<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/openness-to-sugar-relationships-tied-to-short-term-mating-not-life-history-strategy/" 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;">Openness to sugar relationships tied to short-term mating, not life history strategy</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 28th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People’s openness to “sugar relationships” is more strongly predicted by their interest in short-term mating than by their broader life history strategy, according to new research published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049251339453"><em>Evolutionary Psychology</em></a>.</p>
<p>In today’s world, “sugar relationships” have emerged as a modern iteration of relationships involving the exchange of sex for resources, facilitated by digital platforms that pair older, resource-rich individuals with younger companions. Evolutionary psychologists have questioned whether these relationships align more with short-term mating strategies or represent a calculated, long-term investment in resource acquisition.</p>
<p>Previous research has linked such arrangements with traits like sociosexuality (openness to casual sex), but it’s unclear whether these behaviors stem primarily from personality-based mating orientations or are shaped by early-life environmental conditions, as proposed by life history theory.</p>
<p>Norbert Meskó and colleagues explored this question by comparing the relative predictive power of short-term mating orientation and life history strategy in shaping openness to sugar relationships. Life history theory posits that early-life experiences, particularly those marked by instability or scarcity, can foster “fast” strategies focused on immediate reward and reproduction. The researchers therefore examined whether openness to sugar relationships arises from such adaptive, context-sensitive responses or if it more directly reflects individual sociosexual preferences.</p>
<p>The researchers recruited 312 participants between the ages of 18 and 50, predominantly university students in Hungary, with the majority being women. Participants completed a comprehensive online questionnaire that included both demographic information and a range of psychological measures.</p>
<p>The central measure was the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Young Women and Men Scale (ASR-YWMS), which evaluates a person’s willingness to enter a relationship where companionship or sexual access is exchanged for financial or material compensation. Participants also reported their relationship status, sexual orientation, number of sexual partners, and place of residence, among other background variables.</p>
<p>To capture life history strategy—a concept referring to whether someone tends to favor long-term investment versus immediate reward—the High-K Strategy Scale was used. Childhood experiences were measured using two separate tools; the Family Resources Scale assessed the perceived adequacy of material and emotional support during childhood, while the Childhood Unpredictability Scale gauged how chaotic or unstable participants’ early environments were.</p>
<p>Short-term and long-term mating orientations were measured using the Multidimensional Measure of Sociosexual Orientation, which distinguishes between casual and committed relationship preferences. Lastly, the Perceived Vulnerability to Disease Scale was used to examine whether concern about infection might relate to openness to transactional relationships. All scales were translated into Hungarian and validated for this population.</p>
<p>The study revealed that short-term mating orientation was the strongest and most consistent predictor of openness to sugar relationships. Individuals who expressed greater comfort with casual, uncommitted sex were far more likely to endorse sugar relationships as a viable or appealing option.</p>
<p>While there was a significant association between life history strategy and openness to sugar relationships, where individuals with slower, more future-oriented strategies were less inclined to endorse such relationships, this effect was comparatively small. In essence, a person’s current mating preferences mattered more than their developmental background when it came to attitudes toward sugar relationships.</p>
<p>A more nuanced picture emerged when the researchers explored how childhood experiences influenced these adult attitudes. For women, there was an indirect pathway connecting early-life scarcity to openness to sugar relationships: women who experienced lower family resources tended to adopt faster life history strategies, which in turn predicted more favorable attitudes toward sugar relationships.</p>
<p>However, for men, no such developmental pathway was observed. Men’s openness to sugar relationships was driven almost entirely by their short-term mating orientation, with no significant contribution from early-life conditions or life history strategy. Interestingly, participant sex did not directly predict openness to sugar relationships once other psychological traits were accounted for, suggesting that individual differences in mating orientation, rather than gender per se, are what shape these attitudes.</p>
<p>Of note is how environmental harshness and unpredictability were operationalized. Rather than using objective indicators like mortality rates, the authors relied on retrospective self-reports of childhood family support and stability, which may not fully capture the constructs as defined in life history theory.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049251339453">Short-Term Mating Orientation Predicts Openness to ‘Sugar Relationships’ More Than Life History Strategy</a>,” was authored by Norbert Meskó, Jessica S. Ehlers, and András N. Zsidó.</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-regular-psychedelic-users-exhibit-different-brain-responses-to-self-related-thoughts-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;">Regular psychedelic users exhibit different brain responses to self-related thoughts, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 28th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People who use psychedelic substances may think about themselves in a different way — not just psychologically, but also neurologically. A new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2024.111196" target="_blank">Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry</a></em> suggests that individuals who regularly use psychedelics in real-world settings show altered patterns of brain activity when reflecting on themselves. </p>
