<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/women-are-more-inclined-to-maintain-high-conflict-relationships-if-their-partner-displays-benevolent-sexism/" 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;">Women are more inclined to maintain high-conflict relationships if their partner displays benevolent sexism</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 14th 2025, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research sheds light on why some individuals choose to remain in romantic relationships characterized by high levels of conflict. The study, published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology, suggests that benevolent sexism and anxious attachment styles may lead people to base their self-worth on their relationship status, prompting them to utilize maladaptive strategies to maintain the partnership.</p>
<p>Romantic relationships are a fundamental component of daily life for many adults and are strongly linked to psychological well-being and physical health. Despite the benefits of healthy partnerships, many people find themselves unable or unwilling to exit relationships that are unfulfilling or fraught with frequent arguments. Psychological scientists have sought to understand the specific mechanisms that motivate people to maintain troubled relationships rather than ending them.</p>
<p>The new study, spearheaded by Carrie Underwood, focused specifically on the role of benevolent sexism in this dynamic. Benevolent sexism is a subtle form of sexism that subjectively views women positively but frames them as fragile and in need of men’s protection and financial support. The researchers aimed to determine if having a partner who endorses these views makes a person more likely to stay in a troubled union.</p>
<p>“Some people find it difficult to leave romantic relationships that are characterized by high levels of conflict. This is concerning given that romantic relationships are a central part of daily life for many individuals,” explained corresponding author <a href="https://robnett.faculty.unlv.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rachael Robnett</a>, the director of the Women’s Research Institute of Nevada and professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.</p>
<p>“We were particularly interested in whether people are more inclined to stay in conflicted relationships when their romantic partner is described as endorsing benevolent sexism, which is a subtle form of sexism that emphasizes interdependence and separate roles for women and men in heterosexual romantic relationships.”</p>
<p>“For example, benevolent sexism encourages men to protect and provide for women under the assumption that women are not well equipped to do these things themselves. Correspondingly, benevolent sexism also emphasizes that women’s most important role is to care for their husband and children in the home.”</p>
<p>The researchers conducted two studies. The first involved 158 heterosexual undergraduate women recruited from a large public university in the Western United States. The participants ranged in age from 18 to 55, with an average age of approximately 20 years. The sample was racially diverse, with the largest groups identifying as Latina and European American.</p>
<p>The researchers utilized an experimental design involving a hypothetical vignette. Participants were randomly assigned to read one of two scenarios describing a couple, Anthony and Chloe, engaging in a heated argument. In the control condition, participants simply read about the argument.</p>
<p>In the experimental condition, participants read an additional description of Anthony that portrayed him as endorsing benevolent sexism. This description characterized him as a provider who believes women should be cherished, protected, and placed on a pedestal by men. Participants were instructed to imagine they were the woman in the relationship and to report how they would respond to the situation.</p>
<p>After reading the scenario, the women reported how likely they would be to use various relationship maintenance strategies. These included positive strategies, such as emphasizing their commitment to the partner, and negative strategies, such as flirting with others to make the partner jealous. They also rated their likelihood of dissolving the relationship.</p>
<p>Finally, participants completed surveys measuring their own levels of benevolent sexism and relationship-contingent self-esteem. Relationship-contingent self-esteem measures the extent to which a person’s feelings of self-worth are dependent on the success of their romantic relationship.</p>
<p>The researchers found distinct differences in anticipated behavior based on the description of the male partner. When the male partner was described as endorsing benevolent sexism, women were more likely to endorse using positive relationship maintenance strategies than they were to end the relationship. This preference for maintaining the relationship via prosocial means was not observed in the control condition.</p>
<p>The researchers also analyzed how the participants’ own attitudes influenced their anticipated behaviors. Women who scored higher on measures of benevolent sexism tended to report higher levels of relationship-contingent self-esteem. In turn, higher relationship-contingent self-esteem was associated with a greater willingness to use negative maintenance strategies.</p>
<p>This statistical pathway suggests that benevolent sexism may encourage women to invest their self-worth heavily in their relationships. Consequently, when those relationships are troubled, these women may resort to maladaptive coping behaviors, such as jealousy induction, to restore the bond.</p>
<p>“When we asked women to envision themselves in a relationship that was characterized by a high level of conflict, they reported a desire to remain in the relationship and resolve the conflict via prosocial strategies when the man in the relationship espoused ideals that are in line with benevolent sexism,” Robnett told PsyPost.</p>
<p>“We did not see the same pattern in a control condition in which the man’s gender attitudes were not described. This illustrates the insidious nature of benevolent sexism: Its superficially positive veneer may entice some women to tolerate relationships that do not serve their best interests.”</p>
<p>The second study built upon these findings by including both women and men and by incorporating attachment theory. The sample consisted of 190 heterosexual undergraduate students, with a majority being women. The average age was roughly 20 years, and the participants were recruited from the same university participant pool.</p>
<p>Similar to the first study, participants read the vignette about the couple in a heated argument. However, in this study, all participants were assigned to the “benevolent partner” condition. Women read the description of Anthony used in the first study. Men read a description of Chloe, who was portrayed as believing women should be domestic caretakers who rely on men for fulfillment.</p>
<p>Participants completed the same measures regarding relationship maintenance and self-esteem used in the previous study. Additionally, they completed the Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised questionnaire to assess anxious and avoidant attachment styles. Anxious attachment involves a fear of rejection and a strong desire for intimacy, while avoidant attachment involves discomfort with closeness.</p>
<p>The results indicated that the psychological mechanisms functioned similarly for both women and men. The researchers found that participants with higher levels of anxious attachment were more likely to base their self-esteem on their relationship. This heightened relationship-contingent self-esteem then predicted a greater likelihood of using negative relationship maintenance strategies.</p>
<p>The analysis provided evidence that relationship-contingent self-esteem mediates the link between anxious attachment and maladaptive relationship behaviors. This means that anxiously attached individuals may engage in negative behaviors not just because they are anxious, but because their self-worth is on the line.</p>
<p>The study also reinforced the connection between benevolent sexism and self-worth found in the first experiment. Higher levels of benevolent sexism predicted higher relationship-contingent self-esteem for both men and women. Conversely, participants with higher levels of avoidant attachment were less likely to base their self-worth on the relationship.</p>
