Interviews with trans children and their parents highlight systemic issues faced by trans children at primary school

By Emily Reynolds


For many young transgender people, socially transitioning can be a highly difficult experience. Research has shown how prevalent experiences of discrimination and harassment are during adolescent transition, where trans teenagers frequently experience bullying not only from peers but from adults too.

A study in the British Journal of Educational Psychology looks at a group of children who socially transition at an even earlier age, during primary and early secondary school. Through interviews with parents and children, the work finds a culture of cisnormativity – a form of normative thought which assumes that everybody is cisgender and has the same needs – within schools and a failure to protect trans children, potentially leading to serious consequences to children’s education and mental health.

Cal Horton from Goldsmiths University interviewed 30 parents or carers of children who had socially transitioned before the age of 11; social transition was taken to mean pronoun change at school, home, and other settings. Their children, who included 15 trans girls, 12 trans boys and three non-binary children, were aged between 6 and 16 years old at the time of interview, giving a wide range of experiences from primary through to early secondary school. To provide further insight, Horton also interviewed ten of these children themselves.

The interviews were semi-structured, with participants responding to open-ended questions related to school, such as “what has been your experience with school?”, “what worked well in your school?” and “what do you think other schools could learn from your experience?”. Follow-up prompts encouraged parents to expand on answers. Children were questioned using whatever format most suited them (e.g. written responses or interview by a parent rather than researcher).

Thematic analysis, in which key themes from the interview text are identified, analysed, and interpreted, produced three themes: institutional cisnormativity, a failure to protect transgender children, and experiences of educational injustice.

In the first theme, institutional cisnormativity, parents noted that school policies often “fail to consider the existence, needs, or rights of trans pupils”. This included lack of access to appropriate facilities, such as toilets or changing rooms, with a direct impact on wellbeing, a sense of belonging, and sometimes physical health. One parent described their child being “segregated to a room by himself on a residential”, “singling him out”.

The theme also covered schools’ poor understanding of legal protections, and a lack of effective trans inclusion policies; this meant that pupils became vulnerable to decisions informed by individual prejudice. One parent, for example, reported a headteacher denying an eight year old trans girl access to the correct toilets, stating that “I’m worried what she would do in the girls’ toilets”.

The second theme concerned schools’ failure to protect trans children. Many trans children and their parents reported schools being unsafe, with abuse being tolerated and pupils experiencing harassment and threats. Parents felt that schools had a “lower expectation of safety for trans pupils” than cisgender ones, making them slow to respond to abuse. Many pupils also reported being isolated: one child said that “because of all of the rumours about me... people stayed away from me”, while a parent said that their child had been “isolated at school... comments [were] made about him in the corridors”.

The final theme related to experiences of educational injustice. A number of pupils had been taken out of school by their parents when schools failed to meet their needs; one pupil was asked to attend conversion therapy by their school. Others missed classes or dropped out entirely because of bullying or harassment, while some were recommended by teachers to leave out of concerns for their safety. Finally, pupils and parents reported feelings of trauma after “years of strain”, with chronic stress impacting mental and physical health. Some pupils were diagnosed with mental health conditions such as anxiety or depression.

While individual prejudice and harassment clearly impacts trans children, the research also highlights the systemic issues stemming from poor policies within schools and poor understanding of existing legal protections – for example a lack of access to facilities, and individual prejudice contradicting legal protections. As author Cal Horton told Research Digest, “trans children in UK schools are harmed by experiences of discrimination and segregation, in schools where cisnormative policy enables transphobic practice.”

“Schools need to raise their expectations for trans pupils, more proactively demonstrating commitment to building schools that are safe and welcoming, enabling trans children to thrive and grow up with confidence and self-esteem,” they said. “Schools need to take steps to adapt to ensure trans pupils are protected from discrimination and gender minority stress, with trans equality a priority for safeguarding trans pupil well-being.”

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/transgender-children-face-discrimination-even-primary-school-level(accessed 28.12.22)

Neurodiversity-affirmative education: why and how?

Dinah Aitken and Sue Fletcher-Watson.



Think of a child in school experiencing sensory overload – maybe bright strip lighting, or the school bell, or a scratchy school jumper. It’s like a shake of the coke bottle. Then the timetable changes unexpectedly, and the child feels anxious and all at sea – another shake of the bottle. The child wants to be alone but they get paired up in an activity and they have to mask how they are feeling – the bottle shakes again. By the time the child gets home, the bottle erupts and the lid flies off.

Parents faced with this experience report their concerns to school, but are met with a stock response – ‘we don't see that behaviour here’. If the school’s understanding was shaped by a neurodiversity model, they might hear the parent in a different way, and start to think about what classroom adjustments could be made to relieve the child of the burden of coping. This burden may explain the higher rates of mental ill-health experienced by neurodivergent young people at school (Ford et al., 2021). Meanwhile, those who don’t ‘cope’ in this way – i.e. suppress and mask their experiences – may find themselves subject to bullying by peers (Fink et al., 2015), and exclusion by school staff (Aitken & Wang, 2021).

Despite being absolutely central to the delivery of inclusion in schools, neurodiversity as a term is widely misunderstood and misapplied. For example, many use the word ‘neurodiversity’ as a synonym for additional support needs (or equivalent) when actually neurodiversity includes everyone in a school. In fact, one of the powerful facets of neurodiversity is this inclusiveness, and resilience to the othering effects of terminology that separates us, like ‘special needs’.

One of the biggest risks, at a time when neurodiversity is becoming increasingly a part of the discourse around education (and employment too) is that it is perceived to be just the latest acceptable terminology: another burden for over-stretched teaching staff to wrestle with. Can we switch the narrative so that schools see the positive and practical benefits of embracing neurodiversity, not just for the pupils but for the whole school community? What does it really mean to foster, accept and support neurodiversity in a school?
What is neurodiversity?

Before we start, it is worth defining a few terms. Neurodiversity is a basic scientific truth: people vary in the way that their brains take in, process, and respond to information. This diversity of information processing gives rise to a diversity of experiences in the world (see Chapman, 2020). The presence of neurodiversity in the human race explains why it is that we are not all the same, and gives rise to the types of variation that are often labelled with a diagnosis – neurodiversity begets autism, ADHD, developmental language disorder, Down syndrome, dyslexia, dyspraxia, fragile x syndrome, and Tourette syndrome.

Using the terminology of neurodiversity, we can describe the biggest group of people as neurotypical. They tend to flourish fairly easily in our education system and beyond – because they are in the majority, these systems were often built by people like them, for people like them. Neurodivergent people (also referred to as neuro-atypical, or neuro-minorities) can struggle in these systems because of the mismatch between the way their brains process information and the way the system implicitly expects them to operate.

The single most common mistake made when writing or talking about neurodiversity is to describe an individual as neurodiverse. This is grammatically incorrect (diversity is a property of groups, not individuals), but also can be inadvertently discriminatory. As Nick Walker (2021) writes: ‘To describe an Autistic, dyslexic, or otherwise neurodivergent person as a “neurodiverse individual” … serves to reinforce an ableist mindset in which neurotypical people are seen as intrinsically separate from the rest of humanity, rather than as just another part of the spectrum of human neurodiversity.’

That said, it is essential to recognise and adopt the language preferences of individuals talking about themselves. While we refer to non-neurotypical people in this article as ‘neurodivergent’, many individuals might describe themselves as neurodiverse, or using other language altogether, and these preferences should always take precedent when referring to a specific person.
The neurodiversity paradigm and movement

Beyond these basic facts, neurodiversity has socio-political implications for education. These implications have largely been described by autistic scholars but are now embraced far more widely. The neurodiversity paradigm has three main components – all consequences of the basic fact of neurodiversity as applied to society.

First, variability between people in how they learn is natural, and indeed this variability is a collective strength for the human race. Second, there is no one better or correct way to be, and all neurotypes are equally valued. In the words of autistic scholar Jim Sinclair: ‘Grant me the dignity of meeting me on my own terms – recognize that we are all equally alien to each other and that my ways of being are not merely damaged versions of yours.’ Third, neurodiversity, just like other dimensions of diversity such as ethnicity, gender or sexuality, is something that needs to be understood in the context of social and interpersonal dynamics. In other words, the lives of neurodivergent people are heavily dictated by the reactions of others; by stigma, prejudice, discrimination and ignorance. The neurodiversity movement is a catch-all term that refers to any efforts to apply these ideas in policy and practice, just as the feminist movement aims to apply and realise the concept of gender equality.
Becoming neurodiversity-affirmative

As we can see, neurodiversity starts as a simple idea but immediately poses some radical shifts in thinking. What would this look like when applied in a school context?

Successful, inclusive education needs to cater to the naturally occurring variability that is an inevitable part of humanity. An expectation of varying needs and resources to accommodate those should be baked in to our school systems, rather than overlaid as optional extras. A simple example of this is for every classroom to have a cupboard of accessories freely available to help cater to varying needs: wobble cushions for hyperkinetic children to sit on and wiggle; noise-cancelling headphones for sound-sensitivity; stim toys to help induce focus; egg-timers to help structure independent learning time. Universal design can also help to create a neurodiversity informed environment. Classrooms should be fitted with dimmer switches as standard, and visual timetables should be posted up for the whole class, rather than being doled out to individuals with identified needs. Flexible seating arrangements – the option to stand or sit on a beanbag or yoga ball – are another example of the application of universal design.

A considerable added bonus of taking a universal design approach to classroom supports is that undiagnosed pupils can also benefit – a range of techniques and practical supports are suggested in Johnson and Rutherford (2019). For example:Schools that have provided tablets and laptops to the whole school benefit those children who struggle to spell and write, without singling them out.
Relaxing or scrapping school uniform policies supports pupils with sensory issues who cannot tolerate wearing the uniform.
Lots of schools no longer sound a bell between classes, which generates a calmer atmosphere for all.


Efforts to correct atypical development onto a more neurotypical pathway, or to encourage children to blend in, cannot be considered neurodiversity-informed. For example, many schools require a child to sign a 'behaviour contract' after a period of exclusion as a pre-condition for returning to school. This is an unacceptable approach for a neurodivergent child who isn't 'behaving' but is simply 'being'. Another common example of this in practice involves the teaching of “social skills” based on neurotypical norms to autistic children. Most egregiously, this is sometimes recommended as a solution when an autistic child is being bullied at school – a devastating neglect of duty of care to the autistic child, when the focus should clearly be on changing the behaviour of the bully. In moving away from a normative model of education support, it is important to permit variability in outcome as well as process. Children are not just following their own paths, they are headed to different destinations too. A child who is struggling with handwriting may not need more time to get it right – give them the option to get really good at typing instead.

