When we think of having to name objects that we see or are described to us we simply take it as another everyday task. It doesn't really strike us as something that would be so complicated or require much energy. In reality "the naming of visual objects is an immensely complicated process." (Hurley). In a study done at Northwestern University patients were tested on being able to name different objects and comprehend different words. Through a series of tests two different types of anomia were identified; one that was based on impaired retrieval and the second on distorted semantic representation of words. Through these tests different characteristics were found when it came to naming objects. First there were patients (PPA-GL) who could recognize the names of the objects and could associate them with the correct object but could not verbally express the objects name. An example would be a woman who was able to recognize objects and write their names but she was not able to verbally express the name of the objects. In cases like these it was determined that the "problem could not be attributed to a distortion of nonverbal object representation" (Hurley). In other words it was said that naming failures occur when signals are too weak to elicit retrieval but not too weak where they can't recognize objects. When people name objects two networks are required in order for the naming to occur. Both the bilateral inferotemporal lesions and the left hemisphere language network lesions are used; if either one of them where to be damage it would disrupt the other one causing a disconnection as well as causing both parts to not work properly.
Each part of the brain is connected or plays a role in helping other parts of our bodies function. With studies like these we are able to learn and continue to discover new things about problems
like primary progressive aphasia. These situations give us insight into what other individuals are facing when they are not able ot name or comprehend certain objects or words. What seems to us as something very simple is something extremely difficult for them.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Dr. Hurley's talk
Dr. Hurley’s talk was about PPA which is a degeneration of
language network that leads to anomia (inability to name objects) and comprehension
problems. PPA has been subdivided into three main categories: agrammatic
(non-fluent) PPA-G, semantic PPA-S, and logopenic PPA-L. The first form of PPA,
the agrammatic form is associated with poor grammar, inability to form syntactic
structures of sentences. Another form, the semantic aphasia is manifested in
comprehension problems, and logopenic aphasia is the most controversial one
that is widely studied recently. Logopenic aphasia patients have good grammar
and good comprehension of words but they are unable to repeat words, much like
in conduction aphasia.
One of the techniques used by Dr. Hurey measured neural
activity in PPA patients and that was EEG with the N400 ERP. N400 is a negative
going potential that peaks around 400 ms after the stimulus; it is sensitive to
word retrieval. It was observed that the amplitude of the N400 was bigger when
the expected word appeared. In the matching test paradigm, a picture or word
cue was presented, and participants had to press a button when the word matched
that particular picture and another button when it did not. In order to get to
the semantic level of PPA, investigators asked subjects to identify whether the
semantic mismatch was related to the same category.
There was one interesting
patient who said that she knew the name of the object but she just could not
say it. She proved herself right by correctly writing down the name of the object on the paper. It was concluded that this patient had problem with the
speech production, and the EEG showed a big N400, suggesting that she connected
to the word but she could not verbalize it (impairment in the lexical access). The
brain areas that are associated with three forms of PPA were identified. PPA-S
patients showed more atrophy in the anterior temporal lobe, PPA-L displayed
atrophy in the posterior part of the language network.
When Dr. Hurley wanted to correlate
temporal pole with the ability of naming objects an interesting thing happened.
He found inactivation of the temporal pole in the fMRI study, even though there
was activation in the PET scan. This made him think of options other than his CaLLs
model to explore PPA. He proposed a possibility of the disconnection syndrome-inability
to read, write, understand and copy words, where the white matter is damaged
between the Broca’s area and temporal pole and between the temporal pole and
Wernicke’s area. As a good researcher, he took into consideration different possibilities
and he did not stop at this point; he plans to do more research on PPA.
PPA and ASL
During his presentation on primary progressive aphasia, Dr. Robert Hurley mentioned a specific patient that was believed to suffer from semantic primary progressive aphasia but in reality she had a unimodal deficit in the ability to verbalize the name of the objects. Once Hurley gave her a piece of paper and pen she was significantly better at the object recognition task. This got me thinking about whether sign language could help in her case, or possibly cases of primary progressive aphasia. It seems logical that sign language would help the lady who had a unimodal deficit in verbalizing the name of objects, but what about patients who suffer from primary progressive aphasia.
After a little bit of searching I came across a study that Cynthia Pattee and her colleagues conducted in 2006 that found evidence that both text to speech and american sign language are treatment possibilities for progressive speech and language disorders. Specifically the researchers found that the text to speech and ASL increased the number of words, correct information units and correct usage of those information units for progressive speech and language disorder patients. Hopefully there will be more research done on how alternative means of communication could help people who suffer from primary progressive aphasia.
Pattee et al (2006)
http://journals.lww.com/intjrehabilres/Abstract/2006/06000/Effects_of_alternative_communication_on_the.10.aspx
Monday, November 19, 2012
Gary Marcus on Evolution
Gary Marcus focused his talk on the evolution of language and music. After his talk, I had the opportunity to discuss with him the possibility of further human evolution. Marcus doubts that humans will continue to evolve, primarily for two reasons: modern health care and birth control. Modern health care allows those who would have died in a "survival of the fittest" scenario to survive, and birth control slows down the rate of reproduction.
This severely lowers the probability that the human genome will evolve with any species-wide consequences. Whether it is a good or a bad thing is open to interpretation. It is certainly good for those like myself who need glasses for any hope of seeing and asthma which probably would have killed me off in childhood if not for modern medicine. But it also closes off the possibility of further refining or improving human traits.
If humans no longer evolve, is the model of human today what will remain in the far future? Or is there now a possibility of devolution? Only time (billions and billions of years) will tell.
Thorough Research: Dr. Hurley's Talk
Dr. Hurley's talk on progressive primary aphasia was a reinforcement on a very important concept that we have been learning since the beginning of the Cognitive Neuroscience class: that the brain consists of numerous pathways and no one region is solely responsible for a task. In Dr. Hurley's CaLLS model the visual and auditory pathways integrate in the temporal pole which he found evidence for using PET. When participants of his study were naming objects, the PET scans showed metabolism in the temporal lobe, but the fMRI scans are not showing activation in that region during the same task. Dr. Hurley believes that the lack of activation in the fMRI scan could be due to the air pockets around the temporal lobe, so the resolution around that area is not as good. In order to show that there are differences in the integration of incoming information in PPA patients, the study uses a paradigm that pairs different stimuli together (picture with picture, picture with word) and looks if PPAs experience the same surprise when the pair doesn't match as the control. The surprise, or comprehension, is marked by the N400 ERP. There is a difference between the control's and the PPA's N400 that would suggest that the there is a difference in the way the two groups process incoming information.
However, there is still the question of why Dr. Hurley is not seeing activation in the temporal lobe. In his perseverance, Dr. Hurley added another study that paired a picture with sound, so that another type of sensory information can be examined. Even with the extra study added, Dr. Hurley is worried that there may be another cause for the difference in the N400: the Disconnection Syndrome. In this case it would be the white matter that between the visual and language systems that has been disconnected in PPAs. This would cause the same result in the N400 as the CaLLS theory. I thought it was great that Dr. Hurley was honest that there could be another cause for the difference. He is a great example of being a good researcher because even though he would like to be correct in his theory, he did not reject the idea that he could be wrong. Instead, he added another study to his research (sound and olfactory), and he is even starting studies with intracranial recordings on epilepsy patients. He is conducting thorough research instead of pretending that there isn't another potential explanation or giving up. It is important to remember that it is better to use multiple methods in your research so you have more evidence, whether it supports your hypothesis or not. Even when your hypothesis is not supported, you should not be discouraged because your research may lead to other discoveries further down the line.