<p>“Women and men who were high in relationship-contingent self-esteem were particularly likely to report that they would remain in the relationship and attempt to resolve the conflict via maladaptive strategies such as making their partner jealous,” Robnett explained. “Relationship-contingent self-esteem occurs when someone’s sense of self is highly invested in their romantic relationship, such that their self-esteem suffers if the relationship ends. Our findings suggest that relationship-contingent self-esteem may encourage people to (a) remain in troubled relationships and (b) cope with their dissatisfaction by engaging in maladaptive behaviors.”</p>
<p>“Our findings further illustrated that relationship-contingent self-esteem tends to be particularly high in women and men who are high in benevolent sexism and high in anxious attachment. In theory, this is because both of these constructs encourage people to be hyper-focused on their romantic relationships.”</p>
<p>“In sum, our findings suggest a possible chain of events where anxious attachment and benevolent sexism encourage people to invest their sense of self in romantic relationships,” Robnett said. “In turn, this may contribute to them staying in conflicted romantic relationships and attempting to resolve the conflict via maladaptive strategies.”</p>
<p>But the study, like all research, includes some limitations. Both studies relied on hypothetical vignettes rather than observing actual behavior in real-time conflicts. How people anticipate they will react to a scenario may differ from how they react in a real-world situation with an actual partner.</p>
<p>Additionally, the sample was comprised of undergraduate students, which may limit how well the findings apply to older adults or long-term married couples. The researchers also pointed out that the study design was cross-sectional, which prevents definitive conclusions about cause and effect.</p>
<p>“We can only speculate about causal flow in this chain of events,” Robnett explained. “We would need an experiment or longitudinal data to draw stronger conclusions.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.70029" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Benevolent Sexism, Attachment Style, and Contingent Self‐Esteem Help to Explain How People Anticipate Responding to a Troubled Romantic Relationship</a>,” was authored by Carrie R. Underwood and Rachael D. Robnett.</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/dim-morning-light-triggers-biological-markers-of-depression-in-healthy-adults/" 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;">Dim morning light triggers biological markers of depression in healthy adults</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 14th 2025, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Spending the morning hours in dim indoor lighting may cause healthy individuals to exhibit biological changes typically seen in people with depression. A study published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2025.11.008" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Journal of Psychiatric Research</a></em> indicates that a lack of bright light before noon can disrupt sleep cycles and hormonal rhythms. These physiological shifts suggest that dimly lit environments could increase a person’s vulnerability to mood disorders.</p>
<p>The human body relies on environmental cues to regulate its internal clock. This system is known as the circadian rhythm. It dictates when we feel alert and when we feel ready for sleep. The most powerful of these cues is light. When sunlight enters the eye, it signals a region of the brain called the suprachiasmatic nucleus. This brain region then coordinates hormone production and body temperature. In a natural setting, humans would experience bright light in the morning and darkness at night.</p>
<p>Modern life has altered this natural pattern. Many people spend the vast majority of their waking hours inside buildings. The artificial light in these spaces is often far less intense than natural daylight.</p>
<p>Jan de Zeeuw, Dieter Kunz, and their colleagues at St. Hedwig Hospital and Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin have spent years investigating this phenomenon. They describe this lifestyle as “Living in Biological Darkness.” Their previous research found that urban residents spend approximately half of their daytime hours in light levels lower than 25 lux. For comparison, a cloudy day outside might measure over 1,000 lux.</p>
<p>The researchers wanted to understand the specific consequences of this low-light lifestyle. They were particularly interested in how it affects the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. This system controls the release of cortisol. Cortisol is often called the stress hormone. In a healthy person, cortisol levels peak early in the morning to help wake the body. These levels then gradually decline throughout the day and reach their lowest point in the evening. This rhythm allows the body to wind down for sleep.</p>
<p>In patients diagnosed with depression, this rhythm often malfunctions. Their cortisol levels frequently remain elevated throughout the day and into the evening. Another biological marker of depression involves specific changes in sleep architecture. Sleep is composed of different stages, including rapid eye movement, or REM, and deep slow-wave sleep.</p>
<p>Depressed patients often experience a shift in deep sleep from the beginning of the night to later cycles. The researchers aimed to see if dim light alone could induce these depression-like symptoms in healthy volunteers.</p>
<p>The study recruited twenty healthy young adults to participate in a controlled experiment. The group consisted of ten men and ten women with an average age of about twenty-four. To ensure accuracy, the participants maintained a consistent sleep schedule for a week before the testing began. The researchers monitored their adherence using wrist-worn activity trackers.</p>
<p>The participants were randomly divided into two groups. The experiment focused on the morning hours between 8:00 AM and 12:00 PM. For five days, one group spent these hours in a room with low-intensity incandescent lighting. This light measured 55 lux and had a warm, yellowish color temperature. This environment simulated a dimly lit living room or a workspace with poor lighting.</p>
<p>The second group spent the same morning hours in a room with higher-intensity fluorescent lighting. This light measured 800 lux and had a cooler, bluish tone. This intensity mimics a brightly lit office or classroom. It served as a control condition. During the afternoons and evenings, participants left the laboratory and went about their normal lives. They returned to the lab for specific testing sessions.</p>
<p>The research team used several methods to track biological changes. They collected urine and saliva samples to measure hormone concentrations. They focused on cortisol and melatonin. They also utilized polysomnography to record sleep patterns. This involves placing sensors on the head to measure brain waves during the night. The team also assessed the participants’ mood and reaction times using standard psychological tests.</p>
<p>The findings revealed distinct differences between the two groups. The participants exposed to the dim incandescent light showed a disruption in their cortisol rhythms. Their cortisol levels were elevated in the late afternoon and evening. This elevation occurred at a time when the hormone should ideally be decreasing. The statistical analysis showed that this increase was not a random fluctuation. The result mirrors the blunted circadian rhythm often observed in depressive illnesses.</p>
<p>Sleep patterns in the dim light group also deteriorated. After repetitive exposure to low morning light, these individuals slept for a shorter duration. On average, their total sleep time decreased by about twenty-five minutes. The internal structure of their sleep changed as well. Deep sleep is characterized by slow-wave activity in the brain. Typically, the bulk of this restorative sleep occurs in the first few cycles of the night.</p>
<p>In the dim light group, this slow-wave activity shifted. It decreased in the earlier part of the night and appeared more frequently in later sleep cycles. This delay in deep sleep is a known characteristic of sleep architecture in patients with depression. The participants in this group also reported feeling subjectively worse. They rated themselves as sleepier and sadder after days of low light exposure compared to the bright light group.</p>