Finally, the neurodiversity paradigm shows us that neurodivergent experiences cannot be fully understood by people from another neurotype, and thus we need to centre individual experiences and promote self-advocacy (see Pellicano & den Houting, 2022). Neurodivergent teachers and pupils themselves should be at the centre of any school’s inclusion process. Of course, this does not deny the crucial role that can be played by experts and allies who happen to be neurotypical. Especially for children, it may be hard to articulate what are the barriers they are experiencing, let alone identify possible solutions. Experienced professionals can support an individual to analyse their own needs and propose solutions that might be effective. Moreover, a large part of the experience of neurodivergent people consists of the environment created by the attitudes and actions of neurotypical people around them. Inclusion at school is everyone’s business. For example, in a scoping study (Friskney et al., 2019), it was found that schools’ ability to offer a positive learning experience for neurodivergent pupils was linked to ‘the schools’ abilities to respond to a diverse population in general’. The LEANS Programme, Learning About Neurodiversity at School, is one way we have tried to address the attitudes and actions that shape neurodivergent pupils’ experiences.
Myths and risks

When the neurodiversity paradigm is not well understood, it can be mis-applied, resulting in a number of possible negative outcomes. One myth is that neurodiversity denies the disabling impacts of being neurodivergent. You may hear people say something like ‘neurodiversity means that autism is just a difference, not a disorder’. However, when we argue that something is a difference it can still also be a disability – especially within the social model of disability which focuses the cause of the disability in the environment, or the (lack of) environment-person fit. Applying the concept of neurodiversity in this way allows us to simultaneously reject ‘disorder’ labels, while allowing for the fact that those differences may indeed have disabling effects. Ultimately, the word difference should point us to acceptance of needs without judgement, rather than denial of needs without support.

Closely related to this mis-application of the concept of neurodiversity is the idea that we should be celebrating the talents of neurodivergent people. Now, you won’t find us arguing against identifying and lifting up people’s strengths. Working out what you are good at and using that to build skills and self-esteem is an amazing thing for a young person to experience, and a fantastic outcome for a teacher. The difficulty arises when the entire neurodiversity idea is boiled down to a focus on celebrating talents. Where does this leave children who don’t feel they have any talents? And who gets to define what counts as a talent? Is lining up all your coloured pencils perfectly, or never running out of energy, really going to be celebrated in the same way as ace-ing your maths test?

Instead, the focus on strengths is more healthy – and more aligned with the natural variability that is central to neurodiversity – when considered at a group level. Neurodiversity brings collective strength to the table, drawn from variability in experience, helping to drive innovation and empathy – two cardinal features of the evolution of humanity. In the classroom, a focus on collective strengths is apparent when the class celebrate their ability to get along together and their willingness to accommodate each other. As a teacher, one might celebrate the variety of ways in which pupils have approached a creative writing task – ‘look at all these amazing poems – everyone has approached the assignment in their own way!’ – rather than selecting the ‘best’ examples based on a set of metrics which not all will meet.

If the neurodiversity paradigm is not well understood, there is a risk that this transformative idea not only fails to meet its full potential, but that active harm ensues. Mis-appropriating the acceptance agenda of the neurodiversity movement could mean denial of support to those who need it – in a similar way that insistence on a ‘colourblind’ approach prevents anti-racist actions. Tokenistic adoption of neurodiversity language without follow-through in terms of ideas neuters the paradigm and prevents real change.

It is also worth noting that neurodiversity does mean different things to different people – not all readers will agree with the formulations we have adopted here. For example, attempts have been made to position learning disability outside the concept of neurodiversity. The question, we think, to ask yourself is ‘Does my idea of neurodiversity operate to combat stigma and enable flourishing for everyone?’ – if it doesn’t, maybe the simplest solution is to expand and update your idea of neurodiversity.
A neurodiversity-affirmative framework

When neurodiversity is used to include everyone, and to drive a radical agenda of acceptance, the benefits can be substantial. One problem in our current model of classroom support, which all too often relies on a diagnosis before support is offered, is that children may sit on clinical waiting lists for months before receiving a diagnosis. If their needs are not being met in this time, serious outcomes can ensue, including exclusion and mental ill-health. Neurodiversity reminds us of the variability that exists in every school, in every classroom. A neurodiversity-affirmative school provides a platform for teachers to analyse and act upon the apparent needs of the children in their class without waiting for external (often clinical) validation to do so. Such practice is truly child-centred, and permits a rapid response to the changing needs of pupils, while waiting for the insights that can come from a clinical evaluation.

Another benefit of adoption of a neurodiversity-affirmative approach is the shift in focus away from modification of a person against a norm, and towards cultivation of that individual on their own terms. The potential for damage to wellbeing that comes from approaches which focus on correction is clear. In worst case scenarios – and all too often in our experience – this can lead to mental health crises, exclusion or anxiety-related school non-attendance. In contrast, a focus on combating stigma associated with neurodivergence, and on flourishing, nurtures positive self-regard. This can only support engagement with education and maximise learning potential.
The challenge for teachers and schools

Hopefully, we have painted a picture of a neurodiversity-affirmative model for education. A neurodiverse class isn't a bunch of problems to be solved – instead, it's a rich community, brimming with individual and collective potential.

However, it would be unfair and perhaps enraging to suggest this is an easy utopia to create. It’s easy to worry that permitting – or rather, encouraging – children to self-advocate and offering support on a universal-design basis without clinical diagnosis would make your classroom into a free-for-all. Crucially though, we just don’t know much about what a classroom that really delivered on the principles of the neurodiversity paradigm would look like. How much of the difficult behaviour teachers struggle with in class right now is motivated by children trying to hide their difficulties, or push adults away because they don’t feel they can be trusted?

As well as for individual teachers, there is a challenge here for schools. A school is a complex community, and by its very nature it is systemic. The neurodiversity paradigm requires systemic change – we can't continually ask individuals to change themselves to fit in. Instead, we need to meet individuals nearer to where they are. This raises the crucial question of funding. While staff are underpaid and resources in short-supply, it will always be impossible to fully realise the vision of the neurodiversity-affirmative education for everyone. A key way to deliver on the promise of neurodiversity is to campaign for change and investment.

If you want to learn more about neurodiversity, how it applies in schools but also in your workplace or community, we encourage you to check out the It Takes All Kinds Of Minds conference, known as ITAKOM. This large, international, neurodiversity-focused event is happening in Edinburgh on 13-14 March 2023, though you can also attend as an online delegate wherever you are. There’s a huge amount of content to choose from, with five parallel streams, and about a quarter of the programme specifically addressing the education context. See the programme, speaker and registration info.
A pathway to ambitions

A neurodiversity literate school can create an environment that affirms both the existence of neurodiversity and the tenets of the neurodiversity paradigm, to the benefit of pupils and staff. School staff who confidently understand neurodiversity can be empowered to respect their own expertise as educators in recognising the support needs of pupils in their class. Neurodiversity-affirmative classrooms will be characterised by universal design features and flexibility, with teachers adopting and iterating small changes with the potential to benefit everyone. Those same teachers will find ways to focus on the complementary contributions made by the range of people in the class, and shift away from a constant focus on individual achievement, measured against narrow standards. Pupils in such schools will become accomplished self-advocates, who understand their needs, and feel no shame in asking for help. These benefits will radiate out to family networks, as the constant battle for support for their child dissipates. Engagement with the neurodiversity paradigm thus provides a pathway to realise the long-held ambitions of inclusive education, fostering an environment where each pupil can thrive on their own terms.

Professor Sue Fletcher-Watson is Chair of Developmental Psychology and Director of the Salvesen Mindroom Research Centre, The University of Edinburgh. Sue.Fletcher-Watson@ed.ac.uk

Dr Dinah Aitken is Head of Outreach at the Salvesen Mindroom Centre.
Further reading

Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm, Autistic empowerment, and postnormal possibilities. Autonomous Press

GTCS (2020). Understanding neurodiversity in the context of equality and inclusive practice. A professional guide for teachers.

Hall, A., Meyer, A. and Rose, D. (2012). Universal Design for Learning in the Classroom NY. The Guildford Press.
References

Aitken, D. & Wang, L. (2021). Learning Difficulties and Exclusion from School. Salvesen Mindroom Research Briefing,number1.

Chapman, R. (2020). Defining neurodiversity for research and practice. In Neurodiversity Studies (pp. 218-220). Routledge.

Fink, E., Deighton, J., Humphrey, N., & Wolpert, M. (2015). Assessing the bullying and victimisation experiences of children with special educational needs in mainstream schools: Development and validation of the Bullying Behaviour and Experience Scale. Research in developmental disabilities, 36, 611-619.

Ford, T., John, A., & Gunnell, D. (2021). Mental health of children and young people during pandemic. British Medical Journal, 372.

Friskney, R., Tisdall, E.K.M. & Aitken, D. (2019). Communication matters: Three scoping studies about the experiences of children with learning difficulties, and their families, in Scotland. Salvesen Mindroom Centre and University of Edinburgh. Edinburgh.

Johnson, M. and Rutherford, L. (2019). An Autism Evidence Based Practice Toolkit for use with the SCERTS™ Assessment and Planning Framework.

Pellicano, E., & den Houting, J. (2022). Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’to neurodiversity in autism science. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4), 381-396.

Sinclair, J. (2010). Being autistic together. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1).

Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm, autistic empowerment, and postnormal possibilities. Autonomous Press.

SOURCE;

https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/neurodiversity-affirmative-education-why-and-how(accessed 28.12.22)

We'd rather do something that requires mental effort than do nothing at all

Although much has been made of the aversiveness of effort, the study suggests that being bored is at least as unpleasant — if not more so.



By Emma Young


The enforced downtime of the Christmas holidays can sometimes pose a conundrum. On the whole, we don’t much like to exert ourselves, so it’s nice not to have to do a lot. Effort is, well, effortful — and unless it offers adequate rewards, like money or fun, we tend to avoid it. But as the authors of new work in the Journal of Experimental Psychology point out, we don’t like to be bored, either. In fact, Raymond Wu at the University of British Columbia and colleagues find that although much has been made of the aversiveness of effort, being bored is at least as unpleasant — if not more so.

The team ran a pilot study plus 12 experiments (11 of them online, due to Covid restrictions) on a total of 2,311 participants. In almost all of the studies, the participants were repeatedly asked to choose between doing a specific task or doing nothing. They were clearly instructed that whatever they went for, the team would still gather useful data. And they were even encouraged to try out both options — but then to go with whichever they preferred. The number of trials varied across the experiments, from 25 to 100.

In six of the experiments, the participants had to choose between watching a blank screen or doing an addition task (in which they had to add a particular number to each of four numbers that were briefly presented on the screen). In two experiments, the choice was between a blank screen or doing a Stroop task (in which they had to name the font colour of various colour words; e.g. 'red' ’ was coloured blue, and the correct response was ‘blue’). In a further two experiments, participants had to repeatedly choose between either doing a Stroop task or watching the computer complete the task by itself. And in the last two experiments, the participants could opt to either count images, or simply view them.