<p>Psychedelic drugs such as LSD, psilocybin, and DMT are known for their ability to shift perception, mood, and sense of self. In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in how these substances may support mental health by changing how people relate to their thoughts and emotions. Clinical trials have shown that psychedelic-assisted therapy can reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety, and addiction, often with effects that last for months.</p>
<p>However, most of this research takes place in controlled laboratory environments with strict protocols. In contrast, millions of people use psychedelics in naturalistic, unsupervised settings. While large surveys have shown that such users tend to report lower psychological distress and better emotional well-being, much less is known about how psychedelics affect their brain function. The current study aimed to fill that gap by comparing how regular psychedelic users and non-users respond to self-reflective thoughts — both in terms of reported experience and brain activity measured through electroencephalography, or EEG.</p>
<p>To reduce the chance that personality differences would skew the results, the researchers compared regular users to individuals who had never taken psychedelics but said they intended to do so in the future. This design allowed the researchers to focus more precisely on the effects of actual psychedelic use, rather than differences in lifestyle or mindset that might come from being generally open to such experiences.</p>
<p>Participants were recruited through Polish organizations associated with drug policy and harm reduction. After completing a screening questionnaire, they were invited to take part in an EEG study that recorded their brain activity while they engaged in a task designed to prompt self-related thinking. In total, the researchers collected two independent datasets: one from 70 people tested in Warsaw, and a second from 38 people tested in Krakow. Each site included both psychedelic users and non-users, matched by age, gender, and education.</p>
<p>Before the EEG task, participants completed several psychological questionnaires. These measured their levels of rumination (repetitive negative thinking), reflection (thoughtful self-examination), depression, anxiety, and prior experiences with meditation and substance use. The results showed that, in one dataset, psychedelic users scored lower on measures of anxiety, depression, and rumination, and higher on reflection — suggesting more adaptive self-processing. These differences were not found in the second, smaller dataset.</p>
<p>During the EEG session, participants completed a “self-related thoughts induction” task. In this task, they were asked to think about prompts such as “why you react the way you do” or “what kind of person you think you should be.” These were compared to distraction prompts unrelated to the self, such as “why you like the books you do.” After each prompt, participants rated how much they had focused on the topic, how much they had focused on themselves, and how sad they felt. </p>
<p>Both users and non-users showed more self-focus and sadness during self-related prompts, as expected. In one dataset, psychedelic users reported feeling less sadness than non-users, but again, this difference did not appear in the second group.</p>
<p>The most distinctive part of the study involved analyzing EEG data. EEG records the brain’s electrical activity across different frequency bands. The researchers focused on alpha (7–12 Hz) and beta (14–30 Hz) frequencies, which have previously been linked to the brain’s default mode network — a system involved in internal thought, including rumination and self-reflection. In past studies, psychedelics have been found to reduce activity in this network during the drug’s acute effects, which some researchers believe may help explain their therapeutic potential.</p>
<p>EEG analysis revealed that during self-related thought, non-users showed greater increases in alpha and beta power in brain regions commonly associated with self-processing — especially the posterior cingulate cortex, a key hub of the default mode network. Psychedelic users, by contrast, showed weaker increases in these same regions. These differences suggest that the brain dynamics involved in self-reflection may function differently in those who have repeatedly used psychedelics.</p>
<p>However, this pattern appeared only in the first dataset. The second dataset, collected in a different lab with fewer participants, did not replicate the between-group differences. When the researchers combined data from both sites, some effects persisted but were smaller in size. This inconsistency led the authors to urge caution in interpreting the results.</p>
<p>One possible reason for the differences between datasets is sample size. The second group was smaller and may have lacked the statistical power to detect effects. Another factor is the technical setup. Only the first lab had access to detailed individual MRI scans and precise tracking of electrode placement, which improves the spatial accuracy of EEG results.</p>
<p>Importantly, the researchers also looked at whether other variables — such as lifetime meditation or cannabis use — might explain the observed brain activity patterns. After accounting for these factors in statistical models, the differences between psychedelic users and non-users became less clear. This suggests that at least some of the effects initially attributed to psychedelics could also be influenced by related lifestyle habits, like meditation, which is known to alter self-related thought and brain activity.</p>
<p>When the team examined how brain activity correlated with behavioral measures like depression or rumination, no strong relationships emerged after correcting for multiple comparisons. Some brain patterns showed modest associations with lifetime psychedelic use, but these did not hold up statistically. This lack of consistent correlation suggests that brain activity patterns alone may not directly explain differences in mood or thought style — or at least not in a simple, linear way.</p>
<p>The researchers were transparent about the limitations of their work. Since the study was cross-sectional, it cannot establish cause and effect. That is, we don’t know whether psychedelics changed participants’ brains, or whether people with different brain function were more likely to use psychedelics in the first place. The study also relied on participants’ self-reports about their drug use, and did not control for the specific substances, doses, or contexts involved.</p>