However, there is still the question of why Dr. Hurley is not seeing activation in the temporal lobe. In his perseverance, Dr. Hurley added another study that paired a picture with sound, so that another type of sensory information can be examined. Even with the extra study added, Dr. Hurley is worried that there may be another cause for the difference in the N400: the Disconnection Syndrome. In this case it would be the white matter that between the visual and language systems that has been disconnected in PPAs. This would cause the same result in the N400 as the CaLLS theory. I thought it was great that Dr. Hurley was honest that there could be another cause for the difference. He is a great example of being a good researcher because even though he would like to be correct in his theory, he did not reject the idea that he could be wrong. Instead, he added another study to his research (sound and olfactory), and he is even starting studies with intracranial recordings on epilepsy patients. He is conducting thorough research instead of pretending that there isn't another potential explanation or giving up. It is important to remember that it is better to use multiple methods in your research so you have more evidence, whether it supports your hypothesis or not. Even when your hypothesis is not supported, you should not be discouraged because your research may lead to other discoveries further down the line.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Dr. Hurley: Function (Doesn't Always) Follow Form
Dr. Robert Hurley’s talk regarding Primary Progressive Aphasia
(PPA) was very interesting, especially because it connected with what we were
talking about in class. Dr. Hurley discussed the different subtypes of PPA, and
they reminded me of umbrella types of aphasia. In agrammatic PPA (PPA-G), the
patient has deficits in grammar, but their word comprehension is relatively
spared. This sounds like Non Fluent, or Broca’s, Aphasia. This is caused by
atrophy in frontal areas (including Broca’s area) that are related with speech
production, and imaging studies have agreed with this.
When explaining semantic PPA (PPA-S), Dr. Hurley described
that this is caused by anterior temporal (temporal pole) damage which results
in deficits in word comprehension, but not grammar. This reminds me of Fluent,
or Wernicke’s, Aphasia because of the deficits. However, Dr. Hurley pointed out
that if Wernicke’s area is associated with comprehension, one would expect it
to be damaged in PPA-S (since comprehension is impaired), but imaging shows
that it actually is not. This leads one to believe that there is something else
going on, and much research still needs to be conducted.
Dr. Hurley's Talk: Paradigm Conflicts in Language
This conflict of models reminds me of the differing models of memory that we discussed in class. Both Baddeley’s and Cowan’s models of how short-term memory and long-term memory interact have been supported by various experiments, although Cowan’s seems to be supported more strongly by the neurological data. This just goes to show that there are many possible models for how the brain performs a multitude of tasks. It reminds me that, as neuroscientists, we must be flexible with what we believe about the brain, because knowledge is always transforming.
Research Methods
Dr. Hurley’s talk on primary progressive aphasia reminded me
of the many important aspects of producing good research in the field of
behavioral cognitive neuroscience, specifically the importance of using
converging operations, understanding the anatomy of the brain and how it might
relate to the deficit, and finally that what we know about the brain in constantly
changing.
When
researching primary progressive aphasia, Hurley drew his knowledge from the use
of a variety of different methods. For
example among a number of methods, Hurley used EEG to discover that the N400 is
important in the cognitive process of predictive encoding, in the case of his
study, word retrieval. He looked at lesion studies in the temporal pole to
conclude that this area may be important for naming objects, PET data to
confirm metabolic activity in the temporal pole. Hurley also discussed the use
of DTI and ECOG to look at other possible explanations for PPA including the
disconnection of tracts caused by damage to white matter.
Dr. Hurley’s
understanding of brain anatomy allowed him to further explore other
explanations for primary progressive aphasia other than the CaLLs model .
Hurley was able to test whether or not the integration of objects to form a
word meaning takes place in the temporal pole (calls model) or with a connection
between different areas of the brain through white matter tracts. Without a
good understanding of brain anatomy Hurley would not have explored other
possible explanations of primary progressive aphasia needed to produce good
research.
Finally,
Dr. Hurley and other researchers’ flexibility to think outside the realms of
the traditional understanding of language led to the discovery of another
language center of the brain other than Wernicke and Broca areas, the temporal
pole. Previous fmri studies suggested that there was not a significant amount
of activity in the temporal pole to be considered an important spot for
language. However, further exploration and the use of other methods has
suggested that it is important for producing words.
I
really enjoyed Dr. Hurley’s talk because the reasoning behind his research
followed a similar method to how we learn and discover the inner-workings of
the brain in class. It showed me how converging operations, understanding of
brain anatomy and flexibility in neuroscience should always be considered when
both doing and evaluating good research.
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Dr. Hurley's Study
According to the article Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a degenerative syndrome that causes gradual atrophy of the left hemisphere language network, leading to impairments of object naming (anomia) and word comprehension. There were many types of experiments and assessments for different individuals. These type of experiments were done to find out if the condition of aphasia was caused by visual perception problems or verbal problems. This study was using Western aphasia battery and Pea body picture vocabulary test, Northwestern Anagrams Test. The results were also determined to exam the hypothesis that anomia in PPA-S patients is caused by a distortion in word comprehension and lexical labeling at the specific rather than generic level of identification.
Evolution of Music
Whether you are looking at gender, language, or empathy, an evolutionary perspective is always fascinating to explore. Evolutionary in biology has always made since to me, but when it was first introduced to me as a psychological theory I was a bit skeptical. In my ignorance it seemed a little odd to put the two together, but now it makes so much sense. So much of what goes on in the human psyche is caused by evolution, and Marcus extended my understanding of evolutionary psychology even more during his talk at the Neuroscience banquet last week. Both his lecture and book made a compelling argument that music has evolved similarly to language in humans. His point that music has evolved as a form of social cohesion resonated with me after the lecture. Even though it is obvious that making and listening to music is often a social activity, it was interesting to hear him compare it to how language brings people together. Without language we would not be able to build meaningful relationships or share ideas. And Marcus pointed out that music is also important in building relationships though shared experience. It was truly enjoyable to hear about Marcus' theory of origin of music.
Gary Marcus' talk
Gary
Marcus’ presentation dealt with the evolution of language and music, concepts
closely tied up with the field of evolutionary psychology. He started up with
the brief history of survival of the fittest. He proposed that language and
music evolved for couple of reasons. First of all, language evolved for social
purposes as a way of communication between people of various cultures. Secondly,
Marcus indicated that language evolved as means of attraction of mates; he
brought up the concept of sexual selection. He spoke about the origin of
language, specifically how it actually evolved. Marcus claimed that language
did not evolve as a result of new dramatic, genetic changes but rather it
happened to evolve as an outcome of tiny genetic changes that were critical
enough for adaptation and preservation through generations. Also, he stressed
that language should not be viewed as an innovation but something that was
always there; acquired by our ancestors and passed down to the offspring. He
called the theory of evolution of language a Descent with Modifications. He
intertwined concepts from his books: The
Guitar Zero and Kluge. Marcus
suggested that our language is also a kluge, meaning it is not perfect. How many times when you try to find the proper
word to use in a particular moment and you have it right on “the tip of your
tongue”, you cannot retrieve it? It frequently happens to all of us. This is
due to weak connections of speech sounds represented in our memory.
Moving on to music, Gary Marcus advocated that thanks to language we have music. Music as a result of culture’s influence is like social glue; brings people together to create a cohesive society. He gave us examples of how music affects our rewarding systems in the brain. When we hear something that has the same beat, our rewarding systems gets activated, similarly when the beat of the song changes. He made a distinction between language and music by comparing language to instinct, something that is innate, and music being a technologically acquired skill.
I enjoyed Marcus talk because it was much like my anthropology class, where evolution of human social behavior is a hot topic
Moving on to music, Gary Marcus advocated that thanks to language we have music. Music as a result of culture’s influence is like social glue; brings people together to create a cohesive society. He gave us examples of how music affects our rewarding systems in the brain. When we hear something that has the same beat, our rewarding systems gets activated, similarly when the beat of the song changes. He made a distinction between language and music by comparing language to instinct, something that is innate, and music being a technologically acquired skill.
I enjoyed Marcus talk because it was much like my anthropology class, where evolution of human social behavior is a hot topic
Gary Marcus and the Evolution of Language and Music
At the 2012 Neuroscience Banquet, I had the fortune of listening to Gary Marcus give his talk on the evolution of music and language. His talk ranged from the evolution, in general, and transcended towards the parallels between understanding language and understanding music. After reading his book in class all semester, it was an enriching experience to finally attend a talk of his and learn more about his interesting explanations behind two concepts that greatly affect everyone's lives.