The results of the experiments that involved addition showed that people preferred harder (e.g. ‘add 3’) tasks but not easy (‘add 1’) tasks to doing nothing. “This suggests that people do not necessarily prefer to do anything when faced with doing nothing,” the team reports. “Instead, people may prefer only tasks that require some effort, suggesting that effort is sometimes valuable.”

Participants showed no preference between doing the Stroop task and doing nothing, though they preferred to do the Stroop task themselves than to watch the computer doing it. They also preferred to count images than to passively view them — at least, when there were only 25 trials to complete; participants who had 40 trials to work through were just as likely to choose to watch as to work.

Other findings suggested that there’s a limit to our willingness to choose effort over doing nothing. The single laboratory study, in which participants either did the Stroop task or watched a blank screen, involved the greatest number of trials — 100. Just as in the shorter online studies, over the first 25 and 40 trials, the participants didn’t show a preference for doing the task or doing nothing. But when the full span of 100 trials was considered, they chose to do the Stroop task only 40% of the time.

These findings “suggest that people tend to tolerate doing nothing to avoid effort as they complete more trials,” the team writes. In fact, their analysis of all the studies found that with each additional trial, the participants were 1% less likely to choose effort. It might be the case, of course, that with more and more trials, the task itself became boring — and doing nothing became a preferable form of boredom.

Overall, though, their meta-analysis of all their data shows that while previous research has found that people tend to avoid cognitive effort, in these studies, “participants did not choose to avoid effort to do nothing and, interestingly, chose effort significantly more than chance” — though that effect was small. “Together, our findings demonstrate that doing nothing can be just as aversive — and sometimes more aversive — than exerting cognitive effort,” the team writes.

This is not the first research to show that we do things we might not normally choose to do in order to avoid doing nothing. Earlier work has found that people will choose to give themselves electric shocks rather than sit doing nothing. And boredom can even bring out people’s sadistic tendencies, according to work published in 2022.

So if, over the Christmas period, you find yourself exerting more effort than you’d anticipated, don’t give yourself too big a pat on the back: it could simply be that you’d rather peel sprouts, even, than be completely bored.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/wed-rather-do-something-requires-mental-effort-do-nothing-all(accessed 22/12/22)

Η σημασία της ελεύθερης αναπνοής στην καλή ζωή

Καθημερινά επαναλαμβάνουμε τη διαδικασία της εισπνοής και της εκπνοής πάνω από 28.000 φορές. Γεννιόμαστε και μεγαλώνουμε επαναλαμβάνοντας αυτοματοποιημένα αυτή τη λειτουργία του οργανισμού. Τι συμβαίνει όμως όταν η ελεύθερη αναπνοή παρεμποδίζεται και πως μπορούμε να είμαστε σίγουροι ότι αναπνέουμε επαρκή και ποιοτικό αέρα για την υγεία και την ευεξία του οργανισμού μας;

Η λειτουργία της μύτης στο αναπνευστικό σύστημα

Σύμφωνα με τον ιδρυτή της “Breathpod” Stuart Sandeman, τα επίπεδα του στρες στον εγκέφαλο επηρεάζονται άμεσα από τις τεχνικές αναπνοής. “Στις έντονα στρεσογόνες συνθήκες, ο ρυθμός της καρδιάς δείχνει να επηρεάζεται άμεσα από το μοτίβο της αναπνοής. Η μεγαλύτερη σε διάρκεια εκπνοή με μια μικρότερη σε διάρκεια εισπνοή μπορεί να ενεργοποιήσει επαρκώς το πνευμονογαστρικό νεύρο μειώνοντας παράλληλα τον ρυθμό της καρδιάς, επισημαίνει”. Συμπεραίνουμε λοιπόν ότι η σωστή αναπνοή μπορεί να συμβάλει καταλυτικά στην πνευματική υγεία και ισορροπία. Παράλληλα και σύμφωνα με τελευταίες μελέτες είναι πιθανό μέσω της αναπνοής να αποβάλλονται το 80% των συναισθηματικών και σωματικών τοξινών που παράγονται στον ανθρώπινο οργανισμό.
Η ρουτίνα της καθαρής αναπνοής

Η μύτη μας είναι η προστατευτική δίοδος του αναπνευστικού μας συστήματος. Εκτός από την εισπνοή και εκπνοή, η ρινική κοιλότητα είναι υπεύθυνη για το φιλτράρισμα του αέρα που αναπνέουμε, ενώ αποτελεί την πρώτη ασπίδα του ανοσοποιητικού μας συστήματος απέναντι σε παθογόνους μικροοργανισμούς και αέριους ρύπους. Με τα τριχίδια που περιβάλλουν το εσωτερικό της, η μύτη εμποδίζει αποτελεσματικά την είσοδο σε μικρόβια, ιούς και γύρη.

Με το φυσικό ρινικό σπρέι Otrimer, της οικογένειας προϊόντων Otrivin, εξασφαλίζουμε πολύ καλή ενυδάτωση και τον επαρκή καθαρισμό της μύτης καθημερινά, χωρίς τη χρήση συντηρητικών. Το Otrimer είναι ένα 100% φυσικό ισότονο διάλυμα θαλασσινού νερού, το οποίο φροντίζει επαρκώς τη ρινική κοιλότητα και δρα άμεσα ως προς την απομάκρυνση της περίσσειας βλέννας και των αλλεργιογόνων στοιχείων που συσσωρεύονται στη μύτη κατά την εισπνοή, όπως είναι η σκόνη και η γύρη. Επιπλέον, η εφαρμογή του, ανακουφίζει από πιθανούς ερεθισμούς αναστέλλοντας τη ρινική ξηρότητα.


Το Υπουργείο Υγείας και Πρόνοιας και ο Εθνικός Οργανισμός Φαρμάκων Συνιστούν:
ΔΙΑΒΑΣΤΕ ΠΡΟΣΕΚΤΙΚΑ ΤΙΣ ΟΔΗΓΙΕΣ ΧΡΗΣΗΣ
ΣΥΜΒΟΥΛΕΥΤΕΙΤΕ ΤΟ ΓΙΑΤΡΟ ‘Η ΤΟ ΦΑΡΜΑΚΟΠΟΙΟ ΣΑΣ

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/life/health/562160620/i-simasia-tis-eleytheris-anapnois-stin-kali-zoi/(accessed 15.12.22)

We'd rather do something that requires mental effort than do nothing at all

Although much has been made of the aversiveness of effort, the study suggests that being bored is at least as unpleasant — if not more so.


By Emma Young


The enforced downtime of the Christmas holidays can sometimes pose a conundrum. On the whole, we don’t much like to exert ourselves, so it’s nice not to have to do a lot. Effort is, well, effortful — and unless it offers adequate rewards, like money or fun, we tend to avoid it. But as the authors of new work in the Journal of Experimental Psychology point out, we don’t like to be bored, either. In fact, Raymond Wu at the University of British Columbia and colleagues find that although much has been made of the aversiveness of effort, being bored is at least as unpleasant — if not more so.

The team ran a pilot study plus 12 experiments (11 of them online, due to Covid restrictions) on a total of 2,311 participants. In almost all of the studies, the participants were repeatedly asked to choose between doing a specific task or doing nothing. They were clearly instructed that whatever they went for, the team would still gather useful data. And they were even encouraged to try out both options — but then to go with whichever they preferred. The number of trials varied across the experiments, from 25 to 100.

In six of the experiments, the participants had to choose between watching a blank screen or doing an addition task (in which they had to add a particular number to each of four numbers that were briefly presented on the screen). In two experiments, the choice was between a blank screen or doing a Stroop task (in which they had to name the font colour of various colour words; e.g. 'red' ’ was coloured blue, and the correct response was ‘blue’). In a further two experiments, participants had to repeatedly choose between either doing a Stroop task or watching the computer complete the task by itself. And in the last two experiments, the participants could opt to either count images, or simply view them.

The results of the experiments that involved addition showed that people preferred harder (e.g. ‘add 3’) tasks but not easy (‘add 1’) tasks to doing nothing. “This suggests that people do not necessarily prefer to do anything when faced with doing nothing,” the team reports. “Instead, people may prefer only tasks that require some effort, suggesting that effort is sometimes valuable.”

Participants showed no preference between doing the Stroop task and doing nothing, though they preferred to do the Stroop task themselves than to watch the computer doing it. They also preferred to count images than to passively view them — at least, when there were only 25 trials to complete; participants who had 40 trials to work through were just as likely to choose to watch as to work.

Other findings suggested that there’s a limit to our willingness to choose effort over doing nothing. The single laboratory study, in which participants either did the Stroop task or watched a blank screen, involved the greatest number of trials — 100. Just as in the shorter online studies, over the first 25 and 40 trials, the participants didn’t show a preference for doing the task or doing nothing. But when the full span of 100 trials was considered, they chose to do the Stroop task only 40% of the time.

These findings “suggest that people tend to tolerate doing nothing to avoid effort as they complete more trials,” the team writes. In fact, their analysis of all the studies found that with each additional trial, the participants were 1% less likely to choose effort. It might be the case, of course, that with more and more trials, the task itself became boring — and doing nothing became a preferable form of boredom.

Overall, though, their meta-analysis of all their data shows that while previous research has found that people tend to avoid cognitive effort, in these studies, “participants did not choose to avoid effort to do nothing and, interestingly, chose effort significantly more than chance” — though that effect was small. “Together, our findings demonstrate that doing nothing can be just as aversive — and sometimes more aversive — than exerting cognitive effort,” the team writes.

This is not the first research to show that we do things we might not normally choose to do in order to avoid doing nothing. Earlier work has found that people will choose to give themselves electric shocks rather than sit doing nothing. And boredom can even bring out people’s sadistic tendencies, according to work published in 2022.

So if, over the Christmas period, you find yourself exerting more effort than you’d anticipated, don’t give yourself too big a pat on the back: it could simply be that you’d rather peel sprouts, even, than be completely bored.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/wed-rather-do-something-requires-mental-effort-do-nothing-all(accessed 15.12.22)

Οι ανιδιοτελείς άνθρωποι κάνουν πιο συχνά σεξ!

Οι ανιδιοτελείς άνθρωποι κάνουν πιο συχνά σεξ σύμφωνα με έρευνα

Η αλτρουιστική συμπεριφορά έχει παρατηρηθεί σε όλους τους έμβιους οργανισμούς, συμπεριλαμβανομένου και του ανθρώπου.

Τι είναι αλτρουισμός;

Αλτρουιστικές χαρακτηρίζονται οι συμπεριφορές που έχουν ως σκοπό την παροχή σε οφέλη σε έναν παραλήπτη, ασχέτως των βαθύτερων ψυχολογικών κίνητρων εκείνου που ενεργεί αλτρουιστικά.

