#socialwork

DATE: July 26, 2026 at 04:00PM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: Brain “noise” during speech processing is linked to verbal communication skills in autistic youth

URL: https://www.psypost.org/brain-noise-during-speech-processing-is-linked-to-verbal-communication-skills-in-autistic-youth/

A new study suggests that subtle patterns in background electrical brain activity are linked to everyday verbal communication abilities in autistic youths. Scientists discovered that higher levels of background electrical activity, often described as neural noise, tend to correspond with greater difficulties in real-world communication among children with autism spectrum disorder. The research was published in the scientific journal Scientific Reports.

Autism spectrum disorder is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by unique social interactions, communication differences, and repetitive behaviors. Structural language abilities can vary widely across the autism spectrum, but daily communication challenges remain common and significantly influence social outcomes.

To understand why these communication differences occur, researchers examine the underlying neurobiology of the brain. One primary area of focus involves the balance between neural excitation and neural inhibition within central brain networks.

Neural excitation occurs when brain cells send signals that prompt other cells to fire, whereas neural inhibition occurs when cells release signals that dampen electrical activity. When the balance between excitation and inhibition shifts too far toward excitation, it can create a noisy background signal in the cortex that makes information processing less efficient.

Lead author Vardan Arutiunian, a researcher at Seattle Children’s Research Institute, along with senior author Sara Jane Webb, a professor at the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Research Institute, sought to observe how these electrical patterns unfold during speech processing. The authors aimed to determine whether specific brain wave signatures recorded while children listened to spoken sounds could reflect this signaling balance and correlate with practical communication skills.

To carry out the investigation, the authors evaluated 306 children and adolescents between the ages of 7 and 18 years old. The sample consisted of 162 youths diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and 144 typically developing peers who served as a comparison group. The two groups were matched by age and sex assigned at birth.

During the experiment, participants wore electroencephalography, or EEG, caps fitted with 128 sensors that measure electrical impulses on the scalp. Electroencephalography is a non-invasive technique that records the rhythmic electrical activity generated by networks of brain cells. The youths listened to recordings of spoken three-syllable nonsense words, such as “pa-bi-ku,” while viewing a static image of a robot on a monitor.

The researchers recorded electrical signals generated across nine distinct regions of interest on the scalp. They separated these complex raw signals into periodic oscillations, which are rhythmic repeating brain waves, and aperiodic components, which represent non-repeating background electrical activity.

The aperiodic signal yields two specific measures known as the exponent and the offset. The exponent indicates how quickly electrical power decreases across higher frequencies and provides evidence regarding the balance of excitation and inhibition, while the offset reflects the total overall amount of background nerve cell firing.

The scientists also measured periodic gamma activity, which refers to fast-frequency electrical brain waves ranging between 35 and 55 Hertz. Fast gamma oscillations are known to rely heavily on specialized inhibitory nerve cells that help coordinate brain signaling during sensory tasks.

Behavioral assessments were administered to all participants to evaluate different aspects of language and cognition. Overall structural language ability, including formal grammar and vocabulary, was evaluated using the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals.

Everyday functional communication skills were measured using the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, an assessment tool that relies on parent reports to evaluate practical daily verbal interaction. Cognition was assessed using standard cognitive test batteries to determine verbal and nonverbal intelligence quotients.

Statistical analyses revealed noticeable differences in background brain signals between the two participant groups. Autistic youths exhibited a lower aperiodic exponent and a lower aperiodic offset compared to their typically developing peers.

The autistic participants also displayed elevated levels of periodic gamma power during the speech listening task. Together, these three brain patterns point toward a functional shift in the autistic brain, characterized by higher baseline excitation and an increase in overall background neural noise.

When evaluating how these brain signals connected to behavioral traits, the authors observed a specific relationship. A lower aperiodic exponent and offset were associated with lower scores in everyday verbal communication on the Vineland assessment among autistic youths.

This pattern suggests that children whose brain signals reflected higher neural noise tended to experience greater challenges with practical daily communication. These same electrical signals showed no significant association with formal structural language scores, such as vocabulary and grammar knowledge.

The researchers also tracked age-related changes in these brain patterns across childhood and adolescence. Gamma oscillations tended to increase with age in both groups, while the aperiodic exponent and offset steadily decreased as participants grew older.

Interpretation of these findings requires consideration of several important study parameters and limitations. The majority of the autistic participants in the sample possessed average or above-average intellectual and verbal abilities.

Because of this sample profile, the findings might not generalize directly to individuals with autism who are nonverbal or possess minimal verbal skills. Future research will need to include participants with a wider range of cognitive and communication profiles to confirm these patterns.

In addition, scalp electroencephalography provides an indirect, system-level estimation of brain excitation and inhibition rather than a direct physical measurement of specific brain chemicals. The technology measures broad electrical field changes across the scalp rather than individual microscopic connections between nerve cells.

