#Psychology

Self-awareness can drive growth and social harmony, but excessive introspection may backfire. In Thailand’s fast-paced, comparison-driven landscape, experts ask whether too much self-focus harms well-being.

Self-awareness means recognizing one’s character, feelings, motives, and desires. It is valued in education and leadership, and Thai culture—rooted in Buddhist mindfulness—emphasizes understanding oneself to make mindful choices and nurture harmonious relationships. New findings add nuance for students, teachers, and health professionals in Thailand and beyond.

A recently published study has uncovered a troubling association between so-called “honor cultures” and higher rates of depression and suicidal ideation, raising important questions for societies across Asia and the world, including Thailand. The research, first reported by PsyPost, reveals that environments where family reputation, social standing, and personal honor are emphasized may also be environments where mental health challenges are more acute and more stigmatized.

This study matters for Thai readers, as many elements of Thai society—from family life to community expectations—are influenced by honor-based values, though their form and impact can vary. Understanding how these cultural factors may increase vulnerability to depression or even suicidal thoughts is crucial given ongoing national efforts to address mental health and improve prevention services.

A new international study links honor-focused cultures with higher rates of depression and suicidal thoughts. The research suggests that pressures around reputation and face can amplify stress and deter people from seeking help. For Thai readers, this underscores why culturally informed mental health support matters in Thailand’s communities and schools.

Thai society values respect, hierarchy, and communal harmony. These strengths can also make talking about distress difficult. Understanding how cultural expectations affect mental health is essential as Thailand scales up prevention services and youth-focused interventions.

A newly published analysis is shaking up popular beliefs about charisma, revealing that while this seemingly magical quality can boost career success and social influence, having too much of it may actually become a liability—especially for leaders. The findings, outlined in a recent column in The Atlantic, draw on extensive psychological research to dispel myths about the nature of charisma and offer practical advice for Thais interested in cultivating personal magnetism without overdoing it (The Atlantic).

Recent research suggests that while self-awareness is widely celebrated as a key to personal growth and social success, there can be a downside to being overly focused on oneself—a phenomenon increasingly relevant in today’s hyperconnected and comparison-driven world. Psychologists and neuroscientists are now grappling with the question: Can you be too self-aware for your own good?

Self-awareness, defined as the capacity to consciously recognize one’s character, feelings, motives, and desires, has long been prized, especially in education and leadership circles. Thai culture, rooted in Buddhist principles of mindfulness and self-reflection, places a similar value on understanding oneself. The expectation is that this awareness leads to more mindful choices and harmonious relationships. But the latest scientific findings, covered by research in the fields of psychology and cognitive neuroscience, point to more nuanced effects—raising important considerations for individuals, educators, and mental health professionals in Thailand and globally.

In the age of “rizz” and viral TED Talks, having charisma is often viewed as a shortcut to career success and popularity. But the latest research from psychologists and leadership experts reveals a surprising twist: while boosting your charisma can indeed help you make friends and climb the career ladder, too much charisma may actually become a liability, even for those born with the social “gift.” New insights from studies published in 2024 and 2025—including an influential feature in The Atlantic and key academic reviews—are rewriting our understanding of what charisma is, how it shapes happiness, and why there is such a thing as being too magnetic for your own good The Atlantic.

Charisma can open doors to influence, promotions, and popularity. New research from 2024 and 2025, and reviews in major outlets, suggest a nuanced view: more charisma isn’t always better. A certain level helps people connect and follow, but excessive charisma can backfire even for naturally sociable leaders.

Charisma is best seen as a mix of influence and affability. Influence is the confidence and competence to guide others; affability is warm, approachable energy. This blend has helped leaders rise, but studies indicate peaks of charisma may yield diminishing returns once a threshold is crossed. Ultra-charismatic figures can inspire, yet they may struggle with practical execution or cause discomfort among teammates. Some studies link excessive charisma to narcissistic tendencies grounded in strong self-belief.

A wave of recent research reframes meaning not as a puzzle to solve but as an ongoing practice of engaging with uncertainty, hardship, and change. For Thais navigating life transitions—whether fresh graduates entering the workforce, retirees redefining purpose, or anyone facing disrupted routines—this shift offers practical guidance. Behavioral scientists emphasize that meaning develops through adaptation, reflection, and coherence with evolving experiences, not through a single solution.

Thailand has seen rapid shifts in economy, society, and technology over the past decade. As prosperity grows, many urban Thais report a sense of disengagement despite material security. Research from leading institutions echoes this trend, noting a crisis of meaning among high achievers and people whose lives previously rested on clear external structures like school or work. In Thailand and beyond, the sense that something is missing appears more often during periods of transition.

