<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/large-cross-cultural-study-finds-your-body-count-affects-your-desirability-with-little-evidence-of-gender-bias/" 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;">Large cross-cultural study finds your “body count” affects your desirability, with little evidence of gender bias</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People often say the past matters in relationships—but new research suggests it may matter in surprisingly consistent ways. A large cross-cultural study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-12607-1" target="_blank">Scientific Reports</a></em> provides evidence that people tend to view potential long-term partners less favorably when they have had many previous sexual partners. This pattern held across 15 samples in 11 countries, and the researchers found little support for a sexual double standard: men and women evaluated extensive sexual histories similarly.</p>
<p>The study was led by <a href="https://andrewthomas.org/" target="_blank">Andrew G. Thomas</a> of Swansea University, alongside an international team of collaborators from institutions across Europe, Asia, Australia, and the Americas. Their aim was to explore the way sexual history—including the number of sexual partners and the timing of those encounters—influences perceptions of someone’s desirability as a long-term partner. </p>
<p>“There are a couple of things that inspired me to pursue this line of research,” Thomas told PsyPost. “First and foremost, discussion of sexual history (‘body count’) online is quite rampant and often quite toxic. It’s oversimplified, riddled with double standards, and lacks nuance. I think this type of research is interesting because it can help answer some key questions around a subject area that people clearly care about, but in a balanced and thoughtful way. </p>
<p>“The second reason is that I wanted to build on <a href="https://www.psypost.org/study-finds-number-past-sexual-partners-large-effect-attractiveness/" target="_blank">our previous work from 2016</a>, which just focused on number of past partners. That study found some really interesting evidence of a lack of sexual double standards and also that people prefer a mate with a bit of a past, but not too much.”</p>
<p>“Two things stuck with me from that earlier research. The first was the idea that people use ‘the number’ in different ways, and that there are contextual factors that can influence how it’s appraised. For example, if someone has had four sexual partners in the last six months, most people would evaluate that very differently to someone who’s had four partners over the last 10 years.” </p>
<p>“The second point was that our original study was only conducted in the United Kingdom. We wanted to know whether what we found was a specifically British phenomenon or something more universal. So, as with much of my work, I was interested in doing a cross-cultural follow-up.”</p>
<p>The researchers conducted three studies involving a total of 5,331 participants. The first study recruited heterosexual adults in the UK via social media. The second expanded to include British and Greek participants of all sexual orientations. The third was the most ambitious, bringing in over 4,500 participants from 11 countries across five global regions. These included China, Australia, Norway, the Czech Republic, Brazil, Slovakia, Italy, Poland, and the United States, among others.</p>
<p>In each study, participants were shown visual representations of fictional suitors’ sexual histories. These images depicted a series of vertical lines, each representing a sexual partner, spaced across a timeline from sexual debut to six months before the present. Some timelines showed an increase in sexual activity over time, others a decrease, and some a steady pattern. Participants were asked how willing they would be to pursue a long-term relationship with the individual represented by each timeline. Three total partner numbers were shown: four, twelve, and thirty-six.</p>
<p>Participants also completed a measure of sociosexuality, which assesses openness to uncommitted sexual relationships. This allowed the researchers to explore whether people’s mating strategies influenced their judgments of others’ sexual histories.</p>
<p>Across all three studies, a consistent pattern emerged: people preferred partners with fewer past sexual partners. Willingness to pursue a long-term relationship declined significantly as partner numbers increased from four to twelve, and again from twelve to thirty-six. This effect was strong across cultures, with only minor differences in effect size. For example, in China, men showed slightly more tolerance than women for partners with higher numbers of past sexual partners, but this was not a widespread trend. Men and women both showed this pattern, and sex differences were minimal and inconsistent.</p>
<p>Beyond the sheer number of partners, the timing of those encounters played a significant role. Participants expressed more willingness to date someone whose sexual activity had slowed down over time compared to someone whose activity had increased or remained steady. This effect was especially pronounced when the total number of past partners was high. When someone had many past partners but most of those encounters were in the more distant past, they were judged more favorably than someone whose encounters were more recent.</p>
<p>“The most important takeaway from our findings is that, almost universally, people do pay attention to the past sexual history of their prospective partners,” Thomas explained. “Generally speaking, that tracks risk. People with a large number of past partners may have a greater interest in casual sex, may be less interested in settling down, might be at higher risk of sexually transmitted diseases etc. We found that pattern in nearly every culture, and it may well reflect part of our evolved mating psychology for balancing risk when selecting mates. That’s the first big finding: cross-cultural consistency. The second is that timing matters. The number of past partners is evaluated more favorably if someone shows a pattern of slowing down and having fewer new partners over time.”</p>
<p>“Those time effects don’t eliminate the influence of past partner number, but they do soften it. That’s good news for someone who may feel nervous about having an adventurous past, because time and a clear commitment to long-term relationships can counteract some of the bias against a large number of past partners. Another important takeaway is that we found virtually no evidence of a sexual double standard.” </p>
<p>“People judged men and women in the same way, and we found that across countries and cultures,” Thomas said. “Time and again, when we ask participants what society at large thinks, people expect a sexual double standard—men’s histories overlooked while women are judged more harshly. But when we ask individuals to make their own judgments, and when we look at what people actually do, we find no evidence of such a standard. That’s a really interesting distinction.”</p>
<p>Sociosexuality also moderated the results. People who scored higher in sociosexuality tended to judge suitors with many partners more leniently. However, even these participants preferred patterns showing a decrease in sexual activity over time. This suggests that while some individuals are more permissive overall, the broader patterns still influence their judgments.</p>
<p>“One of the findings that challenged my expectations came from including a measure of sociosexuality (people’s interest in short-term mating),” Thomas remarked. “I expected that those high in sociosexuality would show a reversed pattern, reasoning that if someone is very interested in casual sex, then a partner with many recent partners might signal openness to casual sex with them. But that wasn’t the case. We found the same effects: a higher number of past partners, especially recent ones, led to less favorable evaluations. The only difference was that for individuals high in sociosexuality, the negative effects were somewhat muted, though not reversed.”</p>