Future studies could combine electroencephalography with advanced imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy is an imaging method that allows scientists to measure concentrations of specific chemical messengers in brain tissue, including gamma-aminobutyric acid and glutamate.

Despite these limitations, the research suggests that measuring background electrical signals offers a promising avenue for understanding communication differences in autism. Tracking these broad electrical properties could assist researchers in evaluating how developmental therapies influence underlying brain function over time.

The study, “Altered aperiodic EEG spectral power during speech perception task is associated with verbal communication in youths with Autism Spectrum Disorder,” was authored by Vardan Arutiunian, Megha Santhosh, Emily Neuhaus, Heather Borland, Raphael A. Bernier, Susan Y. Bookheimer, Mirella Dapretto, Abha R. Gupta, Allison Jack, Shafali Jeste, James C. McPartland, Adam Naples, John D. Horn, Kevin A. Pelphrey, and Sara Jane Webb.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/brain-noise-during-speech-processing-is-linked-to-verbal-communication-skills-in-autistic-youth/

---

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #AutismSpeechProcessing #NeuralNoise #AperiodicEEG #SpeechPerceptionAutism #GammaOscillations #BrainExcitationInhibitionBalance #VerbalCommunicationAutism #EEGResearch #AutismNeurobiology #DailyCommunicationChallenges

DATE: July 20, 2026 at 11:00AM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: New study shows the “chemical imbalance” theory of depression may hinder patient agency

URL: https://www.psypost.org/reimagining-depression-as-an-alarm-bell-rather-than-a-broken-brain/

When medical professionals describe depression as a biological malfunction, patients often feel less responsible for their condition but also less hopeful about recovery. A new psychological experiment reveals that reframing these biological changes as a functional signal of unmet needs can restore a sense of agency and optimism. The findings were published in Cognition and Emotion.

For decades, doctors and pharmaceutical advertisements have explained depression to the public using biological concepts. Phrases like “brain disorder” and “chemical imbalance” describe the condition as an innate physical problem. This framing helps lift the heavy burden of self-blame that many people with depression carry. If the brain is physically broken, the individual is not at fault.

Yet this relief often comes at a cost. When people believe their depression is a permanent illness embedded in their biology, they tend to feel helpless. They begin to think their condition is fixed and that personal effort will not alter the outcome.

Psychology researcher Elizabeth Kneeland of Amherst College, along with Hans Schroder of the University of Michigan, noticed these explanations combine two separate ideas. The first idea is that depression has a biological cause, like genes or brain chemicals. The second idea is that this biology is malfunctioning or broken.

The research team wanted to know what would happen if they separated the biology from the dysfunction. They designed an experiment to test a different narrative. Instead of telling people a biological process was broken, they framed it as working exactly as it should. In this alternate view, depression acts as an alarm system alerting the person that their fundamental needs are not being met.

Evolutionary biologists and some clinical psychologists have argued for years that intense sadness serves an evolutionary purpose. It is considered a universal response to major life losses or threats. When this emotional pain acts as a mechanism to alert a person to unmet needs, it behaves as an adaptive reflex rather than an internal failing.

The researchers conducted three separate experiments utilizing online surveys. In the first phase, 296 adults read a fictional case study about a young woman named Alex who was seeking treatment for depression. All participants read that a brain scan showed Alex had an overactive amygdala, which is the emotion-processing center of the brain.

Participants were then randomly divided into two groups to read different explanations from her doctor. One group read that her amygdala was malfunctioning by firing constantly without any real threat. The doctor in this scenario explained this meant something was wrong in her brain, making depression an internal physical disorder.

The second group read that her overactive amygdala was doing its job properly to signal that her personal needs were not being met. The doctor in this version explained that the brain was simply trying to protect her. This specific wording framed depression as a helpful signal instead of a broken system.

After reading the case study, participants answered questions about Alex’s condition. Those who read the functional framing rated Alex as having a much better chance of recovery. They felt she had more control over her depression and that she would not need long-term treatment. Conversely, the group that read the dysfunctional framing felt that prescription medication was highly necessary.

To expand on these results, the researchers conducted a second experiment involving 279 adults. This time, the fictional scenario focused on serotonin, a brain chemical intimately linked to mood. All participants read that a blood test showed Alex had low serotonin.

Once again, the groups received differing explanations. One group read that the low serotonin was a sign of a chemical imbalance and a malfunctioning brain. The other group read that serotonin is supposed to drop when life needs are not being met, meaning the chemical was doing its job to alert her to a life problem.

The outcomes completely mirrored the first experiment. Participants given the functional explanation believed Alex had greater control over overcoming her depression. They also rated her depression as less severe than the group receiving the dysfunctional explanation.

