Podcast
PsyberSpace® - we help you understand your world
Hosted by Dr. Leslie Poston, Research Psychologist: Applied Psychology, Media Psychology, Organizational Psychology · EN
PsyberSpace® is a weekly psychology podcast for curious people who want to understand why the world feels the way it does, online and offline. The show helps you name what you’re seeing and feeling, understand the science behind it, and figure out what to do next.
If you've ever wondered what makes "reply guys" tick, why we fall for emotionally manipulative language in politics, why meetings suck, why comfort can keep us stuck, why limerence hits so hard, or how music and media reshape your brain, you’re in the right place. New episodes drop every Monday to help you understand your world a little better each week.
PsyberSpace looks at how psychology, media, and big systems shape everyday life. Some weeks it’s algorithms, AI, and social platforms; other weeks it’s work culture, gender and power, climate anxiety, grief, or the way capitalism sets the baseline for what “normal” looks like. Each episode breaks down how these patterns show up in real people’s bodies and minds—and what you can do to respond with more clarity, care, and agency in your own life, work, and community.
2025 Webby Award Honoree
2026 Women in Podcasting Award Nominee
2025 Women in Podcasting Award Nominee
2024 Women in Podcasting Award Nominee
40episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
Gotcha Culture: Why Catching an AI Cheater Feels So Good
3d ago00:17:17Tap to summarizeThe Psychology Behind AI Call-Outs and False CertaintyDr. Leslie Poston examines why people react with such gleeful certainty when an AI detector flags someone's writing, even though these tools are wrong often enough to falsely implicate one in five students in a single class. The satisfaction people feel rarely tracks whether the accusation is true. It tracks something else entirely, and this episode breaks down five distinct psychological motives hiding underneath that feeling, from protecting a shaky self-image to genuine hypocrisy to anger that belongs somewhere else altogether. Along the way: why detectors fail the way they do, what several centuries of public exposure rituals have in common with a modern callout post, and how to catch yourself doing this before you hit send.00:00 Why AI Callouts Feel Good01:08 Schadenfreude and Deservingness03:10 Algorithms Reward Accusations04:19 Five Motives Behind Callouts04:27 Downward Comparison Relief05:31 Imposter Syndrome Trigger06:28 Secret Users and Hypocrisy08:08 Moral Grandstanding Performance09:00 Misdirected Anger at AI10:03 Why Detectors Fail12:12 Historical Parallels and Exposures14:33 How to Respond Responsibly17:06 Closing and Subscribe ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Coded to Exhaustion: The Hidden Cost of Outsmarting the Algorithm
1w ago00:20:57Tap to summarizeAlgospeak and the Cost of Speaking Under Algorithmic SuppressionWhen millions of creators have to say 'unalive' instead of suicide and use a grape emoji instead of talking about rape, something has gone wrong. In this episode, Dr. Leslie Poston discusses her dissertation research on the psychological impact of algospeak, the deliberate language modifications social media creators use to evade algorithmic content moderation, where those strategies actually come from, what happens when they spread, and what it costs the people who need them most. Portions of this research are currently being prepared for peer-reviewed journal publication. Dissertation successfully defended June 2026, in process for publication July 2026, available to public mid-to-end August 2026.00:00 Welcome and Setup00:44 What Is Algospeak02:40 Origins and Raciolinguistics04:13 Why I Studied This05:28 Methods and Dataset07:03 Emotional Toll08:54 Cognitive Load12:50 "Neutralization Lifecycle"15:11 Beyond Algorithms Harassment16:10 What Needs to Change17:53 What Changed Since Study19:31 Key Takeaways and Sign OffNote: had some trouble with the audio leveling this week on a word or two, if I have time I'll re-record and replace those segments this weekend. ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →What We Lose When Knowledge Has to Pay Rent