As Dr. Marcus started talking about the basis of evolution and how language has developed within our species, he made many interesting connections to his book Kluge where he writes about how language evolved to "get the job done" but not in the most ideal way. In the same way that the human spine could have been better engineered to reduce many problems and work more efficiently, language has many problems, but turned out to stand the test of natural selection.
As he continued to move from language to music, he hit on some key points that really opened my eyes to the connections between neuroscience and everyday life. In my opinion, one of the most interesting parts of the talks was where Marcus explained how dopamine is responsible for our love of music. Since hearing music that fulfills our expectations and hearing new music for the first time both produce an influx of dopamine in our system, it is easy to see why music has evolved the way it has.
One of the most important benefits of learning class-related material outside of class is the chance to connect it to everyday life. After attending this talk, there was a lot of new information that Dr. Marcus had presented which connected parts of our lives to the neuroscience that most of us have been focusing on our entire collegiate careers. It was an honor hearing such a respected member of the science I hope to one day contribute to speak, and I am glad that I had the opportunity to connect aspects of his talk to both my classes and my life.
As Dr. Marcus started talking about the basis of evolution and how language has developed within our species, he made many interesting connections to his book Kluge where he writes about how language evolved to "get the job done" but not in the most ideal way. In the same way that the human spine could have been better engineered to reduce many problems and work more efficiently, language has many problems, but turned out to stand the test of natural selection.
As he continued to move from language to music, he hit on some key points that really opened my eyes to the connections between neuroscience and everyday life. In my opinion, one of the most interesting parts of the talks was where Marcus explained how dopamine is responsible for our love of music. Since hearing music that fulfills our expectations and hearing new music for the first time both produce an influx of dopamine in our system, it is easy to see why music has evolved the way it has.
One of the most important benefits of learning class-related material outside of class is the chance to connect it to everyday life. After attending this talk, there was a lot of new information that Dr. Marcus had presented which connected parts of our lives to the neuroscience that most of us have been focusing on our entire collegiate careers. It was an honor hearing such a respected member of the science I hope to one day contribute to speak, and I am glad that I had the opportunity to connect aspects of his talk to both my classes and my life.
Music
The lecture given at the neuroscience banquet on Saturday
was very interesting as it was about evolutionary psychology. Though there were
many parts of the lecture that were very interesting, I thought the talk about
music was the easiest to relate to. Dr. Marcus went over why music evolved and
its impact on society today. He also went on to say music is a higher motion of
communication. He started off by
saying that music evolved as an advantage for mammals to attract mates. I
thought that was so interesting as I can see how true that is. When I listen to
a song I look at two things; the beat and the lyrics. It isn’t that both have
to be good for me to enjoy it, but one of them should catch my attention in
order for me to stay around and keep listening. If it does not appeal to me at
the first time, I will never hear the song again. Artists must do a good job at
making their music appeal to listeners, as they want the fans. I think this is
so strange because it is also the way most people find their partners. There
has to some attraction either physical or emotional for a person to stick
around and explore that option.
I thought it was very interesting how music also plays a
role in social environment. Music has the ability to bring the most different
types of people together. I never realized the impact music has as it can also
set the mood for everyone. For instance, when I’m having a bad day and I listen
to dancing music, my mood completely changes. Music can also come to a person
as comfort. Music is an outlet for people and when I sit to analyze, I wonder
where our society would be if we didn’t have music to bring us together? Would
it be easier/ harder for the society to get along?
Empathy
The paper on Phylogenic and
ontogenetic perspectives on empathy goes into depth about how the emotion ,empathy,
is developmental and evolutionary. Bringing together the two concepts of neuroevolutionary
with developmental perspectives to find out how the mechanics work when dealing
with emotions. Empathy is an emotional state or condition that comes as a
response for a given situation. As empathy is an adapted function and happens unconsciously.
It is the initial response that then decides what actions follow. This ability
drives what humans do, as it is a response mechanism. For instance, if we see a
friend crying, or initial response is to help them cope, that is to be
empathetic and caring. Without realizing it. Just as mammals develop parenting
behavior, they also develop emotions such as separation, pain, love distress
etc. those emotions we form without any knowledge of doing so. We continue to
have kept these emotions as they have rewards. Parental nurturing has its
rewards, says the article, in which parents seek out thus creating a cycle of
empathy where care is shown and happiness and love is rewarded.
Infants use attachment as a form of
survival. This is another trait humans are biologically predisposed to. Studies
show the more attached an infant is, the more empathetic he or she will be
towards others. Whereas children who are not exposed to this type of care can
result in sociemotional difficulties.
This essay goes over how empathy is
a predisposed trait humans are exposed to.
This essay is interesting in that,
it suggests that if they can figure out the neurobiological underpinnings of
sociemotional difficulties they can try to find interventions.
After reading this essay, I
realized how empathy makes the biggest impact on my actions In situations I
usually have a clear mind that will make decisions I think are right for the
situation. However, the moment I hear or see something that changes the mood,
my actions hugely depend on what I just saw. For instance, when I saw my friend
crying about her boyfriend cheated her. My initial thought was “oh I really
hate this guy”. As the story progressed, I started to get as angry as she was
even though he had done nothing to me. At this point, m judgment was fogged and
the only thing that was clear to me was “ I need to say something to him about
it.” And I did- I proceeded to tell him off and go off on him. Had my thoughts
been clear, I wouldn’t have done that as it is not my business to do that but I
did it because I thought it was the right thing I do given the situation.
Empathy is a very strong response
mechanism that can cause us to do the actions that we may regret in the future.
Emotions are sometimes unbeatable and fog up or mind with things we wan to do
with the things we should do. It is insane how much humans rely on emotions to
cause their actions unconsciously.
Music Evolution
During the 2012 neuroscience banquet, Gary Marcus gave a
speech focusing on the connection between two of his books, Kluge and Guitar Zero. He argued that
music and language were connected through the reasons for their evolution.
Marcus took the time to talk about possible reasons for why
music and language evolved as well as how.
He speculated that two possible reasons that music and language evolved
was for them to be used as a "social glue" in addition to a way to
attract possible mates. When he talked
about sexual selection in terms of animals, Marcus referenced that birds as
well as other animals sing to attract mates.
The better the song, the more offspring were possible. For humans, Marcus referenced the "Jimi
Hendrix Theory." He pointed out
that because Hendrix could play amazing music, he could have had many children
from his travels. Jimi Hendrix's musical
talent raised his reproductive success.
Marcus also states that even though the examples favor men, it could
also apply to women.
Music is involved in our everyday life, its something we hear constantly in things like commercials, entertainment, etc. I
thoroughly enjoyed Marcus' talk about music, especially since I used to be
greatly involved in it when I was younger, playing the violin as well as a few
brass instruments. It was interesting
how he pointed out that while one can have musical talent, without success, one
cannot raise their reproductive success. Marcus' take on why we have music was
extremely interesting
The Appeal of Music
Why is it that hearing only up to the seventh of the eight note octave leaves us with an unsatisfactory, discomforting feeling? I remember as a child hearing my piano teacher tell me the story of how Mozart's mother would play C up to B on the piano in the morning, because it forced Mozart to jump out of bed and run to the piano to play that final C. There is something special, even self-completing to the sound of hearing the whole scale to any musician. But why is it that this particular set of frequencies is so "nice" to us? As Dr. Gary Marcus asked us at the Loyola University Neuroscience Banquet last Saturday, what might an alien find pleasing, if they liked music at all? A 61 note octave, or perhaps 27? An even better question, why are so few mammals on Earth able to appreciate music? Very few have been identified as having care for music being played.
Dr. Marcus argued that music has evolved due to a kind of sexual selection among humans. Those of us who could, for example, sing best may have attracted the most mates. And those who lacked the capacity were more often excluded. But, he also brought up, there are many examples of relatively smart and extremely productive people who have had no care for music, such the infamous psychologist Dr. Freud. In addition, there is absolutely no evidence that has shown that musicians are better able to find mates in this day and age. However, it has been incredibly difficult for musicians to maintain a steady career or even become well-known until the dawn of record players and the radio. In the Medieval Ages musicians were seen as a "lesser" career, to be looked down upon.
