Mind over anger - the value of mindfulness

Feeling mad? New research suggests mindfulness could help manage anger and aggression

Kaboompics.com/Pexels

Siobhan O'Dean, University of Sydney; Elizabeth Summerell, University of Adelaide, and Tom Denson, UNSW Sydney

There’s no shortage of things to feel angry about these days. Whether it’s politics, social injustice, climate change or the cost-of-living crisis, the world can feel like a pressure cooker.

Research suggests nearly one-quarter of the world’s population feels angry on any given day. While anger is a normal human emotion, if it’s intense and poorly managed, it can quickly lead to aggression, and potentially cause harm.

Feeling angry often can also have negative effects on our relationships, as well as our mental and physical health.

So how should you manage feelings of anger to keep them in check? Our new research suggests mindfulness can be an effective tool for regulating anger and reducing aggression.

What is mindfulness?

Mindfulness is the ability to observe and focus on your thoughts, emotions and bodily sensations in the present moment with acceptance and without judgement.

Mindfulness has been practised for thousands of years, most notably in Buddhist traditions. But more recently it has been adapted into secular programs to support mental health and emotional regulation.

Mindfulness is taught in a variety of ways, including in-person classes, residential retreats and through digital apps. These programs typically involve guided meditations, and practices that help people become more aware of their thoughts, feelings and surroundings.

Mindfulness is linked to a range of mental health benefits, including reduced anxiety, depression and stress.

Neuroscience research also suggests mindfulness is associated with reduced activity in brain regions linked to emotional reactivity, and greater activity in those involved in self-regulation (the ability to manage our thoughts, emotions and behaviours).

In this way, mindfulness could foster emotional awareness essential for the effective regulation of emotions such as anger. And when people are less overwhelmed by anger, they may be better able to think clearly, reflect on what matters and take meaningful action, rather than reacting impulsively or shutting down.

Anger is a normal human emotion – but it can sometimes have destructive consequences. Inzmam Khan/Pexels

We reviewed the evidence

To better understand whether mindfulness actually helps with regulating anger and aggression, we conducted a meta-analysis. This is a study that combines the results of many previous studies to look at the overall evidence.

We analysed findings from 118 studies across different populations and countries, including both people who were naturally more mindful and people who were randomly assigned to take part in interventions aimed at increasing mindfulness.

People who were naturally more mindful were those who scored higher on questionnaires measuring traits such as present-moment awareness and non-judgmental thinking. We found these people tended to report less anger and behave less aggressively.

However, mindfulness isn’t just something you have or don’t have – it’s also a skill you can develop. And our results show the benefits of lower anger and aggression extend to people who learn mindfulness skills through practice or training.

We also wanted to know whether mindfulness might work better for certain people or in particular settings. Interestingly, our results suggest these benefits are broadly universal. Practising mindfulness was effective in reducing anger and aggression across different age groups, genders and contexts, including whether people were seeking treatment for mental health or general wellbeing, or not.

Some anger management strategies aren’t backed by science

To manage feelings of anger, many people turn to strategies that are not supported by evidence.

Research suggests “letting off steam” while thinking about your anger is not a healthy strategy and may intensify and prolong experiences of anger.

For example, in one experiment, research participants were asked to hit a punching bag while thinking of someone who made them angry. This so-called “cathartic release” made people angrier and more aggressive rather than less so.

Breaking things in rage rooms, while increasingly popular, is similarly not an evidence-based strategy for reducing anger and aggression.

On the other hand, our research shows there’s good evidence to support mindfulness as a tool to regulate anger.

Mindfulness may reduce anger and aggression by helping people become more aware of their emotional reactions without immediately acting on them. It can foster a non-judgmental and accepting stance toward difficult emotions such as anger, which may interrupt the cycle whereby anger leads to aggressive behaviour.

Mindfulness can help people become more aware of their emotions. New Africa/Shutterstock

Mindfulness is not a magic bullet

All that said, it’s important to keep in mind that mindfulness is not a magic bullet or a quick fix. Like any new skill, mindfulness can be challenging at first, takes time to master, and works best when practised regularly.