<p>Despite these challenges, the study is one of the most detailed attempts to examine the long-term psychological and brain-based differences in naturalistic psychedelic users. It raises questions about how these substances may influence how people process their own thoughts, particularly those involving self-reflection, emotion, and personal meaning.</p>
<p>The authors recommend that future studies include larger and more diverse samples, and that they continue to explore the connections between brain function, subjective experience, and mental health outcomes. In particular, they call for better ways to account for self-selection bias and the cultural narratives that may influence how psychedelic users interpret and report their experiences.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2024.111196" target="_blank">Processing of self-related thoughts in experienced users of classic psychedelics: A source localisation EEG study</a>,” was authored by Anastasia Ruban, Mikołaj Magnuski, Justyna Hobot, Paweł Orłowski, Aleksandra Kołodziej, Michał Bola, and Aneta Brzezicka.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-psychology-research-uncovers-surprisingly-consistent-misjudgments-of-tattooed-individuals/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New psychology research uncovers surprisingly consistent misjudgments of tattooed individuals</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 28th 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 the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2025.104629" target="_blank">Journal of Research in Personality</a></em> finds that while people tend to form strong and consistent impressions about someone’s personality based on their tattoos, those impressions are often off the mark. In particular, observers assumed certain tattoos revealed traits like agreeableness or extraversion, but most of these guesses didn’t line up with how tattooed individuals described themselves—except in one case. Tattoos rated as “wacky” were modestly linked to higher openness to new experiences.</p>
<p>Tattoos have become increasingly common in the United States, with recent surveys suggesting that nearly a third of adults have at least one. Yet tattoos still carry social baggage. People often make snap judgments about others based on body art, assuming, for instance, that tattooed individuals are more rebellious, neurotic, or less conscientious than others. Most past research has focused on whether people with tattoos are judged differently from those without. But this approach overlooks the rich variety of tattoo types and styles, as well as the personal reasons behind getting them.</p>
<p>The researchers behind the current study wanted to explore not just how people judge others based on tattoos, but whether those judgments are accurate—and whether certain features of tattoos, like size or content, reliably signal anything about a person’s personality. They also aimed to test whether knowing the meaning behind a tattoo could help people make more accurate assessments.</p>
<p>“We were partially inspired by a series of studies that compared how we judge people with and without tattoos,” said study author William J. Chopik, an associate professor of psychology at Michigan State University and director of the <a href="https://chopiklab.com/" target="_blank">Close Relationships Lab</a>.</p>
<p>“People will make all sorts of assumptions about people with tattoos—that they are risky, addicted to substances, and are all around more negative. But then we acknowledged that some of these judgments might depend on what the tattoo looks like. We assumed that tattoos are all a bit different from each other and that might guide judgments. Thus, it was less a comparison between someone with or without a tattoo. Rather, we felt people would judge people based on whether the tattoo is something like skull on fire or a moving memorial with flowers.”</p>
<p>The research involved 274 tattooed adults between the ages of 18 and 70. Most were women (71 percent), and the majority were White, although individuals from other racial and ethnic backgrounds were also represented. Each participant completed a well-established personality questionnaire that assessed the five major dimensions of personality: agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism, and openness to experience. Participants also described the meaning of their tattoos and allowed the research team to photograph them.</p>
<p>The study gathered 375 tattoo images in total. Some participants shared two tattoos, though most provided just one. The photos and accompanying personal descriptions were then shown to a group of 30 raters, including undergraduate and graduate students as well as professors trained in psychology.</p>
<p>Half of the raters were asked to assess the personality of the tattooed individuals based on the photo alone. The other half received both the photo and a written explanation of the tattoo’s meaning. None of the raters judged the same tattoo in both formats. All raters used the same personality scale to evaluate how agreeable, conscientious, extraverted, neurotic, and open to experience they believed the tattooed person to be.</p>
<p>To analyze the judgments, the researchers employed a lens model—a framework that examines how people use visible cues in the environment (in this case, tattoo characteristics) to form impressions and whether those cues actually reflect the traits they seem to signal. Raters also assessed 18 specific tattoo features such as size, style, imagery (e.g., life versus death), and how “wacky” or serious the tattoo seemed.</p>
<p>Overall, people were fairly consistent in how they judged tattoos. Raters tended to agree with one another about what certain tattoo features might suggest about personality. For instance, cheerful and colorful tattoos were linked to impressions of higher agreeableness. Large, traditional-looking tattoos were associated with higher extraversion. Tattoos that appeared low in quality or included death imagery led raters to perceive the wearer as more neurotic or less agreeable.</p>
<p>However, these judgments were largely inaccurate. When the researchers compared how participants were rated with how they described themselves, most of the links between tattoo features and personality fell apart. Except for one pattern: people who had tattoos described by raters as “wacky” were somewhat more likely to score higher on openness to experience in their self-assessments.</p>
<p>Adding a description of the tattoo’s meaning did not consistently improve the accuracy of judgments. Although including the story behind a tattoo increased consensus among raters when judging traits like neuroticism, it didn’t significantly enhance their ability to assess whether the tattoo reflected the person’s actual personality.</p>
