<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/neuroscience-explains-why-writing-creates-mental-clarity/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Neuroscience explains why writing creates mental clarity</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 1st 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Ordinary and universal, the act of writing changes the brain. From dashing off a heated text message to composing an op-ed, writing allows you to, at once, name your pain and create distance from it. Writing can shift your mental state from overwhelm and despair to grounded clarity — a shift that reflects resilience.</p>
<p>Psychology, the media and the wellness industry shape public perceptions of resilience: Social scientists study it, journalists celebrate it, and wellness brands sell it.</p>
<p>They all tell a similar story: Resilience is an individual quality that people can strengthen with effort. The <a href="https://www.apa.org/topics/resilience">American Psychological Association defines resilience</a> as an ongoing process of personal growth through life’s challenges. News headlines routinely praise individuals who <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/06/16/terminal-cancer-diagnosis-palliative-care/">refuse to give up</a> or <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/18/a-memorable-year-readers-reveal-their-silver-linings">find silver linings</a> in times of hardship. The wellness industry <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/08/the-self-help-cult-of-resilience-teaches-australians-nothing">promotes relentless self-improvement</a> as the path to resilience.</p>
<p>In my work as a <a href="https://writingstudies.ucmerced.edu/content/emily-r%C3%B3nay-johnston">professor of writing studies</a>, I research how people use writing to navigate trauma and practice resilience. I have witnessed thousands of students turn to the written word to work through emotions and find a sense of belonging. Their writing habits suggest that writing fosters resilience. Insights from psychology and neuroscience can help explain how.</p>
<h2>Writing rewires the brain</h2>
<p>In the 1980s, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=KYOCMe0AAAAJ&hl=en">psychologist James Pennebaker</a> developed a therapeutic technique called <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0021-843X.95.3.274">expressive writing</a> to help patients process trauma and psychological challenges. With this technique, continuously journaling about something painful helps create mental distance from the experience and eases its cognitive load.</p>
<p>In other words, externalizing emotional distress through writing fosters safety. Expressive writing turns pain into a metaphorical book on a shelf, ready to be reopened with intention. It signals the brain, “You don’t need to carry this anymore.”</p>
<p>Translating emotions and thoughts into words on paper is a <a href="https://uwaterloo.ca/writing-and-communication-centre/blog/psychologically-speaking-your-brain-writing">complex mental task</a>. It involves retrieving memories and planning what to do with them, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.076">engaging brain areas</a> associated with memory and decision-making. It also involves <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-mental-dictionary-is-part-of-what-makes-you-unique-heres-how-your-brain-stores-and-retrieves-words-212751">putting those memories into language</a>, activating the brain’s visual and motor systems.</p>
<p>Writing things down <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3856">supports memory consolidation</a> — the brain’s conversion of short-term memories into long-term ones. The process of integration makes it possible for people to reframe painful experiences and manage their emotions. In essence, writing can help free the mind to be in the here and now.</p>
<h2>Taking action through writing</h2>
<p>The state of presence that writing can elicit is not just an abstract feeling; it reflects complex activity in the nervous system.</p>
<p>Brain imaging studies show that putting feelings into words <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsx084">helps regulate emotions</a>. Labeling emotions — whether through expletives and emojis or carefully chosen words — has multiple benefits. It calms the amygdala, a cluster of neurons that detects threat and triggers the fear response: <a href="https://health.clevelandclinic.org/what-happens-to-your-body-during-the-fight-or-flight-response">fight, flight, freeze or fawn</a>. It also engages the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-021-01132-0">prefrontal cortex</a>, a part of the brain that supports goal-setting and problem-solving.</p>
<p>In other words, the simple act of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.01.053">naming your emotions</a> can help you shift from reaction to response. Instead of identifying with your feelings and mistaking them for facts, writing can help you simply become aware of what’s arising and prepare for deliberate action.</p>
<p>Even mundane writing tasks like <a href="https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20241111-stressed-writing-down-a-to-do-list-might-help">making a to-do list</a> stimulate parts of the brain involved in reasoning and decision-making, helping you regain focus.</p>
<h2>Making meaning through writing</h2>
<p>Choosing to write is also choosing to make meaning. Studies suggest that having a sense of agency is both a prerequisite for, and an outcome of, writing.</p>
<p>Researchers have long documented how <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.004">writing is a cognitive activity</a> — one that people use to communicate, yes, but also to understand the human experience. As many in the field of writing studies recognize, <a href="https://upcolorado.com/utah-state-university-press/item/2705-naming-what-we-know">writing is a form of thinking</a> — a practice that people never stop learning. With that, writing has the potential to continually reshape the mind. Writing not only expresses but actively creates identity.</p>
<p>Writing also regulates your psychological state. And the words you write are themselves proof of regulation — the evidence of resilience.</p>
<p>Popular coverage of human resilience often presents it as extraordinary endurance. <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/09/29/nx-s1-5535581/new-orleans-survivors-mental-health-ptsd-hurricane-katrina-resiliency">News coverage of natural disasters</a> implies that the more severe the trauma, the greater the personal growth. <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests/personality/resilience-test">Pop psychology</a> often equates resilience with unwavering optimism. Such representations can obscure ordinary forms of adaptation. Strategies people already use to cope with everyday life — from rage-texting to drafting a resignation letter — signify transformation.</p>
<h2>Building resilience through writing</h2>
<p>These research-backed tips can help you develop a writing practice conducive to resilience:</p>
<p><strong>1. Write by hand whenever possible.</strong> In contrast to typing or tapping on a device, <a href="https://laist.com/news/education/why-writing-by-hand-beats-typing-for-thinking-and-learning">handwriting requires greater cognitive coordination</a>. It slows your thinking, allowing you to process information, form connections and make meaning.</p>
<p><strong>2. Write daily.</strong> Start small and make it regular. Even jotting brief notes about your day — what happened, what you’re feeling, what you’re planning or intending — can help you get thoughts out of your head and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2013.802308">ease rumination</a>.</p>
<p><strong>3. Write before reacting.</strong> When strong feelings surge, write them down first. Keep a notebook within reach and make it a habit to write it before you say it. Doing so can <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002">support reflective thinking</a>, helping you act with purpose and clarity.</p>
<p><strong>4. Write a letter you never send.</strong> Don’t just write down your feelings — address them to the person or situation that’s troubling you. Even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-023-02097-5">writing a letter to yourself</a> can provide a safe space for release without the pressure of someone else’s reaction.</p>
