More on the Dalai Lama’s Vision for Our World

December 16, 2017

That is from the book written for the Dalai Lama by Daniel Goleman, “A FORCE FOR GOOD: The Dalai Lama’s Vision for Our World.” Five healthy memory blog posts have already been written. Several more months could be spent on posts summarizing more wisdom from the book. Instead chapter titles and headings from the remainder of the book will be written here in the hope that they will persuade to you read the book on your own.

The first two parts, that have been reviewed are titled Part One: A World Citizen and Part Two: Looking Inward.

Part Three is titled Looking outward
Representative titles and headings follow;
Compassion Takes Action
Constructive Anger
The Strength of Altruism
The Empathy Gap
Structural Unfairness
Impeccability
Economics as if People Mattered
Rethinking Economics
The Secret of Happiness
Action for Happiness
Doing Good While Doing Well
Care for Those in Need
Helping People Help Themselves
Self-Mastery
Women as Leaders
Barefoot College
Heal the Earth
Radical Transparency
Trade-offs, Innovations—and Education
Rethinking Every Thing
How Did That Get Here?
A Century of Dialogue
Beyond Us and Them
The Power of Truth
Harmony Among Religions
Toward a Century of Dialogue
Put-Ups and Win-Wins
Educate the Heart
Mind Training
Reinventing Education
Social and Emotional Learning
A Call to Care
Part Four is titled Looking Back, Looking Ahead
The Long View
Are Things Getting Better or Worse?
The Stories We Tell Ourselves
Thinking in New Ways
A Theory of Change
Plant the Seeds for a Better World
Act Now
Take It to Scale
The Human Connection
Think, Plan, Act

Advertisements

Center for Investigating Healthy Minds

December 15, 2017

With the Dalai Lama’s encouragement Richard Davidson founded the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds (CIHM). Part of its mission is to study the best routes to compassion. A kindness curriculum is being tested at a preschool there. Preschoolers recite together a kindness pledge: “May all I think, say, or do not hurt anyone and help everyone.”

If the children do something kind for someone, they earn a “seed of kindness” planted on a big poster of a “kindness garden.”

They have a practice they call “belly buddies.” Children put a favorite stuffed animal on their bellies, then lie down and quiet themselves by paying full attention to the buddy rising and falling as they breathe in and out. The kindness curriculum includes a variety of methods like these, all aimed at helping the preschoolers learn to be more calm and quiet. This exercise should also prepare the children for the meditations they will do when they are older.

These preschoolers, four- and five-year-olds, are at the cusp of a development phase when kids are known to become more selfish, self-focused, and egocentric. In a test of the kindness program’s effects, the preschoolers were given a challenge after a semester.

Each child received some “cool” stickers (kids at this age are passionate about stickers) and was asked to allot the stickers to several envelopes: one with their own picture on it, one with a picture of their best fiend, the third with a child they did not know, and the fourth with a sick child.

Over the semester, a comparison group of preschoolers who did not participate in the program became more selfish in their sticker allotments—but not the kids in the kindness curriculum. So this usual trend in five-year-olds toward selfishness can be offset. Moreover, this shift toward a warmer heart is not just for children.

https://centerhealthyminds.org/about/founder-richard-davidson

The website for this center is provided above. It is certainly worth checking out.

Partnering with Science

December 14, 2017

The title of this post is identical to a chapter in “A FORCE FOR GOOD: The Dalai Lama’s Vision for our World” has been written for the Dalai Lama by Daniel Goleman. The Dalai Lama sees science as but one way of grasping reality, limited by its methodologies and assumptions, like another way of knowing. The Dalai Lama said, “Scientists themselves have emotions that create problems. If we get helpful finding from science about how to create greater well-being and lessen destructive emotions, it’s more convincing and it will also help the scientists.

When Goleman was a pre-doctoral traveling fellow in South Asia, he studied a fifth-century text that provided a sampling of “ancient Indian psychology.” He was amazed at the precision with which this text delineated specific methods to shift our emotional and mental states (not to mention achieving transcendental states, which even today are largely off psychology’s map in the West.) So it is not only the Buddhist religion that offers relevant practices for western psychology, but eastern psychology itself has valuable science for the west.

The Dalai Lama has met many distinguished scientists on his visits to the West, and there have been many western scientists who have traveled to India to meet the Dalai Lama.

When Kiley Hamlin, a psychologist at the University of British Columbia was showing the Dalai Lama a video of a three-month-old preferring a nicer triangle (the triangle was shown as being nicer in the video) to the mean square (which was shown as being a meanie in the video). She concluded, “The very young already like goodness and enjoy being helpful and compassionate.”

Although pleased the Dalai Lama did not take this presentation uncritically. The Dalai Lama responded, “Thinking in terms of statistics, you’ve shown only one child. That is the average response?”

Hamlin reassured him that this test had been replicated with hundreds of children and in cultures around the world.

The Dalai Lama nodded in approval—but still queried, “And was their economic level taken into account?

Hamlin confirmed that they had found the same in children from poorer families and from wealthy ones.

In addition to his travels to meet scientists in the west, regular conferences are held at the Dalai Lama’s residence in India where scientists present their research to the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama says that he’s collecting “ammunition,” findings to support his message in his public talks—and with the press.

The Dalai Lama’s Approach to Religion

December 13, 2017

To be sure, the Dalai Lama’s understanding of the power of compassion comes from his deep spiritual reflections of human suffering and relief from that suffering. However, as a world leader, the Dalai Lama puts aside religion, ideology, or any faith-based belief system in seeking a foundation for this compassionate ethic. He notes that, for centuries, religion provided an ethical base—but with the spin-off of philosophy from theology, postmodernism, and the “death of God.” many people have been left with no absolute foundation for ethics. Moreover, so often the talk about ethics polarizes people who get hijacked by extreme voices, particularly when the discussion revolves around religious belief.

Those who cause the troubles we hear about in the daily news all too often invoke as justification one or another religion—whether Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, or any other. The Dalai Lama says, “then there are those narrow-minded believers who say all creatures are the same but emphasize their own faith, forgetting the larger perspective.”

He observes that “their actions show that ‘deep inside’ they do not take their own religion’s moral values seriously and so distort or carefully select some textual sources while ignoring others, to serve their own needs. If we lack basic conviction in the value of compassion, then the effect of religion will be quite limited.”

Religions have had thousands of years to promote ethics—and have often failed, he says. Besides, while selflessness and kindness are ideals found in most faith-based teachings, these virtues also exist in nonreligious ethical systems. He continues”there are countless people in the world who are concerned for all humanity and yet who do not have religion. I think of all the doctors and aid workers volunteering in such places as Darfur or Haiti or wherever there is conflict of natural disaster. Some of them may be people of faith, but many are not. Their concern is not for this group or that group but simply for human beings. What drives them is genuine compassion—the determination to alleviate the suffering of others.”

He seeks a morality of compassion that all agree upon: “My concern is the seven billion human beings alive now, including one billion nonbelievers.”

A Force for Good

December 12, 2017

The Dalai Lama envisions a force for good. That force begins by countering the energies within the human mind that drive our negativity. To change the future and not repeat the past, The Dalai Lama tells us, we need need to transform our own minds—weaken the pull of our destructive emotions to strengthen our better natures.

Absent that inner shift, we remain vulnerable to knee-jerk reactions like rage, frustration, and hopelessness. These only lead us to the same old forlorn paths.

With a positive inner shift, we can more naturally embody concern for others—and so act with compassion, the core of moral responsibility. The Dalai Lama says that this prepares us to enact a larger mission with new clarity, calm, and caring. We can tackle intractable problems, like corrupt decision-makers and tuned out elites, greed and self-interest as giving motives, the indifference of the powerful to the powerless.

By beginning this social revolution inside our own minds, the Dalai Lama’s vision aims to avoid the blind alleys of past movements for the better. He cites the message of George Orwell’s cautionary parable “Animal Farm:” how greed and lust for power corrupted the “utopias” which were supposed to overthrow despots and help everyone equally, but in the end re-created the power imbalances and injustices of the very past they were supposed to have eradicated.

The Dalai Lama sees that the seeds we plant today can change the course of our shared tomorrow. Some may bring immediate fruits others may only be harvested by generations yet to come. But our united efforts, if based on this inner shift, can make an enormous difference.

The life journey that led the Dalai Lama to this vision has followed a complex course, but we can pick up the final trajectory to this book from the moment he attained a sustained global spotlight.

That global spotlight began when the Dalai Lama earned the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989. He was a new breed of celebrity. He was neither thrilled by fame and money nor overly eager for exposure in the world press. His very being seems to tell us you are not the center of the universe—relax your anxieties, drop your self-obsession, and dial down those me-first ambitions so you can think about others too. He immediately gave away the cash award that goes with the Nobel Prize. His main concern was who would be the most worthy recipients.

He refuses to be sanctimonious about himself and laughs at his own foibles. He flavors compassion with joy, not dour and empty platitudes.

Goleman notes that these traits are no doubt grounded in the study and practices the Dalai Lama has immersed himself in since childhood and and still devotes himself to for five hours each day (four in the morning and another hour at night). “His self-discipline in cultivating qualities like an investigative curiosity, equanimity, and compassion undergird a unique hierarchy of values that gives the Daily Lama the radically different perspective on the world from which his vision flows.”

The Dalai Lama’s Vision for Our World

December 11, 2017

Previous posts on the Dalai Lama have focused primarily on the benefits of different types of mindfulness and meditation. Their focus has been primarily on science. “A FORCE FOR GOOD: The Dalai Lama’s Vision for our World” has been written for the Dalai Lama by Daniel Goleman. It outlines the Dalai Lama’s ideas on how to improve this world. This vision is worthy of your attention and the following posts will try to extract his ideas within the limitations of blog posts. You are strongly encouraged to read the book itself. There is also a website associated with this book,
http://joinaforce4good.org/learn. It is certainly worthy of repeated visits.

The following is taken from the Introduction to the book, which is written by the Dalai Lama:
“As a human being I acknowledge that my well-being depends on others and caring for others’ well-being is a moral responsibility I take seriously. It’s unrealistic to think that the future of humanity can be achieved on the basis of prayer or good wishes alone; what we need is to take action. Therefore, my first commitment is to contribute to human happiness as best I can. I am also a Buddhist monk, and according to my experience, all religious traditions have the potential to convey the message of love and compassion. So my second commitment is to foster harmony and friendly relations between them. Thirdly, I am a Tibetan, and although I have retired from political responsibility, I remain concerned to do what I can to help the Tibetan people, and to preserve our Buddhist culture and the natural environment of Tibet—-both of which are under threat of destruction.

The goal of happier human beings living together and supporting each other more fully in a more peaceful world is, I believe, something we can achieve. But we have to look at it taking a broad view and a long-term perspective. Change in ourselves and in the world in which we live may not take place in a hurry; it will take time. But if we don’t make the effort nothing will happen at all. The most important thing I hope readers will come to understand is that change will not take place because of decisions taken by governments or at the UN. Real change will take place when individuals transform themselves sided by the values that lie at the core of all human ethical systems, scientific findings, and common sense. While reading this book, please keep in mind that as human beings, equipped with marvelous intelligence and the potential for developing a warm heart, each and every one of us can become a force for good.

Loving Kindness Meditation

December 10, 2017

Loving-Kindness meditation falls into the class of analytic meditation. Although for many readers Dr. Herbert Benson’s relaxation response will be sufficient, if you want to try a type of analytic meditation, HM strongly recommends loving-kindness meditation. There are several reasons for this. One is that HM finds this meditation personally fulfilling. Another is that researchers have been astounded at the recordings and images of the brain from highly experienced meditators while they are doing this meditation. The third reason is that the world is much in need of love and kindness. Loving-kindness is wanting others to be happy. You should be comfortable doing the relaxation response before trying loving-kindness meditation.

This is taken from Kathleen McDonald’s “How to Meditate.” Be comfortable. Relax your body and mind and let all thoughts and worries subside. Mindfully observe your breath until you are calm and your awareness is focused in the here-and-now. You should think that you are doing this meditation for the benefit of yourself and others: to generate more positive, loving energy in your mind and to send it out to others, to the world.

Start by imagining living beings around you: your mother is on your left, your father on your right, and other relatives and friends are around you and behind you. Visualize in front of you those who dislike or who have hurt you. And extending in every direction, right to the horizon, are all other beings. Feel as if they are there, all in human form, sitting quietly, like you. If it is difficult to visualize all beings, think of as many as you can comfortably. Stay relaxed—don’t feel crowded or tense, but imagine that a sense of harmony and peace pervades everyone.

Consider how nice it would be, for yourself and others, if you were able to love all these beings. Contemplate that everyone wants to be happy and to avoid suffering, just as you do. They are all trying to make the best of their lives, even those who are angry and violent.

Now generate a feeling of love in your heart. You can do this by thinking of someone you love and letting your natural good feelings for this person arise. You might like to imagine your love as a warm, bright light, not physical, but pure, positive energy glowing in your heart.

Before you can love others you need to love yourself as you are, with your personal faults and shortcomings, and recognizing you have the potential to free yourself from all your problems. So, really wish yourself all the happiness and goodness there is. Imagine the the warm energy in your heart expands until it completely fills your body and mind.

Now meditate on your love for others. Start with your family and close friends sitting near you. Say in your mind words such as “May you be happy, may all your thoughts be positive and all your experiences good. May your lives be long and peaceful . Continue in this manner. Imagine the warm luminous energy generating from your body touching them and filling their bodies and minds, bringing them the happiness they wish for. Don’t worry if you don’t actually feel love; it’s enough to say these words and think these thoughts. In time the feeling will come.

Then think of some people you are not so close to and extend the same wishes as before.

The hard part comes last. Turn your attention to the people in front of you, those you are having difficulty with or for whom you have extreme dislike. Contemplate that they also need and deserve your love. Wish them to be free of the confusion, anger, and self-centeredness that drive them to act the way they do. Really want them to find peace of mind, happiness, and finally enlightenment. Think and try to extend the same wishes as in the case of the preceding groups.

Conclude the session by thinking that you definitely have the potential to love everyone, even those who annoy or hurt you and those you don’t even know. Generate a strong wish to work on your own anger, impatience, selfishness and the other problems that prevent you from having such love. Keeping your mind open and trying to overcome ego’s prejudiced attitudes will leave much space in your heart for pure, universal love—and thus happiness for yourself and others—to develop.

Kathleen McDonald likes to dedicate her meditations. In this case, she says, “Finally, dedicate the positive energy of your meditation to all beings, with the wish that they find happiness and enlightenment.

For another version of the loving-kindness meditation, go to the healthy memory blog titled, “SPACE.”

Analytical Meditation

December 9, 2017

This is the advanced deep path meditation. Usually stabilizing meditation (see previous post) is preliminary to analytic meditation. This type of meditation is for the purpose of developing insight or correct understanding of the way things are, and eventually to attain special insight (Sanskrit: vipashyana) into the ultimate nature of all things. Analytical meditation brings into play creative intellectual thought and is crucial to our development: the first step in gaining any real insight is to understand conceptually how things are. This conceptual clarity develops into firm conviction which, when combined with stabilizing meditation, brings direct and intuitive knowledge.

It is doubtful that most readers will want to get into this level of meditation, and fortunately, there are many benefits to just using the relaxation response. However, others might want to try this and see if it is for them. This can lead to retreats and a high level of involvement.

Should you be interested in exploring analytical meditation a good book is “How to Meditate by Kathleen McDonald. In addition to covering the basics, here is what she covers:

Meditations on the Mind which include meditation on the breath, meditation on the clarity of the mind, and meditation on the continuity of the mind.

Analytical Meditations which include Meditation on Emptiness, Appreciating our Human Life, Meditation on Impermanence, Death Awareness Meditation, Meditation on Karma, Purifying Negative Karma, Meditation on Suffering, Equanimity Meditation, Meditation on Love, Meditation on Compassion and Giving and Taking, Dealing with Negative Energy.

Visualization Meditations which include Body of Light Meditation, Simple Purification Meditation, Meditation on Tara, the Buddha of Enlightened Activity, Meditation on Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion, Inner Heat Meditation.

And should you be interested in Prayers and Other Devotional Practices
Prayers, Explanation of the Prayers, A Short meditation on the Graduated Path of Enlightenment, Meditation on the Buddha, Meditation on the Healing Buddha, Meditation on the Eight Verses of Thought Transformation, Prayer to Tara, Vajrsattva Purification, The Eight Mahayana Precepts, Prostations to the Thirty-five Buddhas.

P.S. HM finds parts of this post, which were taken from Kathleen McDonald’s book disturbing. “For example, This type of meditation is for the purpose of developing insight or correct understanding of the way things are, and eventually to attain special insight (Sanskrit: vipashyana) into the ultimate nature of all things.” Readers of this blog should be know that HM advises never be 100% certain of everything. For critical thinking there always needs to be room, however small, for doubt. So to claim eventually to attain special insight into the ultimate nature of things is a bit of an overshoot. So to meditate to develop insight or correct understanding of the way things are can be an aspirational goal. It is important to understand that there are different ways of knowing, and it is a mistake to pursue only one way. Science is a way of knowing. Contemplative practices of religions are a complementary way of knowing. These are two ways of knowing that complement each other. Unfortunately too many fail to realize this. HM thinks that the Dalai Lama is the first religious leader to use science to inform religious beliefs. He sends his priests to learn about science as he thinks this is essential to effective religious leadership

Stabilizing Meditation

December 8, 2017

This type of meditation is used to develop concentration and eventually to achieve calm abiding, a special kind of concentration that enables one to remain focused on whatever object one wishes, for as long as one wishes, while experiencing bliss, clarity, and peace. Concentration and calm abiding are necessary for any real, lasting insight and mental transformation. In stabilizing meditation, we learn to concentrate upon one object, the breath, the nature of one’s own mind, a concept, a visualized image—without interruption.

Dr. Herbert Benson’s relaxation response is an example of stabilizing meditation. Here is the protocol:
Step 1:  Pick a focus word, phrase, image, or short prayer.  Or focus only on your breathing during the exercise.
Step 2:  Find a quiet place and sit calmly in a comfortable position.
Step 3:  Close your eyes.
Step 4:  Progressively relax all your muscles.
Step 5:   Breathe slowly and naturally.
Step 6: Assume a passive attitude.  When other thoughts intrude, simply think, “Oh,                          well,” and return to your focus.
Step 7:  Continue with this exercise for an average of 12 to 15 minutes.
Step 8:   Practice this technique at least once daily.

Amazing benefits can be achieved with this type of meditation. Read the healthy memory blog “An Update of the Relaxation Response Update” to review some of the benefits.
Stabilizing meditation must first be achieved before going into deep path meditations.

Lists of Paramitas

December 7, 2017

Paramitas means completeness or perfection. Lists of paramitas are virtuous traits that mark progress in contemplative traditions. Among the paramitas of the yogi’s discussed in “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body” are generosity, the giving away of material wealth or of oneself, and ethical conduct, not harming oneself or others and following guidelines for self-discipline.

Additional traits are: patience, tolerance, and composure. These imply a serene equanimity. The Dalai Lama told an MIT audience, “Real peace is when your mind goes twenty-four hours a day with no fear, no anxiety.”

The authors note that there are intriguing dovetails between scientific data and the ancient maps to altered traits. An eighteenth-century Tibetan text advises that among the signs of spiritual progress are loving-kindness and strong compassion toward everyone, contentment, and “weak desires.” The authors note that these qualities seem to match with indicators of brain changes that have been tracked: amped-up circuitry for empathic concern and parental love, a more relaxed amygdala, and decreased volume of brain circuits associated with attachment.

A Tibetan tradition proffers a view that we all have a Buddha nature, but we simply fail to recognize it. In this view, the nub of meditative practice becomes recognizing intrinsic qualities, what’s already present rather than the development of any new inner skill. According to this perspective, the remarkable neural and biological findings among the yogis are signs not so much of skill development, but rather the quality of recognition.

This is an interesting question to ponder. The authors point to an increasingly robust corpus of scientific findings showing, for example, that if an infant watches puppets who engage in an altruistic, warmhearted encounter, or ones who are selfish and aggressive when given he choice of a puppet to reach for, almost all infants choose one of the friendly ones. They say this natural tendency continues through the toddler years.

HM wonders if these same results are found with infants who are unloved. And if it occurs through the toddler years for unloved toddlers.

The authors note that historically meditation was not meant to improve our health, relax us, or enhance work success. They note that although these are the kinds of appeal that has made meditation ubiquitous today, over the centuries such benefits were incidental, unnoticed side effects. This was unfortunate, because the benefits that have made meditation popular today are very real, and can be achieved using the relaxation technique espoused by Dr. Benton for only 20 minutes a day.

What the Yogi’s are able to accomplish require many thousands of hour of meditation in the deep mode.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Two Remarkable Yogis

December 6, 2017

Two remarkable yogis receive considerable attention in Goleman and Richardson’s book, “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” Matthieu Ricard is not only a remarkable yogi, but one who also holds a Ph.D. in Biology. Initially yogis were reluctant to serve as research participants in Dr. Davidson’s lab. But once Matthieu assured his peers their participation might be of benefit to people, a total of twenty-one yogis agreed. Matthieu helped design the experimental protocol for the lab.

The next yogi to come to the lab was Mingyur Rinpoche, who was also the one with the most lifetime hours of practice 62,000 hours when he entered the lab. When he meditated on compassion there was a huge surge in electrical activity in his brain recorded by EEG. The fMRI images revealed that during meditation his circuitry for empathy jumped in activity by 700 to 800 percent compared to its level at rest. When he left the lab and went on a retreat as a wanderer for four and a half years the aging of his brain slowed. He was 41, but his brain resembled the norm for 33 year-olds.

It is appropriate to remember here what the goal of Siddhartha was on his way to becoming Buddha. His concern was how to deal with human suffering. Ultimately his finding was simple. Suffering is a matter of how the mind interprets conditions. Meditation is a set of techniques for controlling the mind so that one finds peace and rarely suffers.

Mingyur Rinpoche wandered for four and half years. He controlled his mind so that he wandered in a state of bliss. He did not suffer, was content and enjoying his existence. This was the goal that Buddha succeeded in achieving. And the techniques are there for all who want to use them.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Meditation as Psychotherapy

December 5, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of Chapter 10 of a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson. The subtitle is “Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body. Meditation was not originally intended to treat psychological problems. However, in modern times it has shown promise in the treatment of some disorders, particularly depression and anxiety disorders. A meta-analysis of forty-seven studies on the application of meditation methods to treat patients with mental health problems found that meditation can lead to decreases in depression (especially severe depression), anxiety, and pain. They were about as effective as medications, but had no side effects. To a lesser degree, meditation can reduce the toll of psychological stress. Loving-kindness meditation may be especially beneficial to patients suffering from trauma, especially those with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Mindfulness as been melded with cognitive therapy to produce Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT). MBCT has become the most empirically well-validated psychological treatment with a meditation basis. This integration is having a wide impact in the clinical world. Empirical tests of applications to an ever larger range of psychological disorders are underway. Although there have been occasional reports of the negative effects of meditation, the findings to date point to the potential promise of meditation-based strategies. The enormous increase in scientific research in these areas makes for an optimistic future.

Mind, Body, & Genome

December 4, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a chapter in a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson, “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” None of the many forms of meditation studied in this book was originally designed to treat illness. Nevertheless, today the scientific literature is replete with studies assessing whether these ancient practices might be useful for treating illnesses. Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR; see the healthy memory blog post “Improving Selective Attention” for more information) and similar methods can reduce the emotional component of suffering from disease, but not cure the maladies. But mindfulness training— as short as three days—results in a short-term decrease in pro-inflammatory cytokines, which are the molecules responsible for inflammation. With extensive practice this seems to become a trait effect, with imaging studies finding in mediators at rest lower levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, along with an increased connectivity between regulatory circuitry and sectors of the brain’s self system, especially the posterior cingulate cortex.

For experienced meditation practitioners, a daylong period of intensive mindfulness down regulates genes involved in inflammation. The enzyme telomerase, which slows cellular aging, increases after three months of intensive practicing of mindfulness and loving-kindness (Go to the healthy memory blog post SPACE to find a description of loving-kindness meditation).

Long-term meditation may lead to beneficial structural changes in the brain. Current evidence is inconclusive as to whether such effects emerge with relative short-term practice, like MBSR, to only become apparent with longer-term practice. Taken together, the hints of neural rewiring that undergird altered traits seem scientifically credible, although further studies for specifics are needed.

Lightness of Being

December 3, 2017

This post is based on a chapter in a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson titled, “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” When we let our mind wander, we hash over thoughts and feelings (often unpleasant) that focus on ourselves, constructing the narrative we experience as our “self.” The default mode circuits quiet during mindfulness and loving-kindness meditation (Go to the healthy memory blog post SPACE to find a description of loving-kindness meditation). In early stages of meditation this quieting of self-esteem entails brain circuits that inhibit default zones. In later practice the connections and activity within those areas wane.

The quieting of the self-circuitry begins as a state effect seen during or immediately after meditation. However, with long-term practitioners it becomes an enduring trait, together with decreased activity in the default mode itself. This resulting decrease in stickiness means that the self-focused thoughts and feelings that arise in the mind have much les “grab” and decreasing ability to hijack attention. This is what is meant by “lightness of being.”

Attention

December 2, 2017

This title is the same as a title in a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson, “Altered Traits:  Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.”  William James, the founder of American psychology wrote: “The faculty of bringing back a wandering attention over and over again is the very root of judgment, character and will; an education which should improve this faculty would the the education par excellence.”

At its root meditation retrains attention, and different types boost varying aspects of attention. MBSR strengthens selective attention, while long-term vipassana (analytic meditation will be described later in the series of posts) practice enhances this even more. Five months after a three-month shamantha retreat meditators had enhanced vigilance, the ability to sustain their attention. But the beginnings of this enhancement also showed up after just seventeen minutes of mindfulness in beginners. This was no doubt a transitory state for the newcomers, and a more lasting trait for the experienced meditators. The same practice-makes perfect maxim likely applies to some other quickie meditation: just ten minutes of mindfulness overcame the damage to concentration from multi-tasking—at least in the short term; only eight minutes of mindfulness lessened mind-wandering for a while. About ten hours of mindfulness over a two-week period strengthened attention and working memory. This also led to substantially improved scores on the graduate school entrance exam. Although meditation boosts many aspects of attention, these are short-term gains; more lasting benefits require ongoing practice.

Primed for Love

December 1, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a chapter in Goleman and Richardson’s book, “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” Learning about compassion does not necessarily increase compassionate behavior. From empathizing with someone suffering to actually reaching out to help, loving-kindness/compassion meditation increases the odds of helping. There are three forms of empathy: cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and empathic concern. People frequently empathize emotionally with someone’s suffering but then tune out to soothe their own uncomfortable feeling. However, compassion meditation enhances empathic concern, activates circuits for good feelings and love, as well as circuits that register the suffering of others, and prepares a person to act when suffering is encountered. Compassion and loving-kindness increase amygdala activation to suffering while focused attention on something neutral like the breath lessons amygdala activity. Loving-kindness acts quickly, in as little as eight hours of practice; reductions in usually intractable unconscious bias emerge after just sixteen hours. The longer people practice, the stronger these brain and behavioral tendencies toward compassion become. The authors conjecture that the strength of these effects from the early days of meditation may signal our biological preparedness for goodness.

A description of loving kindness meditation can be found in the previous healthy memory blog post SPACE. More will be written about loving kindness meditation later in this series of posts.

A Mind Undisturbed

November 30, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a chapter in Goleman and Richardson’s book, “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” A key node in the brain’s stress circuitry, the amygdala, shows dampened activity from just thirty or so hours of Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) (enter MBSR into the search box of the Healthymemory Blog to learn more about MBSR). Other mindfulness training shows a similar benefit, and there are hints the these changes are trait like: they appear not simply during the explicit instruction to receive the stressful stimuli mindfully but even in the “baseline” state, with reductions in amygdala activation as much as 50%. More daily practice seems to be associated with lessened stress reactivity. Experienced Zen practitioners can withstand higher levels of pain and still have less reaction to this stressor. A three-month meditation retreat brought indicators of better emotional regulation, and long-term practice was associated with greater functional connectivity between the prefrontal areas that manage emotion and the areas of the amygdala that react to stress, resulting in less reactivity. An improved ability to regulate attention accompanies some of the beneficial impact of meditation on stress reactivity. And finally, the quickness with which long-term meditators recover from stress underlines how trait effects emerge with continued practice.

Altered Traits and the Deep Path

November 29, 2017

The deep path of meditation focuses on deep exploration of the mind toward a profound alteration of our being. An altered trait is a new characteristic that arises from a meditation practice that endures apart from meditation itself. Altered traits affect how we behave in our daily lives, and not just during or immediately after we meditate. The concept of altered traits has been a lifelong pursuit of Goleman and Davidson, authors of “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body,”

For Goleman and Davidson, the most compelling impacts of meditation are not better health or sharper business performance but, instead, a further reach toward our better nature. The research indicates that the deep path markedly boosts science’s models of the upper limits of our positive potential. The further reaches of the deep path cultivate enduring qualities like selflessness, equanimity, a loving presence, and impartial compassion, traits which we should all regard as positive traits.

Goleman and an Davidson wrote an article titled, “The Role of Attention in Meditation and Hypnosis: A Psychobiological Perspective on Transformations of Consciousness. Transformation of consciousness was their term for altered states, which they regarded as a psychological or neural shift. They contended that hypnosis, unlike meditation, produced primarily state effects, and not the trait effects that meditation did. At the time this article was written the fascination was not with traits but rather altered states. As Goleman and Davidson said, “after the high goes, you’re still the same schmuck you were before.”

Goleman and Davidson say that this basic confusion is still too common. Some people focus on the remarkable states attained during a meditation session, particularly during long retreats, and pay little attention to how, or even if, those states translated into a lasting change for the better in their qualities of being after they’ve gone home. Their point is that valuing just the heights misses the true point of practice: to transform ourselves in lasting ways day to day. The Dalai Lama has said, “The true mark of a meditator is that he has disciplined his mind by freeing it from negative emotions.”

Goleman and Davidson articulated the hypothesis: The after is the before for the next during. To elaborate, “after” refers to enduring changes from meditation that last long enough beyond the practice session itself. “Before” means the condition we are in before we start meditating. “During” is what happens as we meditate, temporary changes in our state that pass when we stop meditating. Repeated practice of meditation results in lasting traits—the “after.” Research in the book and in subsequent posts provide scientific support for meditation producing the “after.”

A Few Words About Buddhism

November 28, 2017

A reasonable response after reading the preceding posts is, if Buddhism is so great, what do they have to show for it. This is a variant of “If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?” First of all there are many different sects of Buddhism. They range from the highly ascetic Zen Buddhism, to highly commercialized sects that can be readily found in Japan. It should also be realized that, like other religions, there is a wide variance in the practice of the religion. What is particularly disturbing is how the Burmese, who are predominately Buddhist, have been persecuting the Rohingya, who are Moslem. They are killing them. Killing fellow humans is, or should be, anathema to Buddhists. Self-immolation, rather than fighting, was the preferred reaction in Viet Nam.

The Dalai Lama is the leader of Tibetan Buddhism. But as was said in a previous post, the Dalai Lama is not interested in making converts to Buddhism. However, he is interested in making a better world, and he thinks meditation and mindfulness will help in accomplishing this goal. The data in “Altered Traits” supports his thinking.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Flourishing

November 27, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a section in Goleman and Davidson’s “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.” Aristotle posited the goal of life as a virtue-based eudaemonia, a quality of flourishing, a view that continues under many guises in modern thought. Aristotle said that virtues are attained in part by finding the “right mean” between extremes; courage lies between impulsive risk-taking and cowardice, a tempered moderation between self-indulgence and ascetic denial.

He believed that we are not by nature virtuous, but all have the potential to become so through the right effort. This effort includes what we would call today self-monitoring, the ongoing practice of noting our thoughts and acts. For the Stoics, one key was seeing that our feelings about life’s events, not those events themselves, determine our happiness. This is a fundamental insight at which Siddhartha, the Buddha, arrived. We find equanimity by distinguishing what we can control in life from what we cannot. That creed finds an echo in the popularized Twelve Step version of theologian Reinhold Niebuhr’s prayer:
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

Goleman and Davidson write, “The classical way to the ‘wisdom to know the difference’ lay in mental training. Greek philosophers saw philosophy as an applied art and taught contemplative exercises and self-discipline as paths to flourishing. Like their peers to the East, the Greeks saw that we can cultivate qualities of mind that foster well-being.

Goleman and Davidson write “In the Greco-Roman tradition, qualities such as integrity, kindness, patience, and humility were considered keys to enduring well-being. These Western thinkers and Asian spiritual traditions alike saw value in cultivating a virtuous being via a roughly similar transformation of being. In Buddhism, for example , the ideal of inner flourishing gets put in terms of ‘bodhi’ (in Pali and Sanskrit), a path of self-actualization that nourishes ‘the very best within oneself.’”

University of Wisconsin psychologist Carol Ryff, drawing on Aristotle among many other thinkers, posits a model of well-being with six arms:

*Self acceptance, being positive about yourself, acknowledging both your best and not-so-good qualities, and feeling fine about being just as you are. This takes a non-judgmental self-awareness.

*Personal growth, the sense you continue to change and develop toward your full potential—getting better as time goes on—adopting new ways of seeing or being and making the most of your talents. ‘Each of you is perfect the way you are,’ Zen master Suzuki Roshi told his students, adding, ‘and you can use a little improvement’—neatly reconciling acceptance with growth.

*Autonomy, independence in thought and deed, freedom from social pressure, and using your own standards to measure yourself. This, by the way, applies most strongly in individualistic cultures like Australia and the United States, as compared with cultures like Japan, where harmony with one’s group looms larger.

*Mastery, feeling competent to handle life’s complexities, seizing opportunities as they come your way, and creating situations that suit your needs and values.

*Satisfying relationships, with warmth, empathy, and trust, along with mutual concern for each other and a healthy give-and-take,

*Life purpose, goals and beliefs that give you a sense of meaning and direction, Some philosophers argue that true happiness comes as a by-product of meaning and purpose in life.

Ryff sees the qualities as a modern version of eudamonia—Aristotle’s “highest of all human good,” the realization of you unique potential. Goleman and Davidson write,”…different varieties of meditation seem to cultivate one or more of these capacities. More immediately, several studies have looked at how meditation boosted people’s ratings on Ryffs own measure of well-being.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention fewer than half of Americans report feeling a strong purpose in life beyond their jobs and family. Healthy memory blog readers should remember that ikigai is the Japanese term for having a purpose in life. Many healthy memory blogs have emphasized its importance.

