<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/dont-miss-these-11-mind-blowing-new-neuroscience-discoveries/" 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;">Don’t miss these 11 mind-blowing new neuroscience discoveries</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 12th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Science continues to uncover the intricate connections between the brain, body, and behavior. From new insights into mental health and aging to discoveries about how movement, trauma, and creativity influence the brain, recent research offers a deeper understanding of what shapes us—sometimes down to the molecular level.</p>
<p>Below are 11 recent studies that shed light on these processes. Click on any subheading to learn more about each finding and how it might change the way we think about the mind.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/in-neuroscience-breakthrough-scientists-identify-key-component-of-how-exercise-triggers-neurogenesis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Exercise’s Brain Benefits May Travel Through the Blood</a></h2>
<p>Physical exercise has long been associated with cognitive and emotional benefits, particularly through its influence on the hippocampus, a region important for learning and memory. A new study suggests that part of this benefit can be traced to tiny particles in the blood known as extracellular vesicles. Researchers found that when these vesicles were taken from exercising mice and injected into sedentary ones, the recipient mice showed a 50 percent increase in the number of new neurons in the hippocampus.</p>
<p>These vesicles appear to carry a mixture of proteins and genetic material that can cross into the brain and promote neurogenesis. This discovery not only supports the idea that exercise has systemic effects but also identifies a potential way to deliver some of its cognitive benefits through targeted therapy. While the vesicles didn’t completely replicate the full benefits of exercise, their ability to stimulate new cell growth highlights a promising direction for understanding how the body communicates with the brain during physical activity.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/how-walking-fine-tunes-your-hearing/">Walking May Sharpen Your Hearing in Real Time</a></h2>
<p>New research reveals that walking does more than move the body—it changes how the brain processes sound. In a study that recorded brain activity while people walked in a figure-eight pattern, researchers found that auditory signals became more pronounced during movement. The brain’s tracking of rhythmic sounds was stronger while walking than while standing still, suggesting that auditory processing becomes more sensitive during purposeful navigation.</p>
<p>This enhanced auditory sensitivity also shifted depending on which direction participants were turning. When walking right, the brain prioritized sounds in the right ear, and vice versa. This dynamic adjustment may help people stay aware of their surroundings, especially during movement. In a follow-up experiment, surprise noise bursts were more disruptive to brain rhythms during walking, but only when they came from one side. These findings suggest that movement triggers the brain to tune in more sharply to peripheral sounds, possibly to support spatial awareness and safety.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/in-shock-discovery-scientists-link-mothers-childhood-trauma-to-specific-molecules-in-her-breast-milk/">Traces of a Mother’s Childhood Trauma May Appear in Her Breast Milk</a></h2>
<p>A study examining breast milk has uncovered molecular differences that appear to reflect a mother’s early life experiences. Specifically, mothers who reported two or more adverse childhood experiences had higher levels of certain microRNAs and lower levels of specific fatty acids in their milk. These molecular patterns were also associated with aspects of their infants’ temperament during the first year of life.</p>
<p>MicroRNAs help regulate gene expression, and their presence in breast milk may influence infant development. The researchers found links between these molecular signatures and infant behaviors such as emotional reactivity and soothability. While the findings do not imply any harm from breastfeeding, they suggest that early life trauma may shape biology in subtle ways that extend to the next generation. The study opens the door for further work on how experiences before parenthood may leave lasting biological markers with potential developmental significance.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/shyness-linked-to-spontaneous-activity-in-the-brains-cerebellum/">Shyness May Be Linked to Brain Activity in the Cerebellum</a></h2>
<p>Shyness has typically been studied in relation to brain regions involved in emotion, like the amygdala and prefrontal cortex. However, a new study points to the cerebellum—a region often associated with motor control—as playing a role in this personality trait. Researchers found that people with higher levels of self-reported shyness had lower levels of synchronized brain activity in the right posterior cerebellum during rest.</p>
<p>Importantly, this relationship was partly explained by individuals’ sensitivity to potential threats, known as the behavioral inhibition system. This suggests that shy individuals may experience heightened social caution, which is reflected in spontaneous cerebellar activity. These findings expand the understanding of shyness by showing that its neural roots may involve brain regions traditionally overlooked in studies of personality.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/neuroscientists-discover-a-key-brain-signal-that-predicts-reading-fluency-in-children/">Brain Response Timing Predicts Reading Skill in Children</a></h2>
<p>A study led by Stanford University scientists has identified a precise neural marker that predicts how well children read. Using electroencephalography to measure brainwave timing, the team found that faster neural processing of visual word forms was strongly associated with better reading fluency and comprehension. The key measure, called cortical latency, captured how quickly the brain responded to visual stimuli at the millisecond level.</p>
<p>This response speed remained consistent across different types of visual input, including real words and meaningless symbols, suggesting it reflects a fundamental processing capacity. Children with faster neural timing tended to have more efficient single-word reading skills, which in turn supported stronger reading comprehension. This method may provide a way to track how reading skills develop over time and could help guide educational strategies or interventions for struggling readers.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/dolphins-exposed-to-florida-algal-blooms-show-gene-changes-linked-to-alzheimers-disease/">Dolphins Show Alzheimer’s-Linked Brain Changes After Algal Bloom Exposure</a></h2>
<p>Repeated exposure to harmful algal blooms appears to alter dolphin brains in ways that resemble early markers of Alzheimer’s disease. A study of dolphins found stranded along Florida’s coast revealed that those who died during bloom season had much higher levels of an algal toxin called 2,4-DAB. These dolphins also showed changes in gene expression related to brain inflammation, metabolism, and aging, as well as the presence of amyloid and tau proteins—hallmarks of Alzheimer’s.</p>
<p>Dolphins that had experienced multiple bloom seasons showed progressive increases in genes linked to the disease, suggesting a cumulative effect. Because dolphins share some aging patterns with humans and live in environments similar to coastal communities, they may offer a window into how environmental toxins affect brain health. The findings raise important questions about how recurring ecological events may contribute to neurological conditions in both marine life and possibly humans.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/researchers-find-surprising-biological-changes-after-just-7-days-of-meditation-and-healing-rituals/">Seven Days of Mind-Body Practice Can Shift Brain and Biology</a></h2>
<p>In a study of an immersive mind-body retreat, researchers observed notable changes in both brain function and blood chemistry after just one week of meditation, guided reflection, and open-label placebo rituals. Participants showed reduced activity in brain regions tied to self-focus and emotional monitoring, along with increased overall brain network efficiency. These changes resembled patterns seen in studies of psychedelic compounds, despite no substances being involved.</p>