Music as we know it now has really only become the "way it is" within the past millennium, an insignificant period of time compared to evolutionary history. One can only wonder what people preferred to sing, the kinds of beats they made, or how prevalent music was in civilizations at all.
Perhaps music has only become a focal point of our society during these past few hundred years because only now have we truly had the time or ability to produce and listen to it. We enjoy and attach ourselves emotionally to certain songs, whether it be the first song newlyweds danced to or your break up song from high school. Music has a great power in controlling our feelings, but we have little explanation as to why.
Perhaps one reason why like music is the novelty of it, the challenge of predicting what chord might come next or where a song will lead. The reason we don't like random noises nearly as much as we like songs is because it is complete novelty and impossible to predict; i.e., no challenge presented. We like to hear 80% known material with 20% novelty or challenge. We are then able to enjoy the sounds because it is not entirely foreign but it is not so repetitive that we get bored.
Back to the original question, why is it that we like the eight note octave? Well, I haven't the faintest idea, but my guess is that it is just the way our brains are hardwired. Marcus also spoke of his book Kluge, a book about how humans are not the "optimal" organism per se, but we are the optimal solution given what we had to work with from our evolutionary history. I would imagine that we like music in the fashion we do due to mere chance, that as our brains changed over time for important evolutionary advantages, the eight note octave appeal came as a by product. This could explain why dolphins like music in a completely different manner. They evolved differently than we did, and as such their brain formed differently than ours. We started with the same "materials," and we simply went our separate paths.
Dr. Marcus argued that music has evolved due to a kind of sexual selection among humans. Those of us who could, for example, sing best may have attracted the most mates. And those who lacked the capacity were more often excluded. But, he also brought up, there are many examples of relatively smart and extremely productive people who have had no care for music, such the infamous psychologist Dr. Freud. In addition, there is absolutely no evidence that has shown that musicians are better able to find mates in this day and age. However, it has been incredibly difficult for musicians to maintain a steady career or even become well-known until the dawn of record players and the radio. In the Medieval Ages musicians were seen as a "lesser" career, to be looked down upon.
Music as we know it now has really only become the "way it is" within the past millennium, an insignificant period of time compared to evolutionary history. One can only wonder what people preferred to sing, the kinds of beats they made, or how prevalent music was in civilizations at all.
Perhaps music has only become a focal point of our society during these past few hundred years because only now have we truly had the time or ability to produce and listen to it. We enjoy and attach ourselves emotionally to certain songs, whether it be the first song newlyweds danced to or your break up song from high school. Music has a great power in controlling our feelings, but we have little explanation as to why.
Perhaps one reason why like music is the novelty of it, the challenge of predicting what chord might come next or where a song will lead. The reason we don't like random noises nearly as much as we like songs is because it is complete novelty and impossible to predict; i.e., no challenge presented. We like to hear 80% known material with 20% novelty or challenge. We are then able to enjoy the sounds because it is not entirely foreign but it is not so repetitive that we get bored.
Back to the original question, why is it that we like the eight note octave? Well, I haven't the faintest idea, but my guess is that it is just the way our brains are hardwired. Marcus also spoke of his book Kluge, a book about how humans are not the "optimal" organism per se, but we are the optimal solution given what we had to work with from our evolutionary history. I would imagine that we like music in the fashion we do due to mere chance, that as our brains changed over time for important evolutionary advantages, the eight note octave appeal came as a by product. This could explain why dolphins like music in a completely different manner. They evolved differently than we did, and as such their brain formed differently than ours. We started with the same "materials," and we simply went our separate paths.
Language, Music, and Gary Marcus
Gary Marcus’s talk about language and music from an
evolutionary perspective was very interesting. He began by considering the
notion that these two things evolved for many of the same purposes: a “social
glue,” and way to attract mates.
Language obviously helps us communicate, but Marcus points
out that its evolution is a bit of a kluge (a clumsy or inelegant—yet
surprisingly effective—solution to a problem). This is clearly demonstrated in
what are known as “garden-path” sentences, such as “the horse raced past the
barn fell.” Reading this, you probably stumbled upon reaching the word “fell,”
at which point you had to backtrack to try to find other possible ways to read
the sentence. Language is not a perfect system.
When discussing why music evolved, Marcus mentioned sexual
selection. In birds and other animals, males use songs to entice females: the
better the male’s song, the more offspring they had, raising their reproductive
success, favoring music. For the human equivalent, Marcus cites the “Jimi Hendrix
theory.” Hendrix could play great music and had fathered many children while on
the road; his musical talent raised his reproductive success, and thus music
was selected for. However, Marcus points out that this theory implies that
musical ability should have only involved in men, but we know that this is not true—there are many great female musicians, some of which are even better than
some men.
Marcus’s then explained that the reason for the way language
and music (and everything else) evolved “imperfectly” is because it is not
“survival of the fittest” in the sense that the most advantageous, “perfect”
trait was selected for; rather, nature selected the fittest out of the options
that currently exist without forethought. Things evolve via “evolutionary
inertia:” once moving in particular direction, an evolutionary system tends to
continue to evolve in that direction, maybe making minor changes along the way.
All in all, Gary Marcus’s talk was very thought provoking
and it was a pleasure to hear him speak.
Kluge
"Kluge(s): A clumsy solution that gets the job done but not with the best solution."
At the Loyola neuroscience banquet Dr. Marcus gave a very interesting talk on kluges, evolution, music and language. Dr. Marcus mentioned how many species share basic structures with minor modifications. When individuals think about evolution we realize that evolution does not think ahead, it does not have forethought. On the other hand humans also have difficulties; humans generally have difficulties remembering the exact wording of a sentence, they are generally not able to repeat exact sentences; the only reason actors and other individuals can perform this is because they practice and work towards mastering this skill. When a person tries to process a sentence parts of other sentences interfere, as a result things might look fine locally but not globally. In other words, a sentence might look grammatically correct but when said out loud it is incorrect or confusing.
In reality humans are not good at binding things together; they lack the right kind of memory. Human brains are bound by what we call the binding problem, where individuals do not have the kind of memory like a machine. Unlike humans, machines have very specific parts and locations for different information, they are able to accomplish tasks in one try. Humans on the other hand need many many trials to accomplish tasks. Sometimes the human brain is too poor to remember important things even in life and death situations. Dr. Marcus gave and example of individuals forgetting to pull the cord when they parachute. In situations like these people are very excited and are mostly thinking about their experience and what they will tell others about it. Other reasons people might forget to pull the parachute cord could be because they have experienced this so many times they cannot clearly remember if they already pulled the cord or if they are thinking about the last time they did this.
Human language is the best possible system for language, and evolution has had a big influence on how language works today. In language as well as in music we find repetition to be pleasing; we are actually able to tolerate the constant repetition of a tune in music. While language is an instinct and is something that comes automatically to humans, music is an acquired skill that requires training and technology.
I used to think that our body was always built the best way possible, but Dr. Marcus certainly changed my opinion on many things. Quite often we try to find solutions to fix a problem we have but many times we do not stop to think if it’s the best solution or if we are simply fixing a problem with a kluge.
What Can Evolution Tell Us About Music and Language
At the 2012 annual neuroscience banquet, we had the privilege of hearing from Gary Marcus. In his talk, he focused on drawing a connection between two of his most popular books: Kluge and Guitar Zero. His argument was that music and language seem to be connected in an evolutionary manner but in different ways.
First, he discussed the evolution of language. He began by stating two crucial questions that must be answered. First, why did something evolve? And second, How did something evolve? This compares and contrasts function with structure. It seems that language evolved in order to attract mates and have an advantage in social cohesion. Next, Marcus delved into how language evolved. He refers to language as a "Kluge" because it is a clumsy solution to get the job done, but not ideally. Language allows us to communicate to one another, but the English language does not always make sense. Why do we park in a driveway and drive in a parkway? Marcus attributes this to "evolutionary inertia". Basically once language started moving in a particular direction, it continued on in that direction. It is simply a matter of probability.
