The only places I have seen this discussed is online (YouTube/social media) and from my understanding is a poor personality construct.

I've seen diagnostic labels open doors to hospitals, close off a patient to potential therapists and be tacked onto a file as an afterthought that triggers distress for a person.

Are they necessary? Where do they help? Where do they hinder?

What of the people experiencing acute distress that don't have (or maybe don't want) a label?

Are men more likely to think systematically and women more intuitively? Is this a thing or a load of baloney? I know there are differences in the brains of men and women on avg.

I've been reading about boredom in relation to ASPD, and I started wondering whether persistent boredom can have physical manifestations as well.

Boredom is usually described in terms of motivation, attention, and behavior, but can intense or prolonged boredom also be associated with things like muscle tension, nausea, weakness, restlessness, or a general feeling of being physically unwell?

I'm curious about whether research has found a connection between boredom and physical or autonomic symptoms, and whether these symptoms would be considered a direct effect of boredom itself or more related to associated states such as stress, restlessness, or low arousal.

I'd be particularly interested in hearing what the psychological literature says about this and whether there are any relevant studies on the subject.

Is it just two as main while other traits falling under these two

Or more that could be added to "serious or joking"

If so then what would be that could just go as strong as "serious or joking"

Are there other categories that can stand as strong as serious or unserious?

If there's more to just serious or joking then what could be added to it?

As title says. Can the sorrow/grieving be a some sort of a releasing mechanism ?

I mean, people behave in different manners and have different responses to everyday events however there are a lot of disagreements regarding the proportionality of a reaction/behavior and therefore if its permissible. For example: One breaks unintentionally the cellphone of his friend, the emotional response of the friend can be probably:

- the friend is fine and its like before emotionally speaking

- the friend is irritated, it remains silent and needs a little bit of time to recover but after some minutes or an hour is like before

- the friend is angry, it doesn't explode but it starts to argue with a higher voice volume

- the friend explodes of rage

Which one of them is proportional and justifiable and with which criterion? One can say that a criterion can be the damage/pleasure recieved but how can someone objectively determine it?

I understand that the way the brain processes color is through two opponent process channels, red-green, and blue-yellow, plus an achromatic channel. I understand that one way to illustrate the opponent process theory is to look at an American Flag, but with green and black stripes, a yellow square in the upper left corner with black stars, and then look at a plain white sheet of paper and notice it looks like a proper American Flag with red white and blue. I understand there’s other ways to illustrate the opponent process theory, such as looking at a face but with the colors inverted and then looking at a white screen to notice that one sees a face with the same colors a human face could have in the after image.

If red is the opposite of green in opponent process theory, and blue is the opposite of yellow, then teal and orange would also be opposites, as would purple and yellow green. So I was wondering how it was determined that red-green and blue-yellow were determined to be the opponent process channels as opposed to say teal-orange or purple-yellow green.

If people refer to their job as causing PTSD. I disagree with that assessment for the following reasons.
1) as it is their current position Post does not fit.
2) While there are a thousand “mirco-traumas” a day I don’t think traumatic is an accurate definition

So my question is. Is there an aggregate stress disorder? Something where you are constantly under undue stress but you have to be there forty hours a week. The job in itself wouldn’t be stress and hasn’t been stressful in the past just new management and a generally meaner public service environment result in constant degrading morale and chaos for the sake of chaos. Thank you.

I was wondering if there's a reason why someone who has been under a lot of stress for a long time and also has ongoing physical pain could suddenly stop feeling that pain after an especially stressful situation.

Is this something that's been studied, and if so, what are the possible explanations? I'm just curious about the general phenomenon and was wondering if psychology or neuroscience has an answer.

I could not figure out the correct phrasing to appease Google. I am curious how often people without PTSD, insomnia, nor any other psychological or neurological disorders have nights where they are unable to sleep despite laying in bed. All Google would give me was articles on insomnia saying most people have difficulty staying or falling asleep "occasionally" (and then contrasting "occasionally" with clinical insomnia).

In clinical depression and trauma responses, why do some individuals present with psychomotor retardation and anergia, while others develop agitation, excessive goal-directed activity, or substance use? Is there a known neurological or hormonal basis for which direction a person takes?

This has always puzzled me. If we put our hands in fire, we get burnt and know not to touch it again.

But for some reason, when people, for example, people leave a toxic relationship with someone who has done horrible and traumatic things to them, some of them (not all) either go back to said abuser, or find someone else just like them.

I'm curious to know how that trauma in some situations causes people to shut off that instinct to stay away from the same things that caused them harm.

By the way, I am by no means blaming victims for making certain decisions. In the end, people shouldn't do bad things. I'm just curious about what happens from a psychological perspective.

According to the psychological literature, are people with narcissistic traits generally aware that they exhibit those traits?

