Psychology

Psychology

The problem of people falling for falsehoods has become an urgent issue in recent years, as new technologies have conspired with sociopolitical currents within the culture to spread misinformation at unprecedented speed and reach. Psychologists who study this issue have focused mainly on individual vulnerabilities: the cognitive quirks and biases that predispose us to believe falsehoods, buy into lies, and give in to speculation.

We were walking home from the grocery store in West Yorkshire, England, when a group of teenage boys blocked our path in a narrow alleyway. They hurled racist insults and told us to "go back home." My reaction was instantaneous: Stay quiet, avoid conflict, and get past them as quickly as possible. I grabbed my mother's arm, urging her to move with me. But she didn't.

Kitty and Jose Menendez were watching TV and eating ice cream in their Beverly Hills mansion on August 20, 1989, when their sons, Erik and Lyle, came in and shot them. Lyle blamed organized crime, deflecting the investigation, but a guilt-ridden Erik confessed to a therapist. The young men were arrested. They went through two sensational trials before both were finally convicted.

In the 1890s, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov noticed how dogs began salivating not just when food was placed in front of them, but when they heard the footsteps of the person bringing the food. He ran experiments where he'd ring a bell right before he fed his dogs. After repeating this several times, the dogs started salivating at the sound of the bell alone, no food needed.

As a psychological scientist who studies sexting, I've had people ask me for all kinds of sexting advice and facts, from "How can I prevent my images from being used against me?" to "How does sexting affect young people?" to "Am I weird or what?" A quick Google search doesn't always help with these questions, returning sexting tips and tricks from Cosmo ("60 hot sexting ideas for your inspiration") adjacent to headlines like "Can sexting get you arrested?" from Teen Vogue.

I know I mentioned my profession to him, but I am pretty sure he was the one who engaged me that way. I also know how diabolically good a chatbot can be at saying what is on the tip of your tongue, and doing it before you can, and better than you might have. That makes me feel less troubled by my uncertainty.

In his book The Narrative Brain: The Stories Our Neurons Tell, he points out that most of the Grimm brothers' fairy tales center on the vulnerability of their heroes. This vulnerability is often borne out of an earlier trauma-abandonment or orphanhood, for example-which leaves its character hypervigilant to danger and presumably with a certain level of cunning at recognizing and responding to that threat.

Is aggression part of our primate nature, wired into our systems because it helps us survive, or do we learn it from such seemingly innocent occupations as watching cartoons and wrestling matches on TV? Can the answer be both? There is evidence in support of both a genetic, evolutionary source for human aggression, and for the role of observational learning in its acquisition.

This phenomenon is referred to as selective attention, and a famous study designed by Simons and Chabris (1999) demonstrated it quite well. For their research, these scientists showed a video to student volunteers featuring players passing basketballs back and forth, one team in white t-shirts, and the other team in black t-shirts. The viewers were instructed to count the passes between players wearing the white t-shirts.

I have three daughters, and while I assumed most eldest daughters of the family are bred that way by Type-A moms, it seems my own eldest daughter - who is most definitely not being raised by a Type-A mom - has already taken on some of the classic characteristics. Like when she sees me attempting a DIY project and asks for my phone so she can prepare to dial 911.

Trust is our basic response to people and the things they tell us (Grice, 1975; Schwarz & Jalbert, 2020). If someone tells us something, we tend to believe they are doing their best to tell us the truth. If we walk into a store, we trust the prices listed are what we'll pay. We trust that the item inside the box is what's listed on the outside of the box.

The attention economy stokes conflict, turning social media platforms into merchants of hate. One part of this dynamic concerns upsetting stories that get to the top of the feed. But why does attention run to the latest sensational murder rather than some good-news story? Social media algorithms are designed to give the most visibility to disturbing stories. 1 However, the algorithms work as they do because of the way that the attention systems of our brains evolved.

It's important to recognize that everyone's orgasms are different. And your orgasm can change from time to time based on mood, hormonal levels, the kind of stimulation you're using, who you're with, and even your own stress levels, says licensed sexologist and relationship therapist Sofie Roos. "For some, it's a short and intense experience, while for others, it's more like a calm and warm wave of pleasure that you ride for a long time."