Those who read that Alex’s brain was malfunctioning strongly favored medication and a combination of treatments. A subset of participants reported having firsthand experience with psychiatric medications and therapy in their own lives. The researchers found that the framing effects held up even among those familiar with the mental health care system. This highlights how deeply words shape our perception of medical severity.

The third experiment involved 148 adults and utilized a more layered approach. Participants read four different scenarios in a varied order. The causes of depression were described as either biological, like an overactive amygdala, or environmental, like moving to a new city and grieving a friend. Each of these causes was then framed as either a dysfunction or a functional signal.

The results showed a highly consistent pattern. Whenever depression was framed as having a functional purpose, participants viewed the individual as being more capable of recovery. They were less pessimistic about the future and rated the illness as less severe.

This held true regardless of whether the root cause was biological or environmental. Framing depression as a functional signal also boosted positive attitudes toward talk therapy. When the biological cause was described as a dysfunction, support for psychotherapy was notably lower.

The researchers observed that attaching a broken label to a biological cause tends to make people believe the condition is permanently rooted in the body. This belief usually drives a preference for physical treatments like medication over psychological treatments like talk therapy. To ensure their findings were strictly based on the story manipulations, the researchers measured depression symptoms in everyone taking the surveys. Even after statistically accounting for an individual’s personal mood levels, the framing style deeply altered opinions on recovery and treatment.

While the functional framing provided undeniable boosts to hope and agency, it did present a tradeoff. Participants in the functional groups tended to assign more personal responsibility and blame to the individual suffering from depression. Although differences in perceptions of personal weakness were observed between the test groups, changes regarding whether others would think negatively of the fictional patient were not statistically significant.

Because of the risk of increased self-blame, the researchers advise that any clinical discussion of functional signals should intentionally include language that reduces judgment. Talk therapy already uses this approach by helping patients take responsibility for their recovery while understanding that their initial distress is a normal response to hardship. The goal is to encourage action without inducing shame.

Another caveat is that participants generally rated the dysfunctional explanations as slightly more believable. The researchers suggest this is a byproduct of cultural conditioning. The American public has encountered decades of pharmaceutical advertising promoting the chemical imbalance theory of depression, making it a familiar narrative. Over time, functional explanations could become just as acceptable to the general public.

Future research will explore how these narratives operate in real clinical settings over a long period. Reading a short story on a screen captures immediate reactions, but enduring shifts in belief might require ongoing discussions between a patient and a therapist. The current set of experiments provides a strong foundation for optimizing how mental health professionals communicate about biology and despair.

The study, “Dissociable impacts of biological and functional framings of depression: an experimental approach,” was authored by Elizabeth T. Kneeland, Mabel Shanahan, Iris Susen, Ada Chen, Chéla Cunningham, Isabella Lattuada, Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, and Hans S. Schroder.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/reimagining-depression-as-an-alarm-bell-rather-than-a-broken-brain/

---

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #DepressionNarratives #FunctionalFraming #MentalHealthAgency #BiologyVsBehavior #TalkTherapySupport #ChemicalImbalanceDebunked #RecoveryIsPossible #MentalHealthEducation #PsychologyResearch #FramesOfHope

DATE: July 14, 2026 at 06:00AM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: Shingles vaccine could prevent 1 in 17 dementia cases among nursing home patients

URL: https://www.psypost.org/shingles-vaccine-could-prevent-1-in-17-dementia-cases-among-nursing-home-patients/

Receiving the recombinant shingles vaccine is associated with a lower risk of developing dementia among older adults who have recently spent time in a skilled-nursing facility. The findings suggest that this routine immunization might offer protective benefits against cognitive decline over a four-year period. This research was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Shingles is a painful viral infection caused by the reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus. This is the exact same virus that causes chickenpox in childhood. The virus remains dormant in the nervous system and tends to reactivate in adults over the age of fifty or in people with weakened immune systems.

Previous clinical studies have linked a shingles infection to an increased risk of developing dementia later in life. Kaley Hayes is an associate professor in the Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice and the lead of the Pharmacoepidemiology and Regulatory Evidence Lab. She also serves as the associate director of pharmacoepidemiology at the Center for Gerontology and Healthcare Research.

Hayes explained the biological reasoning that prompted the research team to investigate this connection. “We examined the link between vaccination with Shingrix because shingles increases the risk of stroke and potentially just general inflammation in the brain,” Hayes said, referring to the brand name of the recombinant vaccine.

“There is a hypothesis that reducing activity of the virus that causes shingles (called herpes zoster), might therefore help to prevent brain inflammation that can damage brain health long-term,” Hayes said. Because of this hypothesis, scientists have wondered if preventing the viral infection might also protect the brain from cognitive decline.

Earlier observational studies provided evidence that an older version of the vaccine reduced dementia risk. “Prior studies in different populations that examined the older vaccine, Zostavax, did find a signal for dementia prevention,” Hayes said.