<p>But the study, like all research, has some caveats. While the study had a large and culturally diverse sample, it did not use nationally representative populations. Most participants were young adults and were recruited online. The visual format of the sexual history task, while offering control and clarity, does not fully replicate how sexual history is shared in real-world interactions, where information is often conveyed through stories, social media, or reputation.</p>
<p>Another limitation is that the study focused solely on long-term relationship desirability. Future research could explore whether these effects differ in short-term contexts, where risk perceptions may be different, and sex differences may be more pronounced. The authors also suggest investigating how sexual history interacts with other traits such as physical attractiveness, intelligence, or kindness, which are often weighed together in real-world mate choice.</p>
<p>“We did a good job gathering cross-cultural samples, but they could have been more standardized and more representative within each country,” Thomas told PsyPost. “There’s also scope to include more rural samples. Looking forward, an important next step is to investigate how sexual history information is integrated with other valued traits like humor, physical attractiveness, kindness, intelligence, and so on. Another is to expand beyond just number and timing, to consider aspects such as the type of partners someone has had or the intentions behind those relationships. People’s sexual histories are rich, and there are many potential angles to explore.</p>
<p>“In terms of long-term goals, I’d like to see sexual history placed more firmly on the map of mate-preference research. We’ve shown that it’s important and almost universally considered, but most mate-preference studies don’t look deeply into sexual history. They focus on things like attractiveness or intelligence, and sometimes include chastity, but that’s only part of the story. In modern Western societies, most people aren’t chaste, and there’s far more nuance to sexual history that could be integrated into wider mate-preference work. I’d also like this research to help counter some of the toxic “manosphere” narratives around concepts like ‘body count.’ Those narratives often rely on presumed sexual double standards, but our findings point strongly to the contrary.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-12607-1" target="_blank">Sexual partner number and distribution over time affect long-term partner evaluation: evidence from 11 countries across 5 continents</a>,” was authored by Andrew G. Thomas, William Costello, Mons Bendixen, Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, Menelaos Apostolou, Klára Bártová, Ondřej Burýšek, Rob Lowe, Peter Jonason, Marta Kowal, Yago Luksevicius de Moraes, O. Jiaqing, Piotr Sorokowski, Danielle Sulikowski, Zuzana Štěrbová, Jaroslava Varella Valentova, Marco Antonio Correa Varella, Yan Wang, Arnaud Wisman, Paula Wright, and Steve Stewart-Williams.</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/covid-19-lockdowns-linked-to-lasting-disruptions-in-teen-brain-and-body-systems/" 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;">COVID-19 lockdowns linked to lasting disruptions in teen brain and body systems</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 11th 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/10.1038/s41398-025-03485-2" target="_blank">Translational Psychiatry</a></em> has found that adolescents who experienced the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns show significant differences in stress-related biological systems compared to their peers assessed before the pandemic. The new findings suggest that pandemic-related disruptions may have lasting effects on adolescent development at multiple biological levels.</p>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic was an acute and prolonged stressor that dramatically altered daily life. While earlier research had shown sharp increases in adolescent anxiety and depression during the pandemic, much less was known about how this stress affected neurobiological development. </p>
<p>“Adolescence is a critical time developmental period, shaping who youth become as adults,” said study author Justin Ping Yuan, a postdoctoral Health Science Fellow at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center who conducted the research while a PhD student working with Ian Gotlib in <a href="https://snaplab.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">the Stanford Neurodevelopment, Affect, and Psychopathology Lab</a>.</p>
<p>For an entire generation this period was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns. We knew that these experiences adversely affected teens’ mental health, but it wasn’t clear whether they also had an impact on their bodies and brains. That is what drove us to explore this topic,”</p>
<p>Previous studies have shown that early life stress can disrupt the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, increase inflammation, and alter brain development—effects that raise long-term risks for poor mental and physical health. In this context, the researchers aimed to investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic had measurable effects on these same biological systems. </p>
<p>They focused on three stress-sensitive domains: the HPA axis (which regulates cortisol, the body’s primary stress hormone), systemic inflammation (measured via C-reactive protein or CRP), and neural responses to emotionally meaningful stimuli. By comparing adolescents assessed before the pandemic to those assessed after lockdown restrictions ended, the researchers hoped to identify how the experience of the pandemic shaped the biological underpinnings of adolescent stress response.</p>
<p>The study drew from an ongoing longitudinal project at Stanford University that began in 2013. The researchers selected 154 adolescents from the larger cohort, matching 76 participants who were assessed before the pandemic (from 2016 to 2019) with 78 who were assessed after the lockdowns (from October 2020 to March 2022). The groups were matched by age and sex, and did not differ significantly in early life stress, socioeconomic status, race, or pubertal development. Only one participant in the post-lockdown group had contracted COVID-19, allowing the researchers to isolate the effects of the lockdown experience rather than infection itself.</p>
<p>To assess stress physiology, participants provided saliva samples four times per day across two days. These samples were used to calculate total daily cortisol output, as well as the cortisol awakening response (CAR), which reflects the sharp increase in cortisol shortly after waking. Systemic inflammation was assessed via dried blood spots analyzed for CRP levels. Brain function was measured using fMRI while participants completed two tasks: a monetary incentive task that probes reward processing, and an affect labeling task that taps into implicit emotion regulation.</p>
<p>Across all three biological systems, adolescents assessed after the pandemic differed from those assessed before. First, the post-pandemic group showed lower total cortisol production throughout the day. This pattern—reduced area under the curve for cortisol—suggests a dampened HPA axis response, which has previously been associated with chronic stress and prolonged exposure to adversity. There was no difference between the groups in the cortisol awakening response, indicating that specific aspects of cortisol regulation may have been more affected than others.</p>