<p>The group exposed to the brighter fluorescent light did not show these negative markers. Their cortisol levels followed a more standard daily curve. Their deep sleep remained anchored in the early part of the night. The researchers did note one specific change in this group. The bright light appeared to increase the amount of REM sleep they experienced toward the end of the night.</p>
<p>The study suggests that light intensity affects more than just vision. It serves as a biological signal that keeps the body’s systems synchronized. The “master clock” in the brain requires sufficient light input to function correctly. This input comes largely from specialized cells in the retina that are sensitive to blue light. Incandescent bulbs, like those used for the dim group, emit very little blue light. Fluorescent bulbs emit more of these wavelengths.</p>
<p>When the brain does not receive a strong morning light signal, the circadian system may weaken. This weakening can lead to a misalignment of internal rhythms. The researchers note that the suprachiasmatic nucleus has direct neural pathways to the adrenal glands. This connection explains how light—or the lack of it—can directly influence cortisol production.</p>
<p>The authors propose that the observed changes could represent a “vulnerability” to depression. The participants were healthy and did not develop clinical depression during the short study. However, their bodies began to mimic the physiological state of a depressed person. The combination of high evening cortisol and disrupted sleep creates a physical environment where mood disorders might more easily take root.</p>
<p>The researchers stated, “In healthy subjects repetitive exposure to low-intensity lighting during pre-midday hours was associated with increased cortisol levels over the day and delayed slow-wave-activity within nighttime sleep, changes known to occur in patients with depressive illnesses.”</p>
<p>They continued by noting the implications of these sleep changes. “Insomnia-like changes in sleep architecture shown here may pave the avenue to more vulnerability to depression and contribute to the understanding of pathophysiology in depressive illnesses.”</p>
<p>There are limitations to this study that should be considered. The sample size was relatively small, with only ten people in each group. A larger pool of participants would provide more robust data. The design compared two different groups of people rather than testing the same people under both conditions. This introduces the possibility that individual differences influenced the results.</p>
<p>Additionally, the researchers could not control the light exposure participants received after leaving the lab at noon. While they wore activity monitors, these devices cannot always perfectly track light intake. However, previous studies by the same team suggest that urban residents generally encounter low light levels throughout the day. It is plausible that the participants did not receive significant bright light in the afternoons to counteract the morning dimness.</p>
<p>Future research should investigate these effects over longer periods. A study lasting weeks or months could determine if these biological changes eventually lead to psychological symptoms. It would also be beneficial to test different light sources, such as LED lighting, which is now common. Understanding the specific wavelengths of light that best support the circadian rhythm is an ongoing area of scientific inquiry.</p>
<p>The findings carry practical implications for building design and public health. They suggest that the standard lighting found in many homes and offices may be insufficient for biological health. Increasing light levels during the morning could serve as a simple preventative measure. This might involve using brighter artificial lights or designing spaces that admit more daylight.</p>
<p>The concept of “Living in Biological Darkness” highlights a mismatch between human biology and the modern environment. Our bodies evolved to expect bright mornings. Depriving the brain of this signal appears to set off a chain reaction of hormonal and neurological disruptions. While a few days of dim light may not cause immediate harm, chronic exposure could erode mental resilience.</p>
<p>Jan de Zeeuw and his co-authors argue that it is time to reconsider how we light our indoor spaces. They suggest that integrating bright light into schools, workplaces, and nursing homes could improve overall health. By mimicking the natural rising of the sun, we may be able to stabilize our internal rhythms. This stabilization could protect against the physiological precursors of depression.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2025.11.008" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Living in biological darkness III: Effects of low-level pre-midday lighting on markers of depression in healthy subjects</a>,” was authored by Jan de Zeeuw, Claudia Nowozin, Martin Haberecht, Sven Hädel, Frederik Bes, and Dieter Kunz.</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/amphetamine-overrides-brain-signals-associated-with-sexual-rejection/" 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;">Amphetamine overrides brain signals associated with sexual rejection</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 13th 2025, 18:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Recent experimental findings suggest that d-amphetamine, a potent central nervous system stimulant, can override learned sexual inhibitions in male rats. The research demonstrates that the drug causes animals to pursue sexual partners they had previously learned to avoid due to negative reinforcement. These results, which highlight a disruption in the brain’s reward and inhibition circuitry, were published in the journal <em><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-025-06786-y" target="_blank">Psychopharmacology</a></em>.</p>
<p>To understand the specific nature of this study, one must first look at how animals learn to navigate sexual environments. In the wild, animals must determine when it is appropriate to engage in mating behavior and when it is not. A male rat that attempts to mate with a female that is not sexually receptive will be rejected. </p>
<p>Over time, the animal learns to associate certain cues, such as scents or locations, with this rejection. This learning process is known as conditioned sexual inhibition. It serves an evolutionary purpose by preventing the male from wasting energy on mating attempts that will not result in reproduction.</p>
<p>Researchers have long sought to understand how recreational drugs alter this specific type of decision-making. While it is well documented that stimulants can physically enable or enhance sexual behavior, less is understood about how they affect the psychological choice to engage in sex when an individual knows they should not. Previous work has established that alcohol can dismantle this learned inhibition. The current research aimed to see if d-amphetamine, a drug with a very different chemical mechanism, would produce a similar result.</p>
<p>The research team was led by Katuschia Germé from the Centre for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology at Concordia University in Montreal. The team also included Dhillon Persad, Justine Petit-Robinson, Shimon Amir, and James G. Pfaus. They designed an experiment to create a strong mental association in the subjects. They used male Long-Evans rats as the subjects for the experiment.</p>
<p>The researchers began by training the rats over the course of twenty sessions. This training took place in specific testing chambers. During these sessions, the males were exposed to two different types of female rats. Some females were sexually receptive and carried no added scent. Other females were not sexually receptive and were scented with an almond extract.</p>
<p>The male rats quickly learned the difference. They associated the neutral, unscented females with sexual reward. Conversely, they associated the almond scent with rejection and a lack of reward. After the training phase, the males would reliably ignore females that smelled like almond, even if those females were actually receptive. The almond smell had become a “stop” signal. This state represents the conditioned sexual inhibition that the study sought to investigate.</p>
