"In the film 'Secrets of the Mind' name and explain the 4 main phenomena. What was Dr. Ramachandran's explanation of each? What evidence did he provide?"
Can you all do me a huge favor and post a comment on this blog thread with some of the notes you all took from this movie? I wasn't there, and I just wanted to know if there was anything you all found to be important. Thank you.
GOOD LUCK
-Lucette
The Film's Website FYI:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/mind/
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Monday, December 08, 2008
Strangers May Cheer You Up, Study Says
This study investigates the idea that the happiness of almost strangers has a greater affect on your mood that those close to you. Dr. Nicholas A. Christakis offers the notion that "“There’s kind of an emotional quiet riot that occurs and takes on a life of its own, that people themselves may be unaware of. Emotions have a collective existence — they are not just an individual phenomenon.”
Although the article later goes on to dispute these claims, I do find some relevance in the claim.
I often find my mood affected by the mood of those around me, specifically people that i'm not that close too. If I'm in a bad mood, I'll probably still stay in a bad mood even if I'm around someone close to me, like my boyfriend or a close friend, no matter what their state is- I allow myself to stay unhappy or grumpy around those I'm comfortable with. However, if it is a near stranger that is in a good mood...say a classmate or work colleauge, I find myself unconsciously affected by the mood of those around me.
Although the article later goes on to dispute these claims, I do find some relevance in the claim.
I often find my mood affected by the mood of those around me, specifically people that i'm not that close too. If I'm in a bad mood, I'll probably still stay in a bad mood even if I'm around someone close to me, like my boyfriend or a close friend, no matter what their state is- I allow myself to stay unhappy or grumpy around those I'm comfortable with. However, if it is a near stranger that is in a good mood...say a classmate or work colleauge, I find myself unconsciously affected by the mood of those around me.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Debate
Your speeches should be written and hopefully you've been able to practice once as a group. You'll have 30 minutes of class time to regroup. Let me know if you have any questions!
Friday, December 05, 2008
Tasting Words
http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/12/tasting_words_a_study_of_one_o.php#more
I know some people in our class have been interested in the phenomenon of synesthesia, but what's interesting about the case discussed in the article above is that it's about the least common form of synesthesia--word-gustatory synesthesia, or associating words with a taste. There's only been five documented cases in the past century, whereas word-color associations are estimated to occur to 1 in 200 people.
I remember during someone's presentation we were shown a test for synesthesia, and to prove that one had real synesthesia, that person would look at a piece of paper with a lot of 6's and a few 9's and be able to instantly pick out the 9's because they'd be a different color. I guess the researchers couldn't come up with a similar test for word-taste, so the best way they had to prove that a subject, TD, really was tasting words was to have her take a test, ascribing tastes to random words and nonsense words, and then give her the same test a few monthes later and seeing if the associations were the same.
TD's synesthesia was determined to be genuine at first because her answers were 88% the same three monthes later, while a control group didn't seem to be as accurate. But then the article says it's possible TD just has a good memory for associating words with tastes, because the nonsense words didn't have as strong taste sensations. If it were real synesthesia, I guess, it wouldn't matter whether the letter combinations made real words or not. I think the argument is that if the words have to be real to have a taste, then it could be a process of memory and association (like if you see a letter a certain color because you had fridge magnets where the letters were that color), as opposed to a kind of perception. I'm not sure I totally agree, because we're talking about words, not single letters--in a way, words are not just made up of letters or phonemes and morphemes; they are tied up with their meanings. It's hard to seperate a word from its meaning and look at it purely the way one can with numbers or letters. If TD is tested for her perception of words having tastes, doesn't it seem a little unfair to say she doesn't have synesthesia because she can't taste non-words?
I know some people in our class have been interested in the phenomenon of synesthesia, but what's interesting about the case discussed in the article above is that it's about the least common form of synesthesia--word-gustatory synesthesia, or associating words with a taste. There's only been five documented cases in the past century, whereas word-color associations are estimated to occur to 1 in 200 people.
I remember during someone's presentation we were shown a test for synesthesia, and to prove that one had real synesthesia, that person would look at a piece of paper with a lot of 6's and a few 9's and be able to instantly pick out the 9's because they'd be a different color. I guess the researchers couldn't come up with a similar test for word-taste, so the best way they had to prove that a subject, TD, really was tasting words was to have her take a test, ascribing tastes to random words and nonsense words, and then give her the same test a few monthes later and seeing if the associations were the same.
TD's synesthesia was determined to be genuine at first because her answers were 88% the same three monthes later, while a control group didn't seem to be as accurate. But then the article says it's possible TD just has a good memory for associating words with tastes, because the nonsense words didn't have as strong taste sensations. If it were real synesthesia, I guess, it wouldn't matter whether the letter combinations made real words or not. I think the argument is that if the words have to be real to have a taste, then it could be a process of memory and association (like if you see a letter a certain color because you had fridge magnets where the letters were that color), as opposed to a kind of perception. I'm not sure I totally agree, because we're talking about words, not single letters--in a way, words are not just made up of letters or phonemes and morphemes; they are tied up with their meanings. It's hard to seperate a word from its meaning and look at it purely the way one can with numbers or letters. If TD is tested for her perception of words having tastes, doesn't it seem a little unfair to say she doesn't have synesthesia because she can't taste non-words?