<p>Second, adolescents in the post-lockdown group had higher levels of CRP, a marker of systemic inflammation. While elevated inflammation is expected in individuals with infection or chronic illness, this finding suggests a stress-related shift toward a pro-inflammatory state in otherwise healthy teens. These immune changes are especially concerning given evidence linking chronic inflammation with increased risk for depression, cardiovascular problems, and other health issues later in life.</p>
<p>Third, the researchers found notable differences in brain activity during the two tasks. Adolescents who had lived through the lockdowns showed reduced activation in the medial prefrontal cortex when receiving monetary rewards, and in the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex when labeling emotional faces. These regions play central roles in motivation, decision-making, and emotional control. </p>
<p>The results suggest that adolescents may have become less responsive to reward and less effective at regulating emotions after experiencing pandemic-related stress. Interestingly, the groups did not differ in activity within the nucleus accumbens, another brain region involved in reward anticipation, suggesting that the effects were specific to certain aspects of the reward and regulation processes.</p>
<p>“Our findings indicate that teens went through a profoundly stressful period during the pandemic, and it appears to have adversely affected their biological functioning, including the development of their brain, HPA axis, and immune systems,” Yuan told PsyPost. “We were surprised by how much the teens who experienced the COVID-19 lockdowns looked biologically like people who have been exposed to significant early life stress or trauma. These traumatic experiences (also referred to as adverse childhood experiences, or ACEs) can have a lasting impact on the body and brain. It was striking to us that youth who experienced the pandemic lockdowns, which spanned a relatively short timeframe, had similar patterns of biological functioning as people exposed to early life stress.”</p>
<p>But as with all research, there are some limitations. The analyses were exploratory and not pre-registered, as the study was not originally designed to test the effects of a global pandemic. Although they used multiple imputation to account for missing data and found consistent results across sensitivity analyses, the sample size was relatively small for a neuroimaging study. </p>
<p>Larger samples will be needed to replicate these findings and examine long-term outcomes. Additionally, the sample was predominantly white and from higher-income households. Adolescents from more disadvantaged backgrounds or marginalized communities may have experienced even greater disruptions during the pandemic, so future research should explore whether similar or more severe biological effects occurred in those groups.</p>
<p>Long-term follow-up will be essential. The authors suggest that the pandemic may have altered the developmental trajectory of today’s adolescents in ways that are not yet fully understood.</p>
<p>“Broadly, these findings suggest that the pandemic and lockdowns changed the course of adolescents’ psychobiological development,” Yuan explained. “It will be important for researchers to understand what this ‘new normal’ might look like longer-term and whether there continue to be adverse effects of the pandemic even now so that we best support youth post-pandemic.”</p>
<p>“A common question we are asked is if these differences are due to COVID infection itself. Only a very small number of the adolescents in our project were actually infected with the COVID-19 virus, but all had experienced the lockdowns. This means that the difficulties in their functioning are not explained by the virus itself, but rather, by having experienced the pandemic and its lockdowns.”</p>
<p>“We also want to express our deep gratitude to our participants and their families,” Yuan added. “Many of them came to in-person sessions during the pandemic to provide blood samples and participate in brain scans, making this research possible.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-025-03485-2" target="_blank">The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on neurobiological functioning in adolescents</a>,” was authored by Justin P. Yuan, Lauren R. Borchers, Yoonji Lee, Jessica L. Buthmann, Saché M. Coury, Julian Joachimsthaler, Emma L. Jaeger, Tiffany C. Ho, and Ian H. Gotlib.</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/kissing-bug-disease-linked-to-higher-risk-of-cognitive-impairment/" 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;">Kissing bug disease linked to higher risk of cognitive impairment</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2025, 20:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People with Chagas disease appear to face a greater risk of cognitive difficulties, including memory and spatial problems, compared to those with other forms of heart failure. A new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0012981" target="_blank">PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases</a></em> suggests that these impairments are not just a byproduct of heart dysfunction, but may stem from direct or indirect effects of the disease on the brain.</p>
<p>Chagas disease is caused by a microscopic parasite called <em>Trypanosoma cruzi</em>, which is most often spread to humans by triatomine insects, sometimes called kissing bugs. The disease is widely recognized as endemic to 21 countries in Latin America, where millions of people are infected. However, <a href="https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/31/9/24-1700_article" target="_blank">recent updates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention</a> and other public health researchers suggest that this geographic framing may be outdated. </p>
<p>Triatomine insects infected with <em>T. cruzi</em> have been found in 32 U.S. states, and multiple locally acquired human cases have been documented—particularly in Texas, where public health officials have reported dozens of autochthonous cases since 2013. The parasite has also been detected in wildlife, domestic animals, and zoo-housed mammals across the southern United States. This body of evidence has led researchers to argue that Chagas disease should be considered endemic, albeit hypoendemic, within the U.S., with stable sylvatic transmission cycles and occasional human infections.</p>
<p>Chagas disease can remain silent for years, but about one-third of infected individuals eventually develop chronic complications. Among the most severe outcomes is Chagas cardiomyopathy, a progressive form of heart disease that can result in heart failure and sudden death.</p>
<p>While the heart-related complications of Chagas disease are well-documented, much less is known about how the infection might affect the brain. Previous studies have hinted at cognitive difficulties among people with Chagas disease, but it has been unclear whether these problems stem directly from the infection or are secondary to cardiac dysfunction, which can impair brain perfusion and promote inflammation. The new study was designed to clarify this relationship by comparing cognitive function in people with heart failure caused by Chagas disease to those with heart failure from other causes.</p>
<p>The researchers recruited 518 patients with heart failure from four hospitals in Brazil. These individuals had heart failure from various causes, including Chagas disease, ischemic heart disease, hypertension, and alcoholism. Of the total group, 250 individuals had tested positive for Chagas disease. All participants were over 18 years of age and had no history of stroke, dementia, or other major neurological disorders. Those taking anticoagulants or unable to consent were excluded.</p>