Γιατί υπάρχει η αλτρουιστική συμπεριφορά;

Οι πρώτοι ερευνητές που μελέτησαν την αλτρουιστική συμπεριφορά υποστήριξαν ότι οι άνθρωποι συμπεριφέρονται δίχως εγωισμό με σκοπό να λάβουν οφέλη στο μέλλον. Ωστόσο, τα τελευταία χρόνια πολλοί επιστήμονες πιστεύουν πως υπάρχουν κ άλλοι λόγοι που καθιστούν κάποιον αλτρουιστή. Πιθανότατα η αλτρουιστική συμπεριφορά να έχει εξελιχθεί στο ανθρώπινο είδος, εν μέρει, ως σήμα μετάδοσης διαφόρων επιθυμητών ιδιοτήτων που βοηθούν το άτομο στην αναπαραγωγή. Μάλιστα, σε διάφορες έρευνες που έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί στο παρελθόν και τα δυο φύλα έχουν δείξει προτίμηση στα αλτρουιστικά χαρακτηριστικά ενός πιθανού μελλοντικού συντρόφου και κυρίως οι γυναίκες.

Σύμφωνα με νέα έρευνα η οποία πραγματοποιήθηκε από το Πανεπιστήμιο Nipissing και το Πανεπιστήμιο του Guelph με έδρα τον Καναδά και η οποία δημοσιεύτηκε στο British Journal of Psychology, η ανιδιοτέλεια φαίνεται πως μπορεί να μεταφραστεί σε πραγματική επιτυχία «ζευγαρώματος» στους δυτικούς πληθυσμούς. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι η ανιδιοτέλεια συμβάλει στην πιο εύκολη σύναψη και διατήρηση μιας σχέσης, είτε σταθερής είτε περιστασιακής. Επιπλέον, οι αλτρουιστές έχουν περισσότερους συντρόφους από τους μη αλτρουιστές.

Στην έρευνα συμμετείχαν περίπου 800 άνθρωποι, ηλικίας από 16 έως 47 και οι οποίοι είναι κάτοικοι του Οντάριο του Καναδά. Για τους σκοπούς της έρευνας οι συμμετέχοντες έπρεπε να απαντήσουν σε ερωτήσεις που αφορούσαν τις ερωτικές τους σχέσεις και την κλίση τους στο να βοηθούν άλλους ανθρώπους, συμμετέχοντας σε φιλανθρωπίες, δωρίζοντας αίμα, βοηθώντας ξένους να περάσουν το δρόμο, δωρίζοντας τα κέρδη τους, βοηθώντας συμμαθητές κλπ.

Από την ανάλυση των δεδομένων διαπιστώθηκε ότι οι αλτρουιστές ανέφεραν περισσότερους σεξουαλικούς συντρόφους κατά τη διάρκεια της ζωής τους, περισσότερους περιστασιακούς σεξουαλικούς συντρόφους και πιο συχνό σεξ με τη τωρινή τους σχέση. Επίσης, τα αποτελέσματα έδειξαν πως γενικά τα ανιδιοτελή άτομα έχουν αυξημένα ποσοστά επιτυχίας στα ραντεβού και το σεξ. Παρόλα αυτά, η ανιδιοτέλεια αποτελεί μεγαλύτερο προσόν για τον άντρα απ’ ότι για τη γυναίκα, καθώς επηρεάζει με πιο θετικό τρόπο την ύπαρξη σεξουαλικών συντρόφων καθ όλη τη διάρκεια ζωής. Βασιζόμενοι στα παραπάνω δεδομένα οι επιστήμονες που πραγματοποίησαν την έρευνα κατέληξαν στο συμπέρασμα ότι οι αλτρουιστές έχουν μεγαλύτερη επιτυχία στη σύναψη ερωτικής σχέσης και ότι ο αλτρουισμός, ως χαρακτηριστικό, λειτουργεί ως σήμα που περιλαμβάνει όλες εκείνες τις αρετές του ατόμου που είναι δύσκολο να παρατηρηθούν και οι οποίες εκπέμπονται σε έναν πιθανό μελλοντικό σύντροφο. Τέλος, οι ερευνητές πιστεύουν πως η συγκεκριμένη μελέτη αποτελεί την βάση πάνω στην οποία μπορεί να διερευνηθεί μελλοντικά πώς διαφορετικά είδη αλτρουισμού επηρεάζουν βραχυπρόθεσμα και μακροπρόθεσμα την επιτυχία «ζευγαρώματος».

Βιβλιογραφικές Αναφορές:

Arnocky, S., Piché, T., Albert, G., Ouellette, D., & Barclay, P. (2017). Altruism predicts mating success in humans. British Journal of Psychology, 108(2), 416-435

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://askitis.gr/anidioteleia-altrouismos-synapsi-scheseon-sexoualikoi-syntrofoi-sex/(accessed 9.12.22)

Δεσμοί προσκόλλησης και στρατηγικές διατήρησης της σχέσης

Η θεωρία της προσκόλλησης (Αttachment theory) αναφέρεται στον τρόπο που οι άνθρωποι αναπτύσσουν δεσμούς μεταξύ τους και διατηρούν τις σχέσεις τους. Οι άνθρωποι μπορεί να είναι ασφαλείς ή ανασφαλείς στους δεσμούς τους, ενώ οι ανασφαλείς χαρακτηρίζονται ως αγχώδεις, που διακρίνονται από τον φόβο απόρριψης και εγκατάλειψης που βιώνουν, ή αποφευκτικοί, που έχουν την τάση να μην εμπιστεύονται και να αποφεύγουν την εγγύτητα με τους άλλους.

Τα στυλ δεσμού που αναπτύσσουν τα άτομα μεταξύ τους επηρεάζουν τις σχέσεις τους σε διάφορα επίπεδα όπως στο ότι καθορίζουν τις στρατηγικές διατήρησης της σχέσης (mate-retention strategies), δηλαδή τις συμπεριφορές που χρησιμοποιούν προκειμένου να «κρατήσουν» τον σύντροφο τους και να διατηρήσουν τη σχέση τους. Άτομα με αγχώδεις δεσμούς προσκόλλησης είναι πιο πιθανό να καταφύγουν στη συναισθηματική χειραγώγηση και άλλες επιζήμιες συμπεριφορές, με σκοπό το να αποτρέψουν τον σύντροφο από το να «φύγει» από τη σχέση, γεγονός που, όμως, συνδέεται με μειωμένη σχεσιακή ικανοποίηση.

Χαρακτηριστική είναι έρευνα που δημοσιεύτηκε στο περιοδικό Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences και μελέτησε σε δείγμα 420 ατόμων με μακροχρόνιες σχέσεις τα μέσα που μετέρχονταν προκειμένου να τις διατηρήσουν, καθώς και το επίπεδο της σχεσιακής ικανοποίησης και τα στυλ δεσμού τους.

Τα αποτελέσματα έδειξαν ότι τα άτομα που είχαν αγχώδεις δεσμούς προσκόλλησης είχαν την τάση να καταφεύγουν τόσο σε επιζήμιες στρατηγικές διατήρησης του συντρόφου, όπως έλεγχος των αλληλεπιδράσεων του στο κινητό ή προσπάθεια να κάνουν τον σύντροφο να ζηλέψει πχ μιλώντας σε έναν άγνωστο σε ένα πάρτυ, όσο και ωφέλιμες στρατηγικές διατήρησης του συντρόφου, όπως φιλοφρόνηση στον σύντροφο για την εμφάνιση του ή εκδήλωση τρυφερότητας απέναντι του. Αντιθέτως, τα άτομα με αποφευκτικούς δεσμούς προσκόλλησης παρατηρήθηκε ότι κατέφευγαν μόνο στις επιζήμιες στρατηγικές διατήρησης της σχέσης.

Επιπροσθέτως, τα άτομα με αγχώδεις και εκείνα με αποφευκτικούς δεσμούς ανέφεραν μειωμένη σχεσιακή ικανοποίηση, η οποία συνδεόταν περισσότερο με τις επιζήμιες παρά με τις ωφέλιμες στρατηγικές διατήρησης της σχέσης.

Τα στυλ δεσμού επηρεάζουν τον τρόπο που οι άνθρωποι αντιλαμβάνονται και αξιολογούν την ποιότητα της σχέσης τους, το οποίο κατ’ επέκταση καθορίζει και τις συμπεριφορές που επιδεικνύουν. Ο βαθμός της σχεσιακής ικανοποίησης συγκαταλέγεται στους παράγοντες που μπορούν να μας βοηθήσουν να κατανοήσουμε την παραπάνω συσχέτιση, μαζί με άλλους όπως η ζήλεια, η προσλαμβανόμενη απειλή για απιστία, η εγγύτητα/οικειότητα στη σχέση.

Αγγελική Διδυμοπούλου

Ψυχολόγος

Επιστημονική Συνεργάτης Ι.Ψ.Σ.Υ.

Πηγή: Nascimento, B. S., Little, A. C., Monteiro, R. P., Hanel, P. H. P., & Vione, K. C. (2021). Attachment styles and mate-retention: Exploring the mediating role of relationship satisfaction. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences. Advance online publication.

Πηγή:

https://askitis.gr/desmoi-proskollisis-kai-stratigikes-diatirisis-tis-schesis/(accessed 9.12.22)

Λουτσιάνο Καλεστίνι: Η παιδική κακοποίηση δεν γνωρίζει σύνορα

ΔΙΠΛΩΜΑΤΙΚΟΣ ΕΚΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ ΤΗΣ UNICEF ΣΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΑΔΑ


Εάν η πρόληψη δεν εφαρμόζεται αποτελεσματικά, η συλλογική μας απάντηση θα παραμείνει σε μεγάλο βαθμό μια αντίδραση κατόπιν εορτής

Οι θάνατοι των τριών παιδιών στην Πάτρα, η υπόθεση της κατ’ εξακολούθησιν σεξουαλικής κακοποίησης του 12χρονου κοριτσιού από τον Κολωνό και oι καταγγελίες για την «Κιβωτό του Κόσμου» συγκλονίζουν την ελληνική κοινωνία τους τελευταίους μήνες. 




