socioeconomic status, smoking habits, and a wide range of health conditions, including depression, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, and traumatic brain injury. They also tracked whether participants with ADHD were prescribed psychostimulant medications, such as those commonly used to treat attention problems.</p>
<p>By the end of the follow-up period, 730 participants had received an adult ADHD diagnosis, and 7,726 had developed dementia. Among those with ADHD, 13.2 percent developed dementia, compared to 7 percent of those without ADHD. After adjusting for age, health conditions, and other factors, the researchers found that adults with ADHD were 2.77 times more likely to develop dementia than those without the diagnosis.</p>
<p>This increased risk remained statistically significant even when the researchers conducted additional analyses to test the strength of the findings. For example, they split the data by sex, age groups, smoking status, and whether participants had been prescribed ADHD medications. Across most of these subgroups, the link between adult ADHD and dementia stayed strong.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the researchers did not find a clear increase in dementia risk among adults with ADHD who were treated with psychostimulant medications. This could mean several things. One possibility is that medication helps protect against later cognitive decline. Another is that people who take medication may have more severe symptoms, or that those diagnosed and treated are more accurately identified. Since only about one in five adults with ADHD in the study received medication, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions about its role.</p>
<p>The researchers also examined whether the link between ADHD and dementia might be explained by reverse causation. In other words, could early dementia symptoms have been misdiagnosed as ADHD? To address this, they looked at when ADHD was diagnosed in relation to dementia. The results suggested some overlap between the two, but not enough to explain the entire association.</p>
<p>The study’s lead authors, including researchers from the University of Haifa, Rutgers University, and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, say the findings underscore the importance of paying attention to ADHD symptoms in older adults. While ADHD is often thought of as a childhood disorder, it may have long-term consequences for brain health that stretch into old age.</p>
<p>One possible explanation for the link is that adult ADHD reflects long-standing differences in brain function that make it harder for individuals to cope with the effects of aging and disease. In this view, ADHD might reduce what’s known as cognitive reserve—the brain’s ability to adapt to damage without showing symptoms.</p>
<p>There are also questions about whether untreated ADHD leads to other behaviors or conditions, such as smoking, depression, or lack of exercise, that may in turn increase dementia risk. While the study controlled for many of these factors, it’s still possible that other, unmeasured variables contributed to the results.</p>
<p>Like all observational research, this study cannot prove that ADHD causes dementia. It only shows a strong association. Because it relied on clinical diagnoses, it likely missed people with mild or undiagnosed ADHD. The same is true for dementia, which is often underdiagnosed, especially in its early stages.</p>
<p>The study also lacked data on certain factors that could influence brain health, such as lifelong educational achievement or genetic risk. It couldn’t assess how severe ADHD symptoms were, or how long they had been present. And although it included information on stimulant medications, it couldn’t examine other treatments like therapy or lifestyle changes.</p>
<p>Future research should aim to confirm these findings in other populations and explore whether treating ADHD in adulthood can reduce the risk of dementia later on. It may also be helpful to investigate whether certain ADHD symptoms—such as inattention or impulsivity—are more strongly linked to cognitive decline than others.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2810766" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and the Risk of Dementia</a>,” was authored by Stephen Z. Levine, Anat Rotstein, Arad Kodesh, Sven Sandin, Brian K. Lee, Galit Weinstein, Michal Schnaider Beeri, and Abraham Reichenberg.</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/pandemic-era-children-show-altered-brain-responses-to-facial-expressions-new-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;">Pandemic-era children show altered brain responses to facial expressions, new study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Apr 5th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A large study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2025.101506" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience</a></em> has found that children who were tested during the COVID-19 pandemic showed measurable differences in how their brains processed faces, especially emotional expressions. While some aspects of face perception remained stable, the research found that three-year-olds processed faces faster and, across all age groups, children had reduced neural responses to happy faces, suggesting changes in how familiar or attention-grabbing these expressions were.</p>
<p>The researchers were interested in whether the social restrictions introduced during the pandemic, such as reduced in-person interactions and widespread mask-wearing, may have shaped early brain development. Infants and toddlers learn a lot from observing faces, including how to recognize people and interpret their emotions. The team wanted to know whether a reduced variety of facial exposure might influence how children process faces, how quickly they do so, and whether they can distinguish between different emotional expressions.</p>
<p>“There have been several studies suggesting that input is crucial for the early development of processing emotional faces. This, however, has mainly been studied in extreme cases such as neglect, or in more indirect ways such a relating parental traits to children’s face processing,” explained study author <a href="https://www.uu.nl/staff/CvandenBoomen">Carlijn van den Boomen</a>, an assistant professor at Helmholtz Institute Utrecht University.</p>
<p>“The policies taken to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic included several things that affected the social interaction, and thus the input that children received. This was happening on a very large scale, as it likely affected almost all children in (Western) countries.”</p>
<p>“I was curious from a theoretical perspective, as never before could we study the effects of reduced variety of social input on such a large scale. Moreover, I found it important that this would be investigated, given that it affected so many children: policy makers and parents should know about the effects the policies had on children.”</p>
