<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</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/earworms-may-reflect-your-brains-tendency-for-habits-study-suggests/" 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;">Earworms may reflect your brain’s tendency for habits, study suggests</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 2nd 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>An online survey exploring the frequency of earworms found that these experiences are associated with 22 different everyday life habits and compulsions. The strongest associations were with repetitive motor behaviors, such as foot tapping, and repetitive mental behaviors, such as counting and spelling. The study was published in Consciousness and Cognition.</p>
<p>Earworms are catchy pieces of music that repeatedly play in a person’s mind, often without conscious intent. They are typically short melodies or choruses that are easy to remember and have simple, repetitive structures.</p>
<p>Earworms can be triggered by hearing a song, thinking of certain words, or experiencing particular emotions or situations. They are a common psychological phenomenon and affect most people at some point. While often harmless, persistent earworms can be distracting or irritating for some individuals. Research suggests that people with higher musical engagement or certain personality traits, such as openness or neuroticism, may experience earworms more frequently.</p>
<p>Study author Chris M. Dodds investigated the connection between earworms and various forms of repetitive behavior. He examined how prone individuals are to engaging in different habitual behaviors and analyzed the relationship between the frequency and range of these behaviors and the occurrence of earworms. The research was conducted using an online survey.</p>
<p>The study included 883 adults from the general population of the United Kingdom. Participants were recruited through emails and social media. The average age of participants was 34 years.</p>
<p>Participants provided information about their own and their family’s mental health history and completed several psychological assessments. These included the Habitual Behavior Checklist, the Routine subscale of the Creature of Habit Scale (which measures preference for routine), and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale.</p>
<p>The results indicated that individuals who reported more frequent and intense experiences of earworms also tended to have more repetitive behavioral habits, more severe anxiety symptoms, and a stronger preference for routine in daily life.</p>
<p>Among specific types of repetitive habits, motor and mental behaviors showed the strongest associations with earworms. Motor habits included behaviors such as gesturing, striking poses, foot tapping or leg shaking, fiddling with objects, biting objects, or cracking knuckles. Mental habits included internal behaviors such as memorizing information, mentally spelling words, creating specific mental images, counting objects or actions, and mentally repeating certain words, names, phrases, or numbers.</p>
<p>“These findings suggest that previously observed associations between earworms and OCD [obsessive-compulsive disorder] symptomatology might be due to a common basis in systems that produce and regulate habitual behavior,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the links between repetitive behavior habits and earworms. However, it should be noted that all the study data came from self-reports leaving room for reporting bias to have affected the results.</p>
<p>The paper “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2025.103834">Earworms as ‘mental habits’: Involuntary musical imagery is associated with a wide range of habitual behaviors</a>” was authored by Chris M. Dodds.</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-significantly-shorter-life-expectancy-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 significantly shorter life expectancy, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 2nd 2025, 08:00</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) in the United Kingdom live shorter lives on average than those without the condition, according to a large-scale study published in the <em>British Journal of Psychiatry</em>. Analyzing medical records from over 330,000 individuals, researchers found that men with ADHD lost between 4.5 and 9 years of life, while women lost between 6.5 and 11 years compared to matched individuals without the diagnosis.</p>
<p>ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition that typically emerges in childhood and can persist into adulthood. It is marked by persistent patterns of inattention, hyperactivity, or impulsivity that disrupt daily functioning. Although it is often framed as a childhood disorder, studies indicate that symptoms continue into adulthood for up to 90% of those diagnosed as children. Adult ADHD remains underdiagnosed and undertreated, even though effective interventions are available.</p>
<p>People with ADHD are more likely to face a variety of life challenges, including academic struggles, unemployment, financial instability, and interactions with the criminal justice system. They also experience higher rates of mental and physical health problems, including anxiety, depression, substance use, and cardiovascular disease. Previous research has linked ADHD to an increased risk of premature death, but until now, no study had used life expectancy data to estimate how many years of life might be lost.</p>
<p>“We knew that people with ADHD seemed to experience increased mortality and experience lots of adverse environmental stressors as well as being more likely to have mental health problems and addictions. We suspected this might lead to a significantly reduce life expectancy,” said study author <a href="https://profiles.ucl.ac.uk/10969" target="_blank">Joshua Stott</a>, a professor of ageing and clinical psychology at University College London</p>
<p>The researchers analyzed data from the IQVIA Medical Research Data, a database of electronic health records from over 790 general practices across the UK. They identified 30,029 adults with a recorded ADHD diagnosis and matched them with 300,390 individuals without ADHD based on age, sex, and medical practice. The study observed mortality rates and estimated life expectancy using a statistical technique called the life table method, which models age-specific death rates.</p>
<p>The median age at which people with ADHD entered the study was around 19 for men and 22 for women, with most being young adults. Their diagnoses were typically recorded in the early 2000s. Participants were followed from the time of diagnosis (or a matched date for the comparison group) until death, deregistration from their medical practice, or the study’s end in 2019.</p>
<p>All participants were tracked for all-cause mortality, and the researchers also examined baseline health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, epilepsy, mental illness, and substance use. These co-occurring issues were significantly more common in the ADHD group than in those without the diagnosis.</p>
<p>During the observation period, people with ADHD had notably higher mortality rates. For men with ADHD, 0.83% died, compared to 0.52% in the control group. For women, the rate was 2.22% compared to 1.35%. Mortality rates increased with age, but remained higher in those with ADHD across all age groups.</p>
<p>Using this data, the researchers estimated life expectancy beginning at age 18. Men with ADHD were projected to live to 73.3 years, compared to 80 years in the control group. For women, the figures were 75.2 years versus 83.8 years. This translates to an average of nearly 7 years of life lost for men and nearly 9 years for women. These results were consistent even when the researchers adjusted for potential underreporting of deaths.</p>
<p>“There is an association between being diagnosed with ADHD and significantly lower life expectancy, perhaps particularly in women,” Stott told PsyPost. “We are unsure currently as to the reasons for this, but suspect that they are due to cumulative adverse experiences across the lifetime, mental health problems and addictions as well as systems (including health systems) not adapted to the need of people with ADHD.”</p>
<p>The study authors emphasized that these differences in life expectancy are unlikely to be caused by ADHD itself. Instead, they point to the broader social and medical challenges faced by people with ADHD—many of which are preventable or treatable. Smoking, poor access to healthcare, substance use, untreated mental illness, and lifestyle factors likely contribute to earlier mortality.</p>