<p>Each participant underwent a battery of neuropsychological tests that assessed various aspects of cognitive function, including memory, attention, executive function, and visuospatial abilities. The tests were standardized and adjusted for age using norms from Brazilian and U.S. populations. The researchers also collected demographic and clinical data, including left ventricular ejection fraction, a common measure of heart function.</p>
<p>To isolate the effect of Chagas disease on cognition, the researchers used statistical models that adjusted for confounding variables such as age, sex, educational level, and heart function. This allowed them to compare cognitive outcomes between patients with and without Chagas disease who had otherwise similar health profiles.</p>
<p>The study found that cognitive impairment was more common among individuals with Chagas disease compared to those with other types of heart failure. Specifically, 27.1% of the Chagas group met criteria for global cognitive impairment, compared to 13.1% in the non-Chagas group. The most pronounced deficits were in memory and visuospatial domains. People with Chagas disease performed worse on tests that required recalling visual patterns, drawing complex figures, or processing spatial information.</p>
<p>Importantly, the association between Chagas disease and cognitive impairment remained even after adjusting for potential confounders. Chagas disease was associated with nearly double the odds of global cognitive impairment and a 56% higher likelihood of problems in visuospatial tasks. Memory impairment also appeared more frequently in the Chagas group, although this association did not remain statistically significant in the fully adjusted analysis.</p>
<p>The pattern of impairment seen in this study differed from what is typically observed in other brain disorders. For example, Alzheimer’s disease usually begins with memory deficits, while vascular dementia tends to affect executive functioning more severely. In contrast, the Chagas-related cognitive issues appeared to impact memory and visuospatial abilities most consistently, suggesting a distinct underlying mechanism.</p>
<p>Participants with Chagas disease had better heart function overall than those with other cardiomyopathies, as measured by left ventricular ejection fraction. This further supports the idea that the observed cognitive deficits may not simply be a byproduct of poor cardiac output, but could reflect a more direct effect of the infection on the brain.</p>
<p>Although the study was not designed to determine the exact mechanisms behind the cognitive decline, the authors offer several plausible explanations for the cognitive effects. One possibility is that chronic inflammation linked to Chagas disease could affect the brain directly. Prior research has shown that inflammatory markers such as interferon-gamma and tumor necrosis factor are elevated in Chagas disease and may contribute to brain changes. Another possibility is that the parasite itself may invade brain tissue, as suggested by animal studies that have found behavioral changes associated with brain parasite load and altered serotonin signaling.</p>
<p>While the study excluded individuals with known strokes, the authors acknowledge that small, “silent” brain infarcts could still be present and contribute to cognitive problems. Brain atrophy, or shrinkage, has also been reported in people with Chagas disease and might reflect chronic damage. These factors are now being explored further in an ongoing neuroimaging component of the same research project.</p>
<p>As with any cross-sectional study, the research cannot definitively establish a cause-and-effect relationship between Chagas disease and cognitive impairment. It is possible that unmeasured factors, such as lifetime socioeconomic status or early-life educational opportunities, might contribute to the observed differences. The researchers did adjust for educational attainment, which is often used as a proxy for socioeconomic background, but some residual confounding may remain.</p>
<p>The study also did not include a healthy control group without heart disease, which would have provided additional context. However, the decision to focus on patients with heart failure was intentional, as it allowed the researchers to directly assess whether Chagas disease has an independent impact on cognition when heart function is already compromised.</p>
<p>The authors suggest that future studies should include brain imaging and longitudinal follow-up to better understand how cognitive decline progresses in Chagas disease and whether it can be slowed or reversed. Such research could help inform strategies for screening and intervention, especially in regions where the disease remains endemic.</p>
<p>This study adds to a growing body of research indicating that Chagas disease affects more than just the heart. Cognitive symptoms may go unrecognized in clinical settings, especially in low-resource areas where neuropsychological testing is not routinely available. If confirmed by further studies, these findings may call for the development of new guidelines for cognitive screening and support in patients with Chagas disease.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0012981" target="_blank">Cognitive impairment in Chagas disease patients in Brazil, 2007–2021: A cross-sectional study</a>,” was authored by Carla J. Serrano, Maria E. Lisbôa-Marques, Thiago Cerqueira-Silva, Leila S. B. Santos, Murilo A. Oliveira, Iuri Ferreira Felix, Paulo R. S. P. de Sousa, Leonardo G. M. Cardoso, Pedro J. R. Muiños, Renata M. Maia, Marília B. Catto, Eric Aguiar Wittlich, Lucy Rodrigues-Ribeiro, Victor L. P. P. Botelho, Maria Carmo P. Nunes, Antonio Luiz P. Ribeiro, Lucas C. Barbosa e Silva, Roque Aras, Karen L. Furie, and Jamary Oliveira Filho.</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/air-pollution-worsens-alzheimers-brain-pathology-and-accelerates-cognitive-decline/" 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;">Air pollution worsens Alzheimer’s brain pathology and accelerates cognitive decline</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 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="http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2025.3316" target="_blank">JAMA Neurology</a></em> reveals that exposure to high levels of fine particulate air pollution may worsen the progression of Alzheimer’s disease. Post-mortem analysis of brain tissue showed that individuals who lived in areas with more polluted air had a greater buildup of the toxic proteins that define the disease and experienced a faster decline in their cognitive and functional abilities compared to those with less exposure. This research provides the first direct evidence from human brain tissue linking the severity of Alzheimer’s pathology to ambient air pollution.</p>
<p>Alzheimer’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that gradually destroys memory and other important mental functions. The disease is physically characterized by the abnormal accumulation of two proteins in the brain: amyloid-beta, which forms sticky plaques between nerve cells, and tau, which creates toxic tangles inside them. Together, these plaques and tangles disrupt communication between brain cells and trigger a cascade of events that leads to cell death and brain atrophy. While age and genetics, particularly the APOE ε4 gene variant, are known risk factors, scientists are increasingly looking at environmental factors that might contribute to the disease.</p>
<p>Previous research has suggested a connection between air pollution and an increased risk of developing dementia. Specifically, many studies have focused on fine particulate matter, known as PM2.5. These are microscopic particles, smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, that are released from sources like vehicle exhaust, industrial processes, and wildfires. Because of their tiny size, they can be inhaled deep into the lungs, enter the bloodstream, and potentially cross the protective blood-brain barrier to affect the central nervous system. </p>
