Friday, April 16, 2010

From Medscape Medical News

Women Calm Down After an Apology, Men Get More Worked Up

Jim Kling


April 12, 2010 (Seattle, Washington) — Women’s blood pressure returns to normal more swiftly when they receive an apology after an insult, whereas men recover more slowly, new research presented here at the Society of Behavioral Medicine 31st Annual Meeting and Scientific Sessions shows.

Prior studies have shown that forgiveness can influence physiologic reactivity and recovery when people revisit a memory of a past transgression. The aim of the current study was to investigate physiologic effects after a live incident.

For the study, investigators recruited 29 men and 50 women who were tested for levels of forgiving using the Forgiving Personality Inventory. Subjects were asked to perform a serial subtraction task, beginning with 9000 and subtracting 7. They were exposed to multiple interruptions from the experimenter while performing the task. Interjections included statements such as, "Look, you’re too slow and also inaccurate," That can’t be your best," and "You’re obviously not good enough at doing this."

A total of 40 participants received an apology from the experimenter. Those who scored high in forgiveness displayed faster recovery of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (F 1,70 = 4.88, P < .05) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (F 1,70 = 3.96, P < .05) after the apology.

The effect was most apparent in the immediate aftermath of the apology, when women who scored high in forgiveness had a lower DBP (F 1,23 = 8.75, P < .01) and MAP (F 1,23 = 8.56, P < .01) when compared with low forgiveness women, who had little response to the apology (P > .05).

Women who received an apology recovered faster than women who did not (DBP: F 1,47 = 8.71, P < .01; MAP: F 1,47 = 7.00, P < .01). In men, the effect was reversed. Those who received an apology displayed higher DBP (F 1,26 = 5.13, P < .05) and MAP (F 1,26 = 6.71, P < .05) on recovery than those who received no apology.

The results suggest that people with higher forgiveness levels experience greater attenuation of the cardiovascular stress that can occur as a result of a transgression. However, the beneficial effects of an apology appear to be dependent on sex.

It is premature to say how these findings translate into clinical research, but the difference in men’s and women’s reaction to apologies could potentially be applied to marital therapy, Matthew Whited, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester, who presented the research, told Medscape Psychiatry. "Even nonverbal communication, such as rolling one’s eyes, affects the physiology [of the other person]."

The study drew praise because it elicits reaction to a real-world situation. "A lot of previous studies ask participants to imagine [a transgression]. It’s hard to go anywhere with that," Kevin S. Masters, PhD, professor of psychology at Syracuse University in New York, said during a discussion period after the presentation. Dr. Masters has considered similar experimental designs, he added, but declined to pursue them for fear of having to navigate an institutional review board. "It turned out I was [too] chicken [to do it]."

Another attendee wondered if the participants could have misinterpreted the interruptions. "In an academic setting, they could have seen it as honest feedback [on their performance]. I think it would be better if the study involved genuine aggression," Kathleen Lawler-Row, PhD, professor and chair of psychology at East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina, told Medscape Psychiatry. Nevertheless, she was impressed by the study. "It was a powerful [study] design."

The study did not receive commercial support. Dr. Whited, Dr. Masters, and Dr. Lawler-Row have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) 31st Annual Meeting and Scientific Sessions: Abstract 2C.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Finding love online, despite health problems

By Michael Slenske, Health.com
April 14, 2010 8:19 a.m. EDT

Prescription 4 Love is a dating site for people with special conditions.
Prescription 4 Love is a dating site for people with special conditions.

Despite -- or perhaps because of -- the economic downturn, the billion-dollar online dating industry has been booming. But not everyone has felt welcome at the party.

While sites like Match.com and eHarmony don't discriminate, they also don't cater to people...who are coping with sexually transmitted diseases, disabilities, or mental health conditions. All of these can make dating -- often an ego-shattering minefield for those in perfect health -- even trickier.

"On bigger dating sites the competition is tremendous," says Jim Houran, PhD, a clinical psychologist and columnist for Online Dating Magazine. "And let's face it, depending on what [the illness] is, it could very well make you uncompetitive in the larger dating pool."

Fortunately, there are a number of alternatives. A new breed of dating sites has emerged to play cupid for people with chronic diseases and disabilities.

Over the past five years, several sites -- such as Prescription4love.com, Nolongerlonely.com, and Cisforcupid.com -- have launched to serve the needs of people with conditions ranging from bipolar disorder to Crohn's disease. Together these sites now boast tens of thousands of members.

In addition to providing their users with a more hospitable environment, these websites defuse the tension over how and when to disclose an illness, which is often an issue for people with diseases and disabilities who venture onto mainstream dating sites.

The stigma of mental illness

People with physical disabilities aren't the only ones who face stigma while dating. People with mental health problems, from chronic depression to schizophrenia, have also benefited from specialized sites.

Jim Leftwich, 39, a college librarian from White Plains, New York, has lived with schizoaffective disorder, a condition that combines features of schizophrenia and mood disorders (such as depression), since 1992. In 2004, after years of brushing up against the harsh realities of the dating scene, Leftwich founded No Longer Lonely, a dating site that caters to the mentally ill.

