S2E9: Navigating Mental Health from the Frontlines with Dr. Richard Lopez

Social neuroscientist Dr. Richard Lopez joins Jeff Johnston on Living Undeterred to unpack how our brains make us social—and why that matters for Gen Z navigating algorithm-driven feeds, stress, and loneliness. Lopez explains cognitive reappraisal (reframing), gratitude practices, and values-based living as practical tools that rewire attention toward purpose. He shares why AI journaling—with strong guardrails—can act like a reflective partner between therapy sessions, helping students translate insights into offline action. The conversation previews a WPI first-year pilot using Brightn to anchor students in their values and track well-being over time. Takeaways: set boundaries with negativity, journal to break rumination loops, and use tech to get you back into real life—not to keep you scrolling.

Key Takeaways

• Brains are built for connection. Social neuroscience studies how we read others, regulate emotion, and form purpose—with tools like fMRI revealing what supports healthier choices.
  
• Algorithms hook attention; values set direction. If apps don’t point you back to what matters, they’ll pull you into outrage and comparison. Tech should center you, then send you offline.
  
• Reframing isn’t spin—it’s skill. Cognitive reappraisal and gratitude can interrupt negativity bias (great for “bad days” that are really just harder ones).
  
• Journaling breaks rumination. Writing externalizes looping thoughts; AI journaling can mirror back patterns and nudge small actions—like reaching out to a friend. Guardrails matter.
  
• Boundaries with negativity. You can’t “fix” someone mid-conversation. Listen, hold your ground, then plan next steps and limits.
  
• Pilot at WPI. First-years will use Brightn to clarify values (ACT-informed), journal, and track well-being—looking for trends, not perfection.

Listen to the full episode here:

Q: In plain English, what is social neuroscience—and why should a student or parent care?

‍
A: Social neuroscience looks at how the brain supports the very things that make us human: understanding our emotions, reading other people, managing stress, and building purpose. It’s not a distant lab thing—it explains everyday moments like why a class presentation feels terrifying, why group chats can boost or tank your mood, or why a sincere “thank you” from a teacher sticks in your memory. When we map these patterns, we learn practical levers—sleep, attention, reframing, relationships—that change how we feel and function in real life.

Q: Are young people really “more anxious now,” or are we just talking about it more?

‍
A: Both. We’re finally naming and normalizing mental health, which is great. But the attention economy has also shifted the baseline. Teens and young adults are swimming in feeds optimized for engagement, not well-being. That means more novelty, outrage, and comparison in a shorter time window. The optimistic part: the brain is adaptable. With simple practices—like values-based journaling and small daily actions—we can redirect attention toward what actually matters to you, not what the algorithm tells you should matter.

Q: You often mention “negativity bias.” What is it, and how do we work with it?

‍
A: Negativity bias is the brain’s default to remember and prioritize threats. It’s a great survival feature when the threat is a tiger; it’s less helpful when the “threat” is a so-so grade or a snarky comment. We don’t eliminate negativity bias; we balance it. Two tools help: (1) Cognitive reappraisal—reframing the story you’re telling yourself, and (2) Gratitude practices—calling attention to what’s going right. Over time, these build a reflex to ask, “What else could be true here?” rather than jumping straight to catastrophe.

Q: What does cognitive reappraisal look like in the moment?

‍
A: Imagine you bombed a practice exam. The “old story” is, “I’m not cut out for this.” Reappraisal isn’t spin—it’s precision. Try: “My study plan wasn’t aligned with the question types. I can adapt: two 25-minute drills a day on weak areas, then a retake next Friday.” Same event, different meaning. The story shifts from identity (“I’m a failure”) to process (“Here’s my next step”). The brain learns to associate challenge with adjustment, not shame.

Q: Okay, and what about gratitude—how do we make it not cheesy?

‍
A: Keep it concrete and brief. Write one sentence at night: “Today I appreciated ___ because ___.” Tie it to a behavior or value: “Sam shared their notes; that’s generosity and teamwork.” If you want a booster, send a 60-second voice note to the person you’re grateful for. You’ll get two wins: their day improves, and your brain encodes the relationship as a resource you can draw on when things get hard.