It’s also important to note mindfulness may not be suitable for everyone – particularly when used as a standalone approach for managing more complex mental health concerns. For ongoing emotional challenges it’s always a good idea to seek support from a qualified mental health professional.

However, if you’re looking to dial down the impact of daily frustrations, there are plenty of accessible ways to give mindfulness a go. You can get started with just a few minutes per day. Popular apps such as Smiling Mind and Headspace offer short, guided sessions that make it easy to explore mindfulness at your own pace — no prior experience needed.

While mindfulness may not solve the problems that make us angry, our research shows it could help improve how we experience and respond to them.

Siobhan O'Dean, Research Fellow, The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney; Elizabeth Summerell, Lecturer, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, and Tom Denson, Professor of Psychology, UNSW Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ANZAC Day 2025

                                                                                            Shutterstock

ANZAC Day falls on the 25th April each year and originally commemorated the first major military action fought by Australian and New Zealand forces in World War One at the landings on the Gallipoli peninsula (ANZAC stands for the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps).  This year will mark 110 years since that military event and in more recent decades ANZAC Day has come to commemorate all Australian participation in military and peacekeeping operations.

In 2025, the World has never seemed so fractured. Conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, Israel and the Gaza Strip and ongoing civil wars in the Sudan, Myanmar and the Democratic Republic of Congo bring misery and suffering to millions.

ANZAC Day's message of the sacrifice and losses from war continues to be profound. Lest we forget.

Earth Day 2025 - 22nd April

(c) EarthDay.Org/Alexis Rockman 

 
Earth Day Links: Earth Day 2025 link

The theme for Earth Day is 'Our Power, Our Planet'.

Pope Francis - legacy

Pope Francis has died, aged 88. These were his greatest reforms – and controversies

Joel Hodge, Australian Catholic University and Antonia Pizzey, Australian Catholic University

Pope Francis has died on Easter Monday, aged 88, the Vatican announced. The head of the Catholic Church had recently survived being hospitalised with double pneumonia.

Cardinal Kevin Farrell’s announcement began:

Dear brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis. At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father.

There were many unusual aspects of Pope Francis’ papacy. He was the first Jesuit pope, the first from the Americas (and the southern hemisphere), the first to choose the name “Francis” and the first to give a TED talk. He was also the first pope in more than 600 years to be elected following the resignation, rather than death, of his predecessor.

From the very start of his papacy, Francis seemed determined to do things differently and present the papacy in a new light. Even in thinking about his burial, he chose the unexpected: to be placed to rest not in the Vatican, but in the Basilica of St Mary Major in Rome – the first pope to be buried there in hundreds of years.

Vatican News reported the late Pope Francis had requested his funeral rites be simplified.

“The renewed rite,” said Archbishop Diego Ravelli, “seeks to emphasise even more that the funeral of the Roman Pontiff is that of a pastor and disciple of Christ and not of a powerful person of this world.”

Straddling a line between “progressive” and “conservative”, Francis experienced tension with both sides. In doing so, his papacy shone a spotlight on what it means to be Catholic today.

The day before his death, Pope Francis made a brief appearance on Easter Sunday to bless the crowds at St Peter’s Square.

Between a rock and a hard place

Francis was deemed not progressive enough by some, yet far too progressive by others.

His apostolic exhortation (an official papal teaching on a particular issue or action) Amoris Laetitia, ignited great controversy for seemingly being (more) open to the question of whether people who have divorced and remarried may receive Eucharist.

He also disappointed progressive Catholics, many of whom hoped he would make stronger changes on issues such as the roles of women, married clergy, and the broader inclusion of LGBTQIA+ Catholics.

The reception of his exhortation Querida Amazonia was one such example. In this document, Francis did not endorse marriage for priests, despite bishops’ requests for this. He also did not allow the possibility of women being ordained as deacons to address a shortage of ordained ministers. His discerning spirit saw there was too much division and no clear consensus for change.

Francis was also openly critical of Germany’s controversial “Synodal Way” – a series of conferences with bishops and lay people – that advocated for positions contrary to Church teachings. Francis expressed concern on multiple occasions that this project was a threat to the unity of the Church.