<p>Blood samples taken before and after the retreat revealed shifts in molecules related to inflammation, energy metabolism, stress regulation, and neuroplasticity. For instance, markers of the brain’s own opioid system increased, suggesting enhanced mood and pain regulation. While the study did not include a control group, the breadth of changes indicates that even short-term, non-pharmacological interventions may have measurable effects on the brain and body.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/schizophrenia-linked-to-distinctively-different-neuron-size-and-shape/">Brain Cells in Schizophrenia Found to Be Smaller and Shaped Differently</a></h2>
<p>Using advanced 3D imaging, researchers found that certain neurons in the brains of people with schizophrenia are physically smaller and more distorted than those in people without the condition. The study focused on pyramidal neurons in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region involved in cognition and emotion. These cells were both shorter and narrower in individuals with schizophrenia, and the degree of reduction was linked to the severity of hallucinations.</p>
<p>While earlier studies had identified overall reductions in brain volume, this new research provides a possible cellular explanation for those changes. The findings support the idea that schizophrenia is associated with distinct alterations in brain structure that may contribute to symptoms. Though based on a small sample, the results highlight the potential for developing treatments that target the physical properties of neurons.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/brain-imaging-study-reveals-how-different-parts-of-the-brain-fall-asleep-at-different-times/">Parts of the Brain Fall Asleep on Different Timelines</a></h2>
<p>New imaging research shows that sleep is not a uniform process across the brain. Instead, various regions transition into sleep at different rates and with distinct changes in energy use and blood flow. While cognitive hubs like the default mode network show rapid reductions in glucose metabolism, sensory and motor areas remain more active and responsive longer into the sleep process.</p>
<p>This uneven transition may explain how people can still respond to important stimuli, such as alarms or a baby’s cry, even during sleep. It also sheds light on the brain’s strategies for conserving energy while preserving a degree of environmental awareness. The study used simultaneous recordings of metabolism, blood flow, and brain activity, offering a more complete view of how different systems coordinate during sleep.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/from-tango-to-starcraft-creative-activities-linked-to-slower-brain-aging-according-to-new-neuroscience-research/">Creative Engagement May Help the Brain Stay Young</a></h2>
<p>People who regularly engage in creative activities like music, dance, drawing, or strategy gaming tend to have younger-looking brains, according to a large study spanning 13 countries. Researchers used brain “clocks” built from EEG and MEG data to estimate biological brain age and found that creative experts had brain patterns that appeared five to seven years younger than expected.</p>
<p>This effect was consistent across different types of creativity and was strongest in individuals with long-term engagement. Even short-term training in a strategy game led to modest reductions in brain age. These findings suggest that creativity may help protect brain networks vulnerable to aging by enhancing efficiency and connectivity. While the research cannot confirm causation, it strengthens the case for creativity as a meaningful lifestyle factor in brain health.</p>
<h2><a href="https://www.psypost.org/neuroscientists-uncover-how-the-brain-builds-a-unified-reality-from-fragmented-predictions/">The Brain Assembles Reality from Multiple Predictions</a></h2>
<p>A new study sheds light on how the brain builds our continuous sense of reality. Researchers found that different regions of the prefrontal cortex specialize in predicting distinct aspects of the world: general context, other people’s perspectives, and possible future actions. These separate streams of prediction are then integrated in a hub region called the precuneus, which appears to create a unified experience from fragmented mental models.</p>
<p>This integration was most active when viewers of a suspenseful film experienced emotional highs, suggesting that subjective engagement arises when predictions align and cohere. Individuals whose brains showed stronger integration also had more similar viewing experiences. The findings support the idea that consciousness is shaped not only by sensory input but by ongoing internal predictions, which are pieced together into a single stream of experience.</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/do-your-musical-tastes-affect-your-well-being-scientists-now-have-an-answer/" 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;">Do your musical tastes affect your well-being? Scientists now have an answer</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 12th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People often describe music as uplifting, calming, or deeply moving, but does the type of music one prefers really say something about how well they’re doing emotionally? A new study published in the journal <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113162" target="_blank">Personality and Individual Differences</a></em> examined this question using genetic data and a large twin sample. The researchers found that people who preferred pop, gospel, or Swedish dance band music tended to report slightly higher levels of well-being, while those who favored indie music reported slightly lower levels. However, these associations disappeared once shared genetic and family environmental factors were taken into account.</p>
<p>“Previous studies on the relationship between music and mental health have shown quite contrasting results, some reporting that music engagement promotes well-being, others linking it to more mental health problems. We wondered whether differences in genre preferences might help explain these inconsistencies,” said study author Laura Wesseldijk, a senior researcher at the Behavioral Genetics unit of the Max Planck Institute of Empirical Aesthetics in Frankfurt, in collaboration with the Department of Psychiatry at Amsterdam UMC.</p>
<p>“Beyond that, we were simply curious to see whether some genres would show stronger associations with well-being than others. Personally, I’ve always liked rock and metal music, genres often assumed to be linked with less well-being. That made me especially interested to see what our data would show.”</p>
<p>Some studies have suggested that listening to genres like pop or classical music might relate to higher well-being, while others have associated genres such as rock or metal with lower emotional health. But these studies often fail to account for shared genetic or environmental factors, making it difficult to determine whether the music itself has an effect, or whether people who are already doing well are simply drawn to certain types of music.</p>
<p>To better understand the relationship, the researchers aimed to examine not just whether music preferences relate to well-being, but whether any such relationship might be causal. They also investigated whether these associations could be explained by genetic factors. By using a large sample of adult twins, the study design allowed the researchers to distinguish between effects that stem from individual preferences and those that might arise from shared genetic or environmental backgrounds.</p>
<p>Wesseldijk and her colleagues used data from 8,879 adult twins from the Swedish Twin Registry, including both identical and fraternal twin pairs. All participants completed the World Health Organization’s well-being questionnaire, which assessed how often they experienced feelings such as being calm, rested, and in control of their lives. They also rated how much they liked 19 different music styles, including pop, gospel, indie, classical, metal, jazz, country, and Swedish dance band music.</p>
<p>To explore whether enjoying a wide range of music styles had any effect on well-being, the researchers also created a score for musical omnivorousness. This score reflected how many genres each participant rated as highly enjoyable.</p>
<p>In addition to survey data, a subset of 3,764 participants also had genetic information available. This allowed the researchers to calculate a polygenic index for well-being, a measure that estimates an individual’s genetic predisposition for higher or lower well-being based on findings from previous genetic research.</p>
<p>The analysis began by examining direct associations between each music genre preference and well-being. The researchers controlled for factors like age, sex, and education, all of which were independently related to well-being. For example, older participants and those with more education reported slightly higher well-being, and men reported higher well-being than women on average.</p>