It was found that after a three-month meditation retreat (540 hours total), those participants who had strengthened a sense of purpose in life during that time also showed a simultaneous increase in the activity of telomerase in their immune cells, even five months later. Telomerase protects the length of telomeres, the caps at the ends of DNA strands that reflect how long a cell will live.

Another study found that eight weeks of a variety of mindfulness practices seemed to enlarge a region in the brain stem that correlated with a person’s well-being on Ryff’s test. But Goleman and Davidson caution that only fourteen people were involved in the study, so it needs to be replicated with a larger group before becoming more than tentative conclusion.

In yet another study, people practicing a popular form of mindfulness reported higher levels of well-being and other such benefits for up to a year. The more everyday mindfulness, the greater the subjective boost in well-being. Again the authors caveat this study by saying that not only was the sample size small, but also a brain measure rather than self-evaluations would have been more convincing.

Goleman and Davidson write, “Studies such as these are often cited as “proving” the merits of meditation, particularly these days, when mindfulness has become the flavor du jour. But meditation research varies enormously when it comes to scientific soundness—though when used to promote some brand of meditation, app, or other contemplative “product,” this inconvenient truth goes missing.”

The authors promise that they have used rigorous standards to sort out fluff from fact. They want to determine what science actually does tell us about the impacts of meditation.

Altered Traits and Neuroplasticity

November 26, 2017

There have been many healthy memory blog posts on neuroplasticity, which is a topic of continuing attention. The first evidence of neuroplasticity was of a negative effect. Bruce McEwen produced evidence of how stressful events produce lingering neural scars. The research used a tree shrew, a small creature, but the research had a gigantic effect. The thinking, or rather dogma of the day, was that the neural system was fixed and could not change. It was research by Marian Diamond and her psychologist colleagues that documented that enriched environments increase the size of rats’ brains. Previous research had focused on the nature vs nurture issue. Genes defined nature and the environment defined nurture. Arguments abounded about whether intelligence and many other topics of interest were affected more by nature or more by nurture. The truth is that there is an interaction between nature and nurture. Traits altered by meditation are further examples of neuroplasticity at the positive end and post-traumatic stress disorder at the negative end.

Goleman and Davidson’s interests go beyond the merely healthy spectrum to an even more beneficial range of wholesome traits of being. Extremely positive altered traits, like equanimity and compassion, are a goal of mind training in contemplative traditions. They use the term altered trait as shorthand for this highly positive range.

Neuroplasticity provides a scientific basis for how repeated training can create those lasting qualities of being they encountered in a handful of exceptional yogis, swamis, monks, and lamas, Their altered traits fit ancient descriptions of lasting transformation at these higher levels.

Goleman and Davidson write, “A mind free from disturbance has value in lessening human suffering, a goal shared by science and meditative paths alike. But apart from lofty heights of being, there’s a more practical potential within reach of every one of us: a life best described as flourishing.

This post is taken from Goleman and Davidson’s “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body.”

Altered Traits

November 25, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson. The subtitle is “Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body. The following is taken from the Coda of the book: “We are inspired by the vision of the Dalai Lama. He encourages us all to do three things: gain composure, adopt a moral rudder of compassion, and act to better the world. The first, inner calm, and the second, navigating with compassion, can be products of meditation practice, as can executing the third, via skillful actions. Exactly what action we take, though, remains up to each of us, and depends on our individual abilities and possibilities—we each can be a force for good.”

We view this “curriculum” as one solution to an urgent public health need: reducing greed, selfishness, us/them thinking and impending eco-calamities, and promoting more kindness, clarity, and calm. Targeting and upgrading these human capacities directly could help break the cycle of some otherwise intractable social maladies, like ongoing poverty, intergroup hatreds, and mindlessness about our planet’s well-being.”

To be sure, there are still many, many questions about how altered traits occur, and much more research is needed. But the scientific data supporting altered traits have come together to the point that any reasonable scientist would agree that this inner shift seems possible. Yet too few of us at present realize this, let alone entertain the possibility for ourselves.

The scientific data, while necessary, are by no means sufficient for the change we envision. In a world growing more fractured and endangered, we need an alternative to mind-sets snarky and cynical, views fostered by focusing on the bad that happens each day rather than the far more numerous acts of goodness. In short, we have an even greater need for the human qualities altered traits foster.

We need more people of good will, who are more tolerant and patient, more kind and compassionate. And these can become qualities not just espoused but embodied.”

The philosophy espoused here is eudaemonism, which is a system of ethics that bases moral values on the likelihood that good actions will produce happiness. The exact opposite is hedonism, which is hardly an ethical theory, and maintains that pleasure is the highest good and proper aim of human life. There are several problems with hedonism. One is to take care of oneself and to screw everyone else. Poor health often is concomitant with pleasure. There also constraints on the amount of pleasure one can tolerate. Eudaemonism is unconstrained, promotes health, benefits others, and results in happiness. The hope is that eudaemonism is within us human beings and that meditation and mindfulness are activities that foster eudaemonism.

Understand that the goal here is not to convert people to Buddhism. The Dali Lama uses science to inform Buddhist ideology and practices. He sends monks to study science. Most religions at onetime had contemplative practices like meditation, and some still do. Rather than citing words by rote, prayer should be a meditative practice. It is important to realize that all religions, Buddhism included, have been created by human beings. What is spoken from the pulpit should not be taken uncritically. Rather, one needs to assess not only whether it corresponds with the stated doctrine and literature of the religion, but also whether it corresponds to a loving, just, and forgiving God.

Obviously, this book deserves many posts. Coleman and Davidson apply rigorous standards to assessing the data, so the conclusions above are justified. The primary criticism might well be that they are overly optimistic. Nevertheless, they are well worth pursuing.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Thanks to Daniel Goleman

November 24, 2017

Fortunately Daniel Goleman’s graduate fellowship to Harvard, where he went to study clinical psychology included a year’s study abroad should his studies require it. He managed to extend the study abroad to two years where he went to India. India was the root source of the meditation practices he wished to study.

What he accomplished in India was remarkable. Here he was in a new culture, dealing with new languages, and with a topic that was complex and hard to penetrate. You need to read his book, “The Meditative Mind: The Varieties of Meditative Experience” to appreciate the complexity of this topic, but he managed to build roadmaps routing the way between these complex topics. This book is not recommended unless you have an interest in eastern religions. They are complex and if not impenetrable, difficult to penetrate.

Fortunately, the technique most recommended in this blog is the Relaxation Response as developed by Herbert Benson, M.D. This involves focusing on your breath and a self-selected simple mantra. This builds focal attention and has both mental and medical benefits that have been discussed in previous blog posts.

Goleman reviews meditation as practiced in different religions to include Hindu Bhakti, Jewish Meditation, Christian Meditation, Sufism, Patanjali’s Ashtanga Yoga, Indian Tantra and Kundalini Yoga, Tibetan Buddhism, and Zen. As you can see not all religions that employ meditation are in the east. Contemplative practices have been employed in many if not most religions. All these religions recognize the proneness of humans to less than desirable thoughts and behaviors. The goal of these practices, regardless of the religion, is to bring humans up to a higher standard to behave well not only with respect to the individual, but also with respect to our fellow human beings.

The father of American psychology, William James recognized the importance of attention. He wrote in his Principles of Psychology the importance of bringing back a wandering attention over and over again as it is the very root of judgment, character, and will. It is essential. An education that would improve this faculty would be the education par excellence.

William James, who was the most prominent nineteenth century psychologist, was keenly interested in religion, both Eastern and Western. He befriended the Indian 
Swami Vivekananda who toured America after speaking at the First World Congress of Religions in 1893. Religion and the occult fascinated James. His book “Varieties of Religious Experience” is still a classic on the psychology of religion. Unfortunately, the scientific bent of modern psychology has lead the great majority of Western psychologists to ignore the teachings of their Eastern counterparts.

Fortunately, Daniel Goleman and Richard Davidson are refocusing interest in these teachings of our eastern counterparts.

Happy Thanksgiving 2017

November 23, 2017

Today is the day to give thanks for our blessings. Foremost among them is our memory. Memory provides the basis for all cognitive processes. We want to support it with healthy living and grow it with growth mindsets. We need to actively use our minds throughout out lives.

Thanksgiving is also the time to think of others. Tomorrow there will be a post on a book by Daniel Goleman titled “The Meditative Mind.” He is also the author of Emotional Intelligence. Then there will be eighteen posts on a book by Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson titled “Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Our Mind, Brain, and Body.” It also can change how we interact with our fellow human beings to promote a better world.

Revenge, Sweet, but Not Healthy

November 22, 2017

This post is based on an article titled “Revenge” by Jennifer Breheny Wallace in the Health Section of the 14 November 2017 Washington Post. She wrote, “People are motivated to seek revenge—to harm someone who has harmed them—when they feel attached, mistreated or socially rejected. Getting an eye for an eye, Old Testament-style, is thought to bring a sense of catharsis and closure. Unfortunately, a growing body of research suggests it may have the opposite effect.

Evolutionary psychologists think we are hard-wired for revenge. Absent laws and prisons, our earliest ancestors relied on the fear of retaliation to keep peace and correct injustices. Michael McCullough, a professor of psychology at the University of Miami says, “Acts of revenge not only sought to deter a second harmful act by a wrongdoer, but also acted as an insurance policy against future harm by others, a warning signal that you’re someone who will not tolerate mistreatment.”

In modern life, betrayal and social rejection still hurt. According to research reported in the Journal of Personality Psychology the desire to repair that pain and improve our mood may be one of the things that motivates us to seek revenge.

In one experiment 156 college students wrote a short essay to be submitted for comments. Then the essays were randomly given either positive or negative feedback. Next all participants were given a test that measured their emotional state, and then offered a chance to retaliate by sticking pins into a voodoo doll that represented the grader of the essay. Not surprisingly getting revenge felt good such that the moods of the ones given negative feedback were as high as the moods of those given positive feedback.

In another study, 167 participants were invited to play a video game where some players were snubbed by others. Rejected players were given the chance to seek revenge by increasing the volume in the other player’s headphones. But before they could retaliate, some participants received what they were told was a cognition enhancing drug (which was a placebo) that would steady their mood for 60 minutes. Although most wronged players turned up the volume, those who took the placebo, who presumably thought they wouldn’t be given a mood boost for doing so, were less likely to retaliate because we think it will make us feel better, according to David Chester who studies the psychological and biological processes involved in human aggression at Virginia Commonwealth University.

According to new research by Chester revenge may provide a lift, but the positive effects appear to be fleeting. “Revenge can feel really good in the moment,” he says, “but when we follow up with people 5 minutes to 10 minutes and 45 minutes later, they actually report feeling worse than they did before they sought revenge.”

University of Psychology Professor Timothy Willson and colleagues conducted a study on the “paradoxical consequences” of revenge. Research participants played an investment game where they were told that they could earn money if they all co-operated but that if one player betrayed the group, that person would earn more and the other players would earn less. This is called the “free-rider paradigm.” The game was staged so that players were double-crossed and some were given the chance to retaliate. When asked by researcher how they imagined they would feel after seeking revenge, the players predicted it make them feel better. However, when surveyed afterward, those who had retaliated reported feeling worse than players who didn’t get the opportunity to punish and so had “moved on.” Wilson theorizes that seeking revenge when we were wronged and can make an event appear even larger. He says, “by not retaliating, we’re able to find other ways of coping, like telling ourselves that it wasn’t such a big deal.

Ruminating about getting even by stewing over what the person did to you and what you would like to do in return can interfere with day-to-day well-being and happiness. Psychotherapist Beverly Engel says, “When someone persists in revenge fantasies, over time they can develop anxiety and remorse as well as feelings of shame. These feelings can also take up important cognitive resources, depleting you of time and energy that could be better spent on healthier, more constructive ways of dealing with anger, such as learning to accept the injustice, putting yourself in the other person’s shoes or acknowledging that you, too, may have hurt someone in similar ways.”

With respect to valuable relationships McCullough says “what the angry mind ultimately wants is a change of heart from the transgressor.” He cites studies showing the when a victim receives an explanation and an apology, the desire for revenge decreases. Similarly research suggests that doctors who apologize to patients when they have made a mistake may decrease their risk of a lawsuit.

McCullough also says that sometimes the most helpful thing a wronged party can do is to create conditions that make it easier for the person who hurt you to be honest about what they did and to take responsibility. He says, “You’re not giving the person a free pass, but it may be in your best interest to stay open to an apology and to help pave a road that would allow the offender to make it up to you.”

He concludes, “Revenge may make you feel better for a moment. but making the effort to repair a valuable relationship can pay bigger dividends over a lifetime.”

Socrates and the Dunning-Kruger Effect

November 21, 2017

Socrates asked, “How is not this the most reprehensible ignorance, to think that one knows what one does not know?”

There are two parts to the Dunning-Kruger effect.  The first refers to the cognitive bias in which relatively unskilled persons suffer illusory superiority.  The second part refers to a cognitive bias for highly skilled individuals to underestimate the relative competence of unskilled individuals and assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.

So people who truly know a topic are aware of what they don’t know. But people who think they know a topic can be woefully ignorant of what they don’t know. So knowledgeable people typically qualify there answers. This was the problem President Truman had with economists. They would tell him on one hand there was x, but on the other hand there was y. Truman asked for one-handed economists. It is hoped that he never found one.

There is reason to think that the Dunning-Kruger effect has been magnified in this current era of technology. Life has become an open-book test. All one has to do is to look something up. But true knowledge requires thinking, and thinking takes time and effort. It is not analogous to downloading a file from the computer.

One of the best examples was the response a woman, who was wearing her technology and was well-plugged in to the question of what she thought about Obamacare. She responded that it was terrible and should be repealed. However, when she was asked about the Affordable Care Act, she thought it was wonderful. She did not caveat either response.

First of all, we need to be aware of faux news. So we need to evaluate the source and soundness of everything we see or hear. We should also consider other information that either supports or refutes the new information.

But even for topics we think we know, we need to explore the other side and follow not only the reasoning, but also data. In the case of governments offering health care to all its citizens, every other advanced country does so, and they do so with single payer government systems. Moreover, their medical systems are not only more effective, they are also significantly cheaper. This seems to be a glaring source of ignorance in the United States.

Readers might also consider reading or rereading the healthy memory blog post “Ignorance.”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Understanding Cognitive Enhancement

November 20, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the subtitle of an article titled “Better Minds Ahead” by Joe Dawson in the October 2017 issue of Observer, a publication of the Association for Psychological Science. The article provides a summary to the session at the Integrative Science symposium at the 2017 International Convention of Psychological Science, which was held in Vienna.

Daphne Bavelier, a cognitive psychologist at the University of Geneva, conducts research on the effects of action games. Early experiments showed vision improvements such as contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in long-time action gamers as well as experimental short-term gamers. Playing these games for as few as 30 hours per week produced these effects. Moreover, these effects persisted for months after the experiment and video-game playing ended.

Subsequent research suggested that action-game players were not just better at the skills specific to game play, such as vision, but also were better at more cognitive skills. These cognitive skills were driven, at least in part, by improved attentional control.

Other research has shown that young laparoscopic surgeons who play video games, and especially action video games, perform better in the simulators in terms of being faster and not making more errors than most season laparoscopic surgeons on the team. In these games, players must switch tasks and divide their attention. They monitors errors in skill and judgment. They must also plan goals and revise them on the fly. It appears that the combination of demands is what produces the kind of cognitive enhancements seen in relation to commercially available action games.

Arthur Kramer, the senior Vice President for Research and Graduate Education at Northeastern University, has studied the relationship between exercise and cognition for 25 years. Some of the first clues about the effects of exercise were produced by brain scans. Certain regions changed in volume in both long-term exercisers and in intervention groups. Size, white matter, and connectivity measurements all indicated that exercise has lasting effects on the brain. Exercise also seems seems to show benefits in many tests and also in several cognitive tasks. In 2003 meta-analysis of randomized control trial exercise and cognition studies, Kramer and Stanley Colcombe found that exercise positively affects cognition with an effect size of nearly half a standard deviation.

Kramer said, “Fitness interventions have been assessed in early Alzheimer’s or mild cognitive impairment patients, multiple sclerosis patients, Parkinson’s patients and in breast cancer patients. In each case, there have been benefits.”

Kramer wants to do further work trying to establish the limits of cognitive enhancement, assuming there are limits, and determining which interventions and lifestyle choices work best for different individuals.

Illini Singh, a researcher of neuroscience, ethics, and society at the University of Oxford is focused on the present and potential future use of “smart drugs.” Although there are reports about taking drugs for increased attention, focus, mood modulation, or executive function, science has yet to produce convincing evidence that most common “smart” drugs—Ritalin, Adderall, and Modafinl, provide benefits in nonclinical populations. There is a large placebo effect Singh said “what you hear most is that students say they feel more awake,” but this is because these drugs are stimulants.

HM weighs in that drugs are for clinical situations. Inevitably, there are undesirable side effects to drugs, so they should only be used as a last resort.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Grand Delusions: Why We all Believe the Weirdest Things

November 19, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a Feature article by Dan Jones in the 18 November 2017 issue of the New Scientist.

Delusions are irrational, and they are idiosyncratic, in that the belief is not widely shared. Moreover, the idiosyncratic nature of delusions makes them isolating and alienating in a way that believing, say, a conspiracy theory does not. Delusions also tend to be much more personal than other irrational beliefs, and they usually conform to one of a handful of themes. Despite being diverse and idiosyncratic, delusions cluster into a few core themes.

Persecutory Delusions: beliefs that others are out to harm you. This is the most common type of delusion, affecting between 10% and 15% of people.

Referential Delusions: beliefs that things happening the world—from news headlines to song lyrics—relate directly to you. Persecutory and referential delusions often go hand in hand.

Control Delusions: beliefs that your thought or behaviors are being manipulated by outside agents. Such delusions are common in schizophrenia.

Erotomania Delusions: beliefs that someone who you don’t know, typically a celebrity, is in love with you.

Grandiose Delusions: unfounded beliefs the you are exceptionally talented, insightful or otherwise better than the hoi polloi.

Jealous Delusions: irrational beliefs that your partner is being unfaithful. This is the type of delusion most commonly associated with violence.

Somatic Delusions: erroneous beliefs about the body. In Ekbom’s syndrome, people believe they are infested with parasites. People with Coward delusion believe they are dead or don’t exist.

Misidentification Delusions: beliefs that changed identity. A classic is Capers delusion, where people believe that a loved one has been replaced by a doppelgänger.

An everyday reason that people hold implausible beliefs is a tendency to jump to conclusions on the basis of limited evidence.The proneness to do this can be measured with a simple experiment. Imagine two jars containing a mix of black and orange beads: one contains 85% black beads and 15% orange, and the other has the reverse proportions. You select a bead from one, without know which it is. Let’s say the bead is orange. You are then asked whether you would like to make a call on which jar you are taking the heads from, or whether you want to draw another bead to help work it out. It is prudent to examine a few beads at least as it is quite possible to draw two orange beads from a jar with mostly black, and vice versa. Yet about 70% of people being treated for delusion make a judgement after seeing just one or two beads. Only 10% of the general population are as quick to jump to conclusions, but the more prone you are to delusional thinking, the fewer beads you are likely to sample before making your decision.

This jumping-to-conclusions bias might seem stupid, but it isn’t s a sign of low intelligence, according to clinical psychologist Phillipa Garety at KIng’s College, London. Instead, she invokes Kahneman’s System 1, System 2 model of cognition. System 1 is the default mode of processing that occurs automatically. System 2, commonly referred to as thinking, takes mental effort. One of System 2’s responsibilities is to monitor System 1 for errors, but that requires mental effort. The more analytic a person is, the more System 2 is engaged. Dr Garety kindly terms people more prone to System 1 processing as “intuitive.” She says, “It’s not that people with a jumping-to-conclusions bias don’t understand or can’t use evidence. They’re just overusing System 1 at the expense of System2.” Her latest study confirms the these “intuitive thinkers” are also more prone to clinical delusions.

The following 21 questions constitute the Peter’s Delusion Inventory, which is the most widely used measure of delusion proneness. Give yourself one point for each “yes” and zero points for each “no” then tot up your score

Do you ever feel as if people seem to drop hints about you or say things with a double meaning?
Do you ever feel as if things in magazines or on TV were written especially for you?
Do you even feel as if some people are not what they seem to be?
Do you ever feel as if you are being persecuted in some way?
Do you feel as if there is a conspiracy against you?
Do you feel as if you are, or destined to be someone very important?
Do you ever feel that you are a very special or unusual person?
Do you ever feel that you are especially close to God?
Do you ever think people can communicate telepathically?
Do you ever feel as if electrical devices such as computer can influence the way you think?
Do you ever feel as if you have been chosen by God in some way?
Do you believe in the power of witchcraft, voodoo, or the occult?
Are you often worried that your partner may be unfaithful?
Do you ever feel that you have sinned more than the average person?
Do you ever feel that people look at you oddly because of your appearance?
Do you ever feel as if you had no thought in your head at all?
Do you ever feel as if the world is about to end?
Do your thoughts every feel alien to you in some way?
Have your thoughts been so vivid that you were worried other people would hear them?
Do you ever feel as if our own thoughts were being echoed back o you?
Do you ever feel as if you are a robot or zombie without a will of your own?
If your score is 1-5 you are less prone to delusions than most. Your thinking style is probably more analytical than intuitive.

If your score is 6-7, Congratulations. You are normal. The average score is 6.7 with no difference between men and women.

If your score is 8-21 you are more prone to delusions than most. You are likely to think intuitively and jump to conclusions.

Brain Implant Boosts Human Memory by Mimicking How We Learn

November 18, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a News piece by Jessica Hamzelou in the 18 November 2017 issue of the New Scientist. The team doing the research says,
“Electrical shocks that simulate the patterns seen in the brain when you are learning have enhanced human memory for the first time, boosting performance on tests by up to 30%.” Dong Song of the University of Southern California says, “We are writing the neural code to enhance memory function. This has never been done before.”

The device mimics brain signals associated with learning and memory, stimulating similar patterns of brain activity in the hippocampus via electrodes. This device was implanted in 20 volunteers who were already having electrodes placed in their brains to treat epilepsy.

The first stage was to collect data on patterns of activity in the brain when the volunteers were doing a memory test. The test involved trying to remember which unusual, blobby shapes they had been shown 5 to 10 seconds before. This test measures short- term memory. People normally score around 80% on this task.

The volunteers also did a more difficult version of the test, in which thy had to remember images they had seen between 10 and 40 minutes before. This measures working memory.

Then the team used this data to work out the patterns of brain activity associated with each person’s best memory performances. The group then made the device electrically stimulate similar brain activity in the volunteers while they did more tests.

A third of the time, the device stimulated the participants brains in a way the team thought would be helpful. Another third of the time, it stimulated the brain with random patterns of electricity. For the remaining third of the time, it didn’t stimulate the brain at all.

Memory performance improved by about 15% in the short-term memory test and around 25% in the working-memory test when the correct stimulation pattern was used, compared to no stimulation at all. Some improved by 30%. Random stimulation worsened performance. Song says the “It is the first time a device like this has been fond to enhance an aspect of human cognition.”

Chris Bird of the University of Sussex, UK thing that such a device may be useful for treating medical conditions. However the prosthesis wouldn’t be able to replace the hippocampus entirely. He says, “The hippocampus is quite a large structure and they are only recording from a very small area.’

Now the team is working on ways to enhance other brain functions. Song says,”The approach is very general . If you can improve the input/output of one brain region, you could apply it to other brain regions. Good candidates for this are skills localized to particular parts of the brain, such as sensation of the outside world, vision, and how we move. Enhancing these might improve a person’s hand-eye coordination. However, cognitive functions like intelligence involve many brain regions working together so wouldn’t make good targets.

There are individuals like Kurzweil who think that their brains can be uploaded to silicon, or that direct connections can run between computers and the brain. What these individuals are ignoring is that communications must be in the language of the brain. The research presented here shows what must be done to communicate and exchange information to the brain.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Importance of Mind-set

November 17, 2017

This post is based on article by Sharon Jayson in the Health Section of the 4 July 2017 issue of the Washington Post titled, “Want to slow down your aging process” Mind-set can be key, oldest seniors say.

For elders, staying vital may be about more than physical or mental agility. Research has found that society’s focus on youth culture and negative stereotypes about aging prompt memory loss and stress. However, older adults who want to dispel notions of becoming feeble have growing ranks to emulate.

Warren Barger, who is 95 earned five gold medals and set a new national high-jump recored in the 95-99 age bracket at competitions held in Birmingham, Alabama. He says that his secret of life is to wake up every morning with something to do. Healthy memory blog readers should recognize this as what the Japanese call ikigai. Warren says that he thinks that some people are old because they allow themselves to get old. When people ask him how I’m able to do what I can do, he says that he never quits trying. Warren is a former insurance salesman and church music director, who plays golf and pickleball once a week and badminton twice a week. He mows his lawn, volunteers weekly at his church, and sings in the senior choir.

David Weiss, an assistant professor of sociomedical science and psychology at the Columbia Aging Center at Columbia University published a study that found that those who don’t accept the inevitability of aging can “counteract the detrimental and self-fulfilling consequences of negative age stereotypes.” He says the his research looks at why no one wants to be old. “They want to set themselves apart from the negatively viewed age group. They just want to distance themselves from stereotypes: ‘I’m just not like the stereotype. I’m different.’ Adults who believe that age is just a number showed better memory performance, but adults who believed aging is set in stone and fixed had fixed had a decrease in memory performance and a stronger stress reaction.” Readers of the healthy memory blog should recognize this as having a growth mindset about which many healthymemory blog posts have been written.

Social psychologist Becca Levy of the Yale School of Public Health said that her studies have found an increase in negative age stereotypes over the past two centuries. She said, “Part of it is due to media and marketing. An ageist culture produces many more negative stereotypes.”

Research published this year by Sarah Barber, an assistant professor of psychology at San Francisco University found that people blamed routine forgetfulness on their age—as in saying they had had a “senior moment”—because popular wisdom reinforces stereotypes of age-related memory decline. The negative stereotypes about aging made older adults over-attribute every day memory losses we all have to age.” Readers of the healthy memory blog should be aware that memory failures are part of being human. They occur throughout our lives, and it is a mistake to attribute them to aging. Read the healthy memory blog posts, “The Myth of Cognitivee Decline” and “More on the Myth of Cognitive Decline.”

Remember Dr. Ruth (Weistheimer) of television fame? She advises older people to “do as many things that are enjoyable to them as possible and to not sit at home and say “I’m too old to be out there.”

Carl Reiner, the 95-year old writer, comedian, director, and creator of the 1960s-era “The Dick Van Dyke Show” has written his 22nd book, “Too Busy to Die.” He is working on two more books, which are expected to be published at Thanksgiving. Reiner and his longtime friend Mel Brooks, who turned 91 on June 28, have dinner at Reiner’s house most evenings unless the comedic genius behind such classics as “Blazzing Saddles” and “The Producers” is away on business.

So, the key to successful aging is mind-set, having a growth mind-set, and having a reason to get up in the morning, ikigai, having a purpose in life. To this end HM recommends a book by Victor J. Stretcher titled “Life on Purpose: How Living for What Matters Most Changes Everything.” You’ll find many healthymemoty blog posts based on this book. .

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

How to Convert Terrorists

November 16, 2017

This post is based in part on a Feature Article in the19 August 2017 issue of the New Scientist titled, “Anatomy of terror: What makes normal people extremists?” by Peter Byrne. Anthropologist Scott Atran of the University of Oxford’s Centre for Resolution of Intractable Conflicts asks the question, “What makes someone prepared to die for an idea? He suggests that the answer comes in two parts. Jihadists fuse their individual identity with that of the group, and they adhere to “sacred values.” He writes that sacred values are values that cannot be abandoned or exchanged for material gain. They tend to be associated with strong emotions and are often religious in nature, but beliefs held by nationalists and secularists may earn the label too.

Atran argues that individuals in this state are best understood, not as rational actors but as “devoted actors.” “Once they’re locked in as a devoted actor, none of the classic interventions seem to work. However, there can be openings. Although a sacred value cannot be abandoned it can be reinterpreted. Atran relates the case of an imam he interviewed who had worked for ISIS as a recruiter, but had left because he disagreed with their definition of jihad. For him, but not for them, jihadism could accommodate persuasion by non-violent means. As long as alternative interpretations are seen as coming from inside the group, they can be persuasive within it. Atran is now advising the US, UK, and French governments on the dynamics of jihadist networks to help them deal with terrorism.

Atran says that the key to combating extremism lies in addressing its social roots, and intervening early before anyone becomes a “devoted actor.” Until then there are all sorts of things that can be done. He says that one of the most effective countermeasures is community engagement. High-school football and the scouts movement have been effective responses to antisocial behavior among the disenfranchised children of US immigrants, for example.

Perspectives need to be changed. Tania Singer of the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, Germany thinks brain training could achieve similar effects. Neuroscientists have identified two pathways in the brain by which we relate to others. One mobilizes empathy and compassion, allowing us to share another person’s emotions. The second activates theory of mind, enabling us to see a situation from the other’s perspective. Her group recently completed a project called ReSource in which 300 volunteers spent nine months doing training first on mindfulness, and then on compassion and perspective training, and corresponding structural brain change were detectable in MRI scans.

Tania Singer notes that compassion evolved as part of an ancient nurturing instinct that is usually reserved for kin. To extend it to strangers, who may see the world differently from us, we need to add theory of mind. The full results from ReSource aren’t yet published, but Singer expects to see brain changes associated with perspective-taking training. She says that “only if you have both pathways working together in a coordinated fashion can you really move towards global cooperation.” By incorporating that training into school curricula, she suggests, we could build a more cohesive, cooperative society that is more resilient to extremism. To all of this, healthy memory say “Amen.’

Previous healthy memory posts have argued that had the prisoners held at Guantanomo been treated differently, an understanding could have been developed that would provide the basis for a new and more compelling narrative for these supposed terrorists. Once they had been converted, mindfulness training such as that in the ReSource program might have been highly effective.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Richard Thaler Wins the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2017

November 15, 2017

Assiduous readers of the Healthymemory blog should recognize the name from previous healthy memory blog posts. Richard Thaler is a behavioral economist. Early in his career he met up with the psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman formulated Prospect Theory. Most economic models are normative. That is they describe what a rational human should do if behaving optimally. Prospect Theory explained what people actually do. The theory states that people make decisions based on the potential value of losses and gains rather than the final outcome, and that people evaluate these losses and gains using certain heuristics. The model is descriptive: it describes what people actually do. Kahneman won a Nobel Prize in 2002 primarily for Prospect Theory. Unfortunately Amos Tversky had passed away and was not eligible for the prize.

Prospect Theory was the beginning of behavioral economics. In addition to describing how people actually behave in the economic realm, it develops techniques to nudge people in making good decisions. For example, making what is regarded as the best decision in a list of alternatives the default decision greatly increases the number of people who choose that option. For example, if making deductions for a pension is the default decision, that is the option most likely to be chosen.

Although it is good to know what the theoretical optimal decisions are, if the interest is in public policy, it is important to know what people will actually do. The field of behavioral economics is still young and there is much to be done. But they are working on how best to understand what people will do to better understand how to influence them to make decisions that will benefit them, individually, and society as a whole.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Placebos Can Enhance Creativity

November 14, 2017

There have been many posts on the benefits of placebos, so it should be no surprised that they can enhance creativity. The research report can be found at PLOS One, doi.org/gbwkrd. The article was written by Liron Rosenkratz, Avraham E. Mayo, Tomer IIan, Yuval Hart, Lior Noy, and Uri Alon and published 11 September 2017.

The research participants were randomly assigned to a control group (n=45),that rated an odorant, or a placebo group (n=45) who were treated identically but who were also told that the odorant increases creativity and reduces inhibition. Participants completed a recently developed automated test for creativity, the creative foraging game (CFG), and a randomly chosen subset (n=57), also completed two manual standardized creativity tests, the alternate uses test (AUT) and the Torance Test (TTCT). In all three tests participants were asked to create as many original solutions and were scored for originality, flexibility, and fluency.

The placebo group showed higher originality than the control group both in the CFG and in the AUT, but not in the Torrance Test. The placebo also found more shapes outside the standard categories by a set of 100 CFG in a previous study.

The authors concluded that the findings indicate that a placebo can enhance the originality aspect of creativity. This strengthens the view that placebos can be used not only to reduce negative clinical symptoms, but also to enhance positive aspects of cognition. Furthermore, they found that the impact of placebo can be tested by CFG, which can quantify the multiple aspects of creative search without need for manual coding. This approach opens the way to explore the behavioral and neural mechanisms by which placebo might amplify creativity.

So these results encourage much more research into creativity. Placebos should also be used in the workplace, in the schools, and in individual pursuits. Placebo pills can be purchased on Amazon. And placebos are effective, even when people are aware that they are placebos. Research has shown that placebo pills improve symptoms in people with irritative bowel syndrome and chronic pain, even when the people know they are shams.

The placebo effect argues for a positive outlook and a can-do attitude.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Brain Changes After Socio-affective and Cognitive Training

November 13, 2017

This post is based on an article titled “Structural plasticity of the social brain: Differential change after socio-affective and cognitive mental training” by Sofie l Valk et al. in Science Advances 04 Oct 2017, Vol 3. no.10, e1700489., dos.org/cdw7.

The objective of this study was to investigate whether targeted mental training of different cognitive and social skills can induce specific changes in the brain. They employed a 9-month mental training intervention from a large sample of adults between 20 and 55 years of age. Training protocols specifically addressed three functional domains: mindfulness-based attention and interoception, socio-affective skills (compassion dealing with difficult emotions and prosocial intervention), and socio- cognitive skills (cognitive perspective-taking on self and others and metacognition).

MRI-based cortical thickness analyses were done to see if the different training modules indicated different changes in the brain.

Training of present-moment focused attention mostly led to increases in cortical thickness in prefrontal regions. Socio-affective training induced plasticity in frontoinsular regions. Socio-cognitive training included change in inferior frontal and lateral temporal cortices.

So module-specific structural brain changes correlated with training-induced behavioral improvements in the same individuals in domain-specific measures of attention, compassion, and cognitive perspective, respectively, and overlapped with task-relevant functional networks.