The latest research and expert perspectives suggest that the quest for life’s meaning should not be treated as a puzzle to solve, but instead as an ongoing practice to engage with uncertainty, difficulty, and change. This reframing could be crucial for Thais navigating life transitions—whether it’s a recent graduate adjusting to post-academic life, a retiree redefining purpose, or anyone feeling lost after losing familiar routines. According to leading behavioral scientists, the path to meaning is not linear or formulaic, but deeply connected to our ability to adapt, reflect, and build coherence from ever-changing experiences (Big Think).

A comprehensive, two-decade study from a prominent U.S. university shows that people who cultivate strong daily stress management skills not only cope better with everyday challenges but also tend to become more extroverted, agreeable, and open to new ideas as they age. Those less adept at handling stress may drift toward introversion and skepticism toward unfamiliar concepts. The findings underscore the lasting value of emotional regulation for personal growth.

The study followed over 2,000 participants for nearly 20 years, making it one of the most extensive investigations into how stress coping relates to personality change. Participants kept daily diaries during eight-day windows at three intervals, noting stress experiences, emotions, and personality traits. Advanced analyses revealed clear links between daily stress practices and shifts in key personality dimensions over time. The research was announced by MSU Today.

A landmark study from Michigan State University has revealed that people who develop strong daily stress management skills not only find it easier to cope with everyday challenges but also become noticeably more extroverted, agreeable, and open to new experiences as they age. Conversely, those who handle stress less effectively tend to grow more introverted and less open to unfamiliar ideas, underscoring the long-term value of emotional regulation for personal well-being.

A new study from a leading German university explores how stress can both strengthen in-group bonds and increase hostility toward outsiders. Published in a major scientific journal, the research provides a neurobiological lens on why group conflicts persist and how polarization takes hold in Thai communities and beyond.

Researchers in comparative psychology, with clinical neuroscience support from a major hospital, conducted a psychopharmacological experiment. Participants were given a cortisol analog to simulate stress, a drug to raise noradrenaline, both compounds, or a placebo. They formed groups and competed in economic games with real financial stakes to mirror cooperation and rivalry in real life.

Groundbreaking research from Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf has illuminated the double-edged effects of stress: while it binds people more closely to their in-group, it simultaneously drives hostility toward perceived outsiders. Published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the findings provide a nuanced neurobiological perspective on why group conflicts—even when costly to all—remain so persistent worldwide. This research offers valuable insights into the psychological forces underpinning social divisions, with implications for Thai society and global communities navigating rising polarization.

A recent piece in Psychology Today examines a universal trait: people’s instinct to resist what feels unfamiliar. The article links fear of difference to both biology and the social narratives passed down by families, schools, and communities. For Thai readers, these insights connect with current social, educational, and cultural conversations across the country.

As Thailand becomes more diverse—from northern ethnic communities to southern Malay-speaking regions and Bangkok’s growing international scene—the way society responds to “the other” matters for social harmony, inclusive education, and economic opportunity. Understanding why familiarity can feel safer helps reduce prejudice and unlock collaboration and creativity in a connected world.

A new article in Psychology Today has shed light on a persistent human trait: our tendency to resist anything unfamiliar—a phenomenon that impacts Thai society and communities worldwide in subtle but powerful ways. Recent research highlights how fear of difference is nurtured not just by our brains’ wiring but by deeply embedded societal lessons learned from family, school, and cultural narratives as we grow up (Psychology Today).

The significance of these findings lies in their resonance with ongoing social, educational, and cultural challenges across Thailand. As Thai society becomes more diverse—whether through ethnic communities in the North, the southern Malay-speaking provinces, or Bangkok’s increasingly international population—the question of how we react to “the other” has real implications for social harmony, inclusiveness in education policy, and economic opportunity. By understanding why humans instinctively draw comfort from the familiar and label the different as potentially risky, we can begin to address sources of prejudice and open doors to creativity and collaboration that are essential in an interconnected world.

A new trend is sweeping across South Korea’s youth: personality tests based on the concepts of testosterone and estrogen, labelled as ‘teto’ and ‘egen’, are becoming the latest markers of identity and compatibility, especially among young singles. This hormone-inspired typology is rapidly nudging aside the long-dominant MBTI as the go-to tool for self-understanding, social interaction, and even dating decisions—a phenomenon already echoed by pop culture and social media, and increasingly stirring discussion among experts.