<p>These findings echo similar patterns seen in other high-income countries. A meta-analysis from several nations had previously found that people with ADHD were more than twice as likely to die prematurely as those without the condition. Another long-term study from the United States estimated that childhood hyperactivity reduced life expectancy by about eight years, and by as much as thirteen years among those who continued to meet ADHD criteria in adulthood.</p>
<p>The researchers stress that the results should serve as a wake-up call for healthcare systems, especially in the UK. Despite increasing recognition of ADHD in adulthood, services for adult diagnosis and support remain limited. Many people with ADHD go without treatment, even after seeking help. Some general practitioners report feeling ill-equipped to manage the condition due to a lack of training or systemic support.</p>
<p>At the same time, people with ADHD are at greater risk for socioeconomic disadvantage, including poverty and homelessness. These factors not only limit access to healthcare but may also reinforce unhealthy coping mechanisms such as substance use, which are linked to higher rates of injury, chronic disease, and suicide.</p>
<p>The study has several strengths. It included a large, representative sample and compared people from the same healthcare practices, which reduces bias caused by regional differences. However, it also had some limitations. The researchers could not determine causes of death or fully control for factors like race and gender identity, which were not consistently recorded in the database. They also noted that diagnosed cases of ADHD likely represent only a subset of all individuals with the condition, possibly skewing the sample toward those with more severe or complex needs.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the magnitude of life lost suggests that the findings reflect a widespread public health issue. The researchers argue for the urgent development of national strategies to address the health risks associated with adult ADHD. These might include better training for primary care providers, broader access to diagnosis and treatment, and targeted public health initiatives such as smoking cessation programs and mental health support tailored to individuals with ADHD.</p>
<p>Looking forward, Stott hopes to understand the causes and reasons behind the findings and develop strategies to ameliorate it.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.199" target="_blank">Life expectancy and years of life lost for adults with diagnosed ADHD in the UK: matched cohort study</a>,” was authored by Elizabeth O’Nions, Céline El Baou, Amber John, Dan Lewer, Will Mandy, Douglas G.J. McKechnie, Irene Petersen, and Josh Stott.</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/the-startling-power-of-political-identity-in-shaping-americans-social-preferences/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">The startling power of political identity in shaping Americans’ social preferences</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 2nd 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://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13084" target="_blank">Political Psychology</a></em> suggests that in the United States, political identity is the strongest driver of how people view others in everyday social situations—outweighing other key social identities like race, religion, class, or education. Even in community settings unrelated to politics, partisanship appears to be the most powerful predictor of interpersonal preferences, revealing the extent to which polarization has moved beyond the political sphere and into social life.</p>
<p>The study examined how political identity compares to other social traits in predicting affective polarization, a term used to describe the growing dislike between members of different political parties. The researchers sought to understand whether this polarization is driven mainly by political affiliation or by other traits commonly associated with partisanship, such as ideology, race, and religion. They also wanted to assess whether individuals with “cross-cutting” identities—those who do not align neatly with party stereotypes—are less likely to display polarized attitudes.</p>
<p>“It’s well known that Americans are politically polarized,” said study author <a href="http://drjulienorman.com" target="_blank">Julie Norman</a>, an associate professor at University College London. “It’s also clear that Americans are increasingly living in different social bubbles that reflect not only political differences, but also other types of divides, including preferences related to class, race, religion, education attainment, and geography. We wanted to better understand what was most driving this division in American social life. Is it pure politics, or is it one (or more) of these other factors?”</p>
<p>To address these questions, the researchers conducted a large-scale conjoint survey experiment using a nationally representative sample of 1,330 participants in the United States. Respondents were repeatedly shown side-by-side profiles of two hypothetical people with randomly assigned traits, including political party, ideology, race, gender, religion, education level, income, and geographic region. After viewing each pair, participants were asked to rate how favorably they viewed each individual and to make choices about who they would prefer as a friend, neighbor, or family member by marriage. These social distance questions allowed the researchers to examine both abstract attitudes and more concrete social preferences.</p>
<p>The results showed that political party identity had the strongest and most consistent effect on participants’ responses. People expressed more favorable views of profiles that matched their own party affiliation and showed significantly less favorable attitudes toward those affiliated with the opposing party. This effect was especially strong in general favorability ratings but still present in social distance decisions, such as choosing a preferred neighbor or in-law.</p>
<p>In fact, political identity was a more powerful predictor of social preferences than race, religion, or gender. While religious identity did show some effects—particularly negative biases toward Muslims and atheists—the impact of party identification was even stronger. For example, Democrats consistently rated Democratic profiles more positively than independents or Republicans and showed pronounced dislike for Republican profiles. Republicans similarly favored members of their own party, although the degree of out-group dislike was less intense than among Democrats.</p>
<p>“Overall, our findings indicate that political partisanship is the primary driver of social divides in America today, outweighing race and ethnicity, class, level of education, geographic locale, and other demographic traits and identities that are so often subject to social biases,” Norman told PsyPost. “Many of these traits and identities are indeed intertwined with partisan identity, yet even when we untangle those overlapping identities, partisanship remains the strongest and most significant indicator of social preferences.”</p>
<p>One of the study’s more nuanced findings is that out-group animosity tended to be stronger than in-group favoritism when participants rated profiles in terms of favorability. In other words, people disliked the opposing party more than they liked their own. However, when it came to the interpersonal social distance questions—such as selecting a friend or neighbor—the pattern was more mixed. A deeper analysis using Bayesian modeling techniques found that in-group preference was sometimes more significant than out-group animosity in those behavioral measures, suggesting that while political bias is present in social decision-making, it may not always translate into outright hostility.</p>
<p>The researchers also explored whether individuals or profiles with cross-cutting identities—those who defy partisan stereotypes would generate less polarized reactions. Contrary to expectations, they found no evidence that these identities reduced polarization. Respondents were not more accepting of people with diverse or atypical combinations of traits, nor were individuals with cross-cutting identities themselves less polarized in their responses.</p>
<p>“We were especially interested in the impact of ‘cross-cutting identities,’ or profiles that do not fully conform to partisan stereotypes, such as Black Republicans, or evangelical Christian Democrats. Contrary to our assumptions, cross-cutting identities do not appear to dampen social polarization,” Norman explained. “People’s basic preference for someone with the same political affiliation as them applied even to seemingly ‘atypical’ Democrats or Republicans. And people who themselves had cross-cutting identities were still more likely to prefer their political group over the other.”</p>