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Pain is in the Eye of the Beholder
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081125141610.htm
In this article, researchers were able to increase and decrease the pain and swelling in patients with symptomatic limbs by manipulating the appearance of their chronically painful hands. The study included ten right-handed patients who were asked to watch their hands as they performed a set of standardized movements, in various conditions. They were to repeat the same exercise while looking through binoculars with no magnification, binoculars that doubled the apparent size of their arm, binoculars that reduced the size of their arm, and finally with their eyes ( no visual manipulation)
After the exercise the pain was of course worse than before, but the degree to which the pain increased depended on how they saw their hand. When they saw a magnified image of thei hand, the pain worsened and when they saw a shrunken version of their hand through the inverted binoculars, the pain decreased. Researchers explain that protective responses- including the experience of pain- are activated according to the brain's implicit perception of danger level. So if the problem area appears larger, then so does the pain. This is how the brain measures to protect it.
This article reminded me of the film we watched last class, "Secrets of the Mind", where the man with phantom limb syndrome was able to relieve the chronic pain in his lost hand by watching a mirrored reflection of his remaining hand in a relaxed state.Because he was finally able to "see" his missing hand, his brain was able to get feedback that the hand was no longer in a clenched state. Both of these cases are an altercation of perception to stimulate a different neurological response. However, what I think is special in the amputee's case was how his brain was so receptive to image as a means to relief and yet, how "blind" it was to the fact that his arm was missing in the first place.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
All About Our Debate (especially for Hannah!)
Here is a link to the International Debate Education Association:
http://www.idebate.org/about/index.php
Our team debate format is called the Karl Popper Style:
http://www.idebate.org/standards/ruleskarlpopper.php
"The Karl-Popper format focuses on relevant and often deeply divisive propositions, emphasizing the development of critical thinking skills, and tolerance for differing viewpoints. To facilitate these goals, debaters work together in teams of three, and must research both sides of each issue. Each team is given the opportunity to offer arguments and direct questions to the opposing team. Judges then offer constructive feedback, commenting on logical flaws, insufficient evidence, or arguments that debaters may have overlooked."
If you are still having difficulty conceptualizing the format, post here and we'll talk it out until everyone feels prepared. Debate day is too late to voice that you don't understand!
http://www.idebate.org/about/index.php
Our team debate format is called the Karl Popper Style:
http://www.idebate.org/standards/ruleskarlpopper.php
"The Karl-Popper format focuses on relevant and often deeply divisive propositions, emphasizing the development of critical thinking skills, and tolerance for differing viewpoints. To facilitate these goals, debaters work together in teams of three, and must research both sides of each issue. Each team is given the opportunity to offer arguments and direct questions to the opposing team. Judges then offer constructive feedback, commenting on logical flaws, insufficient evidence, or arguments that debaters may have overlooked."
If you are still having difficulty conceptualizing the format, post here and we'll talk it out until everyone feels prepared. Debate day is too late to voice that you don't understand!
Monday, December 01, 2008
violent teens
This article from the new york times investigates the cause of violence in teens, following 750 children from pre-school to high school. The authors found that violent behavior can not be explicitly linked to nature or nurture, and but that "an interplay between behavior and environment during childhood create a cascade of influences that shape the teenager’s character."
It seems that small disciplinary issues at a young age can create a pattern of punishment and isolation that can lead to further issues over time. The researchers found that as disciplinary issues piled up, their parents spent less time with them, "with the parents providing less supervision, the children gravitated to similarly estranged peers". The article states that violence in teenagers does not seem to be due to a "bad kid" or environment alone, but can be partly attributed to a cycle of detrimental punishments (like getting sent to the principles office and thus missing a lesson), and other environmental issues that stem from small behavioral issues.
I do wonder what can be done in the school environment to halt this kind of cycle. I feel that once someone starts getting punished for small issues ineffectively, they could begin to see themselves as a "bad kid" and just continue to follow that route throughout their life.
It seems that small disciplinary issues at a young age can create a pattern of punishment and isolation that can lead to further issues over time. The researchers found that as disciplinary issues piled up, their parents spent less time with them, "with the parents providing less supervision, the children gravitated to similarly estranged peers". The article states that violence in teenagers does not seem to be due to a "bad kid" or environment alone, but can be partly attributed to a cycle of detrimental punishments (like getting sent to the principles office and thus missing a lesson), and other environmental issues that stem from small behavioral issues.
I do wonder what can be done in the school environment to halt this kind of cycle. I feel that once someone starts getting punished for small issues ineffectively, they could begin to see themselves as a "bad kid" and just continue to follow that route throughout their life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)