A rapid trend from Korea is reshaping how young people think about identity and compatibility. A 28-question test based on hormonal cues, known as the teto-egen typology, has become a popular shorthand in conversations, dating, and online communities—outpacing MBTI in everyday discussions. The wave has extended into pop culture, fueling debates among educators and researchers alike.

In teto-egen, people are categorized by energy type and interpersonal style. The system identifies four archetypes: teto men who are athletic and bold; egen men who are gentle and appearance-conscious; teto women who are expressive and outgoing; and egen women who are reserved and traditionally feminine. Many youths use these labels to gauge potential romantic compatibility from blind dates to discussions about celebrities. A major Southeast Asian study notes that millions have engaged with these archetypes on Korean personality platforms.

A growing body of psychology suggests that chasing happiness as an end in itself may reduce overall life satisfaction over time. Research from leading universities shows that focusing too much on momentary joy can undermine a deeper, more enduring sense of well-being. For Thai readers balancing tradition and global influences, these insights offer practical guidance on building a meaningful life.

Today, happiness is often framed as a product to acquire, display, and showcase on social media. But treating happiness as something to chase can clash with long-term well-being. As philosopher Viktor Frankl noted, happiness “must happen” rather than be forced. Contemporary studies echo this nuance: relentless pursuit of happiness can sometimes lessen life satisfaction.

A growing body of psychological research, backed by both historic wisdom and empirical studies, suggests that the relentless pursuit of happiness could ironically be leading to widespread dissatisfaction. According to recent findings discussed by a renowned psychologist and researchers from Stanford, focusing too much on feeling happy in the moment may actually undermine a more meaningful—and ultimately satisfying—life experience. For Thai readers navigating a society in flux between traditional values and global influences, these insights offer timely lessons for crafting a fulfilling existence.

A newly published meta-analysis involving over half a million participants has shed disturbing new light on how Machiavellian leaders affect their workplaces. Contrary to the popular belief that such cunning, manipulative leadership either guarantees success or spells disaster, this massive international study, appearing in the Journal of Organizational Behavior, finds much more complex and nuanced realities. While Machiavellian leaders consistently create harmful environments for their followers, their own professional fate depends heavily on context rather than clear-cut penalties or rewards psypost.org.

Recent research is reshaping long-held beliefs about trauma, revealing that the true determinant of whether an experience becomes traumatizing is not the event itself, but rather the individual’s subjective perception and ability to process what happened. This insight comes at a critical time, as mental health awareness grows in Thailand and globally, highlighting the importance of individualized support for those affected by trauma.

Traditionally, trauma has been linked directly to objectively severe events—violent assaults, natural disasters, serious accidents, or frontline combat. The prevailing assumption was that those who endured these “major” traumas were destined to suffer lasting psychological wounds like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, compelling new findings, as discussed in the latest analysis in Psychology Today, suggest a more nuanced reality: what makes an experience truly traumatizing is rooted in the brain’s ability—or inability—to process and adapt to the emotional impact of the event, regardless of its objective severity (Psychology Today).

A new meta-analysis examining more than half a million people finds that Machiavellian leaders harm employee well-being and organizational climate. The impact depends on context, not just rewards or punishments. The study, published in a leading psychology journal, shows that such leaders consistently create harmful environments, while career outcomes hinge on internal politics and perception management rather than a simple penalty system. Descriptions of Machiavellian leaders include cynicism, manipulation, and a disregard for conventional ethics.

A new wave of research suggests that trauma is less about the event and more about how a person perceives and processes what happened. As mental health awareness grows in Thailand, experts urge personalized support that considers individual interpretation and coping resources.

Historically, trauma was tied to objectively severe events such as violent crime, natural disasters, major accidents, or frontline combat. The idea was that those exposed to such events would inevitably develop lasting psychological harm like PTSD. However, recent analyses emphasize that trauma depends on the brain’s ability to process emotional impact, regardless of an event’s objective intensity.

Recent scientific work is unpacking the psychology behind extremist beliefs, highlighting markers that may shape how people think ideologically. Research discussed by experts identifies four key traits linked to extremist thinking: cognitive rigidity, emotional volatility, variations in brain structure (notably the amygdala), and differences in the prefrontal cortex. Data from international studies suggest these factors interact with life experiences to influence belief formation.

For Thai readers, these insights are especially relevant as society navigates charged political, cultural, and generational debates. Understanding underlying factors is not just academic; it informs how educators, mental health professionals, parents, and policymakers in Thailand approach prevention and resilience-building. Thai culture places high value on social harmony and respect for diversity, which can guide practical responses.