«Η κατάσταση για τα παιδιά στην Ελλάδα δεν είναι πολύ καλή», είχε δηλώσει μεταξύ άλλων στην «Κ» ο διπλωματικός εκπρόσωπος της UNICEF στην Ελλάδα, Λουτσιάνο Καλεστίνι, τον Μάρτιο, σε μια συνέντευξη που είχε προκαλέσει έντονες αντιδράσεις. Τότε είχε αναφερθεί κυρίως σε δείκτες, όπως η παχυσαρκία, η παιδική φτώχεια, η ψυχική υγεία. Οκτώ μήνες αργότερα, η ελληνική κοινωνία συγκλονίζεται από υποθέσεις που αφορούν την παιδική κακοποίηση. Οι θάνατοι των τριών παιδιών στην Πάτρα. Η υπόθεση της κατ’ εξακολούθησιν σεξουαλικής κακοποίησης του 12χρονου κοριτσιού από τον Κολωνό. Οι καταγγελίες για την «Κιβωτό του Κόσμου». Με αφορμή όλες αυτές τις υποθέσεις επικοινωνήσαμε εκ νέου με τον κ. Καλεστίνι.


«Η παιδική κακοποίηση δεν γνωρίζει σύνορα και ευδοκιμεί στο σκοτάδι», είναι η πρώτη του απάντηση. «Στην Ελλάδα, όπως και σε πολλές άλλες χώρες, η παιδική κακοποίηση, ειδικά όταν συμβαίνει στο σπίτι, έχει αποτελέσει ταμπού, παρ’ όλο που στην ελληνική κοινωνία και κουλτούρα ο θεσμός της οικογένειας έχει κεντρικό ρόλο – κάτι που για την ακρίβεια μπορεί να είναι πολύ ενθαρρυντικό για την προώθηση της αποϊδρυματοποίησης και την υιοθέτηση μορφών φροντίδας που βασίζονται στην οικογένεια, όπως η αναδοχή», συμπληρώνει.

«Σε ατομικό και οικογενειακό επίπεδο είναι προφανές ότι τίποτα δεν είναι πιο σημαντικό από τα παιδιά μας. Σε κοινωνικό επίπεδο όμως και με βάση το τι έχουμε προτεραιοποιήσει πολιτικά εδώ και δεκαετίες, σε τι δαπανούμε πόρους και για τι διαδηλώνουμε, η εικόνα είναι λιγότερο θετική», σημειώνει ο κ. Καλεστίνι. «Πρέπει να γίνει πολύ περισσότερη δουλειά για να αυξηθούν οι γνώσεις του κόσμου σχετικά με τα δικαιώματα των παιδιών και να συζητηθεί ανοιχτά το θέμα της παιδικής κακοποίησης. Η προστασία από τη βία και την κακοποίηση είναι δικαίωμα κάθε παιδιού. Εάν οι φροντιστές του δεν μπορούν να εξασφαλίσουν αποτελεσματική προστασία, τότε το κράτος έχει εντολή να το κάνει».

Για πολλές δεκαετίες η ιδρυματική φροντίδα έχει χρησιμοποιηθεί ως το προεπιλεγμένο μοντέλο της παιδικής προστασίας στην Ελλάδα, λέει ο κ. Καλεστίνι. «Προς το βέλτιστο συμφέρον των παιδιών είναι καιρός αυτό να αλλάξει και επίσης πρέπει πολίτες, επαγγελματίες και φορείς που έρχονται σε επαφή με παιδιά να γνωρίζουν ότι έχουν ένα σημαντικό ρόλο και ευθύνη για την προστασία κάθε παιδιού».


Ο διπλωματικός εκπρόσωπος της UNICEF δεν θεωρεί ότι η Ελλάδα διαφέρει από τις άλλες χώρες όσον αφορά την παιδική κακοποίηση, επισημαίνει όμως το γεγονός ότι η πανδημία επιδείνωσε τους προϋπάρχοντες κινδύνους τόσο στη χώρα μας όσο και παγκοσμίως. Και επιμένει ότι «η Ελλάδα πρέπει να επενδύσει περισσότερο σε εξειδικευμένες υπηρεσίες στην κοινότητα για την προστασία των παιδιών και των οικογενειών, με στόχο την έγκαιρη αξιολόγηση και παρέμβαση με οργανωμένο και εμπεριστατωμένο τρόπο, ώστε να αποφευχθεί το ενδεχόμενο ένα παιδί που χρειάζεται υποστήριξη να γίνει παιδί που κινδυνεύει. Ή ακόμη χειρότερα να γίνει θύμα κακοποίησης, καθώς η κακοποίηση συνήθως κλιμακώνεται εάν δεν υπάρχουν κατάλληλες υπηρεσίες υποστήριξης και παρακολούθησης».«Η παιδική κακοποίηση δεν γνωρίζει σύνορα και ευδοκιμεί στο σκοτάδι», αναφέρει στην «Κ» ο κ. Λουτσιάνο Καλεστίνι.

Oσον αφορά την πραγματική έκταση, τη φύση και τις διαφορετικές εκδοχές της παιδικής κακοποίησης, αναφέρει πως στην Ελλάδα υπάρχει έλλειψη συγκεντρωτικών στοιχείων που να αναδεικνύουν τις παραπάνω διαμέτρους. Τα «τραγικά», όπως λέει στην «Κ», περιστατικά που έρχονται στο φως της δημοσιότητας, πρέπει να μας υπενθυμίζουν πως αυτή είναι η κορυφή του παγόβουνου. «Επί του παρόντος», τονίζει, «η παρέμβαση λαμβάνει χώρα όταν ο κίνδυνος έχει ήδη γίνει πολύ υψηλός, ακόμη και απειλητικός για τη ζωή ενός παιδιού. Εάν η πρόληψη δεν εφαρμόζεται αποτελεσματικά, η συλλογικής μας απάντηση θα παραμείνει σε μεγάλο βαθμό μια αντίδραση κατόπιν εορτής».

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/society/562161643/loytsiano-kalestini-i-paidiki-kakopoiisi-den-gnorizei-synora/(accessed 1.12.22)

Πώς το «gaslighting» έγινε η λέξη της χρονιάς

Το λεξικό Merriam-Webster επέλεξε ως λέξη του 2022 έναν όρο που παρά το ότι φτάνει πίσω στη δεκαετία του 1930, φέτος αναζητήθηκε από τους χρήστες κατά 1.740% περισσότερο


Υπάρχουν πολλές (αρνητικές κυρίως) συμπεριφορές που αν και συμβαίνουν εδώ και πάρα πολλά χρόνια, μέχρι πρότινος δεν είχαν τον δικό τους όρο που να τις περιγράφει. «Mansplaining», «ghosting», «gaslighting» είναι λέξεις που μόλις τα τελευταία χρόνια μπήκαν στο λεξιλόγιό μας, ακόμα κι αν αναγνωρίζαμε ήδη πολύ καλά τις πρακτικές των συμπεριφορών που περιγράφουν.


Η τελευταία, μάλιστα, φαίνεται πως τώρα είναι πιο επίκαιρη από ποτέ, μιας και το λεξικό Merriam-Webster ανακήρυξε το «gaslighting» λέξη της χρονιάς.

Τι είναι, όμως, το «gaslighting»;

Πρόκειται ουσιαστικά για μία μέθοδο ψυχολογικής χειραγώγησης στην οποία, ο θύτης φέρνει το θύμα στο σημείο να αμφιβάλλει για την ίδια του την αντίληψη, τη μνήμη και εν τέλει, τη λογική. Ο θύτης, που σχεδόν πάντα αποσκοπεί στο να επωφεληθεί με κάποιον τρόπο από αυτή τη μέθοδο, χρησιμοποιεί ένα ψευδές αφήγημα στο θύμα, το οποίο συχνά βρίσκεται σε μειονεκτική θέση ή έχει γενικότερα ευάλωτη προσωπικότητα.


Μπορεί ο όρος να έγινε ευρύτερα γνωστός την περασμένη δεκαετία, πάντως, η προέλευσή της φτάνει πίσω σχεδόν έναν αιώνα και το θεατρικό με τίτλο «Gas Light» που έγραψε ο Πάτρικ Χάμιλτον και κυκλοφόρησε το 1938, γνωρίζοντας και δύο κινηματογραφικές εκδοχές, με πιο γνωστή αυτή τη 1944 δια χειρός Τζορτζ Κιούκορ με πρωταγωνιστές τον Τσαρλς Μπόγιερ, την Ίνγκριντ Μπέργκμαν και τον Τζόζεφ Κότεν.

Στο «Gaslight» (όπως εμφανίστηκε με μία λέξη στον τίτλο της κινηματογραφικής μεταφοράς), βλέπουμε μια γυναίκα η οποία παρατηρεί να λείπουν πράγματά της, ακούει θορύβους να έρχονται από τη σοφίτα, ενώ βλέπει τις λάμπες πετρελαίου (εξού και ο τίτλος) να σβήνουν. Ο σύζυγός της, στο μεταξύ, προσπαθεί να την πείσει πως τίποτα από αυτά δε συμβαίνει πραγματικά, παρά είναι αποκυήματα της φαντασίας της, θέλοντας να την κάνει να νομίζει πως οδηγείται στην τρέλα.

Σύμφωνα με το Merriam-Webster, οι αναζητήσεις στο λεξικό για τον όρο «gaslighting» αυξήθηκαν φέτος κατά 1.740%.

Η εταιρεία λεξικών, σχολίασε για την επιλογή της λέξης που γνώρισε δημοφιλία στην εποχή του Τραμπ στις ΗΠΑ πως «Στην εποχή της παραπληροφόρησης, των “fake news”, των θεωριών συνωμοσίας, των τρολ στο Twitter και των εικόνων deepfakes, το “gaslighting” έχει αναδυθεί ως λέξη των καιρών μας».


Ο επιμελητής του Merriam-Webster, Πίτερ Σοκολόφσκι, πάλι, σχολίασε πως «Είναι μία λέξη που έχει αναδυθεί τόσο γρήγορα στην αγγλική γλώσσα και ειδικά τα τέσσερα τελευταία χρόνια, που πραγματικά εξέπληξε κι εμένα και πολλούς από εμάς», επιβεβαιώνοντας πως το «gaslighting» ήταν μία λέξη που οι χρήστες αναζητούσαν καθημερινά τη φετινή χρονιά.

Πάντως, το έργο από όπου προέρχεται δεν αποτελεί τη μοναδική εμφάνιση της λέξης/όρου στην ποπ κουλτούρα. Η φετινή μίνι σειρά γύρω από τη Μάρθα Μίτσελ που υπήρξε ο πρώτος άνθρωπος που κατηγόρησε τον τότε πρόεδρο των ΗΠΑ Ρίτσαρντ Νίξον για ανάμιξη στο σκάνδαλο Γουότεργκεϊτ έχει τίτλο «Gaslit». Τον όρο είδαμε επίσης σε ένα πολυσυζητημένο άρθρο της Teen Vogue από το 2016: «Ο Ντόναλντ Τραμπ κάνει “gaslighting” στην Αμερική».