Next, Marcus continued by relating these same precepts to music. He asks this vital question: Has evolution left its fingerprints on music? To answer this question, he first turned to "exomusicology", which seeks to discover what other species favor about music. He begins by explaining that music could be a sexual-selective trait used to attract mates, but it is not the only way to attract mates. Marcus then continues by drawing the differences between language and music in an evolutionary sense. He states that language and music are both infinite combinatorial systems, but language is learned differently and earlier. In fact, Marcus argues that language is learned naturally in a sort of innate sense. He asserts that language is required to be evolutionary successful, but music is not. Language is instinctual while music is a technologically acquired skill that does not directly evolve. Music is dependent on the structure of the mind, whereas language seems to already by built into the brain's framework.
He concluded by saying that language and music do have the same structure built on physical requirements, functional pressures, and evolutionary inertia, but differ by one distinct thing: culture. Music is dependent on culture, whereas language is not. Music is simply a technology that fits into the culture of that time, whereas language is much more universal and transcends culture.
Furthermore, Gary Marcus' talk about the evolutionary history of language and music was very fascinating. It was a privilege to hear him speak and it was interesting to see him connect his two books together and shed some light on the evolutionary origins of music and language.
First, he discussed the evolution of language. He began by stating two crucial questions that must be answered. First, why did something evolve? And second, How did something evolve? This compares and contrasts function with structure. It seems that language evolved in order to attract mates and have an advantage in social cohesion. Next, Marcus delved into how language evolved. He refers to language as a "Kluge" because it is a clumsy solution to get the job done, but not ideally. Language allows us to communicate to one another, but the English language does not always make sense. Why do we park in a driveway and drive in a parkway? Marcus attributes this to "evolutionary inertia". Basically once language started moving in a particular direction, it continued on in that direction. It is simply a matter of probability.
Next, Marcus continued by relating these same precepts to music. He asks this vital question: Has evolution left its fingerprints on music? To answer this question, he first turned to "exomusicology", which seeks to discover what other species favor about music. He begins by explaining that music could be a sexual-selective trait used to attract mates, but it is not the only way to attract mates. Marcus then continues by drawing the differences between language and music in an evolutionary sense. He states that language and music are both infinite combinatorial systems, but language is learned differently and earlier. In fact, Marcus argues that language is learned naturally in a sort of innate sense. He asserts that language is required to be evolutionary successful, but music is not. Language is instinctual while music is a technologically acquired skill that does not directly evolve. Music is dependent on the structure of the mind, whereas language seems to already by built into the brain's framework.
He concluded by saying that language and music do have the same structure built on physical requirements, functional pressures, and evolutionary inertia, but differ by one distinct thing: culture. Music is dependent on culture, whereas language is not. Music is simply a technology that fits into the culture of that time, whereas language is much more universal and transcends culture.
Furthermore, Gary Marcus' talk about the evolutionary history of language and music was very fascinating. It was a privilege to hear him speak and it was interesting to see him connect his two books together and shed some light on the evolutionary origins of music and language.
The Language of Music
The language of music is something that we can all understand and participate in as either active listeners or creators. Language and music share many commonalities, as highlighted by Gary Marcus. As Marcus stated, music is a "peacock's tail" in that while it may not be for sexual selection, it is a foundation upon which relationships can be formed. This is true of not only humans, but is also exemplified by the mating calls of birds or other species that use the language of music to communicate and attract their mates, which is the evolutionary reason language evolved in the first place. While music may be subject to the same pressures as language, music has the additional requirement of culture. Marcus's presentation made me truly realize how both language and music are forms of communication that have become key components of our society and have evolved with time.
Music is something that has been integrated into our daily lives. We are constantly exposed to music created by both nature and human beings. Having participated in choir and played instruments myself, I have come to appreciate the dedication and effort required to become a proficient musician. Nevertheless, whether it be the rhythm, notes, or harmonies, music has the ability to evoke emotion and truly speak to us. It is exploited by the media and entertainment industry, but also serves as a source of enjoyment and relaxation. As Marcus points out, music cannot be created by computer programs that use statistics to put together notes in a formulaic pattern. Thus, music is truly a form of expression, like language, that requires the human mind to have meaning, but is distinct from language in that it is also a learned skill.
When analyzing music as a language, we can see how music reflects the time period in which it was created. As true of both language and music, as times change, the words that are used as well as the tempos and melodies also evolve. Not only are new words created, but new sounds are also possible, as seen with an increase of autotuning. Despite this evolutionary inertia, the power and universality of language, whether in the form of words or music retains it's power to speak to us. Music from the pre-historic era, to the Rennaissance, all the way to the 50's and even today has grown in the instruments available and the complexities involved in it's creation; yet Shakespeare's works are still regarded as classics with themes that hold true today, similar to the ways in which music from decades ago, created in a different economy and time period can still be understood.
Music is something that has been integrated into our daily lives. We are constantly exposed to music created by both nature and human beings. Having participated in choir and played instruments myself, I have come to appreciate the dedication and effort required to become a proficient musician. Nevertheless, whether it be the rhythm, notes, or harmonies, music has the ability to evoke emotion and truly speak to us. It is exploited by the media and entertainment industry, but also serves as a source of enjoyment and relaxation. As Marcus points out, music cannot be created by computer programs that use statistics to put together notes in a formulaic pattern. Thus, music is truly a form of expression, like language, that requires the human mind to have meaning, but is distinct from language in that it is also a learned skill.
When analyzing music as a language, we can see how music reflects the time period in which it was created. As true of both language and music, as times change, the words that are used as well as the tempos and melodies also evolve. Not only are new words created, but new sounds are also possible, as seen with an increase of autotuning. Despite this evolutionary inertia, the power and universality of language, whether in the form of words or music retains it's power to speak to us. Music from the pre-historic era, to the Rennaissance, all the way to the 50's and even today has grown in the instruments available and the complexities involved in it's creation; yet Shakespeare's works are still regarded as classics with themes that hold true today, similar to the ways in which music from decades ago, created in a different economy and time period can still be understood.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Reading
The article I chose is titled Anatomy of
word and sentence meaning, which focuses on tasks that involve obtaining the
meaning of a word in isolation or in relation to a sentence. Granted many
studies have brought about an agreement as to the general areas that are
involved when it comes to comprehending words.
The data that was gathered from the article supports that the frontal
semantic areas are active before the posterior areas become active. In the
study the participants are showed a sentence with a missing word followed by a
cross fixation, the participants were examined using EEG. They focus on the
participants while reading and seeing how seeing how reading affects the
comprehension of the word or sentence that is being seen. I found it interesting that the results
showed that within the left frontal area activation were seen when a task involved
semantic classification where the frontal areas, more posterior demonstrated activation that were activated by phonological tasks, or the use of verbal
working memory. This finding is interesting because much of the literature
regarding lesions explains that semantic functions use Wernicke’s area which produces
semantic aphasia where sentences will be uttered with a typical fluency but
will not make any sense. One clue regarding how the frontal and posteriors
areas share semantic processing during activities such as listening and
reading, are through an eye movement study. This showed how a skilled reader will stay on
a word for only “300ms and the length and even the direction of the
saccade after this fixation are
influenced by the meaning of the word currently fixated”.
Posner, Michael I., and Antonella
Pavese. "Anatomy of Word and Sentence Meaning."Anatomy
of Word and Sentence Meaning 95
(n.d.): 889-905.Http://www.pnas.org/content/95/3/899.full.pdf+html. Web.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Meditation: A Wisening Practice
I don't know about you, but my goal is to be that wise old man who has all the right things to say at the right time in my old age. But, it sure would be nice to get wise sooner. What is wisdom, you ask? Steven Hall in Wisdom writes that many definitions of wisdom include "humility, patience, and a clear-eyed, dispassionate view of human nature... emotional resilience... and an almost philosophical acknowledgement of ambiguity and the limitations of knowledge." Sure would be nice to have a few of those qualities in your everyday thinking, right?