<p>Despite the growing evidence linking PM2.5 to cognitive problems, the biological mechanisms have remained unclear. Researchers at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania sought to fill this knowledge gap. They wanted to determine if there was a direct, observable relationship between a person’s exposure to PM2.5 and the actual amount of Alzheimer’s-related damage present in their brain after death. By examining brain tissue directly, which is considered the gold standard for diagnosing and staging neurodegenerative diseases, they hoped to establish a more definitive link between pollution, brain pathology, and the clinical symptoms of dementia.</p>
<p>To conduct their investigation, the research team utilized data from the University of Pennsylvania’s Integrated Neurodegenerative Disease database. This database contains comprehensive information from individuals who had consented to donate their brains for research upon their death. The study included 602 deceased individuals, most of whom had been diagnosed with a form of dementia, primarily Alzheimer’s disease or Parkinson’s disease with dementia. </p>
<p>The participants were predominantly White, highly educated, and had a median age of 78 at the time of death. For each individual, the researchers obtained their last known residential address. They then used a sophisticated and publicly available prediction model to estimate the annual average concentration of PM2.5 at that specific location for the year leading up to the person’s death. This provided a snapshot of each participant’s recent environmental exposure.</p>
<p>Following autopsy, a detailed neuropathological assessment was performed on each brain. Pathologists systematically measured the extent of Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change (ADNC). This included quantifying the amount and distribution of amyloid plaques using a measure called the Thal amyloid phase and the spread of tau tangles using the Braak stage. They also looked at the density of amyloid plaques with the CERAD score. These individual measures were combined to generate an overall ADNC level, categorized as none, low, intermediate, or high. </p>
<p>The pathologists also searched for evidence of other common brain pathologies associated with dementia, such as Lewy bodies (linked to Parkinson’s disease and Lewy body dementia) and various forms of cerebrovascular disease, including small strokes. For a subset of the participants who had regular clinical evaluations before their death, the researchers had access to their scores on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). This is a comprehensive tool used to measure the severity of dementia across six domains, including memory, judgment, personal care, and community affairs, with higher scores indicating more severe impairment.</p>
<p>The researchers found a strong association between higher PM2.5 exposure and more severe Alzheimer’s pathology. For every one-microgram-per-cubic-meter increase in the estimated annual PM2.5 concentration, the odds of having more advanced brain pathology rose substantially. </p>
<p>Specifically, the odds of having a more widespread distribution of amyloid plaques (higher Thal phase) increased by 17%, and the odds of having more advanced tau tangles (higher Braak stage) increased by 20%. The overall level of Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change was 19% more likely to be in a higher severity category with each unit increase in PM2.5. This connection appeared to be specific to Alzheimer’s pathology, as the researchers did not find a similar association between air pollution and the severity of Lewy body disease or another proteinopathy called LATE.</p>
<p>When the team examined the clinical data, the results were equally compelling. In the subgroup of individuals with available dementia severity scores, higher PM2.5 exposure was associated with worse cognitive and functional impairment. Each one-unit increase in PM2.5 was linked to a 0.48-point increase on the 18-point CDR-SB scale, a clinically meaningful difference. </p>
<p>For participants with multiple assessments over time, the study showed that higher pollution exposure was also associated with a faster rate of decline. To connect these findings, the researchers performed a mediation analysis. This statistical technique allowed them to explore whether the effect of air pollution on dementia symptoms was explained by the changes in the brain. They discovered that the increased Alzheimer’s pathology was a major intermediary. </p>
<p>The analysis estimated that about 63% of the negative impact of PM2.5 on a person’s dementia severity score was directly attributable to the worsening of amyloid and tau pathology in the brain. This suggests that air pollution does not just coincide with cognitive decline; it may actively contribute to it by accelerating the underlying disease process.</p>
<p>“This study shows that air pollution doesn’t just increase the risk of dementia—it actually makes Alzheimer’s disease worse,” said Edward Lee, co-director of Penn’s Institute on Aging. “As researchers continue to search for new treatments, it’s important to uncover all of the factors that contribute to the disease, including the influence of the environment in which they live.”</p>
<p>But the authors note some limitations of their work. The study cohort was not representative of the general population, as participants were almost all White and highly educated, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other demographic groups. The participants were also drawn from clinical research programs focused on dementia, meaning they were already enriched for Alzheimer’s and had relatively low rates of cerebrovascular disease. This focus might have made it harder to detect any potential links between air pollution and vascular-related brain injury. </p>
<p>Additionally, pollution exposure was estimated based on the last known residential address and did not account for a person’s entire life history of exposure or time spent away from home. The study was also observational, so it shows an association rather than proving a direct cause-and-effect relationship. </p>
<p>Future research is needed to replicate these findings in larger, more diverse population-based autopsy cohorts. Mechanistic studies are also warranted to understand exactly how inhaled pollutants might damage the brain and promote the formation of plaques and tangles. Despite these limitations, the study provides strong evidence that air quality is a meaningful factor in the progression of Alzheimer’s disease.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2025.3316" target="_blank">Ambient Air Pollution and the Severity of Alzheimer Disease Neuropathology</a>,” was authored by Boram Kim, Kaitlin Blam, Holly Elser, Sharon X. Xie,Vivianna M. Van Deerlin, Trevor M. Penning, Daniel Weintraub, David J. Irwin, Lauren M. Massimo, Corey T. McMillan, Dawn Mechanic-Hamilton, David A. Wolk, and Edward B. Lee.</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/antipsychotics-cause-reversible-structural-brain-changes-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;">Antipsychotics cause reversible structural brain changes, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A neuroimaging study conducted in the United Kingdom found that taking the antipsychotic amisulpride (400 mg/day) for one week increased the volume of the left putamen and right caudate regions of the brain. Similarly, taking aripiprazole (10 mg/day) for the same period increased the volume of the right putamen. These changes reversed within weeks after participants stopped taking the medications. The paper was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-025-02120-4"><em>Neuropsychopharmacology</em></a>.</p>
