Therapy Without a Heart: Why Even Psychologists Fall for AI 🤖

Are machines becoming better listeners? A 2025 study investigated in a scientific blind test how well Artificial Intelligence can give therapeutic advice compared to real experts. The AI used was based on the GPT-4 language model. The result is absolutely mind-blowing!

Key Facts from the Experiment:

• AI Wins on Emotions: The AI’s responses were rated significantly more empathetic than those of real therapists, especially regarding emotional and motivational empathy.
• Equal Quality: In terms of scientific quality and cognitive empathy, the AI and the experts were completely on par.
• Flying Blind: The participating psychologists could not reliably distinguish whether a text was written by the AI or a human colleague.
• The Illusion (Bias): When test subjects believed a text came from an expert, they preferred it over 93 percent of the time—regardless of whether it was actually written by a human.

Important Limitations: Despite the excitement, science puts the results into perspective:

• Not Real Therapy: The AI merely answered one-off advice column letters. This cannot replace real psychotherapy, as it lacks the foundation of a genuine therapeutic relationship and human trust.
• Risk of Loneliness: Those who get too used to an always-agreeing AI might struggle with human conflicts in real life. A longitudinal study suggests that excessive use of AI for social companionship can actually make people lonelier in the long run.
• Data Privacy: Currently, highly intimate problems are often processed on the servers of large tech companies, which poses a clear privacy risk.

Despite these limitations, the development is rapid: Around 22.2% of 18- to 21-year-olds in the US already turn to AI for emotional distress. Furthermore, initial studies show that special AI therapy bots are already showing success in alleviating symptoms of depression and anxiety.

📚 Sources:

Main Study (Blind Test AI vs. Experts): Föyen, L. F. et al. (2025). Artificial intelligence vs. human expert… Internet Interventions, 41.

Therapy Chatbot (Therabot Study): Heinz, M.V. et al. (2025). Evaluating therabot: a randomized control trial… NEJM AI.

Longitudinal Study (AI & Loneliness): Folk, D., & Dunn, E. How does turning to AI for companionship predict loneliness and vice versa? (Preprint).

Usage Frequency Survey: McBain, R.K. et al. (2025). Use of Generative AI for Mental Health Advice Among US Adolescents and Young Adults. JAMA Network Open.

#ArtificialIntelligence #Psychology #ComfortWithoutAHeart #Science #Psychotherapy #ChatGPT #Therabot

ADHD Meds: Why the “Limitless” Effect is Just an Illusion! ADHD Pills for Healthy People? The Placebo Effect is Stronger Than the Drug! 

Many students and high-performers turn to ADHD medications like Adderall to boost their cognitive performance. But does it really do anything if you don’t actually have ADHD? A fascinating study from the University of Alabama shows: The effect is mostly in your head!

🔬 The Study (Cropsey et al., 2017): Researchers used a so-called “Balanced Placebo Design” with 32 healthy students (non-ADHD). The twist: There were four scenarios. Participants either received the real medication (Adderall) or a placebo, but were sometimes told the truth and sometimes lied to (“Here is your pill,” even though it was sugar, and vice versa).

🧠 The Tests: Participants had to complete a whole series of cognitive tests, including:

Memory: Remembering words (CVLT-II) and number sequences (Digit Span).

Attention: The “Connors Continuous Performance Task” (CPT) – staying focused over time and reacting to specific signals.

Verbal Fluency: Quickly finding words starting with specific letters (COWAT).

Executive Functions: Multitasking and planning (Trails A/B, Stroop Test).

📉 The Results:

No Super-Intelligence: The medication failed to improve performance in 29 out of 31 tests. There were only minimal improvements in very simple tasks (like remembering the first few words of a list).

The Power of Belief: Those who believed they had taken the medication (regardless of whether they actually did) showed better long-term memory and attention performance than those who thought they had taken a placebo.

Subjective Delusion: Those who believed they were “on drugs” rated their own performance much higher – regardless of their actual results.

Conclusion: For healthy people, these medications offer hardly any objective advantage for complex tasks. The “boost” many feel is often just the placebo effect – the mere expectation that you are now more powerful.