At the same time, Francis was no stranger to controversy from the conservative side of the Church, receiving “dubia” or “theological doubts” over his teaching from some of his Cardinals. In 2023, he took the unusual step of responding to some of these doubts.

Impact on the Catholic Church

In many ways, the most striking thing about Francis was not his words or theology, but his style. He was a modest man, even foregoing the Apostolic Palace’s grand papal apartments to live in the Vatican’s simpler guest house.

He may well be remembered most for his simplicity of dress and habits, his welcoming and pastoral style and his wise spirit of discernment.

He is recognised as giving a clear witness to the life, love and joy of Jesus in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council – a point of major reform in modern Church history. This witness has translated into two major developments in Church teachings and life.

Love for our common home

The first of these relates to environmental teachings. In 2015, Francis released his ground-breaking encyclical, Laudato si’: On Care for Our Common Home. It expanded Catholic social teaching by giving a comprehensive account of how the environment reflects our God-given “common home”.

Consistent with recent popes such as Benedict XVI and John Paul II, Francis acknowledged climate change and its destructive impacts and causes. He summarised key scientific research to forcefully argue for an evidence-based approach to addressing humans’ impact on the environment.

He also made a pivotal and innovative contribution to the climate change debate by identifying the ethical and spiritual causes of environmental destruction.

Francis argued combating climate change relied on the “ecological conversion” of the human heart, so that people may recognise the God-given nature of our planet and the fundamental call to care for it. Without this conversion, pragmatic and political measures wouldn’t be able to counter the forces of consumerism, exploitation and selfishness.

Francis argued a new ethic and spirituality was needed. Specifically, he said Jesus’ way of love – for other people and all creation – is the transformative force that could bring sustainable change for the environment and cultivate fraternity among people (and especially with the poor).

Synodality: moving towards a Church that listens

Francis’s second major contribution, and one of the most significant aspects of his papacy, was his commitment to “synodality”. While there’s still confusion over what synodality actually means, and its potential for political distortion, it is above all a way of listening and discerning through openness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

It involves hierarchy and lay people transparently and honestly discerning together, in service of the mission of the church. Synodality is as much about the process as the goal. This makes sense as Pope Francis was a Jesuit, an order focused on spreading Catholicism through spiritual formation and discernment.

Drawing on his rich Jesuit spirituality, Francis introduced a way of conversation centred on listening to the Holy Spirit and others, while seeking to cultivate friendship and wisdom.

With the conclusion of the second session of the Synod on Synodality in October 2024, it is too soon to assess its results. However, those who have been involved in synodal processes have reported back on their transformative potential.

Archbishop of Brisbane, Mark Coleridge, explained how participating in the 2015 Synod “was an extraordinary experience [and] in some ways an awakening”.

Catholicism in the modern age

Francis’ papacy inspired both great joy and aspirations, as well as boiling anger and rejection. He laid bare the agonising fault lines within the Catholic community and struck at key issues of Catholic identity, triggering debate over what it means to be Catholic in the world today.

He leaves behind a Church that seems more divided than ever, with arguments, uncertainty and many questions rolling in his wake. But he has also provided a way for the Church to become more converted to Jesus’ way of love, through synodality and dialogue.

Francis showed us that holding labels such as “progressive” or “conservative” won’t enable the Church to live out Jesus’ mission of love – a mission he emphasised from the very beginning of his papacy.

Joel Hodge, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, Australian Catholic University and Antonia Pizzey, Postdoctoral Researcher Research Centre for Studies of the Second Vatican Council, Australian Catholic University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Easter 2025

                                                                                               Shutterstock

Easter is the Christian commemorative festival that both acknowledges the crucifiction and death of Jesus Christ (Good Friday) and his resurrection three days later. It is a time of both darkness and light within a single period each year. In 2025, Easter is occuring when the world situation is one of turmoil and semi chaos, some of which is new and other aspects being ongoing conflicts which commenced in previous years. It is a diffcult time across all continents on the planet and portends further negative events through the coming years. Wherever you are, and whatever your faith, may you enjoy strength in the period ahead.