<p>Another key finding was that while both ideology and partisanship influenced social preferences, political identity typically had a stronger effect than ideological labels such as “liberal” or “conservative.” This was especially true among Democrats and liberals, who showed more consistent alignment with their party. Among Republicans, conservative identity played a somewhat stronger role than party affiliation, suggesting a slightly different dynamic.</p>
<p>The study also uncovered differences in how each party responds to race and religion. Democrats rated Black profiles more favorably than other racial groups, while Republicans did not display a statistically significant preference or aversion based on race. For religion, Republicans rated Jewish, Muslim, and atheist profiles significantly lower than comparable Christian profiles. Democrats also rated atheists somewhat less favorably, but were more neutral toward Muslim and Jewish individuals.</p>
<p>“Aside from partisanship, religion emerged as the other key trait that guided people’s choices, but religion’s influence also depended on the respondent’s political affiliation,” Norman said. “Republicans viewed Jewish, Muslim, and atheist profiles more negatively than otherwise identical Christian profiles, and Democrats also viewed atheists more negatively than Christian profiles.”</p>
<p>“Regarding how partisan respondents view racial identity, Democrats viewed Black profiles more favorably than Republicans did. But importantly, this was because Democrats were uniquely positively inclined to Black profiles, not that Republicans viewed Black profiles especially negatively. Interestingly, White participants did not view Black profiles any differently than non-White participants did. So, the racial prejudices that some might expect in these situations were superseded by people’s political allegiances.”</p>
<p>Taken together, these findings show how strongly political identity now influences Americans’ everyday social preferences, often eclipsing other traditional social divisions. The study provides evidence that polarization in the United States is not just about policy or ideology—it’s about who people feel comfortable interacting with in their communities.</p>
<p>At the same time, the findings also suggest that affective polarization may be more limited in certain real-world contexts. While abstract ratings of favorability showed strong partisan bias, behavioral measures of social distance produced more ambiguous results. People may still be willing to befriend or live next to someone from the opposing party, even if they express negative attitudes in more general terms.</p>
<p>The study does have limitations. It relied on hypothetical profiles and survey responses, which may not fully capture how people behave in real life. Social desirability bias—participants modifying their responses to appear more tolerant—was minimized through the survey design, but it cannot be entirely ruled out. Additionally, while the researchers expected cross-cutting identities to play a moderating role, they found no such effect, raising questions about how to measure the influence of complex, overlapping identities in studies of polarization.</p>
<p>Future research may focus more directly on real-world behavior and explore how people navigate political differences in specific social settings. It may also examine how individuals define their identities and which ones are most meaningful to them in different contexts. More work is also needed to explore the role of elite messaging, media framing, and social networks in reinforcing or mitigating partisan divisions.</p>
<p>“While we focus on the identities motivating polarization, recent scholarship has shown that polarization between parties is not inevitable, but rather reflects an interplay between supply and demand factors that interact and reinforce each other,” Norman explained. “That is, it is not just our identities that drive polarization, but rather external cues from politicians, political parties, interest groups, media, social media, etc that activate those identities. In future studies, we’d be interested in building on emerging scholarship to investigate what kinds of messaging or primes helps counter polarization or mitigate social divides.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13084" target="_blank">Why can’t we be friends? Untangling conjoined polarization in America</a>,” was authored by Julie M. Norman and Beniamino Green.</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-shows-handwriting-boosts-early-reading-skills-more-than-typing/" 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 shows handwriting boosts early reading skills more than typing</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 22:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research published in the <em><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096525000013" target="_blank">Journal of Experimental Child Psychology</a></em> suggests that handwriting helps children learn to read more effectively than typing. In an experiment with 5-year-old prereaders, those who practiced writing by hand—either by copying or tracing—outperformed children who typed the same material on a keyboard across a variety of tasks. The findings provide strong support for the idea that the physical act of writing strengthens children’s ability to learn letters and words.</p>
<p>The study was conducted by researchers in Spain who wanted to better understand how different modes of writing—handwriting versus typing—affect early reading development. The recent shift toward digital learning tools has raised concerns that increasing reliance on keyboards may hinder key aspects of early literacy, particularly the learning of alphabetic and orthographic knowledge. Alphabetic knowledge refers to the ability to link letter shapes with their corresponding sounds, while orthographic knowledge involves recognizing familiar patterns and sequences of letters in words.</p>
<p>“As children write less and less by hand, we wanted to explore the impact of this on alphabetic and orthographic skills. In other words, we wanted to see whether the ability to learn letters and to assimilate and remember word structure develops differently through manual training or the use of keyboards,” explained study author Joana Acha, a researcher and lecturer at the University of the Basque Country.</p>
<p>To explore this issue, the researchers designed an experiment with 50 children in the final year of kindergarten. All the children were native Spanish speakers and had not yet learned to read. Each child was randomly assigned to one of four training conditions. Two of the groups learned letters and words through handwriting: one group copied the letters freehand, while the other traced them. The remaining two groups learned the same material by typing—either using a single consistent font or with fonts that varied to simulate different handwriting styles.</p>
<p>The experiment unfolded over three sessions. In the first session, the children’s general skills were assessed, including their knowledge of Spanish letters, memory, and fine motor abilities. In the second and third sessions, the children were trained on unfamiliar letters taken from Georgian and Armenian alphabets, along with made-up two-syllable words formed from these letters. During training, children were shown each letter or word, heard its pronunciation, and then reproduced it using their assigned method. Training was followed by tests that measured how well they could recognize, name, and write the trained material.</p>
<p>The results showed a clear advantage for handwriting. Children who trained by hand-copying or tracing consistently performed better than those in the typing groups. After letter training, handwriting groups were significantly more accurate when naming and writing the letters, both key indicators of alphabetic learning. All children could visually recognize the letters at a high level, suggesting that identification alone is not the best measure of alphabetic knowledge. The real difference emerged when tasks required recalling sounds and producing written letters, skills essential for reading and spelling.</p>
<p>The handwriting advantage extended beyond individual letters. In the word learning tasks, children in the handwriting groups were better at reading aloud the trained pseudowords, writing them from dictation, and identifying them among visually similar alternatives. In contrast, children in the typing groups struggled with these tasks, especially when it came to spelling the trained words.</p>