<p>One of the clearest results came from comparing cue validity (whether tattoo traits truly reflect personality) with cue utilization (whether raters rely on those traits when making judgments). For most personality traits, raters used cues that had little or no connection to how tattooed individuals actually saw themselves. The only meaningful match between cue validity and utilization was found for openness to experience. In this case, tattoos judged as more eccentric or unusual were both used by raters and modestly indicative of a person’s actual level of openness.</p>
<p>For the other traits—like agreeableness, extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness—the visual cues that raters relied on were not valid indicators. In fact, for some traits, the cues used were negatively correlated with actual self-reports. That means raters were not just guessing incorrectly—they were sometimes consistently wrong.</p>
<p>“We did a pretty in depth job of trying to code aspects of the tattoos,” Chopik told PsyPost. “One reason researchers do this is try to figure out how people are using something like how large the tattoo is or if its colorful (or has flowers) to make judgments about people. So one surprising thing is just how little people were using particular features of the tattoos. There were some indicators, like if a tattoo was wacky/strange, that people were latching onto (which was indeed an accurate indicator). But it was a bit strange to see that people were agreeing on judgments but we couldn’t pinpoint exactly what was guiding their judgments.”</p>
<p>The findings suggest that while people feel confident making assumptions about others based on their tattoos, those assumptions rarely hold up. Tattoos seem to invite personality judgments, and people tend to use consistent mental shortcuts based on the artwork they see. But in most cases, these judgments do not reflect reality. They are shaped more by stereotypes and surface-level impressions than by meaningful psychological differences.</p>
<p>One exception, again, was the trait of openness. Open people were more likely to have tattoos that observers found quirky or offbeat. This finding supports earlier research suggesting that people high in openness tend to express themselves through unconventional or creative outlets—including body art.</p>
<p>“People did indeed agree on what people with certain tattoos are like,” Chopik said. “This is called ‘consensus’—that people reach a consensus for how to judge people with particular types of tattoos. But were those judgments accurate? Not really. There was some evidence that tattoos helped provide people evaluate if someone was open to experience (e.g., artistic, open-minded, exploratory) based on their tattoo, and indeed that person is open to experience. But by and large, the judgments weren’t accurate even though people tend to share some idea of what they think of someone with that tattoo.”</p>
<p>The study is one of the first to use a structured model to test whether people can accurately judge personality based on tattoos. Still, the authors note some limitations. The tattoo cues analyzed were relatively broad, and the researchers didn’t explore in depth how or why observers made the judgments they did. Raters may have relied on gut feelings or cultural associations more than any conscious reasoning.</p>
<p>Additionally, the setting of the study—a controlled environment where raters were asked to assess personality traits based on isolated images—differs from real-world interactions, where people might see tattoos alongside other personal cues like clothing, facial expressions, or speech.</p>
<p>“We’re not entirely sure what’s guiding people’s judgments,” Chopik said. “Although they were pretty inaccurate about the judgments, but they were indeed forming consistent judgments. So we may have been incomplete about the tattoo cues/aspects that we were looking at. We also had information about the meaning behind tattoos that some of the raters were provided. We look forward to coding more of those descriptions. That might be more influential in guiding judgments because people describing tattoos also convey a bunch of things about themselves when they do it.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2025.104629" target="_blank">Ink and Identity: Personality perceptions based on tattoos</a>,” was authored by Brooke Soulliere, William J. Chopik, Alejandro Carrillo, W. Keith Campbell, Brandon Weiss, and Joshua D. Miller.</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/neuroscientists-identify-key-gatekeeper-of-human-consciousness/" 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;">Neuroscientists identify key gatekeeper of human consciousness</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 27th 2025, 18:00</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/10.1126/science.adr3675" target="_blank">Science</a></em> has identified the thalamus as a central player in how humans become consciously aware of visual information. By recording electrical activity directly from the brains of five patients during a visual task, scientists discovered that specific thalamic regions activate earlier and more strongly during moments of visual awareness. These findings suggest that the intralaminar and medial thalamic nuclei act as a gateway that initiates conscious perception by influencing the activity of the prefrontal cortex.</p>
<p>The thalamus is a small, egg-shaped structure located deep in the center of the brain. It acts as a hub for relaying sensory information—like sight, sound, and touch—to the cerebral cortex, where perception and interpretation occur. In addition to this relay role, it also helps regulate alertness, sleep, and attention. </p>
<p>While the thalamus has long been understood as a relay station for sensory information, it has been largely viewed as a supporting actor—important for maintaining wakefulness, but not the actual source of conscious experience. The current study challenges this idea, offering new evidence that the thalamus does more than just relay signals. It may actively shape what enters our conscious awareness.</p>
<p>To investigate this, the research team took advantage of a unique opportunity to record deep brain activity in humans. Five adult men undergoing treatment for severe, drug-resistant headaches had stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) electrodes implanted in their brains. These electrodes allowed researchers to monitor neural activity in real-time across multiple brain regions, including various parts of the thalamus and the prefrontal cortex.</p>
