Latest news with #PsychologicalBulletin
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Left-handed people could be at higher risk for some neurological disorders: study
Left-handedness and certain neurological disorders could go hand-in-hand, a new study revealed, though the researchers and others acknowledged potential limitations. While about 10% of people in the world are left-handed, people with autism are 3.5 times more likely to have the trait, according to an international team of researchers that analyzed data from over 200,000 individuals. The study, published in the journal Psychological Bulletin, indicated that left- and mixed-handedness also appear more often in people who have diagnoses such as schizophrenia, autism and intellectual disability. Rising Autism Rates Now Affect 3% Of Children, Says Cdc Report Mixed-handedness refers to a situation in which people may use their left hand for a certain task and their right hand for others, according to psychology experts. This is slightly different from ambidexterity, which is the equal use of both hands. Read On The Fox News App "The key takeaways of this study are that alterations in hand preference from the norm (i.e., right-handedness) are associated especially with psychiatric and psychological conditions that affect the language system (e.g., dyslexia or schizophrenia) or affect neurodevelopment through an early age of onset (e.g., autism or ADHD)," lead author Dr. Julian Packheiser told Fox News Digital. He is a researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at Ruhr University Bochum in Germany. Not all neurological conditions showed a link to people's dominant hand. Depression and dyscalculia (a math learning disability), for example, showed no meaningful difference in hand preference compared to control groups, the study found. The researchers also determined that "atypical handedness" may be associated with long-term linguistic symptoms like stuttering and dyslexia. "In most people, the dominant side of their brain is typically where speech, language, logical thought processing and hand preference is located," Dr. Earnest Lee Murray, a neurologist with West Tennessee Medical Group, told Fox News Digital. He was not involved with the new study. Children With Autism May See Speech Improvements With Off-label Prescription Drug "People who are left-handed or ambidextrous often don't have such a dominant one-sided brain — rather, the key portions of language can be divided between both sides," Murray also said. The study also examined the likelihood of atypical handedness in clinical populations, or groups of people diagnosed with a specific set of health conditions compared to a control population. "We suspected that left- and mixed-handedness could be associated with disorders whose symptoms are related to language," said Packheiser in a press release about the study. "Language, like handedness, has a very one-sided location in the brain, so it stands to reason that the development of both and their disorders could be linked." The researchers also considered other factors that could come into play, such as the age at which a person might exhibit symptoms. Click Here To Sign Up For Our Health Newsletter It appears that the earlier a disorder's symptoms emerged, the more frequently researchers saw cases of left- and mixed-handedness. The researchers hypothesized that left- and mixed-handedness could be associated with diseases that occur very early in life, because the dominant hand is determined at a very early age – possibly even before birth. In the womb, thumb-sucking at 10 weeks' gestation is heavily linked to which hand will be preferred later in life, they noted. The connection could help experts potentially understand the way brains are organized and how they develop. "The study has implications when understanding ways of finetuning the neurorehabilitation of patients with one-sided brain conditions, such as stroke, multiple sclerosis or traumatic brain injury," Murray said. Jonathan Alpert, a Manhattan-based psychotherapist and author, said the study was "interesting," though he emphasized its limitations. "Correlation doesn't imply causation — and being left-handed does not mean someone will develop autism or schizophrenia," Alpert, who was not involved in the study, told Fox News Digital. "Handedness is just one of many factors that can be associated with neurological traits, and these findings should be interpreted with caution to avoid unnecessary alarm or stigma." Alpert called for more research to understand the relationship, if any, between handedness and mental health. Lead author Packheiser agreed the results are "purely correlational." "We have no causal evidence that developing a psychiatric disorder linked to language or neurodevelopment causes a change in handedness, or whether changes in handedness cause any disorder," he told Fox News Digital. For more Health articles, visit "Individuals from the general public should therefore never be alarmed if their child prefers to use the left hand," the researcher said. "But given the rise of mental disorders in the population, it is important to better understand them."Original article source: Left-handed people could be at higher risk for some neurological disorders: study
Fox News
10-05-2025
- Health
- Fox News
Left-handed people could be at higher risk for some neurological disorders: study
Left-handedness and certain neurological disorders could go hand-in-hand, a new study revealed, though the researchers and others acknowledged potential limitations. While about 10% of people in the world are left-handed, people with autism are 3.5 times more likely to have the trait, according to an international team of researchers that analyzed data from over 200,000 individuals. The study, published in the journal Psychological Bulletin, indicated that left- and mixed-handedness also appear more often in people who have diagnoses such as schizophrenia, autism and intellectual disability. Mixed-handedness refers to a situation in which people may use their left hand for a certain task and their right hand for others, according to psychology experts. This is slightly different from ambidexterity, which is the equal use of both hands. "The key takeaways of this study are that alterations in hand preference from the norm (i.e., right-handedness) are associated especially with psychiatric and psychological conditions that affect the language system (e.g., dyslexia or schizophrenia) or affect neurodevelopment through an early age of onset (e.g., autism or ADHD)," lead author Dr. Julian Packheiser told Fox News Digital. He is a researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at Ruhr University Bochum in Germany. "Correlation doesn't imply causation — and being left-handed does not mean someone will develop autism or schizophrenia." Not all neurological conditions showed a link to people's dominant hand. Depression and dyscalculia (a math learning disability), for example, showed no meaningful difference in hand preference compared to control groups, the study found. The researchers also determined that "atypical handedness" may be associated with long-term linguistic symptoms like stuttering and dyslexia. "In most people, the dominant side of their brain is typically where speech, language, logical thought processing and hand preference is located," Dr. Earnest Lee Murray, a neurologist with West Tennessee Medical Group, told Fox News Digital. He was not involved with the new study. "People who are left-handed or ambidextrous often don't have such a dominant one-sided brain — rather, the key portions of language can be divided between both sides," Murray also said. The study also examined the likelihood of atypical handedness in clinical populations, or groups of people diagnosed with a specific set of health conditions compared to a control population. "We suspected that left- and mixed-handedness could be associated with disorders whose symptoms are related to language," said Packheiser in a press release about the study. "Language, like handedness, has a very one-sided location in the brain, so it stands to reason that the development of both and their disorders could be linked." The researchers also considered other factors that could come into play, such as the age at which a person might exhibit symptoms. It appears that the earlier a disorder's symptoms emerged, the more frequently researchers saw cases of left- and mixed-handedness. The researchers hypothesized that left- and mixed-handedness could be associated with diseases that occur very early in life, because the dominant hand is determined at a very early age – possibly even before birth. In the womb, thumb-sucking at 10 weeks' gestation is heavily linked to which hand will be preferred later in life, they noted. The connection could help experts potentially understand the way brains are organized and how they develop. "The study has implications when understanding ways of finetuning the neurorehabilitation of patients with one-sided brain conditions, such as stroke, multiple sclerosis or traumatic brain injury," Murray said. Jonathan Alpert, a Manhattan-based psychotherapist and author, said the study was "interesting," though he emphasized its limitations. "Correlation doesn't imply causation — and being left-handed does not mean someone will develop autism or schizophrenia," Alpert, who was not involved in the study, told Fox News Digital. "Handedness is just one of many factors that can be associated with neurological traits, and these findings should be interpreted with caution to avoid unnecessary alarm or stigma." Alpert called for more research to understand the relationship, if any, between handedness and mental health. Lead author Packheiser agreed the results are "purely correlational." "We have no causal evidence that developing a psychiatric disorder linked to language or neurodevelopment causes a change in handedness, or whether changes in handedness cause any disorder," he told Fox News Digital. "Individuals from the general public should therefore never be alarmed if their child prefers to use the left hand," the researcher said. "But given the rise of mental disorders in the population, it is important to better understand them."
Forbes
08-05-2025
- Health
- Forbes
This Mindset Fuels Friendship Decay In Most Bonds — By A Psychologist
The 'bystander effect' is something we all experience, often without even realizing it. It's that moment when you see an issue and think, 'Someone else will handle it,' so you end up doing nothing. While this behavior is typically linked to emergencies or public scenarios, it can quietly creep into our friendships too. Picture a friend dealing with a personal crisis or feeling overwhelmed. In a tight-knit group, each person might assume, 'Someone else will reach out,' or 'I don't want to intrude; someone else will take care of it.' As a result, no one checks in, leaving your friend feeling alone and unsupported. A 2011 study published in Psychological Bulletin explains that the bystander effect is a phenomenon where people are less likely to assist a victim if others are present. Essentially, having others around makes us feel less responsible for offering help, as we assume someone else will take action. This often results in no one taking action. Understanding how the bystander effect plays out in these situations can make a big difference. Here are three ways these subtle dynamics influence us and what you can do to counteract their negative effects. Diffusion of responsibility occurs when individuals in a group assume that someone else will take action, leading to a lack of personal accountability. In friendships, this can be particularly harmful. Research published in Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience suggests that when our personal sense of responsibility erodes, not only are we less likely to do the right thing, we also don't feel as bad as we otherwise would when someone points out our wrongdoings. When a friend is visibly upset or in distress, each member of the group may believe that someone else will step in to offer support or check on them. This assumption results in a collective inaction, leaving the distressed friend feeling isolated, unsupported and possibly even unimportant to the group. For example, imagine a friend shares a worrying post on social media about feeling sad or overwhelmed. In a close group, everyone might see it and think, 'I'm sure someone else will reach out,' or 'I don't want to bother them.' As a result, no one takes the initiative to check on the friend, which can exacerbate their feelings of loneliness and despair. To counteract this, don't wait for someone else to step in — take the lead and reach out yourself. A quick message or call can make a huge difference and shows your friend that they matter. By taking action, you not only offer immediate