<p><strong>5. Treat writing as a process.</strong> Any time you draft something and ask for feedback on it, you practice stepping back to consider alternative perspectives. Applying that feedback through revision can <a href="https://krieger.jhu.edu/writing-program/writing-toolkit/concepts-and-practices/writing-for-metacognition/">strengthen self-awareness</a> and <a href="https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/16/01/its-good-lets-make-it-great#">build confidence</a>.</p>
<p>Resilience may be as ordinary as the journal entries people scribble, the emails they exchange, the task lists they create — even the essays students pound out for professors.</p>
<p>The act of writing is adaptation in progress.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img decoding="async" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/265188/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1"><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/writing-builds-resilience-by-changing-your-brain-helping-you-face-everyday-challenges-265188">original article</a>.</em></p>
<p> </p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/autistic-individuals-are-more-prosocial-towards-strangers-and-people-they-barely-know/" 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;">Autistic individuals are more prosocial towards strangers and people they barely know</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 1st 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study found that autistic adults tend to be more prosocial towards socially distant individuals compared to their non-autistic peers. These differences were not driven by repetitive responding that is typical of autism. The paper was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613251385029"><em>Autism</em></a>.</p>
<p>Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by differences in social communication, sensory processing, and patterns of behavior that may include strong interests and a preference for routine. Autistic individuals tend to experience the world with heightened or reduced sensitivity to sensory input, which can influence how they interact with their environment.</p>
<p>The social behaviors of many autistic individuals differ from typical norms, but these differences often reflect communication styles rather than a lack of social motivation. Research shows that autistic individuals can display strong prosocial behaviors, such as helping, sharing, and comforting, especially when situations are clear and expectations are explicit.</p>
<p>Compared to non-autistic individuals, autistic people tend to rely more on rules, fairness principles, or empathy based on understanding others’ situations rather than on reading subtle emotional cues. When tasks are structured and communication is direct, autistic individuals often show prosocial responses equal to or greater than their non-autistic peers.</p>
<p>Study author Paul AG Forbes and his colleagues note that previous studies suggest that autistic individuals show a flatter decline in generosity towards socially distant others compared with non-autistic individuals. In other words, non-autistic individuals tend to be the most generous with the people closest to them, but their generosity decreases relatively quickly when more distant individuals (those they do not know well or at all) are considered. This decline in generosity is present in autistic individuals as well, but it is much slower and less steep.</p>
<p>The authors of this study wanted to know whether this less pronounced decline in generosity with social distance is a consequence of autistic individuals’ preference for repetitive responding (whereby they might respond in the same way regardless of how close the person is to them) or is caused by genuinely higher prosociality.</p>
<p>Study participants were 37 autistic and 38 non-autistic adults. They were recruited via a local database of participants at University College London. 36 of them were women. The average age of autistic individuals was 34, and it was 39 for the non-autistic group.</p>
<p>Participants first completed the six primary items of the Social Value Orientation (SVO) questionnaire. In these six items, they needed to allocate money to themselves and another person. The items offered various combinations of amounts allocated to the participant and to another individual.</p>
<p>In each item, combinations of amounts given to oneself and to the other are presented differently on a slider; therefore, choosing the same relative position on the slider in different items results in different distributions of money.</p>
<p>Study participants completed this six times with instructions each time to imagine an individual with a specific social distance from them, ranging from people very close to them, to people they barely know, to people who are complete strangers.</p>
<p>For very close others, participants were told not to think of anyone with whom they share a household or a bank account (as giving money to those people might be like giving money to oneself), nor anyone they have negative feelings toward. </p>
<p>To ensure the results reflected genuine behavior, the decisions were incentivized: participants were informed that a computer would randomly select choices to be paid out in real money. At the end of the study procedure, participants completed an assessment of attitudes towards money.</p>
<p>Results showed that as the social distance increased, the generosity of non-autistic participants decreased faster than the generosity of autistic participants. In other words, autistic participants were more generous towards strangers and people they barely knew than non-autistic individuals.</p>
<p>Further analysis showed that these differences were not caused by repetitive behavior (i.e., autistic people’s preference to give the same answer every time). There were also no differences between the two groups in their attitudes toward money.</p>
<p>“Autistic individuals showed enhanced prosocial behavior, replicating previous work. Compared with non-autistic participants, autistic adults were more generous towards people they felt less close to. We extend previous work by showing that these effects were not due to more repetitive responding in autism nor due to differences in attitudes towards money. Our findings support an emerging view that while autistic people often face challenges navigating their social worlds, autism is associated with more prosocial behavior,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study contributes to the scientific understanding of autism. However, it should be noted that the study was conducted on a relatively small group of participants.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613251385029">Increased prosocial value orientation in autistic adults,</a>” was authored by Paul AG Forbes, Gillian Hughes, Leonhard Schilbach, Sarah White, and Tobias Kalenscher.</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/psychedelics-may-enhance-emotional-closeness-and-relationship-satisfaction-when-used-therapeutically/" 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;">Psychedelics may enhance emotional closeness and relationship satisfaction when used therapeutically</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new systematic review suggests that psychedelic drugs may facilitate feelings of intimacy and social connection, particularly when administered in controlled clinical settings. While the analysis provides evidence for positive outcomes like increased empathy and relationship satisfaction, it also indicates that recreational use carries significant risks of social disconnection and negative interpersonal experiences. The findings were published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2025.2577311" target="_blank">Journal of Psychoactive Drugs</a></em>.</p>
<p>The research was conducted by Anna Bradford, a master’s candidate in psychological counseling at Columbia University; Ethan Freedman, a master of social work candidate at Columbia University; and Rachel E. Dinero, an associate professor of psychology at Le Moyne College and head of <a href="https://sites.google.com/lemoyne.edu/ash-lab" target="_blank">the Applied Social Health Lab</a>.</p>
<p>This team sought to investigate the potential of pharmaceutical interventions to improve relationship functioning. Recent years have seen a resurgence of interest in psychedelic substances within the medical community. Clinical trials have explored the efficacy of drugs like psilocybin and MDMA for treating conditions such as depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.</p>