The longitudinal findings indicated structural plasticity in well-known socio-affective and socio-cognitive brain networks in healthy adults based on targeted daily mental practices.

The authors rightly concluded, “These findings could promote the development of evidence-based mental training interventions in clinical, educational, and corporate settings aimed at cultivating social intelligence, prosocial motivation, and cooperation.

These findings should be replicated with school age populations. If similar results are obtained, such training should be part of the appropriate public school curricula.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

A Surprising Prediction from Some Knowledgeable Individuals

November 12, 2017

There have been many healthymemory blog posts on the risk of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) from head blows suffered playing football. Sportscaster Bob Costas, Tony Kornheiser, Michael Wilbon, and Christine Brennan were headliners at the University of Maryland’s 12th Shirley Povich Symposium. This panel touched on something that would have been difficult to imagine 14 years ago: a future without football.

Costas said that the most substantial—existential—the existential issue—is the nature of football itself. “The nature of football is this: Unless and until there is some technology which we cannot even imagine, let alone has been developed, that would make this inherently dangerous game not marginally safer but acceptably safe, the cracks in the foundation are there. The day-to-day issues, serious as they may be, they may come and go. But you cannot change the basic nature of the game. I certainly would not let, if I had an athletically gifted 12- or 13-year old sone, I would not let him play football.”

Costas rejected those who are quick to dismiss football’s concussion crisis as part of a “left-wing conspiracy to undermine something that is quintessentially American.” Costa said, “The truth is the truth,” referencing the memoir “Truth Doesn’t Have a Side,” by Bennet Omalu, the researcher credited with discovering CTE.” Costa continued, “Some of the best people I’ve met in sports have been football people, but the reality is that this game destroys people’s brains…That’s the fundamental fact of football, and to me is the biggest story in American sports.”

Kornheiser suggested that football eventually will go the way of horse racing and boxing, two other sports that once were wildly popular. “It’s not going to happen this year, and it’s not going to happen in five or 10 years, but Bob is right: At some point, the cultural wheel turns just a little bit, almost imperceptibly, and parents say, ‘I don’t want my kid to play.’ And then it becomes only the province of the poor, who want it for economic reasons to get up and out, and if they don’t find a way to make it safe—and we don’t see how they will—as great as it is, as much fun as it is…the games not going to be around. It’s not.”

The preceding was taken from as article by Scott Allen in the Sports Section of the 9 November 2017 issue of the Washington Post.

HM has argued previously that the game might be changed by making certain adjustments. One would be to put weight restrictions on the participants so that very large individuals would not have an advantage. There would also be restrictions against hard hitting in blocking or tackling. This might even lead to a faster more exciting version of the game. Players might prefer this version because it minimizes the possibility of disabling injuries. And fans might enjoy a faster, more sophisticated version of the game. The popularity of this game would depend on what really attracts people to watch. A fast moving sophisticated game, or the violence of the game.
© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Suggestions for Improving Our Primary and Presidential Elections

November 9, 2017

HM feels guilty about providing explanations of problems without offering solutions for them. One suggestion is to submit anyone who is running for national office for background investigations. They would need to be cleared for Sensitive Compartment Information (SCI). Presidents will be dealing with Sensitive Compartmented Information, and the information members of Congress can receive is limited if they do not have this clearance.

Remember early in his presidency when Trump had Russian visitors in the Oval Office with American news media excluded. Russian news media were there and they supplied the photographs. There was video of the meeting where Trump was gushing over his Russian visitors trying to please and impress them. Later recordings had Trump bragging about firing FBI Director Comey. He also released classified information to the Russians to impress them. This release of this classified information also resulted in the compromise of intelligence from an ally. The next day the pronouncement was made that Trump had not done anything wrong. This statement was based on a technicality that the President can declassify information, and that was how he was protected. A normal individual would have lost clearance and possibly served jail time.

HM has reviewed individuals for SCI clearances. He would not have recommended granting clearance to anyone who expressed admiration of Putin. Putin is a former KGB agent who is the de facto leader of a ruthless oligarchy. He would also have not recommended granting clearance to anyone as emotionally unstable as Trump. He has a textbook case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and it gets worse from there.

The second recommendation is in setting rigorous standards for debates. The Republican debates were modeled after professional wrestling. The Republicans were happy because the ratings were high. Trump’s boorish and childish behavior, calling people names, precluded any rational debate on the issues. Rational debates would have resulted in the nomination of a candidate well-qualified for the office.

The Democrats made a mistake in agreeing to debate Trump. First of all, they should have made Trump’s releasing his tax returns as a precondition for a debate. Secondly, they should have demanded standards of decorum for the debate.

Civility must be brought back into politics. People who like professional wrestling should stick to professional wrestling and stay out of politics.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

What Cognitive Science Tells Us About Trump

November 6, 2017

The immediately preceding post reviews three effects from Cognitive Science that explain much of what and why Donald Trump does. The first is the Dunning-Kruger Effect which states people tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. And this is because people who are unskilled in the domain suffer a dual burden: not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it. It is clear that Trump could not pass a high school civics test. He is a president who has no idea how government works. He thought he could get things done by firing and threatening to fire people. It worked on his show so he is surprised that it does not work in government. There are three independent branches of government. He has control of only one. He is also the leader of the Republican Party. But party members cannot be ordered to do something; they must be convinced that it is in their and their constituents interest. To do this requires some knowledge of the laws and policies he is advocating. He is very short on knowledge, and his opinions vary over time

He has also said that he does not need advisers, that he knows what needs to be done and he’ll do it. He had his cabinet members sing his praises for what he had done when he had not done anything. This is something that is done in North Korea, not the United States. The President needs to understand many different and complex topics. That he thinks he can operate on his own without advisers shows the depth of his ignorance. He needs advice, good advice, but he is woefully unaware of his own ignorance.

Kahneman’s Two System View of Cognition is also relevant here. System 1 is fast and is called intuition.  System 1 needs to be fast so we can process language and make the fast decisions we need to make everyday.  System 1 is also the seat of our emotions.  System 2 is called reasoning and corresponds loosely to what we mean by thinking.  System 2 requires mental effort and our attentional processes. Trump rarely, if ever, uses System 2. Indeed, one doubts that he is capable of System 2 processing. He works almost exclusively in the emotional, System 1, domain. So he is unaware when he contradicts himself. It is somewhat ironic, but this is also the basis of his success. Too many citizens never use System 2 processes and work almost exclusively on what they feel in their guts. In this sense, they are simpatico with Trump.

Then there is classical conditioning that Pavlov found with his salivating dogs. He paired the ringing of a bell with the presentation of food. The dogs became conditioned, so that they salivated just upon hearing the bell. Whomever or whatever Trump does not like he attacks with names that become conditioned to the targets of his attacks. “Crooked Hillary,” “Little Marco,” “faux news.” These terms continue to be used over and over. This is how “Big Lies” work.

These factors make Trump the worst president this country has ever suffered, and we can only hope and pray that our country will survive.

Should anyone wonder why this post, which is apparently political, is in the healthy memory blog is because System 2 processing is essential for a healthy memory. It is also important for an effective democracy.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Hillary’s High Negatives

November 3, 2017

Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote. Unfortunately, she lost the Electoral College and hence, the presidency. It is interesting that the primary justification for the Electoral College was to prevent a political unknown who did not understand how government worked from being elected. Well, that happened, so it seems that the justification for the Electoral College is gone. So let’s go to a popular election where all citizens’ votes count. There is no justification for the votes of citizens in lowly populated states counting for more than votes of citizens in highly populated states. The argument that politicians will not campaign there is irrelevant. They should campaign where most voters reside. Every state gets two senators so small states already have a disproportionally heavier weight in Congress.

The continual drumbeat throughout the election was that Hillary had high negatives. Now some voters did resent Hillary trying to drag them kicking and screaming into the 21st Century. They are certainly entitled to their opinion, but the failure to modernize will ultimately have disastrous effects. But many seemed to have a seething rage and could not articulate why. A explanation can be found by adding one psychological effect to the Dunning-Kruger Effect and Kahneman’s Two System View of Cognition that were discussed in the immediately preceding post. The following is repeated from the immediately preceding post, ““people tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. And this is because people who are unskilled in the domain suffer a dual burden: not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it.” Here is how Dunning explained in “Politico” why so many people seemed untroubled by Trump’s ignorance or gaffes. “Many voters, “especially those facing significant distress in their life, might like some of what they hear from Trump, but they do not know enough to hold him accountable for the serious gaffes he makes. They fail to recognize those gaffes as missteps.” He noted that the problem was not simply that voters were ignorant, “it is that they are often misinformed—their heads filled with false data, facts and theories that can lead to misguided conclusions held with tenacious confidence and extreme partisanship…”

According to Kahneman’s Two System View of Cognition, System 1 is fast and is called intuition.  System 1 needs to be fast so we can process language and make the fast decisions we need to make everyday.  System 1 is also the seat of our emotions.  System 2 is called reasoning and corresponds loosely to what we mean by thinking.  System 2 requires mental effort and our attentional processes.

So the answer to why are so many people willing to believe is that they believe fake news because they wanted to and because it was easy. Ideally we might assume that people want to seek out information that is true, but this is a basic misunderstanding of the human psyche, which feels more comfortable with familiar information or stories that confirm their biases. Kahneman refers to this as “cognitive ease,” the process by which we avoid and resist inconvenient facts that might make us have to think harder. It is much, much easier to bask in a flow of information that tells us that we have been right all along and confirms our view of the world. So many of these facts are so outlandish that it is hard to understand how they can possibly be believed. Cognitive ease is further confounded by the Dunning-Krueger Effect, as more and more false information simply increases the feeling that one truly knows and this can and does build into the construction of alternative (false) realities.

HM’s personal favorite faux belief about Hillary was that she was running a sex ring using children in Washington. Someone even showed up at the place where this sex ring was supposedly being run with a rifle and shot at people.

The other relevant psychological effect is classical conditioning. Most people have heard about Pavlov’s salivating dogs. By pairing a bell with food, the dog’s learn to salivate at the sound of the bell alone. By pairing something bad with the name “Hillary Clinton” negative connotations and denotations are planted in the mind. Hence, high negatives are created. As System 1 is emotional and not cognitive it provides an explanation of negative feelings that could not be articulated. Social media, aided and abetted by Russia had an especially large effect here.

The final paragraph from the preceding post is also relevant here. Social psychology also plays an important role here. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt describes the power of tribalism in shaping our ideas. He wrote in “The Righteous Mind,” Once people join a political team they get ensnared in its moral matrix. They see confirmation of their grand narrative everywhere, and it’s difficult—perhaps impossible—to convince them that they are wrong if you argue with them outside the matrix. Political Scientist Don Kinder writes that political opinions become “badges of social membership.”

A majority of citizens did vote for Hillary, but they were not rewarded with her winning the presidency. This is especially unfortunate as many believe that she was the most qualified candidate who ever ran for the presidency. And these people could actually articulate their reasons.

Should anyone wonder why this post, which is apparently political, is in the healthy memory blog is because System 2 processing is essential for a healthy memory. It is also important for an effective democracy.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Why the Right Lost Its Mind

October 31, 2017

“How the Right Lost Its Mind” is an important book by the conservative, Charles J. Sykes. He reviews the history of the political right from the John Birch Society through William F. Buckley up to Breitbart and Donald Trump. At one time Sykes was a respected conservative. No longer. George Will resigned from the Republican Party, and Ronald Reagan is probably thrashing about in his grave. Sykes reviews the history of the reasons for this change that includes the key individuals, organizations, and the revolutionary changes in technology. He provides a compelling account of the reasons for the insanity in which we are living. The purpose of this post is to provide some key parts of cognitive psychology to explain why such chaos has resulted.

To Sykes credit, he includes these concepts in the book. They are especially important here because they are also examples of what makes memories unhealthy. One is the Dunning-Kruger effect, which has been written about in this blog previously. Research has found that “people tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. And this is because people who are unskilled in the domain suffer a dual burden: not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it.” Here is how Dunning explained in “Politico” why so many people seemed untroubled by Trump’s ignorance or gaffes. “Many voters, “especially those facing significant distress in their life, might like some of what they hear from Trump, but they do not know enough to hold him accountable for the serious gaffes he makes. They fail to recognize those gaffes as missteps.” He noted that the problem was not simply that voters were ignorant, “it is that they are often misinformed—their heads filled with false data, facts and theories that can lead to misguided conclusions held with tenacious confidence and extreme partisanship…”

Much has been written in this blog about Nobel Prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman’s Two Process Theory of Cognition. This theory was expanded upon in Kahneman’s best selling book, “Thinking Fast and Slow.”  System 1 is fast and is called intuition.  System 1 needs to be fast so we can process language and make the fast decisions we need to make everyday.  System 1 is also the seat of our emotions.  System 2 is called reasoning and corresponds loosely to what we mean by thinking.  System 2 requires mental effort and our attentional processes.

For new information, our default is accept. We would advance very slowly if we questioned everything we heard, everything we encountered. However, it is the role of System 2 processes to monitor System 1 to correct any errors. This can be illustrated by presenting statements to a participant and monitoring responses recorded from the brain. If the statement accords with the person’s beliefs, there is little activity. However, if the statement does not accord with a the person’s beliefs, there is a noticeable signal in the brain. At this point the person can either ignore the information or decide to think about it further. Remember that System 2 is called reasoning and corresponds loosely to what we mean by thinking. And remember that System 2 requires mental effort and our attentional processes.

So the answer to why are so many people willing to believe is that they believe fake news because they wanted to and because it was easy. Ideally we might assume that people want to seek out information that is true, but this is a basic misunderstanding of the human psyche, which feels more comfortable with familiar information or stories that confirm their biases. Kahneman refers to this as “cognitive ease,” the process by which we avoid and resist inconvenient facts that might make us have to think harder. It is much, much easier to bask in a flow of information that tells that we have been right all along and confirmed our view of the world. So many of these facts are so outlandish that it is hard to understand how they can possibly be believed. Cognitive ease is further confounded by the Dunning-Krueger Effect, as more and more false information simply increases the feeling that one truly knows and this can and does build into the construction of alternative (false) realities.

Social psychology also plays an important role here. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt describes the power of tribalism in shaping our ideas. He wrote in “The Righteous Mind,” Once people join a political team they get ensnared in its moral matrix. They see confirmation of their grand narrative everywhere, and it’s difficult—perhaps impossible—to convince them that they are wrong if you argue with them outside the matrix. Political Scientist Don Kinder writes that political opinions become “badges of social membership.”

Serious Problems in the Criminal Justice System

October 28, 2017

If HM is ever charged with a criminal offense you will not hear him saying, “I am innocent and I have faith in our system of justice.” What you would hear him say is “I am innocent, but I have little to no confidence in the criminal justice system. I shall be retaining the best justice I can afford, so should I be exonerated, I will likely end up broke.”

The reason here is that the criminal justice system has severe problems with respect to both experimental design and human psychology. The first problem is the confound in the experimental design of a trial. There is a lawyer or legal team representing the prosecution, and a lawyer or legal team representing the defense. These two teams argue with respect to evidence and the law. But a major factor here is the quality of the lawyers. Of course a lawyer will be provided to the defendant if he cannot afford one. A problem here is that, even if public defenders are good lawyers, it is likely that they are woefully overworked. What they mainly do is negotiate plea bargains. And even if the defendant is innocent, he might not want to risk a more serious sentence if he does not plea bargain. A very large majority of criminal offenses are resolved through plea bargaining. Of course, the defendant can demand a trial and will be provided a lawyer. But the likely reality is that the lawyer is overworked and can put only a limited effort at providing a defense.

So if one can provide his own lawyer one should do so. But the quality of the defense is related to the cost of the defense. Criminals from organized crime can afford the best lawyers, and this often results in the lawyers getting the case dismissed on a legal technicality, or by raising a “reasonable doubt” in the jury’s mind. If HM ever ends up on a jury, he is likely to be held in contempt of court by the judge. The reason being that HM would insist on a definition of what a reasonable doubt is. Exactly how many guilty people should be allowed to go free, and how many innocent people people should we be willing to convict. “None” is not an acceptable response. There needs to be an acceptance that there is error in the system. A perfect system is unattainable. “Reasonable doubt” is a covering phrase to disguise the reality that innocent people can be convicted. But HM has never been, and probably never will serve, on a jury. Mind you that he has reported for jury duty and will continue to report for jury duty. However, once lawyers learn that he is a psychologist they will not want to seat him in a jury. They probably fear that he shall raise issues such as this one.

Another problem is the heavy weight provided on eyewitness testimony. Many have gone to their unjust deaths primarily on the basis of eyewitness testimony. People seem to think that seeing is believing, and are unaware what is involved in visual processing. The reality is that eyewitness testimony is highly unreliable and remains so even within an individuals ethnic group.

Another problem is that juries have more confidence when a testimony is well-given without any hesitations or caveats. Again the problem is that human memory is highly unreliable and vulnerable to suggestion. For a psychologist a well-presented testimony is suggests that the witness has been coached and that the coaching might have altered his memory.

Much more could be written on this topic, but this should be sufficient to justify the statement that HM has no faith in the justice system

Readers might want to review the website of the Innocence Project, http://www.innocenceproject.org. They deal primarily, if not exclusively, with DNA evidence as that is the most reliable means of overturning a conviction. But by reviewing these cases one can get some feeling for the problem of wrongful convictions.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Law is Medieval

October 25, 2017

This post is based on an article by Oliver Roeder on the FiveThirtyEight website on 17 Oct 2017 titled “The Supreme Court is Allergic to Math.”

In 1897, before he took his seat on the Supreme Court, Oliver Wendell Holmes delivered a famous speech at Boston University, advocating for empiricism over traditionalism: “For the rational study of the law…the man of the future is the man of statistics and the master of economics. It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV.” HM believes that if Oliver Wendel Holmes were alive today, he would also argue for an understanding of psychology and cognitive science. Much has been learned about how and why we humans perceive, think, and act. Unfortunately there is a poor fit between this knowledge and the law because the law is medieval.

The article notes that this problem was on full display this month, when the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that will determine the future of partisan gerrymandering. The issue here is how to measure a map’s partisan bias and to create a standard for when a gerrymandered map infringes on voters’ rights. A proposed measure is called the efficiency gap. To calculate it, you take the difference between each party’s waster votes for winning candidates beyond what the candidate needed to win—and divide that by the total number of votes case. The aim here is to measure the extent of partisan gerrymandering. Now a threshold needs to be established for deciding when gerrymandering is agreed upon, and that is a reasonable basis for argument. And other metrics can be proposed for measuring gerrymandering. But the only intelligent way of assessing gerrymandering is through a statistic. But apparently, this is too much for some justices mental capacities. HM is asking himself why the term feebleminded was recalled while reading this. This is no esoteric statistical technique. And, indeed, statistical measures provide the only supportable means of addressing this problem. Chief Justice John Roberts dismissed attempts to quantify partisan gerrymandering: “It may be simply my educational background, but I can only describe i as sociological gobbledygook.” To be fair to Chief Justice Roberts, the fault may well lie in the educational system. Previous healthy memory blog posts have argued for teaching some basic statistics before graduating from high school. One cannot be a responsible citizen without some basic understanding of statistics, much less someone deciding questions on the Supreme Court.

Another instance of judicial innumeracy was the Supreme Court’s decision on a Fourth Amendment case about federal searches and seizures. In his opinion Justice Potter Stewart discussed how no data existed showing that people in states that had stricter rules regarding admission of evidence obtained in an unlawful search were less likely to be subjected to these searches. He wrote, “Since as a practical matter, it is never easy to prove a negative, it is hardly likely that conclusive factual data could ever be assembled.

But as the author’s article, Oliver Roeder, wrote “This, however, is silly. It conflates two meanings of the word “negative.” Philosophically, sure, it’s difficult to prove that something does not exist: No matter how prevalent gray elephants are, their number alone can’t prove the nonexistence of polka-dotted elephants. Arithmetically, though, scientists, social and otherwise, demonstrate negatives—as in a decrease, or a difference in rate—all the time. There’s nothing special about these kinds of negatives. Some drug tends to lower blood pressure. The average lottery player will lose money. A certain voting requirement depresses turnout.

Ryan Enos, a political scientist at Harvard, calls this the “negative effect fallacy. This is just one example of an empirical misunderstanding that has proliferated like a tsunami through decades of judges’ thinking, affecting cases concerning “free speech, voting rights, and campaign finance.

Some are suspicious that this allergy to statistical evidence is really a more of a screen—a convenient way to make a decision based on ideology while couching it in terms of practicality. Daniel Hemel, who teaches law at the University of Chicago said: [Roberts] is very smart and so are the judges who would be adjudicating partisan gerrymandering claims—I’m sure he and they could wrap their minds around the math. The ‘gobbledygook’ argument seems to be masking whatever his real objection might be.’

Reluctantly, one comes to the conclusion that there is no objective truth in the law. The corpus of law can be regarded as a gigantic projective test, analogous to the Rorschach Test. Judges can look into the law and see in it what they want to see. Rarely is a decision unanimous. And frequently decisions break down along the strict constructionist philosophy. But the Constitution should be viewed as a changing and growing document as democracy advances. Strict constructionists feel compelled to project themselves back in time and interpret the words literally as written. HM wonders why they would want to go back to a time when slavery existed, women could not vote, and blacks were counted as fraction of a human being. As long as time travel is involved, why not try to think of what they would have been written in light of today’s knowledge. After all, today’s high school science student knows more science than Benjamin Franklin did, who was the most distinguished scientist of his day. And the disciplines of psychology, cognitive science, and inferential statistics did not exist.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Mature Sports Fan

October 22, 2017

The baseball season is into the playoffs and many fans are disappointed in the performance of their teams. Sports writers and commentators are providing their analyses of what went wrong and what needs to be done to get better results next year. The objective of this post is to provide some perspective on this business.

Perhaps the most common complaint is that the players were insufficiently motivated, and they did not want it enough. Given that their livelihoods are at stake, it is doubtful that any fan is more motivated than the players on the field. Moreover, the problem can actually be that the players are too motivated. Motivation is what can be termed a “Goldilocks” variable. That is, the most effective level of motivation, is that it is not too low, or too high, but just right. So a moderate level of motivation is optimal. When the level becomes too high both mental and physical skills can lock up and produce poorer performance.

A 300 hitter is regarded as a good hitter in baseball. This would mean that the hitter is successful 30% of the time and a failure 70% of the time. So expectations of even the best players are modest. But fans tend to think that their good players come through in the clutch. Well, they come through only a minority of the time. Fans tend to remember the successes and forget the failures. A common remark made by announcers is that it is likely after making a good play in the field, the player will lead off the hitting order when he comes in from the field. Well, this happens one out of nine times. It is just that it is remembered when it happens, but overlooked when it does not.

Always remember that these players are human beings. Batters fail more often than they succeed and even the best pitchers have bad days. And it is also the case that a pitcher can pitch a phenomenal game, but make one bad pitch and the game is lost.

Returning to batting, scoring requires sequences of events, none of which are high probability. Even if a batter hits a home run, there is the question of how many runners are on base. The home run can have a value of from one to four. So runners need to get on base and the probability of any one runner getting on base is less than half.

So no matter how good a team is, there is a strong element of luck that determines whether a win will result. Then there need to be many wins and the values of these wins change in the post season.

Washington fans are disappointed as they were eliminated in the first post season series. They feel like they deserve better. Well, they do not and this loss is felt even more profoundly by the players.

So many Washington fans feel that they are cursed. Boston fans talked about the curse of the Bambino, and it was only last year that the Chicago Cubs won a World Series. Be assured that there are no curses. When people are asked to generate random numbers, they fail to generate long strings of particular numbers. What are perceived as curses are actually manifestations of the way that probability works.
It is painful to watch the faces of fans when they lose. They appear to be hurting and hurting badly. Fans live vicariously through their teams. They need to have their own lives. Do not live vicariously through your teams, get a life of your own.

For a healthy memory it is important to have interests and goals of one’s own. So actually participate in sports. Athletics are not required. Educational pursuits are praiseworthy. Hobbies that allow one to grow and develop skills and knowledge can be personally rewarding. Be an autodidact and learn how to teach yourself. You’ll find resources in the healthymemory blog to help you do so.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Going On a Hiatus

October 9, 2017

With over 1,000 posts, HM should not be missed.

Nevertheless, he shall return.

More Memory and Problem Solving Techniques

October 8, 2017

Part of this post is based on the book by Barbara Oakley, Ph.D. titled “A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science (Even If You Flunked Algebra).” It is difficult to learn and remember nonsensical material. So you need to look for meaning in what you’re trying to learn. Suppose you were trying to learn a list of words and you noticed that the words belonged to specific categories. When you recall the list you should group your recall by these categories. This makes meaningful chunks for you to remember. So rather than recalling a list of, say eighteen items, you would recall them by chunks, say six categories each of which included three items. Note that this chunking is effectively reducing the number of items to recall from eighteen to six.

Suppose the list consisted of eighteen unrelated words. Your recall strategy should still be to chunk the items into smaller groups. If you can’t find meaning you can simply rehearse the items in these chunks. Chunking effectively reduces the total number of items to be recalled.

You should note that there is an entire category of healthy memory posts called mnemonic techniques. These are specific techniques for making material more meaningful and easier to learn.

Remember the distinction between information that is available in memory and information that is accessible in memory. Information that is accessible in memory can be readily recalled. However, information can be available in memory but cannot be accessed at the moment.

When HM was in college and bought used books, they usually had sections highlighted in them. He wonder how these previous owners used this highlighting. If they just reread the highlighted material, they might fool themselves into thinking that they would remember the material for the test. It is quite possible that although this information was available in memory, the student might not have been able to access the material during testing. So even if the test is going to be multiple choice, you should force yourself to actively recall the material. And to increase your probability of success, actively recall the material many times.

HM never highlighted sections or made notes directly in the book. He would review the book, to assure himself that he was not missing anything, but would actively recall the material he thought would be on the test. Understand he was not memorizing verbatim the text, but rather the meaning and important points of the text.

HM made it through his entire education up to and including his Ph.D without ever pulling an all nighter for a test. All nighters make absolutely no sense. One needs to be alert and at one’s best when taking a test. Moreover, sleep is required for memories to consolidate. So sleep itself is required for test preparation.

Generally speaking cramming is a lousy technique. Research has shown the advantage of spaced over massed practice. So it is good to try to recall material at multiple intervals, with increased spacing between the intervals.

Here are Steps provided by Dr. Oakley for building a powerful chunk
1.  Work a key problem all the way through on paper.
2.  Do another repetition of the problem, paying attention to key processes
3.  Take a break. Study other aspects of the subject or simply do something different. You need to give yourself your diffuse mode (see the immediately preceding post) time to internalize the problem
4.  Sleep. Before you go to sleep, work the problem again. If you get stuck, listen to the problem. Let your subconscious tell you what to do next.
5.  Do another repetition.

Much of this book addresses procrastination. Now there is a ton of material on procrastination and will power in the healthy memory blog. Just enter those terms in the search block of the healthy memory blog.

As was already mentioned, the Mnemonic Techniques category has many posts on techniques and methods for improving memory. That same category also has posts on mindfulness and meditation, which are also techniques that should enhance focus which is essential to effective memory.

But as always, HM cannot do full justice to this book. So reading the original is always recommended.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Two Modes of Learning

October 7, 2017

This post is based on the book by Barbara Oakley, Ph.D. titled “A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science (Even If You Flunked Algebra).” Since the beginning of he twenty-first century, neuroscientists have been making important advances in understanding two different types of networks that the brain switches between. These are the highly attentive states and the more relaxed resting states. The thinking processes related to these two different modes are the focused mode and the diffuse mode. We frequently switch back and forth between these two modes in our day-to-day activities. We’re in either one mode or the other and are not consciously in both at the same time. The diffuse mode seems to be able to work quietly in the background on something we are not actively focusing on. The diffuse mode is the default mode when we are not actively focusing on something. When we are in the focused mode actively focusing on something we may also flicker for a moment to diffuse-mode thinking.

Focused-mode thinking is essential for studying math and science. It involves a direct approach to solving problems using rational, sequential, analytical approaches. The focused mode is associated with the concentrating abilities of the brain’s prefrontal cortex, which is located right behind our forehead. When we turn our attention to something the focused mode is on.

Diffuse-mode thinking is also essential for learning math and science. It is associated with “big-picture” perspectives and allows us to suddenly gain a new insight on a problem we’ve been struggling with. Diffuse-mode thinking is what happens when we relax our attention and let our mind wander. This relaxation can allow different areas of the brain to hook up and return valuable insights. The diffuse mode is “diffused” throughout the brain. Dr. Oakley writes that “Diffuse mode insights often flow from preliminary thinking that’s been done in the focused mode (The diffuse mode must have clay to make bricks.”)

Of course, to begin to solve a problem we need to focus on it. However, even early in problem solving switching to diffuse mode thinking might help in bringing additional thoughts to the problem. But then we need to focus on the problem to solve it. Sometimes the solution comes readily to mind, but sometimes the solution evades us as we continue to focus. When stuck, relax and switch to the diffuse mode. The problem solving process can involve many iterations between focused and diffused processing. Knowing when and how frequently to switch develop as our problem solving skills mature.

Sometimes problems cannot be solved during one sitting. Nevertheless, our brains keep working on the problem, and sometimes they suddenly pop into consciousness. This can happen long after you think you have given up on the problem. This is HM’s favorite type of problem solving and it’s called incubation. There are stories of mathematicians and scientists going years without being able to solve an important problem and it suddenly pops into mind.
However, it is important not to rely too heavily on incubation. Continue to return to the problem and try to solve it.

Focused problem solving in math and science is frequently more effortful that focused-mode thinking involving language and people. This is likely because humans have not involved over the millennia to manipulate mathematical ideas, which are usually more abstractly encrypted than those of conventional language. Dr Oakley writes “Obviously we can still think about math and science—it’s just that abstractness adds a level—sometime a number of levels—of complexity.

Dr. Oakley also warns of the Einstellung effect. Here an idea you already have in mind, or your simple initial thought, prevents a better idea or solution from being found. She writes that the Einstellung effect is a frequent stumbling block for students. She continues, “This is precisely why one significant mistake students sometime make in learning math and science is jumping into the water before they learn to swim. …they blindly start working on homework without reading the textbook, attending lectures, viewing online lessons, or speaking with someone knowledgeable. This is a recipe for sinking.”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

How to Excel at Learning

October 6, 2017

This post is based on another book by Barbara Oakley, Ph.D. titled “A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science (Even If You Flunked Algebra).”  Note that the title of this post is different from the title of the book, the reasoning being that this book provides excellent material for learning in general—not just for math and science.

The immediately preceding posts were based on another book by Dr. Oakley, “Mindshift.” After she graduated from high school she enlisted in the army because they would actually pay her to learn another language. She did so well studying Russian that she won an ROTC scholarship. She graduated with honors and found herself commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Signal Corps. She was suddenly expected to become an expert in radio, cable, and telephone switching systems. She went from being on top of the world as an expert linguist, to being thrown into a new technological world where she was as stunted as a stump.

She was made to enroll in mathematically oriented electronics training where she finished at the bottom of the class, and was then sent off to West Germany, where she said she became a pitiable communications platoon leader. She saw that officers and enlisted members who were technically competent were in demand.

She didn’t see a future for herself in the army, but neither did she see much of a future as someone with a degree in Slavic languages and literature. She used the GI Bill to retrain her brain and learn math and science. She writes that it wasn’t easy and that the first semesters were filled with frightening frustration. She writes that she felt like she was wearing a blindfold.

Eventually she began to catch on. She found that part of her original problem was she had been putting her effort forth in the wrong way—like trying to lift a piece of lumber while standing on it. She began to pick up little tricks about not only how to study but also when to quit. She learned that internalizing certain concepts and techniques could be a powerful tool. She also learned not to take in too much at once, and allowed herself plenty of time to practice even if it meant that her classmates would sometime graduate ahead of her because she wasn’t taking as many courses each semester as they were.

She found that as she gradually learned how to learn math and science, things became easier, and just as with studying language, the better she got, the more she enjoyed what she was doing. She went on to earn a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering and then a master’s in electrical and computer engineering. Eventually she earned a doctorate in systems engineering, with a broad background that included thermodynamics, electromagnetic, acoustics, and physical chemistry. The higher she went, the better she did.

As was mentioned in the first paragraph, this book is for anyone who wants to learn more effectively. Students find that they can do okay in other subjects, but they run into trouble when they hit math and science. Actually, they have poor methods of studying, but they manage to get by without realizing that their studying is deficient until the encounter math and science. Nevertheless, the methods presented in this book will increase learning efficiency regardless the topic.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Mindshift Resources

October 5, 2017

This post provides information on resources for mindshifts. Although this post focuses on massive online open courses (MOOCs), mindshifts can be accomplished from many sources. However, MOOCs are a new high tech means of learning. Some MOOCs are free, even from first rate universities, and some MOOCs require payment. Usually to get college credits payments are required. However, autodidacts do not necessarily want or desire college credits. There is a website nopaymba.com by Laura Pickard who writes, “I started the No-Pay MBA website as a way of documenting my studies, keeping myself accountable, and providing a resource for other aspiring business students. The resources on this site are for anyone seeking a world-class business education using the free and low-cost tools of the internet.  I hope you find them useful!” She explains how she got an business education equivalent to an MBA for less than1/100th the cost of a traditional MBA.

class-central.com lists free online courses from the best universities. She also list the best 50 MOOCs of all time. This is a good resource for learning about MOOCs.

Here are some notes on additional resources provided in Mindshift.

Coursera: This is the largest MOOC provider. It has courses on many different subjects and in many different languages. It also offers an MBA and data science master’s degree and offers “specializations”—clusters of MOOCs.

edX: Has a large number of courses on many different subjects and in in many different languages. Offers “MicroMasters”—cluster of MOOCs.

FutureLearn: Has a large number of courses on many different subjects and languages, particularly, but not exclusively from British universities. Offers “Programs”—clusters of MOOCs.

Khan Academy: Offers tutorial videos on a large number of subjects, from history to statistics. The site is multilingual and uses gasification.

Kadenze: Special focus on art and creative technology.

Canvas Network: Designed to give professors an opportunity to give their online classes a wider audience. Has a large number of courses on many different subjcts.

Open Education by Blackboard: Similar to Canvass Network.

World Science U: A platform designed to use great visuals to communicate ideas in science.

Instructables: Provides user-created and -uploaded do-it-yourself projects which are rated by other users.