<p>Once this inhibition was established, the researchers moved to the testing phase. They divided the rats into groups and administered varying doses of d-amphetamine. Some rats received a saline solution which served as a control group with no drug effect. Others received doses of 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.</p>
<p>The researchers then placed the male rats in a large open arena. This environment was different from the training cages to ensure the rats were reacting to the females and not the room itself. Two sexually receptive females were placed in the arena with the male. One female was unscented. The other female was scented with the almond extract.</p>
<p>Under normal circumstances, a trained rat would ignore the almond-scented female. This is exactly what the researchers observed in the group given the saline solution. These sober rats directed their attention almost exclusively toward the unscented female. They adhered to their training and avoided the scent associated with past rejection.</p>
<p>The behavior of the rats treated with d-amphetamine was distinct. Regardless of the dose administered, the drug-treated rats copulated with both the unscented and the almond-scented females. The drug had completely eroded the learned inhibition. The almond scent, which previously acted as a deterrent, no longer stopped the males from initiating copulation.</p>
<p>It is important to note that the drug did not simply make the rats hyperactive or indiscriminate due to confusion. The researchers tracked the total amount of sexual activity. They found that while the choice of partner changed, the overall mechanics of the sexual behavior remained competent. The drug did not create a chaotic frenzy. It specifically removed the psychological barrier that had been built during training.</p>
<p>Following the behavioral tests, the researchers investigated what was happening inside the brains of these animals. They utilized a technique that stains for the Fos protein. This protein is produced within neurons shortly after they have been active. By counting the cells containing Fos, scientists can create a map of which brain regions were working during a specific event.</p>
<p>To do this, the researchers re-exposed the rats to the almond odor while they were under the influence of the drug or saline. They did not include females in this phase. This allowed the team to see how the brain processed the cue of the almond scent in isolation.</p>
<p>The analysis revealed distinct patterns of brain activation. In the rats that received saline, the almond odor triggered activity in the piriform cortex. This is a region of the brain involved in processing the sense of smell. However, these sober rats showed lower activity in the medial preoptic area. This area is critical for male sexual behavior. This pattern suggests that the sober brain registered the smell and dampened the sexual control center in response.</p>
<p>The rats treated with d-amphetamine showed a reversal of this pattern. When exposed to the almond scent, these rats displayed increased activity in the nucleus accumbens. The nucleus accumbens is a central component of the brain’s reward system. It is heavily involved in processing motivation and pleasure.</p>
<p>The drug also increased activity in the ventral tegmental area. This region produces dopamine and sends it to the nucleus accumbens. The presence of the drug appeared to hijack the processing of the inhibitory cue. Instead of the almond smell triggering a “stop” signal, the drug caused the brain to treat the smell as a neutral or potentially positive stimulus.</p>
<p>The researchers noted that the activation in the nucleus accumbens was particularly telling. This region lights up in response to rewards. By chemically stimulating this area with d-amphetamine, the drug may have overridden the negative memory associated with the almond scent. The cue for rejection was seemingly transformed into a cue for potential reward.</p>
<p>The team also observed changes in the amygdala. This part of the brain is often associated with emotional processing and fear. The drug-treated rats showed different activity levels in the central and basolateral nuclei of the amygdala compared to the control group. This suggests that the drug alters the emotional weight of the memory.</p>
<p>These findings align with previous research conducted by this laboratory regarding alcohol. In prior studies, the researchers found that alcohol also disrupted conditioned sexual inhibition. The fact that two very different drugs—one a depressant and one a stimulant—produce the same behavioral outcome suggests they may act on a shared neural pathway.</p>
<p>The authors propose that this shared pathway likely involves the mesolimbic dopamine system. This is the circuit connecting the ventral tegmental area to the nucleus accumbens. Both alcohol and amphetamines are known to increase dopamine release in this system. This surge in dopamine appears to be strong enough to wash out the learned signals that tell an individual to stop or refrain from a behavior.</p>
<p>There are limitations to how these findings can be interpreted. The study was conducted on rats, and animal models do not perfectly replicate human psychology. The complexity of human sexual decision-making involves social and cultural factors that cannot be simulated in a rodent model. Additionally, the study looked at acute administration of the drug. The effects of chronic, long-term use might result in different behavioral adaptations.</p>
<p>The researchers also point out that while the inhibition was broken, the drug did not strictly enhance sexual performance. In fact, at the highest doses, some rats failed to reach ejaculation despite engaging in the behavior. This distinction separates the concept of sexual arousal from sexual execution. The drug increased the drive to engage but did not necessarily improve the physical conclusion of the act.</p>
<p>Future research will likely focus on pinpointing the exact chemical interactions within the amygdala and nucleus accumbens. Understanding the precise receptors involved could shed light on how addiction affects risk assessment. If a drug can chemically overwrite a learned warning signal, it explains why individuals under the influence often engage in risky behaviors they would logically avoid when sober.</p>
<p>The study provides a neurobiological framework for understanding drug-induced disinhibition. It suggests that drugs like d-amphetamine do not merely lower inhibitions in a vague sense. Rather, they actively reconfigure how the brain perceives specific cues. A stimulus that once meant “danger” or “rejection” is reprocessed through the reward system. This chemical deception allows the behavior to proceed unchecked.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-025-06786-y" target="_blank">Disruptive effects of d-amphetamine on conditioned sexual inhibition in the male rat</a>,” was authored by Katuschia Germé, Dhillon Persad, Justine Petit-Robinson, Shimon Amir, and James G. Pfaus.</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/survey-reveals-rapid-adoption-of-ai-tools-in-mental-health-care-despite-safety-concerns/" 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;">Survey reveals rapid adoption of AI tools in mental health care despite safety concerns</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 13th 2025, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>The integration of artificial intelligence into mental health care has accelerated rapidly, with more than half of psychologists now utilizing these tools to assist with their daily professional duties. While practitioners are increasingly adopting this technology to manage administrative burdens, they remain highly cautious regarding the potential threats it poses to patient privacy and safety, according to the American Psychological Association’s <a href="https://www.apa.org/pubs/reports/practitioner/2025/index" target="_blank">2025 Practitioner Pulse Survey</a>.</p>
<p>The American Psychological Association represents the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the United States. Its leadership monitors the evolving landscape of mental health practice to understand how professionals navigate changes in technology and patient needs. </p>
<p>In recent years, the field has faced a dual challenge of high demand for services and increasing bureaucratic requirements from insurance providers. These pressures have created an environment where digital tools promise relief from time-consuming paperwork. </p>