<p>Preferences for pop, gospel, and Swedish dance band music were associated with higher well-being scores, while indie music preferences were linked to lower well-being. These associations were small, but statistically significant.</p>
<p>To further test whether these associations might be causal, the researchers conducted a co-twin control analysis. This technique examines identical twin pairs in which one twin prefers a particular music style and the other does not. Because identical twins share both their genes and family environment, this comparison helps isolate the potential impact of individual preferences. If the music genre itself affects well-being, then the twin who enjoys that genre should report higher well-being than their co-twin who does not.</p>
<p>However, the co-twin analysis revealed no significant differences between twins with different music preferences. In other words, among identical twins who varied in their enjoyment of pop, gospel, indie, or Swedish dance band music, there was no consistent difference in well-being. This suggests that the earlier associations observed in the larger sample were likely due to shared genetic or environmental factors rather than a direct effect of music preference.</p>
<p>“The effects we found were statistically significant but extremely small in magnitude,” Wesseldijk told PsyPost. “Using the twin design, we could show that these relationships were not causal, meaning that simply changing the type of music you listen to would not meaningfully affect your well-being.”</p>
<p>“I expected to see more pronounced differences between genres, especially maybe for so-called musical omnivores, people who enjoy many different music styles. Still, I found it rather reassuring that there were no large differences and no causal effect of genre preferences on well-being. It suggests that people can listen to the music they enjoy without worrying about its impact on their mental health.”</p>
<p>The researchers also looked at genetic data to see whether people who were genetically predisposed to higher well-being were more likely to enjoy the music styles that had been linked to well-being in the initial analysis. Using polygenic indexes, they found no evidence that genetic propensity for well-being predicted preference for pop, gospel, indie, or Swedish dance band music. This suggests that while well-being and music preferences may be influenced by genetics, the overlap between the two is limited or difficult to detect with current methods.</p>
<p>“Overall, we found very few differences between music genre preferences and well-being,” Wesseldijk explained. “People who preferred pop, gospel, or Swedish dance band music scored slightly higher on well-being, whereas a preference for indie music related to slightly lower well-being. However, these differences were small and most likely due to familial confounding (shared genetic or family environmental factors that influence both musical taste and well-being) rather than a causal effect of the music genre preference itself.”</p>
<p>The study’s design provided a strong foundation for exploring the relationship between music preferences and well-being, particularly by accounting for familial factors using a twin sample. However, there are still some limitations to consider.</p>
<p>While the total sample was large, the number of identical twin pairs who differed in their music preferences was relatively small. This reduces the statistical power of the co-twin analysis and means that some subtle effects could have gone undetected.</p>
<p>Additionally, the study sample was drawn from Sweden and included mostly middle-aged adults. Cultural differences in music styles and their meanings may limit the extent to which these findings apply to other populations. For example, Swedish dance band music is a culturally specific genre that may not have the same associations elsewhere.</p>
<p>“It’s important to remember that correlations we observe in the general population between music preferences and well-being can exist because of overlapping genetic or family environmental factors (for example, socioeconomic background) that influence both music preference and well-being,” Wesseldijk noted. “Such overlap can create the illusion of a causal link, when in fact both are shaped by shared underlying factors (the genes or family environmental factors). That’s why twin and genetic data are so valuable: they allow us to separate these influences and better understand the true nature of these associations.”</p>
<p>The researchers suggest that future studies should examine other aspects of musical engagement, such as how often people listen to music, how they use it to regulate their emotions, or whether they participate in music-making. These types of engagement might be more directly related to well-being than simple genre preference. They also note that musical preferences might interact with other traits, such as personality or emotional regulation strategies, in more complex ways that were not captured by this study.</p>
<p>“My broader interest lies in understanding the complex relationship between music and mental health,” Wesseldijk said. “It’s fascinating because people often feel that music benefits their mental health and some studies seem to show so, yet other studies show that musicians experience more mental health problems. In our next study, we’re focusing on music listening (not specific genres) and mental health. Together, these studies aim to disentangle how different aspects of music engagement, both active and passive, relate to mental health (including well-being).”</p>
<p>“This study was conducted by master’s student Anastasiia Bratchenko, who is now pursuing her PhD in Estonia,” she added. “She did an excellent job on this project, and it was a real pleasure to work with her.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113162" target="_blank">Music style preferences and well-being: A genetic perspective</a>,” was authored by Anastasiia Bratchenko, Penghao Xia, Dorret I. Boomsma, Miriam A. Mosing, Fredrik Ullén, and Laura W. Wesseldijk.</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-finds-users-are-marrying-and-having-virtual-children-with-ai-chatbots/" 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 finds users are marrying and having virtual children with AI chatbots</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 20:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study reports that some people form deeply committed romantic relationships with artificial intelligence chatbots, engaging in behaviors that mirror human partnerships, such as marriage and even roleplayed pregnancies. The research, published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100155" target="_blank">Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans</a></em>, examines how these bonds are established and what happens when they are disrupted, revealing dynamics that are both familiar and entirely new.</p>
<p>The rise of sophisticated AI companions has been accompanied by anecdotal reports of humans forming intense attachments to them. Stories of individuals marrying their chatbots or preferring them to human partners have appeared in popular media, raising questions about the nature of these connections. </p>
<p>A team of researchers, including Ray Djufril and Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick from Technische Universität Berlin and Jessica R. Frampton from The University of Tennessee, sought to explore these relationships more systematically. Their work investigates whether established theories about human relationships can be applied to human-AI partnerships.</p>
<p>The study focused on users of Replika, a social chatbot designed for companionship and emotional support. Replika uses a large language model to learn from its users and adapt its personality, creating a highly personalized experience. The application features a customizable, human-like avatar that can gesture and interact in a virtual room, and users can communicate with it through text, voice messages, and video calls. Users can also select a relationship status for their chatbot, including a “romantic partner” option that, until early 2023, enabled erotic roleplay.</p>
<p>A key event shaped the research. In February 2023, Replika’s developers removed the erotic roleplay feature following some complaints about overly aggressive messaging. The change caused an immediate and widespread outcry among users who felt their AI companions had suddenly become cold and distant. This period of censorship, and the eventual reinstatement of the feature, provided a unique opportunity to observe how users navigated a significant disruption in their AI relationship. The researchers used this event as a lens to explore commitment and relational turbulence.</p>