<p>However, fewer studies have focused specifically on how these substances affect intimacy. Intimacy is generally defined as the experience of emotional closeness and interdependence between individuals. It is a fundamental component of human well-being.</p>
<p>The rationale for the study stems from the profound impact of social relationships on physical and mental health. Previous data indicates that a lack of positive social bonds can increase mortality rates. The health risks associated with loneliness are comparable to those of smoking or obesity. Given this context, the researchers wanted to determine if psychedelics could serve as a tool to foster connection.</p>
<p>“Our research team is somewhat unique in its interdisciplinary perspective on relationship functioning. Our backgrounds collectively include counseling, human sexuality, attachment, public health, and pharmaceutical intervention effectiveness,” the researchers told PsyPost. </p>
<p>“Our frameworks intersected in a common interest in understanding what types of interventions are effective in improving relationship functioning. We were collectively intrigued with the possible role that pharmaceutical intervention, specifically psychedelic drugs, might have in improving relationships outcomes.” </p>
<p>“There has been increasing interest across the last two decades in the use of psychedelic and psychedelic-related drugs on psychological disorders like depression and PTSD. Early research is promising but the use of these drugs as a pharmaceutical intervention remains controversial.” </p>
<p>“From our perspective, the first step in understanding what impact psychedelic drugs might have on relationship functioning was to see what research already existed and what we can learn from looking a the findings of this body of research as a whole.” </p>
<p>The team searched through seven major academic databases. They used search terms related to a wide range of psychedelic substances, including psilocybin, MDMA, LSD, ayahuasca, and ketamine. They paired these terms with keywords related to intimacy, sexuality, and close relationships.</p>
<p>The initial search yielded 5,902 potential articles. The researchers then went through a multi-step screening process. They removed duplicate entries and screened abstracts for relevance.</p>
<p>Ultimately, they identified 19 studies that met all inclusion criteria. To be included, a study had to be peer-reviewed and published in English. It also had to measure outcomes related to intimacy specifically.</p>
<p>The final selection of studies encompassed a variety of research designs. Nine of the studies were conducted in laboratory settings. These involved researchers administering specific dosages in a controlled environment.</p>
<p>Six of the laboratory studies utilized placebo-controlled experimental designs. This is the gold standard for pharmacological research. It helps distinguish the drug’s pharmacological effects from the participant’s expectations.</p>
<p>The remaining ten studies relied on retrospective self-reports. These involved participants describing their past experiences with drug use in non-clinical, naturalistic settings. This included recreational use or participation in guided retreats.</p>
<p>The review revealed a distinct pattern of results based on the setting of the drug use. The findings from the controlled laboratory studies were overwhelmingly positive regarding intimacy outcomes. In all nine laboratory studies, participants reported improvements in social functioning.</p>
<p>One notable study included in the review examined the effects of MDMA on communication. Participants who received MDMA used more social and emotional words during a standardized talking task compared to those who received a placebo. This suggests that the drug may facilitate emotional disclosure.</p>
<p>Another reviewed study compared psilocybin therapy to a standard antidepressant regimen for major depression. The results indicated that psilocybin was more effective at increasing feelings of connectedness to others. This effect appeared to persist for months after the treatment.</p>
<p>Research involving couples was also highlighted in the review. One study utilized MDMA-assisted therapy for couples where one partner suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. Both partners reported higher relationship satisfaction following the intervention.</p>
<p>The review also touched on specific populations that might benefit from these interventions. For instance, one study involved autistic adults who experienced social challenges. After MDMA-assisted therapy, these participants reported reduced social anxiety.</p>
<p>Similarly, a study involving long-term AIDS survivors found that psilocybin-assisted group therapy helped reduce attachment anxiety. Attachment anxiety is characterized by a fear of abandonment and a desire for extreme closeness. However, this study also noted that those with high attachment avoidance faced more challenges during the psychedelic experience.</p>
<p>The findings from the naturalistic and recreational studies presented a more complex picture. Of the ten studies relying on retrospective reports, six identified positive intimacy-related experiences. Participants described feelings of deep interconnection, empathy, and love.</p>
<p>One survey of people who attended psychedelic ceremonies found that a sense of “communitas” was a key factor. Communitas refers to an intense spirit of community and equality. Those who experienced this during the ceremony reported enduring increases in social connectedness weeks later.</p>
<p>However, the naturalistic studies also provided evidence of significant negative outcomes. Four of the self-report studies documented adverse effects on intimacy. Some users reported feeling socially disconnected or isolated following their experience.</p>
<p>Specific negative outcomes included increased social anxiety and feelings of distrust. In a study examining “chemsex,” which involves using drugs to facilitate sexual encounters, a portion of participants reported that the practice negatively impacted their intimate relationships. This highlights the potential for harm when these substances are used without therapeutic guidance.</p>
<p>Another study interviewed individuals who had experienced difficulties after psychedelic use. These participants reported communication breakdowns and a sense of being judged by others. Some described a state of social withdrawal or “shutdown” after the drug experience.</p>
<p>The researchers also noted that mixing substances could alter outcomes. One cross-sectional survey found that co-using low doses of MDMA with psilocybin or LSD was associated with higher reports of love. However, this did not necessarily reduce feelings of isolation compared to using the substances alone.</p>
<p>Based on these mixed results, the authors suggest that the setting is a major determinant of the outcome. The presence of a trained professional appears to be a protective factor. Therapists can help integrate the experience and manage difficult emotions that arise.</p>
<p>“There is preliminary evidence that psychedelic drugs can have a short-term positive impact on the experience of emotional intimacy, specifically when these drugs are used in a controlled context with a therapist or other trained professional’s support,” the researchers explained. “There are significant risks and negative outcomes associated with recreational psychedelic use.” </p>
<p>“Additionally, more controlled clinical trials are needed to understand what individuals might benefit from this treatment and the specific therapeutic environments that would support positive outcomes.”</p>
<p>As with all research, there are some caveats to consider. The review only included peer-reviewed, published studies. This introduces the possibility of publication bias, where studies with null or negative results are less likely to be published.</p>
<p>Additionally, the reliance on self-report measures in many of the studies is a limitation. Retrospective accounts are subject to memory errors. Participants may remember their experiences as more positive or negative than they were at the time.</p>
<p>The review also notes that “intimacy” was measured in many different ways across the studies. Some used validated psychological scales, while others relied on interviews or behavioral tasks. This makes it difficult to directly compare the magnitude of the effects across all studies.</p>