Άλλα δημοφιλή λήμματα του Merriam-Webster για το 2022 ήταν αυτό για τη λέξη «ολιγάρχης» που άρχισε να προκαλεί το ενδιαφέρον του κόσμου μετά την εισβολή της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία αλλά και το «βασιλική σύζυγος» που είναι και ο επίσημος τίτλος της Καμίλα, τώρα που ο Κάρολος ανέλαβε πλέον τον θρόνο της Μεγάλης Βρετανίας. Ανάμεσα στις δημοφιλής λέξεις, ήταν και μία ελληνική: «όμικρον», όπως δηλαδή και η ομώνυμη παραλλαγή της Covid-19.

Για το λεξικό Collins, πάλι, λέξη της χρονιάς ήταν το «permacrisis» (δηλαδή, «μονιμοκρίση»), ένας όρος που είναι επίσης πιο επίκαιρος από ποτέ, σε μία εποχή που οι κρίσεις είναι απανωτές, είτε είναι υγειονομικές, είτε περιβαλλοντικές, είτε πολιτικές.

Με πληροφορίες από την Washington Post.

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/world/562164574/pos-to-gaslighting-egine-i-lexi-tis-chronias/(accessed 1.12.22)

Normal sexual changes with age

Our bodies change as we get older. Naturally, then, we may experience changes in our sexual lives: our thoughts, desires, and needs. When we know about the sexual changes that can come with older age, it can help us to understand our bodies and decide if we want to seek professional help. But we need to bear in mind that what is normal for one person may not be normal for another. There can be huge differences in people’s levels of sexual activity, and in what they find sexually desirable. Some people have no interest in sex but enjoy acts of intimacy, whereas others prefer no physical contact at all.






Common changes in women



Women can experience physical sexual changes with age. Due to hormonal changes that come with the menopause, it can take longer for the vagina to lubricate, and vaginal tissues can become thinner. This can make penetrative sexual activity painful (dyspareunia) and in turn affect sexual desire. Orgasms can also change, and become less intense or take longer to reach.

During the menopause transition, women may experience symptoms that have an impact on their sex lives. The daily difficulties associated with menopause, such as hot flashes, brain fog, and tiredness, can be stressful. The disrupted sleep from night sweats can be exhausting. All of these can affect mood which in turn affects interest in sex. It is not unusual for women to lose sexual desire at this time, but the reason may be a combination of emotional and physical factors. For example, women might have caring duties which can be tiring, particularly if they are still in work.

Some physical changes are less common but can still affect women’s sex lives. For example, vaginal prolapse as a result of decreased muscle tone, again related to changing hormone levels. And some women find that their orgasms have become painful, which can be due to spasm of the uterus.










Common changes in men



It is not uncommon for men to notice changes in their erections as they get older. Some men find that their erections are less firm, and that they take longer to achieve. Some men find that they cannot get an erection, while others cannot maintain an erection for very long.

Changes to orgasm and ejaculation can also occur. In particular, there can be reduced semen at ejaculation, and the chances of experiencing non-ejaculatory orgasm (dry orgasm) increases with age. The ejaculation itself may feel less forceful, and the urgency to orgasm can reduce. The recovery period after orgasm extends which means there is a longer period between orgasms.

Men may experience physical changes that are less common including prostate disease. Some men undergo prostatectomy which can affect their ability to get an erection.






Emotional issues



Emotional issues are important to our sexuality. Factors such as stress or relationship difficulties can influence our sex lives at any age: our desire, arousal, and satisfaction with sex. Also, relationships can change over time, along with our priorities, and adults may find that they place less importance on sex as they get older.

Depression and anxiety can affect our sex lives in different ways. They can make us lose interest in sex, and can cause erection problems. Sexual changes themselves can impact psychological well-being, and some women describe feeling less of a woman because they do not desire sex, and some men feel de-masculinised when they cannot get an erection.

As adults we can feel differently about our bodies as we get older, especially if we have a visible difference caused by illness or disability. A changed appearance, including the general changes to physical appearance that come with older age (baldness, grey hair, weight gain) can affect self-esteem which in turn can affect interest in sex.










Health conditions and disability



Many health conditions can have an impact on our sex lives, including those we are most likely to encounter as we get older (e.g. dementia, stroke, heart disease). Health conditions can affect our sexuality in physical and emotional ways. For example, we may experience a disability that limits the sexual positions we can hold, and feel fatigue due to illness which then affects sexual desire.

Many prescribed medicines, including those for long-term conditions and common cancer treatments, can have sexual side-effects in women and men. For example, they can cause erection problems, ejaculation difficulties and vaginal dryness. They can also prevent arousal orgasm and reduce sexual desire.






Sexually transmitted infections



We can get a sexually transmitted infection (STI) at any age. It is important to protect yourself during sex, especially if you do not know your partner’s sexual history. Condoms create a barrier to STIs and should be used during oral, anal, and vaginal penetrative sex. Common STIs include HIV, chlamydia, syphilis, and gonorrhoea.








Dr Sharron Hinchliff

Reader in Psychology and Health
The University of Sheffield



Sharron leads a programme of research which explores ageing, sexual health, sexual well-being, intimate relationships, and psychological factors of health. Established in 2001, the aim is to better understand these issues so that we can improve patient quality of life and inform healthcare practice.

Sharron’s work sits within a framework of sexual rights. She is the founder of #SexRightsAge: a national campaign to recognise the sexual rights of older adults.

Age, Sex and You is the first website in the UK dedicated solely to adults aged 50 and older.

Have you found this website useful? If so let us know. We also want to hear from you if you have suggestions for topics to add to this site.

Tel: +44 (0) 114 222 2045

Email: s.hinchliff@sheffield.ac.uk

SOURCE:

http://www.agesexandyou.com/#age(accessed 28.11.22)

Sharing an article makes us feel more knowledgeable - even if we haven’t read it

Sharing information can even influence our behaviour: participants made different financial decisions depending on whether they had shared an article on investing.


By Emily Reynolds


One of the beautiful things about the internet is the sheer amount of knowledge it contains: if you’re interested in any topic, you can find a surfeit of information about it in an instant. But this can also have a downside. Search engines can end perpetuating bias, for example.

And research by Adrian Ward from the University of Texas, Austin suggests that we can mistake information we’ve searched for as our own knowledge. Now, in a new paper in the Journal of Consumer Psychology, Ward and colleagues have found that sharing information online also makes us feel that our knowledge has increased – even if we haven’t read it.

In the first study, participants were given the opportunity to read online news articles shared with them by prior participants and share articles with future participants. They could read and/or share as many or as few as they wanted. Following this, they indicated their subjective knowledge for each article topic on a seven point scale (“compared to most people, I know more about this topic”) , before answering questions about them, measuring their objective knowledge.

Unsurprisingly, those who read the articles both knew more objectively and felt more knowledgeable. But those who shared the articles also felt they knew more than those who didn’t, whether or not they had actually read the article. However, they didn’t actually know any more objectively.

A second study established that people don’t simply share articles because they already know about the topic, but rather that the very act of sharing boosts beliefs about how knowledgeable they are.

The next study looked at whether participants’ still believed that they were more knowledgeable about a topic when sharing under a false identity. This time, participants shared articles without reading them. In one condition, they wrote down their initials, which would appear with any article they chose to share with future participants, while in the other they were instead asked to imagine they were pranking a friend by sharing articles under that friend’s initials instead of their own.

Again, people felt more knowledgeable about the content of articles they shared compared to those they didn’t, even though they hadn’t actually had the opportunity to read any of the stories. However, this was only true when people shared under their own identity, and not when they shared under somebody else’s. When we share articles under our own name, the researchers suggest, we are effectively identifying ourselves as the source of that information, and so come to believe that we do actually have relevant knowledge. A further study also found that the effect of sharing on our subjective knowledge is stronger when we share with close friends as opposed to strangers.

A final study looked at whether people act as if they are more knowledgeable after sharing articles, rather than simply feeling more knowledgeable. Participants were asked to read an article on investing, with those in the sharing condition instructed to share it on their Facebook page, and those in the non-sharing condition proceeding without sharing. All participants were then given investment advice by an AI adviser and took part in an investment planning simulation, in which they chose the level of risk for their investment, before responding to self-report measures of financial knowledge and questions measuring objective knowledge.

The results showed that those in the sharing condition took significantly more risk in the investment planning exercise than those in the no-sharing condition, suggesting that sharing articles can change our behaviour as well as our feelings about things.

Overall, the research shows that sharing online content makes us feel like we know more about that topic, although the strength of this effect shifts depending on who we are sharing with and through what means. The final study also suggests that this can change how we act, making decisions differently based on having shared information.

If we are indeed sharing without reading, we may therefore believe we are more knowledgeable about particular topics. This could be particularly problematic when it comes to “clickbait” headlines, which often don’t accurately reflect the content of an article. As we frequently witness during elections across the world, clickbait headlines often pertain to politics, so sharing these kinds of stories without reading them could make us believe we know a lot about particular politicians, policies, or movements, while actually only having misleading information from the headline we’ve read.

Social media companies have, in recent years, sought to counteract people sharing information they haven’t read through automatic pop ups: Twitter, for example, introduced a feature in 2020 to encourage people to read before they retweet. Later that year, the company claimed that the feature had led to 40% more article opens, though the full impact of such features is not clear; research into such features could further explore how it affects people’s beliefs about their own knowledge.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/sharing-article-makes-us-feel-more-knowledgeable-even-if-we-havent-read-it(accessed 28.11.22)

HR professionals offer women better salaries when reminded of their role in reducing the gender pay gap

HR specialists offered male candidates a higher salary than female candidates - but highlighting egalitarian social norms made this gap disappear.



By Matthew Warren


Giving Human Resources professionals simple messages about their role in promoting equality could help narrow the gender pay gap, according to research in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

HR specialists tended to offer male candidates a higher salary than female candidates in the new study. But when participants were reminded that they had a collective responsibility to reduce the gender pay gap, this difference disappeared.

“Norm messages that lead HR professionals to pay attention to more equitable behavior may be a way to reduce the gender pay gap that undervalues women’s labor without placing the burden of change on women”, the authors write.
The burden of change

Although the gender pay gap is gradually getting smaller, there are still major disparities in how much men and women are paid. In the UK, the most recent figures show that women in full-time employment earn 8.3% less than men on average.

Plenty of psychology research has attempted to identify the causes of, and solutions to, the gender pay gap. But much of this work has focused on what women themselves can do to improve their chances of getting paid well, effectively putting the onus on women to combat a systemic problem.

So in their new paper, Carolin Schuster from Leuphana University Lüneburg and colleagues instead studied the people who actually make decisions about salaries. The team asked more than 200 HR specialists to read a CV for a job candidate. The CV was identical for all participants, except for the gender of the candidate: their title was either given as “Mr M” or “Ms M”.