<p>Antipsychotics are a class of psychiatric medications primarily used to manage psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and sometimes bipolar disorder. They work by altering the activity of neurotransmitters in the brain, especially dopamine, which plays a key role in thought, mood, and perception. Currently, blocking dopamine-mediated neural transmission is the standard approach in the pharmacological treatment of psychotic disorders. Most antipsychotics achieve this by blocking dopamine D₂ receptors, which helps reduce hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized thinking.</p>
<p>Neuroimaging studies have consistently shown that certain brain regions differ in volume in people with psychotic disorders. However, these individuals are also typically taking antipsychotic medications. This has made it difficult to determine whether observed structural changes in the brain are due to the illness itself or the effects of treatment. For example, people with more severe or long-standing psychotic symptoms often receive higher doses of antipsychotics over longer periods—factors that may independently influence brain structure.</p>
<p>To address this issue, study author Pierluigi Selvaggi and colleagues investigated the effects of repeated exposure to antipsychotics in healthy individuals using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). They focused on two widely used antipsychotic medications: amisulpride and aripiprazole.</p>
<p>Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic that selectively blocks dopamine D₂ and D₃ receptors, particularly in limbic regions of the brain. At low doses, it can enhance dopamine activity, potentially improving mood and alleviating negative symptoms such as social withdrawal. At higher doses, it reduces dopamine signaling and can help alleviate positive symptoms like hallucinations and delusions.</p>
<p>Aripiprazole, in contrast, is a dopamine partial agonist. This means it both stimulates and blocks dopamine receptors, depending on the local dopamine environment. Its unique mechanism helps stabilize dopamine activity—reducing it where dopamine is excessive and enhancing it where dopamine is low. Aripiprazole also interacts with serotonin receptors, which contributes to its antidepressant and mood-stabilizing properties.</p>
<p>The study involved 48 healthy volunteers of both sexes, with an average age of 27. Twenty-one were male.</p>
<p>Participants were randomly divided into two equal groups. One group received amisulpride; the other received aripiprazole. Within each group, participants were further randomized to take either the active drug for one week followed by a week of placebo, or vice versa. The placebo capsules were indistinguishable from the active drug to ensure that neither participants nor researchers knew which was being administered at any given time—a design known as double-blind crossover.</p>
<p>The results showed that one week of amisulpride led to a statistically significant increase in the volume of the left putamen and right caudate, compared to both baseline and placebo. Aripiprazole increased the volume of the right putamen compared to placebo. These volumetric changes were not observed in other brain regions, and no cortical changes were detected.</p>
<p>Importantly, the changes reversed within weeks of stopping the medications, indicating that the effects were transient.</p>
<p>“Short-term exposure to either one of two different antipsychotics results in a transient increase in striatal volume measured with T1-weighted MRI [a type of magnetic resonance imaging sequence that produces high-resolution anatomical images in which fat appears bright and fluid appears dark] that normalizes rapidly on stopping treatment without cortical changes. Our findings suggest that striatal volumetric MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] differences detected in people with schizophrenia taking antipsychotics are, at least in part, attributable to pharmacological effects,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the effects of the two studied antipsychotics on brain structure. However, it should be noted that the study was conducted on very small groups of participants meaning that only changes that were quite substantial were statistically detectable. Additionally, study participants were all healthy. Results on individuals suffering from psychotic disorders may not be identical.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-025-02120-4">Antipsychotics cause reversible structural brain changes within one week</a>,” was authored by Pierluigi Selvaggi, Martin Osugo, Uzma Zahid, Ottavia Dipasquale, Thomas Whitehurst, Ellis Onwordi, George Chapman, Valeria Finelli, Ben Statton, Tobias C. Wood, Matthew B. Wall, Robin Murray, Mitul A. Mehta, Tiago Reis Marques, and Oliver D. Howes.</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/psychiatrists-describe-the-rumpelstiltskin-effect-the-surprising-power-of-simply-receiving-a-diagnosis/" 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;">Psychiatrists describe the “Rumpelstiltskin effect”: The surprising power of simply receiving a diagnosis</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Receiving a clinical diagnosis can sometimes feel like a turning point. For many patients, simply being told the name of a condition can bring immediate relief, even before any treatment begins. A new review article published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2025.10137" target="_blank">BJPsych Bulletin</a></em> explores this phenomenon, proposing that the act of diagnosis itself can be therapeutic. The authors call this the “Rumpelstiltskin effect”—a reference to the power of naming in folklore—and argue that the medical community has largely overlooked this aspect of diagnosis as a distinct and potentially meaningful intervention.</p>
<p>The review, co-authored by Awais Aftab, a psychiatrist and assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University, and Alan Levinovitz, a professor of philosophy and religion at James Madison University, draws on clinical anecdotes, folklore, and emerging scientific research to frame diagnosis not just as a label, but as a transformative psychological event.</p>
<p>Although clinicians regularly observe the psychological effects of diagnosis, this specific phenomenon has gone unnamed in scientific literature. The authors argue that recognizing and defining the Rumpelstiltskin effect allows researchers and practitioners to better understand its implications—both positive and negative.</p>
<p>“I’ve been interested in conceptual issues around diagnosis and classification for a long time, and this has been an area of academic focus,” explained Awais Aftab, who authors the Substack newsletter <a href="https://www.psychiatrymargins.com/" target="_blank">Psychiatry at the Margins</a>. “Alan Levinovitz is a brilliant professor of philosophy and religion who has been interested in our relationships with diagnoses, and it was Levinovitz who first realized that the phenomenon of experiencing relief from a diagnosis doesn’t have a formal name or definition. He suggested we team up to work on this.”</p>
<p>To illustrate, the authors describe a hypothetical case: a successful academic who has long struggled with inattention and self-criticism finally receives a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adulthood. The diagnosis reframes a lifetime of self-blame and internalized shame, offering an alternative narrative and unlocking a sense of peace. This kind of reaction, the authors note, is common in psychiatric and medical settings but remains poorly studied.</p>