Research:

Buergler, S., Sezer, D., Bagge, N., Kirsch, I., Locher, C., Carvalho, C., & Gaab, J. (2023). Imaginary pills and open-label placebos can reduce test anxiety by means of placebo mechanisms. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 2624.

Cropsey, K. L., et al. (2017). “Mixed-amphetamine salts expectancies among college students: Is stimulant induced cognitive enhancement a placebo effect?” Drug and Alcohol Dependence.

Esposito, M., Cocimano, G., Ministrieri, F., Rosi, G. L., Di Nunno, N., Messina, G., … & Salerno, M. (2021). Smart drugs and neuroenhancement: what do we know?. Frontiers in Bioscience-Landmark, 26(8), 347-359.

Whitehurst, L. N., Morehouse, A., & Mednick, S. C. (2024). Can stimulants make you smarter, despite stealing your sleep?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(8), 702-713.

Winkler, A., & Hermann, C. (2019). Placebo-and nocebo-effects in cognitive neuroenhancement: when expectation shapes perception. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 498.

The perception of being watched can serve as a powerful intervention to modify human behavior. A field experiment investigated this phenomenon regarding hand hygiene compliance in a public restroom.

In the study conducted by Pfattheicher et al. (2018), researchers observed the behavior of 354 women. A poster was placed above the soap dispenser featuring the text: “Hands spread pathogens. Hand washing protects”. The visual cue displayed above this message was manipulated to test the effect of social pressure.

In the control condition, three stars were displayed above the text. Under this condition, 71.9% of individuals utilized the soap dispenser.

In the experimental condition, the stars were replaced by a pictogram of watching eyes. The presence of these eyes significantly increased compliance to 83.3%. Statistical analysis (Odds Ratio: 1.95) indicates that the probability of hand washing was significantly higher when the watching eyes were present.

The study further identified a moderator effect regarding the duration of the restroom visit. The “watching eyes” effect was statistically significant only for individuals who spent a relatively short time in the restroom (approximately 2 minutes). The authors suggest that in these shorter visits—potentially associated with urination only—the intrinsic motivation to wash hands is lower, making the external cue of the eyes more effective in enforcing social norms.

These findings suggest that simple, low-cost “nudges” utilizing cues of social presence can effectively improve hygiene behavior in public settings.

Reference: Pfattheicher, S., Strauch, C., Diefenbacher, S., & Schnuerch, R. (2018). A field study on watching eyes and hand hygiene compliance in a public restroom. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(4), 188–194.

__________________

Studies (just a small selection):

Bateson, M., Callow, L., Holmes, J. R., Redmond Roche, M. L., & Nettle, D. (2013). Do images of ‘watching eyes’ induce behaviour that is more pro-social or more normative? A field experiment on littering. PloS one, 8(12), e82055.

Conty, L., George, N., & Hietanen, J. K. (2016). Watching Eyes effects: When others meet the self. Consciousness and cognition, 45, 184-197.

Dear, K., Dutton, K., & Fox, E. (2019). Do ‘watching eyes’ influence antisocial behavior? A systematic review & meta-analysis. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(3), 269-280.

Nettle, D., Harper, Z., Kidson, A., Stone, R., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Bateson, M. (2013). The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: it’s not how much you give, it’s being seen to give something. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34(1), 35-40.

Pfattheicher, S., & Keller, J. (2015). The watching eyes phenomenon: The role of a sense of being seen and public self‐awareness. European journal of social psychology, 45(5), 560-566.

Pfattheicher, S., Strauch, C., Diefenbacher, S., & Schnuerch, R. (2018). A field study on watching eyes and hand hygiene compliance in a public restroom. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(4), 188–194.

That well-intentioned screen time limit you set for your child? It might actually be making screens more desirable. This video dives into the science behind this paradox and reveals what actually works.

The insights are based on a fascinating study by Michal Maimaran and Yuval Salant called “The effect of limited availability on children’s consumption, engagement, and choice behavior”.

The revealing LEGO Experiment from the study:

Researchers gave two groups of four- to five-year-old children LEGOs to play with.