Some participants who were given a female candidate’s CV also read a short paragraph highlighting that it is a social norm for HR professionals to help tackle the pay gap. This stated that HR specialists have recently begun helping to reduce the gender pay gap by changing their behaviour to ensure equal treatment of men and women.

Finally, all participants learned that the candidate had asked for a salary of €44,000, and had to come back with a counteroffer. They also indicated the maximum salary that they would be willing to pay the candidate.
Working to a common goal

Schuster’s team found that participants who had seen the man’s résumé offered a significantly higher salary than those who had seen the woman’s résumé without the message about social norms: male candidates were offered €39,251 and female candidates €38,097. (The maximum that participants were willing to pay was similar for both male and female candidates).

However, participants who had seen the social norm message alongside the female candidate’s CV offered her a significantly higher salary. In fact, this intervention brought offers made to women in-line with those made to men, effectively eliminating the gender gap. The gender of the participants themselves didn’t influence any of these effects.

In a second study, the team again found that HR professionals offered female candidates a higher salary after reading the social norm message. In contrast, an “awareness” message, which mentioned the gender pay gap without explicitly stating that HR workers’ behaviour helps to combat it, had more ambiguous results, raising pay offers but not significantly so.

The researchers also found that after reading the social norm message, participants felt more strongly that they were working towards a common goal of reducing the gender pay gap, and this could help to explain why they offered the candidate more money.
Unintended consequences?

In this second study, some participants given the man’s CV also read the social norm message. And this produced a surprising result: these participants offered male candidates a lower salary compared to those who had read the man’s CV without the social norm message. This effectively reversed the gender pay gap, with men getting offered less than women.

However, this effect could be down to the design of the study. Each participant only dealt with a single candidate, and so the only way they could attempt to reduce the gender pay gap was to offer a higher-than-usual salary to a woman or a lower-than-usual salary to a man. In the real world, HR professionals won’t be making decisions in isolation like this – so would hopefully make decisions that would better lead to pay equality.

This unexpected result aside, the results suggest that a really simple message about the role played by HR professionals in helping to reduce the gender pay gap can boost pay offers to women. These messages seem to work by establishing a sense that HR professionals are part of a group with a common goal of working towards equality.

It remains to be seen whether this intervention works outside of the lab, and it’s unclear when in the process HR professionals need to see these messages or how long their effects last. But if they do work in real world hiring processes, they could help narrow a gap that current estimates suggest will take more than a century to close.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/hr-professionals-offer-women-better-salaries-when-reminded-their-role-reducing(accessed 23.11.22)

Test anxiety makes it harder to absorb information while preparing for an exam

Study suggests that test anxiety doesn't simply impair performance during an exam, but rather makes it harder to acquire knowledge in the first place.
2

By Emma Young


Many students find taking exams stressful. “They worry about whether they will be able to recall their knowledge; their hearts beat faster; they sweat and they want to escape the exam room,” write Maria Theobold at the Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education, Germany and colleagues in their new paper in Psychological Science. These are all symptoms of what’s known as ‘test anxiety’. Test anxiety is thought to interfere with a person’s ability to retrieve knowledge from their memory during a test, and has been widely linked to poorer exam performance.

But Theobald and her colleagues wondered whether instead test anxiety might be impairing people’s preparation for an exam, rather than affecting performance during the exam itself. To explore this, they turned to data on 309 medical students in Germany who had used a digital learning platform to prepare for their crucial final university exam. The team was able to track each student’s level of knowledge, starting 100 days before the exam itself. This was revealed in their performance on practice questions, as well as in mock exams that took place shortly before the real thing. The students also all completed a measure of their ‘trait’ (background) levels of test anxiety. And, throughout a 40-day period, they repeatedly reported on their levels of ‘state’ anxiety regarding their exam preparation.

The researchers found that greater trait test anxiety was indeed linked to a poorer performance in the final exam. However, it was also linked to poorer performance on the practice questions, and a lower percentage in the mock exam. So, students with the most test anxiety went into the final exam with less knowledge. In fact, when the researchers took into account performance on the mock exam or the pre-exam practice questions, test anxiety no longer predicted their final exam scores.

The researchers further explored why people with test anxiety might have poorer knowledge. They first looked at each student’s level of trait test anxiety and their performance on practice questions across the course of the pre-exam period. They found that students with higher trait anxiety showed a smaller increase in knowledge over time. This suggests that greater trait test anxiety makes it harder to acquire knowledge.

Finally, the team found evidence that awareness of gaps in one’s own knowledge may trigger more anxiety. During the preparation period, higher state anxiety in the morning was not linked to poorer scores on practice questions that day. However, fewer correct answers on one day was linked to greater test-related anxiety the next morning.

Earlier work has suggested that anxiety during an exam can particularly impair the performance of students with relatively low vs high working memory capacities (worries are thought to take up some working memory, leaving less for the task at hand). The participants in this study were high-performing medical students with presumably capacious working memories. Perhaps this buffered them against any impacts of worries during the exam on performance.

It is possible that anxiety during an exam may interfere with performance in some academic scenarios, but “our work suggests that this interference is not as pervasive as previously believed,” the team writes. Overall, “the results of the present study suggest that the reasons for the negative association between anxiety and test performance are complex and begin well before the final test situation.”

And this has important implications for test-anxious students, they note. There is research suggesting that training sessions designed to improve study strategies can help students who are anxious about an exam. But, as this work found that test anxiety begins to exert its effects early on in exam preparation, these interventions would need to come early, too. (In fact, the new findings might explain why some interventions designed to relieve test anxiety right before an important exam, such as getting students to write about their worries, have not improved exam performance.)

“Future research should focus on the development of interventions that facilitate effective knowledge acquisition during exam preparation, or even earlier, to improve the educational prospects of highly test-anxious students,” the team concludes.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/test-anxiety-makes-it-harder-absorb-information-while-preparing-exam(accessed 14.11.22)

Feeling Better About Our Bodies

link:

https://megjohnandjustin.com/bodies/feeling-better-bodies/

Content note. We discuss how we might feel better about our bodies. So we touch on the social messages we get about bodies and this includes us talking about fatphobia, diets, ‘health’, disablism, but we don’t go into much detail. It’s a long one — sorry about that.



Around the time of year that we recorded this podcast – early Spring – it’s easy to feel bad about our bodies. Cultural scripts suggest that we should overindulge and hibernate over the Winter, but that after new year we should be follow resolutions to diet and ‘get in shape’ for the summer ‘beach body’.



The media doesn’t help. At the moment there are a number of billboard adverts and makeover TV shows focusing on weight-loss and ‘improving appearance’. Particularly problematic are the links that are made between looking a certain way and ‘health’ and ‘fun’. Not only are we meant to have a certain appearance in order to be attractive and sexy, but also we’re blamed and shamed for being ‘unhealthy’ if we don’t conform to cultural beauty ideals, as well as often internalising the idea that caring about ‘looks’ is a fun and pleasurable thing to do, and to do otherwise would mean being a killjoy.

But the beauty ideal is incredibly limited. Looking around at the aspirational bodies that surround us they’re overwhelmingly young, thin, white, ‘flawless’, non-disabled, and gendered to match the ideals of rugged masculinity and delicate femininity, and a good deal of wealth is required to buy all the products necessary for maintaining such an ideal. We scientifically estimate on the podcast that 97% of people will not match these ideals for one reason or another, and all of us will move away from them as we age of course.
Love your body?

Most of us are likely to feel bad about our bodies if we’re surrounded by such narrow body ideals that we can’t possibly match up to. But what can we do about this? There has been a move among some people to replace the ‘change your body’ message of so much advertising and other media with a ‘love your body’ message.

This is pretty risky because it still locates the problem in us as individuals – rather than wider society. It’s bloody hard to love your body when the whole world is implicitly – or explicitly – telling you not to. If we receive the message that we should be able to easily love our bodies, that gives us yet another thing to feel bad about.

There’s a real tension when we live in a very individualising culture to know how to address things like this without continuing to individualise our struggles. At megjohnandjustin.com, we find the following diagram helpful – for all kinds of things – to think through how they work on multiple levels, and how we might address them on all those levels too. We can’t just try to relate differently to our body on an individual level if the people around us, our communities, and wider culture simply stay the same.

In the podcast we explore what we might do at each of these levels:Society – We could notice the images around us and be critical of them. We could confront fat-shaming remembering that it’s actually poverty, type of diet, and fitness that relate to health – not fatness; that being ‘underweight’ is generally more risky health-wise than being ‘overweight’; that these categories are based on an old model of measurement that doesn’t relate to how bodies are these days; and that shaming people about their bodies makes everything far worse – not better – for them. We could engage in body-related activism. We could seek out different subcultures that incorporate more diversity of bodies or expand our ideas of what is beautiful.
Communities – We could deliberately share materials that are critical of body ideals, or which incorporate a wider range of bodies. We could curate our social media accounts to avoid body-shaming from others, and to put out different messages ourselves, including filters and content notes. We could find communities which are trying to cultivate different ways of engaging with bodies. We could deliberately follow communities online which challenge narrow body ideals, including fat activists, disability activists, dwarf community activists, age activists, etc.
Interpersonal Relationships – We could keep an eye on whether we shame people in our lives for aspects of their bodies or bodily practices and try to stop doing that. We could have consent conversations about how we like to be treated in relation to our bodies, and what we find difficult from others.
Yourself – We could try to incorporate more embodied experiences into our lives where we feel ‘at one’ with our bodies rather than separate to them and scrutinising of them. These can include activities where the body is in motion, being alone, being in nature, etc.


Acceptance and Change

The ‘love your body’ message risks replacing the idea that we should always change our bodies to fit beauty ideals with the idea that we should always accept our bodies as they are and that changing them in any way is a bad thing that’s always about conforming to cultural norms.

Actually each person needs to find their own way of navigating the possibilities of change and acceptance in relation to their bodies (and in other areas). For example bodily changes of various kinds can be extremely helpful in decreasing physical pain and discomfort and/or improving mental health and/or opening up new possibilities in our lives.

Many trans people, disabled people, people with chronic health conditions, fat people, and others face a constant barrage of messages from one group of people telling them they should make changes to their bodies, while another group of people tell them they shouldn’t and that they should accept their bodies as they are. It’s not for anybody else to tell us how we should relate to our bodies, and – as a culture – we should help everyone to navigate these complex decisions about change/acceptance and support them through the various options instead of telling people what they should or should not do with their bodies.

© Meg-John Barker & Justin Hancock, 2018

SOURCE:

https://megjohnandjustin.com/bodies/feeling-better-bodies/(accessed 10.11.22)

Study finds little evidence that particular scents help people sleep better

But the research also suggests that smells you personally like could be beneficial.