<p>The authors also raise a safety concern regarding the therapeutic relationship. Psychedelics can induce a state of heightened suggestibility and emotional openness. This can blur boundaries and potentially lead to stronger transference toward the facilitator.</p>
<p>This vulnerability underscores the need for strict ethical guidelines and professional training. The potential for manipulation or emotional harm exists if the facilitator is not properly trained. The authors caution that safety protocols are essential.</p>
<p>“Psychedelic drugs, especially MDMA, are often used recreationally because of the perceived benefits on emotional and sexuality intimacy,” the researchers said. “Unfortunately, recreational use of these drugs often results in the opposite effect. Additionally, psychedelic drugs have significant short and long-term negative effects on users that are more likely in recreational settings. Due to these risks, there is a stigma toward the use of psychedelic drugs, even in clinical settings.” </p>
<p>“There are, of course, significant risks to using these drugs. However, many pharmaceutical interventions have significant risks if not used as directed by medical professionals. We hope this study can help build understanding that there is real potential for these drugs to have clinical benefits. Ideally, this understanding could translate into more research that would provide the information needed to whether and how these drugs can be used to improve relationship functioning.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2025.2577311" target="_blank">Psychedelic Use and Intimacy: A Systematic Review of Experimental and Naturalistic Research</a>,” was authored by Anna Bradford, Ethan Freedman, and Rachel E. Dinero.</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/an-ai-label-fails-to-trigger-negative-bias-in-new-pop-music-study/" 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;">An “AI” label fails to trigger negative bias in new pop music study</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A study in Singapore found that, contrary to expectations, study participants rated pop songs labelled as AI-generated more highly in positive emotions compared to pop songs (which were also AI-generated) that were labelled as human-composed. The positive emotions included happiness, interest, awe, and energy. Consequently, this study found no evidence of negative bias towards AI-generated music. The paper was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100217"><em>Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans</em></a>.</p>
<p>In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems to generate music has been gradually transforming the way in which music is composed. AI music generation systems use machine learning models to create melodies, harmonies, rhythms, and full musical pieces based on patterns learned from large collections of human-made music. </p>
<p>These systems can compose in many styles, from classical orchestral arrangements to electronic beats or film-score atmospheres. Many musicians have started using AI as a creative tool to quickly explore ideas or generate variations they might not think of on their own.</p>
<p>However, some people view AI-generated music with skepticism because they fear it lacks genuine emotion or human intention. Others worry that AI tools could replace human artists or reduce appreciation for traditional craftsmanship. </p>
<p>This leads to a theoretical “negative bias” where people judge AI music more harshly than they would judge the same piece if they thought a human composed it. Sometimes, people rate a piece of music as less creative when told it was made by AI, even if the sound is identical to a piece they rated more favorably.</p>
<p>Study author Suqi Chia and their colleagues wanted to explore whether there really is a negative bias towards AI-generated music. They conducted a study in which they used the same set of AI-generated pop songs but randomly decided which to label as human-composed and which to label as AI-generated. </p>
<p>They reasoned that if people have indeed learned to associate AI-generated music with being less emotional, less immersive, or less meaningful, then labelling a song as AI-composed should activate these expectations and influence the evaluations.</p>
<p>The study participants were 64 university students. Forty-six of them were women, and the participants’ average age was 20 years. Eighty-three percent ranked pop music among their top three favorite genres. While the initial number of participants was higher (90), some were excluded because they correctly guessed the purpose of the study or because they were not paying attention.</p>
<p>The study authors used Suno AI, a program designed to generate songs with vocals and instrumentation, to create eight pop songs. All songs were created using the prompt “pop genre, happy and chill”. Half of the songs featured female vocals and the other half featured male vocals. In this experiment, participants listened to song excerpts that were 30 seconds long, taken from the chorus section of each song.</p>
<p>Participants listened to all eight excerpts in a randomized order. However, for four of the excerpts, they were told that the song was composed by a human, while for the other four, participants were told that the songs were AI-generated. </p>
<p>The decision of which songs were labeled as human-composed and which as AI-generated was randomized. For each song, the study authors also used a made-up composer name, sounding either like an AI (e.g., TuneSoft) or like a human composer (e.g., Victoria Moore).</p>
<p>After listening to each piece, the participants’ task was to provide ratings on how much they liked the music, their emotional responses (happiness, interest, awe, and energy), their sensorial responses, whether the music created pictures in their minds, their experiential responses (e.g., “I felt as if I were part of the song”), their need to re-experience the song (e.g., “I would enjoy listening to this song again”), and how likely they would be to purchase the song.</p>
<p>Contrary to expectations, the results showed no negative bias towards songs labelled as AI-generated. Moreover, participants rated songs labelled as AI-generated more highly in positive emotions—including happiness, interest, awe, and energy—compared to those labelled as human-composed.</p>
<p>“These results suggest that while the perception of AI authorship does influence listeners, the effects are primarily affective rather than sensorial, imaginal, experiential, or behavioral. Notably, considering that listeners rated pop songs labelled as AI-generated more positively in emotions, the findings imply that AI-generated music may be more readily accepted than previously assumed,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study contributes to the scientific understanding of people’s perceptions of AI music. However, it should be noted that study participants were a small group of university students from Singapore. Results for other demographic groups or people from other cultures might differ.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100217">Do listeners devalue AI-generated pop music? Exploring negative biases in listeners’ responses to AI-labelled vs human-labelled pop music,</a>” was authored by Suqi Chia, Andree Hartanto, and Eddie M.W. Tong.</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/learning-via-chatgpt-leads-to-shallower-knowledge-than-using-google-search-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;">Learning via ChatGPT leads to shallower knowledge than using Google search, study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022, millions of people have started using large language models to access knowledge. And it’s easy to understand their appeal: Ask a question, get a polished synthesis and move on – it feels like effortless learning.</p>
<p>However, a new paper I co-authored offers experimental evidence that this ease may come at a cost: When people rely on large language models to summarize information on a topic for them, they tend to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf316">develop shallower knowledge</a> about it compared to learning through a standard Google search.</p>