You can find the author’s MOOC, “Learning How to Learn” on coursera.org.

 

 

Mindshift

October 4, 2017

“Mindshift” is outstanding book by Barbara Oakley, Ph.D. The subtitle is “Break Through Obstacles to Learning and Discover Your Hidden Potential.” Growth mindsets are a central theme of the healthymemory blog. Basically, a mindshift is a shift in the focus of a growth mindset.

This concept of mindshift assumes special importance in today’s world, where workers fear being replaced by robots, and in the changing nature of jobs and the need to update skills for jobs.

Dr. Oakley has an interesting and relevant life story. Her father was in the military and she moved constantly doing her childhood. Her father wanted her to attend college and study math and science. Unfortunately, the only thing she was certain about was that she did not like math and science and did not think that she had any aptitude in math and science. However, she did like studying languages so she began studying French and German. At the time there were no available college loans so she enlisted in the military where she could get paid to study a language. So she studied Russian and learned the language.

When she got out of the army, she could not find any interest in her Russian skills. The jobs were in engineering and science and required advanced mathematical skills. So she moved into a new area for which she thought she had no aptitude. However, she found through diligent work that she was able to learn these subjects, and as she became proficient in these subjects, she found that she enjoyed them. So today she is a professor of engineering, firmly planted in the world of math and science. Along with Terrence Sejnowski, the Francis Crick Professor at the Salk Institute, she teaches the most popular online course in the world—“Learning How to Learn”—for Coursera/UC San Diego.

She writes that a “mindshift” is a deep change in life that occurs thanks to learning, and that is what this book is about. She relates true and inspirational stories of how people change themselves through learning—and who bring seemingly obsolete extraneous knowledge with them that has enabled our world to grown in fantastically creative and uplifting ways.

Diverse examples are provided. Some mindshifts were motivated by necessity. In others, successful people changed their mindsets to pursue new interests and different directions. Readers will be inspired by these examples and by what we know from science of learning to help us grow to achieve our fullest potential.

A recurring theme in the healthymemory blog is to have a growth mindset and to continue to learn to the end of our lives. MIndshift provides additional means for pursuing this end. Not only are instructions on learning how to learn discussed, but available resources for growth mindsets and mindshifts are provided.

 

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Ikigai Fosters Healthy Aging

October 3, 2017

This post is based on an article by Judith Graham in the Health Section of the 26 September 2017 issue of the Washington Post titled “Healthy Aging.” Ikigai is a topic that has been addressed in many healthy memory blog posts. It is a Japanese word meaning to have a purpose in life.

Ms. Graham writes, “Over the past two decades dozens of studies have shown that seniors with a sense of purpose in life are less likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, disabilities, heart attacks or strokes, and more likely to live longer than people without this kind of underlying motivation. “

The article continues by summarizing a report in JAMA Psychiatry that older adults with a solid sense of purpose tend to retain strong hand grips and walking speeds, which are key indicators of how rapidly people are aging. Seniors with a sense of purpose may be more physically active and take better care of their health. Patrick Hill, an assistant professor of psychology and brain sciences at Washington University in St. Louis says, “Purposeful individuals tend to be less reactive to stressors and more engaged, generally, in their daily lives, which can promote cognitive and physical health.”

Now the question becomes how to achieve ikigai. Obviously taking care of a loved one qualifies. Doing important volunteer is another. And we can create our own sources of ikigai. If there are any degrees that need to be completed, they can be completed. Or you can start work on a new degree. A formal education system is not needed. Goals can consist of learning new bodies of knowledge using the internet and the public library. This healthy memory blog is a source of ikigai for HM.

Ikigai is important for everyone, not just the aging. The healthy memory blog post “Loneliness” discussed the problem of loneliness among the young and means of dealing with it. One means was to find a project you can be devoted to can achieve ikigai to the point that you’ll no longer feel lonely.

This what Steve Cole at UCLA writes about loneliness, “finding a sense of purpose and meaning in life can overcome the negative effects of loneliness. If you think of lonely people as having a world view of threat and hostility, this study suggests that you can attack this underlying psychology by becoming engaged in help others, trying to make the world a better place. I’m kind of excited about that as an obliques attack on loneliness.” All of this fits in with with the work of Victor J. Stretcher, which he describes in his book, “Life on Purpose: How Living for What Matters Changes Everything.” There have been many healthy memory posts based on this book.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Walking to Work or Doing the Vacuuming Can Extend Your Life

October 2, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an In Brief News piece in the 30 September 2017 issue of the New Scientist. One in 12 early deaths could be prevented with 30 minutes of physical activity, five days a week. And you don’t need to be sweating in a gym. Walking to work and household chores also count. So concludes the world’s largest study of physical activity, which analyzed data from more than 130,000 people in 17 countries. The study lasted seven years and participants were followed-up at least twice over the this period to record information about cardiovascular disease and death.

Scott Lear of McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada and his colleagues found that 150 minutes of activity per week week reduced the risk of early death by 28% and rates of heart disease by a fifth.

If these goals were met, 8% of early deaths over seven years would be prevented (The Lancet, doi.org/cdfc). James Rudd at the University of Cambridge says, “Exercise truly is the best medicine for reducing the odds of an early death.”

HM fears he sees too many people exercising too hard. He was gladdened by this study as he follows the philosophy of famed pitcher Satchel Paige who said that he liked to get the juices jangling.

Also see the healthy memory blog post “To Improve Your Memory, Build Your Hippocampus.” Walking for 40 minutes three times a week increased the volume of that memory important organ, the hippocampus. This also increased serum Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which helps support the survival of existing neurons and encourages the growth and differentiation of new neurons and synapses.

 

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Progress in Developing a Way to Diagnose CTE

October 1, 2017

Much of this post is based on an article by Rick Maese titled “Breakthrough may lead to ability to diagnose CTE in living football players in the Sports section of the 27 September 2017 issue of the Washington Post.

There have been many previous posts, including the immediately preceding one, on Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). A new study published in the journal PLOS ONE by researchers from Boston University and the VA Boston Healthcare System studied the brains of 23 former football players who were diagnosed with CTE, in addition to those of 50 non-athletes who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease and 18 non-athlete controls. They found significantly elevated levels of a protein related to inflammation called CCL11 in the group of ex-players compared with non-athletes. Dr. Ann McKee, the neuropathologist credited with some of the most high-profile CTE diagnoses was encouraged but cautioned that more research is needed. Until this discovery the diagnosis needed to be performed on cadavers. Now the diagnosis can be made on the living. The hope is that research into the prevention and treatment of the disease can begin to move forward.

Let us indulge in the fantasy that CTE can be cured and consider what the ramifications of that might be. The NFL might be encouraged to continue playing the game as it is currently played and treat players who developed CTE. Their fear is that changing the game could reduce fans and revenues.

But for everyone else, the basic problem would remain. The immediately preceding post discussed children. Why we would ever consider putting them at risk? The same goes for players in secondary schools. Then there is the college game. The college game is also concerned with revenues. It is ironic that institutions whose goal is to foster the development of brains and minds engages in activities the puts the brain and mind at risk. However, one gets the impression that at some schools the brain and mind might well take second place to football. At the University of Alabama, for example, the outside linebacker coach earns more than the president of the university.

The immediately preceding post suggested that the game could be modified to reduce or eliminate head injuries. Football is a fast game that can involve sophisticated offenses and defenses. It seems that the game could be changed so that these features could be maintained and head injuries severely reduced if not eliminated by reducing the hits and the violence. These changes could also reduce the need for linemen to increase their weights to over 300 pounds to be eligible for athletic scholarships. As the number of colleges who actually realize substantial profits for the game is fairly small, this could be the route to go. And perhaps HM is too pessimistic in thinking that it is the violence that has the basic appeal and that professional football could also change.

Much hope is being placed in equipment changes. Unfortunately, in the past this seems to have encouraged harder hitting rather than safer play.
© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Football Before Age 12 Can Lead to Behavior Issues

September 30, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Rick Maese in the Sports section of the 20 September 2017 Issue of the Washington Post.
A study published recently in the medical journal Translational Psychiatry reported that those who participated in football before age 12 were twice as likely to have problems with behavior regulation, apathy, and executive functioning when the get older. Executive functioning includes initiating activities, problem solving, planning, and organizing. The younger football players were three times more likely as those who took up the sport after age 12 to experience symptoms of depression.

One of the authors of this study, Robert Stern is the director of clinical research at Boston University’s Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) Center, said “Perhaps that is a window of vulnerability…It makes sense that children whose brains are rapidly developing should not be hitting their heads over and over again. ”An interesting result was that the findings were not affected by the number of concussions the former players reported, meaning the danger posed by football can’t be boiled down simply to big hits to the head. Research is increasingly focusing on the effects associated with the accumulation of smaller hits that a player might more easily shake off during a game or practice. Stern said, “Concussions are a big deal when it comes to short term problems, and it has to be dealt with. But the dialogue out there needs to now start focusing on these repetitive hits that are part of the game and their potential for long term problems.”

Another study was done by researchers from the Wake Forest School of Medicine. They followed a group of 25 players, ages 8 to 13, for a single season, measuring the frequency and severity of helmet impacts. The players underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tests before and after the season, and they showed significant changes in the brain’s white matter. White matter affects learning and brain functions, modulating the distribution of action potentials, acting as a relay and coordinating communication between different brain regions.
None of the participants in that study showed signs or symptoms of concussions, and the players who suffered more hits saw more significant changes to the brain.

The healthy memory blog has many posts on chronic traumatic encephalopathy. At the professional level the damage caused by playing football is costly, and apparently the brain is adversely affected at very young ages.

Football is a very interesting and complicated game, but modifications of the game could make it much safer. This might not be possible at the professional level, because the violence is a big part of the appeal of the game. However, these modifications should be made for young people. Colleges and universities should also consider modifications to make the game safer. It is ironic that institutions whose purpose is education and building healthy brains pursue a sport that damages brains.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

How To Take Back Your Life from Disruptive Technology

September 27, 2017

There have been twelve posts on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” that documented the adverse affects of technology. There was an additional post demonstrating that just the presence of a Smartphone can be disruptive. The immediately preceding post documented the costs of social media per se. First of all they have disruptive effects on lives and minds. And these disruptive effects degrade your mind, which the blog posts documented affect many aspects of your life, including education. Hence the title of this blog post.

Unfortunately, social media make social demands. So removing yourself from social media is something that needs to be explained to your friends, whom you should let know you’ll still be willing to communicate via email. Review with them the reason for your decision. Cite the relevant research presented in this blog and elsewhere. Point out that Facebook not only has an adverse impact on cognition, it was also a tool used by Russia to influence our elections. Facebook accepted rubles to influence the US Presidential election. The magnitude of this intervention has yet to be determined. For patriotic reasons alone, Facebook should be ditched. You are also taking these steps to reclaim control of your attentional resources and to build a healthy memory.

Carefully consider what steps you need to take. Heavy users become nervous when they are not answering alerts. One can gradually increase the increments in answering alerts. However, going cold turkey and simply turning off alerts might be more painful initially, but it would free you from the compulsion to answer alerts earlier should you of cold turkey. It would also make your behavior clearer to your friends earlier rather than later. Similarly you can only answer text messages and phone calls at designated. Voice mail assures you won’t miss anything.

If asked by a prospective employer or university as to why you are not on Facebook, explain that you want to make the most of your cognitive potential and that Facebook detracts from this objective. Cite the research. You can develop a web presence by having your own website that you would control. Here you could attach supporting materials as you deem fit.

Doing this should make you stand out over any other candidates who might be competing with you (unless they were also following the advice of this blog). If your reviewer is not impressed, you should conclude that he is not worthy of you and that affiliating with them would be a big mistake. Hold to this conclusion regardless of the reputation of the school or employer.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Happiness Effect

September 26, 2017

The subtitle to “The Happiness Effect” is “How Social Media is Driving a Generation to Appear Perfect at Any Cost,” a book by Donna Freitas. The book reports extensive research using surveys and interviews on the use of social media by college students. The subtitle could be expanded to “How Social Media is Driving a Generation to Appear Perfect at Any Cost Resulting In Unhappiness and Anxiety.’ The book focuses on the emotional and social costs and ends with suggestions regarding how to ameliorate the damage.

Although this is an excellent book, HM had difficulty finishing reading it. He kept thinking how stupid, moronic, and damaging social media are. How could new technology be adopted and put to such a counterproductive use? The reason that HM’s reaction is much more severe than that of Donna Freitas is that he is also considering social media in terms of how they exacerbate the problem of the Distracted Mind, which has been the topic of the fifteen healthy memory blog post immediately preceding this current one. So these activities that produce unhappiness and anxiety also assault the mind with more distractions.

They do so in two ways. First of all they subtract time from effective thinking. Social media also foster interruptions that further disrupt effective thinking. So consider the possibility that social media foster unhappy airheads.

Facebook pages are cultivated to impress future employers. Organizations and activities cultivate Facebook pages to provide good public relations for their organizations and activities. But remember the healthy memory blog post, “The Truth About Your Facebook Friends” based on Seth Stephens-Davidowitz’s groundbreaking book, “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who We Really Are.” You should realize that anyone who believes what they read on Facebook is a fool.

The following post will suggest some activities for you to consider should you be convinced of what you have read in the healthy memory blog and related sources on this topic. These suggestions go beyond what was presented in the blog post “Modifying Behavior.”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity

September 25, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Adrian F. Ward, Kristen Duke, Eyelet Sneezy, and Maarten Bos in JACR, volume 2, number 2, Published online April 3, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/691462.

This article reports two experiments that examine whether the mere presence of someone’s smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. In the first experiment participants were assigned to one of three phone location conditions: participants in the desk condition were instructed to place their phones face down in a designated location on their desks; participants in the pocket/bag condition carried all of their belongings into the testing room with them and kept their phones wherever they naturally would; participants in the other room condition left all their belongings including their phones in the lobby before entering the testing room.

Two tasks were used to measure available cognitive capacity. The Automated Operation Span Task was used to measure the capacity of working memory. A 10-item subset of Raven’s Progressive Matrices was used to assess the amount of fluid intelligence.

Working memory capacity was highest when the smartphones were left in another room. The pocket/bag and desk conditions did not differ significantly between each other. However, for the fluid intelligence task, the having the smartphones in the other room performed best followed by the pocket/bag condition, and the desk condition.

Experiment 2 assessed whether self-reported ratings of smartphone dependence moderated the effect of smartphone salience on cognitive capacity. The three conditions of phone location (desk, pocket/bag, other room) were repeated. Half the participants were told to keep the power on for their phones, and half were told to completely turn off their devices.

All participants completed a battery of questions intended to assess individual differences in the use of and connection to one’s smartphone. This experiment did not measure fluid intelligence only the working memory span test. Phone locations affected available cognitive capacity at average and high levels of smartphone dependence, but not at low levels of smartphone dependence.

So the salience of smartphones does adversely affect cognitive capacity except for people who had low levels of smartphone dependence. The rule seems to be out of sight out of mind unless you have a low level of smartphone dependence.

 

 

Modifying Behavior

September 24, 2017

This is the final chapter in The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. This final chapter is devoted to providing advice on modifying behavior to reduce distractions and to improve the performance of your mind,

Here are the questions Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen say we should ask ourselves:

How might I increase my metacognitive view of how my own mind performs in a given situation, and in what ways are my actions not in line with how I should behave based on my goals and an understanding of my situation, and in what ways are my actions not in line with how I should behave based on my goals and an understanding of my limitations?
How might I change my physical environment to reduce accessibility of potential distractors?
How might I assess whether I am self-interrupting because of boredom, and how might I make the task more interesting to stave off boredom?
How might I recognize when my actions are driven by anxiety about missing out on something in my virtual world, and what steps can I take to reduce the anxiety?

McGill University professor Daniel Levitan urges people to check electronic communications at certain times during the day.. More specifically he writes, “If you want to be more productive and creative, and to have more energy, the science dictates that you should partition your day into project periods. You social networking should be done during a designated time, not as constant interruptions to your day. Email, too, should be done at designated times. An email that you know is sitting there, unread, may sap attentional resources as your brain keeps thinking about it, distracting you from what you’ve been doing. What might be in it? Who’s it from? Is it good news or bad news? It’s better to live your email program off than to ear that constant ping and know that you’re ignoring messages.

Something none of these writers address, at least in this volume, are the social ramifications of your change in behavior. It is advisable to discuss what you’ve learned in this book and that you are determined to deal constructively with a destructive mind. Your should encourage your friends to alter their habits. After all, they will benefit also. Somehow the rudeness of disrupting a social interaction to respond to an alert or message became acceptable. In point of fact, it is rude. The person is saying, wait, this is probably more important than you. Also dinners should be for eating and for conversing with others at the table. Participants who are not physically present have not earned the right to participate.

There is a question as to how best inaugurate these changes in behavior. First, notify your friends as discussed above, so they will not become angry with you. Then the question is whether you should ease into these behaviors of adopt them cold turkey. The latter might be more difficult, but it is easier to explain yourself to your friends. Also your agony should be shorter, if not more severe, at least initially.

The chapter also includes some ideas based on research studies for planning restorative, stress-reducing breaks, each of which will take only a few minutes.

*Exercise—even for only twelve minutes—facilitates brain function and improves attention.
*Train your eyes using the 20-20-20 rule: every twenty minutes take a twenty second break and focus on objects twenty feet away. This changes your focal distance from inches to many feet and requires blood flow to brain areas that are not related to constant attention.
*Expose yourself to nature. Consider using at least part of your break to get away from technology and spend a few minutes in a natural setting. Research has shown that just ten minutes in a natural environment can be restorative; even viewing pictures of nature can be restorative.
*Daydreaming, staring into space, doodling on paper, or any activity that takes you away from performing a specific task activates the “default mode network”—a network of interacting brain areas that most often indicate that you are daydreaming, thinking creatively, or just mind wandering—which is restorative for attention.
*Short ten-minute naps have been shown to improve cognitive function. Longer naps work, too as seen in a study of pilots who improved their reaction time after taking a thirty-minute nap.
*Talking to other human beings, face to face or even on the telephone, reduces stress and has been shown to improve work performance.
*Laugh! Read a joke book, look at comic strips, read a funny blog. A Loma Linda University study found that older adults who watched a funny video scored better on memory tests and showed reduced cortisol and increased endorphins and dopamine, meaning less stress and more energy and positive feelings.
*Grab something to drink and a small snack.
*Read a chapter in a fiction book. Recent research shows major brain shifts when reading immersive fiction.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Boosting Control

September 23, 2017

Boosting Control is the penultimate chapter in The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. It begins with this quote from the father of American psychology, William James: “And the faculty of voluntarily bringing back a wandering attention, over and over again is the very root of judgment, character, and will. No one is compos sui he have it not. An education which should improve this faculty would be the education par excellence.”

Gazzaley and Rosen begin by discussing traditional education. They note that the most widely implemented approach is the current system of didactic classroom instruction delivered by a teacher lecturing to a group of students. They write, “Although this long-established, globally adopted, traditional education system varies in its details by geography and historic time period, a common feature is the emphasis on rote memorization via formalized and structured lessons follow by assessments of attained knowledge using formalized testing.“ They note that there seems to be a tension between this traditional model that has largely focused on the delivery of information content and the goal of developing core information-processing abilities of the brain. They do not believe that the objectives of an education system should be directed solely at the transfer of content to young minds. They argue that it is also critical that developing minds build strong cognitive control abilities that allow them to engage flexibly in dynamic and challenging environments. They state that even alternative educational systems that aim to foster real world outcomes may not be developing cognitive control capabilities. There is convincing evidence that superior cognitive control is associated with successful academic performance, but that little is known about whether traditional education actually builds the fundamental information-processing abilities of our brains that underlie cognitive control. They raise the question of whether traditional education is truly an effective form of cognitive enhancement that has the power minimize our control limitations. Put simply, does the current education system help the young Distracted Mind?

The authors point to the Tools of the Mind program developed by psychologists Elana Bodrova and Deborah Leong. It is based on theories and insights into how a system of activities can be designed to boost cognitive control. More details can be found at
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174918
The authors also see the need to think increasingly about education as a lifelong process; we have the potential to enhance our cognitive control at any age. “Educational programs across the lifespan directed at boosting and maintaining cognitive control should be the rule, not the exception.” Healthy memory blog readers should recognize this as being in step with the philosophy of the healthy memory blog.

In the section on meditation the authors write, “Accumulating evidence convinces us that there is a strong signal that meditation engineers improvements in cognitive control, and of course there are many reasons beyond improvements in cognitive control, and of course theater are many reasons beyond that encourage us to recommend engagement in mindfulness practices. They caveat this by stating that many studies have methodological limitations. These methodological limitations and the reasons for not being concerned about them were discussed in the immediately preceding post, “The Somewhat Tarnished Gold Standard.” HM believes that meditation is the best means of increasing attentional and cognitive control. Enter “relaxation response” into the search block of the healthy memory blog to learn more about meditation and the benefits of meditation.

There is a section on cognitive exercise (brain games). On the whole, this review is quite favorable. Different games are effective to differential degrees so it is helpful to do some research on specific games. However, HM warns against using these as a prevention to dementia. Although they might help, memory health is a matter of a commitment to cognitive growth, a healthy lifestyle, and meditation. The same point can be made with respect to video games. They can be helpful, but they do not provide a 100% solution.

There are obvious activities that should not be overlooked. There is a theory that contends that interactions with nature can be beneficial. This theory is called attention restoration theory (ART). In 2007, thirty-eight University of Michigan students, armed with a map and tracked by GPS, tool a one-hour walk through either a tree-lined arboretum or a traffic-heady urban center. Before and after these walks they performed a working memory test. A 2008 paper described a significant improvement in their working memory performance after the nature walk, but not after the urban walk. Similar beneficial effects of nature exposure have been shown to occur in children with ADHD and young adults with depression, and amazingly even in response to just viewing nature pictures. In this context, readers might want to review the healthy memory blog post “Awe.”

There is also much data documenting the benefits of physical exercise. This does increase oxygen to the brain, which is definitely beneficial. However, HM also recommends mental exercise that is accomplished by invoking System 2 processing through lifelong learning, meditation, and other activities that have been reviewed.

The authors also review neurofeedback. HM argues that these same benefits and more can be achieved through meditation absent the neurofeedback hookups.

There is a category of healthy memory posts titled Mnemonic Techniques. These are specific techniques for improving memory. Additionally they provide a means of cognitive exercise that enhances memory health. Try some of them. You also should read “Moonwalking with Einstein” to learn what can be accomplished using these techniques.

It is unlikely that there will ever be a cure or preventative vaccine for Alzheimer’s or dementia (See the healthy memory blog post, “The Myth of Alzheimers). However, following the activities in the healthy memory blog could well increase the likelihood that you will die without experiencing any of the physical or cognitive symptom’s even if you die with the neurofibrillary tangles and amyloid plaque that are the defining feature of the disease.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

 

The Somewhat Tarnished Gold Standard

September 22, 2017

This post is exclusively HM’s. It is being introduced here before the final two posts on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. The final two posts provide guidance on how to cope with the distracted mind. The authors do a well-intentioned but naive review of research and attempt to rank methods with respect to their level of confidence. This post provides some background for understanding research results and conclusions that should be generally valuable.

Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded studies called randomized controlled trials or RCTs are the Gold Standard for research. This is a good standard to employ when it is feasible. But it is not always feasible, and attempts to apply it can lead to erroneous conclusions.

Here is an example where the Gold Standard was applied with no adverse consequences. This was the test of the Salk Vaccine for polio. HM was in the second grade at this time. Some test participants were given the Salk Vaccine and others were given a placebo. HM did not know whether he had been given the vaccine or a placebo, nor did the people administering the vaccine. We were assigned randomly, there were placebo controls, and the people administering did not know if we were being given the vaccine or the placebo (number were assigned to identify the conditions, but the administrators did not know what the numbers meant.

Now suppose participants assigned themselves. Here everything falls apart and valid interpretations are not possible.

Now suppose the Gold Standard was employed, but negative results, no evidence that the vaccine worked, were achieved. Does this allow the conclusion that the vaccine does not work? In statistics, you cannot prove a negative. The procedure is to decide to reject the null hypothesis with a certain degree of confidence. It is conceivable that the dose was too small. Another test might be warranted using larger doses.

Suppose the test involved a medication that was self-administered, and the Gold Standard was rigorously applied. What could possibly confound the results? Well the question is how well did the participants self-administer the medication? Differences in the results could be the result of an artifact caused by their being differences in adherence to self administration in the two groups.

The efficacy of meditation has been tested. HM has been pleasantly surprised by the positive results when the training was short and the training period fairly limited. In a study in which a group instructed to meditate is compared to a group instructed to do something else, there is the following possible problem: if participants have been randomly assigned to the groups, some who have been assigned to the meditation group might not believe in meditation and have a negative attitude to training and the entire project. This is different from RCTs in which the participants are passive and the treatment is administered to them.
When HM was a graduate student there was a hotly contested debate regarding whether humans could learn to control their autonomic nervous systems. HM thought this was ridiculous as there were practitioners of certain religions, Buddhism for example, who were able to control their heart rates and reduce them to frighteningly low levels. So HM thought the issue was resolved. But research was being done at colleges in which students were given biofeedback and examined as to whether they could learn to control their heart rates. Since this research failed, these researchers effectively accepted the null hypothesis, and ignored evidence from the millions of humans who were effective controlling their autonomic nervous systems.

HM is a strong advocate of mindfulness meditation. This increases the control of our attentional processes, which gives us increased control of our mind and emotions. The research question is not whether it works, but how much meditation of different types is useful. There is more than ample research indicating the benefits of the relaxation response discussed in healthy memory blogs.

So for RCTs to yield valid results, the experimental design and sample sizes should be adequate. Research participant compliance is another issue. Moreover, there is a much more important issue to which the research community at large has yet to consider. This issue comes from epigenetics: it is not just genes, but what is read out from the genes that is important. Nurture affects what is read out from the gene, so two individuals with identical genes can differ in how these genes are expressed. So identical twins can differ radically. One outstanding example involved two identical twin sisters. One was popular and a successful student. The other was socially withdrawn and a poor student. These twins were raised in the same family. Medications for people with identical genes could still have different effects. So under what conditions, are RCTs are still applicable? Herbert I. Weinberg has raised this issue in his book, “Willful Ignorance: The Mismeasure of Uncertainty.”

Yet another factor for consideration is the distinction between between near and far conclusions. Practically all results and conclusions should be regarded as near studies. Studies showing the cognitive benefits of games provide a useful example. If cognitive tests reveal a difference between people playing games and people who don’t, one can only make conclusions about these immediate benefits. Conclusions about the far effects of these games, say in the prevention of dementia, are questionable extrapolations. How long do these games have to be played? These conclusions await further research.

Now there are good data (see the healthymemory blog post “Cognitive Activity and the Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease”) indicating that cognitive activity helps build cognitive reserve which reduces the risk of dementia. Now the brain is always active, even when we sleep. So the question is what types of cognitive activity? HM has strongly argued that effortful processing, what Kahneman terms System 2 processing.

HM is mildly depressed when physical activity is emphasized, and cognitive activity relatively ignored. Sure physical activity is beneficial along with living a healthy lifestyle. But a main effect of physical activity is to increase oxygen flow to the brain. However effortful System 2 processing, activates many pathways in the brain and creates new links. Practically all learning initially involves System 2 processing, and as long as different and new ideas are being considered or new material is being learned, more pathways are activated and new links are made. HM argues it is this that enables the overcoming of the amyloid plaque and neurofibrillary tangles that are the defining characteristics of Alzheimer’s.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Mental, Emotional, and Physical Health

September 21, 2017

This is the twelfth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. A study performed by Dr. Rosen’s lab of 1,143 teens, young adults, and adults assessed symptoms of psychiatric disorders, daily media and technology use, preference for multitasking, anxiety about missing out on technology use, and technology-related attitudes. Symptoms of psychiatric disorders were predicted by some combination of daily technology use and preference for multitasking even after factoring out the impact of anxiety about missing out on technology and technology-related attitudes.

Another study from Dr. Rosen’s lab led by Dr. Nancy Cheever investigated the effect that technology use, or rather, lack of use, has on anxiety. 163 college students were brought into a lecture hall, with half being told to turn off their phone and store it and all other materials under their seat while remaining quiet and simply doing nothing. The other half of the students were given the same general instructions about storing materials out of sight and doing nothing, but they had their smartphones taken away and replaced with a claim check for later retrieval. 10 minutes later and then twice more during the hour—plus session, each student completed a paper and pencil measure of anxiety. The prediction was that the students holding a claim check for their phone would become anxious, and they did, but no more so than students whose phone was turned off and stored under the desk. They found that the heaviest users of their smartphones—those who were younger and grew up with technology—showed increased anxiety after just ten minutes of not being able to use their phone, and their anxiety continue to increase across the hour as compared to those who used their phone less.

Once we fall asleep, our brain activity goes through four phases from light sleep to deep sleep, which is followed by rapid eye movement (REM) sleep that signifies we re dreaming. In a normal night’s sleep, this process repeats four times, with REM sleep getting longer as the night wears on. During sleep the brain performs a variety of housekeep chores that are called “synaptic rejuvenation” including pruning and memory consolidation. This serves to remove unimportant connections and enhance important ones. Moreover, our nighttime brain flushed out toxins tat are by-products of daytime neural activity, which if not removed can have deleterious effects on neurons in the brain.

Photopigment cells in the retina at the back of our eyes help control the release of melatonin. To produce white light, technology screens must emit light at multiple wavelengths, including blue short wavelengths. The photopigment cells signal our brains that it is time to be alert when exposed to blue light. So using technology in the bedroom right before sleep, we are bombarding our eyes with blue light that signals awake time rather than red light that signals it is time to go to sleep. Moreover, blue light is far stronger when one is looking at a small screen held close to the face.

Meta analysis of sixty-seven studies of the impact of screen time on children and adolescents found that screen time, particularly in the last hour prior to sleep, is related to sleep problems, primarily resulting in fewer nightly hours of sleep and poorer sleep quality. Studies have shown that 46% of college students awaken at night to answer text messages, and 40% awaken to answer phone calls, resulting in 46 minutes less nightly sleep. The authors conclude, “With the vast majority of teens using a variety of technologies prior to sleep as well as awakening during the night to address smartphone alerts, it is like that their brains are not getting the nightly housekeeping that was previously mentioned, which can lead to mental difficulties.

A study of more than 2,000 fourth and seventh graders found that children who slept near a small screen device had nearly 21 minutes less sleep than those children who did not sleep in close proximity to a phone or tablet, and those who slept in a room with a television set reported 18 fewer nightly minutes of sleep.

Additional research in Dr. Rosen’s lab using a series of measurement tools to assess sleep quality, executive functioning, anxiety about missing out on electronic communications, and daily smartphone use discovered four paths to a predicted poor night’s sleep. Poorer executive functioning (the ability to make good decisions) predicted both more smartphone use, and poorer sleep quality and anxiety about missing out predicted more smartphone use and more nighttime awakenings both leading to poorer sleep. So the authors conclude that “both our ability to make smart nighttime choices as wall as our anxiety about what we might miss out in our virtual worlds during sleep combine to disrupt our sleep, which then leads to poorer thinking skills and more nighttime interruptions. This is indeed a downward spiral that results in disrupted mental functioning.”

Some research has examined the impact of sleep duration and quality for workplace adults. One study of US managers and employees found that those who used their smartphones for work at night after 9 p.m. showed impaired cognitive control at work the following day, which was reflected in reduced attention to work and increased depletion of working memory resources. A study of Belgian adults found that having the Internet in the bedroom resulted in similar negative effects in cognitive control.

So disrupting sleep further disrupts the distracted mind.

 

Relationships

September 20, 2017

This is the eleventh post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. There have been several posts on the deleterious effects of technology on relationships. To find some of these enter (Turkle) in the search block of the healthy memory blog. Turkle sums up her view on the negative impact that technology has on our attention and our important relationships by saying, “As we distribute ourselves we may abandon ourselves.” Regarding parenting she says, “Young people must contend with distracted parents who with their Blackberries and cell phones may be physical present but ‘mentally elsewhere.’” See the healthy memory blog posts “Cyber Babies” and “Frankenstein and the Little Girl” for more on this topic.

HM marvels that when he attends professional conventions, for which the ostensible purpose is to have scholars travel to a spot and gather together, but finds them sitting alone or in groups working their smartphones. During a lecture a considerable number in the audience will be playing with their smartphones.

Parents take their children to the park only to spend the entire time reacting to alerts and notifications on their phones instead of engaging with their children in all-important free-play activities. Spouses who once watched television together and discussed what they saw and learned, now use a second screen while they attempt to divide their attention among their tablet, phone, or laptop, the content on the televisions, and their loved one. Evidence is starting to indicate that our relationships with each may be one peril of our distracted minds. A 2014 Pew Internet & American Life project report found that one in four cell phone owners in marriage felt that “their spouse or partner was distracted by their cell phone when they were together.

Most have experienced dinner where the table is littered with smartphones. A game has been created called “cellphone stack” where everyone at the table places their phone in the center of the table, one on top of the other, and whoever looks at their device before the check arrives must pay the entire bill.

A research team studying the ‘IPhone Effect” compared partners who did not place their own mobile device on the table or hold one in their hands with those who did and found that conversations between these strangers in the presence of a device were rated as less satisfying and were reported as generating less empathic concern. Another similar study found that “simply the presence of a cell phone and what it might represent (i.e., social connections broader social network, etc.,)” can be similarly distracting and have negative consequences in a social interaction. The authors ask, “If our distracted mind can negatively affect social connections and feelings of closeness just by being in the presence of modern technology during a short conversation with a stranger, what does that imply about how it can impair our real relationships?”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Workplace

September 19, 2017

This is the tenth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen.

A study of more than 200 employees at a variety of companies studied the facts that predicted employee stress levels. Although having too much work to do was the best prediction, it was only slightly stronger in predicting exhaustion, anxiety, and physical complaints than outside interruptions, many of which were electronic in nature. Gloria Mark summarized one study that “working faster with interruptions has its cost: people in the interrupted conditions experienced a higher workload, more stress, more time pressure and effort. So interrupted work may be done faster, but at a price. Clive Thompson, in a New York Times interview, summed up research results on workplace interruptions by asserting that “we humans are Pavlovian; even thought we know we’re just pumping ourselves full of stress, we can’t help frantically checking our email the instant the bell goes ding.”