<p>However, the introduction of automated systems into sensitive therapeutic environments raises ethical questions regarding confidentiality and the human element of care. To gauge how these tensions are playing out in real-world offices, the association commissioned its annual inquiry into the state of the profession.</p>
<p>The 2025 Practitioner Pulse Survey targeted doctoral-level psychologists who held active licenses to practice in at least one U.S. state. To ensure the results accurately reflected the profession, the research team utilized a probability-based random sampling method. They generated a list of more than 126,000 licensed psychologists using state board data and randomly selected 30,000 individuals to receive invitations.</p>
<p>This approach allowed the researchers to minimize selection bias. Ultimately, 1,742 psychologists completed the survey, providing a snapshot of the workforce. The respondents were primarily female and White, which aligns with historical demographic trends in the field. The majority worked full-time, with private practice being the most common setting.</p>
<p>The survey results revealed a sharp increase in the adoption of artificial intelligence compared to the previous year. In 2024, only 29% of psychologists reported using AI tools. By 2025, that figure had climbed to 56%. The frequency of use also intensified. Nearly three out of 10 psychologists reported using these tools on at least a monthly basis. This represents a substantial shift from 2024, when only about one in 10 reported such frequent usage.</p>
<p>Detailed analysis of the data shows that psychologists are primarily using these tools to handle logistics rather than patient care. Among those who utilized AI, more than half used it to assist with writing emails and other materials. About one-third used it to generate content or summarize clinical notes. These functions address the administrative workload that often detracts from face-to-face time with clients.</p>
<p>Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD, the CEO of the association, commented on this trend.</p>
<p>“Psychologists are drawn to this field because they’re passionate about improving peoples’ lives, but they can lose hours each day on paperwork and managing the often byzantine requirements of insurance companies,” said Evans. “Leveraging safe and ethical AI tools can increase psychologists’ efficiency, allowing them to reach more people and better serve them.”</p>
<p>Despite the utility of these tools for office management, the survey highlighted deep reservations about their safety. An overwhelming 92% of psychologists cited concerns regarding the use of AI in their field. The most prevalent worry, cited by 67% of respondents, was the potential for data breaches. This is a particularly acute issue in mental health care, where maintaining the confidentiality of patient disclosures is foundational to the therapeutic relationship.</p>
<p>Other concerns focused on the reliability and social impact of the technology. Unanticipated social harms were cited by 64% of respondents. Biases in the input and output of AI models worried 63% of the psychologists surveyed. There is a documented risk that AI models trained on unrepresentative data may perpetuate stereotypes or offer unequal quality of care to marginalized groups.</p>
<p>Additionally, 60% of practitioners expressed concern over inaccurate output or “hallucinations.” This term refers to the tendency of generative AI models to confidently present false or fabricated information as fact. In a clinical setting, such errors could lead to misdiagnosis or inappropriate treatment plans if not caught by a human supervisor.</p>
<p>“Artificial intelligence can help ease some of the pressures that psychologists are facing—for instance, by increasing efficiency and improving access to care—but human oversight remains essential,” said Evans. “Patients need to know they can trust their provider to identify and mitigate risks or biases that arise from using these technologies in their treatment.”</p>
<p>The survey data suggests that psychologists are heeding this need for oversight by keeping AI largely separate from direct clinical tasks. Only 8% of those who used the technology employed it to assist with clinical diagnosis. Furthermore, only 5% utilized chatbot assistance for direct patient interaction. This indicates that while practitioners are willing to delegate paperwork to algorithms, they are hesitant to trust them with the nuances of human psychology.</p>
<p>This hesitation correlates with fears about the future of the profession. The survey found that 38% of psychologists worried that AI might eventually make some of their job duties obsolete. However, the current low rates of clinical adoption suggest that the core functions of therapy remain firmly in human hands for the time being.</p>
<p>The context for this technological shift is a workforce that remains under immense pressure. The survey explored factors beyond technology, painting a picture of a profession straining to meet demand. Nearly half of all psychologists reported that they had no openings for new patients.</p>
<p>Simultaneously, practitioners observed that the mental health crisis has not abated. About 45% of respondents indicated that the severity of their patients’ symptoms is increasing. This rising acuity requires more intensive care and energy from providers, further limiting the number of patients they can effectively treat.</p>
<p>Economic factors also complicate the landscape. The survey revealed that fewer than two-thirds of psychologists accept some form of insurance. Respondents pointed to insufficient reimbursement rates as a primary driver for this decision. They also cited struggles with pre-authorization requirements and audits. These administrative hurdles consume time that could otherwise be spent on treatment.</p>
<p>The association has issued <a href="https://www.apa.org/topics/artificial-intelligence-machine-learning/ethical-guidance-professional-practice.pdf" target="_blank">recommendations</a> for psychologists considering the use of AI to ensure ethical practice. They advise obtaining informed consent from patients by clearly communicating how AI tools are used. Practitioners are encouraged to evaluate tools for potential biases that could worsen health disparities.</p>
<p>Compliance with data privacy laws is another priority. The recommendations urge psychologists to understand exactly how patient data is used, stored, or shared by the third-party companies that provide AI services. This due diligence is intended to protect the sanctity of the doctor-patient privilege in a digital age.</p>
<p>The methodology of the 2025 survey differed slightly from previous years to improve accuracy. In prior iterations, the survey screened out ineligible participants. In 2025, the instrument included a section for those who did not meet the criteria, allowing the organization to gather internal data on who was receiving the invites.</p>
<p>The response rate for the survey was 6.6%. While this may appear low to a layperson, it is a typical rate for this type of professional survey and provided a robust sample size for analysis. The demographic breakdown of the sample showed slight shifts toward a younger workforce. The 2025 sample had the highest proportion of early-career practitioners in the history of the survey.</p>
<p>This influx of younger psychologists may influence the adoption rates of new technologies. Early-career professionals are often more accustomed to integrating digital solutions into their workflows. However, the high levels of concern across the board suggest that skepticism of AI is not limited to older generations of practitioners.</p>
<p>The findings from the 2025 Practitioner Pulse Survey illustrate a profession at a crossroads. Psychologists are actively seeking ways to manage an unsustainable workload. AI offers a potential solution to the administrative bottleneck. Yet, the ethical mandates of the profession demand a cautious approach.</p>