Laura Schwecher of the Times writes about a recent study linking meditation with "a thicker cerebral cortex and more gray matter - i.e., the parts of the brain linked to memory, attention span, decision making and learning." All of these higher processes can also generally be thought of as aspects absolutely fundamental to the growth and/or gain of wisdom. Wisdom requires a vast library of memories to work with, a large attention span and learning ability with which to perform extremely complex metacognitive processes, and a keen or sharp ability to make decisions. This decision making must work with a robust communication network, one with efficiently placed synapses and without an excess of extraneous, ill-linked cells. And Schwecher goes on to say that some scientists argue "devoting complete attention to one specific object or thought [as in meditation] actually alters our neural networks." Perhaps meditating causes a "pruning" of our neural networks, ridding itself of excess neural connections and creating new ones in more efficient or optimal patterns.
It is well known that as we develop from child to adulthood our brains undergo a massive pruning, or reduction of synapses by the millions. This symbolizes our maturation: we slowly become more apt at facing harder life decisions and are better able to apply complex information to concepts already in our mind as our brain weeds out those problematic synapses that get in the way of efficient metacognitive processing. I argue that meditation not only speeds this process up by weeding, but also reopens the door to some of the plasticity seen in childhood, though in a more abstract manner. In the weeding process in meditation, structural changes are made to make the mind better suited for memory, learning, attention, and decision making. In childhood, our brains slowly rewire themselves to be able to better process what is around them in the everyday environment, from how one should talk to adults versus those in similar age groups, to the kinds of things one should and shouldn't eat. Meditation, on the other hand, rewires our brains to be able to better handle new situations the moment they're thrown at us.
So, meditating a few times week or better, daily, potentially holds the key to being able to better handle the instances of daily life. Larger attention span and learning from all events encountered enable complex metacognitive processing, linking these events to past and potential future events, allowing for a higher probability of making optimal decisions rapidly. Therefore, beginning meditation in youth may allow for you to be just as wise, just as able to see connections and come up with clever solutions, as your somehow-still-walking biology professor.
References
[1] http://healthland.time.com/2012/08/10/can-meditation-make-you-smarter/
[2] Hall, Steven. Wisdom. New York: Random House, 2010. Print.
[3] Luders, Eileen, Christi Clark, et al. "Neuroimage." Neuroimage. 57.4 (2011): n. page. Web. 15 Nov. 2012.
Laura Schwecher of the Times writes about a recent study linking meditation with "a thicker cerebral cortex and more gray matter - i.e., the parts of the brain linked to memory, attention span, decision making and learning." All of these higher processes can also generally be thought of as aspects absolutely fundamental to the growth and/or gain of wisdom. Wisdom requires a vast library of memories to work with, a large attention span and learning ability with which to perform extremely complex metacognitive processes, and a keen or sharp ability to make decisions. This decision making must work with a robust communication network, one with efficiently placed synapses and without an excess of extraneous, ill-linked cells. And Schwecher goes on to say that some scientists argue "devoting complete attention to one specific object or thought [as in meditation] actually alters our neural networks." Perhaps meditating causes a "pruning" of our neural networks, ridding itself of excess neural connections and creating new ones in more efficient or optimal patterns.
It is well known that as we develop from child to adulthood our brains undergo a massive pruning, or reduction of synapses by the millions. This symbolizes our maturation: we slowly become more apt at facing harder life decisions and are better able to apply complex information to concepts already in our mind as our brain weeds out those problematic synapses that get in the way of efficient metacognitive processing. I argue that meditation not only speeds this process up by weeding, but also reopens the door to some of the plasticity seen in childhood, though in a more abstract manner. In the weeding process in meditation, structural changes are made to make the mind better suited for memory, learning, attention, and decision making. In childhood, our brains slowly rewire themselves to be able to better process what is around them in the everyday environment, from how one should talk to adults versus those in similar age groups, to the kinds of things one should and shouldn't eat. Meditation, on the other hand, rewires our brains to be able to better handle new situations the moment they're thrown at us.
So, meditating a few times week or better, daily, potentially holds the key to being able to better handle the instances of daily life. Larger attention span and learning from all events encountered enable complex metacognitive processing, linking these events to past and potential future events, allowing for a higher probability of making optimal decisions rapidly. Therefore, beginning meditation in youth may allow for you to be just as wise, just as able to see connections and come up with clever solutions, as your somehow-still-walking biology professor.
References
[1] http://healthland.time.com/2012/08/10/can-meditation-make-you-smarter/
[2] Hall, Steven. Wisdom. New York: Random House, 2010. Print.
[3] Luders, Eileen, Christi Clark, et al. "Neuroimage." Neuroimage. 57.4 (2011): n. page. Web. 15 Nov. 2012.
Can't Remember? Eat Some Chocolate
What do cocoa, green tea, blueberries, and red wine have in
common? You’ve probably heard in the past few years that all of these things
contain flavonoids, which are linked to health benefits such as antiviral,
anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant effects. As it turns out, they also may be
related to improvements in cognitive function…at least in rodents, and now
snails.
A recent study conducted at the University of Calgary in
Canada by a team of scientists at the Hotchkiss Brain Institute examined the
effects of Epicatechin (epl)—a type of flavonoid—on long-term memory formation
in the great pond snail. Since a snail’s experience can be easily manipulated,
the effects of the epl to be isolated without having to take many other
external factors into account. Furthermore, snail neurons are fairly large, so
single unit recording can be used to pinpoint exactly where in the brain the
memory is formed while the animal is still alive.
To actually conduct the study, the researchers were able to
train these snails to memorize a behavior related to breathing. First, here's some useful information about snails. Great pond
snails are bimodal breathers, meaning that they can breathe by absorbing oxygen
in the water directly through their skin. However, if the oxygen level is
lowered, the snails open their pneumostome—a respiratory orifice—above the
surface of the water and take in oxygen through the air.
During the study, the researchers reduced the oxygen in the water, which
prompted the snail to open their pneumostome to breathe. Each time they did
this, the researchers gave them a gentle poke with a wooden stick, causing the
snail to close the pneumostome. After a 30 minute training period, the snail’s
memory only lasted up to 3 hours; they called this “intermediate memory.”
However, after the snails received a dose of epl, the researchers found that
after that same 30 minute training period, snails remembered to keep their
pneumostomes closed up to 3 days
later! This shows a significant improvement in memory. The researchers also wanted to see
how long the long-term memories lasted, and did so by not poking the snails
when they came up to breathe. Because the snails kept their pneumostomes shut
even in the absence of pokes, the researchers concluded that the memory was
persistent and not easily forgotten (as one might expect in extinction after classical
conditioning).
Though the researchers are not sure how exactly epl enhances
memory, they theorize it could be that the antioxidant properties protects
neurons from injury caused by oxidative stress. Alternatively, increased blood
flow to the central nervous system is an effect of flavonoids, and this effect has also
been linked to neurogenesis and memory enhancement.
If I had to guess, looking at the Atkinson and Shiffrin
model of memory, epl’s effect occurs at the process of encoding from short term
memory to long term memory. The training period acts as maintenance and
rehearsal: with the epl, 30 minutes was sufficient to encode the
memory; without epl, however, the training period was not enough, and thus the
memory did not last as long since it was not fully encoded. Clearly, more research regarding this topic has yet to be conducted.
To make this long
story shorter, next time you want to remember something for a longer period of
time, grab a piece of chocolate and a glass of red wine!
To read the whole article, go to http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/running-ponies/2012/09/30/how-to-improve-snail-memories-with-chocolate/
Lucid dream and consciousness
Despite the advanced neurological imaging technology, clear
and full visualization of what goes on in the brain when our mind makes a
transition from unconsciousness to consciousness is difficult to create. Luckily,
scientists from the Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry in Munich, from the
Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, and from Berlin figured out the
way to locate the seat of meta- consciousness in the brain by using fMRI and
EEG recordings during the sleep, and by taking advantage of the abilities of
lucid dreamers. Lucid dreamers are individuals who are aware of the fact that
they are dreaming and they might be able to control their dreams, depending on
the degree of consciousness. These people know that they are dreaming, thus
they have access to memories; they can even do what they were asked to do, remaining in
the dream state. In this particular experiment, four subjects were told to move their fingers and eyes as a indicator that they enter into lucid dreaming phase. The goal of the experiment was to compare brain activities during normal dream
and lucid periods. It was observed that neural basis during normal and lucid
dream are similar. Although, the brain activity during lucid dream increases
rapidly, and it is significantly stronger in the areas of the cerebral cortex
(right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, frontopolar regions, and precuneus). We know the function of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; it plays an important role in consciousness, decision making, working memory. The frontopolar regions are relevant in evaluation of our thoughts and feelings, and precuneus is also associated with self-consciousness.