Q: Boundaries with negativity: how do you protect your energy without abandoning people?

‍
A: Separate presence from problem-solving. In the moment, you can say, “I’m here to listen. I might not have answers right now.” Afterward, define your role and limits: “I can check in twice a week and help you find resources, but I can’t text all night.” Boundaries aren’t rejection; they’re structure. If you enable a spiral, you both suffer. If you offer steady presence plus clear limits, people often regulate faster—and the relationship gets healthier.

Q: How does journaling actually interrupt rumination?

‍
A: Rumination is a loop: same thoughts, slightly different costumes. Journaling forces externalization—the thought leaves your head and lands on paper (or an app), where you can examine it. Good prompts nudge you from “what went wrong” into pattern + plan: “When this happens, what’s the trigger? What value matters here? What’s one next step?” That tiny shift—from replaying to re-planning—is where stress starts to drop.

Q: Where does AI journaling fit—especially for students who aren’t in therapy?

‍
A: It’s not a replacement for therapy, and it shouldn’t pretend to be. Think of AI journaling as a reflective partner between sessions or for people who don’t have access. It mirrors patterns you might miss (“Every Sunday night your stress spikes”), helps you name values, and translates reflection into small, doable actions. Guardrails matter: privacy by design, clear escalation for crisis language, and prompts that point you back to real life, not deeper into the screen.

Q: What kinds of prompts actually move people from insight to action?

‍
A: I like a three-step flow:

1. Name the value: “Which value did I want to live today—growth, kindness, integrity?”
2. Spot the moment: “Where did I meet or miss that value?”
3. Decide one action: “Tomorrow, a 5-minute behavior that matches the value—text a friend, block 25 minutes, draft the email.”
   The action must be tiny and time-boxed. The brain rewards completion, not ambition.

Q: You mentioned a first-year pilot at WPI. What’s the design goal?

‍
A: The goal is to help students “land” in college with values clarity, consistent reflection, and a simple behavior loop. Practically: short check-ins, value tagging, and weekly micro-commitments. We look for trends (not perfection): Is sleep stabilizing? Are social micro-actions increasing? Do stress spikes shorten? We’re not grading feelings—we’re helping students notice patterns earlier and course-correct sooner.

Q: What are you measuring—and how do you keep it ethical?

‍
A: We focus on aggregate patterns and student-owned data. Measures include completion rates for brief check-ins, self-reported stress/energy, sleep consistency, and frequency of values-aligned actions. Participation is opt-in; students can export or delete their data, and we avoid invasive metrics. Any insights we share are de-identified and used to improve student supports—not to police them.

Q: What do students actually feel in weeks 1–6 if this works?

‍
A: Less whiplash. Early college is noisy—new schedules, new friends, new expectations. With a light daily structure, students typically report fewer “lost days,” faster recovery from setbacks, and better alignment between time and what they care about. That doesn’t mean zero bad days; it means the bad days become informative, not defining.

Q: Tips for parents and educators who want to help without hovering?

‍
A: Ask process questions, not outcome questions. Instead of “How was the test?”, try “What was your plan the day before?” or “What 10-minute step helped the most?” Celebrate systems students build—sleep routines, study blocks, friend check-ins—because systems beat motivation on low-energy days. And model your own boundaries and recovery; students copy what we do, not what we say.

Q: For students who feel stuck right now—what’s a 7-day reset?
‍

• Day 1: Write your top 3 values and one 5-minute action for each.
• Days 2–6: Nightly 3-line journal: (1) Today’s mood 1–5, (2) One value you lived, (3) One tiny action for tomorrow.
• Every other day: Reframe a sticky thought with “What else could be true?”
• Day 7: Send one gratitude note.
  If you miss a day, skip the guilt and pick up where you are. The win is consistency over intensity.

Q: If you could give Gen Z one rule for tech and mental health, what would it be?

‍
A: “Use tech to center, then exit.” Let the tool help you clarify values, set one action, and—this is key—put the phone down and go do the action. Tech should be the launchpad, not the destination.

‍