Open offices settings further exacerbate this problem. Approximately 70% of US offices—including Google, Yahoo, Goldman Sachs, and Facebook, have either no partitions or low ones that do not make for quiet workplaces. Research has shown that open offices promote excessive distractions. HM personally testifies regarding the disruptive effects of these distractions. A content analysis of 27 open-office studies identified auditory distractions, job dissatisfaction, illness, and stress as major ramifications of this type of workplace.

The bottom line is that being constantly interrupted and having to spend extra time to remember what we were doing has a negative impact on workplace productivity and quality of life. One 2005 study, before the major increase in smartphone usage, estimated that when office workers are interrupted as often as eleven times an hour it costs the United States $558 billion per year.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Safety

September 18, 2017

This is the ninth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. Safety is another casualty of the distracted mind.

Ira Hyman and his colleagues at Western Washington University designed a creative situation to illustrate the effects of distraction. They had a clown, fully clothed in a bright purple and yellow outfit, with large shoes and a bright red bulbous nose, pedal a unicycle around a large open square that is crossed often by most campus students. The researchers interviewed more than 150 students who walked through the square and noted if they were walking alone or with someone else, and if they were using a cell phone or listening to music with ear buds. When asked if they saw anything unusual, only 8% of cell phone users reported that they saw the clown. This is compared with one in three students walking alone without technology or listening to music wearing ear buds and more than half of the students who were walking in pairs without using technology. When asked directly if they saw a clown, only one in four of the cell-phone using students reported seeing it compared with half of single walkers, 61% of music listeners, and 71% of walking pairs. Whatever was happening between the user and his or her phone appears to have inhibited the ability to identify a somewhat unusual happening in the immediate neighborhood.

According to one report in Scientific American, data from a sample of 100 US hospitals found that while in 2004 an estimated nationwide 559 people had hurt themselves by walking into a stationary object while texting, by 2010 that number topped 1,500 and estimates by the study authors predicted the number of injuries would double between 2010 and 2015. A recent study by Corey Basch and her colleagues at several universities tracked more than 3,700 pedestrians crossing Manhattan’s most dangerous intersections and discovered that nearly 30% focused their attention on their mobile device while crossing during the “walk” signal, and one in four were even looking at their phones while crossing during the “don’t walk” signal.

Researchers at the University of Washington and Seattle children’s hospital found similar results in their study of more than 1,000 pedestrians. They discovered than 30% were doing something other than just walking while crossing an intersection, including listening to music and texting. The texting pedestrians took an additional few seconds to cross the street and were nearly four times more likely to show at least one unsafe crossing behavior than those who did not have their head down looking at they phone.

In one experimental study, college students were asked to cross the street in a virtual environment either talking on the phone, listening to music, or texting. Those who were texting and or listening to music were more likely to be hit by a simulated car, which the authors attributed to the conflict between the cognitive demands of crossing the street and paying attention to vehicles and the demands of paying attention to the text message conversation or their music. There is an interruption cost, but perhaps a deadly one in this case.

Little will be written here on driving while distracted. There have already been at least eleven posts on this topic (Enter “Strayer” in the healthy memory blog search box to find some). Suffice it to say, do not do it. Driving while talking on a cell phone is comparably to driving while drunk, and texting is even much more dangerous. Hands free laws are irrelevant. The attentional demands here are what is dangerous.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

 

The Impact of Constantly Shifting Our Attention on Higher Education

September 17, 2017

This is the eighth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. In one study by Dr. Rosen’s research team observed hundreds of middle school, high school, and university students studying something important for fifteen minutes in the environment where they normally study. Minute by minute observations showed that the typical student couldn’t stay focused on work for more than three to five minutes. Students were asked to provide their grade point average (GPA) on a four point scale. The predictors of a lower GPA from these extensive data were: percentage of time on task studying strategies, total media time doing a typical day, and preferences for task-switching rather than working on a task until it was completed. Moreover, by examining the websites that students visited during their fifteen minute sample, they uncovered a fifth predictor of a lower GPA. Only one website visited predicted a lower GPA: Facebook. It did not matter whether students visited it one or fifteen times. Once was enough to predict lower grade performance.

In another experiment by Laura Bowman and her colleagues at Connecticut State University, students were randomly assigned to three groups to read a book chapter and then take a test. One group simply read the chapter and took the test. The second group first completed an instant messaging conversation with the experimenter and then read the chapter and took the test. The third group started to read the chapter, were interrupted with the same instant messaging conversation, which was delivered in pieces at various times during reading, and then took the test. All three groups performed equally well on the test. But the third group took substantially longer even when the time spent instant messaging was removed. This result leads to two conclusions. One is that interrupted studying takes significantly more time. And the second conclusion answers why it takes more time. Each time one switches back to the primary task, time is lost switching and reorienting to where in the task one was when interrupted. In addition, working memory may also be compromised, as distractions degrade the fidelity of the information they are trying to maintain during the learning process.

Another study validating the negative impact of classroom multitasking interrupted students during a short video lecture and required them either to text the experimenter or post material on social media, under two conditions: one new text or post every minute, or one new text every thirty seconds. The control group simply watched the video, which was followed by a test. The results found that more texting or social media posting resulted in poorer lecture notes and lower test scores than the control group. A negative linear trend emerged in both lecture notes and test scores, where the highest scores and best notes demonstrated by those students who did not receive any interruptions, followed by lesser scores and notes of students who were interrupted every minute, and, not surprisingly the worst scores and notes of students who were interrupted every thirty seconds.

Several research studies have shown even more far-reaching effects of technology use by college students. One study showed that those students who used cell phones and texted more often during class showed more anxiety, had lower GPAs, and were less satisfied with life than students who used phones and texted less frequently. A different study of more than 770 college students discovered that students who used more interfering technology in the classroom also tended to engage in more high-risk behaviors, including using alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs, drunk driving, fighting, and having multiple sex partners. So it appears that college students who use inessential technology during either class sessions or while studying face difficulties on both an academic and personal level.

The Psychology of Technology

September 16, 2017

At the centerpiece of technology is the internet. This is the seventh post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. There is a distinction made in human memory between information that is accessible in memory and information that is available in memory, but not at the moment accessible. A similar distinction can be made for information in transactive memory. Information that can be readily accessed, say via Google for instance, is accessible in transactive memory. However, information that requires more than one step to access is in available transactive memory. Obviously, the amount of information available in transactive memory is enormous, so only information that can be quickly accessed is in accessible transactive memory. So a hierarchy of information knowledge is
accessible personal memory
available personal memory (information that is personal memory but is currently inaccessible)
accessible transactive memory (information readily accessible from technology or a fellow human)
available transactive memory (information that can be found with sufficient searches)

This hierarchy can be regarded as an indication of the depth of knowledge.

Someone who can communicate extemporaneously and accurately on a topic has an impressive degree of knowledge.

Someone who refers to notes is dependent on those notes.

Whenever we encounter new relevant information we are confronted with the problem as whether commit that information to memory, or to bookmark it so it can be accessed when needed. Too much reliance on bookmarks can lead to superficial knowledge and unimpressive presentations.

Dr. Betsy Sparrow and her colleagues at Columbia University studied the ability to remember facts and unsurprisingly discovered that we were much better at knowing where to find the answers to our questions than we were at remembering the answers themselves. She dubbed this the “Google Effect.”

Social media began with email, but this is fundamentally one to one communication. Facebook is the medium for widespread communication. Moreover, there is the business of friending and liking. This tends to be taken to extremes. One cannot have hundreds of meaningful friends, and the continuous seeking of approval through likes can become problematic.

Smartphones are smart because the computer is in the phone making it smart. More than seven in ten Americans own one, more than 860 million Europeans own one, and more than half all cell phone owners in Asia have at least one smartphone if not more. More photographs are taken with smartphones than with digital cameras, and more online shopping is done via smartphones than through standard computers. Smartphone users pick up their phone an average of 27 times a day, ranging from 14 to 150 times per day depending on the study, the population, and the number of years that someone has owned he smartphone—and the number of years that someone has owned the smartphone—those who have owned a smartphone longer check it far more often than those who have recently obtained a phone. Frequently, there is no good reason for them to do so; 42% check their phone when they have time to kill (which rises to 55% of young adults). Only 23% claim to do so when there is something specific for them to do. Feelings of loneliness appear to underlie at least some of this apparently non-needed use of technology (see the healthy memory blog post “Loneliness”).

Multitasking, task switching, and continuous partial attention are serious problems. Remember that we cannot multitask. What is apparently multi-tasking is the rapid switching between or among tasks, and there are attentional costs in doing this switching. Multitasking occurs in every sphere of our world, including home, school, workplace, and our leisure life. Moreover, this is not just limited to the younger generation. One study followed a group of young adults and a group of older adults with wore biometric belts with embedded eyeglass cameras for more than 300 hours of leisure time. Younger adults switched from task to task twenty-severn times an hour, about once every two minutes. Older adults switched tasks seventeen times per hour, or once every three to four minutes. Former Microsoft executive Linda Stone termed this constant multitasking, “continuous partial attention.” This could also be termed half-keistered information processing. Attention is not being distributed optimally.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Cognitive Control Limitations

September 15, 2017

This is the sixth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. A brief summary of cognitive control limitations follows.

Selectivity is limited by susceptibility to both internal and external influences. Only one source can be selected. It takes attention to disregard both internal and external sources that are external to what you’ve selected. This is why libraries are kept silent. Extraneous external sources require attention to be filtered out. This also involves internal sources. For example, you might be trying to concentrate on your homework, but you keep thinking about your upcoming date. Most meditation begins with focusing on your breath and perhaps a word or phrase and ignoring extraneous thoughts and extraneous stimuli.

Distribution of attention results in diminished performance compared to focused attention. This focusing requires attentional effort.

Sustainability of attention over time is limited, especially in extended boring situations. Although multitasking situations are not boring, there is the tendency to switch attention rather than to attend to what one is currently attending.

There are processing speed limitations that affect both the efficiency of allocation and withdrawal of attention.

Our working memory capacity is severely limited as to the number of items that can be held in working memory. The magic number 7 plus or minus 2, is closer to 5 plus or minus 2, and the limit can be as small as one depending on the nature of the information.

The fidelity, or quality of information maintained in working memory, decays over time and as a result of interference.

Multitasking is limited by our inability to parallel process two attention demanding taks. In reality task switching is required, which results in costs to accuracy and speed performance.

Although these are the same limitations homo sapiens have always had, they become much more pronounced due to the way we use our current technology. Moreover, this technology keeps multiplying, which exacerbates this problem further.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

The Prefrontal Cortex

September 14, 2017

This is the fifth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. The (pre) in prefrontal cortex refers to its location in the brain. Otherwise it plays central roles in cognition and emotion.

An unfortunate accident first called attention to the prefrontal cortex. In 1848 working on railroad construction in Vermont 25 year old Phineas Gage had an accident which caused a three-foot-long, 1.25 inch diameter, fourteen-pound iron rod to be propelled up through his head, passing below his left eye, and traveling out the top of his skull to land almost one hundred feet behind him. He is reported to have remained awake with a gaping hole in his head during transport in a cart to his boarding house forty-five minutes away, where he received medical care and survived the incident. Although he survived his life deteriorated. Previously he had been a well-mannered man. After the accident he was disposed to fits of rage. He had difficulties planning and controlling his life.

An irony here that is usually missed is that he was 25 years old. The prefrontal cortex takes about that long to mature, so just as this structure reached maturity, it was destroyed. This explains why teenagers can be ill-behaved; they have adult bodies but immature minds. It’s unfortunate that this maturation takes so long. By the age of 25, there has been ample time to make decisions that destroy our lives.

Most people who have heard of prefrontal lobotomies think that it is something bad. People who have had lobotomies emerge zombie like. What is not realized is that Antonio Egas Moniz was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine in 1949 for his pioneering work in doing lobotomies. It is important to realize that at this time psychiatry did not have effective techniques for treating psychotics. The hospitals were referred to as insane asylums with padded walls and straight jackets. They were referred to as snake pits. So even though they were far from being an ideal treatment, lobotomies made an unbearable situation somewhat more bearable. Nowadays there are drugs to treat psychotics, so lobotomies are no longer justified.

So the prefrontal cortex is where decisions are made and it controls and coordinates communication throughout the brain. The American neuroscientist Joaquin Fester offers this explanation of a combined network and modular model, such that higher-order cognition emerges from complex neural networks that functionally connect distributed modules. This is the model he describes in his book “Cortex and Mind:
(1) cognitive information is represented in wide, overlapping, and interactive neural networks of the cerebral cortex; (2) such networks develop on a core of organized modules of elementary sensory and motor functions, to which they remain connected;(3) the cognitive code is a relational code, based on connectivity between discrete neuronal aggregates of the cortex (modules, assembled, or network nodes); (4) the code’s diversity and specificity derive from the myriad possibilities of combination of those neuronal aggregates between themselves; (5) any cortical neuron can take part in many networks, and thus in many percepts, memories, items of experience, or personal knowledge; (6) a network can serve several cognitive functions; and, (7) cognitive functions consist of fuctional interactions within and between cortical networks.

So this is what goes on in our brains every day and night.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Cognitive Processes

September 13, 2017

This is the fourth post based on “The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. The authors note that “‘Attention’ is likely the most widely used term in cognitive science.” Attention is also used widely by the general public and practitioners from diverse fields of education, philosophy, mental health, marketing, design, politics, and human factors.

To understand what attention means in cognitive science, its most fundamental feature is selectivity. Selectivity is required because attention is limited. Indeed, it is one of our must fundamental constraints. So we need to be selective to use this limited supply where it is most needed. It can be thought of as the spotlight in our cognitive control toolkit. Selective attention also involves suppression of perceptions that are outside of the spotlight. This is also known as the act of ignoring. What is not so well known is that this suppression requires attention which further depletes the limited supply. The amount of suppression required depends on extraneous stimuli in the immediate environment. And it also entails the suppression of thoughts extraneous to what is in the spotlight. Expectation also play a role here as we used our expectations to direct our attention. Expectation is what allows us to transition from the internal world of our goals to our perceptions and actions. Expectation is a critical factor in optimizing our performance by enabling knowledge of past events to shape our future. To a large extent our brains live in the future, using predictive information to bias both incoming stimuli and outgoing responses.

Directionality is another important feature of selective attention, We can direct our limited cognitive resources to stimuli in the environment, but we can also aim it internally at our thoughts and emotions. As in the case for external selective attention, our ability to control internal attention allows us to attend to relevant or ignore irrelevant information in our minds based on our goals. We can direct our attention toward searching memories and/or focusing on feedback from the body, such as a hungry stomach. It is often important to selectively ignore internal information such as suppressing sadness at a time when you need to remain upbeat, or suppressing a recurrent that is interfering with your current activities.

Another critical factor when using selective attention is our ability to sustain it. This is especially true in situations that are not engaging, or boring. Moreover, over time activities that once were engaging can become boring. Vigilance is the area of research concerned with looking for a signal over a long period of time.

Working memory refers to the amount of information we can hold in our active memory at the same time. This amount of information is limited. The exact amount is dependent on the items. George Miller’s original estimate was seven items plus or minus two. Over time this magic number has decreased. It might even be as small as one, depending on the nature of the information. We must keep thinking about or rehearsing this information to maintain it in working memory. And this is another strong constraint in our cognitive abilities.
Goal management is required when we have more than one goal. So when we engage in more than one goal-directed activity at a time, we are switching back and forth between multiple goals, we are multi-tasking. It is more accurate to call multi-tasking task switching as we can only perform one task at a time. We accomplish multi-tasking by rapidly switching between or among tasks, and this switching requires attention. There is also a requirement to review where we are in the goal to which we have switched back.

All tasks require cognitive control. Even if two tasks are not competing for the same sensory resources, mental task switching is required, with perhaps the requirement to determine where we were when we left that task.

Infovores

September 12, 2017

Infovores is a term that has been coined to characterize we humans as information-seeking creatures. Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen, the authors of “The Distracted Mind”, note that as we are information-seeking creatures, behaviors that maximize information accumulation are optimal. This notion is supported by findings that molecular and physiological mechanisms that originally developed in our brain to support food foraging for survival have now involved in primates to include information foraging. Data that support this assertion are based on observations that the dopaminergic stream, which is crucial for all reward processing, plays a key role in both basic food-foraging behavior in lower vertebrates and higher-order cognitive behaviors in monkeys and humans that are often dissociated from clear survival benefits. The role of the dopamine system has been shown to relate directly to information-seeking behavior in primates. For example, macaque monkeys respond to receiving information similarly to the way they respond to primitive rewards such as food or water. Moreover, “single dopamine neurons process both primitive and cognitive rewards, and suggest that current theories of reward-seeking must be revised to include information-seeking. From this perspective behaviors that are intended to maximize exposure and consumption of new information, but end up causing interference, can be thought of as optimal.

So does this explain why, according to a 2015 report by the Pew Research Center, 96% of all US adults own a mobile phone, and 68% own a smartphone? Among these smartphone users, 97% regularly use their phones to send text messages, 89% to access the Internet, and 88% send and receive email. Worldwide estimates are that 3.2 billion people, 45% of the world’s population, own a mobile phone. Smartphones, desktops, and laptops support multiple apps while web browsers allow numerous simultaneously open tabs and windows, which make it increasingly difficult to attend to a single website or app without having our attention lured away.

So, we can blame our dopamine neurons for our being drawn to all these new sources of information. But it does not appear that we are using these sources of information optimally. Perhaps insights from behavioral ecology. a field that explores the evolutionary basis of behavior by studying interactions between animals and their environments might shed light on our interference inducing behavior.

An important contribution to the field of behavioral ecology has been the development of optimal foraging theories. These theories are built on findings that animals do not forage for food randomly, but rather optimize their foraging activities based on the drive to survive. Shaped by natural selection, foraging behaviors that successfully maximize energy intake are selected and persist over time. Mathematical models of foraging behavior have been developed that can be used to predict the action given their environmental conditions. They describe how an “optimal forager” would behave in any given situation. Although actual behaviors deviate from predictions made from these models, these models are frequently not far off the mark and have served as useful tools to understand the complex interplay between behavior and the environment.

In 1976 evolutionary biologist Eric Charnel developed an optimal foraging model known as the “marginal value theorem” (MVT). This theorem was formulated to predict the behavior of animals that forage for food in “patchy” environments. MVT models predict how much time an animal will spend in a current patch before moving on to a new patch, given environmental conditions.

Optimal foraging theories have already been applied to human information foraging to help us understand how we search the Internet and our own memories, as well as how scholars and physicians search the research literature. Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen state that to the best of their knowledge, such theories have not been used to address the critical question of why we engage in interference-inducing behaviors, even when they are self-destructive. The answer to this question will be pursued in future posts.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Interference

September 11, 2017

Interference is the title of a chapter in “The Distracted Mind” by Drs. Adam Gazzaley and Larry Rosen. Frequently we feel challenged when trying to fulfill even fairly simple goals. This is the result of interference caused by distractions from irrelevant information and interruptions by our attempts to simultaneously pursue multiple goals. Our sensitivity to interference was not born out of modern technology. Rather, it is a fundamental vulnerability of our brain.

Interference is a term used to describe something that hinders, impedes or derails another process. Goal interference occurs when we reach a decision to accomplish a specific goal (look for something to eat, complete a work assignment, engage in a conversation, drive a car) and something takes place to hinder the successful completion of that goal. This interference can either be generated internally, presenting thoughts within our minds, or generated externally, by sensory stimuli such as restaurant chat, beeps, vibrations or flashing displays. This goal interference, regardless of whether generated internally or externally (frequently both) occurs in two distinct varieties—distractions and interruptions—depending upon how we manage the interference.

Distractions are goal-irrelevant information that we either encounter in our external surroundings or generate internally within our own minds. When it comes to distractions, our intention is to ignore them. For example, we are trying to enjoy a television program, but we start worrying about a meeting tomorrow. This is an internal distraction commonly referred to as mind wandering. Mind wandering is particularly troublesome when we are trying to study. These are internal distractions.
But suppose while we’re trying to watch a television program, but are disturbed by something happening elsewhere in the house. This is an example of an external distraction.

Interruptions are the other major source of goal interference. Interruptions can come from external sources from people or environmental events. But interruptions happen when we make a decision to concurrently engage in more than one task at the same time, even if we attempt to switch rapidly between them. These latter interruptions are commonly referred to as multitasking, although research has shown that we cannot multitask. Rather we can switch between or among tasks, but switching itself entails cognitive costs.

Our brains are extremely sensitive to interference at many levels. The reason why goal interference is so prominent in our lives is the inherent complexity of our goals and the limitations we have in fulfilling them. The authors state that our ability to establish high-level goals is arguably the pinnacle of human brain evolution. The authors continue, “Complex, interwoven, time-delayed and often shared goals are what allow us humans to exert an unprecedented influence over how we interact with the world around us, navigating its multifaceted environments based on our decisions rather reflexive responses to our surroundings. Our impressive goal-setting abilities have permitted the remarkable development of our cultures, communities, and societies and have enabled us to create complex human constructs such as art, language, music, and technology. The sheer magnitude of our impressive goal setting-abilities has resulted in the conditions necessary for goal interference to exist in the first place.

Our proficiency in setting goals is edited by cognitive abilities known as executive functions. These are the skills that include evaluation, decision making, organization, and planning. However, goal setting is only half the battle. We need specialized processes to enact these goals. Out ability to effectively carry out our goals is dependent on an assemblage of cognitive abilities referred to in the book as cognitive control. This includes attention, working memory, and goal management. Our ability to set high-level goals does not necessarily mean that it is inevitable that we are overwhelmed by goal interference. It is conceivable that the goal-enactment abilities of our brain evolved alongside our goal-setting abilities to offset any negative impact of goal interference. The authors conclude that this is not what seems to have happened. Our cognitive control abilities that are necessary for the enactment of our goals have not evolved to the same degrees as the executive function required for goal setting.

The authors continue, “ Our cognitive control is really quite limited: we have a restricted ability to distribute, divide and sustain attention; actively hold detained information mind; and concurrently manage or even rapidly switch between competing goals.”

The authors note that “In many ways, we are ancient brains in a high-tech world.”

 

The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World

September 10, 2017

The title alone should indicate the importance of this book. Although the distracted mind has always been a problem with which humans have had to deal, modern technology has greatly exacerbated this problem. One of the authors, Dr. Adam Gazzaley, is a cognitive neuroscientist and a leader in the study of how the brain manages distractions and interruptions. Another author is Dr. Larry Rosen who is a psychologist who has studied the “psychology of technology” as a pioneer in this field for more than thirty years. Their complementary perspectives focus on demonstrating why we fail to successfully navigate our modern technological ecosystem and how that has detrimentally affected our safety, cognition, education, workplace, and our relationships with family and friends.

The authors note that there are two equally valid perspectives to conceptualize that magnificent organ tucked between our ears: as the brain—the most extraordinary information processing-system, and complex structure in the known universe—and as the mind—the emergent higher-order function of that biological machine. The mind is the very core of our identity and consciousness, The brain has over one hundred billion processing units (neurons) intricately interwoven by hundreds of trillions of connections (synapses) into a distributed network of staggering. They write that perhaps the most impressive feat of the human brain is its functional offspring: the human mind. “Despite centuries of academic thought and research on this topic, we still find the most effective way to conceptualize the wonder of the mind is to fully appreciate that it is the essence of every emotion we feel, every thought we have, every sensation we experience, every decision we make, every move we take, every word we utter, every memory we store and recall…in the truest sense it is who we are.”

Now move this wonderful mind into our every growing technological world. Dr. Rosen’s research has found that the typical teen and young adult believes that he or she can juggle six to seven different forms of media at the same time. Other studies have found that up to 95% of the population report multitasking each day, with activity in more than one domain occupying approximately a third of the day. What is not realized is that there is no such activity as multi-tasking. What is termed multitasking is more accurately a switching between, or all too often among, tasks. .

Moreover these technological innovations have been accomplished by a shift in societal expectations such that we now demand immediate responsiveness and continuous productivity. Studies have reported that US adults and teenagers check their phone up to 150 time a day, or every six to seven minutes when they are aware. Studies in the UK have found that more than half of all adults and two-thirds of young adults and teens do not go one hour without checking their phones. They’ve found that three in four smartphone owners in the US feel panicked when they cannot immediately locate their phone, half check it first thing in the morning while still lying in bed, one in tree check it while using the bathroom, and three in ten check it while dining with others. According to a Harris Poll, eight in ten vacationers brought or planned to bring at least one high-tech device on vacation, and a substantial portion of vacationers check in in often with their devices.

Drs. Gazzeley and Rosen describe how our cognitive systems cope with these tasks, and present a strategy for coping effectively. They also review the research on how we can increase the effectiveness of our cognitive processes. Plus they include strategies for coping with these overwhelming demands.
Obviously, it will take a substantial number of healthy memory posts to convey a meaningful portion of the valuable contents in this book.

An Important and Informative Website

September 9, 2017

Welcome to TrumpDiaries

This excellent website will help in correcting a ton of misinformation.

Why Does Misinformation Spread?

September 9, 2017

Psychological science has identified several seeds of false beliefs.

One is the power of mere repetition.
How often have people heard or read it: Climate change is a hoax. Islamic terrorism is a grave threat to the United States (never mind that, of 230,000 murders since 9/11, only 123 have been perpetuated by Muslims. Moreover, Islamic terrorists have killed many orders of magnitude more fellow Mulsims then Christians.
Mere repetition makes statements easier to process and remember. The power of familiar, hard-to-ease falsehoods and fake news is appreciated by political manipulators, from those in Orwelll’s “1984” to those running today’s presidential campaigns. Unfortunately, rebuttals sometimes backfire because they repeat the myth.

The power of confirmation bias.
In a may 2016 national survey, those favorable to Trump believed Obama was Muslim rather than Christian by a 65% to 13% margin. Those unfavorable to Trump believed the reverse by a mirror image of 64% to 13%.

The power of cognitively available anecdotes.
A brutal crime may make the world seem more violent that it actually is. Do not believe anecdotes. Insist upon data and statistics. Remember, the plural of anecdote is not data.

The power of group polarization. Groups tend to have similar beliefs. Indeed that is likely why the group has formed. However, do not blame this on the internet. (See the healthy memory blog post, “The Truth About the Internet.”

To understand why misinformation spreads as well as how to counter this misinformation. Kahneman’s Two Process View of Cognition can be quite helpful. System 1 is named Intuition. System 1 is very fast, employs parallel processing, and appears to be automatic and effortless. They are so fast that they are executed, for the most part, outside conscious awareness. Emotions and feelings are also part of System 1. Islamophobic responses are essentially System 1 responses. Learning is associative and slow. For something to become a System 1 process requires much repetition and practice. Activities such as walking, driving, and conversation are primarily System 1 processes. They occur rapidly and with little apparent effort. We would not have survived if we could not do this types of processing rapidly. But this speed of processing is purchased at a cost, the possibility of errors, biases, and illusions. System 2 is named Reasoning. It is controlled processing that is slow, serial, and effortful. It is also flexible. This is what we commonly think of as conscious thought. One of the roles of System 2 is to monitor System 1 for processing errors, but System 2 is slow and System 1 is fast, so errors to slip through.

Moreover, System 1 is the default mode of processing. So when you read or hear something, the default mode is to believe it. Then further repetitions serve to consolidate this belief. Remember that one of the roles of System 2 is to monitor System 1 for errors. However, to do so require cognitive effort, thinking. So it pays to examine your beliefs carefully to see if they’re justified and whether they should be disbanded or modified.

This post is largely based on an article by David G. Myers titled Misinformation, Misconceptions, and our Teaching Mission in the Association for Psychological Science publication “Observer, September 2017.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

False Beliefs

September 8, 2017

Belief: Crime is rising. Every recent year, 7 in 10 Americans have told Gallup that there is more crime “than there was a year ago.” Donald Trump said in early 2017 that “The murder rate is the highest it’s been in 47 years.” And the Attorney General said that “rising crime is a dangerous and permanent trend.”
Fact: For several decades, both violent and property crime rates have been falling. In 2015, the FBI-aggregated violent crime was less than half the 1990 rate—a downward trend confirmed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics crime-victimization surveys.
HM Comment: Perhaps one of the reasons for this is the prevalence of police and crime shows on television. These shows frequently involve firearms. In point of fact, the majority of police officers retire without ever having fired their weapons (apart from training). A ratio of only 1 in 20 officers having fired their weapons according to “Blue Bloods,” HM remembers.

Belief: Many immigrants are criminals. Horrific true incidents, as in the endlessly retold story of a Mexican national killing a young woman in San Francisco, feed this narrative. Trump’s words epitomize this perception: “When Mexico sends its people…They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”
Fact: Poor immigrants may fit our image of criminals, yet some studies report that, compared with native-born Americans, immigrants commit less violent crime.
HM Comment: Never rely on anecdotes, whether or not they are true. Always rely on statistics correctly collected and analyzed.

Belief: Under Obama, unemployment rose and the stock market fell. At the end of 2016, 67% of Trump voters told Public Policy Polling that unemployment increased during the Obama years, and only 41% said the stock market had risen.
Fact: At the end of 2016, the 4.7% US unemployment rate was about half the 2009 rate, while the stock market had more than doubled.

Belief: At the end of the Reagan presidency, more than half of strong Democrats believed inflation had worsened under Reagan.
Fact: In actuality,it had plummeted from 13% to 4%.

This post is based on an article by David G. Myers titled “Misinformation, Misconceptions, and our Teaching Mission” in the Association for Psychological Science publication “Observer”, September 2017.

The Loss of a Neuroscientist Who Should Have Been Awarded a Nobel Prize

September 6, 2017

And that neuroscientist is Marian Diamond who passed away on July 25, 2017 at the age of ninety. Her painstaking research showed that the body’s three-pound seat of consciousness was a dynamic structure of beautiful complexity, capable of development even in old age.

Prior to her research it was strongly believed the nervous system was fixed. We were stuck with the brain we were born with. And any damage to the brain was irreparable. The brain was a static and unchangeable entity that simply degenerated as we age.

Inspired by the research of psychologist Donald Hebb, she began studying the brains of lab rats. Rats that were raised alone, in small and desolate cages, had more trouble navigating a maze than did rats were raised in “enriched” cages, with toys and rat playmates. Through painstaking analyses of these rat brains she found that the cerebral cortices of rats in “enriched” cages were about 6% thicker than the rats in the “impoverished” cages.

Her findings, published in a 1964 paper with three colleagues, were a pivotal contribution to the long-running debate between nature and nurture, which seeks to determine the extent to which a person is shaped by their genes or by their life experiences.. UC-Berkely professor Robert Knight said “The idea that the brain could change based on environmental input and stimulation was felt to be silly, and that’s the boat she completely sank.

Further research generalized these conclusions to humans. Neuroplasticity was found to be ubiquitous. We continue to generate neurons until we die.

Dr. Diamond went on to develop a rich theory of brain plasticity summarized in the phrase use it or lose it. She outlined the following five factors crucial to brain development at any age: diet, exercise, challenge, newness, and love.

Later in her career she was given several sections of Albert Einstein’s brain. She found an unusually high amount of glial cells, which were thought to be a relatively unimportant part of the tissue that held the brain together. This discovery launched renewed interest in the role of glial cells, which are now believed to play a crucial role in cognitive processes.

This post is based in part on an obituary by Harrison Smith in the 31July 2017 Washington Post.

 

These Posts Only Scratched the Surface

September 5, 2017

Of the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who We Really Are, ” the preceding posts have only scratched the surface. The adjective groundbreaking is appropriate as this book opens up a new and very valuable source of data, internet searches. These searches bypass most of our defenses and provide a more accurate view of the person making the searches. Seth describes not only how words are used as data, but also how bodies and pictures are used as data.

One section is titled Digital Truth Serum. In addition to Hate and Prejudice, and the Internet itself it covers the truth about customers, child abuse, abortion, and sex. HM expects that this book will become a best seller primarily for its truth about these very sensitive topics. Much of this true content is depressing and the author asks, “Can We Handle the Truth?”

A section titled Zooming In discusses
What’s Really Going on in Our Counties, Cities, and Towns?
How We fill Our Minutes and Hours
Our Doppelgängers
Seth tells stories using data.

A section titled All the World’s a Lab discusses the techniques Google and other companies use to test and evaluate their presentations. It also discusses what Seth terms Natures Cruel—but Enlightening Experiments.

The last part of the book is titled: BIG DATA HANDLE WITH CARE.
Here he discusses what Big Data Can and Cannot Do that includes The Curse of Dimensionality and The Overemphasis on What is Measurable. Although the discussion is technical, it should be accessible to most readers.

The penultimate chapter discusses two dangers:
The Danger of Empowered Corporations
The Danger of empowered Governments

 

The Truth About the Internet

September 3, 2017

This post is based largely on the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who we Really Are.” Perhaps the most common statement about the internet with which everyone agrees is that the internet is driving Americans apart and that it plays a large part in the polarization of the nation. The only problem with this generally agreed upon view is that it is wrong.

The evidence against this piece of conventional wisdom comes from a 2011 study by two economists, Matt Gentzkow and Jesse Shapiro. They collected data on the browsing behavior of a large sample of Americans. Their dataset included the self-reported ideology, whether they were liberal or conservative, of the research participants.

Gentzkow and Shapiro asked themselves the following question: Suppose you randomly sampled two Americans who happen to both be visiting the same news website. What is the probability that one of them will be liberal and the other conservative? In other words, how frequently do liberals and conservatives “meet” on news sites? Suppose liberals and conservatives on the internet never got their online news from the same place? In other words, liberals exclusively visited liberal websites, and conservatives exclusively visited conservative ones. If this were the case, the chances that two Americans on a given news site have opposing political views would be 0%. The internet would be perfectly segregated. Liberals and conservatives would never mix.

However, suppose, in contrast, that liberals and conservatives did not differ at all in how they got their news. In other words, a liberal and a conservative were equally likely to visit any particular news site. If this were the case, the chances that two Americans on a given news website have opposing political views would be about 50%. Then the internet would be perfectly desegregated. Liberals and conservatives would perfectly mix.

According to Gentzkow and Shapiro in the United States, the chances that two people visiting the same news site have different political views is about 45%. So the internet is far closer to perfect desegregation than perfect segregation. Liberals and conservatives are “meeting” each other on the web all the time.

Using data from the General Social Survey, Gentzkow and Shapiro found that all these numbers were lower than the chances that two people on the same news website have different politics.