– Group 1 was given a 10-minute time limit.

– Group 2 was given no time limit at all.

The stunning result: The children with the time limit played significantly longer. They averaged 494 seconds of playtime, while the group with no limit played for only 390 seconds. The restriction itself increased their engagement and desire for the activity.

So, what are better strategies than constant time limits? This video explores alternatives grounded in psychology:

Curate Their Environment: Proactively manage which devices and apps are available in the first place.

Foster Positive Alternatives: Create engaging offline activities that naturally compete with screen time.

Use Natural Consequences: Link the end of screen time to a logical next event rather than an arbitrary timer.

Collaborate on a Plan: Create a media usage schedule with your child to foster autonomy and self-regulation.

Source:
Maimaran, M., & Salant, Y. (2019). The effect of limited availability on children’s consumption, engagement, and choice behavior. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(1), 72-79.

Can dancing alleviate depression? A groundbreaking study by Noetel et al. (2024) in the BMJ suggests so! It analyzed 218 randomized controlled trials and found that dancing is one of the most effective forms of exercise for combating depression.  Why? It combines mood-lifting music, social support from being in a group, and physical activity – all of which are boosts for mental health!

But a word of caution: The findings are based on a small number of studies, primarily involving women, and could be influenced by outliers. Therefore, it is worthwhile to look closely at the individual studies. Nevertheless, dancing is promising – and the study reminds us to carefully examine research findings. Even more exciting insights can be found in the video.

Studies (a small selection):

• Barranco-Ruiz, Y., & Villa-González, E. (2020). Health-related physical fitness benefits in sedentary women employees after an exercise intervention with Zumba Fitness®. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8), 2632.
• Domene, P. A., Moir, H. J., Pummell, E., Knox, A., & Easton, C. (2016). The health-enhancing efficacy of Zumba® fitness: An 8-week randomised controlled study. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34(15), 1396-1404.
• Fountoulakis, K. N., & Möller, H. J. (2011). Efficacy of antidepressants: a re-analysis and re-interpretation of the Kirsch data. International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 14(3), 405-412.
• Kirsch, I. (2015). Antidepressants and the placebo effect. Zeitschrift für Psychologie.
• Noetel, M., Sanders, T., Gallardo-Gómez, D., Taylor, P., del Pozo Cruz, B., Van Den Hoek, D., … & Lonsdale, C. (2024). Effect of exercise for depression: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ, 384.
• Norouzi, E., Hosseini, F., Vaezmosavi, M., Gerber, M., Pühse, U., & Brand, S. (2020). Zumba dancing and aerobic exercise can improve working memory, motor function, and depressive symptoms in female patients with Fibromyalgia. European Journal of Sport Science, 20(7), 981-991.
• Kumaat, N. A., Rusdiawan, A., Dafun JR, P. B., Wahyudi, H., Arfanda, P. E., Wijaya, F. J. M., … & Artanty, A. (2025). Comparative effects of Zumba and Yoga on stress, body satisfaction, and self-esteem in working women: a randomized control trial. Pedagogy of Physical Culture and Sports, 29(3), 160-171.

In this video, we dive deep into practical strategies to overcome social anxiety, also known as the fear of being judged or evaluated by others. Social anxiety can feel overwhelming, but with the right tools, you can regain confidence and live more freely in social situations. We’ll explore powerful concepts like the Spotlight Effect, the Illusion of Transparency, and how Metacognitive Therapy can help you break free from anxious thought patterns.

The Spotlight Effect is a psychological phenomenon where individuals overestimate how much others notice or judge their actions, appearance, or mistakes. For example, you might feel like everyone is staring at a small stain on your shirt or critiquing a minor slip-up in a conversation. In reality, most people are too focused on themselves to pay close attention to your perceived flaws. This cognitive bias, rooted in egocentrism, was first coined by psychologists Thomas Gilovich and Kenneth Savitsky. Their groundbreaking studies, including the famous Barry Manilow T-shirt experiment, demonstrated that people significantly overestimate how much their actions stand out to others. In this experiment, participants wearing an embarrassing T-shirt estimated that far more people noticed it than actually did—highlighting how our self-focused perspective amplifies our fears of being judged.