Climate change and the loss of coral reefs

Reality check: coral restoration won’t save the world’s reefs

A coral ‘rope’ nursery in the Maldives. Luca Saponari/University of Milan, CC BY-ND

Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Flinders University; Clelia Mulà, The University of Western Australia, and Giovanni Strona, University of Helsinki

Coral reefs are much more than just a pretty place to visit. They are among the world’s richest ecosystems, hosting about a third of all marine species.

These reefs also directly benefit more than a billion people, providing livelihoods and food security, as well as protection from storms and coastal erosion.

Without coral reefs, the world would be a much poorer place. So when corals die or become damaged, many people try to restore them. But the enormity of the task is growing as the climate keeps warming.

In our new research, we examined the full extent of existing coral restoration projects worldwide. We looked at what drives their success or failure, and how much it would actually cost to restore what’s already been lost. Restoring the reefs we’ve already lost around the world could cost up to A$26 trillion.

Bleached Acropora corals in the Maldives. Davide Seveso/University of Milan

Global losses

Sadly, coral reefs are suffering all over the world. Global warming and marine heatwaves are the main culprits. But overfishing and pollution make matters worse.

When sea temperatures climb above the seasonal average for sustained periods, corals can become bleached. They lose colour as they expel their symbiotic algae when stressed, revealing the white skeleton underneath. Severe bleaching can kill coral.

Coral bleaching and mass coral deaths are now commonplace. Last month, a massive warm-water plume bleached large areas of Ningaloo Reef on Australia’s northwest coast just as large sections of the northern Great Barrier Reef were bleaching on the northeast coast.

Since early 2023, mass coral bleaching has occurred in throughout the tropics and parts of the Indian Ocean.

Over the past 40 years, the extent of coral reefs has halved. As climate change continues, bleaching events and coral deaths will become more common. More than 90% of coral reefs are at risk of long-term degradation by the end of the century.

Dead corals in the Maldives following a bleaching event. Simone Montano/University of Milan

Direct intervention

Coral reef restoration can take many forms, including removing coral-eating species such as parrot fish, transferring coral spawn, or even manipulating the local community of microbes to improve coral survival.

But by far the most common type of restoration is “coral gardening”, where coral fragments grown in nurseries are transplanted back to the reef.

The problem is scale. Coral restoration can only be done successfully at a small scale. Most projects only operate over several hundred or a few thousand square metres. Compare that with nearly 12,000 square km of loss and degradation between 2009 and 2018. Restoration projects come nowhere near the scale needed to offset losses from climate change and other threats.

Conservationists work to garden coral and help preserve these unique life forms.

Sky-high costs

Coral restoration is expensive, ranging from around $10,000 to $226 million per hectare. The wide range reflects the variable costs of different techniques used, ease of access, and cost of labour. For example, coral gardening (coral fragments grown in nurseries transplanted back to the reef) is relatively cheap (median cost $558,000 per hectare) compared with seeding coral larvae (median $830,000 per hectare). Building artificial reefs can cost up to $226 million per hectare.

We estimated it would cost more than $1.6 billion to restore just 10% of degraded coral areas globally. This is using the lowest cost per hectare and assuming all restoration projects are successful.

Even our conservative estimate is four times more than the total investment in coral restoration over the past decade ($410 million).

But it’s reasonable to use the highest cost per hectare, given high failure rates, the need to use several techniques at the same site, and the great expense of working on remote reefs. Restoring 10% of degraded coral areas globally, at $226 million a hectare, would cost more than $26 trillion – almost ten times Australia’s annual GDP.

It is therefore financially impossible to tackle the ongoing loss of coral reefs with restoration, even if local projects can still provide some benefits.

Rope nurseries nurture coral fragments until they’re ready to be planted out. Luca Saponari/University of Milan

Location, location, location

Our research also looked at what drives the choice of restoration sites. We found it depends mostly on how close a reef is to human settlements.

By itself, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But we also found restoration actions were more likely to occur in reefs already degraded by human activity and with fewer coral species.

This means we’re not necessarily targeting sites where restoration is most likely to succeed, or of greatest ecological importance.