"I thought to myself, 'There should be something like this out there,' and I was surprised to find there wasn't," says Leftwich. "If you're mentally ill, it's kind of a hostile world out there. I thought by taking down that whole bugaboo of having an illness, making it all open with everyone knowing, it would facilitate things. People would be more trusting and relationships might be more successful."

No Longer Lonely now has 16,000 members and a brand new interface (similar to those of social-networking sites) that allows users to upload poems, art, videos, and blogs. The site has been responsible for more than 20 marriages.

"I find with my clientele, they're more willing to get to know someone remotely and they're more open," he says. "They don't have the same kind of prejudices that people in general tend to have."

Even though most mental illnesses can be controlled with medication, therapy, or a combination of the two, some people still view conditions such as bipolar disorder as a mark of weakness or instability.

"Even in today's enlightened society, where acceptance and diversity are hailed as the right thing to do...mentally ill people tend to be outcasts. It's terrible," says Houran, who is also a former instructor of clinical psychiatry at the Southern Illinois School of Medicine.

"The minute someone knows you have a certain mental disorder, they assume it means that you're not capable of love, or that you're dangerous or unstable. Those are myths. Given the right care, people with mental illnesses and other medical conditions can lead very normal, functioning lives."

Some mental illnesses -- certain mood or personality disorders, for instance -- could cause problems in fledgling relationships, Houran acknowledges. And especially if the relationship progresses to thoughts of marriage and kids, two partners who each have bipolar disorder, for example, could find themselves debating whether it's safe or wise to have children.

However, says Houran, in most cases these considerations aren't enough to forestall a relationship. "Even under the best of circumstances, people still have major relationship challenges," he says.

For Houran, this outgrowth of illness-specific dating sites and services is a boon. "Niche sites are growing in popularity because they allow people with these very specific needs or interests to connect in a way that's not possible on the big dating sites," he says.

"The big dating sites are akin to Wal-Mart. You have a lot of quantity, but that doesn't mean you're going to find people with a lot quality in the way you define it. That being said, niche sites by their very construction tend to be very small. So I always advocate [that] people use both."

Thursday, April 8, 2010

"Acedia"

Struggling with a 'bad thought'

By Kathleen Norris, Special to CNN

April 6, 2010 8:16 a.m. EDT

(CNN) -- On a recent trip across America, what surprised me most was the number of people -- over 200 in one city, 80 to 150 elsewhere -- who wanted to discuss this odd word, "acedia."

It's an ancient term signifying profound indifference and inability to care about things that matter, even to the extent that you no longer care that you can't care.

I liken it to spiritual morphine: You know the pain is there but can't rouse yourself to give a damn.

The concept of acedia was developed by Christians in the fourth century who had fled to the deserts of the Middle East, opting for a simple life in rebellion against a newly legal, wealthy and politically powerful church. Today, we would say that they went off the grid.

These men and women quickly discovered that although they had left material possessions behind, they hadn't shed their inner demons. They developed a sophisticated psychology of the "eight bad thoughts" that commonly troubled them, the most spiritually devastating of which were acedia, anger and pride.

Several centuries later, as the church developed its doctrine of the "seven deadly sins," acedia was tucked into the sin of sloth, and the word disappeared from the common vocabulary. Unless you were a student of monastic history or medieval literature, chances are, you would never encounter it.

I wrote my book because I suspected that although the word "acedia" is unfamiliar to most of us, its effects are widely known. When I compared the classic descriptions of acedia with the plagues of contemporary society -- a toxic, nearly unbearable mix of boredom and restlessness, frantic escapism (including that of workaholism), commitment-phobia and enervating despair -- I found the ancient demon of acedia in modern dress.

Acedia can manifest as either extreme lethargy or hyperactivity, but it is not merely an individual spiritual problem. It affects communities as well. And it was this aspect of acedia that my audiences wanted to discuss.

They raised questions about addictions to the Internet and "virtual reality," about fractured families who are so hyper-scheduled that they no longer spend much time together, about the dissonance of living in a society that is the wealthiest in history but whose citizens remain dissatisfied, gobbling up drugs for anxiety, depression and sleep disorders at an alarming rate.

In hard economic times, we can lose faith in ourselves and others, and acedia offers a false sense of complacency and security. We can care about celebrities or online "friends" more than our neighbors; we can treat rampant homelessness as just "the way things are," and that relieves us from having to do anything about it.

We can keep ourselves so busy that we don't have time to care, or we can simply drop out of the fight. Acedia feeds on "compassion fatigue" and assures us that the world's problems are so big that we need not trouble ourselves about them. It's useless to try to change things.

If the Christian church has made too much of the vice of pride, which seduces us into thinking too highly of ourselves, it has not made enough of sloth, which allows us to settle for being less than we can be, both as individuals and a society.

As the late playwright Wendy Wasserstein wrote in her book "Sloth," "When you achieve true slothdom, you have no desire for the world to change. ... Better to fall into line than to question the going ethos."