<p>The data indicates that while the tools are entering the office, they have not yet entered the therapy room in a meaningful way. Practitioners are balancing the need for efficiency with the imperative to do no harm. As the technology evolves, the field will likely continue to grapple with how to harness the benefits of automation without compromising the human connection that defines psychological care.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-research-maps-how-the-brain-processes-different-aspects-of-life-satisfaction/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New research maps how the brain processes different aspects of life satisfaction</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 13th 2025, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study suggests that the brain uses distinct neural pathways to process different aspects of personal well-being. The research indicates that evaluating family relationships activates specific memory-related brain regions, while assessing how one handles stress engages areas responsible for cognitive control. These findings were published recently in the journal <em><a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2026-03740-001" target="_blank">Emotion</a></em>.</p>
<p>Psychologists and neuroscientists have struggled to define exactly what constitutes a sense of well-being. Historically, many experts viewed well-being as a single, general concept. It was often equated simply with happiness or life satisfaction. This approach assumes that feeling good about life is a uniform experience. However, more recent scholarship argues that well-being is multidimensional. It is likely composed of various distinct facets that contribute to overall mental health.</p>
<p>To understand how we can improve mental health, it is necessary to identify the mechanisms behind these different components. A team of researchers set out to map the brain activity associated with specific types of life satisfaction. The study was conducted by Kayla H. Green, Suzanne van de Groep, Renske van der Cruijsen, Esther A. H. Warnert, and Eveline A. Crone. These scientists are affiliated with Erasmus University Rotterdam and Radboud University in the Netherlands.</p>
<p>The researchers based their work on the idea that young adults face unique challenges in the modern world. They utilized a measurement tool called the Multidimensional Well-being in Youth Scale. This scale was previously developed in collaboration with panels of young people. It divides well-being into five specific domains.</p>
<p>The first domain is family relationships. The second is the ability to deal with stress. The third domain covers self-confidence. The fourth involves having impact, purpose, and meaning in life. The final domain is the feeling of being loved, appreciated, and respected. The researchers hypothesized that the brain would respond differently depending on which of these domains a person was considering.</p>
<p>To test this hypothesis, the team recruited 34 young adults. The participants ranged in age from 20 to 25 years old. This age group is often referred to as emerging adulthood. It is a period characterized by identity exploration and significant life changes. The researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, to observe brain activity. This technology tracks blood flow to different parts of the brain to determine which areas are working hardest at any given moment.</p>
<p>While inside the MRI scanner, the participants completed a specific self-evaluation task. They viewed a series of sentences related to the five domains of well-being. For example, a statement might ask them to evaluate if they accept themselves for who they are. The participants rated how much the statement applied to them on a scale of one to four.</p>
<p>The task did not stop at a simple evaluation of the present. After rating their current feelings, the participants answered a follow-up question. They rated the extent to which they wanted that specific aspect of their life to change in the future. This allowed the researchers to measure both current satisfaction and the desire for personal growth.</p>
<p>In addition to the brain scans, the participants completed standardized surveys outside of the scanner. One survey measured symptoms of depression. Another survey assessed symptoms of burnout. The researchers also asked about feelings of uncertainty regarding the future. These measures helped the team connect the immediate brain responses to the participants’ broader mental health.</p>
<p>The behavioral results from the study showed clear patterns in how young adults view their lives. The participants gave the lowest positivity ratings to the domain of dealing with stress. This suggests that managing stress is a primary struggle for this demographic. Consequently, the participants reported the highest desire for future change in this same domain.</p>
<p>The researchers analyzed the relationship between these ratings and the mental health surveys. They found that higher positivity ratings in all five domains were associated with fewer burnout symptoms. This means that feeling good about any area of life may offer some protection against burnout.</p>
<p>A different pattern emerged regarding the desire for change. Participants who reported more burnout symptoms expressed a stronger desire to change how they felt about having an impact. They also wanted to change their levels of self-confidence and their feelings of being loved. This suggests that burnout is not just about exhaustion. It is also linked to a desire to alter one’s sense of purpose and social connection.</p>
<p>Depressive symptoms showed a broad association with the desire for change. Higher levels of depression were linked to a wish for future changes in almost every domain. The only exception was self-confidence. This implies that young adults with depressive symptoms are generally unsatisfied with their external circumstances and relationships.</p>
<p>The brain imaging data revealed that the mind does indeed separate these domains. When participants evaluated sentences about positive family relationships, a specific region called the precuneus became highly active. The precuneus is located in the parietal lobe of the brain. It is known to play a role in thinking about oneself and recalling personal memories.</p>
<p>This finding aligns with previous research on social cognition. Thinking about family likely requires accessing autobiographical memories. It involves reflecting on one’s history with close relatives. The activity in the precuneus suggests that family well-being is deeply rooted in memory and self-referential thought.</p>
<p>A completely different neural pattern appeared when participants thought about dealing with stress. For these items, the researchers observed increased activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. This region is located near the front of the brain. It is widely recognized as a center for executive function.</p>
<p>The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex helps regulate emotions and manage cognitive control. Its involvement suggests that thinking about stress is an active cognitive process. It is not just a passive feeling. Instead, it requires the brain to engage in appraisal and regulation. This makes sense given that the participants also expressed the greatest desire to change how they handle stress.</p>
<p>The study did not find distinct, unique neural patterns for the other three domains. Self-confidence, having impact, and feeling loved did not activate specific regions to the exclusion of others. They likely rely on more general networks that overlap with other types of thinking.</p>
<p>However, the distinction between family and stress is notable. It provides physical evidence that well-being is not a single state of mind. The brain recruits different resources depending on whether a person is focusing on their social roots or their emotional management.</p>
<p>The researchers also noted a general pattern involving the medial prefrontal cortex. This area was active during the instruction phase of the task. It was also active when participants considered their desire for future changes. This region is often associated with thinking about the future and self-improvement.</p>
<p>There are limitations to this study that should be considered. The final sample size included only 34 participants. This is a relatively small number for an fMRI study. Small groups can make it difficult to detect subtle effects or generalize the findings to the entire population.</p>
<p>The researchers also noted that the number of trials for each condition was limited. Participants only saw a few sentences for each of the five domains. A higher number of trials would provide more data points for analysis. This would increase the statistical reliability of the results.</p>
<p>Additionally, the study design was correlational. This means the researchers can see that certain brain patterns and survey answers go together. However, they cannot say for certain that one causes the other. For instance, it is not clear if desiring change leads to burnout, or if burnout leads to a desire for change.</p>