2w ago00:17:16Tap to summarizeEducation’s Value Beyond Jobs: Critical Thinking, Humanities, and the Real Jobs CrisisHost Dr. Leslie Poston argues that education’s value is not defined by whether it leads directly to a job, criticizing the “elite overproduction” framing that treats employment outcomes as the only metric and shift systemic economic failures onto individuals. She emphasizes that a good education builds durable capacities like critical thinking, tolerance for ambiguity, and empathy (traits tied to better judgment in civic life, relationships, and work) supported by research on intrinsic motivation, liberal arts outcomes, and longitudinal gains in reflective learning and need for cognition. In medicine, humanities-linked interventions measurably improve empathy and uncertainty tolerance, reducing unnecessary tests and stress. She cites evidence that employers inflated degree requirements as a screening filter, worsening credential gaps, and explains cultural bias toward individual-blame narratives. She concludes that labor-market reform and valuing knowledge should be treated as separate fixes.00:00 Education Beyond Jobs01:16 The ROI Framing Trap03:27 Critical Thinking Core05:57 Intrinsic Motivation Wins07:24 Medicine Needs Humanities09:27 AI Ethics Training Gap11:51 Who Caused Credential Creep13:36 Bias Toward Blame14:56 Two Problems Two Fixes16:57 Closing Values Call ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Love Languages Were Never Scientific
3w ago00:19:13Tap to summarizeWhy Love Languages Went Viral Without the Science to Support ThemMillions of people can name their love language. Almost none of them know the man who invented the concept wasn't a psychologist, never ran a study, and built the whole thing from his own irritation with how his wife loaded the dishwasher. Host Leslie Poston traces "The Five Love Languages" back to its actual origins, checks Gary Chapman's core claims against three decades of relationship research, and asks a harder question: who benefits when a framework this thin gets treated as settled science, and who ends up doing the work of proving it.00:00 Love Languages Phenomenon 01:18 Who Is Gary Chapman 02:47 Pastoral Origins Story 04:13 Brand Expansion Machine 04:59 Putting The Theory To Test 05:40 What The Research Finds 07:15 Why It Still Spreads 09:19 A Closer Look At Who Does The Work 11:43 The Physical Touch Question 13:04 When It Becomes A Shield 16:27 What Holds Up Instead 18:38 Closing Thoughts And Sign Off**Note: We had some technical difficulties during recording this week. If there is a problem with your audio, please let us know** ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Why We Keep Falling For Moral Panics
Jul 200:19:26Tap to summarizeMoral Panics as Effort Shields: Why Outrage Replaces ActionWhy do we grab onto moral panics so eagerly, and then quietly drop them the moment they stop being convenient? In this episode, host Leslie Poston, Ph.D., introduces the concept of the 'effort shield' and argues that moral panics serve a psychological function most people never examine. Drawing on Stanley Cohen's foundational work, system justification theory, and the Semmelweis effect, she walks through four case studies spanning technology and policy to show how the pattern repeats, who profits from it, and what it costs us. If you've ever wondered why the same cycle of outrage keeps happening without anything actually changing, this one's for you.00:00 Stranger Danger to Uber01:04 What Moral Panics Do02:24 Effort Shields Explained05:14 Stranger Danger Myth07:58 Video Games Scapegoat10:44 Social Media Panic12:29 KOSA and Policy Fallout13:50 Anti Abortion Effort Shield16:42 Pattern Across Examples18:01 Why Panics Persist18:29 Spotting the Shield19:17 Closing and Subscribe ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Why We Reject New Evidence That Could Directly Help Us: The Semmelweis Effect
Jun 2500:19:31Tap to summarizeThe Semmelweis Effect, COVID Cognitive Decline, and Why Evidence Struggles to SpreadHost Leslie Poston explains the Semmelweis effect (reflexively rejecting strong evidence because it threatens identity or established norms) through Ignaz Semmelweis’ 1840s discovery that chlorinated handwashing slashed childbed-fever deaths, despite fierce professional backlash and decades-long delay before adoption. She distinguishes the effect from confirmation bias and links it to cognitive dissonance, status quo bias, and identity-protective cognition. The episode then connects this pattern to research showing COVID-19 infection is associated with measurable, cumulative cognitive deficits (memory, reasoning, executive function), limited protection from vaccination, and brain changes, with reinfection worsening decline and older or severe cases at higher risk. Poston argues these impairments may reduce society’s ability to update beliefs, compounding the typical 17-year medical translation gap and polarized trust in science, and suggests bias awareness, infection prevention, living guidelines, better evidence infrastructure, and transparent communication.00:00 Semmelweis Effect Intro01:05 Deadly Maternity Mystery01:38 Handwashing Breakthrough02:21 Why Evidence Gets Rejected03:30 Bias Mechanics Explained05:58 Not Just Skepticism07:11 COVID Cognitive Decline Data08:37 Brain Changes And Reinfection11:22 Translation Gap In Medicine13:33 Trust Polarization Problem14:38 Three Forces Collide15:30 Practical Ways Forward18:20 Closing Reflection And Signoff ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →The Age of Uncertainty: What Workplace Instablity is Doing to Your Brain
Jun 1800:15:58Tap to summarizeSustained Uncertainty at Work: Why It Hurts Your Brain and What HelpsHost Leslie Poston discusses sustained workplace uncertainty and its psychological effects, citing an APA Monitor on Psychology article and survey data showing widespread job insecurity, low engagement, and feelings of being replaceable or invisible—especially among workers under 25. She explains research finding peak stress at maximum uncertainty and connects it to ongoing “maybe” conditions created by economic instability, policy shifts, AI restructuring, and layoffs at profitable companies, which sever the link between effort and security and contribute to survivor syndrome, reduced collaboration, and morale gaps between HR and executives. Declining trust and weak communication—highlighted by Edelman and Gallup findings—intensify uncertainty, while workplace ostracism can activate pain-related brain regions and disproportionately affects women of color. She offers limits-aware coping ideas: reduce self-blame, assess whether uncertainty is temporary or permanent, diversify identity beyond work, and evaluate whether leadership will tell the truth.00:00 Welcome and Setup00:21 Workplace Uncertainty Data01:48 Why Uncertainty Hurts02:37 Living in Maybe04:03 Profit Driven Layoffs06:30 Survivor Syndrome Fallout08:01 Trust Makes It Bearable10:03 Manager Pipeline Breakdown10:40 Invisibility and Ostracism12:25 What You Can Do13:09 Action Steps That Help15:46 Closing Thoughts ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Sounds Deep, Says Nothing: The Science of Bullshit Receptivity
Jun 1100:15:11Tap to summarizeBullshit Receptivity: Why We Trust the Wrong WordsHost Leslie Poston discusses “bullshit receptivity,” a peer-reviewed construct describing susceptibility to impressive-sounding but meaningless language. She highlights Cornell cognitive psychologist Shane Littrell’s studies in which over 1,000 office workers rated AI-generated corporate jargon alongside real executive quotes; those most impressed scored lowest on analytic thinking and workplace decision-making, and were more likely to amplify jargon in a feedback loop that rewards BS-producing leaders. Poston connects this to earlier work by Gordon Pennycook (University of Waterloo) on pseudo-profound statements and cognitive defaults like initial acceptance and weak conflict monitoring, and to research linking BS receptivity with overclaiming, poor metacognition, fake news vulnerability (Pennycook and Rand), political slogans, and “scientific” BS. She notes Brandolini’s Law and emphasizes practicing analytic thinking, including restating claims in plain language, citing the University of Washington’s “Calling Bullshit” course and mentioning future coverage of pre-bunking.00:00 Welcome and Setup00:41 Cornell Corporate BS Study02:49 Feedback Loop and Examples04:56 Waterloo Origins of BS Scale06:12 Why We Fall for It07:55 Metacognition and Overclaiming08:41 BS in News and Politics10:28 Scientific and General BS11:52 Training Your BS Detector13:50 Practical Plain Language Test14:47 Wrap Up and TeaserThe studies