Similarly, the Illusion of Transparency refers to the mistaken belief that our internal thoughts, emotions, or anxieties are more visible to others than they truly are. When you’re nervous during a presentation, you might think everyone can see your shaking hands or hear your racing heart, but in truth, these signs are often barely noticeable. This concept, also explored by Gilovich and Savitsky, shows how we overestimate the extent to which our inner state is apparent to others, fueling social anxiety. Their research revealed that people consistently believe their nervousness is more obvious than it is, which can intensify feelings of vulnerability in social settings…

__________________

Studies (just a small selection):

Burck, E. (2019). Angst-Was hilft wirklich gegen Angst und Panikattacken?: Die effektivsten Strategien gegen Angst und Panik aus Sicht der Forschung. BoD–Books on Demand.

Gilovich, T., Medvec, V. H., & Savitsky, K. (2000). The spotlight effect in social judgment: an egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one’s own actions and appearance. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(2), 211.

Gilovich, T., Kruger, J., & Medvec, V. H. (2002). The spotlight effect revisited: Overestimating the manifest variability of our actions and appearance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(1), 93-99.

Gilovich, T., & Savitsky, K. (1999). The spotlight effect and the illusion of transparency: Egocentric assessments of how we are seen by others. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(6), 165-168.

Nordahl, H., & Wells, A. (2018). Metacognitive therapy for social anxiety disorder: An A–B replication series across social anxiety subtypes. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 540.

Nordahl, H. M., Vogel, P. A., Morken, G., Stiles, T. C., Sandvik, P., & Wells, A. (2016). Paroxetine, cognitive therapy or their combination in the treatment of social anxiety disorder with and without avoidant personality disorder: a randomized clinical trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 85(6), 346-356.

Nordahl, H., Nordahl, H. M., Hjemdal, O., & Wells, A. (2017). Cognitive and metacognitive predictors of symptom improvement following treatment for social anxiety disorder: A secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial. Clinical psychology & psychotherapy, 24(6), 1221-1227.

Vogel, P. A., Hagen, R., Hjemdal, O., Solem, S., Smeby, M. C., Strand, E. R., … & Wells, A. (2016). Metacognitive therapy applications in social anxiety disorder: an exploratory study of the individual and combined effects of the attention training technique and situational attentional refocusing. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 7(4), 608-618.

The Psychology Trick You’re Probably Already Falling For…

In this video, we explore the intriguing concept of the “ego trap”—an influence technique that leverages the idea that people are more likely to agree when it affirms their positive qualities. We examine the recent study “Egotistic Trap as a Social Influence Technique” by Dolinski, Grzyb, and Kulesza (2023), which provides a detailed analysis of this approach.

The study highlights just how powerful this technique can be: In one experiment, 52.4% of participants agreed to take part in a survey when they were told it was aimed at intelligent people—a significant increase compared to 32.7% in the control group. In another experiment, the willingness to have cars inspected at official workshops rose from 56.7% to 71.7% when participants were told, “reasonable customers have their cars officially inspected.”  There’s also an alternative version of the ego trap that might be even more effective…

Yoga is not just about physical fitness—it’s a powerful tool for mental health. A 2024 study by Yadla et al. explored the effectiveness of yoga as an addition to traditional treatments for panic disorders. This randomized controlled trial revealed fascinating insights.

The study involved 64 participants divided into two groups. One group followed standard treatments like medication and cognitive-behavioral therapy, while the other incorporated a structured 12-week yoga program. The yoga sessions included breathing techniques (Pranayama), mindfulness meditation, and physical postures (Asanas), all designed to address both mental and physical symptoms of panic disorders.

Results showed that participants in the yoga group experienced significantly greater reductions in anxiety (measured by the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale) and improvements in quality of life (evaluated using the WHOQOL-BREF). The yoga group demonstrated substantial progress in psychological resilience, social engagement, and environmental satisfaction. This research highlights how integrating yoga into conventional therapy can provide a holistic approach to managing panic disorders (Yadla et al., 2024).