<p>The researchers also explored whether variability in how letters appeared—such as different fonts or handwritten forms—might improve learning by helping children form more robust mental representations of letters. While there was some evidence for this in the letter naming task, the effects were much smaller than those associated with handwriting. Overall, the study found limited support for the idea that visual variability alone, without physical writing, improves learning.</p>
<p>These findings support the graphomotor hypothesis, which suggests that the physical act of forming letters by hand enhances the mental representation of those letters. Writing by hand involves coordinated movements, attention to shape, and sensorimotor feedback—all of which seem to reinforce learning. Typing, by contrast, requires only pressing a key, which may not engage the same cognitive or neural processes.</p>
<p>Interestingly, children who copied letters by hand outperformed those who traced them, especially in tasks that required more memory effort, such as writing from dictation. This suggests that generating letters freehand, which allows for greater variation in the output, may help children build more flexible and enduring representations of written forms. Still, both handwriting conditions outperformed typing.</p>
<p>These findings align with <a href="https://www.psypost.org/handwriting-activates-broader-brain-networks-than-typing-study-shows/" target="_blank">a recent study</a> published in <em>Frontiers in Psychology</em>, which found that handwriting activates more extensive and interconnected brain networks than typing. Using brain imaging, researchers observed stronger neural connectivity during handwriting, particularly in areas tied to memory and sensory processing. The results suggest that handwriting engages the brain in ways that support learning more effectively than typing.</p>
<p>The study’s authors caution that their findings do not mean digital tools have no place in early education. However, they suggest that relying too heavily on typing-based programs—especially during the early stages of reading acquisition—may leave children with weaker foundations in letter–sound mapping and word recognition. These foundational skills are essential for reading fluency and academic success in later years.</p>
<p>Several limitations should be considered. The sample size was modest, with only 12 to 13 children per training condition, which may have limited the ability to detect smaller effects. Additionally, the study measured only short-term learning. Future research could explore whether the benefits of handwriting persist over time and how they interact with the broader range of digital experiences children encounter in modern classrooms.</p>
<p>Despite these caveats, the results provide evidence that handwriting helps young children master both the building blocks of reading and the structure of written language. As digital devices become more common in classrooms, the researchers recommend that handwriting remain a central part of early literacy instruction.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106195" target="_blank">The impact of handwriting and typing practice in children’s letter and word learning: Implications for literacy development</a>,” was authored by Gorka Ibaibarriaga, Joana Acha, and Manuel Perea.</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/psilocybin-shows-promise-for-improving-mood-cognition-and-motor-symptoms-in-parkinsons-disease/" 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 shows promise for improving mood, cognition, and motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 20:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A small pilot study has found that psilocybin, the active compound in psychedelic mushrooms, may improve not only mood but also cognitive and motor symptoms in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. The results surprised the research team, who initially aimed only to evaluate the drug’s safety. Instead, participants experienced noticeable improvements that lasted for weeks following a single high-dose session. The findings, published in <em><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-025-02097-0" target="_blank">Neuropsychopharmacology</a></em>, mark the first time a psychedelic has been tested in people with any neurodegenerative disease.</p>
<p>Parkinson’s disease is best known for its motor symptoms, including tremor, stiffness, and slowed movement. But many people with the disease also struggle with depression and anxiety, which often begin years before motor symptoms appear. These mood issues are not just emotionally distressing—they are strongly linked to faster physical decline and worse overall quality of life. Standard treatments for depression and anxiety, such as antidepressants, are often less effective in people with Parkinson’s, making the search for new therapeutic options especially urgent.</p>
<p>Psilocybin is a naturally occurring psychedelic compound that is converted in the body into psilocin, which interacts with serotonin receptors in the brain. Studies in major depression and anxiety linked to terminal illness have shown that even a single dose of psilocybin, when paired with psychotherapy, can lead to rapid and long-lasting improvements in mood. Scientists believe the drug may help the brain form new neural connections, a property referred to as neuroplasticity. These effects may be particularly relevant for people with Parkinson’s disease, who exhibit disrupted serotonin signaling, inflammation, and loss of neural connectivity—all factors that may contribute to both mood and motor symptoms.</p>
<p>Given the complex neurobiology of Parkinson’s and concerns about possible drug interactions and psychosis risk, the research team at the University of California, San Francisco set out to test the safety and tolerability of psilocybin in this population. They enrolled 12 participants between the ages of 40 and 75, all of whom had mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease and met diagnostic criteria for depression or anxiety. People with significant cognitive impairment, active psychosis, or other medical risks were excluded from the trial. Most participants were already being treated with levodopa, the most common medication for managing motor symptoms of Parkinson’s.</p>
<p>Each participant underwent two supervised psilocybin sessions on a research unit at UCSF. The first dose was a lower, safety-focused 10 milligram dose, followed about two weeks later by a higher, 25 milligram therapeutic dose. Both sessions were paired with multiple psychotherapy visits before and after. The therapists provided preparation, emotional support during the experience, and integration afterward.</p>
<p>To track the effects of psilocybin, the researchers used a range of assessments. These included standard clinical rating scales for motor and non-motor Parkinson’s symptoms, mood and anxiety measures, cognitive performance tasks, and caregiver observations. Safety was monitored throughout the sessions, including blood pressure, heart rate, and reports of any adverse psychological or physical effects.</p>
<p>The study found that psilocybin was generally well tolerated. The most common side effects during the sessions included mild anxiety, nausea, and temporary increases in heart rate or blood pressure. Two participants reported intense anxiety during one of the sessions, and one of them experienced a transient worsening of tremor and increased thoughts about death related to future disability. However, no serious adverse events occurred, and suicidal ideation decreased overall after treatment.</p>
<p>Beyond safety, the researchers observed a range of improvements across different symptom domains. Participants reported significant reductions in depression and anxiety one week after the high-dose session, and these gains were maintained at the three-month follow-up. Motor symptoms also improved, as measured by both self-reports and clinician ratings. These included reductions in everyday motor difficulties and improvements in motor exam scores. The magnitude of these improvements exceeded thresholds considered clinically meaningful.</p>
<p>Cognitive function also improved in several domains. Participants performed better on tests of memory, spatial working memory, and cognitive flexibility. These gains were still present a month after the psilocybin session. Interestingly, caregiver reports also reflected meaningful changes. Family members noted that participants were less distressed by neuropsychiatric symptoms and showed fewer behavioral issues. They also expressed high satisfaction with the treatment.</p>