<p>Participants completed a visual awareness task that presented images at the edge of conscious visibility. On each trial, a patterned stimulus briefly appeared to one side of a central fixation point. Some images were bright and clearly visible, while others were faint and difficult to detect. Occasionally, no stimulus was shown at all. After each trial, participants responded with an eye movement indicating whether they had seen the stimulus and where it had appeared.</p>
<p>This setup allowed the researchers to compare brain activity between trials where participants consciously saw the stimulus and trials where they did not, even though the visual input was nearly identical. This critical contrast helped isolate the neural processes specifically linked to awareness, rather than simple sensory input.</p>
<p>The results showed that certain regions deep within the thalamus—specifically the central medial nucleus, mediodorsal medial nucleus, and parafascicular nucleus—showed increased activity during trials when participants reported seeing the stimulus. These regions are known as the intralaminar and medial thalamic nuclei. Their responses occurred earlier and with greater intensity than activity in other thalamic regions, such as the ventral nuclei, and even earlier than responses in the prefrontal cortex.</p>
<p>Using a range of analyses, the researchers found that these high-order thalamic nuclei exhibited stronger electrical signals, increased low-frequency oscillations, and more synchronized activity during moments of awareness. Importantly, the timing of this activity—beginning around 200 milliseconds after stimulus presentation—aligned with the earliest known brain signatures of conscious perception, such as the visual awareness negativity signal recorded in prior scalp-based studies.</p>
<p>To understand how these signals travel through the brain, the researchers examined how different brain regions communicated during conscious versus unconscious trials. They measured the synchronization of neural oscillations, particularly in the theta frequency range (about 4–8 Hz), which has been linked to cognitive control and awareness. They also analyzed cross-frequency coupling, which describes how slow brain rhythms may coordinate faster activity in other areas. Both measures revealed that the intralaminar and medial thalamic regions drove neural coordination with the prefrontal cortex during conscious perception.</p>
<p>In other words, when participants were aware of the stimulus, the thalamus was not simply reacting to sensory input—it was actively shaping the brain’s response, sending signals to the prefrontal cortex and helping to organize brain-wide activity in support of awareness.</p>
<p>Additional analyses showed that the neural patterns in the thalamus and prefrontal cortex encoded information about whether participants were consciously aware of the stimulus, rather than simply reflecting aspects of the task like contrast strength, motor response, or reaction time. This strengthens the case that these regions are directly involved in conscious perception, rather than just downstream reflections of other cognitive processes.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the researchers also found that the activity in the thalamus, particularly in the intralaminar and medial nuclei, could begin even before the stimulus appeared. This pre-stimulus activity was more synchronized in trials where participants would later report being aware of the stimulus, suggesting that these regions may help set the stage for conscious perception by influencing the brain’s state of readiness.</p>
<p>This study is the first to offer such detailed recordings from multiple thalamic nuclei in humans during a task designed to probe the boundary between conscious and unconscious visual perception. Prior studies using imaging methods like functional MRI or magnetoencephalography hinted at thalamic involvement in awareness but lacked the precision to pinpoint when and where this activity occurred. The use of sEEG here provided a rare opportunity to capture the dynamics of deep brain structures with both high temporal and spatial resolution.</p>
<p>The findings provide strong support for the idea that consciousness is not solely a cortical phenomenon. Instead, the thalamus—especially its high-order nuclei—appears to play an active and early role in making sensory information available to our awareness. This may reflect the thalamus’s unique position as a hub, with widespread connections to both cortical and subcortical brain regions, allowing it to coordinate complex patterns of neural activity required for consciousness to emerge.</p>
<p>However, the authors note some limitations. The study was conducted in a small sample of five male patients, all of whom had electrodes implanted for clinical reasons related to headache treatment. Although their cognitive abilities and vision were intact, these participants do not represent the general population. Moreover, electrode placement was determined by medical need, not research goals, which means some brain regions may have been under-sampled or missed entirely.</p>
<p>Additionally, while the study strongly suggests that intralaminar and medial thalamic nuclei initiate the conscious perception process, it does not rule out important contributions from the cortex. The prefrontal cortex, particularly the lateral regions, still showed significant activity and participated in synchronized neural networks during awareness. The researchers suggest that the thalamus may act as a gate or initiator, while the cortex elaborates on the content of experience.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr3675" target="_blank">Human high-order thalamic nuclei gate conscious perception through the thalamofrontal loop</a>,” was authored by Zepeng Fang, Yuanyuan Dang, An’an Ping, Chenyu Wang, Qianchuan Zhao, Hulin Zhao, Xiaoli Li, and Mingsha Zhang.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-links-intermittent-fasting-to-improved-mood-via-brains-dopamine-system/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New study links intermittent fasting to improved mood via brain’s dopamine system</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 27th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Intermittent fasting may help alleviate depression symptoms by targeting dopamine receptors in the brain, according to a new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2025.106931" target="_blank">Neurobiology of Disease</a></em>.</p>