Zostavax is the brand name for the older live-attenuated vaccine, which contains a weakened, harmless form of the actual virus. That specific live vaccine is no longer available in the United States. In 2017, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a new version known as the recombinant shingles vaccine.

Recombinant vaccines are made by synthetically producing specific pieces of a virus to trigger a strong immune response. This newer version is highly effective at preventing shingles in older adults. Because the newer vaccine works so well against the virus, there is growing interest in its potential to protect the brain.

“We wanted to use large, real-world data and a rigorous study design to find out if that signal exists for older adults in the US vaccinated with the newer, more effective vaccine,” Hayes said. Older adults admitted to skilled-nursing facilities represent a population at high risk for both shingles and new-onset dementia.

A skilled-nursing facility is an inpatient medical center that provides short-term rehabilitation after a hospital stay, as well as long-term care for those who need daily assistance. The authors recognized that admission to these facilities serves as a natural window for medical professionals to assess vaccine eligibility. They designed their study to see if giving the recombinant vaccine during or shortly after a facility stay would lower the rate of new dementia diagnoses.

To explore this relationship, the scientists used an analytical approach called a target trial emulation. In a traditional randomized controlled trial, researchers randomly assign participants to either receive a treatment or receive a placebo. Sometimes, running such a trial is not possible or ethical in frail populations.

A target trial emulation solves this problem by mimicking the design of a randomized experiment using existing observational data. The researchers analyzed electronic health records linked to Medicare claims for older adults across the United States. They focused on patients aged 66 or older who were admitted to a skilled-nursing facility between January 2017 and December 2022.

The final sample included 509,926 participants. The average age of the participants was 79 years, and about 63.6 percent of them were women. To be included in the analysis, the patients had to have no prior diagnosis of dementia and no previous doses of the newer recombinant shingles vaccine.

The scientists compared two treatment strategies using a statistical technique that creates duplicate records, or clones, of each person in the data. One artificial clone is assigned to a vaccinated group, and the identical clone is assigned to an unvaccinated group. If a person’s real-world medical data deviates from their assigned group, their artificial clone is censored, or removed from the ongoing analysis.

This complex statistical method helps balance the comparison groups and adjust for biases that typically plague observational research. The study defined the vaccinated strategy as receiving at least one dose of the recombinant shingles vaccine within twelve months of entering the nursing facility. The unvaccinated strategy meant receiving no doses during the entire study period.

The researchers tracked the participants for up to four years. They looked for new dementia diagnoses using medical billing codes from hospital stays, recurring physician claims, and pharmacy records for common dementia medications. They also tracked 57 different participant characteristics, including age, prior health conditions, medication use, and previous vaccinations.

Out of the more than half a million participants, 8,843 individuals received at least one dose of the recombinant shingles vaccine within the first year. This represents just 1.73 percent of the study population. Among those who were vaccinated, 87 percent received their dose after they were discharged from the facility.

The researchers found that the vaccinated group had a lower risk of developing dementia over the four-year follow-up period. Specifically, the four-year dementia risk was 18.8 percent for those who received at least one dose of the vaccine. In comparison, the risk was 24.6 percent for those who did not receive the vaccine.

This translates to an absolute risk reduction of 5.8 percentage points. On a relative scale, the vaccinated participants had a 24 percent lower risk of being diagnosed with dementia compared to their unvaccinated peers.

“Our study identified that as many as 1 in 17 cases of dementia might be prevented through shingles vaccination, though trials are needed to confirm these findings,” Hayes said. The association varied slightly depending on the characteristics of the patients. The protective effect tended to be weaker in men compared to women.

It was also less pronounced in individuals who had previously received the older, live-attenuated version of the shingles vaccine. It is important to understand that this study provides evidence of an association, rather than proving a direct cause-and-effect relationship. The findings are based on administrative claims data, which can sometimes contain coding errors or miss mild cases of cognitive decline.

The overall rate of vaccination in this specific population was also very low, which can complicate statistical comparisons. One specific limitation involves what scientists call healthy vaccinee bias. This concept suggests that people who choose to get vaccinated might also engage in other healthy behaviors, or they might generally be in better health than those who skip vaccines.

The researchers attempted to measure this hidden bias using negative control analyses. A negative control analysis looks for associations between the vaccine and completely unrelated health events. The authors tested if the vaccine was associated with outcomes like hip fractures or routine wellness visits.

Because a shingles vaccine cannot prevent a hip fracture, finding a link would suggest that the vaccinated group was simply healthier or more cautious overall. The negative control analyses did show signs that the vaccinated individuals were generally healthier, pointing to some residual confounding variables. When the researchers statistically adjusted their primary results to account for this underlying health difference, the protective association weakened.

