<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/global-brain-efficiency-fails-to-predict-general-intelligence-in-large-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;">Global brain efficiency fails to predict general intelligence in large study</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 27th 2026, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Recent research challenges the popular idea that general intelligence relies on the brain’s overall efficiency or “small-world” architecture. A new study demonstrates that broad, whole-brain measures of network organization fail to predict cognitive ability. Instead, the specific connection patterns of individual brain regions drive the relationship between neural architecture and intelligence. This work appears in the journal <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhaf074" target="_blank">Cerebral Cortex</a></em>.</p>
<p>For over a century, scientists have debated the biological origins of general cognitive ability (GCA). This is often referred to as general intelligence. It represents the observation that individuals who perform well on one type of cognitive task tend to perform well on others. Early neuroscience attempted to locate intelligence in specific brain areas. Later, the focus shifted to the connections between these areas.</p>
<p>Modern researchers view the brain as a complex network. They call the map of these neural connections the “connectome.” To make sense of this vast web, scientists use a branch of mathematics known as graph theory. This mathematical approach simplifies the brain into a set of nodes (regions) and edges (connections).</p>
<p>Graph theory allows researchers to calculate specific properties of the network. Some properties describe the entire network at once. For example, “global efficiency” measures how easily information can travel across the whole brain. Other properties function at the local level. These “node-level” measures describe the role of a single brain region within the larger structure.</p>
<p>Previous studies yielded mixed results regarding how these measures relate to intelligence. Some researchers reported that smarter brains are more globally efficient. Others claimed that “small-worldness,” a balance of local clustering and long-range connections, was the key. However, these earlier investigations often suffered from small sample sizes. Many included fewer than one hundred participants. This lack of data led to inconsistent findings and made it difficult to draw firm conclusions.</p>
<p>To resolve these discrepancies, a team of researchers conducted a massive investigation. The study was led by M. Fiona Molloy and Chandra Sripada from the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Michigan. They utilized two of the largest neuroimaging datasets available.</p>
<p>The first dataset came from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. It included functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans from 5,937 children aged 9 to 10. The second dataset served as a replication sample. It came from the Human Connectome Project (HCP) and included scans from 847 adults.</p>
<p>The researchers analyzed “resting state” fMRI data. This method records brain activity while participants are awake but not performing a specific task. It reveals the intrinsic functional architecture of the brain. The team then assessed how well different graph theory measures could predict each participant’s GCA score.</p>
<p>The investigators first examined whole-brain measures. They calculated nine different properties, including global efficiency and small-worldness. They looked at both positive connections (regions activating together) and negative connections (regions where one activates as the other deactivates).</p>
<p>The results were clear. None of the whole-brain graph theory measures showed a meaningful relationship with general intelligence. Even when the researchers combined all global measures into a single predictive model, the association remained negligible. The idea that a smarter brain is simply a more “efficient” or “small-world” network across the board was not supported by the data.</p>
<p>The researchers then turned their attention to node-level measures. These metrics do not assign a single number to the whole brain. Instead, they assign a value to each distinct brain region. This approach asks how specific areas connect to their neighbors.</p>
<p>Here, the findings were quite different. Fifteen out of the sixteen node-level measures evaluated in the ABCD dataset showed a statistically significant relationship with intelligence. The researchers found that properties of individual nodes were robust predictors of GCA.</p>
<p>One specific measure stood out as the strongest predictor. This measure is called “within-module degree.” The brain is organized into communities, or modules, of highly interconnected regions. Within-module degree quantifies how well a specific node communicates with other nodes in its own community.</p>
<p>The study found that higher within-module degree in certain regions predicted higher intelligence. These regions included the temporal poles and the cerebellum. Conversely, in other areas like the striatum and parts of the temporal cortex, a lower within-module degree was associated with higher intelligence. This suggests that for some brain regions, being tightly integrated with their local community supports cognition. For others, a different pattern is optimal.</p>
<p>The researchers validated these results by replicating them in the adult HCP dataset. The patterns observed in the children were largely present in the adults. This successful replication across two independent samples with different age groups provides strong evidence for the reliability of the findings.</p>
<p>The team also compared these graph theory approaches to a “full connectome” model. The full connectome model uses every single connection in the brain—over 87,000 distinct weights—to predict intelligence. This comprehensive model predicted GCA scores with the highest accuracy.</p>
<p>The aggregated node-level graph measures captured about 36 to 39 percent of the predictive power of the full connectome. This indicates that while node-level graph theory simplifies the data immensely, it preserves a substantial portion of the signal relevant to intelligence. It offers a more interpretable summary than looking at thousands of individual wires.</p>