<p>Depression is one of the most common mental health disorders. Traditional antidepressants can take weeks to take effect and often come with undesirable side effects. Researchers have been exploring alternative strategies to improve mental health, and one promising avenue is nutrition. Intermittent fasting — a dietary pattern that involves alternating periods of eating and fasting — has gained increasing attention.</p>
<p>Previous studies have suggested that fasting may influence the brain’s neurotransmitter systems, but the precise mechanisms have remained unclear. In this new research, scientists investigated whether intermittent fasting could reduce depression-like symptoms by acting on dopamine D1 receptors, which are known to play a key role in mood regulation.</p>
<p>To test their hypothesis, a research team led by Jingjing Piao from the Second Hospital of Jilin University in China used a well-established mouse model of depression known as Chronic Unpredictable Mild Stress (CUMS).</p>
<p>The mice were exposed to a series of randomly arranged stressors over several weeks — such as foot shocks, water deprivation, and tail pinching — to mimic the effects of chronic stress in humans. After this period, some of the mice were placed on an intermittent fasting schedule that alternated 24-hour periods of food availability with 24-hour fasting. For comparison, other groups of mice received the common antidepressant fluoxetine or underwent a shorter 9-hour fasting period.</p>
<p>The results were striking. Mice in the intermittent fasting group showed marked improvements in depression-related behaviors. They were more likely to engage in pleasurable activities, such as drinking a sugar solution — a sign of reduced anhedonia, or loss of pleasure. These mice also exhibited decreased immobility in behavioral tests designed to assess despair-like symptoms, suggesting greater resilience to stress.</p>
<p>To understand how intermittent fasting produced these effects, the researchers examined the mice’s brain activity. They found increased neuronal activation in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), a brain region involved in emotional regulation. More specifically, intermittent fasting enhanced activity in the Drd1-cAMP-PKA-DARPP-32-CREB-BDNF signaling pathway — a cascade of molecular events associated with dopamine D1 receptor function.</p>
<p>When researchers administered a drug that blocked dopamine D1 receptors, the antidepressant-like effects of intermittent fasting disappeared. This indicated that the benefits were directly dependent on this dopamine pathway.</p>
<p>Further experiments using optogenetics — a technique that uses light to control the activity of specific neurons — reinforced this conclusion. When the researchers artificially activated dopamine D1 receptor-expressing neurons in the mPFC, the mice exhibited behavioral improvements similar to those seen with fasting. Conversely, inhibiting these neurons reversed the effects of fasting.</p>
<p>While the findings offer promising insights into the biological mechanisms linking intermittent fasting and depression, the researchers acknowledge key limitations. The study was conducted in mice, and more research is needed to determine whether similar effects occur in humans.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2025.106931" target="_blank">Intermittent fasting produces antidepressant-like effects by modulating dopamine D1 receptors in the medial prefrontal cortex</a>,” was authored by Jingjing Piao, Hongyu Chen, Xinmiao Piao, Ziqian Cheng, Fangyi Zhao, Ranji Cui, and Bingjin Li.</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/ashwagandha-extract-boosts-memory-and-cognition-in-people-with-mild-cognitive-impairment-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;">Ashwagandha extract boosts memory and cognition in people with mild cognitive impairment, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 27th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new clinical trial published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/02698811251324377" target="_blank">Journal of Psychopharmacology</a></em> suggests that an extract of ashwagandha standardized with a compound called Sominone may improve memory and overall cognitive performance in people with mild cognitive impairment. Participants who took the supplement daily for two months showed significant improvements in several domains of memory and spatial reasoning compared to those who took a placebo. The supplement was also well-tolerated, with no significant side effects reported.</p>
<p>Mild cognitive impairment, or MCI, refers to a decline in memory or thinking skills that is noticeable but does not yet interfere significantly with daily life. People with MCI are at a higher risk of developing dementia later in life, including Alzheimer’s disease. </p>
<p>Currently, there are no approved medications specifically for treating MCI, and many people turn to lifestyle interventions such as exercise, diet changes, and cognitive training to slow cognitive decline. Herbal supplements have also gained attention, with ashwagandha — a plant long used in traditional Indian medicine — often recommended for stress, anxiety, and cognitive support.</p>
<p>Ashwagandha, also known by its botanical name <em>Withania somnifera</em>, has a long history of use in Ayurveda, the traditional medical system of India. Recent research has suggested that its compounds may have neuroprotective properties. In particular, Sominone — a metabolite derived from one of the plant’s active constituents — has shown promise in animal studies. It has been found to support the growth of nerve cells, protect neurons from damage, and enhance memory performance. The current study was designed to test whether a standardized extract of ashwagandha containing Sominone (called Somin-On™) could produce similar effects in humans diagnosed with MCI.</p>
<p>The researchers conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study at a medical center in Jhansi, India. A total of 40 adults with MCI were selected to participate after meeting specific inclusion criteria. Participants were between the ages of 25 and 65 and had mild memory problems as measured by common clinical tests. They were randomly assigned to receive either 250 mg of Somin-On™ or a placebo capsule once daily for 60 days. Both participants and researchers were unaware of who received the treatment and who received the placebo.</p>
<p>Cognitive function was measured using several standardized tools: the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III), and the Shepard Mental Rotation Task. These assessments were administered at the beginning of the study, halfway through, and again at the end. The researchers focused on changes in immediate memory, general memory, working memory, attention, and visuospatial processing.</p>