support but also set a positive example for the rest of the group. This approach helps your friend feel seen and valued, and strengthens the bonds of your friendship. Evaluation apprehension is that nagging fear of being judged or embarrassed when you think about stepping in to help. In friendships, this fear can stop us from offering much-needed support, especially in sensitive situations. Friends might hold back from giving advice or help because they worry it'll come off as intrusive or judgmental. This hesitation can result in missed opportunities to help and can lead to unresolved issues within the friendship. For example, consider a situation where one friend is struggling with unhealthy behavior, such as excessive drinking or harmful eating habits. Another friend might recognize the issue and feel compelled to offer support or advice. However, the fear of being perceived as overly critical or meddlesome can prevent them from speaking up. They might worry about damaging their relationship or making the situation worse by bringing it up. This fear of judgment can lead to inaction, allowing the problem to persist and potentially fester. To overcome this barrier, focus on building a supportive and non-judgmental atmosphere in your friendships. Talk openly about how important it is to help each other out and make sure everyone knows that offering support will be appreciated, not criticized. Encourage honest conversations about feelings and concerns to make seeking and giving help feel more natural. By creating an environment of understanding and empathy, you will feel more at ease stepping in to support each other, knowing their intentions are valued and not seen as intrusive. This will strengthen your friendship and build trust. Pluralistic ignorance happens when a group misjudges its own collective beliefs and attitudes, mistakenly believing they are different from those of others in the group. Even though members may feel confident about their views, they are often incorrect about their shared stance. Here's how a 2023 literature review published in Frontiers in Psychology describes the phenomenon: 'Individual bystanders, despite being alarmed and concerned about the victim themselves, assume that their fellow (non-acting) bystanders have concluded that it was not a situation that called for intervention.' Imagine a friend has been noticeably absent from group activities and hasn't been their usual self in recent conversations. When someone notices but doesn't reach out, they might assume that the friend's absence is not a big deal or that someone else will check in. They might think, 'If no one else is mentioning it, maybe they just need some space,' or 'Others probably know more about what's going on.' This shared misunderstanding can lead to no one offering support, leaving the friend feeling unnoticed and unsupported. To combat pluralistic ignorance, make it a practice to regularly check in with your friends and encourage them to do the same. Promote open discussions about the importance of offering support and ensure everyone feels comfortable sharing their feelings. By proactively asking how others are doing, even when there's no immediate crisis, you help create a supportive environment where everyone feels valued and heard. This approach not only strengthens individual friendships but also helps prevent issues from being overlooked due to assumptions of indifference. Do you struggle with making decisions in social situations? Take The Intuitive Decision Style Scale to know your approach.
New York Post
07-05-2025
- Health
- New York Post
Study finds surprising new link between lefties, autism and schizophrenia
Need a hand? An estimated 10% of people in the world are left-handed — and suffer from a societal bias than spans back centuries. Now, a new study published in the journal Psychological Bulletin has more bad news for people who prefer humanity's less popular hand. New research shows lefties are more likely to have psychotic disorders. Suriyawut – The comprehensive meta-analysis found that individuals with early-onset disorders characterized by language impairments — such as autism, schizophrenia and dyslexia — are significantly more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous compared to the general population. Previous studies have shown that people who are left-handed or ambidextrous are disproportionally likely to have these disorders, but the reasons behind this phenomenon have been unclear — until now. 'We suspected that left- and mixed- handedness could be associated with disorders whose symptoms are related to language,' lead author Dr. Julian Packheiser. a researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at Ruhr University Bochum in Germany, said in a press release. The study emphasizes that this association is particularly strong in disorders that manifest early in life and involve language difficulties. In contrast, conditions that develop later in life, such as depression, do not exhibit this link. 'Language, like handedness, has a very one-sided location in the brain, so it stands to reason that the development of both and their disorders could be linked,' Packheiser said. The study emphasizes that this association is particularly strong in disorders that manifest early in life and involve language difficulties. andriano_cz – For much of history, being left-handed was viewed not just as unusual but as outright devilish. In fact, in Latin, the word 'sinister' means left. Throughout medieval Europe, left-handed people were often associated with witchcraft, devil worship, or moral deviance. This bias persisted well into the 20th century, with many children forcibly trained to use their right hands in school, sometimes through physical punishment. In certain parts of the world — such as India and other parts of Asia — it is considered 'rude' to eat with your left hand, as it is reserved for 'unclean' tasks, further reinforcing a sense of 'wrongness.' Modern neuroscience has added more nuance to the picture. While some studies do suggest that lefties are more likely to have psychotic disorders, other research has linked left-handedness to enhanced creativity and spatial reasoning. Being left-handed is also a known advantage is many sports, such as baseball, tennis and boxing. Some reportedly famous lefties include Barack Obama, John McCain, Benjamin Franklin, Oprah Winfrey, Leonardo DaVinci, Justin Bieber and the Boston Strangler.