<p>The term “Rumpelstiltskin effect” is drawn from the well-known fairy tale in which a young woman is freed from a magical bargain only after learning the name of the mysterious creature who helped her. The authors point out that this motif—where naming something grants power over it—is found in cultures around the world. From ancient exorcisms to modern psychiatric practice, naming a hidden force has often been seen as a step toward control or healing.</p>
<p>“I personally hadn’t appreciated the deep cultural roots of Rumpelstiltskin style folktales,” Aftab told PsyPost. “This type of folktale (Aarne-Thompson Tale Type 500) appears in numerous cultures. The details vary, but the theme is identical. Discover the esoteric name, control, and destroy the source of suffering. Traditional exorcism works according to a similar principle.”</p>
<p>In medicine, the act of naming a condition often changes how a person sees their own experiences. The authors suggest that diagnosis serves several overlapping functions. First, it provides a clinical lens through which previously confusing or stigmatized experiences can be reinterpreted. Second, it resolves ambiguity by organizing scattered symptoms into a coherent story. Third, it can create a sense of connection by linking patients with support groups or communities of others who share the diagnosis. Finally, diagnosis can evoke psychological effects similar to those seen in placebo treatments, such as relief, hope, and expectancy of care.</p>
<p>Evidence from recent reviews supports this view. One scoping review found that diagnostic labels often help people feel validated and empowered, while also aiding in communication and future planning. Another review focused on young people found that psychiatric labels helped reduce self-blame and increased social acceptance. In both cases, diagnosis did not merely describe symptoms—it changed how those symptoms were experienced and understood.</p>
<p>Experimental studies suggest that even the style in which a diagnosis is delivered can influence outcomes. For example, patients with medically unexplained symptoms reported greater improvement when their physician provided a clear label and expressed confidence in recovery, even in the absence of treatment. These findings suggest that the language and ritual of diagnosis may carry psychological weight, acting as a kind of intervention in their own right.</p>
<p>“Medical diagnosis is a powerful tool,” Aftab said. “The Rumpelstiltskin effect reminds us that the symbolic, the cultural, and the narrative are woven into the fabric of medicine. Clinicians should be aware that part of a patient’s improvement may stem from the naming itself, not just the treatment. When a patient seeks a specific diagnosis, it can be useful to explore what they expect that diagnosis to give them and to consider whether those needs can be met alongside or apart from the label.”</p>
<p>The authors propose several mechanisms that might explain the Rumpelstiltskin effect. One is what philosopher Miranda Fricker calls a “hermeneutical breakthrough”—a moment when someone gains access to a concept that helps them make sense of a previously inexpressible experience. For example, understanding one’s emotional struggles as “postpartum depression” instead of “personal failure” can change both how a person feels and how others respond.</p>
<p>Another pathway involves learned associations. In many cultural contexts, receiving a diagnosis is closely followed by care and support. Over time, this association between naming and healing may condition people to experience relief upon diagnosis, regardless of whether treatment follows. The act of diagnosis also functions as a culturally sanctioned ritual, often carried out by a figure of authority in a setting imbued with expectations of care.</p>
<p>Finally, the authors point to the concept of affect labeling, which refers to the emotional benefits of putting feelings into words. In this view, diagnosis functions not only as a medical classification but also as a psychological tool for emotional regulation. Naming what one is going through can reduce distress simply by making it more manageable and less mysterious.</p>
<p>“We are describing a phenomenon; our proposed mechanisms are hypothetical, and we don’t know how often this effect happens, what its magnitude is like, and how various from diagnosis to diagnosis,” Aftab noted.</p>
<p>While the review focuses on the therapeutic potential of diagnosis, the authors caution that naming is not always beneficial. A diagnosis can bring stigma, fear, or a sense of permanence that might not reflect reality. In some cases, patients may adopt the diagnosis as a fixed part of their identity, potentially limiting their sense of agency or reinforcing maladaptive behaviors. Others may feel misunderstood or pathologized, particularly if their experiences carry cultural or spiritual significance that clashes with medical interpretations.</p>
<p>Diagnosis can also lead to iatrogenic harm through unnecessary treatment or overmedicalization. Some individuals may become discouraged if the promised relief of diagnosis is not followed by effective care. Social and internalized stigma can further complicate the picture, particularly in psychiatric contexts where diagnostic categories are often contested or poorly understood.</p>
<p>The authors call for more systematic research on the Rumpelstiltskin effect. They suggest that both qualitative and quantitative studies are needed to understand how often this phenomenon occurs, what mechanisms underlie it, and how its effects compare to better-known psychological interventions like the placebo effect. Future studies could also explore the relationship between diagnosis and self-diagnosis, especially in the digital age where online communities and mental health content are increasingly shaping how people understand their struggles.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2025.10137" target="_blank">The Rumpelstiltskin effect: therapeutic repercussions of clinical diagnosis</a>,” was published August 22, 2025.</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/students-rate-identical-lectures-differently-based-on-professors-gender-researchers-find/" 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;">Students rate identical lectures differently based on professor’s gender, researchers find</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Sep 10th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Students may judge professors differently based on gender, even when the teaching is identical. A study in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2025.2551237" target="_blank">Philosophical Psychology</a></em> provides evidence that implicit stereotypes continue to shape evaluations in ways that could affect academic careers.</p>
<p>The study was motivated by concerns about the fairness of student evaluations of teaching, particularly in disciplines like philosophy, which remain heavily male-dominated. Across European academia, women account for a substantial share of early-career researchers but are still underrepresented at the full professor level. In Italy, for example, women make up only 27% of full professors despite being nearly half of the academic workforce at earlier stages.</p>
<p>Philosophy is one of the disciplines with the most pronounced gender disparities. In Italian philosophy departments, women comprise less than a third of full and associate professors combined. Prior research suggests that fields perceived as “male-typed” tend to carry implicit expectations that ideal performers embody stereotypically masculine traits like assertiveness, confidence, and authority. This can create a double bind for women, who are often penalized for being too assertive while also being judged as less competent when they express communal or nurturing traits.</p>
<p>“Our project began with personal and anecdotal evidence. In our daily experience, we noticed that students often behaved differently depending on whether they were interacting with men or women professors and these patterns varied with the gender of the students themselves,” said study author <a href="https://www.unibo.it/sitoweb/pia.campeggiani2/en" target="_blank">Pia Campeggiani</a>, an associate professor of moral philosophy at the University of Bologna and author of <em><a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/theories-of-emotion-9781350297913/" target="_blank">Theories of Emotion: Expressing, Feeling, Acting</a></em>.</p>
<p>“We wanted to understand whether these impressions were backed up by systematic data and we were surprised to discover that, in the Italian context, no such data existed. This absence in itself seemed telling and it convinced us that we needed to design and conduct our own studies in order to investigate the phenomenon directly.</p>
<p>“Our broader aim is for this research to help build a stronger empirical foundation for institutional policies, which in Italian academia remain largely inadequate for effectively confronting gender discrimination and marginalization. To give just one example of the structural imbalance: in the philosophy department where I work, at Bologna University, the number of women full professors is only one quarter of that of their men colleagues.”</p>
<p>The research team conducted two separate experiments. In both studies, participants were philosophy students or recent graduates from Italian universities. The students were asked to evaluate short lecture excerpts that were identical in content but varied in the gender of the professor attributed to them.</p>
<p>In the first study, 95 participants read four lecture excerpts on philosophical topics, including Aristotle’s ethics and Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic power. Each excerpt was randomly assigned a fictitious male or female name. After reading each passage, participants answered questions about the clarity, interest, perceived competence, self-confidence, care, and overall engagement they felt toward the lecturer. These evaluations mirrored the types of items typically found in real-world student evaluations.</p>
<p>The second study involved 92 participants and used the same lecture excerpts, but this time delivered as audio recordings by voice actors selected to represent typical male and female vocal characteristics. Again, participants evaluated each lecture on the same seven dimensions and completed an additional questionnaire measuring their beliefs about gender roles.</p>
<p>By manipulating only the apparent gender of the professor—either via a name or a voice—the researchers aimed to isolate the effects of gender bias on teaching evaluations.</p>
<p>In the first study, male participants consistently rated lectures more favorably when they were attributed to a man. This was true across several key dimensions, including clarity, interest, competence, self-confidence, and perceived benefit. Men also showed a greater willingness to take a full course with a male professor. The only area where they rated women higher was in perceived care, consistent with stereotypes that associate women with nurturing roles.</p>
<p>In contrast, women participants in the first study showed little bias in their evaluations, except when it came to engagement. Like men, they expressed a greater willingness to enroll in a full course when the professor was male. The researchers suggest this may reflect the influence of deeper, possibly unconscious biases that persist even when women consciously attempt to judge content fairly.</p>
<p>“We were surprised by the behaviour of women participants in our first study, which used written texts,” Campeggiani told PsyPost. “In their evaluations, women participants were relatively unbiased: they rated lectures similarly, regardless of whether they believed the instructor was a man or a woman. Yet when asked whether they would take a full course with that instructor, they showed a clear preference for men.” </p>
<p>“We have hypothesized that women participants may have been able to suppress bias in straightforward, text-based evaluations, but that bias re-emerged when their attention shifted toward personal choices and motivations. Another possible explanation is that the low gender salience of the text condition led participants to perceive women professors as exhibiting masculine-coded traits. This may have prompted women participants to evaluate women professors as positively as men, while simultaneously triggering a backlash against counter-stereotypical behavior, expressed in their reluctance to commit to a full course with a woman professor.”</p>
<p>The second study, which used spoken rather than written lectures, found even broader evidence of gender bias. In this version, both male and female participants rated male professors higher across nearly all dimensions, including clarity, interest, competence, and self-confidence. Women were still rated more highly on care. This pattern held even for participants who reported egalitarian views about gender roles.</p>
<p>“In our second study, where the gender of the professors was made more salient through the use of audio recordings, women participants displayed the same gender biases as men participants,” Campeggiani said.</p>
<p>The second study also found that students’ explicit beliefs about gender equality, as measured by a standardized questionnaire, were not strongly related to their actual evaluations. Even students with progressive attitudes tended to favor male professors. This suggests that implicit biases can operate independently of a person’s stated values and may remain influential even when individuals consciously reject traditional gender norms.</p>
<p>The results indicate that “there is still a great deal of work to be done,” Campeggiani told PsyPost. “One of our findings is that explicit egalitarian beliefs do not necessarily translate into the absence of gender bias. In other words, nobody is immune. We are all at risk of falling prey to these ‘mindbugs’ and for this reason we must actively cultivate self-awareness and self-criticism. At the same time, we need to put in place procedural safeguards: rules and structures that help ensure our decisions, choices, and assessments are less biased and more impartial.”</p>
<p>But there are a few limitations to note. The study focused specifically on philosophy students in Italy, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other academic fields or cultural contexts. While the researchers made efforts to select gender-neutral lecture content and control for confounding variables, real-world classroom dynamics involve more interpersonal interaction than what was simulated in the experiments.</p>
<p>The researchers are interested in extending their work. “We are considering several possible next steps,” Campeggiani explained. “One is to extend this line of research to primary and secondary schools, in order to see how early these patterns of bias emerge. Another is to replicate our study within academia but across different disciplines, to explore whether the dynamics we observed in philosophy are shared more broadly or vary by field.</p>
<p>“It wasn’t easy to carry out this study,” she added. “At various stages we encountered a certain degree of resistance, which in itself speaks to the sensitivity of the topic. I’ll leave it at that, but I think the difficulty is part of what makes the work both necessary and worthwhile.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2025.2551237" target="_blank">The boys’ club: gender biases in students’ evaluations of their philosophy professors</a>,” was authored by Pia Campeggiani, Marco Viola, and Marco Marini.</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>