<p>Future research could address these issues by recruiting larger and more diverse groups of people. It would be beneficial to include individuals from different cultural backgrounds. Different cultures may prioritize family or stress management differently. This could lead to different patterns of brain activity.</p>
<p>Longitudinal studies would also be a logical next step. Following participants over several years would allow scientists to see how these brain patterns develop. It is possible that the neural correlates of well-being shift as young adults mature into their thirties and forties.</p>
<p>Despite these caveats, the study offers a new perspective on mental health. It supports the idea that well-being is a multifaceted construct. By treating well-being as a collection of specific domains, clinicians may be better able to help patients.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001526" target="_blank">Neural Correlates of Well-Being in Young Adults</a>,” was authored by Kayla H. Green, Suzanne van de Groep, Renske van der Cruijsen, Esther A. H. Warnert, and Eveline A. Crone.</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/social-dominance-orientation-emerges-in-early-childhood-independent-of-parental-socialization-new-study-suggests/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Social dominance orientation emerges in early childhood independent of parental socialization, new study suggests</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 13th 2025, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research published in the <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001861" target="_blank">Journal of Experimental Psychology: General</a></em> provides evidence that children as young as five years old develop preferences for social hierarchy that influence how they perceive inequality. This orientation toward social dominance appears to dampen empathy for lower-status groups and reduce the willingness to address unfair situations. The findings suggest that these beliefs can emerge early in development through cognitive biases, independent of direct socialization from parents.</p>
<p>Social dominance orientation is a concept in psychology that describes an individual’s preference for group-based inequality. People with high levels of this trait generally believe that society should be structured hierarchically, with some groups possessing more power and status than others. In adults, high social dominance orientation serves as a strong predictor for a variety of political and social attitudes. It is often associated with opposition to affirmative action, higher levels of nationalism, and increased tolerance for discriminatory practices.</p>
<p>Psychologists have traditionally focused on adolescence as the developmental period when these hierarchy-enhancing beliefs solidify. The prevailing theory posits that as children grow older, they absorb the competitive nature of the world, often through conversations with their parents. This socialization process supposedly leads teenagers to adopt worldviews that justify existing social stratifications.</p>
<p>However, the authors of the new study sought to determine if the roots of these beliefs exist much earlier in life. They investigated whether young children might form dominance orientations through their own cognitive development rather than solely through parental input. Young children are known to recognize status differences and often attribute group disparities to intrinsic traits. The research team hypothesized that these cognitive tendencies might predispose children to accept or even prefer social hierarchy before adolescence.</p>
<p>“The field has typically thought of preferences for hierarchy as something that becomes socialized during adolescence,” said study author <a href="http://www.haverfordismlab.org" target="_blank">Ryan Lei</a>, an associate professor of psychology at Haverford College.</p>
<p>“In recent years, however, researchers have documented how a lot of the psychological ingredients that underlie these preferences for hierarchy are already present in early childhood. So we sought to see if a) those preferences were meaningful (i.e., associated with hierarchy-enhancing outcomes), and b) what combinations of psychological ingredients might be central to the development of these preferences.”</p>
<p>The researchers conducted three separate studies to test their hypotheses. In the first study, the team recruited 61 children between the ages of 5 and 11. The participants were introduced to a flipbook story featuring two fictional groups of characters known as Zarpies and Gorps. The researchers established a clear status difference between the groups. One group was described as always getting to go to the front of the line and receiving the best food. The other group was required to wait and received lower-quality resources.</p>
<p>After establishing this inequality, the researchers presented the children with a scenario in which a member of the low-status group complained about the unfairness. The children then answered questions designed to measure their social dominance orientation. For example, they were asked if some groups are simply not as good as others. The researchers also assessed whether the children believed the complaint was valid and if the inequality should be fixed.</p>
<p>The results showed a clear association between the children’s hierarchy preferences and their reactions to the story. Children who reported higher levels of social dominance orientation were less likely to view the low-status group’s complaint as valid. They were also less likely to say that the inequality should be rectified. This suggests that even at a young age, a general preference for hierarchy can shape how children interpret specific instances of injustice.</p>
<p>The second study aimed to see if assigning children to a high-status group would cause them to develop higher levels of social dominance orientation. The researchers recruited 106 children, ranging in age from 5 to 11. Upon arrival, an experimenter used a manual spinner to randomly assign each child to either a green group or an orange group.</p>
<p>The researchers then introduced inequalities between the two groups. The high-status group controlled resources and received three stickers, while the low-status group had no control and received only one sticker. The children completed measures assessing their empathy toward the outgroup and their preference for their own group. They also completed the same social dominance orientation scale used in the first study.</p>
<p>The study revealed that children assigned to the high-status group expressed less empathy toward the low-status group compared to children assigned to the low-status condition. Despite this difference in empathy, belonging to the high-status group did not lead to higher self-reported social dominance orientation scores. The researchers found that while group status influenced emotional responses to others, it did not immediately alter the children’s broader ideological preferences regarding hierarchy.</p>
<p>The third study was designed to investigate whether beliefs about the stability of status might interact with group assignment to influence social dominance orientation. The researchers recruited 147 children aged 5 to 12. This time, the team used a digital spinner to assign group membership. This method was chosen to make the assignment feel more definitive and less dependent on the experimenter’s physical action.</p>
<p>Children were again placed into a high-status or low-status group within a fictional narrative. The researchers measured the children’s “status essentialism,” which includes beliefs about whether group status is permanent and unchangeable. The study tested whether children who believed status was stable would react differently to their group assignment.</p>
<p>The findings from this third study were unexpected. The researchers initially hypothesized that high-status children would be the most likely to endorse hierarchy. Instead, the data showed that children assigned to the low-status group reported higher social dominance orientation, provided they believed that group status was stable.</p>
<p>“When we tested whether children randomly assigned to high or low status groups were more likely to endorse these preferences for hierarchy, we were surprised that those in low status groups who also believed that their group status was stable were the ones most likely to self-report greater preference for hierarchy,” Lei told PsyPost.</p>