All these brain areas are components of networks that are
responsible for integration of sensory inputs to make higher levels of
consciousness possible.
This study not only confirmed what has been believed to be the neural basis of consciousness but also for the first time, this research made possible to visualize the neural basis of consciousness. This is exciting news for scientists interested in studying treatments for people with dream disorders (recurrent nightmares, hypnagogic hallucinations, etc.).
This study not only confirmed what has been believed to be the neural basis of consciousness but also for the first time, this research made possible to visualize the neural basis of consciousness. This is exciting news for scientists interested in studying treatments for people with dream disorders (recurrent nightmares, hypnagogic hallucinations, etc.).
I have found this article interesting because I am myself a lucid dreamer sometimes, and I know how aggravating it is to know while dreaming that dream is just a dream, even though you wish it was not. This happened to me many times when I dreamed about someone being alive and I normally interacted with that person in a dream. The reality was different, the person passed away long time ago. In my dream I knew it; I was literally telling myself not to get happy because it is just a dream. Anyways, when I woke up, that dream made me feel wonderful for the rest of the day.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120727095555.htm
Wired to Read
Throughout grade school there was nothing I disliked more than reading. It didn’t matter whether I was reading a novel, textbook, or magazine...I hated it. So naturally, I felt that movies and TV shows felt more relevant to my life because they were easier to visualize. In second grade I remember being put in the remedial reading course because I bombed the reading placement test I was given when I went to a new school. Reading just wasn’t for me.
In the article Brain Activity Predicts Reading Skills: Children could benefit from personalized lessons based on brain scans Mo Costandi argues that reading ability in children correlates to development of the arcuate and inferior longitudinal fasciculi. The researchers, Jason Yeatman and his colleagues at Stanford University, did a longitudinal DTI study with 55 participants from 7 to 15 years of age to see how the development of the arcuate and inferior longitudinal fasciculi developed over three years. They found that the development of the arcuate and inferior longitudinal fasciculi differed in stronger and weaker readers. These results suggest that it might be possible to anticipate if a child will find learning to read to be especially difficult, and in turn help make specific reading lessons for individual children.Looking back, I would have loved to have specially tailored reading lessons that aided in my learning to read, but like most kids, I would have declined the magnetic resonance scan. But this just doesn’t seem like a practical way to help children learn to read. Given that a diffusion tensor image is obtained with a magnetic resonance machine it is most likely hard to get children to go into the machine. Running a magnetic resonance scanner is not cheap and probably not worth the cost to diagnose a child as a potentially weak reader. Maybe in the near future we will be able to use cheaper and less claustrophobic neuroimaging techniques to anticipate children’s reading ability.
News Article:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=brain-connectivity-predicts-reading-skills
Study:
http://intl.pnas.org/content/early/2012/10/04/1206792109.abstract
Can Freestyling Increase Brain Activity?
Have you ever wondered if rapping
could improve brain function? Well now the answer is here. Researchers in the voice, speech, and
language branch of the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication
Disorders (NIDCD) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have used
functional magnetic resonance imaging to study the brain activity of rappers
when they are "freestyling" -- spontaneously improvising lyrics in
real time. The findings, published in the Nov. 15 issue of the journal Scientific Reports, shows
that freestyling, a form of vocal improvisation, is related to unique brain
activity in the prefrontal cortex. It
also and suggests that there is a neural network that appears to be directly
related to improvisatory and creative endeavors.
The
researchers, led by Siyuan Liu, Ph.D., using funtional magnetic resonance, scanned
the brains of 12 freestyle rap artists (who had at least 5 years of rapping
experience) imaging while they performed two tasks using an identical 8-bar
musical track. For the first task, they improvised rhyming lyrics and rhythmic
patterns guided only by the beat. In the second task, they performed a
well-rehearsed set of lyrics. During freestyle rapping, the researchers
observed increases in brain activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, a brain
region responsible for motivation of thought and action, but decreased activity
in dorsolateral prefrontal regions that normally play a supervisory or
monitoring role. This means that the shift in brain function allows for freedom
of expression without the neural constraints that usually exist. The study also
showed that freestyling also increased brain activity in the perisylvian system
(which is involved in language production), the amygdala (an area of the brain
linked to emotion), and cingulate motor areas, suggesting that improvisation
engages a brain network that links motivation, language, mood, and action.
Further studies of this network in other art forms that involve the innovative
use of language, such as poetry and storytelling, could offer more insights
into the initial, improvisatory phase of the creative process. This could mean
that freestyling can be helpful in language production.
"This Is Your Brain On Freestyle Rap: Study Reveals Characteristic Brain Patterns of Lyrical Improvisation." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 15 Nov. 2012. Web <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121115133154.htm>.
"This Is Your Brain On Freestyle Rap: Study Reveals Characteristic Brain Patterns of Lyrical Improvisation." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 15 Nov. 2012. Web <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121115133154.htm>.
Language Development affected by Mother's Depression
As we have been learning in class, there is a critical period for language development in babies. In Elizabeth Landau's CNN Article, "Does mom's depression affect baby's language?", she states that babies are born with "linguistic super-powers". Janet Werker, from University of British Columbia in Vancouver, conducted a study to investigate what may influence when babies are no longer sensitive to non-native languages. We already know that babies are sensitive to different phonemes used in different languages., but this study was designed to "explore language development milestones".
The study contained three groups of babies, one whose mothers "took antidepressants during pregnancy", another group whose mothers were depressed but did not take any medication, and a group whose mothers did not suffer from depression. The babies then completed tasks where they had to discriminate between auditory sounds from two languages and the visual speech without the auditory component.
Werker's findings supported the fact that babies were able to discriminated between the languages at 6 months but were unable to do so at 10 months. Interestingly, the experimental groups showed deviation from this norm. Babies whose mothers did not take medication for their depression seemed to exhibit a delay in their critical period, as they were unable to discriminate between the languages at 6 months but were successful at 10 months. Furthermore, those whose mothers took antidepressants during the pregnancy showed the opposite effect in that they were not successful in the discrimination tasks at 6 months or 10 months of age, possibly because their critical period had passed prematurely.
While researchers are not sure as to the reasons for such variability, one hypothesis is that the chemicals from the mother's depression or the antidepressants themselves could have effected the baby's brain development. Another possibility is that babies with depressed mothers were not exposed to the same levels of "motherese".
While I did find the sample size to be a little small, and am not sure how representative the data actually is, I am curious as to whether other stresses during pregnancy or even how other medications may affect babies' critical period. It would also be interesting to see if this disparity is seen across cultures, or whether cultural remedies or attitudes to depression may also play a role in the critical period. Perhaps brain development in Wernicke's area, which is involved in the comprehension of language, or even Broca's area, which is involved in the production of language, is affected by the presence of antidepressents or lack of interaction with the mother. It could also be possible that varied level of vascularization could contribute to such effects.
Source: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/08/does-moms-depression-affect-babys-language/
Reliving Experiences Through Memories
We have all heard it before, "I remember that day like it was yesterday." Someone is explaining an important past experience, and he/she claims that every time they think about that time it is like they are reliving it. However, is that actually possible? Can your memories be so vivid that it is as if you are are experiencing it all over again? As it turns out, your brain may have a similar activation as you replay the memory to its original activation during the experience. Dr. Brad Buchsbaum and colleagues conducted a study at Baycrest Rotman's Research Institute which tests whether the brain activates similar areas when bringing up a memory as when the brain perceives the original experience. The study consisted of 20 adult participants who had to watch 12 videos that were 9 seconds long. Each video had a variety of different animals, scenery, and sounds, and each video was paired with a stimuli. The participants were told that they would be tested on the videos. While the participants were viewing the videos, and fMRI was taken so that the activation of their brain can be seen.