<p>While the improvements in mood were expected based on prior research in depression, the benefits in motor symptoms and cognition were unexpected. The authors suggest several possible explanations. One is that psilocybin may directly influence dopamine and serotonin signaling in ways that support motor control. Another is that improving mood may indirectly benefit motor function, as depression is associated with increased stress and biological changes that can worsen physical symptoms. A third possibility is that psilocybin may influence the underlying disease process through its effects on inflammation, neural plasticity, or other brain systems disrupted in Parkinson’s.</p>
<p>“We are still in very early stages of this work, but this first study went well beyond what we expected,” said the paper’s first author, Ellen Bradley, an assistant professor and associate director of UCSF’s Translational Psychedelic Research Program (TrPR). “Many people don’t realize this, but mood symptoms in Parkinson’s are linked to a faster physical decline. And they are actually a stronger predictor of patients’ quality of life with Parkinson’s than their motor symptoms.”</p>
<p>But the study has important limitations. With only 12 participants and no placebo group, the findings must be interpreted with caution. Expectancy effects and the powerful psychological context of the therapy sessions may have contributed to the observed improvements. Also, because the study excluded people with more advanced disease or significant medical complications, it’s unclear how generalizable the results are. Future research will need to include more diverse and larger samples to better understand the risks and benefits.</p>
<p>Encouraged by the results of this pilot study, the researchers have launched a larger randomized controlled trial involving 100 participants across two sites: UCSF and Yale University. This follow-up study will include brain imaging, noninvasive brain stimulation, and blood tests to help identify how psilocybin affects the brain and immune system. The hope is to uncover biological mechanisms behind the clinical improvements and determine whether psilocybin could one day become part of Parkinson’s care.</p>
<p>“The vast majority of brain diseases still lack interventions that change the course of illness,” said the study’s senior author, Joshua Woolley, an associate professor at UCSF and director of the TrPR Program. “We can often treat the symptoms, but we don’t alter the trajectory or prevent decline. Now, that’s beginning to change. These results raise the exciting possibility that psilocybin may help the brain repair itself.” </p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-025-02097-0" target="_blank">Psilocybin therapy for mood dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease: an open-label pilot trial</a>,” was authored by Ellen R. Bradley, Kimberly Sakai, Gisele Fernandes-Osterhold, Balázs Szigeti, Connie Ludwig, Jill L. Ostrem, Caroline M. Tanner, Meredith A. Bock, Katiah Llerena, Patrick R. Finley, Aoife O’Donovan, Jose Rafael P. Zuzuarregui, Zachary Busby, Amber McKernan, Andrew D. Penn, Aliss C. C. Wang, Raymond C. Rosen, and Joshua D. Woolley.</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-research-uncovers-a-surprising-role-for-brain-derived-estrogen/" 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 research uncovers a surprising role for brain-derived estrogen</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study from Fujita Health University sheds light on how a brain-produced form of estrogen known as neuroestrogen plays a direct role in appetite regulation. The researchers found that neuroestrogen increases the activity of a key appetite-suppressing receptor in the brain and boosts the body’s response to the hunger-regulating hormone leptin. Their findings, published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.17426" target="_blank">The FEBS Journal</a></em>, could pave the way for new treatments targeting overeating and obesity.</p>
<p>Estrogen has long been known to influence body weight and energy balance, but it was traditionally believed to act through the reproductive system. More recent findings, however, suggest that estrogen is also synthesized in the brain, particularly in areas such as the hypothalamus, through an enzyme called aromatase. This brain-derived version of estrogen—neuroestrogen—was suspected to influence behaviors and physiological processes beyond reproduction, but its specific function in appetite control had remained uncertain. The present study aimed to fill that gap.</p>
<p>To investigate the role of neuroestrogen, the researchers used several mouse models that differed in their ability to produce estrogen. One group included ovariectomized (OVX) mice, which had their ovaries removed and could no longer produce estrogen systemically. Another group consisted of ArKO mice, genetically modified to lack aromatase entirely and thus unable to synthesize estrogen anywhere in the body, including the brain. These groups were compared with normal mice and with a third group—BrTG-ArKO mice—engineered to restore aromatase expression specifically in the brain.</p>
<p>The team monitored the mice’s food intake and body weight over time and measured the activity of genes known to be involved in appetite regulation, including the melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R), which suppresses appetite when activated. They also conducted experiments using hypothalamic neurons in cell cultures to test whether neuroestrogen directly affected MC4R gene expression.</p>
<p>Results showed that mice without systemic estrogen (OVX and ArKO mice) tended to gain more weight and consume more food than control mice. Interestingly, OVX mice initially showed a slight decrease in food intake after surgery but eventually gained more weight, suggesting complex hormonal feedback mechanisms. ArKO mice, which lacked both systemic and brain-derived estrogen, had lower levels of MC4R expression and a pronounced increase in food intake.</p>
<p>In contrast, BrTG-ArKO mice—engineered to produce neuroestrogen only in the brain—ate less and had significantly higher levels of MC4R in the hypothalamus than their ArKO counterparts. These mice also responded more strongly to leptin, the hormone secreted by fat cells that tells the brain when the body has had enough food. When administered leptin, BrTG-ArKO mice showed a greater reduction in food consumption compared to mice without neuroestrogen. This finding suggests that neuroestrogen boosts the brain’s sensitivity to appetite-suppressing signals.</p>
<p>Cell culture experiments reinforced the findings from the mouse models. When researchers introduced aromatase into hypothalamic neuron cells, these neurons began producing neuroestrogen and showed increased expression of the MC4R gene in response to testosterone or estradiol. The effect disappeared when aromatase activity was blocked, indicating that the rise in MC4R expression depended on estrogen synthesis within the neurons themselves. The experiments also confirmed that this effect was mediated through estrogen receptors, particularly ERα.</p>
<p>In addition to the effects on MC4R, the researchers found that neuroestrogen levels in the hypothalamus were correlated with other appetite-related genes, such as POMC and NPY. These genes help balance the signals that either suppress or promote food intake, suggesting that neuroestrogen acts at multiple points in the brain’s appetite-regulating system.</p>
<p>These findings offer a new understanding of how estrogen produced in the brain contributes to energy balance. While systemic estrogen from the ovaries can influence appetite, this study highlights that neuroestrogen has a more direct and localized effect by increasing the expression of key genes involved in suppressing hunger. It does so in part by enhancing the activity of MC4R and improving the effectiveness of leptin signaling.</p>
<p>However, the researchers caution that their work was conducted in mice, and more research is needed to determine whether similar mechanisms apply to humans. Hormonal regulation of appetite is highly complex and influenced by a wide range of factors including sex, age, and environmental conditions. Additionally, while this study focused on the hypothalamus, other brain regions involved in emotion and reward may also be affected by neuroestrogen and play roles in food-related behaviors.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the results suggest that neuroestrogen could be a promising target for interventions aimed at appetite control. Obesity remains a growing global health issue, and many existing treatments have limited long-term success. A better understanding of how the brain itself regulates hunger through its own hormone production could lead to novel strategies for managing body weight.</p>