referenced:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886926000620https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2026/03/workers-who-love-synergizing-paradigms-might-be-bad-their-jobshttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/judgment-and-decision-making/article/on-the-reception-and-detection-of-pseudoprofound-bullshit/0D3C87BCC238BCA38BC55E395BDC9999https://sjdm.org/~baron/journal/20/200221/jdm200221.pdfhttps://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/202007/does-america-have-problem-bullshit-receptivityhttps://www.niemanlab.org/2017/08/when-it-comes-to-the-academic-study-of-fake-news-bullshit-receptivity-is-a-thing/https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/6565https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546783.2022.2066724UPDATED with notes from the study author: (Note: I love it when an author adds nuance! We lead with curiosity here and we know 15 - 25 minute episodic summaries can potentially overly-condense a topic.)Replying to the LinkedIn post about this, Dr. Littrell said: "Re: "The findings are consistent across every domain: the strongest predictor of whether someone catches BS is whether they engage analytic thinking or "go with their gut"."There's a bit more to it than that. People can fall for BS through either mode of thinking (more "reflective" and more "intuitive"):https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13546783.2023.2189163https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/acp.4154More detailed discussion here, for anyone interested: https://bullshitology.substack.com/p/brown-pilled-why-we-fall-for-bullshit" ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →The Credibility Trap: Why We Trust Confident Wrongness
Jun 500:18:32Tap to summarizeThe Credibility Trap: Why Confidence Beats CorrectnessHost Leslie Poston is back after a hiatus to move PsyberSpace to a new weekly Thursday schedule and explains why people often trust confident speakers over accurate ones, calling it the “credibility trap.” She outlines the confidence heuristic (certainty feels like evidence), why it works through verbal cues across all media, and how Dunning-Kruger dynamics and overclaiming research show that learning a little can increase false recognition and perceived expertise, a risk she notes may worsen with increased LLM use. She adds the authority heuristic, where credentials or platforms suppress scrutiny, and describes harms when confidently wrong figures are amplified, including in public health and policy. Research on “bullshit receptivity” and overconfidence in news judgment shows some people are especially vulnerable and unaware. She argues honest expertise sounds uncertain due to scientific qualifiers, which media incentives punish, and offers habits to resist: treat uncertainty as a knowledge signal, watch for broad undifferentiated certainty, separate authority from accuracy, and question one’s own discernment.00:00 Welcome Back Update00:21 The Credibility Trap01:14 Confidence Heuristic Explained03:05 Dunning Kruger And Overclaiming06:10 Authority Signals Amplify Errors09:49 Who Falls For It12:11 Honesty Sounds Uncertain15:38 How To Resist The Trap18:18 Final Thoughts And Sign Off ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →Propaganda: Nobody's Immune
May 1100:12:55Tap to summarizeHow Propaganda Uses Your Values Against Your Brain: The Passport Revocation ExampleHost Leslie Poston explains that no one is immune to propaganda, using her own initial approval of a proposal to revoke passports for unpaid child support as an example of how emotional framing can short-circuit deeper thinking. She argues effective propaganda relies on a grain of truth and an emotional trigger, using agenda-setting to shape what people think about and how, and distinguishes agitation propaganda (fast, gut-response) from integration propaganda (slow, worldview-shaping). She describes how moral conviction, motivated reasoning, and cognitive fluency can recruit analytical skill to defend prior conclusions, making simple frames feel both right and true. She warns that vague mechanisms attached to sympathetic victims can expand beyond intent, citing civil asset forfeiture and welfare fraud provisions, and offers habits: slow down on strong emotions, ask who’s missing from the frame, examine the mechanism and recourse, reject forced binaries, and note topics where scrutiny feels disloyal.00:00 No One Is Immune00:35 Passport Law Gut Reaction02:15 Propaganda Uses Truth03:08 Agitation vs Integration04:55 Moral Conviction Trigger06:26 Fluency Feels Like Truth07:30 Framing Hides Mechanisms08:42 Policy History Examples09:33 Five Anti Propaganda Habits12:10 Create the Thinking Gap12:41 Closing and Subscribe ★ Support this podcast ★
Transcribe →