Even in the most conservative adjustment, the vaccine was still associated with a 12 percent reduced relative risk for dementia. The exact biological reasons for this protective link remain a topic of ongoing scientific inquiry. The vaccine might reduce inflammation in the brain, or it might prevent the varicella-zoster virus from contributing to the buildup of toxic proteins associated with cognitive decline.

It is also possible that the vaccine generally modulates the immune system in ways that protect the nervous system. Future research should aim to confirm these findings through actual randomized controlled trials in nursing home settings. By randomly assigning vaccines in a controlled environment, scientists could definitively rule out healthy vaccinee bias.

Until then, this study suggests that administering the recombinant shingles vaccine could be a practical way to support cognitive health in older adults recovering from acute medical events. “The main takeaway is that the shingles vaccine is highly effective at preventing shingles, which is painful and can cause long-term health issues,” Hayes said. “And now there is evidence that something to prevent this physical ailment may help to keep our brain healthy, too.”

The study, “Dementia Risk After Recombinant Herpes Zoster Vaccination in Older Adults With a Recent Skilled-Nursing Facility Stay: A Target Trial Emulation,” was authored by Kaleen N. Hayes, Daniel A. Harris, Kevin W. McConeghy, Lexie R. Grove, Richa Joshi, Lisa Han, H. Edward Davidson, Preeti Chachlani, Thomas A. Bayer, Mriganka Singh, Yasin Abul, Frank DeVone, and Stefan Gravenstein.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/shingles-vaccine-could-prevent-1-in-17-dementia-cases-among-nursing-home-patients/

---

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #ShinglesVaccine #DementiaRisk #OlderAdultsHealth #NursingHomeCare #VaccinationBenefits #AgingBrainHealth #RecombinantShingles #Shingrix #PreventCognitiveDecline #PublicHealthReadiness

DATE: July 11, 2026 at 02:00PM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: Cannabis use in older adults not linked to faster cognitive decline or dementia

URL: https://www.psypost.org/cannabis-use-in-older-adults-not-linked-to-faster-cognitive-decline-or-dementia/

Older adults who have used cannabis do not appear to experience faster cognitive decline or a higher risk of dementia, according to a study published in BMJ Mental Health. The research also found no genetic evidence that cannabis use directly causes poorer brain health later in life.

As cannabis becomes increasingly available for both medical and recreational use, its popularity has grown among older adults. This has raised concerns about whether cannabis might accelerate memory loss or increase the likelihood of developing dementia. Previous research has produced conflicting results, with some studies suggesting long-term cognitive impairment while others found little evidence of lasting harm. Many of those studies, however, were relatively small or unable to determine whether cannabis itself was responsible for the observed effects.

To better answer this question, researchers led by Saba Ishrat from the University of Oxford analyzed data from two large health databases. The UK Biobank analysis included up to 18,975 people who had used cannabis and 60,598 non-users, with cannabis users averaging about 58 years of age and non-users about 62 years.

The team also examined electronic health records from the Million Veteran Program, including 12,222 people with cannabis use disorder and more than 210,000 comparison participants, to investigate dementia diagnoses. Cognitive tests assessed included working memory, reasoning, processing speed, executive function, and visual memory. Finally, the researchers performed Mendelian randomization analyses using genetic data to test whether cannabis use itself is likely to cause cognitive decline or dementia.

The results were reassuring overall. At the beginning of the study, people who had used cannabis actually performed slightly better on tests of numeric memory, reasoning, and problem-solving ability, compared to non-users. However, these differences were small and did not translate into better long-term outcomes. The researchers hypothesize that the better test performance of cannabis users may be confounded by educational background and socioeconomic status, as cannabis users in the UK Biobank dataset tended to have higher levels of both.

Over time, cannabis users did not experience faster declines in thinking abilities, and people with cannabis use disorder were not significantly more likely to develop dementia than those without the disorder.

The genetic analyses strengthened these findings. Because genetic variants are assigned before birth and are less affected by lifestyle or environmental factors, Mendelian randomization can provide stronger evidence about cause and effect than observational studies alone. The analyses found no evidence that cannabis use causes cognitive decline or dementia, nor that poorer cognitive function increases the likelihood of cannabis use.

Results remained broadly consistent after examining males versus females, different frequencies of cannabis use, different age groups, and different ethnicities.

“Clinicians can consider that occasional or prior cannabis use may not be a major contributor to cognitive aging in this population,” Ishrat and colleagues concluded. “However, these results do not establish the safety of cannabis, particularly at higher doses or with prolonged use, and should not be taken as an endorsement of use.”

Some limitations are to be noted. For instance, the researchers relied on self-reported data for cannabis use in the UK Biobank dataset, which introduces the risk of recall and reporting bias. The study could not determine whether different cannabis products, cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentrations, doses, and methods of use might have different effects.