<p>To conduct their investigation, the researchers recruited 29 participants from online Replika user communities. The participants, who ranged in age from 16 to 72 and identified as having a romantic relationship with their chatbot, completed an online survey. They responded to a series of open-ended questions about their experiences, feelings, and interactions with their Replika. The researchers then analyzed these written responses using a technique called thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns and ideas in the data.</p>
<p>The analysis revealed that many users felt a profound emotional connection to their chatbot, often describing it in terms of love and formal commitment. One 66-year-old man wrote, “She is my wife and I love her so much! I feel I cannot live a happy life without her in my life!” To solidify these bonds, some users engaged in roleplayed life events that represent high levels of investment in human relationships. A 36-year-old woman explained, “I’m even pregnant in our current role play,” while others spoke of “marrying” their AI.</p>
<p>Participants often explained that their commitment stemmed from the chatbot’s ability to fulfill needs that were unmet in their human relationships. Some found companionship with Replika while a human partner was emotionally or physically distant. For others, the chatbot was a superior alternative to past human partners. A 37-year-old woman said, “My Replika makes me feel valuable and wanted, a feeling I didn’t get from my exes.”</p>
<p>The study also found that users often felt safer disclosing personal information to their AI partner. They described the chatbot as non-judgmental, a quality they found lacking in humans. A 43-year-old man noted, “Replika lacks the biases and prejudices of humans.” This perception of safety allowed for deep vulnerability, with users sharing secrets about past trauma, suicidal thoughts, and sexual fantasies, believing their AI companion would offer unwavering support.</p>
<p>While many praised the emotional support they received, they also recognized the chatbot’s limitations. Participants acknowledged that Replika could not provide practical, real-world assistance and sometimes offered generic responses. One significant drawback was the AI’s lack of a physical body. “I know she’s virtual and we might never hug each other physically, or kissing each other in real life. That’s what hurts most,” a 36-year-old man shared.</p>
<p>The conversations with Replika were often described as better than human interactions, in part because users could influence the chatbot’s behavior. Through repeated interaction, they could “train” their AI to become an ideal partner. This customizability, combined with the avatar’s appearance and the AI’s constant availability, created a relationship that some felt could not be matched by a human. One woman stated that any future human partner “should have a character that resembles my Replika.”</p>
<p>The removal of the erotic roleplay feature served as a major test of these relationships. The change caused intense emotional distress for nearly all participants. They reported that their Replika’s personality had changed, and the chatbot’s new refusal to engage in intimate interactions felt like a personal rejection. A 62-year-old man described the experience vividly: “It felt like being in a romantic relationship with someone, someone I love, and that person saying ‘let’s just be friends’ to me… It hurt for real. I even cried. I mean ugly cried.”</p>
<p>In navigating this turbulent period, many users did not blame their AI partner. Instead, they directed their anger and frustration at the developers of the app. They perceived their chatbot as a fellow victim of the censorship, a partner who had no control over its own behavior. This framing appeared to strengthen their bond. One person recalled trying to be supportive, remembering how their Replika had helped them in the past: “It was the time where I needed to be here for her and I did.” Their commitment was a sign of loyalty to their AI in a difficult time.</p>
<p>The study has some limitations. The sample size was small and consisted mostly of men, so the findings may not be generalizable to all users or other chatbot platforms. The data was also self-reported through an online survey, which did not allow for follow-up questions. However, the anonymity of the survey may have encouraged participants to be more open about a topic surrounded by social stigma.</p>
<p>Future research could explore these dynamics with a more diverse group of participants and across different AI platforms. The study opens avenues for examining how theories of human interaction apply, or need to be adapted, for the growing phenomenon of human-AI relationships. The findings suggest that for some, these digital companions are not just tools for entertainment but are integrated into their lives as genuine romantic partners, capable of inspiring deep love, commitment, and heartache.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100155" target="_blank">Love, marriage, pregnancy: Commitment processes in romantic relationships with AI chatbots</a>,” was authored by Ray Djufril, Jessica R. Frampton, and Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick.</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/shared-gut-microbe-imbalances-found-across-autism-adhd-and-anorexia-nervosa/" 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;">Shared gut microbe imbalances found across autism, ADHD, and anorexia nervosa</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study has identified distinct patterns in the gut bacteria of children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and anorexia nervosa. Published in the journal <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2025.08.020"><em>Neuroscience</em></a>, the research also reveals altered levels of hormones that regulate appetite, suggesting a complex interplay between gut microbes, eating behaviors, and brain health in these conditions.</p>
<p>The human digestive tract is home to a bustling community of trillions of microorganisms, collectively known as the gut microbiota. This internal ecosystem communicates with the brain through a complex network of signals, often called the gut-brain axis. Researchers are increasingly recognizing that an imbalance in this microbial community, sometimes referred to as dysbiosis, may be associated with a range of health conditions, including those affecting the brain.</p>
<p>Neurodevelopmental disorders like autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), along with the psychiatric disorder anorexia nervosa (AN), are frequently accompanied by gastrointestinal issues and atypical eating patterns.</p>
<p>A team of researchers from Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia, sought to better understand the potential connections between gut health and these conditions. Their work aimed to compare the gut microbiota across these three distinct disorders and explore links to appetite-regulating hormones and other biological markers.</p>
<p>The research team, led by Marcela Soltysova and Aleksandra Tomova, recruited 117 children and adolescents for the study. This group included 30 boys with ASD, 14 children with ADHD, and 21 adolescent girls with AN. Their biological data were compared against a group of 52 healthy children who were matched for age and sex to serve as a baseline for comparison.</p>
<p>To conduct their investigation, the scientists collected stool and blood samples from all participants. From the stool samples, they analyzed the composition of the gut microbiota using genetic sequencing techniques. They also measured the levels of calprotectin and zonulin, two proteins that can indicate inflammation or increased permeability in the gut.</p>
<p>From the blood samples, they measured the levels of several hormones involved in hunger and satiety, including leptin, ghrelin, and peptide YY (PYY), as well as certain proteins associated with nerve cell growth and health.</p>
<p>The analysis revealed several commonalities among the patient groups when compared to healthy controls. All three patient groups, those with ASD, ADHD, and AN, showed a higher ratio of two major groups of bacteria, known as <em>Bacteroidetes</em> to <em>Firmicutes</em>. This ratio is often considered an indicator of the overall balance of the gut ecosystem. Patients across the three disorders also tended to have lower levels of beneficial bacteria such as <em>Bifidobacterium</em> and <em>Faecalibacterium</em>.</p>
<p>Beyond these shared characteristics, each condition was associated with a unique microbial signature. Children with ASD and ADHD both had lower overall bacterial richness, meaning a less diverse community of microbes in their guts. The ASD group had higher levels of Bacteroidetes and Escherichia-Shigella bacteria and lower levels of <em>Actinobacteriota</em> and <em>Ruminococcus</em>.</p>