Another limitation is coral gardening normally involves only a few coral species – the easiest to rear and transplant. While this can still increase coral cover, it does not restore coral diversity to the extent necessary for healthy, resilient ecosystems.

Measuring ‘success’

Another sad reality is that more than a third of all coral restoration efforts fail. The reasons why can include poor planning, unproven technologies, insufficient monitoring, and subsequent heatwaves.

Unfortunately, there’s no standard way to collect data or report on restoration projects. This makes it difficult – or impossible – to identify conditions leading to success, and reduces the pace of improvement.

Succeed now, fail later

Most coral transplants are monitored for less than 18 months. Even if they survive that period, there’s no guarantee they will last longer. The long-term success rate is unknown.

When we examined the likelihood of extreme heat events immediately following restoration and in coming decades, we found most restored sites had already experienced severe bleaching shortly after restoration. It will be difficult to find locations that will be spared from future global warming.

Sometimes the young coral is bleached before the restoration project is complete. Davide Seveso/University of Milan

No substitute for climate action

Coral restoration has the potential to be a valuable tool in certain circumstances: when it promotes community engagement and addresses local needs. But it is not yet – and might never be – feasible to scale up sufficiently to have meaningful long-term positive effects on coral reef ecosystems.

This reality check should stimulate constructive debate about when and where restoration is worthwhile. Without stemming the pace and magnitude of climate change, we have little power to save coral reefs from massive losses over the coming century and beyond.

Other conservation approaches such as establishing, maintaining and enforcing marine protected areas, and improving water quality, could improve the chance a coral restoration project will work. These efforts could also support local human communities with incentives for conservation.

Reinforcing complementary strategies could therefore bolster ecosystem resilience, extending the reach and success of coral restoration projects.

Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Matthew Flinders Professor of Global Ecology and Node Leader in the ARC Centre of Excellence for Indigenous and Environmental Histories and Futures, Flinders University; Clelia Mulà, PhD student in Marine Ecology, The University of Western Australia, and Giovanni Strona, Doctoral program supervisor, University of Helsinki

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Fake images - real or not ?

 Can you tell the difference between real and fake news photos? Take the quiz to find out

A (real) photo of a protester dressed as Pikachu in Paris on March 29 2025. Remon Haazen / Getty Images

T.J. Thomson, RMIT University

You wouldn’t usually associate Pikachu with protest.

But a figure dressed as the iconic yellow Pokémon joined a protest last week in Turkey to demonstrate against the country’s authoritarian leader.

And then a virtual doppelgänger made the rounds on social media, raising doubt in people’s minds about whether what they were seeing was true. (Just to be clear, the image in the post shown below is very much fake.)

This is the latest in a spate of incidents involving AI-generated (or AI-edited) images that can be made easily and cheaply and that are often posted during breaking news events.

Doctored, decontextualised or synthetic media can cause confusion, sow doubt, and contribute to political polarisation. The people who make or share these media often benefit financially or politically from spreading false or misleading claims.

How would you go at telling fact from fiction in these cases? Have a go with this quiz and learn more about some of AI’s (potential) giveaways and how to stay safer online.

---

---

How’d you go?

As this exercise might have revealed, we can’t always spot AI-generated or AI-edited images with just our eyes. Doing so will also become harder as AI tools become more advanced.

Dealing with visual deception

AI-powered tools exist to try to detect AI content, but these have mixed results.

Running suspect images through a search engine to see where else they have been published – and when – can be a helpful strategy. But this relies on there being an original “unedited” version published somewhere online.

Perhaps the best strategy is something called “lateral reading”. It means getting off the page or platform and seeing what trusted sources say about a claim.

Ultimately, we don’t have time to fact-check every claim we come across each day. That’s why it’s important to have access to trustworthy news sources that have a track record of getting it right. This is even more important as the volume of AI “slop” increases.

T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Goodbye to the Gaia telescope

The best space telescope you never heard of just shut down

ESA / Gaia / DPAC, CC BY-SA

Laura Nicole Driessen, University of Sydney

On Thursday 27 March, the European Space Agency (ESA) sent its last messages to the Gaia Spacecraft. They told Gaia to shut down its communication systems and central computer and said goodbye to this amazing space telescope.

