The Era of Suspicion

In today’s newsletter, we’ll look at emerging research that is almost certainly relevant to your life in one way or another.

1. Loneliness makes rejection easier to see

One recent study found that lonely people felt more rejected in ambiguous social situations, especially when the social cues were unclear.

Modern life leaves a lot of room for interpretation. A delayed text or short reply might mean nothing, but if you already feel disconnected, it becomes easier to take it personally.

You assume distance where there may be busyness. You assume rejection where there may be poor communication.

It is even worse than it sounds because loneliness can make you more likely to perceive a neutral cue as negative, which can make you pull back socially, and the cycle continues.

Before reacting, ask yourself:

“What assumptions am I making?”

Then apply Occam’s razor: when there are multiple possible explanations, start with the one that requires the fewest assumptions.

Notice the assumption. Choose the simplest reasonable explanation. Then respond from there.

2. Screen time is the wrong question

A 2025 Nature Human Behaviour study found that adolescents with mental health conditions used social media differently than their peers. Teens with internalizing symptoms reported more social comparison, greater mood impact from online feedback, lower happiness with online friendships, and less honest self-disclosure.

Translation: the same app can serve very different functions depending on the kid using it.

For one kid, it may be jokes, group chats, creativity, and connection. For another, it may become a constant social ranking system.

This should matter to you because if you are reading this, you are probably a parent, uncle, aunt, coach, teacher, clinician, boss, mentor, or someone who has influence over a younger person.

So instead of asking a kid, “How much time are you spending online?” ask what function the internet is serving while they are there.

Is it making them feel more connected or more excluded?

Is it helping them express themselves or perform a version of themselves?

Better questions:

“How do you feel after you scroll?”

“Do likes and comments change your mood?”

“Do you feel like yourself online?”

Those answers will tell you more than a screen-time report.

3. Check your sample before you trust your conclusion

A 2025 PNAS Nexus paper found that Americans dramatically overestimate how many people post harmful content online. Participants guessed that 43% of Reddit users had posted severely toxic comments and 47% of Facebook users had shared false news. The real numbers were much lower, with harmful content coming from a small but highly active group of users. These overestimates were linked to greater pessimism about society.

That matters beyond comment sections.

A bad sample can ruin your view of almost anything.

If your view of relationships comes from dating apps and viral breakup videos, everyone starts to look avoidant, narcissistic, unfaithful, or emotionally useless.

If your view of politics comes from the most unhinged person on the other side, half the country starts to look insane.

If your view of men or women comes from gender-war content, resentment starts to feel like insight.

So before deciding on a stance, if you in fact, need to take one, ask:

“What am I basing this on?”

Your feed is a sample.

Your sample shapes your conclusion.

And a distorted sample will give you a distorted worldview.

So this week, be careful what you let become evidence.

Hack of the week: "Send later" function

I’ve made it a rule to text people when I think of them.

Sometimes it’s too early or too late to send the text, so I use the “send later” function.

Small thing, but it helps you stay connected without overthinking it.