<p>The researchers plan to continue investigating how neuroestrogens influence other parts of the brain and how these hormones interact with stress and reward systems that also affect eating behavior. They hope their work can eventually contribute to the development of drugs that mimic or boost the effects of neuroestrogens in the brain without the side effects associated with systemic estrogen therapies.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.17426" target="_blank">Estrogen synthesized in the central nervous system enhances MC4R expression and reduces food intake</a>,” was authored by Takanori Hayashi, Kanako Kumamoto, Tatsuya Kobayashi, Xinfeng Hou, Shizuko Nagao, Nobuhiro Harada, Shinichiro Honda, Yohei Shimono, and Eiji Nishio.</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/these-common-insecurities-may-be-fueling-dating-app-obsession/" 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;">These common insecurities may be fueling dating app obsession</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 16:00</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/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108566" target="_blank">Computers in Human Behavior</a></em> sheds light on how young adults’ psychological vulnerabilities influence the way they use dating apps. The researchers found that individuals with high levels of social appearance anxiety, social interaction anxiety, and sensitivity to rejection are more likely to view dating apps as useful for building relationships and managing self-presentation. At the same time, these vulnerabilities are linked to a greater risk of problematic use, with rejection sensitivity playing a key role in this connection.</p>
<p>Dating apps have become one of the most popular ways for young people to meet potential partners, with millions of users worldwide. While many people use these platforms to explore new relationships, some are drawn to them because they offer features that reduce the pressure of face-to-face interaction. Past studies have suggested that individuals who struggle with anxiety, low self-esteem, or fear of rejection may find dating apps especially appealing. Yet, there has been limited research into how these vulnerabilities interact with the perceived benefits of dating apps and the risks of overuse.</p>
<p>To explore this question, the researchers conducted a large online study in Taiwan, focusing on young adults between the ages of 18 and 35. They aimed to understand how three psychological traits—social appearance anxiety, social interaction anxiety, and rejection sensitivity—were connected to dating app behavior. The study examined both positive outcomes, such as the ability to make connections and control one’s image, and negative outcomes, such as excessive or compulsive use of dating apps.</p>
<p>A total of 5,427 participants completed a detailed questionnaire about their experiences with dating apps. The sample was predominantly male (around 87%), with an average age of just over 27 years. All participants had used a dating app within the past month, and more than half reported using apps daily. The researchers assessed each participant’s level of social appearance anxiety, social interaction anxiety, and rejection sensitivity, along with their beliefs about the benefits of digital communication, their preference for online social interaction, and any problematic behaviors related to dating app use.</p>
<p>The study used a method called structural equation modeling to analyze the relationships among these variables. This approach allowed the researchers to test how different psychological traits influenced participants’ perceptions of dating app benefits and their likelihood of problematic use.</p>
<p>The results showed that individuals with higher levels of social appearance anxiety and social interaction anxiety were more likely to experience rejection sensitivity. This means that young people who worry about their appearance or have trouble with social interactions also tend to be more sensitive to cues that suggest they are being rejected. In turn, this rejection sensitivity was linked to a greater risk of problematic dating app use.</p>
<p>At the same time, all three psychological traits—appearance anxiety, interaction anxiety, and rejection sensitivity—were associated with stronger beliefs that dating apps are helpful for building relationships and controlling self-presentation. In particular, users with higher anxiety felt that apps made it easier to form connections and manage how they appeared to others. These benefits, in turn, were associated with a preference for interacting with potential partners through dating apps rather than in person.</p>
<p>The study also revealed that the more people believed dating apps helped them build relationships and manage their self-image, the more likely they were to prefer online interaction over face-to-face communication. While these perceived benefits can be positive in the short term, the study found that they may contribute to excessive reliance on dating apps over time.</p>
<p>Importantly, the study showed that rejection sensitivity partly explains the link between social anxiety and problematic dating app use. In other words, when people are sensitive to rejection, they may use dating apps in ways that are harder to control, even if they also see the apps as helpful.</p>
<p>These findings support two competing ideas in the field of online communication. The “social compensation” hypothesis suggests that people who struggle with face-to-face interaction use digital tools to fill in the gaps and improve their social lives. By contrast, the “social enhancement” hypothesis argues that digital tools tend to benefit people who are already socially skilled, while those with existing vulnerabilities may end up worse off.</p>
<p>This study found evidence for both perspectives. On one hand, young adults with social anxiety and sensitivity to rejection appear to benefit from the ability to build relationships and manage their self-presentation through apps. On the other hand, these same traits also make them more vulnerable to problematic use. Rejection sensitivity, in particular, seems to amplify the risk of using dating apps in ways that could harm mental health or well-being.</p>
<p>Although the study was conducted in Taiwan, the psychological dynamics it explored are likely relevant across cultures. The authors note that young adulthood is a formative time for building relationships and navigating social pressures, making this age group especially vulnerable to the double-edged nature of dating app use.</p>
<p>The researchers acknowledge limitations in their study. Because the data were collected at a single point in time, it’s not possible to determine whether dating app use causes psychological issues or simply reflects existing problems. The sample was also skewed toward male users and may not reflect the experiences of other gender groups or older adults. In addition, the findings were based on self-reported data, which could be influenced by social desirability or memory biases.</p>
<p>Future research could explore how these relationships evolve over time or in different cultural settings. The authors also suggest that developers of dating apps could use these findings to design features that support mental well-being, especially for users who may be at higher risk of problematic use. Interventions aimed at reducing rejection sensitivity or improving real-world social skills might also help people use dating apps in healthier ways.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108566" target="_blank">Too vulnerable to resist: Problematic use of dating apps associated with social appearance anxiety, social interaction anxiety, and rejection sensitivity</a>,” was authored by Yi-Ting Huang and An-Di Gong.</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/neuroimaging-shows-limited-value-in-predicting-treatment-response-in-pediatric-anxiety/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Neuroimaging shows limited value in predicting treatment response in pediatric anxiety</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>An analysis of brain neuroimaging data from youths undergoing cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for anxiety found no significant associations between the brain’s structural features or functional connectivity and treatment outcomes. Although some associations between specific brain characteristics and therapy outcomes were observed, the study authors considered these effects too small to be of practical relevance. The findings were published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724003131"><em>Psychological Medicine.</em></a></p>