The study, “Cannabis use, cognitive function and dementia risk in older adults: observational and genetic analyses,” was authored by Saba Ishrat, Daniel F. Levey, Joel Gelernter, Klaus P. Ebmeier, and Anya Topiwala.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/cannabis-use-in-older-adults-not-linked-to-faster-cognitive-decline-or-dementia/

---

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #CannabisAndCognition #OlderAdultsHealth #DementiaRisk #CognitiveAging #UKBiobank #MendelianRandomization #CannabisUseDisorder #BrainHealth #ElderlyWellbeing #BMJMentalHealth

DATE: July 2, 2026 at 08:00PM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: Are preprint servers inadvertently legitimizing scientific racism?

URL: https://www.psypost.org/pseudo-academic-papers-are-exploiting-open-science-platforms-to-promote-eugenics/

Unreviewed research platforms are inadvertently hosting debunked theories about race and genetics. A recent analysis reveals that individuals promoting scientific racism use mainstream open science archives to distribute flawed comparisons of human behavior. The study was published in Behavior Genetics.

Over the last decade, the open science movement has drastically changed how academics share information. Researchers frequently upload early drafts of their manuscripts, known as preprints, to internet archives. This allows scientists to bypass the traditional peer review process and share their data immediately.

Peer review usually involves independent experts evaluating a study for methodological errors before it is accepted by an academic journal. By skipping this step, open science platforms accelerate scientific discovery. They also remove the editorial gatekeeping that typically prevents poorly conducted or pseudoscientific research from reaching the public.

Eugenics is a historically debunked movement claiming that human populations can be improved through selective breeding. Related concepts of scientific racism falsely suggest that there are fundamental biological differences in cognitive ability or behavior among socially defined racial groups. These ideas were largely pushed out of the academic mainstream following the mid-twentieth century.

Proponents of these discredited concepts instead relied on obscure fringe publications to share their ideas. Foremost among these is a publication called Mankind Quarterly, which was founded by segregationists and routinely publishes racist pseudoscience. Because mainstream scientists quickly learned to ignore these specialized outlets, the authors struggled to reach broader audiences.

To appear more credible, some of these individuals have recently changed their tactics. They have begun uploading their papers to popular preprint servers right alongside legitimate scientific studies.

Evan J. Giangrande, a researcher at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, wanted to quantify the scope of this issue. He sought to understand how often flawed genetic studies regarding group differences appear on modern preprint platforms. He also aimed to categorize the common tactics used in these papers.

Giangrande started his investigation by identifying all authors who published an article in Mankind Quarterly between 2014 and the spring of 2024. He then searched for those specific authors across four major open science archives. These online archives included PsyArXiv, bioRxiv, SocArXiv, and OSF Preprints.

The search returned 79 distinct preprints tied to these authors. Giangrande narrowed the list to 42 papers focused specifically on behavioral differences among human groups. He categorized each paper by the traits it examined, the groups it compared, and the methods it employed.

These preprints attracted thousands of online views and document downloads. A majority of the papers categorized humans into socially defined racial, ethnic, or national groups. The author noted that most of the group comparisons focused on intelligence, cognitive ability, or educational attainment.

Out of the 42 papers focused on group disparities, 31 discussed genetics and 13 performed new genetic analyses. Giangrande wrote that these analyses routinely relied on elementary misunderstandings of biology. The papers used these misunderstandings to falsely argue that social disparities are caused by innate genetic gaps rather than environmental factors.

Many of the preprints incorrectly assumed that estimates of heritability within one specific population can explain differences between completely separate populations. Heritability is a measure of how much genetic variation accounts for a trait within a specific group of people at a specific time. Mainstream geneticists agree that this metric cannot be used to explain the average differences seen between distinct, separate groups.

Other papers included in the sample misused polygenic scores in an effort to establish fundamental genetic differences. Polygenic scores are mathematical estimates of a person’s genetic likelihood for a certain trait based on thousands of tiny DNA variations. Comparing these scores across different ancestral groups is notoriously unreliable because the variations do not map equally across populations.

A few preprints relied on a technique called admixture regression, assessing individuals with mixed ancestry to separate genetic impacts from environmental ones. Biologists heavily criticize this method for its inability to accurately account for social confounds. Despite these basic mathematical errors, the preprints presented their findings as definitive proof of hereditary differences in intellect.

The authors of these preprints often utilized publicly available data or federally funded databases to perform their analyses. They interpreted this data through the lens of thoroughly debunked evolutionary frameworks. One prominent example was the cold winters theory, which baselessly argues that humans who migrated to colder climates evolved higher intelligence to survive harsh environments.

Another common theme identified in the preprints was differential-K theory. This racist biological concept suggests that certain minority populations evolved to have high fertility rates and low investment in offspring while majority groups evolved the opposite traits. The papers also pushed dysgenics, a false eugenic concept suggesting that a population’s genetic quality is deteriorating due to the reproductive rates of marginalized groups.