<p>There are limitations to consider. This study focused exclusively on the resting brain. Brain networks reconfigure themselves when people perform active tasks. It is possible that global network properties become more relevant during complex problem-solving.</p>
<p>Additionally, the researchers used a standard atlas to define brain nodes. This atlas groups brain areas based on average functional connectivity. However, individual brain anatomy varies. Future research might benefit from using personalized brain maps for each participant.</p>
<p>Another consideration is the interpretation of “general intelligence” itself. Cognitive ability is intertwined with environmental factors. These include socioeconomic status and educational opportunity. The biological signatures identified here likely reflect a combination of innate neurobiology and life experience.</p>
<p>Despite these caveats, the study provides a definitive update to the neuroscience of intelligence. It moves the field away from simple, whole-brain explanations. The results suggest that the neural basis of intelligence is not a global property like overall efficiency.</p>
<p>Instead, intelligence appears to be supported by a distributed pattern of local connectivity. Specific regions must be integrated into their local networks in precise ways. This nuance was lost in earlier, smaller studies but becomes visible with large-scale data.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhaf074" target="_blank">Regional, but not brain-wide, graph theoretic measures are robustly and reproducibly linked to general cognitive ability</a>,” was authored by M. Fiona Molloy, Aman Taxali, Mike Angstadt, Tristan Greathouse, Katherine Toda-Thorne, Katherine L. McCurry, Alexander Weigard, Omid Kardan, Lily Burchell, Maria Dziubinski, Jason Choi, Melanie Vandersluis, Cleanthis Michael, Mary M. Heitzeg, and Chandra Sripada.</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/feeling-powerful-in-a-relationship-appears-to-benefit-both-you-and-your-partner/" 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;">Feeling powerful in a relationship appears to benefit both you and your partner</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 27th 2026, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Feeling powerful within a romantic relationship is associated with a more satisfying and active sex life, according to new research published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2025.2599941" target="_blank">The Journal of Sex Research</a></em>. The findings suggest that individuals who feel they can influence their partners report higher levels of sexual satisfaction, motivation, and assertiveness. This positive association extends to partners as well, indicating that power dynamics in relationships are not necessarily a competition where one person’s gain is another’s loss.</p>
<p>Psychologists define power in romantic contexts as the ability to influence a partner and ensure one’s own wishes, needs, and goals are fulfilled. While previous psychological research has established that feeling powerful can change how people think and behave, often boosting confidence and goal-directed behavior, there has been limited investigation into how specific types of power influence the sexual domain of couples. </p>
<p>“We know about how structural, work-related power relates to sexual attitudes, but we know relatively little about how power within romantic relationships shapes sexuality,” said study author <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert-Koerner" target="_blank">Robert Körner</a> of the Department of Psychology at the University of Bamberg.</p>
<p>“This gap is important to address because relationship power typically matters more for relationship outcomes than, for example, power at work, socioeconomic status, or other related variables. Moreover, we aimed to illuminate not only how an actor’s power shapes their own sexual thoughts and behaviors, but also how a partner’s power relates to the actor’s sexual thoughts and behaviors.”</p>
<p>“Actor power” is a person’s own sense of influence, while “partner power” is the degree of influence a partner is perceived to have. The researchers also examined “desired power,” which is the specific wish to have control over a partner. By separating these concepts, the researchers aimed to see if simply wanting power yields different sexual outcomes than actually possessing it. They also aimed to move beyond one-time surveys by looking at how power and sex interact in daily life.</p>
<p>The research team began with an initial study involving 147 individuals currently in romantic relationships. Participants were recruited through email lists and word-of-mouth advertising in Germany. They completed online surveys assessing their sense of power and various aspects of their sexuality. The survey included items asking participants to rate their agreement with statements regarding their ability to get their partner to listen to them.</p>
<p>The data from this first study showed that those who felt they had more influence in their relationship reported greater sexual satisfaction. They also reported higher motivation to be sexually active and greater confidence in expressing their sexual desires. This provided a preliminary baseline suggesting that personal empowerment translates into positive sexual experiences.</p>
<p>To understand how these dynamics play out between two people, the second study recruited 287 heterosexual couples. Both partners independently answered questions about their perceived influence and sexual experiences. This design allowed the researchers to analyze how one person’s sense of power affected their partner. The researchers utilized the “Personal Sense of Power Scale” and the “Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire.”</p>
<p>The results from the couples confirmed the initial findings regarding personal power and sexual benefits. Individuals with high “actor power” consistently reported better sexual outcomes. Additionally, the study revealed that having a powerful partner was associated with higher sexual satisfaction for the other person. This suggests that being with an influential partner does not diminish one’s own sexual enjoyment and may actually enhance it.</p>