<p>This result suggests a psychological process known as system justification. When children in a disadvantaged position believe their status is unchangeable, they may adopt beliefs that justify the existing hierarchy to make sense of their reality. By endorsing the idea that hierarchy is good or necessary, they can psychologically cope with their lower position.</p>
<p>Across all three studies, the data indicated that social dominance orientation is distinct from simple ingroup bias. Social identity theory suggests that people favor their own group simply because they belong to it. However, the current findings show that preferences for hierarchy operate differently. For instance, in the third study, children in both high and low-status groups preferred their own group. Yet, the increase in social dominance orientation was specific to low-status children who viewed the hierarchy as stable.</p>
<p>The researchers also performed a mini meta-analysis of their data to examine demographic trends. They found that older children tended to report lower levels of social dominance orientation than younger children. This negative correlation suggests that as children age, they may become more attuned to egalitarian norms or learn to suppress overt expressions of dominance.</p>
<p>“The more that children prefer social hierarchy, the less empathy they feel for low status groups, the less they intend to address inequality, and the less they seriously consider low status groups’ concerns,” Lei summarized.</p>
<p>Contrary to patterns often seen in adults, the researchers found no significant difference in social dominance orientation between boys and girls. In adult samples, men typically report higher levels of this trait than women. The absence of this gender gap in childhood suggests that the divergence may occur later in development, perhaps during adolescence when gender roles become more rigid.</p>
<p>As with all research, there are some limitations. The experiments relied on novel, fictional groups rather than real-world social categories. It is possible that children reason differently about real-world hierarchies involving race, gender, or wealth, where they have prior knowledge and experience. The use of fictional groups allowed for experimental control but may not fully capture the complexity of real societal prejudices.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001861" target="_blank">Antecedents and Consequences of Preferences for Hierarchy in Early Childhood</a>,” was authored by Ryan F. Lei, Brandon Kinsler, Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson, Ian Davis, and Alissa Vandenbark.</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-uncover-a-distinct-narrative-pattern-in-autistic-people-and-their-siblings/" 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 uncover a distinct narrative pattern in autistic people and their siblings</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Dec 13th 2025, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A study of individuals with autism and their siblings and parents found that autistic individuals and their siblings used fewer causal explanations to connect story elements when asked to tell a story based on a series of pictures. They also used fewer descriptions of the thoughts and feelings of protagonists. The research was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-024-06424-0"><em>Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders</em></a>.</p>
<p>Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by differences in social communication, sensory processing, and patterns of behavior or interests. People on the autism spectrum tend to perceive and organize information in distinctive ways that can be strengths in some contexts and challenges in others. Among other things, they seem to differ from their neurotypical peers in the way they tell stories—specifically regarding their narrative patterns and abilities.</p>
<p>Research shows that many autistic individuals produce narratives that are shorter or less elaborated compared to neurotypical peers, focusing more on concrete details than on social or emotional aspects. Difficulties may appear in organizing stories into a clear beginning, middle, and end, or in emphasizing the motives, thoughts, and feelings of characters. At the same time, many autistic people display strong memory for facts and may provide narratives rich in precise and specific information.</p>
<p>Study author Kritika Nayar and her colleagues wanted to explore and compare the narrative skills of individuals with autism and their first-degree relatives. They wanted to see whether their narrative skills and styles showed similarities with their relatives who do not have autism.</p>
<p>Study participants were 56 autistic individuals, 42 of their siblings who do not have autism, 49 control participants without autism (who were not related to the autistic participants), 161 parents of autistic individuals, and 61 parents who do not have autistic children.</p>
<p>Overall, there were 58 parent-child pairs in the autism group, and 20 parent-child pairs in the control group. The average age of participants with autism and their siblings and peers was approximately 17–19 years. The average age of parents of participants with autism was roughly 50 years, and the average age of parents of non-autistic participants was roughly 46 years.</p>
<p>Study participants were given a 24-page wordless picture book called “Frog, Where Are You?” depicting the adventures of a boy and his dog while searching for a missing pet frog. The story is comprised of five main search episodes in addition to the introduction, plot establishment, and resolution. Participants were asked to narrate the story page-by-page while viewing it on a device that tracked their eye movements.</p>
<p>All audio files of their narration were transcribed and then hand-coded by researchers. Study authors looked for descriptions of affective states and behaviors of protagonists, and protagonists’ cognitive states and behaviors. They also looked for causal explanations of story protagonists’ behaviors and for causal explanations of protagonists’ feelings and cognitions.</p>
<p>The study authors differentiated between explicit causal language, marked by the use of the term “because,” and more subtle use of causal language indicated by words such as “so,” “since,” “as a result,” “in order to,” and “therefore.” They also looked for the presence of excessive detail and for topic perseveration (whether a participant got stuck on a specific topic) throughout the story. Study authors analyzed participants’ eye movements while telling the story.</p>
<p>Results showed that participants with autism and their siblings used fewer descriptions of affect and cognition, and fewer causal explanations than control participants. They were also more likely to omit story components.</p>
<p>Parent groups did not differ in their overall use of causal language or in how often they described feelings and thoughts (cognition) of story protagonists. However, parents of participants with autism used more causal explanations of story protagonists’ thoughts and feelings (affect), but fewer causal descriptions of characters’ behavior compared to control parents. Results also showed some differences in gaze patterns between participants with autism and their siblings on one side, and control participants on the other.</p>
<p>“Findings implicate causal language as a critical narrative skill that is impacted in ASD [autism spectrum disorder] and may be reflective of ASD genetic influence in relatives. Gaze patterns during narration suggest similar attentional mechanisms associated with narrative among ASD families,” study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study contributes to the scientific understanding of the cognitive characteristics of individuals with autism. However, authors note that the eye-tracking metrics used, which focused on the entirety of the book, might have masked certain important patterns of gaze that could unfold over the course of time.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-024-06424-0">Narrative Ability in Autism and First-Degree Relatives,</a>” was authored by Kritika Nayar, Emily Landau, Gary E. Martin, Cassandra J. Stevens, Jiayin Xing, Sophia Pirog, Janna Guilfoyle, Peter C. Gordon, and Molly Losh.</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>