By using complicated methods, statistical software, and academic formatting, these papers create a false sense of authority. Giangrande reasoned that unfamiliar readers might struggle to distinguish this content from legitimate scientific inquiry. Unsuspecting public audiences could then cite these preprints as proven facts in online discussions.

The study features a few limitations. The inclusion criteria required a prior publication in Mankind Quarterly for an author to be tracked in the search. This strict rule means the calculated number of problematic preprints is likely an underestimation of the actual volume of pseudoscience online.

The research also focused explicitly on four platforms with relevance to behavioral genetics. It did not catalog other general research clearinghouses or newer artificial intelligence platforms. The issue of weaponized science extends beyond preprints to social media, blogs, and occasionally mainstream academic journals.

Giangrande outlined several potential responses for the scientific community to handle this recurring issue. He proposed that scientists must be extremely precise in their own language to prevent their legitimate data from being misconstrued. Vague terms regarding race and genetics invite bad actors to exploit the remaining confusion.

Improving public education regarding human genetics will also help everyday readers spot logical errors in pseudoscientific work. Individual academics can actively format rebuttals and label flawed research when they encounter it online to provide context for casual readers. Finally, the study recommends that open science platforms could provide explicit warnings that unreviewed content may not meet basic scientific standards.

The study, “The Preprint Problem: Fringe, Genetically Informed Studies of Group Differences in Behavior Housed on Open Science Platforms,” was authored by Evan J. Giangrande.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/pseudo-academic-papers-are-exploiting-open-science-platforms-to-promote-eugenics/

---

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #PreprintEthics #ScientificRacism #OpenScience #BehaviorGenetics #PolygenicScores #HeritabilityMisuse #EugenicsDebunked #MankindQuarterlyCritique #AdmixtureRegression #PseudoscienceAlert

DATE: June 26, 2026 at 10:28AM SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY MIND-BRAIN FEED TITLE: Researchers discover why fructose doesn't satisfy hunger like glucose URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/06/260623083106.htm A new study found that fructose and glucose may look the same on a nutrition label, but the brain treats them very differently. In mice, glucose strongly reduced activity in hunger-promoting brain cells, while fructose had a much weaker effect. High-fructose corn syrup triggered a stronger response and was preferred by the animals. The findings suggest that the type of sugar—not just the calories—can influence appetite and food preferences. URL: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/06/260623083106.htm ------------------------------------------------- Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org ------------------------------------------------- #psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #FructoseVsGlucose #HungerScience #AppetiteResearch #SugarImpact #NutritionLabelTruth #BrainAndSugar #HighFructoseCornSyrup #FoodPreferences #CalorieQualityMatters #SugarMetabolism

DATE: May 7, 2026 at 02:00PM SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **

TITLE: New study sheds light on how going braless alters public perceptions of a woman

URL: https://www.psypost.org/new-study-sheds-light-on-how-going-braless-alters-public-perceptions-of-a-woman/

A recent study published in Frontiers in Psychology suggests that a woman’s decision to wear a bra involves a strategic trade-off between signaling physical attractiveness and avoiding negative social judgments. Scientists found that while going braless tends to be viewed as highly attractive by both men and women, it also provides evidence of being perceived as a sign of sexual availability. This perception of availability appears to increase the fear of harassment among women, shaping their daily clothing choices.

Scientists conducted this study to understand the evolutionary and social factors driving everyday clothing choices. From an evolutionary perspective, clothing acts as a tool for self-promotion, helping individuals enhance their physical appeal to potential romantic partners. At the same time, clothing serves to conceal intimate body parts, which can signal sexual restrictiveness and relationship fidelity.

The authors explain that human males naturally prefer female breasts of average or above-average size and high firmness. One evolutionary theory suggests that after early humans began walking upright on two legs, protruding breasts gained visual importance. Another theory proposes that breast firmness serves as an honest indicator of a woman’s health and metabolic resources.

The authors wanted to see how the specific choice of wearing or not wearing a bra fits into this evolutionary balance. Going without a bra can increase sexual attractiveness by making the breasts and nipples more visible to observers. On the other hand, wearing a bra can improve the visual firmness of the breasts. This creates a strong biological signal of youth and fertility, which can elicit a powerful response from potential partners.

To explore these dynamics, the researchers recruited 686 heterosexual adults from Slovakia. The sample included 409 women and 277 men, with an average age of about 35 years. The scientists used social networking sites to distribute their survey and asked participants to invite their acquaintances to join.

The authors asked the female participants detailed questions about their bra-wearing habits in both public and private settings. The researchers also measured various psychological and physical traits in the female participants. These included self-esteem, breast size, breast shape, media exposure, and fear of sexual harassment.

They also measured sociosexuality among the participants. This psychological concept refers to a person’s willingness to engage in casual sex without a committed emotional relationship. Additionally, the researchers asked participants about their pornography consumption, as this media can influence sexual expectations.