<p>The researchers expanded their scope in the third study to include 96 LGBTQ couples. This step was taken to see if the connections between power and sexuality generalize beyond heterosexual norms. The measures and procedures were similar to the previous study, involving independent online surveys for both partners. The sample included gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other sexual minority participants.</p>
<p>The analysis indicated that the benefits of feeling powerful were largely consistent regardless of sexual orientation. For LGBTQ participants, feeling influential was linked to higher sexual satisfaction and assertiveness. However, the link between a partner’s power and one’s own sexual motivation was less consistent in this group compared to heterosexual couples. This implies that while the internal experience of power is universally beneficial, the interplay between partners may have slight variations depending on relationship type.</p>
<p>The final study employed a daily diary method to capture fluctuations in power and sex over time. For two weeks, 106 participants received daily emails asking them to report their feelings of power and sexual experiences for that day. This approach allowed the scientists to see if feeling more powerful on a specific day predicted better sexual outcomes on that same day. This method reduces memory bias and captures the immediate effects of relationship dynamics.</p>
<p>The data showed that daily spikes in feeling powerful corresponded with increases in sexual satisfaction, motivation, and assertiveness. On days when participants felt they had more influence than usual, they were happier with their sex lives. This effect was observed within individuals, meaning it tracked personal changes over time rather than just comparing different people to each other.</p>
<p>“Higher relationship power was associated with greater sexual satisfaction, stronger sexual motivation, and greater sexual assertiveness,” Körner told PsyPost. “In other words, individuals who experienced more influence and control in their relationship were more sexually satisfied, reported a stronger desire for sex, and were better able to express and assert their sexual desires.” </p>
<p>“In addition, the partners of individuals with higher power were also more sexually satisfied. Thus, feeling powerful in a relationship appears to be important for sexual outcomes and can enhance not only one’s own sexual satisfaction but also that of one’s partner. These findings have important implications for sexual well-being and sexual health more broadly.”</p>
<p>The findings indicate that power in relationships is not a zero-sum game. “One partner feeling powerful does not necessarily imply that the other partner feels powerless,” Körner explained. “In fact, both partners can feel powerful—or powerless—at the same time. Accordingly, an important goal for couples may be to create relationship dynamics in which both partners experience power, meaning that both are able to have their needs and goals fulfilled.”</p>
<p>It is likely that having a powerful partner means that partner is better at communicating needs and initiating intimacy. This clarity and confidence can make sexual interactions smoother and more enjoyable for the other person. When both partners feel they can influence the relationship, it may foster an environment of mutual respect and satisfaction.</p>
<p>“Our findings largely replicated across four studies,” Körner noted. “This pattern held regardless of whether power was measured as a stable sense of power or as a momentary state (assessed via a daily diary design). In addition, there were hardly any differences between women and men, and only partial differences between heterosexual and LGBTQ individuals, suggesting that the effects are relatively robust across groups.”</p>
<p>Surprisingly, wanting control over a partner was not consistently linked to positive or negative sexual outcomes. This suggests that the aspiration for power is psychologically distinct from the actual experience of having influence. People who crave power do not necessarily have better or worse sex lives than those who do not, which stands in contrast to the positive effects of actually possessing influence.</p>
<p>“Although prior research has linked the power motive to rather negative interpersonal outcomes, we found that it did not predict sexual outcomes in our studies,” Körner told PsyPost.</p>
<p>While the study identifies strong associations, it cannot prove the direction of cause and effect. It is possible that having a satisfying sex life makes people feel more empowered in their relationship, rather than the other way around. A positive sexual encounter might boost a person’s confidence and sense of influence for the rest of the day. Future research using experimental designs would be needed to establish causality definitively.</p>
<p>The participants were recruited from Germany, a Western culture that generally values autonomy and egalitarianism. The way power dynamics function in more traditional or collectivist cultures might differ. In cultures with more rigid gender roles or hierarchical relationship norms, the link between personal power and sexual satisfaction could manifest differently.</p>
<p>Another potential limitation is the reliance on self-report measures. While standard in this field, self-reports can be subject to social desirability bias. Participants might overstate their power or sexual satisfaction. However, the use of partner reports and daily diaries helps to mitigate some of these concerns by providing multiple data points.</p>
<p>There is a potential misinterpretation that these findings encourage dominance. The authors clarify that “power” in this context is about the ability to influence and get needs met, not about dominating or controlling a partner against their will. The fact that partner power also predicts satisfaction suggests a cooperative dynamic rather than a domineering one.</p>