This lack of segregation on the internet can be put further in perspective by comparing it to segregation in other parts of our lives. Here are the probabilities that someone you meet has opposing political views

On a News website 45.2%
Coworker 41.6%
Offline Neighbor 40.3%
Family Member 37%
Friend 34,7%

So in other words, you are more likely to come across someone with opposing views online than offline.

As to why isn’t the internet more segregated, there are two factors that limit political segregation on the internet. The first reason is that the internet news industry is dominated by a few massive sites. In 2009, four sites, Yahoo News, AOL News, msnbc.com, and cnn.com —collected more than half of the news views. Yahoo News is the most popular news site among Americans, with close to 90 million unique monthly visitors. This is 600 times the white supremacist Stormfront audience. Mass media sites like to appeal to a broad, political diverse audience.

The second reason the internet isn’t all that segregated is that many people with strong political opinions visit sites of the opposite viewpoint. The reason here is similar to the reason for the hostility to the first address by President Obama on the Mass Shooting in San Bernadino. People like to defend their views, and, perhaps, to convince themselves that the opposition are idiots. Seth notes that someone who visits think progress.org and maven.org—two extremes liberal sites—is more likely than the average internet user to visit foxnews.com, a right leaning site. Someone who visits rushlimbaugh.com or glennbeck.com —two extremely conservative sites—is more likely than the average internet user to visit nytimes.com, a more liberal site.

The Gentzkow and Shapiro study was based on data from 2004-2009, which was relatively early in the history of the internet. Might the internet have grown more compartmentalized since then? Have social media, particularly Facebook, altered their conclusion. If our friends tend to share our political views, the rise of social media should mean a rise of echo chambers, shouldn’t it.

It’s complicated. Although it is true that people’s friends on Facebook are more likely than not to share their political views, a team of data scientists—Eytan Bakshy, Solomon Messing, and Lada Adamic—found that a surprising amount of the information people get on Facebook comes from people with opposing views? So how can this be? Don’t our friends tend to share our political views? They do? But there is a crucial reason that Facebook may lead to a more diverse political discussion than offline socializing. On average people have substantially more friends on Facebook than they do offline. These weak ties facilitated by Facebook are more likely to be people with opposite political views.

So Facebook exposes its users to weak social connections. These are people with whom you might never have external social interactions, but you do Facebook friend them. And you do see their links to articles with views you might never have otherwise considered.

In sum, the internet actually does not segregate different ideas, but rather gives diverse ideas a larger distribution.

 

Effectively Countering Islamophobia

September 2, 2017

The immediately preceding post on Obama’s Prime-time Address After the Mass Shooting in San Bernadino indicated that President’s Obama’s appeal to our better nature failed. Worse yet, it was counterproductive, with Islamophobia increasing, not decreasing. As promised, here is a more effective presentation President Obama made two months after that original piece. This time Obama spent little time insisting on the value of tolerance. Instead he focused overwhelmingly on provoking people’s curiosity and changing their perceptions of Muslim Americans. He told us that many of the slaves from Africa were Muslim; Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had their own copies of the Koran; the first mosque on U.S. soil was in North Dakota; a Muslim American designed skyscrapers in Chicago. Obama again spoke of Muslim athletes and armed service members but also talked of Muslim police officers and firefighters, teachers, and doctors.

So what was wrong with Obama’s original address? He was telling many in his audience that their emotional responses were wrong. Kahneman’s Two System view of cognition can be helpful. System 1 is named Intuition. System 1 is very fast, employs parallel processing, and appears to be automatic and effortless. They are so fast that they are executed, for the most part, outside conscious awareness. Emotions and feelings are also part of System 1. Islamophobic responses are essentially System 1 responses. Learning is associative and slow. For something to become a System 1 process requires much repetition and practice. Activities such as walking, driving, and conversation are primarily System 1 processes. They occur rapidly and with little apparent effort. We would not have survived if we could not do this types of processing rapidly. But this speed of processing is purchased at a cost, the possibility of errors, biases, and illusions. System 2 is named Reasoning. It is controlled processing that is slow, serial, and effortful. It is also flexible. This is what we commonly think of as conscious thought. One of the roles of System 2 is to monitor System 1 for processing errors, but System 2 is slow and System 1 is fast, so errors to slip through.
In addition to engaging System 1 processes, many in the audience needed to justify their feelings. Consequently they made Google searchers hardening their views.

However, in his second address he bypassed System 1 processes by providing new information processing to System 2, which is what we commonly regard as thinking. So their views were not directly challenged in this nonthreatening presentation. New information was presented that might be further processed with a resulting decrease in Islamophobia.

Changing hardened beliefs is very difficult. Directly challenging these beliefs is counterproductive. So the approach needs to employ some sort of end run around these beliefs. That is what Obama did by providing nonthreatening information in his second address.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has developed some effective approaches in which people of different beliefs work together to solve a problem. This approach is difficult and time consuming but it has worked in a variety of circumstances. This approach is not likely to be universally applicable as it does require people of different beliefs to interact.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Response to Obama’s Prime-time Address After the Mass Shooting in San Bernadino

September 1, 2017

This post is based largely on the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who we Really Are.” On December 2, 2015 in San Bernadino, California Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik entered a meeting of Farook’s coworkers armed with semiautomatic pistols and semiautomatic rifles and murdered fourteen people. Literally minutes after the media first reported one of the shooter’s Muslim-sounding name, a disturbing number of Californians had decided what they wanted to do with Muslims: kill them.

The top Google search in California at the time was “kill Muslims” with about the same frequency that they searched for “martini recipe,” “migraine symptoms,” and “Cowboys roster.” In the days following the attack, for every American concerned with “Islamophobia” another was searching for “kill Muslems.” Hate searches were approximately 20% of all searches before the attack, more than half of all search volume about Muslims became hateful in the hours that followed it.

These search data can inform us how difficult it can be to calm the rage. Four days after the shooting, then-president Obama gave a prime-time address to the country. He wanted to reassure Americans that the government could both stop terrorism and, perhaps more important, quiet the dangerous Islamophobia.

Obama spoke of the importance of inclusion and tolerance in powerful and moving rhetoric. The Los Angeles Times praised Obama for “[warning] against allowing fear to cloud our judgment.” The New York times called the speech both “tough” and “calming.” The website Think Progress praised it as “a necessary tool of good governance, geared towards saving the lives of Muslim Americans.” Obama’s speech was judged a major success.

But was it? Google search data did not support such a conclusion. Seth examined the data together with Evan Soltas. In the speech the president said, “It is the responsibility of all American—of every faith—to reject discrimination.” But searches calling Muslims “terrorists,” “bad,” “violent,” and “evil” doubled during and shortly after the speech. President Obama also said, “It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country.” But negative searches about Syrian refugees, a mostly Muslim group then desperately looking for a safe haven, rose 60%, while searches asking how to help Syrian refugees dropped 35%. Obama asked Americans to “not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear.” Still searches for “kill Muslims” tripled during the speech. Just about every negative search Seth and Soltas could think to test regarding Muslims shot up during and after Obama’s speech, and just about every positive search hey could think to test declined.

So instead to calming the angry mob, as people thought he was doing, the internet data told us that Obama actually inflamed it. Seth writes, “Things that we think are working can have the exact opposite effect from the one we expect. Sometimes we need internet data to correct our instinct to pat ourselves on the back.”

So what can be done to quell this particular form of hatred so virulent in America? We’ll try to address this in the next post.

Implicit Versus Explicit Prejudice

August 30, 2017

This post is based largely on the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who we Really Are.” Any theory of racism has to explain the following puzzle in America: On the one hand, the overwhelming majority of black Americans think they suffer from prejudice—and they have ample evidence of discrimination in police stops, job interviews, and jury decisions. On the other hand, very few white Americans will admit to being racist. The dominant explanation has been that this is due, in large part, to widespread implicit prejudice. According to this theory white Americans may mean well, but they have a subconscious bias, which influences their treatment of black Americans. There is an implicit-association test for such a bias. These tests have consistently shown that it takes most people milliseconds more to associate black faces with positive words such as “good,” than with negative words such as “awful.” For white faces, the pattern is reversed. The small extra time it takes is interpreted as evidence of someone’s implicit prejudice—a prejudice the person may not even be aware of.

There is an alternative explanation for the discrimination that African-Americans feel and whites deny: hidden explicit racism. People might be aware of widespread conscious racism but to which they do not want to confess—especially in a survey. This is what the search data seems to be saying. There is nothing implicit about searching for “n_____ jokes.” It’s hard to imagine that Americans are Googling the word “n_____“ with the same frequency as “migraine and economist” without explicit racism having a major impact on African-Americans. There was no convincing measure of this bias prior to the Google data. Seth uses this measure to see what it explains.

It explains, as was discussed in a previous post, why Obama’s vote totals in 2008 and 2012 were depressed in many regions. It also correlates with the black-white wage gap, as a team of economists recently reported. In other words, the areas Seth found that make the most racist searches underpay black people. When the polling guru Nate Silver looked for the geographic variable that correlated most strongly with support in the 2016 Republican primary for Trump, he found it in the map of racism Seth had developed. That variable was searches for “n_____.”

Scholars have recently put together a state-by-state measure of implicit prejudice agains black people, which enabled Seth to compare the effects of explicit racism, as measured by Google searches, and implicit bias. Using regression analysis, Seth found that, to predict where Obama underperformed, an area’s racist Google searches explained a lot. An area’s performance on implicit-association tests added little.

Seth has found subconscious prejudice may have a more fundamental impact for other groups. He was able to use Google searches to find evidence of implicit prejudice against another segment of the population: young girls.

So, who would be harboring bias against girls? Their parents. Of all Google searches starting “Is my 2-year-old, the most common next word is “gifted.” But this question is not asked equally about young boys and young girls. Parents are two and a half times more likely to ask “Is my son gifted?” than “Is my daughter gifted?” Parents overriding concerns regarding their daughters is anything related to appearance.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

The URL above will take you to a number of options for taking and learning about the implicit association test.

The Truth About Your Facebook Friends

August 29, 2017

This post is based largely on the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who we Really Are.” Social media are another source of big data. Seth writes, “The fact is, many Big Data sources, such as Facebook, are often the opposite of digital truth serum.

Just as with surveys, in social media there is no incentive to tell the truth. Much more so than in surveys, there is a large incentive to make yourself look good. After all, your online presence is not anonymous. You are courting an audience and telling your friends, family members, colleagues, acquaintances, and strangers who you are.

To see how biased data pulled from social media can be, consider the relative popularity of the “Atlantic,” a highbrow monthly magazine, versus the “National Enquirer,” a gossipy often-sensational magazine. Both publications have similar average circulations, selling a few hundred thousand copies (The “National Enquirer” is a weekly, so it actually sells more total copies.) There are also a comparable number of Google searches for each magazine.

However, on Facebook, roughly 1.5 million people either like the “Atlantic” or discuss articles from the “Atlantic” on their profiles. Only about 50,000 like the Enquirer or discuss its contents.

Here’s an “Atlantic” versus “National Enquirer” popularity compared by different sources:
Circulation Roughly 1 “Atlantic” for every 1 “National Enquirer”
Google searches 1 “Atlantic” for every 1 “National Enquirer”
Facebook Likes 27 “Atlantic” of every 1 “National Enquirer”

For assessing magazine popularity, circulation data is ground truth. And Facebook data is overwhelmingly biased against the trashy tabloid, making it the worst data for determine what people really like.

Here are some excerpts from the book:
“Facebook is digital brag-to-my friends-about-how-good-my life-is-serum. In Facebook world, the average adult seems to be happily married, vacationing in the Caribbean, and perusing the “Atlantic.” In the real world, a lot of the people are angry, on supermarket checkout lines, peeking at the “National Enquirer”, ignoring phone calls from their spouse, whom them haven’t slept with in years. In Facebook world, family life seems perfect. In the real world, family life is messy. I can be so messy that a small number of people even regret having children. In Facebook world, it seems every young adult is at a cool party Saturday night. In the real world, most are at home alone, binge-watching shows on Netflix. In Facebook world, a girlfriends posts twenty-six happy pictures from her getaway with her boyfriend. In the real world, immediately after posting this, she Googles “my boyfriend won’t have sex with me.”

 

In summary:
DIGITAL TRUTH                          DIGITAL LIES
Searches                                        Social media posts
Views                                             Social media likes
Clicks                                             Dating profiles
Swipes

Some Common Ideas Debunked

August 28, 2017

This post is based on the groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz “Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who we Really Are.”

A common notion is that a major case of racism is economic insecurity and vulnerability. So it is reasonable to expect that when people lose their jobs, racism increases. But neither racist searches nor membership in Stormfront rises when unemployment does.

It is reasonable to think that anxiety is highest in overeducated big cities. A famous stereotype is the urban neurotic. However, Google searches reflecting anxiety—such as “anxiety symptoms” or “anxiety help” tend to be higher in places with lower levels of education, lower median incomes, and where a larger portion of the population lives in rural areas. There are higher search rates for anxiety in rural upstate New York than in New York City.

It is reasonable to think that a terrorist attack that kills dozens or hundreds of people would automatically be followed by massive, widespread anxiety. After all, terrorism, by definition, is supposed to instill a sense of terror. Seth looked for Google searches reflecting anxiety. He tested how much these searches rose in a country in the days, weeks, and months following every major European or American terrorist attack since 2004. So, on average, how much did anxiety-related searches rise? They didn’t. At all.

Humor as long been thought of as a way to cope with frustrations, the pain, the inevitable disappointments of life. Charlie Chaplin said, “laughter is the tonic, the relief, the surcease from pain.” Yet, searches for jokes are lowest on Mondays, they day when people report they are most unhappy. They are lowest on cloudy and rainy days. And they plummet after a major tragedy, such as when two bombs killed three and injured hundreds during the 2013 Boston Marathon. Actually people are more likely to look for jokes when things are going well in life than when they aren’t.

Seth argues that the bigness part of big data is overrated. He writes that the smartest Big Data companies are often cutting down their data. Major decisions at Google are based on only a tiny sampling of all their data. Seth continues, “You don’t always need a ton of data to find important insights. You need the right data. A major reason that Google searches are so valuable is not that there are so many of them; it is that people are so honest in them.

Every Body Lies

August 27, 2017

“Everybody Lies” is the title of a groundbreaking book by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz on how to effectively exploit big data. The subtitle to this book is “Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Reveals About Who We Really are.” The title is a tad overblown as we always need to have doubts about data and data analysis. However, it is fair to say that the internet currently does the best job at revealing who we really are.

The problem with surveys and interviews is that there is a bias to make ourselves look better than we really are. Indeed, we should be aware that we fool ourselves and that we can think we are responding honestly when in truth we are protecting our egos.

Stephens-Davodowitz uses Google trends as his principle research tool and has found that people reveal more about their true selves in these searches than they do in interviews and surveys. Although the pols erred in predicting that Hilary Clinton would win the presidency, Google searches indicated that Trump would prevail.

Going back to Obama’s first election night, when most of the commentary focused on praise of Obama and acknowledgment of he historic nature of his election, roughly one in every hundred Google searches that included “Obama” also included “kkk” or “n_____.” On election night searches and sign-ups for Stormfont, a white nationalist site with surprisingly high popularity in the United States, were more than ten times higher than normal. In some states there were more searches for “n____- president” than “first black president.” So there was a darkness and hatred that was hiding from the traditional sources but was quite apparent in the searches that people made.

These Google searches also revealed that a much of what we thought about the location of racism was wrong. Surveys and conventional wisdom placed modern racism predominantly in the South and mostly among Republicans. However, the places with the highest racist search rates included upstate New York, western Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio, industrial Michigan and rural Illinois, along with West Virginia, southern Louisiana, and Mississippi. The Google search data suggested that the true divide was not South versus North, but East versus West. Moreover racism was not limited to Republicans. Racist searches were no higher in places with a high percentage of Republicans than in places with a high percentage of Democrats. These Google searches helped draw a new map of racism in the United States. Seth notes that Republicans in the South may be more likely to admit racism, but plenty of Democrats in the North have similar attitudes. This map proved to be quite significant in explaining the political success of Trump.

In 2012 Seth used this map of racism to reevaluate exactly the role that Obama’s race played. In parts of the country with a high number of racist searches, Obama did substantially worse than John Kerry, the white presidential candidate, had four years earlier. This relationship was not explained by an other factor about these ares, including educational levels, age, church attendance, or gun ownership. Racist searches did not predict poor performance for any Democratic candidate other than Obama. Moreover these results implied a large effect. Obama lost roughly 4% points nationwide just from explicit racism. Seth notes that favorable conditions existed for Obama’s elections. The Google trends data indicated the there were enough racists to help win a primary or tip a general election in a year not so favorable for Democrats.

During the general election there were clues in Google trends that the electorate might be a favorable one for Trump. Black Americans told polls they would turn out in large numbers to oppose Trump. However Google searches for information on voting in heavily black areas were way down. On election day, Clinton was hurt by low black turnout. There were more searches for “Trump Clinton” than for “Clinton Trump” in key states in the Midwest that Clinton was expected to win. Previous research has indicated that the first name in search pairs like this is likely the favored candidate.

The final two paragraphs in this post are taken directly from Seth’s book.

“But the major clue, I would argue, that Trump might prove a successful candidate—in the primaries, to begin with—was all that secret racism that my Obama study had uncovered, The Google searches revealed a darkness and hatred among a meaningful number of Americans that pundits, for many years, had missed. Search data revealed that we lived in a very different society from the one academics and journalists, relying on polls, thought that we lived in. It revealed a nasty, scary, and widespread rage that was waiting for a candidate to give voice to it.

People frequently lie—to themselves and to others. In 2008, Americans told surveys that they no longer cared about race. Eight years later, they elected as president Donald J. Trump, a man who retweeted a false claim that black people were responsible for the majority of murders of white American, defended his supporter for roughing up a Black Lives Matter protestor at one of his rallies, and hesitated in repudiating support from a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan (HM feels compelled to note that Trump has not renounced the latest endorsement by the leader of the Ku Klux Klan). The same hidden racism that hurt Barack Obama helped Donald Trump.

 

Another Hiatus

August 1, 2017

We’re going on another international cruise. On our last international cruise Trump was running for the Republican nomination. This was extremely embarrassing. Now that he’s President, it’s more than embarrassing. We shall be ashamed to admit we are Americans.

During his absence, HM strongly recommends “NO IS NOT ENOUGH: Resisting Trump’s Shock Politics and Winning the World We Need” by Naomi Klein. It provides an enlightening analysis of how this disaster occurred, and, more importantly, provides ideas on how we can recover from this disaster.

 

Con Artists

July 31, 2017

This post is based on an article by Marc T. Swogger in the News section of the 29 July 2017 edition of the New Scientist titled, “In the age of the scam we need to know how to see a con coming.”

When Swooger was a graduate student in clinical psychology he interviewed lifelong con artists who had been jailed. Not surprisingly, he found that they tend to think a lot of themselves. Con artists see braggadocio as endearing or dismissed as healthy confidence or benign insecurity. But grandiosity is common in these fraudsters and unabashed boasting is a red light.

In a job interview or on a date they sprinkle in a lot of disarming flattery and vague reference to assumed commonality creating the illusion that you are on the inside of something special. Swogger writes, “your emotional reactions might induce bemusement, unease, confusion and excitement. Note your reaction. It is your cue to take a breath and a step back.

Since the con depends on a show to distract, Swooger advises to be grounded and aware of your feelings, focus on words alone. Rather than nuanced and measured, they are peppered with superlatives. The con artist may also contradict themselves—it is hard for them to keep track of what they have said. Uncoupled from their cracking confidence, their claims raise questions.

Consider the above paragraph and its relevance to the greatest con artist of all time—Donald Trump. What is interesting is that in spite of all the indications he provides that he is a con, people being explicitly warned that he is a con artist, yet they still remain conned.

And even today, with video evidence that he delivered classified material and compromised an ally to the Russians— thus indicating that he is worse than a con man, people are still falling for his con.

Amazing.
Sad.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Mindfulness Against Stress and Racism

July 30, 2017

This post is inspired by an article titled “Stress of poverty, racism raise risk of Alzheimer’s for African Americans, new research suggests” by Frederick Kunkle in the 17 July 2017 Issue of the Washington Post.

Recent research into racial disparities among people with Alzheimer’s disease suggests that social conditions, including stress of poverty and racism, substantially raise risks of dementia for Africa Americans. Four independent studies found that conditions that affect blacks disproportionately compared with other groups—such as poor living conditions and stressful events such as the loss of a sibling, the divorce of one’s parents or chronic unemployment—have severe consequences for brain health later on.

A study at the University of Wisconsin found that stress literally takes years off a person’s life in terms of brain function—an average of four years for African Americans, compared with 1.5 years for whites. A different Wisconsin study showed that living in a disadvantaged neighborhood is associated with later decline in cognitive function and even the biomarkers linked to Alzheimer’s disease.

One of the best, if not the best, means of coping with stress is meditation. Meditation places the mind and its worries at rest. It increases the ability of the mind not to focus on stress and opens up the possibilities of ideas for overcoming stress.

If mindfulness were taught universally in schools, people would already have these coping skills. Mindfulness, universally taught, has the potential for mitigating, if not defeating, racism. Research has also found that mindfulness taught in the schools can propagate up to the parents and siblings of the students. So the benefits go beyond the students themselves.

Growth mindsets, in addition to fostering healthy memories, also have the prospect of enhancing economic outcomes. To understand how, consider Scott Adams book “How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big.” Entering “Scott Adams” into the search block of the healthy memory blog will yield healthy memory blog posts based on this book.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Awe

July 29, 2017

This post is based on an article by Jo Marchant in the Features section of the 29 July 2017 edition of the New Scientist titled, “Awesome awe: The emotion that gives us superpowers.”

The feeling of awe is something that hopefully most, if not all, of us have experienced. It has only recently become a topic for scientific investigation. In 2003 Dacher Keltner and Jonathan  Haidt published the first scientific definition. They described awe as the feeling we get when confronted with something vast, that transcends our frame of reference, and that we struggle to understand. It’s an emotion that combines amazement with an edge of fear. Wonder, by contrast, is more intellectual—a cognitive state in which we are trying to understand the mysterious.

We might think that investigating such a mystical experience would be a challenge, but Keltner insists it’s not so hard. He says, “We can reliably produce awe. You can get people to go out to a beautiful scene in nature, or put them in a cathedral or in front of a dinosaur skeleton, and they’re going to be pretty amazed.” Then a numerical scale is used so people can report how much awe they are feeling. A physiological measure, the appearance of goosebumps, is second only to cold temperatures as a source of the goosebumps.

Keltner and other researchers have found that even mild awe can change our attitudes and behavior. People who watched a nature video that elicited awe, rather than other positive emotions such as happiness or pride—were subsequently more generous and described themselves as feeling more connected to people in general. Gazing up at tall eucalyptus trees left others more likely to help someone who stumbled in front of them. After standing in front of a Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton, people were more likely to describe themselves as part of a group. Although it might seem counterintuitive that an emotion we often experience alone increases our focus on others, Keltner thinks it’s because awe expands our attention to encompass a bigger picture, thus reducing our sense of self.

In a large study Keltner found that after inspiring awe in people from the US and China, they signed their names smaller and drew themselves smaller, but with no drop in their sense of status or self-esteem. Neuroscientist Michiel van Elk found that people who watched awe-inducing videos estimated their bodies to be physically smaller than those who watched funny or neutral videos.

At the annual meeting of the Organization of Human Brain Mapping in Vancouver, Canada, in June, van Elk presented functional MRI scans showing that awe quiets activity in the default mode network, which included parts of the frontal lobes and cortex, and is thought to related to the sense of self. Keltner says, “The voice in your head, self-interest, self-consciousness, disappears. Here’s an emotion that knocks out a really important part of our identity. As a result we feel more connected to bigger collectives and groups.”

Keltner’s team has found that feeling awe makes people happier and less stressed, even weeks later, and that it assists the immune system by cutting the production of cytokines, which promote inflammation. A team from Arizona State University found that awe activates the parasympathetic, which works to calm the fight or flight response. Researchers at Stanford University discovered that experiencing awe made people feel as if they had more time—and made them more willing to give up their time to help others.

Awe also seems to help us break habitual patterns of thinking. The Arizona team discovered that after experiencing awe, people were better able to remember the details of a short story. Usually, our memories are colored by our expectations and assumptions, but awe reduces this tendency, improving our focus on what’s actually happening. Increases in curiosity and creativity have also been reported. In one study, after viewing images of Earth, volunteers came up with more original examples in test, found greater interest in abstract painting and persisted longer on difficult puzzles, compared with controls.

Given all these benefits, the question is how to obtain awe experiencing materials. This topic is not discussed in this article. There seems to be business opportunities here. Are there any additional benefits from virtual reality? There is much work to be done.

HM envisions that in the future flat panels will be placed on the walls of our homes, where we have the option of displaying different subjects. Of course, paintings are a likely subject. But consider wrap around flat panels that could place us in the middle of a Redwood Forest, or in the Grand Canyon.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

An AI Armageddon

July 27, 2017

This post is inspired by an article by Cleve R. Wootson, Jr. in the July 24, 2017 Washington Post article titled, “What is technology leader Musk’s great fear? An AI Armageddon”.

Before addressing an AI Armageddon Musk speaks of his company Neuralink, which would devise ways to connect the human brain to computers. He said that an internet-connected brain plug would allow someone to learn something as fast at it takes to download a book. Everytime HM downloads a book to his iPad he wonders, if only… However, HM knows some psychology and neuroscience, topics in which Musk and Kurzweil have little understanding. Kurzweil is taking steps to prolong his life until his brain can be uploaded to silicon. What these brilliant men do not understand is that silicon and protoplasm require different memory systems. They are fundamentally incompatible. Now there is promising research where recordings are made from the rat’s hippocampi while they are learning to perform specific tasks. Then they will try to play these recordings into the hippocampi of different rats and see how well they can perform the tasks performed by the previous rats. This type of research, which stays in the biological domain, can provide the basis for developing brain aids for people suffering from dementia, or who have had brain injuries. The key here is that they are staying in the biological domain.

This biological silicon interface needs to be addressed. And it would be determined that this transfer of information would not be instantaneous, it would be quite time consuming. And even if this is solved, both the brain and the human are quite complicated and there needs to be time for consolidation and other processes. Even then there is the brain mind distinction. Readers of this blog should know that the mind is not contained within the brain, but rather the brain is contained within the mind.

Now that that’s taken care off, let’s move on to Armageddon. Many wise men have warned us of this danger. Previous healthy memory posts, More on Revising Beliefs, being one of them reviewed the movie “Collosus: the Forbin Project.” The movie takes place during the height of the cold war when there was a realistic fear that a nuclear war would begin that would destroy all life on earth. Consequently, the United States created the Forbin Project to create Colossus. The purpose of Colossus was to prevent a nuclear war before it began or to conduct a war once it had begun. Shortly after they turn on Colossus, the find it acting strangely. They discover that it is interacting with the Soviet version of Colossus. The Soviets had found a similar need to develop such a system. The two systems communicate with each other and come to the conclusion that these humans are not capable of safely conducting their own affairs. In the movie the Soviets capitulate to the computers and the Americans try to resist but ultimately fail.

So here is an example of beneficent AI; one that prevents humanity from destroying itself. But this is a singular case of beneficent AI. The tendency is to fear AI and predict either the demise of humanity or a horrendous existence. But consider that perhaps this fear is based on our projecting our nature on to silicon. Consider that our nature may be a function of biology, and absent biology, these fears don’t exist.

One benefit of technology is that the risks of nuclear warfare seem to have been reduced. Modern warfare is conducted by technology. So the Russians do not threaten us with weapons; rather they had technology and tried to influence the election by hacking into our systems. This much is known by the intelligence community. The Russians conducted warfare on the United States and tried to have their candidate, Donald Trump, elected. Whether they succeeded in electing Donald Trump cannot be known in spite of claims that he still would have been elected. But regardless of whether their hacking campaign produced the result, they definitely have the candidate they wanted.

Remember the pictures of Trump in the Oval Office with his Russian buddies (Only Russians were allowed in the Oval Office). He’s grinning from ear to ear boasting about how he fired his FBI Director and providing them with classified intelligence that compromised an ally. Then he tries to establish a secure means of communication with the Russians using their own systems. He complains about the Russian investigation, especially those that involve his personal finances. Why is he fearful? If he is innocent, he will be cleared, and the best thing would be to facilitate the investigation rather than try to obstruct and invalidate it. Time will tell.

How could a country like the United States elect an uncouth, mercurial character who is a brazen liar and who could not pass an elementary exam on civics? Perhaps we are ready for an intervention of benign AI.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

Loneliness

July 25, 2017

This post is largely based on a feature article titled “Feeling lonely? You’re not on your own” by Moya Sarner in the 22 July 2017 New Scientist.

Steve Cole at the University of California at Los Angeles says that lonely people are at increased risk of “just about every major chronic illness — heart attacks, neurodegenerative diseases, cancer. A meta-analysis of nearly 150 studies found that a poor quality of social relationships had the same negative effect on risk of death as smoking, alcohol and other well-known factors such as inactivity and obesity. Cacioppo of the University of Chicago says that “Correcting for demographic factors, loneliness increases the odds of early mortality by 26%. That’s about the same as living with chronic obesity,”

One reason is that loneliness lowers willpower, so we are more likely to indulge in self-defeating behavior. We make take risks and make bad decision from choosing unhealthy food to avoiding exercise, Feeling socially isolated also increases the risk of mental health problems such as stress, depression, and eating disorders, all of which aversely effect our physical health.

Cacioppo and Cole compared gene expression in the white blood cells of two groups. One group consisted of six persistently lonely middle-aged adults and in the other group were eight who ranked as consistently socially enfranchised. In the lonelier group, the activity of genes responsible for inflammation was ramped up.

Although inflammation is the body’s first line of defense against injury and bacterial infection, too much inflammation has been linked to cancer, depression, Alzheimer’s disease, and obesity. The lonely people also had less activity in the genes that regulate immune response to viral infections.

Too much inflammation changes the brain triggering behaviors that prime for threats. Cole says, “Inflammatory biology makes the brain a little more suspicious, vigilant and irritable.” Cacioppo and his team measured people’s brain activity while they looked at either threatening or neutral pictures and found that lonely people tuned in to social threats faster. This hyper-vigilance could explain the correlation between loneliness and poor sleep quality.

Today young people seem particularly vulnerable. This article does not mention the manner in which technology is used. Being constantly connected and friending could be driven in large part by loneliness. Robin Dunbar, at the University of London (who has appeared in five previous healthy memory blog posts) states that if there’s one factor that stands out in alleviating loneliness, it is the quality, rather than quantity of relationships. He says that this fits our evolutionary past. “For you to live, survive, work, and function well depends on you having a set of very intense close friendships, or family relationships. It turns out that this core group numbers about five close friends and family—and this is very consistent across primates, including humans.” To maintain those crucial five or so relationships, there’s an easy formula. You need to dedicate 40% of your total social effort to them, “ and that means seeing them on a very regular basis.” Small changes like pruning random acquaintances from social media, setting notifications for updates from real friends, and spending time with a core group could all act as a buffer against loneliness.

It seems the best approach is to start with the mind, rather than trying to expand you social network. A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness found that the most successful dealt with the psychological aspects of loneliness using cognitive behavioral training. The heightened sense of threat lonely people feel means they are more likely to pay attention and remember negative details and events, and behave in ways that confirm their negative expectations, perpetuating the vicious spiral of loneliness.

Research by Cole, who is investigating what factors might make people less likely to succumb to the negative health effects of loneliness, thinks that finding a sense of purpose and meaning in life can overcome the negative effects of loneliness. Cole says, “If you think of lonely people as having a world view of threat and hostility, this study suggests that you can attack this underlying psychology by becoming engaged in help others, trying to make the world a better place. I’m kind of excited about that as an obliques attack on loneliness.” All of this fits in with with the work of Victor J. Stretcher, which he describes in his book, “Life on Purpose: How Living for What Matters Changes Everything.” There have been many healthy memory posts based on this book.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Brain Training Games in Perspective

July 23, 2017

In the July 11, 2017 issue of the Washington Post there was an article by Jenna Gallegos titled “Brain training games fail to deliver exceptional cognitive boost, study finds”. This article summarized a study published in the Journal of Neuroscience in which 128 young adults were tested for mental performance after playing either Luminosity brain-training games or regular video games for 10 weeks. Researchers saw no evidence that commercial brain training games lead to improvements in memory, decision-making, sustained attention, or ability to switch between mental tasks.

So what can do these results mean? Luminosity might want to work on developing games that will show improvements in mental performance when compared against regular video games. Suppose that either the current study had or a future study will show improvements in mental performance when compared to regular video games. Although these results would be positive, they would not prove that playing them warded off dementia.

It is already known that cognitive activity does decrease the likelihood of dementia, and that cognitive activity can produce a cognitive reserve such that even when the defining characteristics of Alzheimer’s, the amyloid plaque and neurofibrillary tangles, appear dementia might be delayed or forestalled altogether. After all, there have been autopsies performed on people whose brains were plagued with amyloid plaque and neurofibrillary tangles who never exhibited any cognitive or behavioral symptoms of the disease.

The healthy memory blog has warned against waiting for drugs that prevent or cure Alzheimer’s (see the healthy memory blog post, “The Myth of Alzheimer’s). The healthy memory blog does recommend a healthy lifestyle that features growth mindsets for continually learning and meditation and mindfulness. Social activities are also an important part of this healthy lifestyle.

HM also argues that it is not just mental activity, but the type of mental activity that is important. Here it is important to understand the different types of cognitive activity Daniel Kahneman described in his book “Thinking Fast and Slow.”

System 1 is named Intuition. System 1 is very fast, employs parallel processing, and appears to be automatic and effortless. This processing is so fast that it is executed, for the most part, outside conscious awareness. Emotions and feelings are also part of System 1. Learning is associative and slow. For something to become a System 2 process much repetition and practice is required. Activities such as walking, driving, and conversation are primarily System 1 processes. They occur rapidly and with little apparent effort. We would not have survived if we could not do these types of processes rapidly. But this speed of processing is purchased at a cost, the possibility of errors, biases, and illusions.
System 2 is named Reasoning. It is controlled processing that is slow, serial, and effortful. It is also flexible. This is what we commonly regard as thinking. One of the roles of System 2 is to monitor System 1 for processing errors, but System 2 is slow and System 1 is fast, so errors do slip through. Learning, particularly the early stages, are largely a System 2 process.