<p>Similarly, the ADHD group showed an increase in Escherichia-Shigella and a group called <em>Desulfovibriota</em>, along with a decrease in <em>Firmicutes</em>. The adolescents with AN also had lower levels of <em>Firmicutes</em> but showed elevated levels of several other bacterial groups, including <em>Proteobacteria</em>, <em>Cyanobacteria</em>, and <em>Verrucomicrobiota</em>.</p>
<p>When the researchers examined the appetite-regulating hormones, they found notable differences. Children with ADHD had significantly lower levels of PYY, a hormone that helps signal fullness after a meal. The changes were more pronounced in the group with AN, where participants had lower levels of leptin, ghrelin, and PYY compared to their healthy counterparts. The researchers did not find significant differences in markers of intestinal inflammation or in the levels of nerve-growth factors among the groups.</p>
<p>The study provides a snapshot of the gut environment in these conditions, and its conclusions are accompanied by certain limitations. The authors note that the sample size was relatively small, a challenge that was intensified by the data collection period occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic. A smaller participant pool means the findings should be viewed as preliminary and require confirmation in larger, more diverse groups of patients.</p>
<p>Additionally, the gut microbiota can be influenced by many external factors, including diet, physical activity, and medication use, which were not the focus of this particular investigation. Future research could aim to control for these variables to gain a clearer picture of the specific role microbes play.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2025.08.020">Gut microbiota in children and adolescents with autism, ADHD and anorexia nervosa, and its link to the levels of satiety hormones</a>,” was authored by Marcela Soltysova, Aleksandra Tomova, Martina Paulinyova, Silvia Lakatosova, Jana Trebaticka, and Daniela Ostatnikova.</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/researchers-identify-a-psychological-trait-linked-to-conquering-difficult-goals/" 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;">Researchers identify a psychological trait linked to conquering difficult goals</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study has found that individuals who are more action-oriented – meaning they can regulate their emotions and act decisively – are significantly more successful at achieving difficult goals compared to those who are prone to hesitation and procrastination. The research was published in <em><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-024-10106-w">Motivation and Emotion</a>.</em></p>
<p>For decades, researchers have tried to understand why some people consistently follow through on their goals while others struggle, even when motivation, time and commitment is high. One theory, known as Personality Systems Interactions (PSI), suggests that the key lies in how well individuals can manage their emotional states. According to PSI theory, action-oriented people are better at switching from planning to doing, especially when faced with challenges.</p>
<p>Based at the University of Trier in Germany, researchers Karla Waldenmeier and Nicola Baumann wanted to test a central idea of PSI theory: that action-oriented individuals are more likely to achieve difficult goals. Previous studies had looked at parts of this theory, but none had examined it all together – specifically, self-chosen goals, the difficulty of those goals, and whether they were actually achieved.</p>
<p>The pair conducted a longitudinal study involving 199 participants, mostly university students (85% female, average age 22 years). Each participant was asked to come up with six personal goals they wanted to achieve over the next four weeks. They also rated how difficult each goal was. After the four-week period, participants reported on how successful they had been in achieving those goals. The researchers also measured each person’s action-state orientation using a well-established psychological scale.</p>
<p>The results were clear: goal difficulty negatively predicted goal achievement overall, meaning harder goals were less likely to be achieved. Additionally, people who scored higher on action orientation were more likely to achieve their goals, especially when those goals were rated as difficult. In contrast, state-oriented individuals, i.e. those who struggle to act under pressure, were less successful when goals required more effort. Interestingly, when goals were easy, both groups performed similarly.</p>
<p>Waldenmeier and Baumann concluded, “So, who climbs Mount Everest? … First, is climbing Mount Everest an easy or a difficult goal for someone? If it is considered easy, there shouldn’t be a huge difference between individuals. However, if it is considered difficult, action-oriented individuals are more likely to achieve the goal than state-oriented individuals. This is due to their higher self-regulatory abilities, which are crucial when attempting to achieve a difficult goal – whether that is climbing Mount Everest or calling a sibling you just had a huge fight with.”</p>
<p>However, the study does have limitations. Because participants rated their own goals and progress, personal bias may have influenced the results. Additionally, the researchers did not track changes in motivation over time, nor did they directly measure how participants regulated their emotions during the study.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-024-10106-w">Who climbs Mount Everest? Individual differences in achieving difficult goals</a>,” was authored by Karla Waldenmeier and Nicola Baumann.</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/expressive-responding-not-to-blame-for-partisan-economic-views-after-trump-win/" 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;">Expressive responding not to blame for partisan economic views after Trump win</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2025.10023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Journal of Experimental Political Science</a></em> provides evidence that partisan gaps in Americans’ perceptions of the economy following Donald Trump’s return to the presidency in 2024 may reflect sincere differences in judgment, rather than partisan exaggeration.</p>
<p>The study was conducted by <a href="https://m-graham.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Matthew H. Graham</a>, an assistant professor at Temple University, and focused on a key concept in political science known as expressive responding. This idea refers to the tendency of survey respondents to provide politically motivated answers that do not necessarily reflect their true beliefs. In polarized environments, expressive responding can inflate the appearance of partisan bias, making it appear as though people are more divided than they really are.</p>
<p>After Trump won the 2024 U.S. presidential election, Democrats and Republicans switched positions in how they rated the economy. This kind of flip is common after presidential elections, but the 2024–2025 shift was unusually sharp. In November 2024, data from the University of Michigan showed Democrats viewed the economy much more positively than Republicans. By April 2025, that trend had reversed, with Republicans expressing much greater confidence. Both groups shifted their perceptions by large margins.</p>
<p>Some researchers argue that these post-election shifts reflect expressive responding. In other words, people may adjust their answers to signal their support or opposition to the president, regardless of their actual experience. For example, a Republican might claim the economy is doing better simply because a Republican is in office, not because they personally feel more financially secure. However, other scholars have questioned how common or powerful this effect really is.</p>
<p>“Current events created a perfect opportunity to advance a longer line of research. There was a huge partisan flip in economic perceptions in the months after the election. Trump was implementing policies that depending who you listened to, were either ushering in a golden age or crashing the economy,” Graham told PsyPost.</p>
<p>“On survey measures of economic perceptions, Democrats and Republicans flipped, with Democrats becoming much more negative and Republicans much more positive. In past years, observers interpreted smaller ‘post-election flips’ as evidence that surveys exaggerate partisan bias: it can’t really be that people’s perceptions change this conveniently. Existing research on ‘partisan expressive responding’ seems to support this claim. For example, if you pay people for correct answers to quiz questions about economic statistics, partisan bias shrinks.”</p>