<p>“We aim to continue studying how power shapes romantic relationships, including sexual outcomes,” Körner said. “In one ongoing project, we examine how structural and subjective power relate to the orgasm gap (i.e., women’s lower orgasm frequency compared to men). In another project, we investigate how relationship power relates to romantic jealousy.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2025.2599941" target="_blank">Power and Sexuality: Associations of Experienced and Desired Power with Sexual Aspects of Couples’ Lives</a>,” was authored by Robert Körner and Astrid Schütz.</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/chia-seeds-may-help-the-brain-regulate-appetite-and-inflammation/" 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;">Chia seeds may help the brain regulate appetite and inflammation</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 26th 2026, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Recent research suggests that components derived from chia seeds may help mitigate some of the harmful effects that a poor diet inflicts on the brain. The study indicates that chia flour and chia oil can alter how the brain regulates appetite and manages inflammation. These findings were published in the journal <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2025.113008" target="_blank">Nutrition</a></em>.</p>
<p>Diets rich in saturated fats and sugars have become increasingly common worldwide. This eating pattern is often referred to as the Western diet. It is strongly linked to a rise in metabolic conditions such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. However, the consequences of such a diet extend beyond the rest of the body to the central nervous system. Consuming high amounts of fat and fructose can disrupt the delicate balance of hormones that signal fullness.</p>
<p>This disruption often leads to a cycle of overeating. In addition to confusing appetite signals, unhealthy diets can trigger inflammation within brain tissue. They also cause oxidative stress, which is a form of cellular damage. Scientists are currently searching for functional foods that might reverse or prevent these neurological changes.</p>
<p>Researchers from the Federal University of Viçosa in Brazil investigated whether chia seeds could offer a solution. Chia seeds are known for their nutritional density. They contain high levels of dietary fiber, vitamins, and healthy fatty acids. The research team wanted to see if processing the seeds into flour or oil would affect their biological activity.</p>
<p>The study was led by Bárbara Pereira da Silva from the Department of Nutrition and Health. The paper’s first author is Patrícia Nayara Estevam. They focused on how these chia products influenced gene expression in the brains of rats.</p>
<p>The scientists conducted their experiment using male Wistar rats. They divided the animals into groups to test different dietary conditions. For the first eight weeks, a majority of the rats consumed a diet designed to mimic unhealthy human habits. This feed was high in lard and fructose.</p>
<p>This initial phase was intended to induce metabolic alterations in the animals. A control group received a standard, healthy diet during this time. After the eight weeks concluded, the researchers redistributed the animals into new groups for a ten-week treatment phase.</p>
<p>One group continued on the high-fat, high-fructose diet without any changes. Another group received this unhealthy diet but with soybean oil replaced by chia oil. A third group had their high-fat feed supplemented with chia flour. The researchers then collected brain tissue samples for analysis.</p>
<p>The team looked for specific genetic markers associated with satiety. Satiety is the feeling of being full after eating. They also measured levels of hormones that control appetite. Finally, they assessed biological markers related to inflammation and antioxidant activity.</p>
<p>The results revealed distinct differences between the effects of chia flour and chia oil. The animals that consumed chia oil showed increased activity in specific genes that suppress hunger. These genes produce proteins known as POMC and CART.</p>
<p>These proteins are essential for signaling to the body that it has consumed enough energy. The activation of this pathway typically leads to a reduction in food intake. The researchers did not observe this specific genetic increase in the group fed chia flour.</p>
<p>However, both the flour and oil treatments appeared to improve how the brain handles leptin. Leptin is a hormone produced by fat cells that inhibits hunger. In a healthy brain, leptin binds to specific receptors to stop the urge to eat.</p>
<p>Diets high in fat often cause the brain to ignore leptin signals. This condition is known as leptin resistance. The rats fed chia products showed a reduction in the genetic expression of the leptin receptor. This suggests a restoration of normal sensitivity to the hormone.</p>
<p>The study also examined a neurotransmitter called Neuropeptide Y. This chemical is a potent stimulator of appetite. The high-fat diet caused levels of Neuropeptide Y genetic expression to rise. Both chia flour and chia oil succeeded in lowering the expression of this hunger-inducing marker.</p>
<p>Beyond appetite control, the researchers investigated inflammation. The unhealthy diet increased the expression of a protein complex called nuclear factor kappa B. This molecule acts as a switch that turns on inflammation in cells.</p>
<p>Both chia treatments were effective in lowering the activity of this inflammatory switch. This indicates that components in chia seeds may protect brain cells from inflammatory damage. The researchers attribute this to the bioactive compounds found in the seeds.</p>
<p>Chia flour provided an additional benefit regarding antioxidant defense. The group fed flour showed increased expression of a gene called Nrf2. This gene serves as a master regulator for the body’s antioxidant response.</p>
<p>It helps cells produce enzymes that neutralize harmful free radicals. The researchers believe the phenolic compounds in the flour are responsible for this effect. These compounds act as antioxidants and help maintain cellular health.</p>
<p>To understand these molecular interactions better, the team used computer simulations. This method is often called molecular docking. It allows scientists to predict how different molecules might fit together physically.</p>
<p>They analyzed specific phenolic acids found in chia flour, such as rosmarinic acid and caffeic acid. The simulation tested how these compounds interact with appetite receptors in the brain. The analysis showed that these compounds can bind directly to the receptors.</p>
<p>Rosmarinic acid showed the strongest potential interaction. This suggests that the compounds in chia might physically attach to brain receptors to help regulate satiety. This direct interaction could explain some of the observed changes in gene expression.</p>