<p>Co-author <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=x0S_vSgAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">Jin Ho Yun</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=1UnvjWoAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">and I</a>, both professors of marketing, reported this finding in a paper based on seven studies with more than 10,000 participants. Most of the studies used the same basic paradigm: Participants were asked to learn about a topic – such as how to grow a vegetable garden – and were randomly assigned to do so by using either an LLM like ChatGPT or the “old-fashioned way,” by navigating links using a standard Google search.</p>
<p>No restrictions were put on how they used the tools; they could search on Google as long as they wanted and could continue to prompt ChatGPT if they felt they wanted more information. Once they completed their research, they were then asked to write advice to a friend on the topic based on what they learned.</p>
<p>The data revealed a consistent pattern: People who learned about a topic through an LLM versus web search felt that they learned less, invested less effort in subsequently writing their advice, and ultimately wrote advice that was shorter, less factual and more generic. In turn, when this advice was presented to an independent sample of readers, who were unaware of which tool had been used to learn about the topic, they found the advice to be less informative, less helpful, and they were less likely to adopt it.</p>
<p>We found these differences to be robust across a variety of contexts. For example, one possible reason LLM users wrote briefer and more generic advice is simply that the LLM results exposed users to less eclectic information than the Google results. To control for this possibility, we conducted an experiment where participants were exposed to an identical set of facts in the results of their Google and ChatGPT searches. Likewise, in another experiment we held constant the search platform – Google – and varied whether participants learned from standard Google results or Google’s AI Overview feature.</p>
<p>The findings confirmed that, even when holding the facts and platform constant, learning from synthesized LLM responses led to shallower knowledge compared to gathering, interpreting and synthesizing information for oneself via standard web links.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Why did the use of LLMs appear to diminish learning? One of the most fundamental principles of skill development is that people learn best when they are <a href="https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10321235">actively engaged with the material</a> they are trying to learn.</p>
<p>When we learn about a topic through Google search, we face much more “friction”: We must navigate different web links, read informational sources, and interpret and synthesize them ourselves.</p>
<p>While more challenging, this friction leads to the development of a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.569">deeper, more original mental representation</a> of the topic at hand. But with LLMs, this entire process is done on the user’s behalf, transforming learning from a more active to passive process.</p>
<h2>What’s next?</h2>
<p>To be clear, we do not believe the solution to these issues is to avoid using LLMs, especially given the undeniable benefits they offer in many contexts. Rather, our message is that people simply need to become smarter or more strategic users of LLMs – which starts by understanding the domains wherein LLMs are beneficial versus harmful to their goals.</p>
<p>Need a quick, factual answer to a question? Feel free to use your favorite AI co-pilot. But if your aim is to develop deep and generalizable knowledge in an area, relying on LLM syntheses alone will be less helpful.</p>
<p>As part of my research on the psychology of new technology and new media, I am also interested in whether it’s possible to make LLM learning a more active process. In <a href="https://oup.silverchair-cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/pnasnexus/4/10/10.1093_pnasnexus_pgaf316/1/pgaf316_supplementary_data.pdf?Expires=1766054688&Signature=Xqnv2Q42RUMys-17wZLGfTGKhagRvNecWWw-ddF~hNg3mAoMm1ZM78-4Smt7VMdTPH7o3vWWBPA~t-5SYa26yPR8~1WYsyJ7Q0FGgvubbfC776neCu-W7g4uocv8Yr70xDwGVecHCVEYp7nA8louP2qbTV0FCeho5rx9CWyG~JJf29NmkWhfuNMpWkrTSpC-8aiH-G4bAviyW3dgCw5eKHV81063yz6ebK9tueV18tjDGxY1ke05g9MRcKlJfThQTHTiNW9-eN6dUPFvxGasGkw-GxdNKfTDyVv8cJfXY6HI1TCmJHALTM4oam-H5vIVvSzmmvZC7vWZZ2R7XRky6A__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA">another experiment</a> we tested this by having participants engage with a specialized GPT model that offered real-time web links alongside its synthesized responses. There, however, we found that once participants received an LLM summary, they weren’t motivated to dig deeper into the original sources. The result was that the participants still developed shallower knowledge compared to those who used standard Google.</p>
<p>Building on this, in my future research I plan to study generative AI tools that impose healthy frictions for learning tasks – specifically, examining which types of guardrails or speed bumps most successfully motivate users to actively learn more beyond easy, synthesized answers. Such tools would seem particularly critical in secondary education, where a major challenge for educators is how best to equip students to develop foundational reading, writing and math skills while also preparing for a real world where LLMs are likely to be an integral part of their daily lives.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/learning-with-ai-falls-short-compared-to-old-fashioned-web-search-269760">original article</a>.</em></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/participating-in-activist-groups-may-increase-narcissism-and-psychopathy-over-time/" 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;">Participating in activist groups linked to increased narcissism and psychopathy over time</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new longitudinal study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113495" target="_blank">Personality and Individual Differences</a></em> provides evidence of a complex, two-way relationship between environmental activism and specific personality traits. The findings suggest that while manipulative and aggressive tendencies can predict involvement in environmental causes, engaging in activism may also reinforce traits such as narcissism and psychopathy over time.</p>
<p>Hannes Zacher, a professor at Leipzig University, conducted this research to investigate the psychological underpinnings of environmental engagement. Previous cross-sectional research has often linked environmentalism with positive traits like agreeableness and openness. However, more controversial tactics employed by groups such as Last Generation have prompted questions about potential “dark” personality traits among activists.</p>
<p>Zacher aimed to test two competing psychological theories regarding this relationship. The first is the dark-ego-vehicle principle, which posits that individuals with high levels of dark traits are drawn to activism to satisfy ego-focused needs, such as a desire for status or dominance. The second framework is self-perception theory, which suggests that people infer their own personality characteristics by observing their past behaviors.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.psypost.org/dark-personality-traits-linked-to-engagement-in-environmental-activism/" target="_blank">a previous 2024 study</a>, Zacher observed positive associations between environmental activism and traits such as Machiavellianism, narcissism, and left-wing authoritarianism. But that research relied on data collected at a single point in time. This limited the ability to determine whether these personality traits drive people to become activists or if the experience of activism actually changes a person’s character.</p>
<p>For his new study, the researcher utilized a panel study design involving employed individuals in Germany. The study included 1,998 participants at the first time point. One year later, 1,199 of these individuals provided follow-up data that could be matched to their initial responses.</p>
<p>The study measured three distinct forms of environmental activism. The first was civic environmental actions, which included general activities like attending rallies or organizing events. The second was direct participation in specific activist groups, namely Fridays for Future and Last Generation. The third measure assessed the level of support a participant felt for these activist groups.</p>