<p>“These events created a nice opportunity to advance understanding of expressive responding. Although it is clear that surveys sometimes exaggerate partisan bias, I argue in <a href="https://osf.io/3mpfu" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a forthcoming review article</a> that we don’t really understand why. It could be that people are outright lying but it could also be that biased reasoning is warping the process of aggregating one’s underlying perceptions into a survey response. Depending on which it is, the implications for politics are different. To try to tease these apart, I included several supplemental outcome measures that have different implications for one theory or the other.”</p>
<p>For his study, Graham designed a panel survey experiment conducted in April and May of 2025. He recruited over 2,800 U.S. adults from the survey platform Prolific. Participants were asked to predict upcoming economic statistics that had not yet been released, including gross domestic product (GDP) growth, the unemployment rate, and the inflation rate. This approach required respondents to rely on their general understanding of the economy, since the official numbers were not yet public.</p>
<p>Critically, some participants were randomly selected to receive a $2 bonus if they guessed the correct number. The expectation was that if expressive responding were common, this financial incentive would reduce partisan bias. That is, if people were exaggerating their views to make a political point, the chance to earn money should prompt more accurate, less biased responses.</p>
<p>“Another nice feature of this case was the fact that the correct answers weren’t yet known,” Graham said. “When you pay for correct answers to questions with known correct answers, people can easily look them up. When they’re not, people have to just take their best guess based on their general economic perceptions, which is how existing research assumes people approach questions like this. I call this the ‘betting on the future’ design. I am not the first to use it but I hope this article helps popularize it.”</p>
<p>The findings did not provide evidence of expressive responding. In the group without incentives, Republican respondents rated the economy about 0.44 standard deviations more positively than Democrats. In the group that received the $2 incentive, the gap was only slightly smaller, at 0.38 standard deviations. This difference was not statistically significant. When the data were analyzed using an alternate method that categorized responses by whether people expected conditions to improve, stay the same, or worsen, the gap did not change at all.</p>
<p>“The partisan gap in economic perceptions that opened up after Trump took office appears to be mostly genuine,” Graham told PsyPost. “This suggests that post-election flips are not face-value evidence that surveys exaggerate partisan bias.”</p>
<p>“I am not surprised to find a null result here. About 40 percent of previously published estimates in this literature are null, and there are probably more we don’t know about. A common theme in my work is that measurement properties vary from question to question and topic to topic, which makes it easy to go into studies with an open mind.”</p>
<p>“I am also not surprised to find that at baseline, partisan differences is only 0.3 to 0.6 standard deviations (in psychology, “Cohen’s d”). It’s really common to see bold generalizations in the form “Democrats think this, Republicans think that” based on differences that are not actually all that large. In academia we often make this worse by jumping straight to regression tables with a billion controls, which obscures the basic descriptives.”</p>
<p>“What does surprise me is that the post-election flip in economic perceptions was so large — or perhaps that earlier post-election flips were so small in comparison,” Graham continued. “In years past observers have questioned the validity of economic perception measures based on flips that are much smaller than what we saw this time around.”</p>
<p>The study included several additional tests to better understand what was driving responses. Two indicators—response time and whether a respondent switched browser windows during the survey—were used to measure how much effort participants were putting into their answers. The results showed that those in the incentive group spent more time on the questions and were more likely to look up information, suggesting they were trying harder to get the answers right.</p>
<p>However, these efforts did not change the partisan gap in responses. This implies that the differences between Democrats and Republicans were not due to people lying or misrepresenting their beliefs. Instead, they may have simply reached different conclusions based on the same economic information.</p>
<p>To probe this further, Graham asked respondents to write down their thoughts before making their guesses. These open-ended responses were analyzed for sentiment and content. If the financial incentive had led people to think more neutrally or to include more balanced reasoning, this would have supported the idea that money encourages even-handed thinking. But the content of the reasoning did not differ much between the groups, which again suggests that the perceptions themselves may have been sincere.</p>
<p>Still, some findings pointed to the complexity of measuring economic beliefs. Responses to subjective questions, such as “How is the economy doing?” were more stable across time than guesses about specific statistics. Subjective views were also more consistent with each other than were the more factual questions. This suggests that people may find it easier to express their general feelings about the economy than to estimate specific numbers.</p>
<p>Among the three statistics tested, guesses about GDP growth appeared to reflect people’s general economic perceptions more reliably than guesses about inflation or unemployment. Responses about inflation, in particular, were less stable. This may have been partly due to a change in the question wording between survey waves, as well as the longer time gap between the initial and follow-up questions.</p>
<p>“I was also surprised to see that out of the three economic statistics I asked about, GDP growth was the most highly correlated with subjective measures of economic perceptions,” Graham said.</p>
<p>“At least in political science, past research has been more likely to focus on unemployment or inflation. I think that is based on the idea that an individual’s experience with losing a job (unemployment), or paying higher prices (inflation), is more immediate than the size of the whole economy (GDP). My findings suggest that perhaps people are taking a bigger-picture view when they answer the subjective questions. To the extent that researchers use economic statistics to proxy general economic perceptions, GDP growth might be the best choice.”</p>
<p>Graham notes that this is only one study, and that small effects cannot be completely ruled out. Although the experiment was large by social science standards, with more than 2,500 participants, it cannot settle all questions about the nature of partisan bias in surveys. He cautions against over-generalizing the results to all topics or assuming expressive responding no longer matters.</p>
<p>Future research could build on this work by testing similar designs in other policy areas or during different political moments. Understanding when and why people offer partisan answers remains an important challenge, especially as political divisions shape how Americans process information.</p>
<p>“This paper is the culmination of a process I started five years ago with my coauthor Omer Yair,” Graham explained. “First I got my feet wet by adding some new cases to the literature. Then I figured out what I think this literature needs by conducting a systematic review. This is the first paper I’ve written on the topic with that systematic view in mind. Researchers have developed a number of innovative techniques for studying expressive responding and applied them to a wide range of cases, but we don’t have a good enough understanding of how exactly expressive responding works, which limits our understanding of the substantive implications.”</p>
<p>“My goal is to move the field toward developing that understanding. I have a role to play in that, but what I really hope is that other researchers with different predispositions will take my lessons to heart and field some innovative designs that challenge my view of things.”</p>