<p>Despite these promising changes in brain chemistry, the study reported a notable caveat. The animals consuming chia did not lose body weight compared to the untreated group. The researchers suggest that the extremely high calorie count of the diet might have masked the benefits.</p>
<p>It is possible that the molecular changes were a first step. Behavioral changes in eating and subsequent weight loss might require a longer period to manifest. The intense energy density of the feed was likely sufficient to maintain weight gain despite better appetite signals.</p>
<p>Another limitation is that this research was conducted on rats. Animal models provide essential insights but do not perfectly replicate human metabolism. The human brain and digestive system are influenced by a wider variety of environmental factors.</p>
<p>Future research is needed to determine if these effects translate to humans. Clinical trials would need to establish the correct dosage of chia flour or oil for people. Scientists also need to investigate if these changes can lead to actual weight loss in a human population.</p>
<p>The study highlights the potential of functional foods to modulate brain health. It reinforces the idea that what we eat directly influences the molecular machinery of our brains. Chia seeds may offer a dietary strategy to help unwanted metabolic changes.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2025.113008" target="_blank">Chia flour and chia oil (Salvia hispanica L.) modulate the satiety and inflammation in brain of rats fed a high-fat high-fructose diet</a>,” was authored by Patrícia Nayara Estevam, Renata Celi Lopes Toledo, Vinícius Parzanini Brilhante de São José, Luiza de Paula Dias Moreira, Bárbara Nery Enes, Mariana Grancieri, Neuza Maria Brunoro Costa, Hércia Stampini Duarte Martino, and Bárbara Pereira da Silva.</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/primary-psychopathy-linked-to-lower-morning-cortisol-levels/" 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;">Primary psychopathy linked to lower morning cortisol levels</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 26th 2026, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A study conducted on university students found that individuals with higher levels of primary psychopathic traits tend to have lower baseline cortisol levels in the morning, but not in the afternoon. This effect did not depend on participants’ sex. The research was published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2024.2390849"><em>Social Neuroscience</em></a>.</p>
<p>Psychopathic traits are personality characteristics involving callousness, lack of empathy and remorse, manipulativeness, shallow affect, and a tendency toward impulsive or antisocial behavior. They are commonly divided into primary and secondary psychopathy.</p>
<p>Primary psychopathy is characterized by low anxiety, emotional coldness, lack of empathy, superficial charm, and reduced fear responsiveness. Individuals high in primary psychopathy tend to be manipulative, callous, and emotionally detached. These traits are thought to primarily depend on genetics and temperament.</p>
<p>Secondary psychopathy is characterized by impulsivity, emotional instability, hostility, and high negative affect. Individuals high in secondary psychopathy frequently show reactive aggression, poor emotional regulation, and heightened sensitivity to stress. Secondary psychopathy is more strongly associated with adverse environmental influences, such as trauma or an unstable upbringing.</p>
<p>Study author Todd A. Armstrong and his colleagues wanted to explore the associations between testosterone, cortisol, and psychopathic traits. They hypothesized that psychopathic traits would be associated with higher testosterone levels when cortisol is high. They also expected higher testosterone levels to be associated with higher levels of secondary psychopathy, while lower levels of cortisol would be associated with higher levels of primary psychopathic traits.</p>
<p>Data for their study were collected as part of a project exploring biological influences on traits associated with antisocial and criminal behavior. Study participants were 552 undergraduate students from a university in the southern United States. Of these, 366 participants were women. Their average age was 20 years.</p>
<p>Study participants completed assessments of primary and secondary psychopathic traits (the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale and the Inventory of Callous Unemotional Traits). They then reported to a laboratory where they gave saliva samples allowing the study authors to estimate their cortisol and testosterone levels.</p>
<p>As there were many students, the laboratory samples were taken between 08:00 in the morning and 18:30 in the evening. This allowed the study authors to look at cortisol and testosterone levels at different times of day. In the laboratory, study participants completed a short social stressor speech task. </p>
<p>In this task (which was designed to induce stress), participants were given 2 minutes to prepare a speech in which they would address their greatest strengths and weaknesses. They would then record their 2-minute speech. Saliva samples were collected before and after this task, allowing researchers to measure both baseline hormone levels (before the speech task) and their levels when the participant was stressed (i.e., after the speech task).</p>
<p>Cortisol is a hormone released by the adrenal glands that plays a central role in the stress response by mobilizing energy and regulating metabolism, immune function, and arousal. Testosterone is a steroid hormone primarily produced by the testes (and in smaller amounts by the ovaries and adrenal glands) that influences sexual development, muscle mass, dominance-related behavior, and aspects of motivation and risk-taking.</p>
<p>Results showed that individuals with more pronounced primary psychopathic traits tended to have lower baseline cortisol levels (i.e., levels before the speech task). However, this association was present in the morning only and absent in the afternoon. The observed association between primary psychopathic traits and cortisol did not depend on participants’ sex.</p>