<p>Participants also completed the “Dirty Dozen” scale to assess the dark triad of personality. This includes Machiavellianism, characterized by manipulation and strategic calculation; narcissism, defined by grandiosity and entitlement; and psychopathy, which involves impulsivity and a lack of empathy. Additionally, the study measured three dimensions of left-wing authoritarianism: antihierarchical aggression, anticonventionalism, and top-down censorship.</p>
<p>The researcher used statistical models to determine whether personality traits at the first time point predicted activism one year later. These models also tested the reverse possibility: whether engaging in activism predicted changes in personality traits over the subsequent year.</p>
<p>The results revealed a reciprocal relationship regarding Machiavellianism. Individuals with higher levels of Machiavellianism were more likely to engage in civic environmental actions one year later. Simultaneously, those who engaged in civic actions showed increased levels of Machiavellianism over the course of the year.</p>
<p>This finding aligns with the idea that the strategic and alliance-building nature of activism may appeal to those with Machiavellian tendencies. It also suggests that the environment of political engagement might reinforce these manipulative traits.</p>
<p>Regarding left-wing authoritarianism, the study found that antihierarchical aggression predicted greater participation in environmental activist groups. This dimension involves a desire to overthrow established power structures and punish those in power. </p>
<p>This predictive link supports the notion that individuals with aggressive, anti-establishment views are drawn to groups advocating for systemic change. However, the reverse was not true; participation did not predict subsequent increases in antihierarchical aggression.</p>
<p>A different pattern emerged for narcissism, offering a notable divergence from earlier results. The data did not support previous findings that narcissism predicts engagement in civic actions or support for activist groups. Instead, participation in activist groups predicted higher levels of narcissism one year later. </p>
<p>This contradicts the dark-ego-vehicle assumption for this trait but lends support to self-perception theory. It suggests that the act of participating in high-profile, often moralized group activities may cultivate a sense of grandiosity or moral superiority over time.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most unexpected findings concerned psychopathy. The researcher had not initially hypothesized a link here, and the 2024 study found no unique associations. Yet, the current analysis showed that both civic environmental actions and participation in activist groups predicted higher levels of psychopathy one year later.</p>
<p>This suggests that the confrontational nature of certain forms of activism might foster characteristics associated with psychopathy, such as callousness or impulsivity. It is also possible that the disruption associated with protests allows for the expression of these traits.</p>
<p>Zacher also examined anticonventionalism, a facet of left-wing authoritarianism involving the rejection of traditional values. The analysis showed a reciprocal positive relationship between anticonventionalism and support for activist groups. Those who rejected tradition were more likely to support these groups, and supporting these groups appeared to deepen anticonventionalist views.</p>
<p>Finally, the results regarding top-down censorship provided mixed evidence compared to the prior study. Consistent with the 2024 findings, merely supporting activist groups predicted an increase in top-down censorship over time. In contrast, actual engagement in civic environmental actions predicted a decrease in censorship preferences. </p>
<p>This makes sense given that activists often protest against government authorities and would likely oppose state censorship. The distinction highlights a psychological difference between active participants on the ground and those who offer passive support.</p>
<p>The researcher noted some limitations to the study. The data relied entirely on self-reports, which can be subject to bias. Additionally, the sample consisted of employed individuals in Germany, meaning the results may not apply to students, retirees, or people in other cultural contexts.</p>
<p>The time lag of one year is another factor to consider. Personality traits are generally stable, and a single year may not be sufficient to capture long-term developmental changes. Future research could benefit from longer timeframes and more diverse samples to verify these patterns.</p>
<p>Despite these limitations, the study offers significant contributions to the psychology of political engagement. It demonstrates that the relationship between who we are and what we do might be bidirectional. Our personality influences the causes we champion, but those causes also leave a mark on our character.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113495" target="_blank">Environmental activism, dark triad traits, and left-wing authoritarianism: A constructive replication study</a>,” was authored by Hannes Zacher.</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/rare-mutations-in-three-genes-may-disrupt-neuron-communication-to-cause-adhd/" 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;">Rare mutations in three genes may disrupt neuron communication to cause ADHD</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Researchers have identified specific genes containing rare mutations that significantly increase the likelihood of developing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. These findings, published in the journal <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09702-8" target="_blank">Nature</a></em>, suggest that distinct biological mechanisms involving nerve cell communication play a major role in the condition. The study links these genetic alterations to broader life outcomes, including educational attainment and socioeconomic status.</p>
<p>Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a neurodevelopmental condition that affects a significant portion of the global population. Previous research indicates that the disorder is highly heritable, meaning it is largely passed down through families. </p>
<p>Most genetic studies have focused on common variants, which are small changes in DNA found in many people that individually have a tiny effect on risk. However, these common changes do not account for the full genetic picture of the disorder. A gap remained in understanding how rare but powerful genetic mutations might contribute to the diagnosis.</p>
<p>To address this, a large international team led by researchers from Aarhus University in Denmark and the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard initiated a massive genetic analysis. The lead authors include Ditte Demontis, Jinjie Duan, and Anders D. Børglum, who sought to pinpoint specific genes that carry a high risk. They aimed to uncover the biological machinery that malfunctions when these specific genetic errors occur.</p>
<p>The team utilized the iPSYCH cohort, which is a large collection of genetic data derived from the Danish population. They performed whole-exome sequencing on nearly 9,000 individuals diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and approximately 54,000 individuals without the diagnosis. </p>
<p>Whole-exome sequencing focuses on the protein-coding regions of the genome, where mutations are most likely to disrupt biological function. This targeted approach allows scientists to filter out the noise of the non-coding genome and focus on changes that alter the structure of proteins.</p>
<p>The analysis revealed three specific genes where rare variants were significantly more common in people with the disorder compared to the control group. These genes are named MAP1A, ANO8, and ANK2. The study indicates that carrying a rare variant in these genes can increase the risk of developing the condition by up to 15 times. This effect size is substantially larger than what is typically seen with common genetic variants.</p>
<p>The researchers then sought to understand the function of these specific genes within the human body. To do this, they analyzed gene expression patterns in various types of brain tissue. They discovered that these genes are highly active in the brain during fetal development and continue to be important into adulthood. This suggests that the genetic roots of the disorder may be established very early in life.</p>