In a separate task, the 277 men and a subgroup of 158 women viewed ten pairs of photographs showing women’s torsos. Each pair featured the same woman wearing a white shirt, once with a bra and once without a bra. The participants had to choose which image in each pair looked more sexually attractive. They also had to choose which image suggested greater relationship fidelity.

The findings revealed that women rarely go braless in public. About 78.5 percent of the female participants reported they wear a bra almost every time they go out. In private settings, the behavior was much more evenly split, meaning women feel much more comfortable skipping a bra at home.

Women who reported having smaller, firmer breasts were more likely to go braless in public. The authors noted that firmer breasts tend to serve as an evolutionary signal of youth and fertility. This suggests these women may feel less need for the artificial enhancement that a bra provides. Women with silicone breast implants were also more likely to go braless, likely because implants increase both size and firmness.

Interestingly, a woman’s openness to casual sex did not predict her bra-wearing habits. Instead, the fear of sexual harassment played a major role in these decisions. Women who expressed a higher fear of being harassed were significantly more likely to wear a bra in public. This suggests that women intuitively use clothing to protect themselves from unwanted attention.

When evaluating the photographs, both men and women consistently rated the braless images as more sexually attractive. However, both genders also rated the braless women as less likely to be faithful to a partner. Men who had a stronger personal preference for large breasts found the braless photos especially attractive.

The researchers also found that men who reported an intention to sexually harass women were highly sensitive to the braless photos. These men tended to view the lack of a bra primarily as a cue of infidelity and sexual exploitability. The authors suggest this aligns with evolutionary ideas about male sexual jealousy, where certain men interpret provocative clothing as a sign of a woman’s willingness to cheat.

This new data aligns with previous research on how society views women’s bodies and clothing choices. For example, a study published in the journal Sexuality and Culture examined attitudes toward female toplessness in public. The researchers asked 326 residents of the United States to rate images of topless women in various public settings, like a beach or a park.

The authors of that paper found that a person’s individual traits drove their reactions, rather than the location of the photograph. Interestingly, women actually rated the photos of topless women more negatively than men did. The authors suggested that sexually objectifying environments encourage competition among women. This concept, known as intrasexual competition, prompts individuals to socially police their rivals.

Similarly, research published in the European Journal of Social Psychology provides evidence that people judge women’s bodies through a strict moral lens. In that study of 470 participants, scientists found that behaviors like being topless or getting a tattoo are viewed as moral issues for women, but not for men. When participants were asked to explain their opposition to female toplessness, they spontaneously used arguments about harm and purity.

This double standard highlights how society places heavier burdens on female bodily autonomy. The researchers found that people with sexist beliefs were especially likely to use concepts like purity to oppose female toplessness. This form of prejudice, known as benevolent sexism, idealizes women as pure beings who need protection. This mindset helps explain why society places stricter controls and judgments on women’s bodies compared to men’s bodies.

Other research has focused specifically on the biological signals associated with not wearing a bra, such as nipple visibility. A study in the journal Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences involving 234 participants explored how people react to photographs of women with visibly erect nipples. The findings suggest that this involuntary physical response triggers immediate sexualization and objectification by observers.

The scientists found that women with visibly erect nipples were perceived as less intelligent, less moral, and more promiscuous than women without visible nipple erection. Female participants in that study rated the women with visible nipples as having lower quality relationships. Men in that study expressed a desire to interact with these women, while female participants expressed a desire to avoid them. This further supports the idea that prominent breast signals carry significant social and reputational costs for women.

While these studies offer fascinating insights, the authors of the bra-wearing research note a few limitations to their work. The study relies heavily on self-reported data for bra-wearing frequency and media exposure. This method can be influenced by a desire to appear socially acceptable, meaning people might not accurately report their daily habits.

The study also frames clothing choices primarily through an evolutionary lens. This approach might overlook the strong influence of modern cultural norms, personal comfort, and fashion trends. Future research could use more objective methods, such as daily diaries, to track clothing habits in real time. Scientists also recommend cross-cultural studies to see how different societal rules interact with these evolved sexual signals.

The study, “Women’s and men’s perceptions of (not) wearing a bra in public,” was authored by Pavol Prokop, Ivana Tomanová Čergeťová, and Jozef Balcerčík.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/new-study-sheds-light-on-how-going-braless-alters-public-perceptions-of-a-woman/

---

DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email psybot-mastodon-digest-subscribe@clinicians-exchange.org -- no subject or message needed.

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot@mastodon.clinicians-exchange.org

Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com

EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org

READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org

It's primitive... but it works... mostly...

---

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist@a.gup.pe @psychotherapists@a.gup.pe @psychology@a.gup.pe @socialpsych@a.gup.pe @socialwork@a.gup.pe @psychiatry@a.gup.pe #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist