This is your brain on Britney

Wendy, Stephanie and Marie, three high school psychology students, have voiced over Britney’s Baby One More Time video with lyrics about the occipital lobe.

It is, dare I say, a work of genius (and very funny to boot).

And if you’re interested in reading a study on the cognitive neuroscience of Britney’s brain, one was recently published by the Mackledoodle Institute of Radioscopy.

The findings are, er… unique.

Link to Britney Occipital Lobe video on YouTube.
Link to article ‘A Default mode of the brain function of Britney Spears’.

The light and dark of attraction in SciAmMind

A new edition of Scientific American Mind has been published and, as is customary, two of their feature articles are online, each on a different end of the human attraction spectrum.

The first looks at online dating and how the psychology of relationships is altered by perusing your potential partners on a website.

One of the most significant differences stems from how the internet allows people to have quite a fine-grained control over how they present themselves online – even to the point where being ‘economical with the truth’ is a fairly standard tactic.

For men, the major areas of deception are educational level, income, height, age and marital status; at least 13 percent of online male suitors are thought to be married. For women, the major areas of deception are weight, physical appearance and age. All of the relevant research shows the importance of physical appearance for both sexes, and online daters interpret the absence of photos negatively. According to one recent survey, men’s profiles without photos draw one fourth the response of those with photos, and women’s profiles without photos draw only one sixth the response of those with photos.

The second article examines the psychology and treatment of paedophilia – sexual attraction to children.

Often paedophiles are described as ‘evil’ by the media, as if this was an explanation rather than a label that describes the gravity of their acts.

Knowing how best to protect children, through both the legal and medical system, need a deeper understanding. The SciAmMind article looks both at current theories and how they’re applied in practice.

Link to article on online dating.
Link to article on paedophilia.

The science of happiness

The Harvard Magazine has an in-depth article on the psychology of happiness and personal growth.

Whereas this was previously the domain of pop psychology and self-help books, the development of ‘positive psychology’ in the last decade has attracted serious researchers determined to understand how the mind and brain support positive attributes and emotions.

We covered this topic before when The New York Times published a very well researched article on the field.

Positive psychology was initially treated with scepticism but now seems to be largely in the mainstream of psychology research and is gathering significant public attention.

Link to ‘The Science of Happiness’ from Harvard Magazine.
Link to NYT article ‘Happiness 101’.

2007-02-16 Spike activity

Quick links from the past week in mind and brain news:

Could it be magic? Extreme apparent mental causation. Mixing Memory investigates the psychology of magical thinking.

The presence of genes for the immune system can go a little way to predicting how likely couples are to remain faithful.

Corpus Callosum on a study showing that psychotherapy can reduce the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs.

PsyBlog examines the psychology of self-disclosure in the formation of relationships.

A computer system based on the cognitive science of perception can make sense of street scenes. Full paper is online as a pdf.

A fifteen-minute exercise may help overcome a lifetime of racial stereotyping. Cognitive Daily reports on a surprising study.

Researchers have been able to use a brain scan to read people’s intentions, albeit in very restricted circumstances.

Trailer for documentary about suicides from the Golden Gate Bridge is online.

Developing Intelligence has a fantastic introduction to the neuroscience of dopamine.

Chronic Brian damage

Another in the occasional series of PubMed typos. This time from the Scandanavian Journal of Social Medicine.

The last line accidentally describes the effect of exposure to solvents on one unfortunate individual:

A cohort study of disability pension and death among painters with special regard to disabling presenile dementia as an occupational disease.

Scand J Soc Med Suppl. 1980;16:34-43.

Mikkelsen S.

In the last decade several investigations have demonstrated an association between impaired cerebral function in employed workers and occupational exposure to organic solvents. Many case-histories and two case-referent studies indicate, that such an impairment might develop into disabling irreversible neuropsychiatric disease. The main purpose of this study was to further investigate the risk of chronic brain damage in solvent exposed workers. A cohort of 2601 male painters and 1790 male bricklayers from the Copenhagen area was identified retrospectively and followed Jan. 1,71-Dec. 31,75. For this period the incidence of disability pensioning and mortality was examined for the two occupational groups and for a “‘normal” population of Copenhagen men. Using bricklayers and Copenhagen men as referents, the painters had a relative risk of approximately 3.5 of being awarded a disability pension due to a state of being awarded a disability pension due to a state of cryptogenic presenile dementia. When indications of alcohol abuse, cerebral concussions or other etiologic factors were present, the relative risk was approximately 2. No excess risk was found for neuropsychiatric diseases other than presenile dementia. Other differences between the groups were found, but they were inconsistent and difficult to interpret. In the light of the findings of this and other studies, it seems likely, that chronic brian damage may result from industrial exposure to organic solvents.

Link to PubMed entry.