By Emma Young


The idea that certain scents promote sleep has been popular for thousands of years. Ancient Egyptians believed that myrrh increased sleep quality, for example, while recent studies have suggested that citrus smells may help sleep by improving mood, and a lavender scent is often touted as the perfect pillow spray. However, there has been little systematic objective investigation of the impact of specific odours on sleep, write the authors of a new paper in Scientific Reports. Agnieszka Sabiniewicz at the Technical University of Dresden, Germany and colleagues now report just such a study.

The participants were 139 healthy men and women. They first went into the lab to complete a batch of tests, including measures of their smelling ability and also symptoms of anxiety and depression. They were then given a nose clip to take home with them. Each clip delivered one of: an orange odour; l-Laurinal (a sweet floral scent); a perfume with citrus, floral, musky and orange scents; no scent at all.

Over a two week period, the participants wore their clip each night and completed a sleep diary each morning. (The diary asked about their quantity and quality of sleep.) A subgroup of 66 participants also used wrist-worn devices that measured their minutes of REM, deep sleep and light sleep.

After two weeks, the participants went back into the lab for repeat testing. They also reported on how pleasant or otherwise they had found their scent. Then they went home and, without wearing the nose clip this time, completed a sleep diary each morning for the following two weeks. At the end of this period, they went back into the lab, to re-take the key tests for a final time.

The team found a few small differences in the impact of specific odours on participants’ depression and anxiety scores. Those who’d sniffed the perfume tended to report less anxiety than those who’d smelled the Laurinal, although this effect was only marginally significant. And those who’d sniffed either the perfume or no odour had better depression scores than those who’d sniffed the Laurinal.

But the main aim of the study was to investigate impacts on sleep. The team found that, whatever the nose clips delivered, the participants generally reported feeling better rested as the study period went on. (So even the zero-odour, control group felt that they benefited.) Also, participants who found the odour they had been assigned particularly pleasant tended to report feeling better rested at the end of the study, compared with the beginning.

However, when the team compared the sleep quantity and quality data for each of the four nose clip groups, they found no differences — none of the odour groups had slept any better than the control group. As some earlier studies have suggested that certain odours can improve sleep (the scent of bitter orange has been linked to better sleep quality, for example), why did this research find no odour benefits? One possibility is that perhaps it had something to do with how the scent was delivered— via nose clip, rather than a spray or a scented candle, for example.

Some researchers have suggested that certain scents (including lavender and citrus odours) may act via the central nervous system to exert a direct relaxing or mood-boosting effect, and affect sleep in this way. However, this new work does suggest that how much you like a smell is what matters, rather than the odour itself.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/study-finds-little-evidence-particular-scents-help-people-sleep-better(accessed 10/11/22)

Ένα εκατομμύριο ορφανά από μητέρα παιδιά ετησίως, λόγω του καρκίνου

Ο καρκίνος αποτελεί μείζον πρόβλημα δημόσιας υγείας με προφανείς αρνητικές συνέπειες για τα άτομα που διαγιγνώσκονται με τη νόσο και το περιβάλλον του.


Σε πρόσφατη ανακοίνωση στο Παγκόσμιο Συνέδριο για τον Καρκίνο (World Cancer Congress 2022) ερευνητές παρουσίασαν τα δεδομένα για τον αριθμό των παιδιών που μένουν ορφανά από μητέρα εξαιτίας του καρκίνου. Συγκεκριμένα, το έτος 2020 καταγράφηκαν 4,4 εκατομμύρια θάνατοι γυναικών από καρκίνο. Το 78% αυτών των θανάτων αφορούσαν γυναίκες ηλικίας κάτω των 50 ετών. Οι ερευνητές χρησιμοποίησαν τα δεδομένα του Οργανισμού Ηνωμένων Εθνών για τον παγκόσμιο πληθυσμό αλλά και τον μέσο αριθμό ζώντων παιδιών ανά γυναίκα σε κάθε χώρα καθώς και τα ποσοστά γονιμότητας ανά πενταετία ηλικίας των γυναικών σε κάθε χώρα για τα προηγούμενα 18 έτη. Με βάση τα στοιχεία αυτά, εκτιμήθηκε ότι περίπου 1 εκατομμύριο παιδιά έμειναν ορφανά από μητέρα λόγω των θανάτων από καρκίνο σε όλο τον κόσμο.

Οι περισσότεροι από αυτούς τους θανάτους αφορούσαν την ήπειρο της Ασίας (49%) και της Αφρικής (35%) και σχετιζόταν συχνότερα με τον καρκίνο του μαστού (25% των περιπτώσεων), του τραχήλου της μήτρας (18%) και του ανώτερου γαστρεντερικού (13%). Μάλιστα φαίνεται να υπάρχει αντίστροφη σχέση ανάμεσα στον δείκτη ανθρώπινης ανάπτυξης και τον αριθμό των ορφανών από μητέρα ανά 100 θανάτους γυναικών. Συγκεκριμένα, η Ευρώπη που έχει τον υψηλότερο δείκτη ανθρώπινη ανάπτυξης είχε τον μικρότερο αριθμό ορφανών ανά θάνατο γυναικών από καρκίνο.

Τα στοιχεία αυτά είναι σημαντικά γιατί αποτυπώνουν για πρώτη φορά την έκταση του προβλήματος που μπορεί να έχει σημαντικές επιπτώσεις για τα παιδιά. Όπως αναφέρουν οι Καθηγητές της Θεραπευτικής Κλινικής της Ιατρικής Σχολής του Εθνικού και Καποδιστριακού Πανεπιστημίου Αθηνών, Μιχάλης Λιόντος (Επ. Καθηγητής), Φλώρα Ζαγουρή (Καθηγήτρια), Θεοδώρα Ψαλτοπούλου (Καθηγήτρια) και Θάνος Δημόπουλος (Καθηγητής και Πρύτανης ΕΚΠΑ), είναι γνωστό από μελέτες σε ορφανά παιδιά ότι χαρακτηρίζονται σε μερικές περιπτώσεις από χαμηλότερο επίπεδο εκπαίδευσης και μεγαλύτερη θνησιμότητα από τους συνομηλίκους τους. Προφανώς πρέπει να εντατικοποιηθεί η έρευνα για τον καρκίνο για να μειωθεί η θνησιμότητα από τη νόσο. Τα δεδομένα αυτής της μελέτης όμως δείχνουν ότι αυτό μπορεί να βοηθήσει και την επόμενη γενιά, σημειώνουν οι Καθηγητές του ΕΚΠΑ.


Επιπλέον, προσθέτουν, περίπου οι μισοί θάνατοι γυναικών σχετίζονταν με νοσήματα που μπορούν να προληφθούν ή να διαγνωσθούν πρώιμα όπως ο καρκίνος του μαστού και του τραχήλου της μήτρας. Επομένως, τέτοιες μελέτες αυξάνουν την ευαισθητοποίηση του κοινού για τις επιπτώσεις του καρκίνου μεταξύ των γενεών και υπογραμμίζουν την ανάγκη μείωση του αριθμού των θανάτων από καρκίνου από αίτια που μπορούν να προληφθούν.

Πηγή:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/life/health/562112065/ena-ekatommyrio-orfana-apo-mitera-paidia-etisios-logo-toy-karkinoy/(accessed 2.11.22)

Past experience of adversity can lead to feelings of guilt - and more compassion for others

Heightened feelings of guilt seem to be key to previously found association between personal experience of hardship and increased empathy.



By Emma Young


There are reasons to view guilt as a damaging emotion. It does not feel good. It’s also a key feature in major depression and obsessive-compulsive disorders. And when someone feels personal guilt in relation to a trauma that they have suffered, such as abuse, they’re more likely to develop symptoms of post-traumatic stress. However, recent research also shows that this emotion can have upsides.

Guilt is generally viewed as stemming from a belief that you have done something wrong, either morally or socially, and as a result, caused harm to others. And there is work finding that people will make pro-social, unselfish choices to avoid feeling it.

A new paper in Emotion identifies another upside of guilt. Past work has found that people who have suffered more adversity feel more empathy and compassion for others in need. Now Daniel Lim at Adelphi University and David DeSteno at Northeastern University find that feelings of guilt associated with personal experience of past hardship and trauma are the key driver of this effect.

In the first study, 127 US-based adults kept a three-week record of daily feelings of a variety of emotions, including guilt and compassion. Afterwards, they completed a survey that asked about any past life adversity, including bereavements, illnesses and difficulties in relationships. The researchers found that feelings of guilt and compassion tended to track each other — so on a day when someone felt more guilt, they also tended to feel more compassion. They also found that people who’d suffered more adversity tended to feel both more guilt and more compassion than the other participants.

To build on this, the pair ran a second study involving 126 online participants. They read a passage about the impact of conflict in Darfur on local people, and saw eight images of suffering children. This was intended to evoke compassion. The participants then reported on feelings of compassion and guilt. Again, the researchers found that levels of compassion were associated with levels of guilt — and that levels of both were linked to levels of past adversity. Their analysis suggested that feelings of guilt at least helped to explain the link between levels of past adversity and levels of compassion.

In the third, lab-based study on 100 participants, the pair directly manipulated feelings of guilt. Half of the participants were set up to physically collide with someone who they believed to be a fellow participant (but who was in fact a confederate). This ‘accident’ caused the confederate to drop a set of puzzle blocks that they had just spent time carefully arranging. The other half only witnessed the confederate dropping the puzzle blocks.

The researchers found that, as they’d expected, those who’d been led to cause the accident felt more guilt. They also found that, within this group, those who’d experienced more past adversity felt the most guilt. What’s more, there was a stronger link between past adversity and feelings of compassion for the confederate among these participants than among those who’d only witnessed the accident. So, as the pair writes, people who’d suffered greater past adversity were more likely to experience a large spike in guilt from their involvement in the accident, and this prompted more compassion for the ‘victim’.

Why would people who’d experienced greater adversity feel more guilt? It could be that knowing themselves what it is like to suffer, witnessing suffering in others leads them to feel more guilt at not having known about this suffering, or not already having done anything to help – or, in the case of the type of scenario in the second study, feel more guilt at causing someone else to suffer.

"The current set of studies offers an important insight related to the general notion that having experienced adversity in life can lead to increased compassion," the researchers write. The research also suggests a fresh social upside of guilt. Greater compassion could, the researchers write, "nudge people toward engaging in greater efforts to assist those in need".

Of course, there are factors that will influence how much guilt and compassion that someone who has experienced past adversity will feel in any given situation. People who are suffering from post-traumatic symptoms may be able to feel only limited compassion for others. And if they feel that the victim is in some way to blame for their suffering, this clearly could limit compassion. “Nonetheless,” the pair concludes, “in general, it does appear that an adversity-induced propensity for guilt enhances compassion in most.”

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/past-experience-adversity-can-lead-feelings-guilt-and-more-compassion-others(accessed 2.11.22)