<p>“The current results join a small group of studies that indicate a role for hormones in the explanation of variation in psychopathy. While recent work in this area has emphasized interactions between testosterone and cortisol, the current results suggest that direct associations between cortisol and psychopathic traits may be central to our understanding of associations between hormones and psychopathy,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study contributes to the scientific understanding of biochemical correlates of psychopathy. However, it should be noted that the study was conducted on university students, a population in which the overall levels of psychopathic traits are generally very low. Results in groups with greater variability in psychopathic traits might differ.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2024.2390849">Testosterone, cortisol, and psychopathy: Further evidence with the Levenson self-report psychopathy scale and the inventory of callous unemotional traits,</a>” was authored by Todd A. Armstrong, Danielle L. Boisvert, Jessica Wells, Richard H. Lewis, Eric M. Cooke, Matthias Woeckener, Nicholas Kavish, and James M. Harper.</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-find-biological-evidence-of-the-toll-colorism-takes-on-young-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;">Researchers find biological evidence of the toll colorism takes on young adults</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 26th 2026, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>New research suggests that the bias against darker skin tones does more than affect social standing; it physically alters the body’s stress response mechanisms. A study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2025.107676" target="_blank">Psychoneuroendocrinology</a></em> links these specific experiences of discrimination to disruptions in cortisol levels and subsequent physical health declines in young adults. This research provides evidence that sociocultural stressors can bypass psychological defenses to impact biological function directly.</p>
<p>Health disparities between racial groups are well documented in the United States. However, broad racial categories often obscure the nuanced experiences of individuals within those groups. Antoinette M. Landor, an associate professor at the University of Missouri, sought to investigate these variations. Along with colleagues from several other institutions, Landor focused on the concept of colorism.</p>
<p>This term refers to bias that favors lighter skin over darker skin. It can come from outside one’s community or from within it. It acts as a layer of inequality separate from, though related to, racism. The researchers theorized that the stress arising from this specific type of bias creates a unique biological burden.</p>
<p>The team utilized an intersectional framework to guide their inquiry. This approach recognizes that systems of oppression do not operate in isolation. A person is not just influenced by their race or their gender separately. Instead, these identities overlap to create distinct experiences of privilege or marginalization.</p>
<p>Specifically, the study engaged with the “skin tone trauma model.” This theoretical model posits that skin tone is a primary marker for social stratification. It suggests that individuals with darker skin face more frequent and intense devaluation. The researchers aimed to see if this social trauma could be detected in the body’s hormonal rhythms.</p>
<p>They focused on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, often called the body’s central stress response system. When a person perceives a threat, this system activates a cascade of hormones. The end product of this cascade is cortisol. In a healthy individual, cortisol follows a specific daily pattern known as a diurnal rhythm.</p>
<p>Levels of this hormone typically spike roughly thirty minutes after a person wakes up. This surge helps mobilize energy to start the day. The levels then steadily drop as the day progresses. By bedtime, cortisol should reach its lowest point to facilitate sleep.</p>
<p>Chronic stress can disrupt this healthy curve. When the body stays in a state of high alert, the stress system may lose its sensitivity. The brain struggles to shut off the production of stress hormones. This results in a “flatter” diurnal slope.</p>
<p>A flatter slope means cortisol does not drop as much as it should during the day. This dysregulation is often associated with fatigue, depression, and cardiovascular issues. The researchers hypothesized that colorism acts as a chronic stressor that flattens this curve.</p>
<p>To test this, the team recruited 53 African American and Latino undergraduate students. These participants engaged in a rigorous data collection process over several weeks. At the start, the students rated their own skin tone using a visual scale. They also completed questionnaires detailing their recent experiences with ethnic-racial discrimination.</p>
<p>The most intensive part of the study involved collecting biological samples. Participants provided saliva samples three times a day for two consecutive days. They repeated this process every week for a month. This allowed the team to track cortisol fluctuations accurately over time.</p>
<p>Participants collected spit samples immediately upon waking, thirty minutes later, and right before bed. This provided the data points necessary to graph each individual’s cortisol slope. The researchers also asked participants to rate their general physical health at the beginning and end of the study.</p>
<p>The data revealed a clear pattern connecting appearance to social experience. Participants with darker skin tones reported more frequent instances of ethnic-racial discrimination. This finding aligns with sociological research suggesting that darker skin acts as a primary target for bias.</p>
<p>The study then connected these social experiences to biological markers. High levels of reported discrimination correlated with flatter diurnal cortisol slopes. The stress system appeared to lose its natural rhythm in those facing consistent prejudice. The body’s regulatory “brakes” seemed to function less effectively.</p>
<p>Finally, the analysis linked these hormonal patterns to general well-being. The flatter cortisol slopes were associated with poorer self-reported physical health six weeks later. This suggests a specific pathway for health deterioration. Darker skin leads to increased exposure to discrimination.</p>
<p>That discrimination acts as a persistent stressor that disrupts the endocrine system. Eventually, that physiological disruption manifests as a perceptible decline in physical health. The researchers controlled for initial health status to ensure they were capturing a change over time.</p>