<p>Pediatric anxiety refers to excessive fear, worry, or nervousness in children that interferes with their daily functioning. It is one of the most common mental health conditions in childhood and can manifest as separation anxiety, social anxiety, or generalized anxiety disorder. Symptoms may include irritability, restlessness, trouble sleeping, stomachaches, or avoidance of certain situations.</p>
<p>Younger children often have difficulty verbalizing their worries and may instead express them through physical complaints or clingy behavior. Causes of pediatric anxiety can include genetic predisposition, temperament, environmental stress, and traumatic experiences. Early identification is important because untreated anxiety can negatively affect academic performance, social development, and self-esteem. It also often precedes the onset of long-term emotional problems in adulthood.</p>
<p>Study author Andre Zugman and his colleagues aimed to explore whether the outcomes of CBT for pediatric anxiety could be predicted using anatomical characteristics of the brain and its functional connectivity. Although CBT is currently the first-line treatment for pediatric anxiety, it leads to full remission in fewer than half of treated children.</p>
<p>To investigate this, the researchers analyzed neuroimaging data from 54 youths who enrolled in a study at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland. All participants were diagnosed with an anxiety disorder by a licensed clinician and completed 12 weekly CBT sessions. The researchers also used a second, smaller dataset consisting of 15 youths who had participated in an earlier study examining the effects of an 8-week CBT protocol.</p>
<p>All participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans. Their anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) either at four time points before, during, and after CBT (for the first dataset), or at two time points—before and after treatment—in the second dataset.</p>
<p>The researchers used a machine learning approach called connectome predictive modeling (CPM) to determine whether changes in anxiety symptoms could be predicted based on functional connectivity between brain regions. They also attempted to predict treatment outcomes using structural characteristics of the brain, such as cortical thickness and gray/white matter contrast.</p>
<p>Overall, the researchers were not able to predict CBT outcomes from the neuroimaging data using the statistical methods applied. Although a few associations were identified, the authors did not consider them to be clinically meaningful.</p>
<p>“Despite using expert clinicians, gold-standard outcome measures, and medication-free subjects, the models failed to consistently identify robust patterns associated with treatment response. This study, therefore, does not support evidence for the use of CPM [connectome predictive modeling, the statistical/machine learning technique applied in the study] to predict treatment outcomes in pediatric anxiety,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the links between pediatric anxiety on one side, and structural and functional characteristics of the brain on the other. However, it also highlights the current limitations of using brain-based data to make accurate clinical predictions. The sample sizes were relatively small, and the field’s understanding of how brain characteristics map onto psychological symptoms remains limited.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724003131">Brain functional connectivity and anatomical features as predictors of cognitive behavioral therapy outcome for anxiety in youths,</a>” was authored by Andre Zugman, Grace V. Ringlein, Emily S. Finn, Krystal M. Lewis, Erin Berman, Wendy K. Silverman, Eli R. Lebowitz, Daniel S. Pine, and Anderson M. Winkler.</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/neuroscience-discoveries-5-new-studies-offer-unexpected-insights-into-the-brain/" 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;">Neuroscience discoveries: 5 new studies offer unexpected insights into the brain</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 13:30</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>The human brain is constantly responding to its environment, storing memories, learning new skills, and navigating complex social and emotional experiences. But what exactly influences the way our brains develop, adapt, or decline? A growing body of research is shedding light on the forces that shape our neural circuitry—ranging from the music we love to the air we breathe. Below are five recently published neuroscience studies that uncover surprising insights into how the brain works.</p>
<p> </p>
<hr>
<h3><strong>1. <a href="https://www.psypost.org/scientists-find-alarming-storm-in-your-brain-caused-by-air-pollution/">Air pollution may trigger memory loss by disrupting brain proteins</a></strong></h3>
<p>New research published in <em>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</em> shows how breathing polluted air can damage the brain. The study focused on a chemical process called S-nitrosylation, which can be triggered by inflammation and environmental toxins like smog or wildfire smoke. Scientists found that this process alters a key brain protein called CRTC1, which normally helps activate genes necessary for learning and memory. When CRTC1 is modified by S-nitrosylation, it can no longer interact properly with another important protein called CREB, disrupting gene expression and harming memory-related brain functions.</p>
<p>In experiments using brain cells, mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease, and human nerve cells derived from patients, the researchers found that blocking this chemical change improved brain cell function and even reversed some memory problems. This suggests that pollution-related brain damage may be reversible—and that targeting S-nitrosylation could be a promising treatment strategy for neurodegenerative diseases. The research highlights a direct biological link between environmental toxins and conditions like Alzheimer’s, opening the door to preventive and therapeutic approaches that go beyond the lungs and heart to protect the brain.</p>
<hr>
<h3><strong>2. <a href="https://www.psypost.org/in-fascinating-study-neuroscientists-reveal-the-unique-impact-of-nostalgic-music-on-the-brain/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nostalgic music activates memory and emotion networks in the brain</a></strong></h3>
<p>A study published in <em>Human Brain Mapping</em> found that nostalgic songs uniquely engage brain areas related to memory, self-reflection, and emotion. Participants who listened to personally meaningful songs from their past showed greater activation in regions like the hippocampus, medial prefrontal cortex, and anterior insula—areas involved in retrieving autobiographical memories and processing emotions. Older adults in the study showed especially strong responses to nostalgic music, suggesting that these songs may play a powerful role in emotional regulation and memory preservation as we age.</p>
<p>The researchers carefully compared nostalgic music to musically similar—but emotionally neutral—songs to ensure that the effects were driven by memory and personal meaning rather than tempo or familiarity. Brain scans revealed that nostalgic music not only activated more areas overall but also enhanced connectivity between regions involved in self-awareness and emotional salience. These findings support the use of personalized music in therapeutic settings, especially for individuals with dementia, and point to a biologically grounded explanation for why music can evoke vivid memories and feelings from long ago.</p>
<hr>
<h3><strong>3. <a href="https://www.psypost.org/authoritarian-attitudes-linked-to-altered-brain-anatomy-neuroscientists-reveal/">Left- and right-wing authoritarianism linked to different brain structures</a></strong></h3>
<p>A new study in <em>Neuroscience</em> suggests that people who hold authoritarian views—regardless of political leaning—may have distinct brain differences. The research found that young adults with strong right-wing authoritarian beliefs had smaller gray matter volume in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, a region involved in perspective-taking and moral reasoning. In contrast, those with high scores on left-wing authoritarianism, particularly aggressive anti-authority views, had thinner cortex in the right anterior insula, a region tied to empathy and emotional regulation.</p>
<p>These brain differences were associated with behavioral traits often linked to authoritarianism, such as impulsivity and anxiety. The study also found that right-wing authoritarians were more likely to endorse social dominance, while left-wing authoritarians aligned with more radical anti-establishment views. Though the research is limited by its cross-sectional design and homogenous sample, it opens a new line of inquiry into how structural brain differences might interact with emotional tendencies and social environments to shape political beliefs. The authors emphasize that brain anatomy does not cause ideology but may reflect long-term patterns of thought and behavior.</p>