<p>To investigate, the researchers used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure brain activity in over 900 children aged 5 months, 10 months, or 3 years. Some children were tested before the onset of the pandemic, while others were tested during the period when COVID-19-related government policies were in place, between March 2020 and April 2022. This allowed the researchers to compare brain responses in children who had typical social exposure to those whose early years were shaped by limited interactions and more frequent mask use in adults.</p>
<p>Children in the study passively viewed a series of images that included neutral faces, happy faces, fearful faces, and houses. EEG recordings focused on event-related potentials (ERPs), patterns of electrical activity that occur in response to specific stimuli. The researchers analyzed three well-known ERP components linked to face processing: the N290, P400, and Nc. These components reflect different aspects of visual and emotional processing, including how fast faces are recognized and how emotionally meaningful or familiar they are perceived to be.</p>
<p>When it came to how quickly the brain responded to faces, the researchers found no meaningful differences in 5- or 10-month-old infants between those tested before and during the pandemic. However, in three-year-olds, there was a notable difference. Children tested during the pandemic showed earlier N290 responses to faces than their pre-pandemic counterparts, indicating faster neural processing of facial information. This was specific to faces and not observed when children looked at images of houses.</p>
<p>The finding of faster face processing was somewhat unexpected. In typical development, the speed at which the brain processes faces increases with age and experience. However, some previous research in adults has shown that reduced facial information — such as when faces are masked — can lead to quicker processing.</p>
<p>In contrast, the ability to tell the difference between faces and non-facial objects, known as face categorization, appeared unaffected by the pandemic. Across all age groups, children tested before and during the pandemic showed similar patterns of brain activity when viewing faces versus houses. This suggests that this fundamental aspect of face processing is resilient and may not depend as strongly on a wide range of facial experiences.</p>
<p>However, the most striking differences emerged when the researchers examined how children responded to emotional expressions. Children tested before the pandemic showed distinct patterns of brain activity when viewing happy, fearful, and neutral faces. But among those tested during the pandemic, this differentiation was reduced or absent.</p>
<p>In both ten-month-olds and three-year-olds, brain responses to happy and fearful faces became less distinguishable, especially in the later ERP components, the P400 and Nc, which are thought to reflect attention or familiarity.</p>
<p>“Even though we expected effects of the policies on emotional face processing, it was surprising to see that these were so clear, and present in all tested age-groups,” van den Boomen told PsyPost. “Particularly the 3-year-olds likely did process emotional expressions before the pandemic (as they learned this in their first year, which was pre-pandemic). It was surprising, and as a parent somewhat unsettling, to find that even these children were so severely affected.”</p>
<p>These differences were particularly driven by a reduced neural response to happy faces. While children in the pre-pandemic group showed stronger brain responses to happy expressions, those tested during the pandemic had weaker responses. This pattern suggests that happy faces were either less familiar or attracted less attention in the post-pandemic group.</p>
<p>The researchers propose several possible explanations. One is that the variety of happy expressions that children saw may have decreased during the pandemic, due to both mask-wearing and the emotional toll experienced by caregivers.</p>
<p>If children saw fewer smiling faces, their brains may have become less attuned to recognizing and reacting to them. The brain’s emotional face processing system is known to be shaped by experience, especially during early development. Just as infants need to see a variety of faces to build a robust mental representation of them, they may also need a range of emotional expressions to learn how to distinguish them.</p>
<p>“This study shows how important social experience is for shaping the social brains of children,” van den Boomen explained. “The policies taken to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic affected the social experience of young children. Consequently, brains of children tested during the pandemic did not differentiate between facial emotional expressions, while children tested before the pandemic did. Facial expressions of emotions are important cues in social and cognitive learning.”</p>
<p>“As such, the limited processing of such cues can have far-reaching consequences for the further development of children. This is important to know for policy makers, and for parents of and practitioners working with children that were 0-4 years old during the pandemic. Moreover, this insight could also benefit children born in non-pandemic times children, as they benefit from a variety of social experiences as well.”</p>
<p>The study does come with some limitations. While the researchers inferred that children tested during the pandemic had reduced facial input, they did not measure the exact nature or frequency of children’s social interactions. It’s possible that some families maintained relatively typical social environments, while others experienced more extreme isolation.</p>
<p>Other factors, such as parental stress, mental health, and daycare attendance, may also have influenced the outcomes. Additionally, while brain activity patterns were measured, the study did not assess behavioral responses, such as whether children could label or respond appropriately to different facial expressions.</p>
<p>“We hope to test long-term effects of the policies: hopefully, the social brains of children have caught up and (re)learned to differentiate between facial expressions after the pandemic,” van den Boomen said. “Furthermore, we’d like to test whether there are inter-individual differences in how much the policies affected emotional face processing of a child.”</p>
<p>“Please know that I support the policies taken during the pandemic,” she added. “I’d not like to contribute to criticism on these policies, but do find it important that the effects are known and limited by further policies (e.g. support for children with social problems).”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2025.101506" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The effects of Covid-19 related policies on neurocognitive face processing in the first four years of life</a>,” was authored by Carlijn van den Boomen, Anna C. Praat, Caroline M.M. Junge, and Chantal Kemner.</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>