CBC
29-01-2025
- Science
- CBC
Parents really do have a favourite child, new study suggests. And it's probably who you think it is
This may not feel like news if you have siblings and a long-standing hunch that one of you could rob a bank and still be the golden child. But a new study suggests parents really do have a favourite kid based on birth order, gender and personality. Although the reasons may be more complex. Younger siblings generally receive slightly more favourable treatment from their parents, according to a meta-analysis of nearly 19,500 people in 30 different studies published in the U.S., Canada and Western Europe between 2015 and 2022, plus an additional 14 unpublished databases. However, this favouritism for the baby of the family was no longer true when the authors looked specifically at control and autonomy as predictors, and then, parents preferred the eldest. In other words, parents were less controlling of older siblings. Parents also reported slightly favouring daughters over sons. But personality played a role, too, with the authors noting that parents tended to favour children who were "agreeable" and "conscientious," regardless of birth order and gender. "Our findings specifically suggest that within families, some children may be easier to parent than others," the authors wrote in the study, which was was published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin earlier this month. The researchers from Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, Utah, and Western University in London, Ont., looked at birth order, gender, temperament and personality and whether these predicted parental differential treatment. The authors analyzed responses from parents and siblings. The study has been making headlines around the world. But Lisa Strohschein, a sociology professor at the University of Alberta and the editor-in-chief of the journal Canadian Studies in Population, suggests this may be because the story simply fits narratives people already have about parental preferential treatment. The study itself had very small effect sizes, she cautioned, to the point that they're nearly "trivial." Even the authors acknowledge their small effect sizes in their limitations, Strohschein added, where they write that "the reasons why parents treat their children differently are likely more complex and extend beyond the factors explored in this study." "If parents are preferring one child over another, that can have really toxic effects," Strohschein, who was not involved with the new study, told CBC News. "It's very common, but I don't think it depends on age or gender or birth order as much as we think." WATCH | Is parenting harder today? Is parenting harder today than it used to be? 4 months ago Duration 4:06 Favouritism is common The prodigal son. The golden child. The rebel. As much as parents may deny it, the belief that parents prefer one sibling over another is entrenched throughout our culture. For good reason. A swath of research suggests parental favouritism is quite common, occurring in as many as 65 per cent of U.S. families. In studies, it's called "parental differential treatment," or PDT for short. It's been reported across other countries, like China and Mexico, and has been associated with children's psychosocial well-being. 2020 study in Hong Kong. And other studies that examine the predictors of PDT, like birth order and gender, have shown similar results. For instance, a 2003 study suggested parents often favour the youngest child. A 2006 study said mothers often favour daughters over their sons. "Most parents probably connect more easily with one child over another, whether that be due to personality, birth order, gender or other things like shared interests," BYU School of Family Life professor Alex Jensen said in a news release. "Watch for those patterns within yourself. Pay attention to how your children react to things that could be perceived as favouritism." But Strohschein stresses that parenting isn't fixed; it's dynamic, changing over time as children get older and parents get more experienced. So she says that asking flat questions in studies like these, like "did your parents favour girls over boys," doesn't necessarily reflect the reality of who parents are and how they treat their children. "You're learning as you're going," Strohschein said. Good news for middle kids? But as for the current study's finding that parents tended to favour the more agreeable and conscientious child? That may be good news for middle children, according to new Canadian-led research published at the end of December in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences That study of more than 700,000 online participants from Canada, the U.S., Australia and the United Kingdom found that middle children were more co-operative. That's in contrast to most previous research, which had found that adults' personality trait levels were unrelated to their birth order, Michael Ashton, a psychology professor at Brock University, and lead author of the Canadian study, told CBC News. But his research found that middle-borns scored highest on two personality dimensions involving co-operativeness —specifically, honesty/humility and agreeableness. That said, he noted that the findings may relate more to family size than birth order, since middle children tend to be from larger families. And on average, people from larger families tended to be higher in these co-operative traits. "We suspect that when one grows up around siblings, even during one's first few years, there's a greater need to co-operate, which leads one to develop a slightly more co-operative personality," Ashton said. WATCH | Why people aren't having as many kids: Why aren't people having as many kids? It's complicated 3 months ago Duration 3:43 Canada's birth rate is among the lowest low. Why aren't people having as many children? CBC sat down with three women to talk about their decision.