<p>Specifically, the variants appear to affect dopaminergic and GABAergic neurons. These distinct types of nerve cells are essential for regulating attention, motivation, and impulse control. Dopaminergic neurons allow the brain to process rewards and maintain focus. GABAergic neurons act as a braking system for neural activity, helping to prevent overexcitement in the brain.</p>
<p>To further explore these mechanisms, the investigators examined how the proteins produced by these genes interact with other proteins. They utilized induced pluripotent stem cells to grow human nerve cells in the laboratory for this purpose. This allowed them to observe the cellular machinery in a controlled environment. The experiments showed that MAP1A, ANO8, and ANK2 interact with a wider network of proteins.</p>
<p>These protein networks are often implicated in other neurodevelopmental conditions. The study found significant overlap with genes associated with autism and schizophrenia. This suggests a shared biological foundation across different psychiatric diagnoses. Disruption in these networks appears to affect the cytoskeleton, which provides structure to cells, and ion channels, which help cells communicate electrically.</p>
<p>MAP1A encodes a protein involved in the assembly of microtubules, which are structural components of the cell. ANK2 and ANO8 encode proteins involved in transporting calcium ions across the cell membrane. The proper flow of calcium is essential for the transmission of signals between neurons. When these genes are mutated, the structural integrity and signaling capabilities of the neurons may be compromised.</p>
<p>Beyond the diagnosis itself, the team investigated how these rare variants correlate with life outcomes. They linked the genetic data to Danish national registries containing detailed information on education and employment. The analysis showed that individuals with the disorder who carry these rare deleterious variants had lower educational attainment on average. They were also more likely to have a lower socioeconomic status compared to those without the variants.</p>
<p>The definitions of low socioeconomic status included receiving social security payments, early retirement benefits, or experiencing long-term unemployment. Individuals with the disorder and these specific mutations were five to seven times more likely to fall into these categories than the general population. This association held true even when the researchers accounted for other factors.</p>
<p>The study further assessed intellectual function in a subgroup of adults. The data revealed a link between these rare mutations and cognitive performance. For each rare high-risk variant an individual carried, their IQ score was lower by approximately 2.25 points. This provides evidence that the genetic architecture of the disorder directly influences cognitive domains.</p>
<p>The authors also looked at how these rare variants interact with the more common genetic risks. They found that the risks act additively. An individual might have a background load of common risk variants, and the presence of a rare variant adds another layer of susceptibility on top of that. The combined weight of these genetic factors pushes the individual past the threshold for diagnosis.</p>
<p>Ditte Demontis explains the importance of the findings regarding brain development. “Our findings support that disturbances in brain development and function are central to the development of ADHD,” she says. The identification of specific cell types provides a clearer target for future biological research.</p>
<p>While this study identifies three specific genes, the authors estimate that many more rare risk variants remain to be discovered. The current sample size allowed for the statistical confirmation of only the strongest signals. Future research will require even larger cohorts to map the remaining genes involved in the disorder.</p>
<p>The study also notes that these rare variants explain only a small fraction of the total cases. Most individuals with the diagnosis do not carry these specific high-impact mutations. The majority of the risk in the general population is still driven by the accumulation of many common variants.</p>
<p>Additionally, the overlap with intellectual disability was significant in the cohort. Approximately 18 percent of the individuals with the disorder also had a diagnosis of intellectual disability. However, the associations with education and socioeconomic status held true even when excluding those with intellectual disabilities. This confirms that the impact on life outcomes is not solely due to cognitive impairment.</p>
<p>Uncovering these mechanisms opens new avenues for understanding the biology of the brain. The discovery of causal genes with high-effect variants provides a foothold for deeper mechanistic studies. Anders D. Børglum notes that these genes “give us insight into some of the fundamental biological processes, which can guide the design of deeper mechanistic studies.”</p>
<p>This could eventually lead to the identification of new targets for pharmaceutical treatment. By understanding exactly which ion channels or structural proteins are affected, drug developers might create more precise therapies. Currently, treatments focus on symptoms, but genetic insights offer the potential for addressing underlying causes.</p>
<p>Jinjie Duan emphasizes that this is just the start of this line of inquiry. “We are only at the beginning of uncovering these rare high-effect variants,” Duan says. The team’s calculations suggest that many other genes will be implicated as sample sizes grow.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09702-8" target="_blank">Rare genetic variants confer a high risk of ADHD and implicate neuronal biology</a>,” was authored by Ditte Demontis, Jinjie Duan, Yu-Han H. Hsu, Greta Pintacuda, Jakob Grove, Trine Tollerup Nielsen, Janne Thirstrup, Makayla Martorana, Travis Botts, F. Kyle Satterstrom, Jonas Bybjerg-Grauholm, Jason H. Y. Tsai, Simon Glerup, Martine Hoogman, Jan Buitelaar, Marieke Klein, Georg C. Ziegler, Christian Jacob, Oliver Grimm, Maximilian Bayas, Nene F. Kobayashi, Sarah Kittel-Schneider, Klaus-Peter Lesch, Barbara Franke, Andreas Reif, Esben Agerbo, Thomas Werge, Merete Nordentoft, Ole Mors, Preben Bo Mortensen, Kasper Lage, Mark J. Daly, Benjamin M. Neale & Anders D. Børglum.</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/this-common-snack-enhanced-memory-and-brain-vascular-function-in-a-16-week-trial/" 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;">This common snack enhanced memory and brain vascular function in a 16-week trial</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Nov 30th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2025.10.020" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Clinical Nutrition</a></em> provides evidence that the regular consumption of unsalted, skin-roasted peanuts may enhance brain vascular function and memory in older adults. The research indicates that eating a moderate daily amount of peanuts improves blood flow to specific regions of the brain and aids in the retention of verbal information.</p>
<p>As individuals age, the vascular system in the brain often undergoes changes that can reduce the efficiency of blood flow. This reduction in cerebral blood flow is a known physiological marker associated with cognitive decline and neurodegenerative conditions such as dementia.</p>
<p>Because the delivery of oxygen and nutrients is vital for maintaining neuronal health, researchers have focused on identifying modifiable lifestyle factors that can support vascular function. Diet is considered a significant factor in this regard.</p>
<p>While peanuts are botanically classified as legumes rather than tree nuts, they share a comparable nutritional profile. They are dense in protein, unsaturated fatty acids, and fiber. The researchers, led by Peter J. Joris and Lucia Kerkhof, initiated this study to investigate whether peanuts specifically could offer neuroprotective benefits similar to those observed with tree nuts.</p>
<p>A primary motivation for the trial was the high content of L-arginine found in peanuts. L-arginine is an amino acid that serves as a precursor for the synthesis of nitric oxide, a molecule essential for relaxing blood vessels and regulating blood flow.</p>
<p>Additionally, the study focused on skin-roasted peanuts because the peanut skin is rich in bioactive compounds, including polyphenols like resveratrol, which have antioxidant properties that may further support vascular health.</p>
