The presence of an animal can significantly increase positive social behaviors in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), according to a new paper.

Trust fools you into remembering that your partner was more considerate and less hurtful than they actually were, say psychologists who examined the role of trust in biasing memories of transgressions in romantic partnerships. 

People who are highly trusting tended to remember transgressions in a way that benefits the relationship, remembering partner transgressions as less severe than they originally reported them to be. People low on trust demonstrated the opposite pattern, remembering partner transgressions as being more severe than how they originally reported them to be, they concluded. 

Psychologist Lera Boroditsky says she's "interested in how the languages we speak shape the way we think" [1].

This statement seems so innocent, and yet it implies that language definitely does shape thought¹. It also leads us to use a metaphor with "shape."

Causes and Dependencies

Does language cause thought? Or at least in part? Or is it the other direction--thought causes language?

Is language even capable of being a cause of thought, even if it isn't in practice?

Or in an architectural sense, is one dependent on the other? Is thought built on top of language?

Or is language built on top of thought?

Does language influence thought at all, even if one is not dependent on the other?

Schizophrenia may affect up to 1 percent of the population, it is diagnosed primarily in the teenage or early adult years, and is associated with problems in mental ability and memory.

People who have a greater familial genetic link to schizophrenia are more likely to see a fall in IQ as they age, even if they do not develop the condition, according to psychologists in a new paper. 

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have not found genetic causes for schizophrenia but familial instances are considered a risk factor. The psychologists used genetic analysis matched with IQ test results to reach their conclusion on how thinking skills change with age. 

Howard Blume over at “looseendsdotme” in Assisted Suicide for Jumpers provides us with a strange article on my Suicidal Philosophy (which is as yet largely unpublished for reasons that should be obvious). 

Males and females differ in a lot of traits (besides the obvious ones) and some evolutionary psychologists have proposed hypotheses to explain some baffling ones. As an example, the slight, but significant, superiority in spatial navigation among males of many species is probably 'adaptive', they believe - meaning that over the course of evolutionary history that trait gave males an advantage that led them to have more offspring than their peers.

Some controversial modern psychologists claim that conservatives and liberals don't just differ in political ideology, correlation and causation is inferred in actual personality templates and even genetics - yes, that would mean Americans are evolving into two distinct species separate from the rest of the planet. So in that odd framework they have decided American liberals are conscientious, conservatives are reactionary, conservatives are afraid of uncertainty, liberals are open to new experiences, etc. 

Which is more important, feeling close to your romantic partner or whether you are as close as you want to be, even if that's really not close at all? 

Outside the social sciences, the answer is obvious. But in social psychology, it is a paper in time for Valentine's Day. Let's go to the surveys.

When is it time for parents to help and when it is time to back away?

Since kids were having children of their own at age 18 a century ago it seems obvious that hovering over college-age students is not needed.  And a new paper in Journal of Child and Family Studies
 says that college students with over-controlling parents are more likely to be depressed and less satisfied with their lives. This so-called helicopter parenting style negatively affects students' well-being by violating their need to feel both autonomous and competent.