<p>This biological “wear and tear” is consistent with a concept known as allostatic load. The body adapts to stress in the short term to survive. However, maintaining that state of adaptation requires energy and resources. Over time, this effort damages various bodily systems.</p>
<p>The findings support the idea that colorism contributes to this weathering process. It suggests that the health disadvantages faced by communities of color are not uniform. Those with darker skin may carry a heavier physiological load due to colorism.</p>
<p>The authors noted several limitations that provide context for these results. The sample size was relatively small, consisting of only 53 individuals. All participants were college students, who may have access to resources that buffer against stress. This specific demographic might not represent the general population of young adults.</p>
<p>Additionally, the study relied on participants to rate their own skin tone and physical health. Perceptions of skin tone can be subjective and influenced by social factors. Future investigations could benefit from objective measurements, such as using spectrophotometers to analyze skin color.</p>
<p>The researchers also suggest that future work should include more diverse age groups. Examining these dynamics in older adults could reveal how these effects accumulate over a lifetime. It would also be beneficial to look at participants from various socioeconomic backgrounds.</p>
<p>Despite these caveats, the study offers important insights for public health. It indicates that addressing health disparities requires looking beyond broad racial categories. Interventions may need to account for the specific stressors associated with skin tone.</p>
<p>Medical professionals and policymakers should be aware that colorism is a health risk factor. It is distinct from racism and requires targeted attention. The intersection of these biases creates a complex environment for young adults of color.</p>
<p>By identifying the biological footprints of this bias, the study validates the physical reality of social experiences. The phrase “getting under the skin” is often used metaphorically. This research suggests it is also a literal physiological process.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2025.107676" target="_blank">How colorism gets “under the skin”: The role of ethnic-racial discrimination and diurnal cortisol in the physical health of African American and Latino young adults</a>,” was authored by Antoinette M. Landor, Katharine H. Zeiders, Alaysia M. Brown, Kayla M. Osman, Evelyn D. Sarsar, and Jasmine Godwin.</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/comfort-with-genital-terminology-predicts-sexual-self-efficacy-and-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;">Comfort with genital terminology predicts sexual self-efficacy and satisfaction</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Jan 26th 2026, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in the <em><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03360-7" target="_blank">Archives of Sexual Behavior</a></em> provides evidence that knowing the correct names for genital anatomy and feeling comfortable using them are linked to better sexual health outcomes. The findings suggest that while many young adults still lack accurate vocabulary for their bodies, those who are familiar with these terms tend to report higher sexual self-efficacy and satisfaction. This research highlights the potential role of language in fostering sexual well-being and respectful communication between partners.</p>
<p>Public health organizations, including the World Health Organization, recommend teaching children the correct names for their external genitalia to promote safety and bodily autonomy. Despite these guidelines, prior data indicates that a small minority of children can accurately name their genital anatomy. This lack of knowledge often persists into young adulthood, a developmental period marked by increased engagement in intimate relationships.</p>
<p>“This study was motivated by an ongoing tension between public debates and both clinical practice and empirical knowledge surrounding sexual health and sexuality education,” said study author <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Judith-Kotiuga" target="_blank">Judith Kotiuga</a>, a clinical psychologist and psychology professor at Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières in Canada.</p>
<p>“While comprehensive sexuality education remains contested by some and the use of anatomically correct genital terminology is sometimes perceived by some as inappropriate or ‘nasty,’ practitioners largely operate from the premise that knowing one’s body and feeling comfortable with it are foundational to sexual health. Some empirical work supports this assumption, yet important gaps remain.”</p>
<p>“Among these gaps is the fact that, although existing data suggest that both children and adults are often unfamiliar with correct genital terminology, knowledge is typically treated as a binary construct. I was interested in moving beyond whether individuals ‘know’ the terms to examine how they engage with them—whether they use accurate terminology, rely on slang, provide incorrect answers or are completely clueless. These distinctions may carry meaningful implications that are typically overlooked.” </p>
<p>“Importantly, knowledge does not necessarily translate into comfort using these terms. Some individuals may know the correct terms but feel uneasy using them for personal, social, or cultural reasons. This led us to examine knowledge and comfort as related but distinct dimensions, and to explore how each is associated with different indicators of sexual health. Specifically, I was interested in how knowledge and comfort are associated with sexual self-efficacy, which draws on self-knowledge and communication skills, as well as with sexual function and respect for a partner’s bodily autonomy.”</p>
<p>To investigate these questions, the research team recruited 516 young adults living in the United States. The participants were between the ages of 18 and 21 and had all been in at least one romantic relationship. The sample included 290 cisgender women, 162 cisgender men, and 64 gender-diverse individuals. Recruitment took place through an online crowdsourcing platform for a project titled Sexuality, Technology, and Relationships in the Virtual Era.</p>