There is no certain remedy for acedia, any more than for anger and pride. It is part of the human condition. But we can learn to recognize it and resist it when it strikes.

A method that was recommended by a Christian monk in the fourth century, and is also a technique employed in current cognitive behavioral therapy, is to "think about your thoughts." When anger comes, or acedia, examine it dispassionately and try to figure out where it is leading you.

There is no blame attached to having a "bad thought," because they come to everyone. But we do have some choice in how we respond to them.

Monday, April 5, 2010

Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ

The IQ differences are statistically significant, but experts say the data shouldn't be used to stereotype or make assumptions

(CNN) -- Political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.

Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.

The reasoning is that sexual exclusivity in men, liberalism and atheism all go against what would be expected given humans' evolutionary past. In other words, none of these traits would have benefited our early human ancestors, but higher intelligence may be associated with them.

"The adoption of some evolutionarily novel ideas makes some sense in terms of moving the species forward," said George Washington University leadership professor James Bailey, who was not involved in the study. "It also makes perfect sense that more intelligent people -- people with, sort of, more intellectual firepower -- are likely to be the ones to do that."

Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said.

The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002. The study also looked at the General Social Survey, another cross-national data collection source.

Kanazawa did not find that higher or lower intelligence predicted sexual exclusivity in women. This makes sense, because having one partner has always been advantageous to women, even thousands of years ago, meaning exclusivity is not a "new" preference.

For men, on the other hand, sexual exclusivity goes against the grain evolutionarily. With a goal of spreading genes, early men had multiple mates. Since women had to spend nine months being pregnant, and additional years caring for very young children, it made sense for them to want a steady mate to provide them resources.

Religion, the current theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. Assuming that, for example, a noise in the distance is a signal of a threat helped early humans to prepare in case of danger.

"It helps life to be paranoid, and because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of God everywhere," Kanazawa said.

Participants who said they were atheists had an average IQ of 103 in adolescence, while adults who said they were religious averaged 97, the study found. Atheism "allows someone to move forward and speculate on life without any concern for the dogmatic structure of a religion," Bailey said.

"Historically, anything that's new and different can be seen as a threat in terms of the religious beliefs; almost all religious systems are about permanence," he noted.

The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.

"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.

Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.

It also makes sense that "conservatism" as a worldview of keeping things stable would be a safer approach than venturing toward the unfamiliar, Bailey said.

Neither Bailey nor Kanazawa identify themselves as liberal; Bailey is conservative and Kanazawa is "a strong libertarian."

Vegetarianism, while not strongly associated with IQ in this study, has been shown to be related to intelligence in previous research, Kanazawa said. This also fits into Bailey's idea that unconventional preferences appeal to people with higher intelligence, and can also be a means of showing superiority.

None of this means that the human species is evolving toward a future where these traits are the default, Kanazawa said.

"More intelligent people don't have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen," he said.

(CNN) -- Political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.

Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.

The reasoning is that sexual exclusivity in men, liberalism and atheism all go against what would be expected given humans' evolutionary past. In other words, none of these traits would have benefited our early human ancestors, but higher intelligence may be associated with them.

"The adoption of some evolutionarily novel ideas makes some sense in terms of moving the species forward," said George Washington University leadership professor James Bailey, who was not involved in the study. "It also makes perfect sense that more intelligent people -- people with, sort of, more intellectual firepower -- are likely to be the ones to do that."

Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said.

The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002. The study also looked at the General Social Survey, another cross-national data collection source.

Kanazawa did not find that higher or lower intelligence predicted sexual exclusivity in women. This makes sense, because having one partner has always been advantageous to women, even thousands of years ago, meaning exclusivity is not a "new" preference.

For men, on the other hand, sexual exclusivity goes against the grain evolutionarily. With a goal of spreading genes, early men had multiple mates. Since women had to spend nine months being pregnant, and additional years caring for very young children, it made sense for them to want a steady mate to provide them resources.

Religion, the current theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. Assuming that, for example, a noise in the distance is a signal of a threat helped early humans to prepare in case of danger.

"It helps life to be paranoid, and because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of God everywhere," Kanazawa said.

Participants who said they were atheists had an average IQ of 103 in adolescence, while adults who said they were religious averaged 97, the study found. Atheism "allows someone to move forward and speculate on life without any concern for the dogmatic structure of a religion," Bailey said.

"Historically, anything that's new and different can be seen as a threat in terms of the religious beliefs; almost all religious systems are about permanence," he noted.

The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.

"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.

Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.

It also makes sense that "conservatism" as a worldview of keeping things stable would be a safer approach than venturing toward the unfamiliar, Bailey said.

Neither Bailey nor Kanazawa identify themselves as liberal; Bailey is conservative and Kanazawa is "a strong libertarian."

Vegetarianism, while not strongly associated with IQ in this study, has been shown to be related to intelligence in previous research, Kanazawa said. This also fits into Bailey's idea that unconventional preferences appeal to people with higher intelligence, and can also be a means of showing superiority.

None of this means that the human species is evolving toward a future where these traits are the default, Kanazawa said.

"More intelligent people don't have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen," he said.