<hr>
<h3><strong>4. <a href="https://www.psypost.org/your-brain-doesnt-learn-the-way-we-thought-according-to-new-neuroscience-breakthrough/">Neurons use multiple “learning rules” to store new information</a></strong></h3>
<p>In a study published in <em>Science</em>, researchers uncovered a surprising detail about how the brain learns: neurons don’t follow just one rule for changing their connections—they follow several at once. Using real-time imaging in mice, scientists found that synapses (the junctions between neurons) on different parts of the same neuron followed different rules for learning. Some synapses strengthened their connections when neurons fired together, as predicted by the classic “fire together, wire together” rule. But others followed entirely different patterns, responding independently of the neuron’s own firing.</p>
<p>This discovery offers a new explanation for how the brain efficiently encodes complex information. By applying different learning rules across different synapses, a single neuron can process multiple types of input at once, helping the brain multitask and adapt to new experiences. The findings could have implications for artificial intelligence and mental health. For example, understanding these flexible learning mechanisms may improve treatments for conditions like depression, which involve disruptions in synaptic plasticity, and inspire more biologically realistic models of learning in AI systems.</p>
<hr>
<h3><strong>5. <a href="https://www.psypost.org/neuroscientists-show-childrens-brains-function-differently-during-book-reading-and-screen-time/">Children’s brains respond differently to books than to screens</a></strong></h3>
<p>A study in <em>Developmental Science</em> found that preschool children’s brains show distinct activity patterns when being read to from a book versus watching a story on a screen. During live book reading, children showed greater activation in the right hemisphere, especially in the temporal parietal junction—a region involved in social understanding and shared attention. In contrast, screen-based storytelling produced more balanced activity across both brain hemispheres, suggesting a different kind of engagement.</p>
<p>The study involved 3- to 6-year-old children who experienced both types of storytelling while their brain activity was measured using near-infrared imaging. Despite the screen stories having the same content and language as the live readings, the presence of a real person reading aloud appeared to make a difference in how the brain processed the experience. These findings suggest that the social interaction involved in live book reading may help build neural pathways important for communication and empathy. While the study had a small, homogenous sample, it adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that not all storytime experiences are equal in their effects on early brain development.</p>
<p> </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/a-familiar-prejudice-may-have-more-to-do-with-identity-signaling/" 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;">A familiar prejudice may have more to do with “identity signaling”</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">May 1st 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People who express negative attitudes toward atheists are perceived as more religious and may use these attitudes to signal their religious identity, according to new research published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2025.2485459"><em>Self & Identity</em></a>.</p>
<p>Although religion is often linked to prosocial behavior, it can also fuel prejudice, particularly against atheists. In the United States, atheists represent a growing demographic but continue to experience widespread discrimination and social stigma. Previous research has documented that religious individuals are more likely to harbor anti-atheist prejudice, which is often explained through moral distrust, ingroup favoritism, or perceived threats to traditional values. However, these explanations don’t fully address the expressive and social functions of such prejudice.</p>
<p>Joshua T. Lambert and colleagues proposed a new framework: the identity-signaling account of atheist prejudice. Drawing on self-presentation, symbolic self-completion, and self-verification theories, they suggested that expressing anti-atheist attitudes can serve as a signal of religious identity. Just as wearing religious symbols might indicate one’s faith, voicing distrust of atheists may help religious individuals affirm their identity to themselves and others.</p>
<p>The researchers conducted five studies involving 1,734 participants, primarily Christian undergraduates in the United States. Studies 1 and 2 assessed whether people intuitively perceive anti-atheist sentiments as signals of religiosity. Participants read brief statements made by fictional individuals (either endorsing or rejecting atheists), then rated those individuals on various traits, including religiosity. The key manipulation involved the fictional person expressing either willingness or unwillingness to date an atheist (Study 1) or expressing trust or distrust toward atheists (Study 2), with all other information held constant.</p>
<p>Study 3 examined whether people actively use anti-atheist sentiment to communicate their own religious identity. Participants first completed measures assessing how strongly they identified with their religion. Then, under the pretense of completing multiple tasks, participants were instructed to either conceal or convey their level of religious commitment while responding to anti-atheist statements. This allowed researchers to observe whether stronger religious identifiers would vary their responses depending on whether they wanted to hide or highlight their religiosity.</p>
<p>In Study 4, Christian participants were asked to imagine working with an atheist either publicly or privately, and then report how much identity discomfort, such as feelings of inauthenticity or negative emotion, they would experience. Study 5 explored whether participants’ own prejudice could be altered by manipulating what they believed to be typical among religious Christians. Participants read bogus information suggesting that either most religious Christians dislike atheists or that they tend to accept them. Then, they completed measures of anti-atheist sentiment, allowing the researchers to assess whether perceived group norms shaped their attitudes.</p>
<p>Across all five studies, results consistently supported the identity-signaling account. In Studies 1 and 2, participants rated fictional individuals as significantly more religious when they expressed anti-atheist views. Specifically, those who refused to date atheists or stated they distrusted atheists were seen as more devout compared to individuals who expressed openness or trust. These differences were exceptionally large in magnitude, indicating that anti-atheist statements were strong cues for perceived religiosity.</p>
<p>Study 3 revealed that people do in fact adjust their own attitudes toward atheists depending on whether they wish to appear more or less religious. Participants who strongly identified with their religion were more likely to endorse anti-atheist statements when instructed to signal their religious identity and less likely to do so when instructed to hide it.</p>
<p>In Study 4, imagining affiliation with an atheist, whether in private or public, triggered stronger identity-threat responses among highly committed Christians. They anticipated greater emotional discomfort and felt more inauthentic, particularly in public settings, suggesting that even hypothetical proximity to atheists could threaten their religious identity. Study 5 further demonstrated that anti-atheist prejudice is malleable: participants reported lower prejudice when led to believe that most Christians accept atheists, but only if they strongly identified as Christian.</p>
<p>Participant samples were limited to U.S. college students, predominantly identifying as Christian, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.</p>
<p>The research, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2025.2485459">Tell me you’re religious without saying you’re religious: An identity-signaling account of prejudice against atheists</a>,” was authored by Joshua T. Lambert, Charlotte Kinrade, Danielle E. Wahlers, Braden Hall, and William Hart.</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>