System 1 processing occurs rapidly over frequently travelled pathways in the brain. However, System 2 processing involves traveling over many pathways, some which are little used to find supporting, refuting, or conflicting information, or in establishing new links for learning

It is HM’s conjecture that it is System 2 processing that is most beneficial to healthy memories, the formation of a cognitive reserve, and the forestalling or prevention of dementia.

So what types of experiments could test this hypothesis. Here are two possibilities;

One hypothesis is that voters who voted for Trump engaged primarily, if not exclusively ,in System 1 processing. and are more likely to suffer from dementia. Many, if not most, decisions were based on emotions, which are System 1 processes. Other decisions where based on religion or party affiliation. So these people were essentially just following orders. Even if people gave an answer such as jobs or the economy, did they bother to think critically how Trump promised to accomplish his promises, or were they just placing blind faith in Trump?

So the argument here is that voters who did not vote for Trump engaged in System 2 processing that kept them from making the error of voting for Trump. Consequently, they have healthier memories and are less likely to safer from dementia.

Another hypothesis is that viewers of Fox News are more likely to suffer from demential. Fox’s “Fair and Balanced” news is accomplished by presenting news that appeals to existing biases and beliefs. This enables Fox viewers to use System 1 processes almost exclusively and to avoid or minimize System 2 thinking.

But what about viewers who do not view Fox news? As they receive a wider range of views in the news coverage, some, but not all, of the news will require System 2 processing. In other words, these viewers will need to think more, which might well assist in building a cognitive reserve and warding off dementia.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Is Blood Doping a Placebo Effect?

July 22, 2017

This post is based on a piece by Chris Cooper titled “Blood Doping: Was Lance Armstrong just wasting his time? in the Comment Section of the July 15 2017 issue of the New Scientist.

There have been many previous posts on the placebo effect (just enter “placebo” into the search block of the healthy memory blog). This article is based on a Dutch study that used amateur riders injecting either EPO, the blood doping drug used by Lance Armstrong, or saline. So all bicycle riders in a road race thought they were being given EPO, but only half received EPO injections and the other half receive saline injections. No difference was found in the performance of the two groups.

This study needs to be replicated, and HM suggests the following addition, and that is the addition of a group that receives neither injection. A placebo effect is expected, so the saline group should perform better than the no injection control. Both the placebo group and the saline group should outperform the no injection group This result would be important. Chris Cooper suggests that, as these cyclists were not elite competitors, the blood oxygen content may not have been limiting performance in the amateurs. Research to determine if EPO only enhances performance when blood oxygen content limits performance would also be informative.

It would also be interesting to try to convince several veteran participants in the Tour de France bicycle race that there was an effective way of making EPO doping undetectable, and then fool any dishonest riders into taking a placebo. Now suppose they either won the race or performed much better than expected. Then wouldn’t it be humorous if these doping agencies prohibited placebos?

There was another report on placebos in the Significant Digits piece on 20 July 2017 FiveThirtyEight Blog. It reports a 2014 knee pain study comparing elective surgical procedures and sham surgeries. People undergoing the sham surgery were aware that it was sham. The study found that faking a surgery (doing all the fasting and knocking them out and fake incisions and the whole routine) provided some benefit to the ailment in 74% of the cases and was as effective as the actual elective surgery in roughly half the time. HM thinks that the placebo effect is the most interesting of all medical effects. The placebo effect wide applications.

 

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Seven Ways to Overhaul Your Smartphone Use

July 21, 2017

This post is taken directly from the March 2017 issue of “Monitor on Psychology.”
If you want to minimize the pitfalls of smartphone use, research suggests seven good places to start.

Make Choices. The more we rely on smartphones, the harder it is to disconnect. Consider which functions are optional. Could you keep lists in a paper notebook? Use a standalone alarm clock? Make conscious choices about what you really need your phone for, and what you don’t.

Retrain yourself. Larry Rosen, Ph.D., advises users not to check the phone first thing in the morning. During the day, gradually check in less often—maybe every 15 minutes at first, then every 20, then 30. Over time, you’ll start to see notifications as suggestions rather than demands, he says, and you’ll feel less anxious about staying connected.

Set expectations. “In many ways, our culture demands constant connection. That sense of responsibility to be on call 24 hours a day comes with a greater psychological burden than many of us realize,” says Karla Murdock Ph.D. Try to establish expectations among family and friends so they don’t worry or feel slighted if you don’t reply to their texts or emails immediately. While it can be harder to ignore messages from your boss, it can be worthwhile to have a frank discussion about what his or her expectations are for staying connected after hours.

Silence notifications. It’s tempting to go with your phone’s default settings, but making the effort to tun off unnecessary notifications can reduce distractions and stress.

Protect sleep. Avoid using your phone late at night. If you must use it, turn down the brightness. When it’s time for bed, turn you phone off and place it in another room.

Be active. When interacting with social media sites, don’t just absorb other people’s posts. Actively posting idea or photos, creating content and commenting on others’ posts is associated with better subjective well-being.

And, of course, don’t text/email/call and drive. In 2014, more than 3,000 people were killed in distracted driving incidents on U.S. roads, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. When you’re driving, turn off notifications and place your phone out of reach.

(Dis)connected

July 20, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Kirsten Weir in the March 2017 issue of “Monitor on Psychology.” This article reviews research showing how smartphones are affecting our health and well-being, and points the way toward taking back control.

Some of the most established evidence concerns sleep. Dr. Klein Murdock, a psychology professor who heads the Technology and Health Lab at Washington and Lee University followed 83 college students and found that those who were more-attuned to their nighttime phone notifications had poorer subjective sleep quality and greater self-reported sleep problems. Although smartphones are often viewed as productivity-boosting devices, their ability to interfere with sleep can have the opposite effect on getting things done.

Dr. Russell E. Johnson and his colleagues at Michigan State University surveyed workers from a variety of professions. They found that when people used smartphones at night for work-related purposes, they reported that they slept more poorly and were less engaged at work the next day. These negative effects were greater for smartphone users than for people who used laptops or tablets right before bed.

Reading a text or email at bedtime can stir your emotions or set your mind buzzing with things you need to get done. So your mind becomes activated at a time when it’s important to settle down and have some peace.

College students at the University of Rhode Island were asked to keep sleep diaries for a week. They found that 40% of the students reported waking at night to answer phone calls and 47% woke to answer text messages. Students who were more likely to use technology after they’d gone to sleep reported poorer sleep quality, which predicted symptoms of anxiety and depression.

FOMO is an acronym for Fear Of Missing Out. In one study, Dr Larry Rosen a professor emeritus of psychology at California State University and his colleagues took phones away from college students for an hour and tested their anxiety levels at various intervals. Light users of smartphones didn’t show any increasing anxiety as they sat idly without their phones. Moderate users began showing signs of increased anxiety after 25 minutes without their phones, but their anxiety held steady at that moderately increased level for the rest of the hour long study. Heavy phone users showed increased anxiety after just 10 phone-free minutes, and their anxiety levels continued to climb throughout the hour.

Rosen has found that younger generations are particularly prone to feel anxious if they can’t check their text messages, social media, and other mobile technology regularly. But people of all ages appear to have a close relationship with their phones. 76% of baby boomers reported checking voicemail moderately or very often, and 73% reported checking text messages moderately or very often. Anxiety about not checking in with text messages and Facebook predicted symptoms of major depression, dysthymia, and bipolar mania.

When research participants were limited to checking email messages just three times a day, they reported less daily stress. This reduced stress was associated with positive outcomes including greater mindfulness, greater self-perceived productivity and better sleep quality.

In another study participants were asked to keep all their smartphone notifications on during one week. In the other week, they were asked to turn notifications off and to keep their phones tucked out of sight. At the end of the study participants were given questionnaires. During the week of notifications participants reported greater levels of inattention and hyperactivity compared with their alert-free week. These feelings of inattention and hyperactivity were directly associated with lower levels of productivity, social connectedness, and psychological well being. Having your attention scattered by frequent interruptions has its costs.

The article also stresses the importance of personal interactions, which are inherently richer. The key to having healthy relationships with technology is moderation. We want to get the best from technology, but at the same time to make sure that it’s not controlling us.

 

Ivan Pavlov and American Democracy

July 19, 2017

The question that should come to mind with this title is what does Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist, have to do with American democracy? You should remember Pavlov from his drooling dogs. He would pair a sound, a buzzer for example, with food. After sufficient training the dogs would drool whenever they hear the buzzer. This was called the conditioned response (CR), that resulted from pairing a buzzer, the conditioned stimulus (CS), with the food. Pavlov earned a Nobel Prize for this finding. He is also regarded as a psychologist as conditioned stimuli became central to many theories in psychology.

When many conservatives hear about the success of the medical insurance provided to the citizens of other advanced countries their response is “socialism” or “socialized medicine,” and that’s the end to it. It is important to understand why they make these conditioned responses, as the conditioned response is the lowest form of behavior, being a highly simplified version of Kahneman’s System 1 processing. All their lives they have been conditioned to respond to government supplied medical insurance as socialism and to socialism as bad. Many have conflated socialism with communism, which makes it doubly bad.

So when you get this response, explain to them why they’re making this response. It is highly unlikely that they understand that this is a conditioned response rather than any sort of reasoned response that involves actual thinking. So before going further ask them to shove all their beliefs as far up their keisters as they can, and to provide a reasoned response as to their opposition to government provided medical care. Not surprisingly, it is likely that few will be willing to do this, so the interaction should end here. But if they can explain why these systems have been working well in Europe, be prepared to listen.

A response that you might get from someone about why they work in Europe, but will not work here is exceptionalism. HM finds this very concept wreaking of hubris. These countries consist of the same species and are from representatives democracies, not kleptocracies like Putin’s.

That Trump felt honored to meet Putin is very disturbing. In an earlier life, HM worked on classified programs and reviewed people who were applying for security clearances. If any one of them had expressed admiration for Putin, HM would have recommended strongly against their being given access to classified information. Consequently, he is disturbed to have a President who admires Putin.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Ignorance

July 18, 2017

A previous post titled “Making People Smart” discussed a course entitled “Ignorance” that has been taught at Columbia University. Guest scientists are invited to speak about what “they don’t know, what they think is critical to know, how they might get to know it, what will happen if they do find this or that thing out, or what might happen if they don’t.” The course focuses on all that is not in the textbooks and thus guides students to think about what is unknown and what could be known. The idea is to focus not on what students themselves don’t know, but what entire fields of science don’t know, with the aim of provoking and directing students to ask questions about the foundations of a scientific field. This course requires that a students ponder not just some set of scientific theories and ideas; it requires that they begin to understand what the entire community has and hasn’t mastered. This course is taught by Stuart Fierstein and he has published the book on which that course is based. The book is titled, appropriately enough, “Ignorance: How It Drives Science.”

HM has read the book. It is well written and fairly short. HM recommends this book to anyone who is interested in science. HM will not be writing further posts on this book, but he will be using it as a point of departure to consider a larger truth the book holds. Previous healthy memory blog posts have noted that the rapid improvements in life on this planet come from science, or more particularly, scientific thinking. Truly effective and innovative scientific thinking comes from looking for areas of ignorance, information that we don’t have. In the words of Donald Rumsfeld, these are unknown unknowns.

Contrast this with how most of us think. We comfort ourselves with what we know. We like to stay close to home. However, growth mindsets encourage us to grow our knowledge and skills continually till the end of life. Staying active and continuing to learn is one of the best, if not the best, means of warding off dementia. Another way of looking at this is to look for areas of our own ignorance, and pursue those areas which we would like to pursue.

Businesses that survive know that it is important to adapt to changes constantly. This is needed if they are, at worst, able to survive, or, at best, to thrive. So they are examining areas of ignorance and making decisions as to which to pursue.

What is generally ignored is that governments need to adapt to survive. They need to identify areas of ignorance and address them or difficulties will be encountered, and, eventually, even survival will be threatened. This is not to say that conservative views are not valued. But there role is to preclude foolish pursuits, not to preclude addressing pressing problems with new ideas.

A good example of this is the problem of healthcare in the United States. The problem is severe as the United States has the most expensive healthcare in the world, but health statistics characteristic of third world countries. Every advanced country has successfully addressed healthcare and is providing healthcare for all its citizens via a single payer system in which the single payer is the government.
It is unbelievable that in the United States that there are people who do not think that healthcare is a right for all people. HM regards people who do not believe this as moral degenerates, and that goes double for such people who profess religious faiths. One party believes in market forces, which are very effective under many circumstances, but not for healthcare. But they continue to believe that market forces are universally applicable. When someone has a hammer, everything looks like a nail, which is the problem here.

Perhaps it is ironic that communism is an ideology that failed because, among other factors, it was too widely applied and ignored market forces. The lesson here is that ideologies preclude effective thinking, and ideologues are the bane of an effective democracy. Think and look around. There are many effective examples of universal healthcare in all advanced countries, except one, the good old USofA.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Robots Will Be More Useful If They are Made to Lack Confidence

July 17, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Matt Reynolds in the News & Technology section of the 10 June 2017 issue of the New Scientist. The article begins “CONFIDENCE in your abilities is usually a good thing—as long as you know when it’s time to ask for help. Reynolds notes that as we build ever smarter software, we may want to apply the same mindset to machines.

Dylan Hadfield-Menell says that overconfident AIs can cause all kinds of problems. So he and his colleagues designed a mathematical model of an interaction between humans and computers called the “off-switch-game.” In the theoretical set-up robots are given a task to do and humans are free to switch them off whenever they like. The robot can also choose to disable its switch so the person cannot turn it off.

Robots given a high level of “confidence” that they were doing something useful would never let the human turn them off, because they tried to maximize the time spent doing their task. Not surprisingly, a robot with low confidence would always let a human switch it off, even if it was doing a good job.

Obviously, calibrating the level of confidence is important. It is unlikely that humans would ever provide a level of confidence that would not allow them to shut down the computer. A problem here is that we humans tend to be overconfident and to be unaware of how much we do not know. This human shortcoming is well documented in a book by Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach titled “The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone.” Remember that transactive memory is information that is found in our fellow human beings and in technology that ranges from paper to the internet. Usually we eventually learn the best sources of information in our fellow humans and human organizations, and we need to learn where to find and how much confidence to have in information stored in technology, which includes AI robots. Just as we can have the wrong friends and sources of information, we have the same problem with robots and external intelligence.

So the title is wrong. Robots may not be more useful if they are made to lack confidence. They should have a calibrated level of confidence just as we humans should have calibrated levels of confidence depending upon the task and how skilled we are. Achieving the appropriate levels of confidence between humans and machines is a good example of the Man-Machine Symbiosis J.C.R. Licklider expounded upon in his Classic paper “Man-Computer Symbiosis.”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Conclusion: Appraising Ignorance and Illusion

July 16, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of the final chapter of The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. The authors note that this book has three central themes: ignorance, the community of knowledge, and the illusion of understanding.

The authors note that ignorance is inevitable simply because there’s too much complexity in the world for any individual to master. The Dunning-Kruger effect, which has been discussed in previous healthy memory posts, is that those who perform the worst overrate their own skills the most. This effect can be found by giving a group of people a task to do and then asking them how well they think they’ve done on the task. Poor performers overestimate how well they’ve done; strong performers often underestimate their performance. This effect has been found many times both in the psychological laboratory and in many real-world environments: among students, in offices, and among doctors. Dunning has collected an impressive amount of evidence that the reason it happens is that those who lack skills also lack the knowledge of what skills they’re missing. Consequently, they think they’re pretty good. However, those who are knowledgeable have a better sense of how matters should be handled and they know what skills they need to improve on. Dunning stresses the importance of this effect because all of us are unskilled in most domains of our lives.

The authors wrote, “As for the community of knowledge, intelligence resides in the community and not in any individual. So decision-making procedures that elicit the wisdom of the community are more likely to produce better outcomes than procedures that depend on the relative ignorance of lone individuals. A strong leader is one who knows how to inspire a community and take advantage of the knowledge within it, and can delegate responsibility to those with the most expertise.”

There are good and bad aspects of the illusion of understanding. We’re more likely to be accurate by avoiding illusion. We have a good idea of what we know and what we don’t know, and this should help us achieve our goals. We won’t take on projects that are beyond us, and we’ll be less likely to disappoint others, and we’ll be better positioned to deliver on our promises.

But they also note that illusion is a pleasure, as many of us spend a significant part of our lives living in illusions quite intentionally. We entertain ourselves with fictional worlds. Illusions can stimulate creative products by inspiring us to imagine alternative worlds, goals, and outcomes. And they can motivate us to attempt what we wouldn’t otherwise attempt.

Many posts have been devoted to this book because it addresses an important topic. It provides us with a more accurate picture of what we know and the consequences of shortfalls in knowledge. The title states “why we never think alone.” Perhaps it should read, “why we should never think alone.” Although he has certainly tried, HM has not done this volume justice, and he encourages you to read it for yourself.

 

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Making Smart Decisions

July 15, 2017

This is the twelfth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Making Smarter Decisions is a chapter in this book. Perhaps the one area it is important to make smart decisions is in finance.

Consider the following question: Assume that you deposit $400 every month into a retirement savings account that earns a 10% yearly rate of interest and that you never withdraw any money. How much money do you think you will have in any account (including interest earned): After 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, and 40 years.

Respondents answering these questions responding with a median response of
$223,000.00 after forty years. The correct answer is almost $2.5 million. Use your spreadsheet to prove this for yourself.

HM’s father passed away before he retired, and he was denied a large amount of the pension he should have received. Nevertheless, both his parents had managed their finances carefully. All they invested in were FDIC insured savings accounts and Certificates of Deposit. HM was amazed at the money his Mom accumulated. She was in fine shape, placed no burden on him, and left him a substantial inheritance.

HM’s parents also never carried credit card debt. No one should ever carry credit card debt. This debt is compounded, and increases at a nonlinear rate just as savings accounts do. But unlike savings accounts, debt is subtracted.

Actually the rates that are charged are usurious and should not be allowed. But the financial industry has effectively bought congress. (You should know that the United States has the best congress money can buy). Added to this are the clever programs where you gain rewards for using the card. Using the card and earning rewards is not a problem unless you do not pay off the card monthly when it is due. You should remember if you carry credit debt you are losing money.

Behavioral economics has some effective ideas to aid in better financial decisions (enter, “behavioral economics” into the healthy memory blog search box to find additional posts on behavioral economics). It has found ways to nudge better decisions. Nudging can be done by setting defaults. Rather than have employees opt in regarding retirement contributions, have them opt out if they do not want to contribute. Have being an organ donor being the default option on a driver’s license, and have them opt out if they do not want to be a donor. The big idea of the nudge approach is that it easier and more effective to change the environment that it is to change the person. Once we understand what quirks of cognition drive behavior, we can design the environment so that those quirks help us instead of hurting us.

We can apply these lessons to how we make decisions as part of a community of knowledge. Realizing that people are explanation foes—that we usually don’t have the inclination or even the capability to master he details of all our decisions, we can try to structure the environment to help ourselves make good decisions despite our lack of understanding.

Reduce Complexity
Simple Decision Rules
Just-in-Time Education
Check Out Understanding

 

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Making People Smart

July 14, 2017

This is the eleventh post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Making People Smart is a chapter in this book.

The authors state, “The illusion of comprehension arises because people confuse understanding with familiarity or recognition. When you reread text at a later time, it seems familiar. Psychologist Paul Kolers provided an extreme case of this by having people read inverted text. More than a year later the same people could read the same text faster than different text they hadn’t read before. Thus, they had retained a memory over the course of a year for how to read specific text.

A problem that we all have is that this sense of familiarity can be confused with actual understanding of the material. It’s one thing to be familiar with some text or to know it by heart, but another to really get a full understanding of its meaning. Comprehension requires processing text with care and effort in a deliberate manner. It requires thinking about the author’s intention. This isn’t obvious to everyone and many students confuse studying with light reading. The knowledge illusion extends to education as well. Learning requires breaking common habits by processing information more deeply.

Sloan and Fernbach neglect to discuss how current technology hinders the development of fuller and deeper understanding. In their chapter on Thinking with Technology they did discuss how technology fools us into thinking we know more than we know. But they did not discuss how being continually plugged in and multitasking prevents fuller and deeper understanding. The belief that we can multitask is mistaken. What we are in reality doing is switching between, or all too often, among tasks, and the act of switching has attentional and cognitive costs. Fuller and deeper understanding comes from concentrating on one topic for a prolonged period of time. Usually many such encounters are often needed for this fuller and deeper understanding. Multitasking fosters superficial, not deep processing.

We suffer from the knowledge illusion when we confuse what experts know with what we ourselves know. The fact that we can access someone else’s knowledge makes us feel like we already know what we’re talking about. We are not built to become masters of all subjects, but we are built to participate in a community.

The authors write, “A real education includes learning that you don’t know certain things (a lot of things). Instead of looking in at the knowledge you do have, you learn to look for the knowledge you don’t have. To do this, you have to let go of some hubris; you have to accept what you don’t know. Learning what you don’t know is just a matter of looking at the frontiers of your knowledge and wondering what is out there beyond the border. It’s about asking why.”

Since 2006, a course entitled “Ignorance” has been taught at Columbia University. Guest scientists are invited to speak about what “they don’t know, what they think is critical to know, how they might get to know it, what will happen if they do find this or that thing out, and what might happen if they don’t.” The course focuses on all that is not in the textbooks and thus guides students to think about what is unknown and what could be known. The idea is to focus not on what students themselves don’t know, but what entire fields of science don’t know, with the aim of provoking and directing students to ask questions about the foundations of a scientific field. This course requires that students ponder not just some set of scientific theories; it requires that they begin to understand what the entire community has and hasn’t mastered.

Being a cognitive psychologist, HM has needed to learn about many disciplines, computer science, neuroscience, statistics, and linguistics, to name just a few. This is vastly more knowledge that one individual can comprehend. So much knowledge is accepted as faith. What distinguishes this faith from religious faith is that there is a higher power to appeal to: namely the power of verification. The Dalai Lama is a religious leader who is unique in that he incorporates scientific results into the Buddhist religion.

It was perhaps when HM graduated from high school that he had high confidence in what he knew. His undergraduate education quickly disabused him of this notion, and his graduate and continuing studies have increased his awareness of how much he does not know.

We all need to become better consumers of information. We need to be skeptical when deciphering the media. As has been noted in previous posts that there is a profitable business in false science and false news. Adrian Chen wrote in the New York Times Magazine of Russian “troll farm”, which was a business whose employees are assigned pro-Kremlin viewpoints and putative information to propagate by blogging, posting on social media sites, and flooding comment sections of news sites, often using false identities. It is sad that this sort of thing goes on all the time in both the political and commercial domains. All of which emphasizes that we should be modest about what we do know, to never have absolute beliefs in anything, and to constantly try to increase our understanding so we can use knowledge more effectively, and perhaps contribute to communal understanding.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

The New Definition of Smart

July 13, 2017

This is the tenth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. The New Definition of Smart is a chapter in this book.

The chapter begins by stating that we tend to be knowledgeable of only a few, and oftentimes one, individuals for an area accomplishment. Martin Luther King, jr., is known by most people as being key to the Civil Rights Movement. In reality, many people over a prolonged period of time were involved in the movement. They write that the tendency to substitute individuals for complicated entities can be seen in how we talk about institutions. We talk about the Eisenhower administration or the Kennedy administration as if the president of the United States personally carried out all the function of the executive branch of government. The Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare, runs to about 20,000 or so pages of legalese. The authors ask how much of it do you think that Barack Obama himself wrote? Their guess is none. We speak of great scientists as if they changed the world, but they did not do it alone. Wasn’t it the great physicist Sir Isaac Newton who said that if he saw further than other men it was because he stood on the shoulders of giants?

The authors spend a good deal of time discussing the concept of intelligence, commonly referred to as IQ and how it has developed. Rather then try to summarize their summary consider the title of a presentation that Robert J. Sternberg made at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science in 2017, “Are We Creating a Society of Smart Fools? Lesson from 40+ Years of Research on Human Intelligence, Creativity, and Wisdom”. HM can think of no better expert as an authority on this topic.

 

Sloan and Fernbach, building on the concept of a group mind come up with the concept of c for collective intelligence. Diversity is important for successful groups. A group in which everyone has the same expertise will unlikely be effective. The question is what are the objectives for a group, and what areas of expertise are needed to fill it. Then one searches for these unique pieces and asks the question, what does a given individual add to the group. As the group advances it is likely that new sources of expertise will be required and that groups will be dynamic. If a new member does improve a group, c increases.

This concept of c is relatively new. A team led by Anita Woolley of the Tepper School of Business is developing this concept. Instead of testing people individually, they gave each of forty teams of these people a variety of tests that included brainstorming the possible uses for a brick, Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices that is often used as a quick assessment of intelligence, a moral reasoning problem, a shopping trip planning task, and a group typing taAnisk. Each team did each task together.

All tasks were positively correlated in that a group who did well on one task was more likely to do well on another task than a group who didn’t do well on the first task. Thus, they uncovered c the factor. The new research being done suggests that the success of a group is not predominately a function of the intelligence of its individuals, but rather by how well they work together with their respective competencies.

Obviously c is a very promising concept, one for which much work still needs to be done.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

Thinking About Politics

July 11, 2017

This is the ninth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Thinking About Politics is a chapter in this book.

HM remembers when the Affordable Care Act was being debated, a woman was asked what she thought about it. She remarked that she was strongly in favor of it. However, when she was asked about Obamacare, she said that she was strongly against it. Such is the state of politics in the United States. A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation in April 2013, found that more than 40% of Americans were not even aware that the Affordable Care Act was Law (12% thought it had been repealed by Congress—it hadn’t.)

Drs. Sloman and Fernbach write that public opinion is more extreme than people’s understanding justifies. Americans who most strongly justified military intervention in the Ukraine in 2014 were the ones least able to identify Ukraine’s location on a map. A survey out of Oklahoma State University’s Department of Agricultural Economics asked consumers whether the labeling of foods produced with genetic engineering should be mandatory. 80% of the respondents thought that it should. But 80% also approved of a law stating that there should be mandatory labels on foods containing DNA. They believe that people have the right to know if their food has DNA. So these respondents thought that all meats, vegetables, and grains should be labeled “BEWARE HAS DNA.” But we would all die if we avoided foods that contain DNA.

We all need to appreciate how little we understand. The authors write, “Taken to its extreme, the failure to appreciate how little we understand combined with community support, can ignite really dangerous mechanisms. You don’t have to know much history to know how societies can become caldrons in an attempt to create a uniform ideology, boiling away independent thinking and political opposition through propaganda and terror. Socrates died because of a desire for ancient Athenians to rid themselves of contaminated thinking. So did Jesus at the hands of the Romans. This is why the first crusades were launched to free Jerusalem of the infidel, and why the Spanish Inquisition drove Jews and Muslims to convert to Christianity or leave Spain between 1492 and 1501. The twentieth century was shaped by the demons of ideological purity, from Stalin’s purges, executions, and mass killings to Mao’s Great Leap Forward: the herding of millions of people into agricultural communes and industrial working groups, with the result than many starved. And we haven’t even mentioned the incarcerations and death camps of Nazi Germany.”

The authors write, “Proponents of political positions often cast policies that most people see as consequentialist in values-based terms in order to hide their ignorance, prevent moderation of opinion, and block compromise. They note the health care debate as a perfect example of this. Most people just want the best health care for the most people at the most affordable price. This is what the national conversation should be about how to achieve this. But this might be technical and boring. So politicians and interest groups make it about sacred values. One side asks whether the government should be making decisions about our health care, focusing the audience on the importance of limited government. The other side asks whether everybody in the country deserves decent health care, focusing on the value of generosity and preventing harm to others. The authors say that both sides are missing the point. All of us should have similar values: we want to be healthy, we want others to be healthy, and we want doctors and other medical professionals to be compensated, but we don’t want to pay too much. The health care debate should not be about basic values, because in most people’s minds basic values are not the issue. The issue is the best way to achieve the best outcomes.

Ideologies and ideologues are the bane of effective government. They constrain alternatives and blind us to obvious solutions. As mentioned in the second post in this series, other advanced countries have effectively addressed the problem of healthy care with a single payer system in which that single payer is the government. There are already proven examples from which to choose. But in the United States, ideology has deemphasized the role of government, and the single payer system is regarded as a radical solution.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

Thinking About Science

July 9, 2017

This is the eighth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Thinking About Science is a chapter in this book.

Were it not for science and, more importantly, scientific thinking we would still be living in the dark middle ages. Our wealth and health is due to scientific thinking. Yet knowledge about science and belief in scientific facts is lacking. HM admires the Amish. Although they reject science, they live the humble lives dictated by their beliefs. Too many others enjoy the fruits of science yet reject scientific methods and findings. Their lack of respect for science exposes us to the continued risks of global warming and puts unvaccinated children at risk, to name just two problems.

In 1985, Walter Bodmer, a German-born geneticist, who is a professor at Oxford University in the UK, was appointed by the Royal Society of London to lead a team to evaluate the current state of attitudes toward science and technology in Britain. The Royal Society was concerned about antiscientific sentiment in Britain, seeing it as a serious risk to societal well-being. The results and recommendations of the study were published in a seminal paper known as the Bodmer Report.

Previous research had focused primarily on measuring attitudes directly, but Bodmer and his team argued for a single and intuitive idea that opposition to science and technology is driven by a lack of understanding. So via the promotion of better understanding of science, society can promote more favorable attitudes and take better advantage of the benefits afforded by science and technology. This idea about science attitudes is called the deficit model. According to this model, antiscientific thinking is due to a knowledge deficit. Once this deficit is filled, antiscientific attitudes will be mitigated or will disappear.

The paucity of scientific knowledge and abundance of antiscientific beliefs have been documented in all societies that have been studied. Although there is a weak relationship between scientific knowledge and attitudes about science, attempts to address the deficit model have failed. This is in spite of the millions and millions of dollars spent on research, curriculum design, outreach and communication, little to no headway has been achieved.

HM thinks that science is so vast and continually expanding that the deficit is simply too large to fill. Although scientists are knowledgeable in their specialties, as they move away from the specialities that knowledge falls off.

But there is another explanation that scientific attitudes are not based on the rational evaluation of evidence, so providing information does not change them. Attitudes are determined instead by a host of contextual and cultural factors.

These two explanations are not mutually exclusive. They are likely both operative.

One of the leading voices promoting this new perspective is Dan Kahan, a Yale law professor. He argues that our attitudes are not based on rational, detached evaluation of evidence because our beliefs are not isolated pieces of data that we can take and discard at will. Instead these beliefs are intertwined with other beliefs, shared cultural values, and our identities, To discard a belief means discarding a whole host of other beliefs, forsaking our communities, going against those we trust and love, virtually challenging our identities.

Drs. Sloman and Fernbach flesh out this theory by the story of Mike McHargue, who now is a podcaster and blogger who goes by the moniker Science Mike. Mike once attended a fundamentalist church and held fundamentalist beliefs. When he reached his thirties he began reading scientific literature and his faith in these beliefs began to waver. His initial reaction was to lose his faith completely, but for a long time he kept his new beliefs from his community. Eventually a personal experience helped him rediscover his faith and he is now, once again, a practicing Christian, but he continues to reject his fundamentalist church’s antiscientific beliefs.

Here is Science Mike’s response to a caller who has begun to question many of his beliefs:

Do I have advice on how to live when you’re at odds with your community? Absolutely. Do not live at odds with your community… You are a time bomb right now. Because at some point you won’t be able to pretend anymore, and you will speak honestly, and there will be a measure of collateral damage and fallout in your church. It’s time to move on. It’s time to find a faith community that believes as you believe…When that happens, you’re going to lose relationships. Some people cannot agree to disagree and those relationships can become abusive…There is a lot of pain because there are some people who are dear to me that I can’t talk to anymore…It is not possible for us to have the relationship we once had, and it’s rough. I’m not gonna lie. It’s rough.

This poignant response provides useful and important advice.

HM accepts the fundamental thesis of Drs. Sloman and Fernbach, that our knowledge is inadequate. Scientific evidence can be wrong, but at any given time, the scientific evidence available is the best information to use. We ignore it at our peril.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Thinking with Technology

July 8, 2017

This is the seventh post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Thinking with Technology is a chapter in this book. Much has already been written in this blog on this topic, so this post will try to hit some unique points.

In the healthy memory blog Thinking with Technology comes under the category transactive memory as information in technology, be it paper or the internet, falls into this category. Actually Thinking with Other People also falls into this category as transactive memory refers to all information not stored in our own biological brains. Sloan and Fernbach realize this similarity as they write that we are starting to treat our technology more and more like people, like full participants in the community of knowledge. Just as we store understanding in other people, we store understanding in the internet. We already know that our having knowledge available in other people’s heads leads us to overrate our own understanding. We live in a community that shares knowledge, so each of us individually can fail to distinguish whether knowledge is stored in our own head or in someone else’s. This is the illusion of explanatory depth, viz., I think I understand things better than I do because I incorporate other people’s understanding into my assessment of my own understanding.

Two different research groups have found that we have the same kind of “confusion at the frontier” when we search the internet. Adrian Ward of the University of Texas found that engaging in Internet searches increased people’s cognitive self-esteem, their own sense of they ability to remember and process information. Moreover, people who searched the internet for facts they didn’t know and were later asked where they found the information often misremembered and reported that they had known it all along. Many completely forgot ever having conducted the search, giving themselves credit instead of Google.

Matt Fisher and Frank Keil conducted a study in which participants were asked to answer a series of general causal knowledge questions like, “How does a zipper work?” One group was asked to search the internet to confirm the details of their explanation. Th other group was asked to answer the questions without using any outside sources. Next, participants were asked to rate how well they could answer questions in domains that had nothing to do with the questions they were asked in the first phase. The finding was that those who had searched the internet rated their ability to answer unrelated questions as higher than those who had not.

The risk here should not be underestimated. Interactions with the internet can result in our thinking we know more than we know. It is important to make a distinction between what is accessible in memory and what is available in memory. If you can provide answers without consulting any external sources, then the information is accessible and is truly in your personal biological memory. However, if you need to consult the internet, or some other technical source,or some individual, then although the information is available, but not accessible. This is the difference between a closed book test or an open book test. Unless you can perform extemporaneously and accurately, be sure to consult transactive memory

Sloman and Fernbach have some unique perspectives. They discount the risk of super intelligence threatening humans, at least for now. They seem to think that there is no current basis for some real super intelligence taking over the world. The reason they offer for this is that technology does not (yet) share intentionality with us. HM does not quite understand why they argue this, and, in any case, the ‘yet” is enclosed in parentheses, implying that this is just a matter of time.