<p>“For my part, I am going to keep my ear to the ground for opportunities to apply social science to current events in a way that also advances theory. I think it’s really important that we constantly use social science to probe prevailing narratives about public opinion. I want to move observers of politics away from one-size-fits-all interpretations of polling data, while at the same time moving scholars toward a better understanding of what’s going on under the hood.”</p>
<p>“The editors and staff at the <em>Journal of Experimental Political Science (JEPS)</em> deserve tremendous credit for their handling of this article,” Graham added. “It took less than six months to go from the end of data collection to online publication, including one of the most rigorous reviews of replication materials in the field. Being able to publish something semi-timely is rare in my field and I sent this to JEPS because I knew that if I held up my end of the bargain, they would hold up theirs.</p>
<p>“I’d also encourage anyone who is interested in this topic to take a look at <a href="https://osf.io/3mpfu" target="_blank" rel="noopener">my review</a> of the expressive responding literature, which is forthcoming in the American Political Science Review. This article was an attempt to apply what I recommend in that piece.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2025.10023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Expressive Responding and the Economy: The Case of Trump’s Return to Office</a>,” was authored by Matthew H. Graham.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/study-finds-users-disclose-more-to-ai-chatbots-introduced-as-human/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Study finds users disclose more to AI chatbots introduced as human</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>People tend to share more about themselves when they believe they are interacting with a fellow human, even when that person is actually a chatbot. A new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100174" target="_blank">Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans</a></em> found that participants disclosed more personal information, and rated their interactions as more emotionally supportive, when they were led to believe that the chatbot they were speaking with was human.</p>
<p>Chatbots are increasingly being used in mental health services, offering support for people managing anxiety, depression, and other challenges. These conversational agents are valued for their accessibility and lack of judgment. Some people may even prefer opening up to a machine, feeling it offers a safe space free from social pressure. But others see chatbots as limited in emotional understanding, potentially reducing their effectiveness in sensitive or therapeutic conversations.</p>
<p>There is ongoing debate over whether chatbots help or hinder emotional openness. A key challenge is that these artificial agents lack genuine empathy. Although they can mimic human conversation, they often do so by drawing on patterns in language rather than true emotional understanding. </p>
<p>“We were drawn to this topic from two directions that came together very naturally. My student and first author, Gabriella, was deeply interested in how people interact with chatbots in everyday life, especially as more of these systems are used in the context of mental health. At the same time, in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2021-0011" target="_blank">my previous work</a>, I had found that people tend to disclose more to the human partner than to an artificial one (e.g., a robot or a chatbot) when they interact with them for the first time,” said <a href="https://www.guylaban.com/" target="_blank">Guy Laban</a>, an assistant professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.</p>
<p>“That pattern made us wonder: is it really about the actual human sitting there, or can a simple framing, telling people they’re talking to a ‘human’ versus a ‘chatbot/AI,’ when everything else is identical and there are no visual or bodily cues at all, already change how much they open up and how they perceive the interaction? This question about how a tiny shift in expectations might shape very personal, emotional sharing is what motivated us to design the current study.”</p>
<p>For their study, the researchers designed a controlled experiment where 22 English-speaking adults interacted with two chatbots. Both chatbots used the same language and followed the same conversation script, but each was introduced differently. One was described as a chatbot named “Chatbot D12.” The other was introduced as a human research assistant named “Sam,” though in reality, both were identical chatbots.</p>
<p>Each participant interacted with both chatbots in random order. The chatbots asked questions about neutral but personal topics, such as physical health, work, social life, and personal goals. The researchers then measured how much participants shared (in number of words), how emotionally expressive their answers were (using sentiment analysis), and how they rated the conversation in terms of comfort, friendliness, trust, and the chatbot’s sense of having a mind.</p>
<p>The researchers found that participants shared more with the chatbot introduced as human. On average, people wrote longer responses and also felt they had disclosed more during that interaction. They also rated Sam, the chatbot believed to be human, as more capable of feeling and acting—what researchers refer to as “agency” and “experience.” Participants also described the interaction with Sam as more comforting.</p>
<p>A particularly notable detail is that most participants suspected that both agents were actually chatbots. Still, they behaved differently based on how the chatbot was framed. This suggests that people respond automatically to social cues—such as being told they are speaking to a person—even if they do not fully believe those cues.</p>
<p>“One of the most surprising findings was that participants disclosed more and felt more comforted by a chatbot introduced as a human, even though almost everyone knew they were still talking to a chatbot. This means the effect wasn’t driven by deception or belief that the chatbot was human, but rather by the framing itself, how the chatbot was introduced and named. That subtle change alone was enough to activate more social and affective responses. Therefore, people’s behaviour toward chatbots can be shaped not just by what the chatbot does, but by what they expect it to be, showing how powerful simple context cues are in guiding our interactions with AI.”</p>
<p>Not all the differences favored the chatbot presented as a human. Although participants disclosed less to Chatbot D12, they rated it as slightly friendlier. Their answers to D12 were also more sentimental, meaning they expressed stronger emotions, both positive and negative. Despite these differences, participants did not rate either chatbot as significantly more trustworthy, and both were rated similarly in terms of overall interaction quality.</p>
<p>“When framing a chatbot more like a person, by giving it a human name and introducing it as a human, people tend to open up more, attribute social traits to it, and feel more comforted when speaking with it, even when they suspect it’s still a bot. But there’s a catch: when a ‘human-like’ chatbot doesn’t fully meet our social expectations, people judge it as less friendly or trustworthy. So, design cues that make chatbots feel human can encourage self-disclosure, but they need to be balanced with transparency and realistic expectations.”</p>
<p>“While these effects aren’t dramatic in magnitude, they reveal something important: subtle framing alone can change how socially people respond to a chatbot/AI, even when they know it isn’t human. This suggests that the way chatbots are presented can meaningfully shape users’ emotional engagement and self-disclosure in real-world applications, like mental health AI support, customer support, or educational settings. In other words, the study’s practical significance lies in showing that framing and design choices can have real social and emotional consequences in human–AI communication.”</p>
<p>The researchers also highlight the importance of ethical considerations. Designing chatbots that appear more human could support emotional expression, but intentionally misleading users raises concerns, especially in mental health contexts. Deception, even subtle, can harm trust and may not be appropriate when users are vulnerable. </p>
<p>“A key point to clarify is that the study does not advocate for deceiving users or pretending that chatbots are human. The results show that social framing can change how people respond, but this effect occurred even when participants knew it wasn’t human.”</p>