<p>The study employed a detailed procedure to assess knowledge. Participants were presented with diagrams of male and female genital anatomy and asked to type the names of the body parts without using external aids like search engines. The researchers coded the responses into categories: accurate terms, slang, incorrect answers, or admitted lack of knowledge.</p>
<p>Following the labeling task, participants rated their comfort level using specific terms with a partner. These terms included vulva, vagina, clitoris, penis, testicles, anus, and breasts. The researchers also administered standardized scales to measure sexual health. These measures assessed sexual satisfaction, sexual function difficulties, and self-efficacy regarding health-promoting behaviors and the refusal of unwanted sex.</p>
<p>The results revealed significant variability in anatomical knowledge depending on the specific body part. More than half of the participants could accurately identify the clitoris, vagina, penis, and testicles. However, knowledge was substantially lower for the vulva, with only about 18% to 32% of participants identifying it correctly. A common error involved mislabeling the vulva as the vagina, suggesting that confusion between internal and external female genitalia remains widespread.</p>
<p>Gender differences emerged in the analysis of this knowledge. Gender-diverse participants generally displayed the highest levels of anatomical accuracy, outperforming both cisgender men and women. Cisgender women also scored higher than cisgender men when identifying female anatomy. The use of slang was relatively rare overall but appeared more frequently when participants labeled male genitalia compared to female genitalia.</p>
<p>Regarding comfort, Kotiuga and her colleagues found that participants felt the least at ease using the terms “vulva” and “anus.” Patterns of comfort also varied by gender. Cisgender men reported higher comfort levels using terms for male anatomy than cisgender women did. Gender-diverse individuals reported lower comfort levels with certain terms, such as vagina and breasts, compared to cisgender women, which may reflect complex feelings related to gender dysphoria or identity.</p>
<p>The statistical analysis showed that both knowledge and comfort were associated with positive sexual health outcomes. Participants who knew the correct terms and felt comfortable using them reported higher sexual satisfaction. They also expressed greater confidence in their ability to engage in health-promoting behaviors, such as discussing sexual health needs with a provider or negotiating contraception.</p>
<p>Specific associations appeared between different types of competency and distinct outcomes. Comfort with terminology was a significant predictor of a person’s belief in their ability to refuse unwanted sexual contact. This suggests that emotional ease with the language of the body may support assertiveness. On the other hand, possessing accurate anatomical knowledge was the only significant predictor of having a respectful approach toward a partner’s boundaries.</p>
<p>“The key takeaway is that, although the associations observed were modest, as expected given the complexity of sexual health, knowledge of and comfort using correct genital terminology are meaningfully related to sexual health and wellbeing indicators,” Kotiuga told PsyPost. “Still, many individuals still lack the vocabulary needed to understand and communicate about their bodies. This matters because when something is nameable, it becomes more manageable.”</p>
<p>These findings align with and expand upon previous research regarding the language used to describe genitals. For instance, <a href="https://www.psypost.org/a-womans-choice-of-words-for-her-genitals-is-tied-to-her-sexual-well-being-study-finds/" target="_blank">a separate study</a> by Tanja Oschatz and colleagues found that the specific names women use for their genitals are linked to their body image and sexual experiences. That research indicated that women who used playful or childish terms for their anatomy tended to have a more negative genital self-image.</p>
<p>In the Oschatz study, using vulgar terms during sexual intimacy was actually connected to more positive outcomes, such as higher orgasm frequency. This contrasts with the use of childish language in non-sexual contexts, which was associated with negative outcomes like a lower perception of a partner’s enjoyment. Both studies collectively imply that the vocabulary individuals possess and the context in which they use it matter for their psychological and sexual well-being.</p>
<p>The current study did have some limitations. The data relied on self-reports, which can be influenced by social desirability or memory errors. The sample was recruited online and included a higher percentage of gender-diverse individuals than the general population, meaning it is not fully representative of all U.S. young adults. </p>
<p>Additionally, the study was also cross-sectional, capturing data at a single point in time. This design makes it impossible to determine if knowing the terms causes better sexual health or if people with better sexual health seek out this knowledge. Future research would need to track individuals over time to establish the direction of these relationships.</p>
<p>“These findings should not be interpreted as suggesting that knowledge or comfort alone determine sexual health outcomes,” Kotiuga noted. “Rather, they are linked to sexual health and well-being within a broader constellation of individual and structural factors, including access to education and health services and rights-affirming social contexts.”</p>
<p>Despite these limitations, the research provides observational support for the value of anatomical literacy. The authors argue that while knowledge alone is not a panacea, it is a foundational element of sexual health. When individuals have the words to describe their bodies, they may be better equipped to manage their health, communicate their desires, and respect the boundaries of others.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03360-7" target="_blank">Exploring Knowledge and Comfort with Genital Anatomical Terminology Among Young Adults</a>,” was authored by Judith Kotiuga, Chelly Maes, and Anne J. Maheux.</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>