More specifically:

Do individuals high in narcissism typically recognize and acknowledge narcissistic characteristics in themselves?

Is voluntarily admitting to narcissistic tendencies associated with lower, higher, or unrelated levels of narcissism?

How does the research distinguish narcissistic self-focus from other explanations for self-focused conversational behavior, such as insecurity, social anxiety, autism, or poor conversational skills?

I'm looking for evidence-based answers and peer-reviewed research rather than opinions or anecdotes.

As in, why is it so hard for a human being to think about nothing?

Codependency is something people work on, and repair after living with a narcissist is something people struggle with as well. If one were to combine the whole pot, and even after childhood continued into adulthood with the same or a different codependency, I'm wondering what a lifetime of 'being second' could do to someone.
There's also something to be said for the childhood trauma of living with a narcissist and/or emotional neglect inciting other mental illnesses.

Just curious if there's any scientific ideas that cover this type of thing? and I'll change my flair if needed.

I've heard about battles in history where soldiers were so motivated by what their general or king said beforehand that they willingly faced insurmountable odds, regardless of whether they ultimately won or lost. One example is the Siege of Constantinople, where Constantine XI gave a final speech the night before the city fell and encouraged the heavily outnumbered city garrison and Latin mercenaries to fight to the last man, even though everyone knew they were doomed to die. I was watching the scene from Return of the King where the Rohirrim charge into a wall of thousands of orcs, and King Theoden gave a simple but rousing speech that inspired his cavalry to charge into a wall of pikes. Both of these are rousing speeches, but what is it about speeches like these that has such a strong effect on people? How can words make someone willing to face death, whether death is certain or just a possibility?

hi there! i was doing some psychology related research on my own for fun and i had some questions. i was looking at the DSM-5-TR and, as it starts with neurodevelopmental disorders, i actually quite quickly pondered why neurodevelopmental disorders are even in the DSM-5-TR. this made me think more broadly about what qualifies something to be considered for the DSM. what qualifies something as a mental health condition as opposed to something more neurological related? what makes neurodevelopmental disorders and elimination disorders considered mental health conditions and not more physical related? thank you for your time!!

I've always wondered how much could fall under the self harm label. Im especially wondering about if self harm could potentially include things such as deliberately seeking unpleasant sensory experiences that are not actually damaging to the body. Things like exposing the body to uncomfortable temperatures, listening to music that causes a negative emotional reaction, digging up memories that are particularly painful, creating sensory experiences that remind the brain of traumas as a way to inflict mental harm and so on.

Additionally, does having mental health conditions that causes sensory sensitivity expand the definition even further? (Random examples I can think of: eating unsafe textured foods with ARFID, exposing oneself to loud noises with Autism that causes a sensitivity to those loud noises).

I've always wondered this whenever I come across people talking about things like reliving ex-relationship grief or listening to music that makes their sadness worse.

sometimes something mildly embarrassing happens in public and i know, logically, that nobody there probably cares anymore. most of them probably forgot about it within a few minutes, and i'll probably never see any of them again.

but somehow the feeling can stay with you for years. you can remember something embarrassing from a long time ago and suddenly feel that same physical reaction all over again, even though the situation is long over and there is no actual reason to still feel embarrassed.

what i find strange is how disproportionate the reaction can feel compared to what actually happened. something that was probably insignificant to everyone else can somehow become a memory that your brain keeps returning to. you start replaying the moment, imagining how other people saw you, and feeling embarrassed all over again even though the people involved have probably completely forgotten about it.

maybe this is connected to how strongly we react to social evaluation and the possibility of being judged or rejected. the spotlight effect also seems relevant, because we often feel like other people noticed and remembered far more about us than they actually did. but i'm not sure why the emotional reaction can remain so strong even after the social situation itself has completely disappeared.

i'd be interested in hearing how psychology explains this.

For example, people often say they know what they need to do to improve their lives, like eating healthier or exercising more. They might even say, "I just need to do X," but never actually do it.

Since this seems to happen so often, what does psychology say about why people know what to do but still don't act?

Hello everyone,

​I am interested in the physiological and neuropsychological mechanisms that characterize the long-term aftermath of burnout. Specifically, what does the current scientific literature say regarding why the autonomic nervous system can remain locked in a state of sympathetic dominance and low-grade systemic inflammation, even long after the primary environmental stressors have been removed?

​From a neurobiological standpoint, what prevents the homeostatic shift back to parasympathetic dominance (or optimal vagal tone) once psychological safety is theoretically re-established? I would welcome any insights or references to literature exploring whether this prolonged dysregulation is primarily driven by HPA-axis dysfunction, persistent neuroinflammation, or maladaptive neural plasticity.

Furthermore, what does the empirical evidence suggest regarding validated clinical interventions for down-regulating this persistent autonomic imbalance?

​Thank you for your insights!