<p>The results were striking. Compared to those taking a placebo, participants in the Somin-On™ group showed consistent and statistically significant improvements across nearly all domains tested. Improvements were already evident after 30 days of treatment and became more pronounced by the end of the 60-day study period.</p>
<p>For example, the Shepard Mental Rotation Task, which assesses spatial reasoning and mental imagery, showed a 12% increase in performance at 30 days and a 32% increase at 60 days among those taking Somin-On™, while the placebo group showed a decline by the end of the study. Similar trends were seen in the Wechsler Memory Scale. </p>
<p>In measures of immediate memory, participants taking the supplement improved by about 7% at 60 days, while those in the placebo group actually declined slightly. General memory scores rose nearly 15% in the treatment group, compared to only a small increase in the placebo group. Working memory improved by over 18% in those taking Somin-On™, with negligible change in the control group.</p>
<p>The two widely used screening tools, MoCA and MMSE, also showed marked improvement. MoCA scores in the treatment group rose nearly 15% from baseline, and MMSE scores increased by more than 19%. Both improvements were significantly higher than those observed in the placebo group.</p>
<p>The supplement was also well-tolerated. No participants in either group reported any adverse side effects, and standard blood tests and liver and kidney function markers remained stable throughout the trial.</p>
<p>The researchers suggest that the cognitive benefits of Somin-On™ may stem from its neuroprotective mechanisms. Previous animal research has shown that Sominone, the main active ingredient, can enhance the growth of neural connections and reverse memory deficits caused by damage to brain cells. It has also been shown to improve spatial memory and reduce brain cell shrinkage in models of Alzheimer’s disease, without necessarily affecting other markers like amyloid plaques. These findings hint at a potential mode of action involving the growth and maintenance of neural networks, rather than targeting traditional hallmarks of neurodegeneration.</p>
<p>Other possible mechanisms include increased resistance to oxidative stress, improvements in mitochondrial function, and support for cholinergic signaling — all of which have been linked to memory function in the brain. Inflammation and excitotoxicity, two processes involved in neurodegeneration, have also been shown to be reduced by components of ashwagandha in previous studies. Although the current study did not examine these mechanisms directly, the cognitive improvements observed may reflect the result of one or more of these biological pathways.</p>
<p>Despite these encouraging findings, the study has several limitations. First, the sample size was small, with only 40 participants. Larger studies are needed to confirm the results and better understand how widely they apply. Second, the duration of the study was limited to two months. It is unclear whether the benefits of Somin-On™ persist over a longer period or whether the supplement could help prevent further decline. Third, the study did not use imaging techniques or biological markers to assess brain changes, so the underlying processes behind the cognitive improvements remain speculative.</p>
<p>Another limitation is the absence of an active comparator group. The study compared Somin-On™ to a placebo, but did not compare it to other forms of ashwagandha or to other cognitive-enhancing treatments. Since ashwagandha contains multiple bioactive compounds, future studies could investigate whether Sominone alone is responsible for the observed benefits or if the effects arise from a broader mix of constituents.</p>
<p>The researchers suggest that future trials should include a more diverse participant pool, longer follow-up, and potentially integrate imaging or biomarker data to explore how ashwagandha affects brain structure and function. It would also be valuable to test the supplement in combination with other non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as cognitive training or physical exercise.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/02698811251324377" target="_blank">Effect of ashwagandha (Withania somnifera) extract with Sominone (Somin-On™) to improve memory in adults with mild cognitive impairment: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study</a>,” was authored by Hari Prakash Rai and Deo Nidhi Mishra.</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/similarity-in-long%E2%80%91term-romantic-couples-probably-matters-less-than-we-think/" 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;">Similarity in long‑term romantic couples probably matters less than we think</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jun 27th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People have long believed that couples who have a lot in common are more satisfied and stay together longer. But a new review of nearly 340 studies finds that this popular idea may not be as strong as many assume. The review, published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075251349720" target="_blank">Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</a></em>, shows that while people often value feeling like their partner is similar to them, actual similarity across traits like personality, interests, or background has only a modest and inconsistent link with better relationship outcomes.</p>
<p>The idea that “birds of a feather flock together” is deeply rooted in Western ideas about romance and guides online dating platforms and everyday thinking about relationships. At the same time, some psychologists have argued that differences can balance couples out, making relationships richer and stronger. The available evidence has been scattered, making it hard to draw a firm conclusion about the role that similarity plays. The researchers wanted to unite these threads of evidence and understand how both actual and perceived similarity relate to long‑term relationship satisfaction and stability.</p>
<p>“I’ve always been interested in understanding what predicts compatibility between different people and whether similarity is important for this,” said study author Annika From, a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan. “However, despite the fact that people have strong beliefs about the importance of similarity (or the importance of having a dissimilar partner who balances you out) and that researchers have been studying this topic for decades, we still have little consensus as a field about whether similarity matters. This paper aimed to find a more conclusive answer.” </p>