In this video, we explore how changing the way we talk to ourselves can help reduce anxiety. Based on a study by Kross et al. (2014), using third-person language or addressing yourself by name, rather than using “I”, creates emotional distance that helps to calm the mind. Whether you’re facing social anxiety, stress from public speaking, or just everyday worries, learning to adjust your internal dialogue can make a big difference. Watch to learn more about how small changes in self-talk can have a powerful impact on your mental health.
The study by Ethan Kross and his colleagues (2014), published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, investigates how using different forms of self-talk (first-person vs. non-first-person) influences emotional regulation, especially under stressful conditions. The key finding is that using non-first-person pronouns (like “you” or one’s own name) helps create psychological distance, which aids in regulating emotions and reduces stress more effectively than using first-person pronouns like “I”. This self-distancing mechanism can reduce anxiety, improve performance in stressful situations, and help people view future stressors as challenges rather than threats. This method is particularly useful even for individuals with social anxiety, showing broad applicability.

Hashtags:

#MentalHealth #AnxietyRelief #SelfTalk #EmotionalRegulation #StressManagement #PsychologyTips #AnxietyHelp #MindsetShift #SelfImprovement #PublicSpeakingAnxiety
__________________

Studies (small sample only):

Gainsburg, I., Sowden, W. J., Drake, B., Herold, W., & Kross, E. (2022). Distanced self-talk increases rational self-interest. Scientific reports, 12(1), 511.

Gainsburg, I., & Kross, E. (2020). Distanced self-talk changes how people conceptualize the self. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 88, 103969.

Kross, E., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., Park, J., Burson, A., Dougherty, A., Shablack, H., … & Ayduk, O. (2014). Self-talk as a regulatory mechanism: how you do it matters. Journal of personality and social psychology, 106(2), 304.

Kross, E., Vickers, B. D., Orvell, A., Gainsburg, I., Moran, T. P., Boyer, M., … & Ayduk, O. (2017). Third‐person self‐talk reduces Ebola worry and risk perception by enhancing rational thinking. Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 9(3), 387-409.

Moser, J. S., Dougherty, A., Mattson, W. I., Katz, B., Moran, T. P., Guevarra, D., … & Kross, E. (2017). Third-person self-talk facilitates emotion regulation without engaging cognitive control: Converging evidence from ERP and fMRI. Scientific reports, 7(1), 4519.

Orvell, A., Vickers, B. D., Drake, B., Verduyn, P., Ayduk, O., Moser, J., … & Kross, E. (2021). Does distanced self-talk facilitate emotion regulation across a range of emotionally intense experiences?. Clinical Psychological Science, 9(1), 68-78.

Webb, T. L., Miles, E., & Sheeran, P. (2012). Dealing with feeling: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation. Psychological bulletin, 138(4), 775.

Are you searching for the most effective way to release yourself from panic attacks? While Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) has long been hailed as the “gold standard” in treating panic disorders, a groundbreaking new study is shaking things up! EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing), traditionally used for treating PTSD, has now been shown to match CBT in effectiveness for panic attacks.

In a 2017 study by Horst et al., EMDR demonstrated results comparable to CBT, suggesting it may help in rewriting old fear memories through a process called memory reconsolidation. Could EMDR be the future of panic attack therapy?

In this video, we dive into the details of the study and compare these two powerful therapeutic approaches. Discover which one might be the best solution for you!

References:

Burck, E. (2019). Angst – Was hilft wirklich gegen Angst und Panikattacken?: Die effektivsten Strategien gegen Angst und Panik aus Sicht der Forschung. BoD – Books on Demand.

Faretta, E., & Dal Farra, M. (2019). Efficacy of EMDR therapy for anxiety disorders. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 13(4), 325-332.

Faretta, E. (2013). EMDR and cognitive behavioral therapy in the treatment of panic disorder: A comparison. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 7(3), 121-133.

Horst, F., Den Oudsten, B., Zijlstra, W., de Jongh, A., Lobbestael, J., & De Vries, J. (2017). Cognitive behavioral therapy vs. eye movement desensitization and reprocessing for treating panic disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1409.