To summarize succinctly, technology increases our knowing more than we know. In other words, it increases the knowledge illusion.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Thinking with Other People

July 7, 2017

This is the sixth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. Thinking with Other People is a chapter in this book. The evolution of modern humans from other species of hominids was extremely rapid on an evolutionary time scale. It began with the emergence of the genus Homo on the African savannah 2 to 3 million years ago. Sloan and Fernbach note that the great leap that humanity took during that period was cognitive. The brain mass of modern humans is about three times that of our early hominid ancestors.

A compelling hypothesis, the social brain hypothesis, is that the driving force of the evolution of human intelligence was the coordination of multiple cognitive systems to pursue complex, shared goals. Living in a group confers advantages, such as hunting, but it demands certain cognitive abilities. There are needs to communicate in sophisticated ways, to understand and incorporate the perspectives of others, and the sharing of common goals. According to the social brain hypothesis the cognitive demands and adaptive advantages associated with living in a group created a snowball effect: As groups got larger and developed more complex joint behaviors, individuals developed new capabilities to support those behaviors, which in turn allowed groups to get even larger and allowed group behavior to become even more complex.

Anthropologist Robin Dunbar, whom we have encountered previously in healthy memory blog posts, tested the social brain hypothesis against the ecological hypothesis. He collected data on many species of primates on brain size as well as facts about the environment they live in like the extent of their roaming territory and dietary habits, and facts about their societies such as their average group size. Brain size and group size are closely related. Primate species that live in large groups have bigger brains. Environmental measures such as territory size and diet were unrelated.

Increased brain size led to language and what sets people apart from other species is the ability to seamlessly communicate ideas of arbitrary complexity. Members of a hunting party need to understand the intentions of others in the hunting party so that each can play their respective roles.

Sloan and Fernbach argue that we humans have the unique capability of shared intentionality. They argue that this ability is one that no other machine or cognitive system does: We can share our attention with someone else. When we interact with one another, we do not merely experience the same event; we also know we are experiencing the same event. And this knowledge that we are sharing our attention changes more than the nature of the experience; it also changes what we do and what we’re about to accomplish in conjunction with others.

Sloan and Fernbach contine, “Sharing attention is a crucial step on the road to being a full collaborator in a group sharing cognitive labor, in a community of knowledge. Once we can share attention, we can share common ground. We know some things that we know others know, and we know that they we know (and of course we know that they know that we know, etc.) The knowledge is not just distributed; it is shared. Once knowledge is shared in this way, we can share intentionality, we can jointly pursue a common goal. A basic human talent is to share intentions with others so that we can accomplish things collaboratively. HM thinks that Sloan and Fernbach are describing the ideal situation. It is not unusual for consultants and training to be required to make this happen. And many organizations continue to function in a state that is far from ideal.

Sloan and Fernbach note that the knowledge illusion is the flip side of what economists call the curse of knowledge. When we know something, we find it hard to imagine that someone else doesn’t know it. The curse of knowledge sometimes comes in the form of hindsight bias. “The curse of knowledge is that we tend to think what is in our heads is in the heads of others. In the knowledge illusion, we tend to think what is in others’ heads is in our heads. In both cases, we fail to discern who knows what.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

The Brain is in the Mind

July 6, 2017

This is the fifth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. The title of this post is identical to the title of a section in that book.

When asked where the mind is located, most people respond that it is in the brain. So most people assume that the locus of thought—the most impressive of human capacities—is in the most sophisticated of human organs, the brain. Is this correct? Consider the following experiment.

This is a simple experiment where participants are asked to push a button with one of their hands to indicate their response. We have no problem with this task and respond in not much more than half second. But if the experiments vary one little detail, a detail that shouldn’t matter if the mind is in the brain, the results changed. The objects were oriented either to the left or to the right. For example, the handle of a watering can be on the right-hand side in half the pictures and on the left-hand side in the other half. If all we’re doing to decide whether the object is upright or upside down is consulting the knowledge stored in our brain about the object’s orientation, then whether the handle is on the left or right should make no difference. But it does. When responding yes with our right hand, we are faster when the handle is on the right than when the handle is on the left. When we are asked to say yes by pressing a button with our left hand, we are faster when the handle is on the left.

Here’s why. A photograph of a utensil with a handle on the right makes it easier to use our right hand. We see the photograph and immediately and unconsciously start organizing our body to interact with the picture object. Even though the handle is a photograph and not real, the handle is calling for our right hand. The fact that our right hand is primed for action makes us faster to respond with it, even to a question about the orientation of the object, which has nothing to do with action. By priming our hand to interact with the object, our body is directly affecting how long it takes us to answer the question. We don’t just pull the answer out of our brain. Instead our body and brain respond in synchrony to the photograph to retrieve an answer.

We use our bodies to think and remember. One study showed that acting out a scene is more effective than other memorization techniques for recalling a scene. Embodiment is a cluster of ideas about the important role the body plays in cognitive processing. Cognition is unified with objects that we’re thinking about and with. When we make music, our thoughts about music and the music we make with out mouths or instruments are part of the same process and highly interdependent. It’s much easier to move our fingers as if we’re playing a guitar if we actually have a guitar, and it’s much easier spell a word or do arithmetic if we write down what we’re thinking. The fact that thought is more effective when it is done in conjunction with the physical world suggests that thought is not a disembodied process that takes place on a slate inside the head. The authors conclude, “Mental activities do not simply occur in the brain. Rather, the brain is only one part of a processing system that also includes the body and other aspects of the world.

Emotional reactions are also memories. Remember the healthy memory blog post on Dr. Lisa Feldman Barrett and her book “How Emotions Are Made” Our emotions are the result of our interpretations of and models based on our interoceptive responses. We learn to interpret our internal bodily responses in an analogous manner to how we build models and interpret the external world.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Dougla Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Two Causal Reasoners Inside

July 5, 2017

This is the fourth post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. The title of this post is identical to the title of a section in that book. Drs. Sloman and Fernbach state that we are engaged in some type of causal reasoning almost all the time, but that not all causal reasoning is the same. Some of it is fast. It’s quick and automatic as when a man concludes that the reason his hand hurts is because he bashed it against the wall. Another type of causal reasoning is when we try to remember the causes of WW I.

This two process distinction goes beyond causal reasoning and can be used for all cognitive processing. Daniel Kahneman formulated this distinction in his best selling book, “Thinking Fast and Slow.” There have been many previous posts on this topic. There are sixty-nine hits using Kahneman in the healthy memory blog search box. Normal conversation, driving, and skilled performance are dominated largely by System 1. System 1 is called intuition. When we have to stop and think about something, that is an example of System 2 processing, which is called reasoning. The psychologist Stanovich breaks down System 2 processing into instrumental and epistemic processing in his efforts to develop a Rational Quotient (RQ) that improves upon the standard IQ.

Professor Shane Frederick has introduced a simple test to determine whether a person is more intuitive or more deliberative. It’s called the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT). Here’s an example problem.

A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs one dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

Do you think the answer is 10 cents? If you do, you’re in good company. Most people report that as the answer (including the majority of students in Ivy League colleges). !0 cents pops into almost everyone’s mind. This is the product of System 1 processing. However, if System 2 is engaged, one realizes that if the ball costs 10 cents and the bat costs $1 more than the ball, then the bat costs $1.10 and together they cost $1.20. So 10 cents is the wrong answer. The small proportion of people whose System 2 processes kick in, realize that 10 cents is wrong, and they are able to calculate the correct answer. Frederick refers to such people as reflective, meaning that they tend to suppress their intuitive reasons and deliberate before responding.

Here is another CRT problem.

In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it take 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half the lake?

The answer 24 comes to most people’s mind. But if the patch doubles in size every day, then if the lake is half covered on day 24, it would be fully covered on day 25. But the problem states that the lake is fully covered on day 48, so 24 can’t be correct. The correct answer is one day before it’s fully covered, day 47.

Here’s another CRT problem.

If it takes 5 machines to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?

Try to solve this on your own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The correct answer is 5 minutes (each machine takes 5 minutes to make one widget).

The solution to all three problems requires the invoking of System 2 processing. Less than 20% of the U.S. population gets all three problems correct. This finding might reflect a reluctance to think and might account for many of the problems the United States is facing. About 48% of students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) got all three problems correct, but only 26% of Princeton students did.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Illusion of Understanding

July 4, 2017

This is the third post in the series The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged), written by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach.

In the 1980s the cognitive scientist Thomas Landauer decided to estimate the size of human memory on the same scale that is used to measure the size of computer memories. He used several clever techniques to measure how much knowledge people have. For example, he estimated the size of an average adult’s vocabulary and calculated how many bytes would be required to store that much information. Then he used that result to estimate the size of the average adult’s entire knowledge base. The answer was half of a gigabyte. Currently HM is looking at his USB flash drive with 32 gigabytes of storage.

Dr. Landauer did another study in which he measured the difference in recognition performance between a group that had been exposed to items and a group that had not. This difference is as pure a measure of memory that one can get. He measured the amount of time people spent learning the material in the first place. This told him the rate at which people are able to acquire information that they later remember. He also found a way to take into account that people forget. His analyses found that people acquire information at roughly the same rate regardless of the details of the procedure used in the experiment to the type of material being learned. People learn at approximately the same rate whether the items were visual, verbal, or musical.

Then Dr. Landauer calculated how much information people have on hand, the size of their knowledge base, by assuming they learn at this same rate over the course of a seventy-year lifetime. The same result of 1 gigabyte was obtained by every technique he tried. This number is just a tiny fraction of what a modern laptop can retain.

Drs. Sloman and Fernbach note that this is only shocking if you believe the human mind works like a computer. The model of the mind a machine designed to encode and retain memories breaks down when you consider the complexity of the world with which we interact. They conclude that it would be futile for memory to be designed to hold tons of information because there’s just too much out there.

Drs. Sloman and Fernbach note that most of cognition consists of intuitive thought that occurs below the level of conscious awareness. Huge quantities of information are processed in parallel. People are not computers in that we don’t just rely on a central processor that reads and writes to a memory to think. We rely on our bodies, on the world around us, and on other minds. There’s no way we could store in our heads, all there is to know about our environment.

We humans are surprisingly ignorant, more ignorant that we think. We also exist in a complex world, one that is even more complex than one might have thought. But if we’re so ignorant, how can we get around, sound knowledgeable, and take ourselves seriously while understanding only a tiny fraction of what there is to know?

The authors’ answer is that we do so by living a lie. We ignore complexity by overestimating how much we know about how things work, by living life in the belief that we know how things work even when we don’t. We tell ourselves the we understand what’s going on, that our opinions are justified by our knowledge, and that our actions are in justified beliefs even hough they are not. We tolerate complexity by failing to recognize it. That’s the Illusion of understanding.

The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged) 2

July 2, 2017

If you have not read the immediately preceding post, please scroll down and read it. The immediate post presents HM’s thoughts about how the need to use knowledge from fellow humans fails. A good example of this can be found in the current debates about the Affordable Care Act and its replacement. Although the Affordable Care Act is flawed, information from fellow humans who have successfully dealt with this problem is being ignored.

The United States has the most expensive healthcare costs in the world, but results characteristic of a third world country. And it is the only advanced country that does not have a single payer system in which the single payer is the government. This progression did not happen all at once. It began in England after WW II and variants of it were gradually adopted over time by advanced countries with the notable exception of the United States.

How can this be explained? It can be explained most simply in one word, “beliefs.” In this case, the belief in free markets. Free markets are good, but what is frequently forgotten is that free markets do not remain free, they are manipulated and require government intervention to disrupt the development of monopolies. Moreover, free markets are not universally applicable. Economists have effectively argued that free markets are not appropriate for medical care.

However, even if one believed in the viability of free markets for medical care, how can they ignore the success of single payer systems in the developed world? The problem is that beliefs stymy new and creative thinking and using knowledge from knowledgeable people. New beliefs require thinking and thinking requires mental effort, which many people find uncomfortable.

Then there is the faux “Fair and Balanced” news. When the Affordable Care Act was being proposed, “Fair and Balanced” news featured an English Woman who had a complaint about a surgical procedure she had undergone. This woman was livid about this presentation on “Fair and Balanced” news. Although she had complaints about this one procedure, she was highly enthusiastic about the national health system in Britain. Moreover, none of the countries who have adopted a single payer system in which the single payer is the government have abandoned these programs. It should be noted that in the United States Medicare is a single payer system that works quite well. However, Medicare covers only a certain percentage of costs, so supplemental insurance is prudent.

So beliefs can thwart change and innovation. But not all beliefs are necessarily bad. Consider religion, particularly religions for which the medical suffering of fellow human beings is important. One would think that in the United States where such religious beliefs are widespread, medical care would be among the best, not the worst. What apparently happens here is compartmentalization. These religious beliefs are thwarted by beliefs about government and the supremacy of market forces. The result of this compartmentalization is that the health and finances of fellow citizens suffer.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (Unabridged)

July 1, 2017

“The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone” is an important book by Steven Sloman and Phillip Fernbach. An earlier healthy memory blog post with the same title as the book has already been written. That post was based on a summary of the book done by Elizabeth Kolbert for the New Yorker. Having now read the entire book, HM feels that this volume deserves more detailed attention.

Drs. Sloman and Fernbach are cognitive scientists. Cognitive science emerged in the 1950s to understand the workings of the human mind. It asks questions such as “how is thinking possible?” What goes on inside the brain that allows sentient beings to do math, understand their mortality, act virtuously and (sometimes) selflessly, and still do simple things, like eat with a knife and fork? Currently no machine, and probably no other animal, is capable of these acts.

The authors write, “The human mind is not like a desktop computer, designed to hold reams of information. The mind is a flexible problem solver that evolved to extract only the most useful information to guide decisions in new situations. As a consequence, we individuals store very little detailed information about the world in our heads. In that sense people are like bees and society a beehive: Our intelligence resides not in individual brains, but in the collective mind. To function, individuals rely not only on knowledge stored within our skulls, but also on knowledge stored elsewhere: in our bodies, in the environment, and especially in other people.” In the lingo of the healthy memory blog, information not held within our individual brains, is stored in transactive memory. The authors conclude, “When you put it all together, human thought thought is incredibly impressive, but it is a product of a community, not of any individual alone.”

The authors make a compelling argument that we all suffer, to a greater or lesser extent, from an illusion of understanding, an illusion that we understand how things work when in fact our understanding is meager. Unfortunately, we are not adequately aware of the shortcomings in our understanding. We think we understand much much more than we actually do. Readers of the healthy memory blog should be aware of the risks of having absolute beliefs, that all beliefs should be hedged with some reasonable degree of doubt.

The authors note that history is full of events that seem familiar, that elicit a sense of mild to deep understanding, but whose true historical context is different that we imagine. The complex details get lost in the mist of time while myths emerge that simplify and make stories digestible in part to service one interest group or another. There is a very interesting book by James W. Lowen titled “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook got wrong”. He argues that history as taught in the public schools is basically propaganda advanced by the school board selecting texts. HM found this book most instructive. People should be recalled for a defective education, but reading this book is more practical.

It is also important to remember that the study of history is dynamic. New research yields new interpretations of history.

The authors write, “Thought is for action. Thinking evolved as an extension of the ability to act effectively; it evolved to make us better at doing what’s necessary to achieve our goals. Thought allows us to select from among a set of possible actions by predicting the effects of each action and by imagining how the world would be if we had taken different actions in the past.”

It is unlikely that we would have survived had we been dependent on only the limited knowledge stored in our individual brains. The authors write,”The secret to our success is that we live in a world in which knowledge is all around us. It is in the things we make, in our bodies and workspaces, and another people. We live in a community of knowledge.”

But not all of this is knowledge is accurate, meaning that there are degrees of belief and some knowledge is faux. Understanding that our knowledge is not golden can offer us improved ways of approaching our most complex problems. Recognizing the limits of our understanding should make us more humble, and open our minds to other people’s ideas and ways of thinking. The authors note that It offers lessons about how to avoid things like bad financial decisions, and can enable us to improve our political system and help us assess how much reliance we should have on experts versus how much decision-making power should be given to individual voters.

The authors write, “This book is being written at a time of immense polarization on the American political scene. Liberals and conservative find each other’s views repugnant, and as a result, Democrats and Republicans cannot find common ground or compromise.” The authors note, “One reason for this gridlock is that both politicians and voters don’t realize how little they understand. Whenever an issue is important enough for public debate, it is also complicated enough to be difficult to understand.” They conclude, “Complexity abounds. If everybody understood this, our society would likely be less polarized.”

Neuroscience is much in the news as there have been many exciting developments in the field. Little is currently being written about cognitive science, although there are exciting and relevant new findings in cognitive science. The following is directly quoted from “The Knowledge Illusion: ”Our skulls may delimit the frontier of our brains, but they do not limit the frontier of our knowledge. The mind stretches beyond to include the body, the environment, and people other than one’s-self, so the study of the mind cannot be reduced to the study of the brain. Cognitive science is not the same as neuroscience.”

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Brain Starts to Eat Itself After Chronic Sleep Deprivation

June 30, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Andy Coghlan in the News & Technology section of the May 27, 2017 issue of the New Scientist. Michele Belles of the Marche Polytechnic University in Italy says the chronic sleep deprivation could explain why a chronic lack of sleep puts people at his age of Alzheimer’s disease and other neurological disorders.

The brain cells that destroy and digest worn-out cells and debris go into overdrive in mice that are chronically sleep deprived. Although this might b beneficial in the short term, clearing potentially harmful debris and rebuilding worn circuitry might protect health connections. But when this continues in the long term it destroys healthy brain material.

The researchers specifically looked at glial cells, which serve as the brain’s housekeeping system. Previous research had found that a gene that regulates the activity of these cells is more active after a period of sleep deprivation. One type pf glial cell called an astrocyte, removes unnecessary synapses in the brain to remodel its wiring. Another type of cell, called a microglial cell, prowls the brain for damaged cells and debris.

The research suggest that sleep loss can trigger astrocytes to start breaking down more of the brain’s connections and their debris. Bells says, “We show for the first time that portions of synapses are literally eaten by astrocytes because of sleep loss.

The researcher found that microglial cells were more active after chronic sleep deprivation (Journal of Neuroscience, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3981-16.2017). Excessive microglial activity has been linked to a range of brain disorders. Bells says, “We already know that sustained microglial activation has been observed in Alzheimer’s and other forms of neurodegeneration.

This research could explain why a lack of sleep seems to make people more vulnerable to developing such dementias.

It is still not clear whether getting more sleep could protect the brain or rescue if from the effects of a few sleepless nights. The researchers plan to investigate how long the effects of sleep deprivation last.

To learn more about the effects of sleep deprivation, enter “sleep deprivation” into the search block of the healthymemory blog.dem

 

Technology and Maturity

June 29, 2017

Sally Jenkins is one of my favorite writers. She writes substantive articles on sports for the Washington Post. She is an outstanding writer and what she writes on any topic is worth reading. Unfortunately, few of her articles are directly relevant to the Healthymemory blog. Fortunately, this current article “Women’s college athletes don’t need another cuddling parent, They need a couch” in the 25 June 2017 Washington Post is relevant. This article is relevant as it identifies certain adverse effects of technology.

The following is cited directly from the article. “According to a 2016 NCAA survey 76% of all Division I female athletes said they would like to go home to their moms and dads more often and 64% said they communicate with their parents at least once a day, a number that rises t0 73% among women’s basketball players. And nearly a third reported feeling overwhelmed.”

Social psychologists say that these numbers “reflect a larger trend in all college students that is attributable at least in part to a culture of hovering parental-involvement, participation trophies and constant connectivity via smartphones and social media, which has not made adolescents more secure and independent, but less.”

Since 2012 there has been a pronounced increase in mental health issues on campuses. Nearly 58% of students report anxiety and 35% experience depression, according to annual freshmen surveys and other assessments.

Research psychologist Jean Twenge wrote a forthcoming book, pointedly entitled “IGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood and What That Means for the Rest of Us.” She writes that the new generation of students is preoccupied with safety. “Including what they call emotional safety. Perhaps because they grew up interacting online through text, where words can incur damage.”

Along with this anxiety, iGens have unrealistic expectations and exaggerated opinions of themselves. Nearly 60% of high school students say they expect to get a graduate degree. In reality, just 9 to 10% actually will. 47% of Division I women’s basketball players think it’s at least “somewhat likely” they will play professional or Olympic ball. In reality, the WNBA drafts just 0.9% of the players.

Dr. Twenge writes that if you compare IGEN to GEN-Xers or boomers, they are much more likely to say their abilities are ‘above average.’

Perhaps not all, but definitely some, and likely a large % of these problems are due to the adverse effects of technology

 

Memory Biases, Rumination, and Depression: Underlying Mechanisms and Novel Interventions.

June 28, 2017

The title of this blog is identical to the title of a symposium at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science. The primary participants were Samantha L. Connoly, Ellis J. Hamlat, and Paula T. Hertel. All these topics have been addressed in previous healthymemory blog posts.

Memory biases are a correlate of and potential cognitive variability factor for depression. This symposium examined novel interventions informed by these relationships.

They used a variety of methodologies including ecological momentary assessment, inhibition bias modification, and memory training.

Overgeneral memory impairs rumination inhibition, verbal fluency and working memory.

Memory specificity training was administered in 4 one hour sessions. Memory strategy training included the method of loci, chunking and other techniques.

The results were promising, but much more work is needed to decrease memory biases and rumination affecting depression.

 

 

The Benefits of Mindfulness for Uncertain Waiting

June 27, 2017

Most of us don’t like waiting. Waiting is stressful. This is especially true when we don’t know how long we’ll be waiting. Consider law students who have taken the bar exam and don’t know when they’ll receive their results regarding whether they’ll be admitted to the bar. Professor Sweeney delivered a presentation titled “Bracing later and Coping Better: Benefits of Mindfulness Meditation during an Uncertain Waiting Period” at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science.

The study divided law students awaiting the results of their bar exam into two groups. The experimental group was provided an audio presentation for self-guided mindfulness. The mindfulness was of the loving-kindness variety. The participants were asked to practice this mindfulness three times a week. A control group practiced a control activity.

Although the participants who practiced mindfulness worried the same as the participants in the control group, they managed their expectations better and reported coping better. The participants who were at risk for poor coping benefitted most.

 

 

Cognitive Restoration Through Interactions in Nature

June 26, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a presentation by Professor David L. Strayer at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science. The healthy memory blog has many posts, ten to be exact, on the work of Professor Strayer. Most of these have been on divided attention and the increased risks when one is talking on a cell phone while driving. However, his presentation at this meeting was about the benefits of nature.

The cognitive and emotional benefits from exposure to natural environments are well known. This current research was on the mechanisms of cognitive restoration through interactions with nature. They found that when spending time outdoors near biomarkers of frontal activity decrease, positive emotions and feelings of well-being increase, and event memory improves.

So this gives us some insight as to why we feel so good interacting with nature.

 

EverWalk

June 25, 2017

EverWalk is a new organization founded by marathon swimmer Diana Nyad and Bonnie Stoll. The goal of this organization is to get more people walking. Check out their website http://everwalk.com. Healthy memory is promoting this organization because physical health underlies memory health.

Perhaps the primary feature of walking is that it does no harm. Perhaps the only other activity for which that can be said is swimming, provided you do not drown. Probably running is the most popular exercise, but HM knows very few runners who do not suffer injuries from running. Sometimes these injuries can be quite severe, but runners tend to persevere because it seems to have an addictive quality. HM’s favorite activity is biking. He once suffered a painful broken collarbone, but resumed biking. As he became a senior citizen he ceased biking, because broken bones can result in swift declines.

The putative purposes of sports are to promote health and, for team sports, sportsmanship. But is it not both counterproductive and ironic when these sports result in physical injuries. Consider football, and chronic traumatic encephalopathy, which is a devastating injury to the brain. It is even more ironic when football is promoted by educational universities. One can even think of universities where the university is basically a justification for a football team.

Try walking. Try walking and meditating, activities that promote healthy memories.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Off Again. Sorry, there will be another hiatus

June 9, 2017

But with 1,000 posts, there should be plenty to read. Here are some suggestions.
Enter topics of interest into the search blog of the healthy memory blog.
Read or reread the 1,000th Post post and consider reading or rereading earlier posts.
Scroll down to the Gone to the Annual Meeting… post and consider some of the searches offered there.

 

Is the Electorate Becoming More Stupid?

June 7, 2017

One of the more interesting, and depressing, presentations during the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science was Kayla Jordan’s presentation titled “Great Debating: The Influence of the 2016 Presidential Debates on Public Opinion.” She has software that measures the sophistication of English. The software does not measure content, but rather the sophistication in which the content is presented. She used this software to measure the sophistication of the presentations of the different candidates. In the Republican debates basically all the candidates, except one, had fairly sophisticated presentations. Not surprisingly, that low outlier was Donald Trump, who won the Republican primaries. In the debates in the national election, Hillary Clinton was head and shoulders above Donald Trump who won the election. So the likely answer to the question posed in the title is “yes,” and that Donald Trump knew how to pander to this stupidity.

Of course, hope springs eternal, so the initial thought was that this election was an anomaly resulting from peculiarities surrounding this election. To assess whether there was “Balm in Gilead” Dr. Jordan analyzed the speeches done in prior elections. She found a consistent pattern in that the candidates who scored lower in sophistication tended to win the election.

Dr. Jordan went further in analyzing the inaugural addresses of all the Presidents. She found that the most sophisticated inaugural address was George Washington’s, and there was a continuing downward trend thereafter. A colleague who read a draft of this post informed me that Washington’s inaugural address was written almost entirely by Hamilton. This point should be kept in mind when considering these data. Today’s presidents have ready access to speechwriters.

This finding is indeed curious. Both education and technology level have increased since Washington’s time. Many people were illiterate in Washington’s time and illiteracy was a serious problem in fielding an army for World War I. Of course, there is ample data indicating that voters are ill-informed on the issues and that many do not vote in their own interests. Perhaps higher education levels have led many to believe that they know more than they do. Perhaps increases in technology have diluted good messages and introduced lies and false news. Or perhaps, politicians are learning that simpler messages are more persuasive. Let us hope that Trump represents the degenerate case, and that matters will rebound in the future. Otherwise the answer to the title of this post is a resounding YES, and we can kiss off the future of our democracy.

Of course, Donald Trump did not win the popular vote; he won the abomination called the electoral college. It is interesting to read the ostensible justification of the electoral college, which apparently was to prevent someone unfit for the Presidency, like Donald Trump, to win a popular election. It is a tad ironic that many Americans vote only in Presidential elections. Yet, in Presidential elections, the odds are that their vote will not count. Citizens need to demand that all votes count and that there be one vote for each citizen.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

How to Get Scientists and Politicians Talking the Same Language

June 5, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by David Willetts in the News section of the 3 June 2017 issue of the New Scientist. David Willetts was the UK’s science minister from 2010 to 2014. Currently, he chairs the British Science Association.

Willetts begins, “ELECTIONS can be a frustrating reminder of how deep the mutual incomprehension is between scientists and politicians. And the reasons are that researchers don’t like how politicians appeal to instinct and revere as “intuitive wisdom” what scientists see as ignorance and prejudice, or their use of creative ambiguity rather than precision to reconcile conflicting views. But scientists seem to politicians like a pressure group after funds, one with a patronizing assumption of superiority. The question here is what is the justification for the funds. But the majority of published research has already been paid for. So why not pay attention to it? Moreover, the money, and really big money is to be found in debunking science, not in conducting quality research. Although it might be desirable to drop the patronizing attitude, the scientists are superior in their methods and in their subject knowledge.

An important point that the article misses is that good scientists should caveat their results. Findings can always be wrong and science is always an ongoing project that is subject to change. Nevertheless, it presents the best answers that are available to date. Claims of certainty should always be rejected.

Scientists need to make their voices heard and politicians need to see their value. Every major policy review should include a consideration of the relevant technological advances. In the United States there is a Congressional Budget Office that provides studies on the various costs of different policies. There should also be a Congressional Scientific Office (CSO) that provides the best scientific counsel. The CSO could also conduct research and design experiments to resolve political differences. Of course, this change in the United States would require a new administration.

Willetts also argues about the importance of a good liberal arts education. Nonscientists should learn some science and inferential statistics. Scientists and engineers need to learn some of the humanities. HM remembers that when he attended Ohio State University, a bachelor’s degree in engineering took five years. The engineering faculty had decided that four years of engineering were required to become an engineer, but it was important to have a full year of liberal arts. It is important for politicians also to have some understanding of these issues. One problem is that lawyers predominant and legal thinking alone is dangerous.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

This is the 1,000th Healthymemory Post

June 3, 2017

As the title attests this blog is dedicated to healthy memories. The blog’s subtitle is Memory health and technology. Here technology refers to transactive memory, which is information that is stored outside our individual biological memories. So transactive memory refers to information stored in the memories of our fellow humans as well as in technology. Technology ranges from paper to computers to the world wide web. Transactive memory provides the means for memory growth which underlies memory health. This blog also addresses the negative aspects of transactive memory which range from erroneous information to outright lies. As several posts have indicated, lies on the internet have become a highly profitable business.

The early days of this blog featured many posts on memory techniques under the category mnemonic techniques. Memory techniques specifically improve memory performance while also affording healthy exercise for the brain. If you are unfamiliar with these techniques you might want to peruse and try out some techniques. Practically all known techniques have been posted, so that is why you need to view older posts. For a while meditation and mindfulness was discussed under the memory techniques category, but they have mostly been moved to Human Memory: Theory and Data. Although these techniques are important and beneficial to memory, they are not commonly regarded as mnemonic techniques.

One of the most important posts in this blog is “The Myth of Alzheimer’s.” “The Myth of Alzheimer’s” by Peter J. Whitehouse, M.D., Ph.D. and Daniel George, M.Sc. is an important book. The myth is that Alzheimer’s is a single disease, and that a drug will be developed that serves as a silver bullet and eradicate Alzheimer’s. Whitehouse is no crackpot. He knows whereof he speaks. Note that he has a Ph.D and an M.D. Although he is now working as a clinician, he spent many years at the forefront of research on drugs to mitigate or eradicate Alzheimer’s disease (AD). He was a prominent researcher who was well funded and promoted by drug companies. When he became convinced that a cure for Alzheimer’s was not forthcoming, he turned his efforts to treatment.

What constitutes a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s is the presence of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. However, there are people who are living with these defining features, but who do not have the behavioral or cognitive symptoms of Alzheimer’s. People have died with these Alzheimer features who never knew that they had the disease.

Research indicates that a healthy lifestyle, social activity, and cognitive activity greatly decrease the prospect of suffering any cognitive or behavioral symptoms of Alzheimer’s. The explanation offered for those with the physical characteristics but no cognitive or behavioral symptoms of Alzheimer’s is that they have built up a cognitive reserve.
The healthy memory blog strongly recommends a growth mindset, meditation and mindfulness as being extremely important in thwarting dementia. Central to a growth mindset is to continue learning till the end of one’s life. Beyond thwarting dementia, these activities provide the basis for a fulfilling life.

The vast majority of posts do not deal directly with Alzheimer’s and dementia. This is an exciting era for cognitive neuroscience and this blog endeavors to keep the reader up to date on much of this research. Of course, using technology to foster a growth mindset remains an important topic, and the problem of lies and misinformation being spread by technology is always a concern to the healthymemory blog.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Back from the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science (APS)

June 1, 2017

HM attended the very first meeting of the APS. Time really does fly. HM has attended many more meetings since then, and he has become quite proficient at attending these programs. At one time it was common for there to be published proceedings of these meetings. For large meetings one would have several large books to schlep around. Then a transition was made to putting the printed programs on CDs.

However, today the norm has been for there to be no printed records, so one has to try to attend the presentations that are of interest. Unfortunately, it is not unusual for there to be multiple programs of interest at the same time, and a choice has to be made as to which one to attend. Most speakers use slides, and all to often, these slides cannot be read by everyone in the room. Speakers are given an alloted time for their presentations. HM has been a speaker and must confess to making the same mistakes. The primary concern is getting through the presentation in the alloted amount of time. HM used to plan for his presentation to be well within the allotted time, because speakers do go over time with the result of squeezing the remaining speakers of their alloted time. But still HM thinks that most of us do not pace the presentation properly. We do not allow sufficient time for the listeners to think about and process our presentations. And frequently there is insufficient time to take proper notes. The speaker is already on to the next slide before the main points of the preceding slide can be adequately captured. This is HM’s excuse for not adequately summarizing these presentations in his posts. Plus these meetings are mentally exhausting.

This time the exhaustion is even greater due to all the investigations taking place. Watergate took place while HM was a graduate student. That was a time of critical importance for the United States. The current problem portends a much greater importance.

It is already clear that Russia did disrupt the 2016 presidential election. The open questions are whether they stole the election, whether there was collusion between the campaign and the Russians, and financial matters that could have contributed to the problem.

During the election it was disturbing to learn that Trump idolized Putin. Putin worked his way up as a KGB agent and used his skills to become the de facto leader of a kleptocracy. How can a US president idolize such a man? It is doubtful that anyone expressing admiration of a Soviet or Russian leader could ever have gotten a security clearance much less be elected President of the United States.

We learn that a War Room is being set up. A War against what? the truth? It should be understood that given the conclusion that Russia did hack America, it is obligatory that an investigation to undertaken to assess whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. These investigations are not the result of the press or of leakers. Investigations must be done. There are also financial investigations that must be done and they have just begun. It is imperative that we know whether there are any financial dealings resulting in compromises in the Trump administration. This will take some time. All of this could be done more efficiently with the cooperation of Trump. War rooms and tweeter attacks are counterproductive.

There is a good book by Malcolm Nance titled “THE PLOT TO HACK AMERICA: How Putin’s Cyberspies and Wikileaks Tried to Steal the 2016 Election.” This book provides an enormous amount of information that can help us follow the current investigations.

Nevertheless, following these investigations on top of the normal fatigue from attending a scientific meeting will likely slow down my blogging about the conference.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Gone to the Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science

May 22, 2017

So although there will be a hiatus in new posts, there are already close to one thousand posts already available.  So that should be more than sufficient until the new posts resume.

Use the search block of the healthy memory blog to find posts of interest.
Here are some suggestions:
cognitive reserve
suggestible you
relaxation response
ikigai
growth mindset
system 2
emotion