Group items tagged

new research by EyalOphir, Clifford Nass, and Anthony D. Wagner at Stanford University suggests that people who multitask suffer from a problem: weaker self-control ability.

then recruited people who had scores that were extremely high or low and asked them perform a series of tests designed to measure the ability to control one's attention, one's responses, and the contents of one's memory. They found that the high- and low- media-multitasking groups were equally able to control their responses, but that the heavy media-multitasking group had difficulties, compared to the low media-multitasking group, when asked to ignore information that was in the environment or in their recent memory. They also had greater trouble relative to their counterparts when asked to switch rapidly between two different tasks. This last finding was surprising, because psychologists know that multitasking involves switching rapidly between tasks rather than actually performing multiple tasks simultaneously.

It seems that chronic media-multitaskers are more susceptible to distractions. In contrast, people who do not usually engage in media-multitasking showed a greater ability to focus on important information. According to the researchers, this reflects two fundamentally different strategies of information processing. Those who engage in media-multitasking more frequently are "breadth-biased," preferring to explore any available information rather than restrict themselves. AsLin Lin at the University of North Texas puts it in a review of the article, they develop a habit of treating all information equally. On the other extreme are those who avoid breadth in favor of information that is relevant to an immediate goal.

It is clear that with time, most people can and do psychologically recover from even devastating losses, like the death of a spouse; but reactions to the same blow vary widely, and no one can reliably predict who will move on quickly and who will lapse into longer-term despair.

The role of genes is likewise uncertain. In a paper published online Monday in The Archives of General Psychiatry, researchers at the University of Michigan who analyzed more than 50 studies concluded that variations in a single gene determine people’s susceptibility to depression following stressful events. But an earlier analysis, of fewer but similar studies, concluded that the evidence was not convincing. New research suggests that resilience may have at least as much to do with how often people have faced adversity in past as it does with who they are — their personality, their genes, for example — or what they’re facing now. That is, the number of life blows a person has taken may affect his or her mental toughness more than any other factor.

is called connectomics, and the neuroscientists pursuing it compare their work to early efforts in genetics. What they are doing, these scientists say, is akin to trying to crack the human genome — only this time around, they want to find how memories, personality traits and skills are stored.

“You are born with your genes, and they don’t change afterward,” said H. Sebastian Seung, a professor of computational neuroscience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who is working on the computer side of connectomics. “The connectome is a product of your genes and your experiences. It’s where nature meets nurture.”

Oxytocin isn't just the "love hormone." And dopamine isn't merely "the reward neurotransmitter." And serotonin isn't just the "happy chemical."

It's an elegant way to understand the primary structure of the human brain. The old parts of the brain are like the elephant: A simple yet powerful creature, ruled by primal emotion and desires. The new brain (or prefrontal cortex) is the rider: Smarter and more rational but easily overpowered.

One paper published by a Duke University researcher in 2006 found that more than 40 percent of the actions people performed each day weren't actual decisions, but habits.

‘Grid cells’ that act like a spatial map in the brain have been identified for the first time in humans, according to new research by UCL scientists which may help to explain how we create internal maps of new environments. The study is by a team from the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and was funded by the Medical Research Council and the European Union. Published today in Nature, it uses brain imaging and virtual reality techniques to try to identify grid cells in the human brain. These specialised neurons are thought to be involved in spatial memory and have previously been identified in rodent brains, but evidence of them in humans has not been documented until now.

What happens in our brain when the mind is considering itself? Until now, it has been unclear what happens during a navel-gazing session. Now a team of neuroscientists has shed light on the process by identifying an area of the brain that is larger in more introspective individuals. Introspection is the act of assessing or thinking about one's own thoughts, decisions and feelings. Stephen Fleming from University College London and his colleagues were interested in how the act of introspection - thought to be a crucial component of consciousness - links to the physiology of the brain.

Individuals with a high level of introspective ability should be more confident after making a correct choice and less confident after a poor decision than people who are less good at self-reflection. After the perceptual test, the team scanned the participants' brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging to look for links between the individual's introspective ability and their brain structure. They found that people with a high introspective ability had a larger amount of grey matter in the right anterior prefrontal cortex, an area of the brain located just behind the eyes, involved in decision-making. It is thought that there are different levels of consciousness. Sometimes we are aware of mental processes, like playing the piano, while others may proceed in the absence of consciousness, like driving a car, says Fleming. Thinking about our own thoughts occurs when we are more highly aware of our own consciousness.

"I am cautious about saying that what we are measuring here is consciousness," he says. "But we might be measuring something that is required for a particular type of conscious awareness." "The study addresses an intriguing problem," says neuroscientist Alan Cowey from the University of Oxford in the UK. "The results reveal a fascinating correlation between a level of self-awareness and activity in the prefrontal cortex. They do not yet reveal the neural mechanisms that underlie introspection but that will surely follow".