Faces, faces everywhere

The New York Times has a brief article on why we have a tendency to see faces in chaotic or almost random visual scenes.

The tendency to see meaning in essentially random data is variously known as apophenia or pareidolia, and statistically would be known as a Type I error – a false positive.

Although it is controversial as to whether it is specifically dedicated to recognising faces, an area of the brain known as the fusiform gyrus is certainly heavily involved in perceiving faces.

The fact that this area is so specialised for faces might lead us to detect faces even when they are only suggested by a few dots, the position of clouds or the markings on just about anything.

“The information faces convey is so rich ‚Äî not just regarding another person’s identity, but also their mental state, health and other factors,” he said. “It’s extremely beneficial for the brain to become good at the task of face recognition and not to be very strict in its inclusion criteria. The cost of missing a face is higher than the cost of declaring a nonface to be a face.”

There’s a great web page with pictures of ‘cloud faces‘ if you want to see how spectacular some of these effects can be.

Link to NYT article ‘Faces, faces everywhere’.

Cardiac arrest

Quick links from this year’s Valentine’s psychology stories:

Early social experiences can influence adult behavior in romantic relationships. More on the same from the San Francisco Chronicle.

Love activates the same brain areas as cocaine, reports the The New York Sun. It also activates the same brain areas as chess, but apparently that isn’t worthy of a mention.

Smells like man. A component of male sweat can boost arousal in heterosexual women.

Thinking Meat (excuse the innuendo) has a round up a several studies on love published in the APA’s monthly journal. My favourite is an article that looks at the psychology of how romantic love and sexual desire are related.

Sex and relationship psychologist Dr Petra Boyton suggests ways to celebrate.

Psychologist explains the neurochemistry behind romance. Really, this is all there is to this news story. No event, purely a press release.

The award for the most tenuously linked news story: neuroscience of tasting sweetness “fueled [sic] by some powerful biology”.

Relationship studies are popular with university researchers. Is this news?

A transhumanist dictionary

George Dvorsky has published a guide to the terms and buzzwords of transhumanism – an optimistic movement that seeks to apply current and future scientific discoveries to extending human experience and abilities.

Transhumanists are interested in neuroscience as a way of improving on the natural human range, either through optimising the biological systems already present or extending them with technological interfaces.

They are variously treated with excitement, suspicion and amusement by mainstream scientists who tend to be conservative by nature.

However, the movement has attracted some leading lights in the sciences who are not put off by the sometimes science-fiction focus of the transhuman mission.

You may see lots of references to the Singularity, a key concept in transhumanist thought.

It’s exact meaning differs depending on the context, but one of the most influential definitions is from Ray Kurzweil who uses it to describe the notional point when computers will overtake the abilities of the human brain.

Needless to say, this puts the back up of many philosophers and cognitive scientists who believe that computers will never be able to fully emulate human intelligence or consciousness.

There’s plenty more of these thorny issues touched on by Dvorsky’s dictionary, so have a look through if you want to know what the dreamers of neuroscience are thinking about.

Link to ‘Must-know terms for the 21st Century intellectual: Redux’.

Mad love

Highlighting the striking parallels between our least understood and most exalted states of mind, Nietzsche commented that “there is always some madness in love”.

Perhaps the reason love has such a good reputation when compared to other forms of madness, is its effect on mood.

Euphoria, arousal, elation, talkativeness and flights of fancy can fill the mind in the most pleasurable way and it’s interesting that these are also core symptoms of mania – one end of the manic-depressive spectrum.

The defining feature of madness is delusion, however, where the affected person holds a fixed, unrealistic belief despite persuasive contrary evidence.

People in love are notorious for their unusual beliefs and, indeed, research has shown that we tend to hold unlikely and overly positive beliefs about our lovers.

Romance doesn’t even need a willing partner in some cases, as people who are diagnosed with de Clerambault’s syndrome hold the delusional belief that another person is in love with them, even if they’ve never met.

The original subject of de Clerambault’s seminal case study was a 53 year old woman who believed that King George V was in love with her and signalled his desires by moving the curtains of Buckingham Palace.

It seems madness and love are, in many ways, soul mates, and perhaps we should be grateful for their shared history.

Indeed, madness is at its most spectacular when shared, and the prospect of falling sanely in love with someone surely seems to miss the point.

The power of praise

There’s a fascinating article in The New York Magazine about the dramatic effects of different types of praise on a child’s success when tackling new challenges.

A team of researchers led by Prof Carole Dweck asked children to complete a series of short tests, and randomly divided into groups. Each child was given a single line of praise.

One group was praised for their intelligence (“You must be smart at this”), while the others were praised for their effort (“You must have worked really hard”). This simple difference had a startling effect.

Children who were praised for their effort were more likely to choose a harder test when given a choice, were less likely to become disheartened when given a test they were guaranteed to fail, and when finally given the original tests again, their marks improved.