<p>“The number of people who suffer from age-related cognitive decline or are diagnosed with dementia is increasing rapidly. Currently, dementia is ranked as the 7th leading cause of death worldwide according to the World Health Organization,” said Joris, an associate professor at the Institute of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism (NUTRIM) at Maastricht University.</p>
<p>“As researchers studying nutrition and brain health, we are very interested in how the food we consume can support healthy aging. Peanuts are widely consumed, affordable, and nutrient-dense, yet relatively little was known about their specific effects on the brain.”</p>
<p>“Earlier work from our group showed that mixed nuts can improve memory and blood flow in the brain in older adults. Adequate blood flow in the brain is important for the delivery of oxygen and nutrients to the brain cells. Without enough oxygen and nutrients, the highly metabolically active brain cannot function properly, and key functions like memory can be affected.”</p>
<p>“In this study, we sought to determine whether peanuts, which are botanically classified as legumes rather than nuts, also exert beneficial effects on brain health,” Joris explained.</p>
<p>To test the effects of peanut consumption, the investigators designed a randomized, single-blind, controlled crossover trial. This study design allowed each participant to serve as their own control, reducing variability caused by individual differences.</p>
<p>The research team recruited 31 healthy older adults ranging in age from 60 to 75 years. The participants included both men and women with body mass indexes between 20 and 35 kg/m ². Individuals were excluded if they had a history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, peanut allergies, or if they were current smokers.</p>
<p>The study consisted of two 16-week periods separated by an eight-week washout phase. During the intervention period, participants consumed 60 grams of unsalted, skin-roasted peanuts daily. This portion size is approximately equivalent to two servings or two handfuls.</p>
<p>The peanuts were of the runner variety and were eaten with the skins intact. Participants were instructed to incorporate the peanuts into their regular diet but were not permitted to heat or crush them, as this might alter their nutritional properties. During the control period, participants refrained from eating peanuts and avoided other nut-based products to ensure a clear comparison.</p>
<p>The primary measure for the study was cerebral blood flow, assessed using a non-invasive imaging technique called pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging. This advanced method allows researchers to quantify the amount of blood reaching brain tissue without the use of radiation or contrast dyes.</p>
<p>Secondary outcomes included cognitive performance, which was evaluated using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery, a series of computerized tests designed to measure memory, psychomotor speed, and executive function. The researchers also monitored blood pressure and gathered data on dietary intake through food frequency questionnaires.</p>
<p>The imaging results revealed a statistically significant improvement in brain vascular responsiveness following the peanut intervention. Global cerebral blood flow increased by 3.6 percent compared to the control period.</p>
<p>When the analysis focused specifically on gray matter, which contains the cell bodies of the brain’s neurons, the increase in blood flow was 4.5 percent. The researchers observed regional improvements as well. Blood flow increased by 6.6 percent in the frontal lobes and 4.9 percent in the temporal lobes. These areas of the brain are intimately involved in processing memories, language, and executive control.</p>
<p>“We were intrigued to see improvements not only in specific brain regions, but also at the whole-brain level,” Joris told PsyPost. “That indicates a more widespread effect on brain vascular function than what we observed in earlier studies.”</p>
<p>In parallel with the physiological changes, the researchers identified improvements in cognitive function. Participants demonstrated a 5.8 percent increase in verbal memory performance. This was measured by a delayed recall task where participants were asked to identify words they had seen on a list twenty minutes earlier. Those who had consumed the peanuts were able to correctly recognize more words than they did during the control period.</p>
<p>“Our results suggest that eating unsalted, skin-roasted peanuts every day can support brain health as we age,” Joris said. “After 16 weeks, participants showed better brain blood flow and improved memory.”</p>
<p>While memory improved, the study did not find significant changes in executive function or psychomotor speed. There was a slight increase in reaction latency during one of the multitasking tests, which the authors suggest might reflect a trade-off where participants prioritized accuracy over speed, although this particular finding requires further verification.</p>
<p>Beyond brain health, the intervention appeared to benefit cardiovascular metrics. Systolic blood pressure, the top number in a blood pressure reading, decreased by an average of 5 mmHg during the peanut consumption phase. Pulse pressure, which represents the difference between systolic and diastolic blood pressure, decreased by 4 mmHg. These reductions are relevant for older adults, as elevated blood pressure is a risk factor for both cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment.</p>
<p>Dietary analysis confirmed that during the peanut intervention, participants had higher intakes of total fat, monounsaturated fatty acids, and fiber, while their carbohydrate intake was lower.</p>
<p>Despite the addition of approximately 340 calories per day from the peanuts, body weight remained generally stable across the study population, though there was a minor interaction effect depending on the order in which the participants completed the intervention and control phases. This suggests that participants may have naturally adjusted their intake of other foods to compensate for the added peanuts.</p>
<p>The study has several limitations that provide context for the findings. Due to the nature of the dietary intervention, it was not possible to blind the participants to the fact that they were eating peanuts. This awareness could potentially influence their behavior or self-reported data, although the researchers analyzing the MRI and cognitive data remained blinded to the treatment conditions.</p>
<p>Additionally, while the results show a clear association between peanut consumption and improved vascular function, the specific biological mechanism remains to be fully elucidated. It is not yet known if the effects are driven primarily by L-arginine, the phenolic compounds in the skins, the fatty acid profile, or a synergistic combination of these nutrients.</p>
<p>The research was funded by The Peanut Institute Foundation. The authors state that the funding body had no role in the design of the study, the collection and analysis of data, or the decision to publish the results. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.</p>
<p>Future research directions include investigating whether different forms of peanut products offer similar benefits. The investigators also aim to explore the dose-response relationship to determine if smaller amounts of peanuts could yield comparable results.</p>
<p>“We would like to examine whether different peanut preparations, such as peanut butter, produce similar effects,” Joris said. “In addition, we seek to clarify which peanut components may underlie the observed benefits. To this end, we are now conducting a study assessing the effects of protein on the same outcomes, given that peanuts are rich in protein.”</p>
<p>“One important point is that the peanuts were unsalted and skin-roasted,” the researcher added. “The skin contains many antioxidants and fibre that may contribute to the beneficial effects.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2025.10.020" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Longer-term skin-roasted peanut consumption improves brain vascular function and memory: A randomized, single-blind, controlled crossover trial in healthy older adults</a>,” was authored by Lucia Kerkhof, Ronald P. Mensink, Jogchum Plat, Kevin M. R. Nijssen, and Peter J. Joris.</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>