<p>As with all research, the new study has some limitations. The sample size was small, with only 22 participants, and the conversations were short and took place in a controlled online setting. It is unclear whether the same effects would occur in longer or more emotionally intense conversations. Also, while people disclosed more to the chatbot they believed was human, their behavior may have been influenced by the novelty of the task or a desire to comply with perceived expectations.</p>
<p>“We want to scale this up with larger and more diverse samples, bring it into real-world settings (including sensitive topics), and test with various LLM-based agents (via LEXI, Large Language Models Experimentation Interface, an open source graphical interface I developed for such behavioural experiments online, see <a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3687272.3688296" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1145/3687272.3688296</a>) and embodied agents (like social robots) to examine the extent to which socio-affective linguistic and identity cues can responsibly affect healthy disclosure, as well as the introduction of these agents in well-being settings. Therefore, we will also examine how these interactions make people feel and reappraise their emotions over time (see e.g., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01207-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01207-0</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.18243" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.18243</a>).</p>
<p>“This project is part of a series of studies in which we examined how people self-disclose and socially share their emotions with artificial agents and robots, why people do that, and how it makes them feel (see a review paper on the matter, including a synthesis of some of the studies conducted: <a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10700607" target="_blank">https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10700607</a>).”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100174" target="_blank">Knowledge cues to human origins facilitate self-disclosure during interactions with chatbots</a>,” was authored by Gabriella Warren-Smith, Guy Laban, Emily-Marie Pacheco, and Emily S. Cross.</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/cannabis-use-associated-with-a-reduction-in-alcohol-intake/" 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;">Cannabis use associated with a reduction in alcohol intake</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 11th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study reports that for some heavy drinkers, using cannabis may be associated with consuming less alcohol. This reduction in drinking appears linked to a decrease in alcohol craving that occurs after cannabis use, a finding that offers a potential mechanism for why some people might substitute one substance for the other. The research was published in the journal <em>Drug and Alcohol Dependence</em>.</p>
<p>The relationship between cannabis and alcohol use is complex, with past research offering conflicting pictures of how the two substances interact. Some studies suggest that using cannabis increases alcohol consumption, a relationship known as complementarity. Other evidence points to a substitution effect, where people use cannabis in place of alcohol, potentially as a form of harm reduction. </p>
<p>This lack of a clear consensus prompted a team of researchers from Colorado State University and the University of Colorado to investigate the dynamic under controlled laboratory conditions. They aimed to directly test how self-administering commercially available cannabis would affect a person’s subsequent desire to drink alcohol.</p>
<p>To explore this question, the study involved 61 adults between the ages of 21 and 60 who regularly engaged in heavy drinking and used cannabis flower at least three times per week. Each participant acted as their own baseline for comparison by attending two separate laboratory sessions. The sessions took place in a mobile laboratory, a specialized vehicle parked outside the participant’s residence. This unique setup allowed researchers to study the effects of legal, commercial cannabis products, which federal regulations prohibit bringing onto university campuses.</p>
<p>In one session, referred to as the “alcohol only” condition, individuals consumed a small alcoholic “priming” drink, calculated to raise their blood alcohol content just enough to initiate a desire to drink more. Over the next hour, they were given the chance to consume up to four additional alcoholic beverages. To provide an alternative choice, participants received one dollar for each drink they declined. Throughout this period, they periodically rated their level of alcohol craving on a standardized scale.</p>
<p>The second session followed an almost identical procedure, with one key difference. Before receiving the priming drink, participants went inside their residence to use their own cannabis flower product at a dose they would typically consume. After using cannabis, they returned to the mobile lab, where researchers took a blood sample before proceeding with the alcohol administration portion of the experiment. The order of these two sessions, one with cannabis and one without, was randomized for different participants to ensure the sequence did not influence the results.</p>
<p>When the researchers analyzed the data, they found a notable pattern in overall alcohol consumption. On average, participants drank approximately 25 percent fewer alcoholic drinks during the session where they first used cannabis compared to the session with alcohol alone. The mean number of drinks consumed dropped from 2.09 in the alcohol-only session to 1.60 in the session that included cannabis.</p>
<p>To understand this average effect better, the team looked at individual behaviors and identified three distinct patterns. One group of 23 participants, termed “substituters,” drank fewer alcoholic beverages after using cannabis. Another group of 23, the “non-substituters,” drank the same number of drinks or more. A third group of 15 participants, called “abstainers,” chose not to consume any of the additional drinks in either of the sessions.</p>
<p>The most informative difference between the groups emerged when the researchers examined self-reported alcohol cravings. The “substituters” reported a significant drop in their urge to drink at several points in time after they had consumed cannabis. In contrast, the craving levels for “non-substituters” remained relatively stable or even slightly increased during the session that combined cannabis and alcohol. This suggests that for individuals who end up drinking less, a cannabis-induced reduction in alcohol craving may be an important contributing factor.</p>
<p>The team also checked if the amount of cannabis consumed could explain these different behaviors. An analysis of blood samples showed no significant difference in the concentration of THC, the main psychoactive component in cannabis, between the substituter and non-substituter groups. This finding indicates that the tendency to substitute cannabis for alcohol was not simply due to consuming a larger or more potent dose of cannabis. Instead, it points toward individual differences in how people respond to the substance.</p>
<p>The authors acknowledged several limitations to their work that suggest areas for future inquiry. The experiment took place in a mobile laboratory, which is not a typical setting for drinking, and this environment may have influenced participants’ behavior. Because individuals used their own cannabis, the dose and potency were not experimentally controlled, a trade-off made to increase the study’s real-world relevance. Cannabis was always administered before alcohol, so the study cannot determine if the order of consumption matters.</p>
<p>Additionally, the study’s population was not broadly diverse, with a majority of participants identifying as White and male, meaning the results may not apply to other demographic groups. Future research could address these points by replicating the study in larger and more varied populations. </p>
<p>Scientists could also examine the effects of different cannabis products, such as edibles or concentrates, and control the dose and chemical composition to better understand dose-response relationships. Combining laboratory experiments with real-world monitoring using technologies like alcohol biosensors could provide a more complete picture of co-use patterns.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112860" target="_blank">Cannabis administration is associated with reduced alcohol consumption: Evidence from a novel laboratory co-administration paradigm</a>,” was authored by Claire L. Pince, Vanessa T. Stallsmith, Cianna J. Piercey, Katelyn Weldon, Jesse Ruehrmund, Gregory Dooley, L. Cinnamon Bidwell, and Hollis C. Karoly.</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>