Everyone employs bias-otherwise known as cognitive shortcuts-in their lives every day. Imagine you're scrolling through your social media feed and immediately dismiss a news article because it comes from a source you don't typically trust. Or maybe you're convinced your favorite restaurant is the best in town, remembering all the great meals you've eaten there while forgetting that mediocre dinner last month.

Whether it's a partner, friend, or family member, certain people have what it takes to act fast under pressure. Others? Not so much. You know someone would make a horrible emergency contact if they're accident-prone themselves. If you're hobbling out of the doctor's office on crutches, the last thing you need is a chaotic friend closing the car door on your foot.

When faced with failure, do you tend to react with anger or hurt? Do you get defensive, deny a role in what happened, or perhaps deny that failure even occurred? Do you slant information to avoid looking guilty, or come up with a laundry list of reasons for the failure that were outside of your control? Perhaps you try being nice with the hopes that others will overlook the failure or point their fingers elsewhere.

Back in college, I worked in the produce department of a local grocery store. I spent a lot of early mornings unloading cases of apples, oranges, and everything else from the back of a semi, then restocking shelves throughout the day. It wasn't glamorous, but it was oddly satisfying. Over time, I developed what felt like a quiet superpower: I could pick fruit with the best of them.

In the 1960s and 70s, researchers showed that while people's actions are heavily influenced by the context around them, we tend to explain behavior by focusing on internal traits. This tendency, for example, to say someone was rude because they are a rude person, rather than because they were in a stressful situation, is called the Fundamental Attribution Error. We pay less attention to the context and attribute behavior to the content of a person's character.

'Successive generations are defined by sets of values, beliefs and behaviours that also manifest visually - most notably through their own distinctive colours,' the experts explained in an article for The Conversation. 'Segmenting by generation - boomers, X, Y, Z, Alpha - thus allows us to observe chromatic preferences that are not merely matters of individual taste, but reflections of a collective relationship to time, aspirations and dominant aesthetics.'

Ladder of inference is a step-by-step process that you naturally follow while making decisions. The seven steps of this decision-making process are observation, data selection, interpretation, assumptions, conclusion, beliefs, and action. The ladder of inference is a metaphorical model of cognition and action designed by an American business theorist, Chris Argyris, in the 1970s. He created it to help people understand the decision-making process and avoid jumping to wrong conclusions. It was later popularized by Peter Senge in his book 'The Fifth Discipline'.

Much of our common understanding of hypnosis has been gleaned from mind-control plots in Hollywood movies or hokey on-stage demonstrations. On this episode of How To!, Carvell Wallace brings on Stanford University psychiatrist and researcher Dr. David Spiegel to talk about what hypnosis is (and isn't), as well as its potential to address stress, pain, and even athletic performance. Plus, with Carvell wrestling with an ongoing major project, Dr. Spiegel tests our host's hypnotizability-then leads him through an exercise aimed at confronting procrastination.

The question of whether there's a science to grief comes at a time when prolonged grief disorder is included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a medical condition treatable by drugs. DSM-5 TR (2022)defines extended grief in adults as lasting more than one year, and in children and adolescents for more than six months. For a diagnosis to occur, the grief should "last longer than might be expected based on social, cultural, or religious norms."

Most of us know the pain and isolation that occurs when we feel judged unfairly by others. We can move through the discomfort of judgment by understanding the reasons why others judge. By focusing on forgiveness and learning the lessons of our situation, we can adopt a healthy mindset. We all make mistakes. Sitting in the discomfort that judgment creates can deepen our connection to humanity.

Money mistakes happen. We've all had that moment of overspending, taking on debt or making an investment that didn't work out. Financial mistakes are part of being human, but for many, these mistakes come with the heavy burden of shame. Unlike guilt, which can motivate us to change our behavior, shame can leave us stuck. Understanding how shame shows up and learning how to work through it can create a path toward a healthier relationship with money.