In contrast, the children praised for their intelligence tended to choose an easier test if asked, were distressed by failure, and actually had worse marks after re-taking the original tests.

Dweck had suspected that praise could backfire, but even she was surprised by the magnitude of the effect. “Emphasizing effort gives a child a variable that they can control,” she explains. “They come to see themselves as in control of their success. Emphasizing natural intelligence takes it out of the child’s control, and it provides no good recipe for responding to a failure.”

In follow-up interviews, Dweck discovered that those who think that innate intelligence is the key to success begin to discount the importance of effort. I am smart, the kids’ reasoning goes; I don’t need to put out effort. Expending effort becomes stigmatized‚Äîit’s public proof that you can’t cut it on your natural gifts.

Repeating her experiments, Dweck found this effect of praise on performance held true for students of every socioeconomic class. It hit both boys and girls—the very brightest girls especially (they collapsed the most following failure).

The article is fascinating, although it seems the writer has somewhat overused the phrase ‘the inverse power of praise’ and might lead some people to think that praise itself has an ‘inverse effect’.

Praising children is incredibly important. Countless psychological studies have shown that excessive critical comments have a damaging effect on mental health.

This research just suggests that in terms of encouraging children to tackle challenges effectively, praising their effort seems more effective than praising their intelligence.

The article is a thorough look at the issues raised by this research, and how it is being applied in education.

Link to The New York Magazine article.

Prescribe two, get one free

A new psychiatric journal called Clinical Schizophrenia is launching in April that will have a novel distribution policy.

If you’re in the top 70% of antipsychotic drug prescribers in America, you’ll get your copy free.

The journal is intending to publish prestigious studies on the treatment of schizophrenia.

So it not only acts as an incentive to prescribe drugs to patients, it also guarantees that the advertisers (i.e. drug companies) will reach the doctors spending the most money on medication.

Someone got a promotion for that idea I’m sure.

Stephen Pinker on The Colbert Report

Cognitive scientist Steven Pinker was a guest on the comedy show The Colbert Report where he talks about the brain, language and having bad hair days.

Pure Pedantry has embedded video of the interview if you want to catch the quickfire questions and cognitive one-liners.

For those not familiar with the format of the show, it is hosted by spoof conservative talk show host Stephen Colbert who often seems hilariously but unnervingly realistic.

Beauty and the average girl

Flickr user Pierre Tourigny has created a series of composite images from popular portrait rating website Hot or Not? that nicely demonstrates our bias for perceiving average faces as beautiful.

He’s made average images from a series of female faces but divided them up into the scoring categories, so there’s an average of faces rated 5 to 5.4, 5.5 to 5.9 and so on.

The average image of the highest rated faces, and an average of faces from all rating categories are shown on the left, although the whole range is on Tourigny’s Flickr page.

If you do have a look at the full series, you’ll notice that the overall average face seems more attractive than the composite face created from images rated in the average range (5-5.4).

Previously on Mind Hacks, we reported on research that suggested that faces created from the average of many others possibly seem more beautiful because they’re easier for the brain to process.

This may be because our brain does a similar averaging process to create a ‘face template’ which we use during face recognition.

Faces that deviate least from this template are easier to match and, therefore, tend to be seen as more attractive.

This, of course, is not the complete story as cultural ideas of what is considered beautiful and perhaps even specific ways in which a face could differ from the ‘template’ might also contribute to our subjective perception of beauty.

Link to Pierre Tourigny’s ‘Average Face Scale’.
Link to previous post on facial attractiveness perception on Mind Hacks.

Our memory is our coherence

“You have to begin to lose your memory, if only in bits and pieces, to realize that memory is what makes our lives. Life without memory is no life at all, just as an intelligence without the possibility of expression is not really an intelligence. Our memory is our coherence, our reason, our feeling, even our action. Without it, we are nothing.”

The legendary surrealist Spanish filmmaker Luis Buñuel on the existential importance of memory. Thanks Katerina!

Neurophilosophers in The New Yorker

The Feb 12th edition of The New Yorker has an extensive article on neurophilosophers Paul and Patricia Churchland.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like the article is available online, even to subscribers, but is worth checking out if you catch a copy in the library or on news stands as it’s an in-depth look into their work and theories.

The Churchlands are known for a radical approach to philosophy of mind called eliminative materialism that argues that we should reject the majority of psychological concepts we talk about in everyday language.

Everyday theories of the mind are known as folk psychology and includes concepts such as belief and intention.

They argue that neuroscience will not eventually produce better specified theories of (for example) belief, but that like the four humours theory of medicine, the concept of belief will eventually be rejected wholesale as science advances and that the concept as it currently stands is little more than a linguistic fiction.

Link to excellent Wikipedia article on eliminative materialism.