Gaia has been the most successful ESA space mission ever, so why did they turn Gaia off? What did Gaia achieve? And perhaps most importantly, why was it my favourite space telescope?

Running on empty

Gaia was retired for a simple reason: after more than 11 years in space, it ran out of the cold gas propellant it needed to keep scanning the sky.

The telescope did its last observation on 15 January 2025. The ESA team then performed testing for a few weeks, before telling Gaia to leave its home at a point in space called L2 and start orbiting the Sun away from Earth.

L2 is one of five “Lagrangian points” around Earth and the Sun where gravitational conditions make for a nice, stable orbit. L2 is located 1.5 million kilometres from Earth on the “dark side”, opposite the Sun.

L2 is a highly prized location because it’s a stable spot to orbit, it’s close enough to Earth for easy communication, and spacecraft can use the Sun behind them for solar power while looking away from the Sun out into space.

It’s also too far away from Earth to send anyone on a repair mission, so once your spacecraft gets there it’s on its own.

Keeping L2 clear

L2 currently hosts the James Webb Space Telescope (operated by the USA, Europe and Canada), the European Euclid mission, the Chinese Chang’e 6 orbiter and the joint Russian-German Spektr-RG observatory. Since L2 is such a key location for space missions, it’s essential to keep it clear of debris and retired spacecraft.

A final status update from Gaia. ESA, CC BY-SA

Gaia used its thrusters for the last time to push itself away from L2, and is now drifting around the Sun in a “retirement orbit” where it won’t get in anybody’s way.

As part of the retirement process, the Gaia team wrote farewell messages into the craft’s software and sent it the names of around 1,500 people who worked on Gaia over the years.

What is Gaia?

Gaia looks a bit like a spinning top hat in space. Its main mission was to produce a detailed, three-dimensional map of our galaxy, the Milky Way.

To do this, it measured the precise positions and motions of 1.46 billion objects in space. Gaia also measured brightnesses and variability and those data were used to provide temperatures, gravitational parameters, stellar types and more for millions of stars. One of the key pieces of information Gaia provided was the distance to millions of stars.

A cosmic measuring tape

I’m a radio astronomer, which means I use radio telescopes here on Earth to explore the Universe. Radio light is the longest wavelength of light, invisible to human eyes, and I use it to investigate magnetic stars.

But even though I’m a radio astronomer and Gaia was an optical telescope, looking at the same wavelengths of light our eyes can see, I use Gaia data almost every single day.

I used it today to find out how far away, how bright, and how fast a star was. Before Gaia, I would probably never have known how far away that star was.

This is essential for figuring out how bright the stars I study really are, which helps me understand the physics of what’s happening in and around them.

A huge success

Gaia has contributed to thousands of articles in astronomy journals. Papers released by the Gaia collaboration have been cited well over 20,000 times in total.

Gaia has produced too many science results to share here. To take just one example, Gaia improved our understanding of the structure of our own galaxy by showing that it has multiple spiral arms that are less sharply defined than we previously thought.

Not really the end for Gaia

It’s difficult to express how revolutionary Gaia has been for astronomy, but we can let the numbers speak for themselves. Around five astronomy journal articles are published every day that use Gaia data, making Gaia the most successful ESA mission ever. And that won’t come to a complete stop when Gaia retires.

The Gaia collaboration has published three data releases so far. This is where the collaboration performs the processing and checks on the data, adds some important analysis and releases all of that in one big hit.

And luckily, there are two more big data releases with even more information to come. The fourth data release is expected in mid to late 2026. The fifth and final data release, containing all of the Gaia data from the whole mission, will come out sometime in the 2030s.

This article is my own small tribute to a telescope that changed astronomy as we know it. So I will end by saying a huge thank you to everyone who has ever worked on this amazing space mission, whether it was engineering and operations, turning the data into the amazing resource it is, or any of the other many jobs that make a mission successful. And thank you to those who continue to work on the data as we speak.

Finally, thank you to my favourite space telescope. Goodbye, Gaia, I’ll miss you.

Laura Nicole Driessen, Postdoctoral Researcher in Radio Astronomy, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.