<p>To do this, the researchers conducted what is called a scoping review, a method suited for making sense of a very large and diverse body of literature. They searched four academic databases for articles published in English that examined established couples, focusing only on studies that measured long‑term characteristics, such as personality or interests, and connected them to outcomes like satisfaction, stability, or divorce. </p>
<p>They started by identifying over 7,600 studies. After removing duplicates and screening for relevance, they narrowed the sample down to 339 articles published between 1937 and 2024. These studies came from across the globe, although more than half were conducted in the United States and the rest were primarily from other Western countries.</p>
<p>The review included couples from many different walks of life, though most were heterosexual and married. The researchers looked at studies that measured actual similarity, where both partners completed questionnaires about themselves, as well as perceived similarity, where one person rated how similar they felt to their partner. </p>
<p>The review captured six domains of similarity: beliefs and values, demographics and background, lifestyle and interests, personality, physical characteristics, and romantic habits. Most studies looked at only one of these areas, making direct comparisons challenging.</p>
<p>To understand how researchers quantified similarity, the review assessed a range of statistical methods, from basic matching approaches that grouped couples with comparable scores, to more advanced analyses that accounted for overlap between couples’ characteristics and general trends across people. The researchers also examined how statistical controls for individual tendencies or stereotype effects impacted the results. They found that studies using robust statistical methods tended to report weaker connections between actual similarity and relationship outcomes.</p>
<p>The results were largely mixed. In studies that calculated actual similarity, most found no strong link between being alike and having a higher-quality or more stable relationship. The review identified very few instances where actual similarity clearly predicted better outcomes across domains. </p>
<p>The strongest evidence was for similarity in demographics, such as race or education, but even this was far from universal. Meanwhile, perceived similarity appeared to be more important. Studies in this category were far more likely to find that seeing one’s partner as similar was associated with higher satisfaction and stability.</p>
<p>Closer inspection revealed that statistical methods shaped the results. Studies relying on basic matching approaches often found significant benefits for actual similarity, but those using methods that accounted for confounding variables tended to find weaker or no effects. </p>
<p>Studies that adjusted for a person’s general tendency to rate themselves highly or the general trend for people to pick others like themselves were less likely to find benefits from actual similarity. This suggests that much of the evidence for the benefits of actual similarity may be influenced by how the data were analyzed.</p>
<p>The review also tested whether certain characteristics acted as moderators, making the link between similarity and outcomes stronger or weaker. The researchers looked at gender, marital status, and location, finding little evidence that any of these factors reliably shaped the results. The biggest difference came from statistical method. Analyses using self-reported perceptions of similarity were much more likely to find a link between similarity and satisfaction, whereas more complex statistical methods rarely did.</p>
<p>The researchers conducted sensitivity analyses as well, estimating the smallest effect sizes that the studies in their review could reliably detect. They found that many studies, especially those with null results, were only powered to detect relatively large effects. This means that smaller benefits of similarity could have gone unnoticed in some studies, making it challenging to draw firm conclusions about the role of actual or perceived similarity.</p>
<p>This review highlights a significant paradox in how people understand long‑term relationships. Despite a strong belief in the benefits of being alike, the evidence does not clearly support actual similarity as a strong or universal factor in determining how well couples fare over time. The review suggests that perceptions of similarity matter more than measurable overlap, hinting at deeper questions about why this is the case.</p>
<p>“We do not see evidence that being similar to your romantic partner affects your relationship quality or whether or not you stay together with your partner,” From told PsyPost. “This is true across different domains of similarity, such as demographics, beliefs and values, and lifestyle. However, there is more evidence that perceived similarity (thinking you are similar to your partner) is positive for relationships.”</p>
<p>The review has some limitations. Its focus was primarily on studies conducted in English and published in peer‑reviewed journals, which may have overlooked relevant work conducted in other languages or settings. The review also concentrated on long‑term couples and trait‑like characteristics, making it unclear how these findings apply to early dating relationships or other forms of interpersonal connections, such as friendships or work collaborations.</p>
<p>“As this is a scoping review, we present a comprehensive overview of the research that has been done on this topic,” From explained. “However, there are many different ways that similarity has been studied, and some studies may be more representative and use better methods than others. Additionally, this work is limited in its ability to investigate potential moderators, so future work should look into whether there are more specific cases when similarity may matter.”</p>
<p>“Our main finding presents an interesting tension—that perceptions of similarity may be important, though there is little evidence that actual similarity is. I hope to explore why these perceptions matter, how they form, and if they can be changed in future work.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075251349720" target="_blank">Does similarity matter? A scoping review of perceived and actual similarity in romantic couples</a>,” was authoerd by Annika From, Emily Diamond, Nazanin Kafaee, Miranda Reynaga, Robin S. Edelstein, and Amie M. Gordon.</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>