After the initial viewing, 9 of those participants were trained in remembering the 12 videos. During the training, the participants were taught to associate the stimuli with its respected video. The stimuli would cue the the participant to mentally replay a video. The memory training took several weeks, but once it was over the participants partook in another fMRI scan. This time they would mentally replay each one of the video and watch the real videos afterwards. Buchsbaum found that the perception areas of the brain activated during the original video viewing are correlated with the areas activated for mentally replaying them. There is an even stronger correlation vice versa which means that if an area is activated in the retrieval of the memory then it is very likely that it was also activated in the perception.
If areas that were used during the perception of an experience are being reactivated in the retrieval of the memory of that experience, then the claim that you remember something so vividly that it is like you are reliving it is not very far off base. However, the participants were trained to replay the videos for several weeks. This brings to question how much activation in perception areas is present when replaying a memory that you only experienced one time. Is it possible to still have a similar re-activation or is it greatly diminished because you were not exposed to the stimuli over and over again? Perhaps this finding is more applicable to traumatic and/or extremely joyous memories since you are more likely to replay those memories various times.
None the less this study may bring new meaning to testing the accuracy of memory. Since perception areas are reactivated during retrieval, an fMRI can be taken when a person who is "remembering" to see how much activation is taking place. If there is high activation in the perception areas then it is more likely that the person is accurately remembering the event. Perhaps in the future a techniques such as that can be implemented for criminal identification and court testimonies. It would be a lie detector in the sense that if the person is not telling the truth their would not be a lot of perception activation. Although it would not be practical to give a testimony while in an fMRI machine, this study could open the door for finding better techniques to implement a similar way to detect lies. At least for now when you hear people's vivid memories, you know that their brain is partially reliving that experience.
News Article
Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care (2012, July 23). Why does a vivid memory 'feel so real?'. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 15, 2012,
Study
Bradley R. Buchsbaum, Sabrina Lemire-Rodger, Candice Fang, Hervé Abdi. The Neural Basis of Vivid Memory Is Patterned on Perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2012; : 1 DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00253
After the initial viewing, 9 of those participants were trained in remembering the 12 videos. During the training, the participants were taught to associate the stimuli with its respected video. The stimuli would cue the the participant to mentally replay a video. The memory training took several weeks, but once it was over the participants partook in another fMRI scan. This time they would mentally replay each one of the video and watch the real videos afterwards. Buchsbaum found that the perception areas of the brain activated during the original video viewing are correlated with the areas activated for mentally replaying them. There is an even stronger correlation vice versa which means that if an area is activated in the retrieval of the memory then it is very likely that it was also activated in the perception.
If areas that were used during the perception of an experience are being reactivated in the retrieval of the memory of that experience, then the claim that you remember something so vividly that it is like you are reliving it is not very far off base. However, the participants were trained to replay the videos for several weeks. This brings to question how much activation in perception areas is present when replaying a memory that you only experienced one time. Is it possible to still have a similar re-activation or is it greatly diminished because you were not exposed to the stimuli over and over again? Perhaps this finding is more applicable to traumatic and/or extremely joyous memories since you are more likely to replay those memories various times.
None the less this study may bring new meaning to testing the accuracy of memory. Since perception areas are reactivated during retrieval, an fMRI can be taken when a person who is "remembering" to see how much activation is taking place. If there is high activation in the perception areas then it is more likely that the person is accurately remembering the event. Perhaps in the future a techniques such as that can be implemented for criminal identification and court testimonies. It would be a lie detector in the sense that if the person is not telling the truth their would not be a lot of perception activation. Although it would not be practical to give a testimony while in an fMRI machine, this study could open the door for finding better techniques to implement a similar way to detect lies. At least for now when you hear people's vivid memories, you know that their brain is partially reliving that experience.
News Article
Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care (2012, July 23). Why does a vivid memory 'feel so real?'. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 15, 2012,
Study
Bradley R. Buchsbaum, Sabrina Lemire-Rodger, Candice Fang, Hervé Abdi. The Neural Basis of Vivid Memory Is Patterned on Perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2012; : 1 DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00253
Dr. Hurley's Presentation: Primary Progressive Aphasia
I
am glad that I was able to attend Dr. Robert Hurley’s presentation on
primary progressive aphasia (PPA). This presentation was the first time I
had heard of this syndrome and I was excited to learn about it. Now
that we have discussed PPA in class, I have a more in depth
understanding because of this presentation, as Dr. Hurley presented us
with examples, the different types of PPA, as well as where as the
research is headed on this syndrome.
Dr. Hurley mentioned several things in his presentation that I found particularly interesting. First, the example of a PPA patient who had a unimodal deficit. This patient was shown a picture of a celebrity. She recognized the celebrity but could not name it verbally. However, she was able to write down the name of the celebrity, and she was correct in the identification of the celebrity. It is rare that one sees a deficit this specific. Usually PPA affects many aspects of language, such as comprehension. Most deficits are multimodal.
Second, I found the findings of the word identification task to be particularly interesting. A PPA patient was shown a picture of a belt. They were then shown the words: belt, hat, pair and broom. Although the participants affected by PPA did not correctly choose “belt,” they did select a word from the same semantic category, which in this example was “hat.” I found it interesting that these patients displayed some level of comprehension of meaning, even though they were not able to correctly identify the correct word.
This presentation also taught me many new things that are not always specific to PPA. For example, I learned more about functional neuroimaging. When speaking about research on the temporal pole, Dr.Hurley mentioned that this region is “fMRI shy” because it is difficult to get a clear image of the temporal pole using fMRI. The temporal pole is near sinuses which contain air. This air blurs the fMRI image. Because this area cannot be clearly captured by an fMRI, it is called an “artifact” and additional measures must be taken to obtain data and images from this region.
Also not specific to PPA, Dr. Hurley's presentation reminded me of a valuable lesson: to challenge what is believed, whether it is believed by me or it is believed by others. A theory is a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles ofexplanation and prediction for a class of phenomena (dictionary.com). Dr. Hurley talked about the Semantic Hub Theory, which theorizes that the temporal pole is a task dependent representation. Although this theory is believed by many, Dr. Hurley and his colleagues challenged it. They do not accept the findings of the Semantic Hub Theory simply because others believe in them. Instead, Dr. Hurley and his colleagues challenged it by developing and testing a theory of their own: the Calls Theory. Not only have they challenged the Semantic Hub Theory, they continue to challenge there own theory and findings. I, personally, am too quick to believe what I hear when it comes to research findings. I'll think, "oh that makes sense" and just stop there. This is human nature for many people as well, as discussed by Gary Marcus in "Kluge." In "Kluge," Marcus suggested ways to train our thinking so that we are less likely to fall victim to our kluge of a mind. These suggestions can be applied to my tendency to believe in research findings without considering alternatives. Dr. Hurley reminded me of the importance of Gary Marcus's suggestions: to ask further questions, challenge the results, and to think in non-conventional ways.
I am glad that I was able to hear Dr. Hurley speak. I am thankful for the new information about primary progressive aphasia, neuroimaging, and am especially grateful for the reminder to challenge research findings, no matter how much sense they may make, and to challenge the way I have evolved to think.
Dr. Hurley mentioned several things in his presentation that I found particularly interesting. First, the example of a PPA patient who had a unimodal deficit. This patient was shown a picture of a celebrity. She recognized the celebrity but could not name it verbally. However, she was able to write down the name of the celebrity, and she was correct in the identification of the celebrity. It is rare that one sees a deficit this specific. Usually PPA affects many aspects of language, such as comprehension. Most deficits are multimodal.
Second, I found the findings of the word identification task to be particularly interesting. A PPA patient was shown a picture of a belt. They were then shown the words: belt, hat, pair and broom. Although the participants affected by PPA did not correctly choose “belt,” they did select a word from the same semantic category, which in this example was “hat.” I found it interesting that these patients displayed some level of comprehension of meaning, even though they were not able to correctly identify the correct word.
This presentation also taught me many new things that are not always specific to PPA. For example, I learned more about functional neuroimaging. When speaking about research on the temporal pole, Dr.Hurley mentioned that this region is “fMRI shy” because it is difficult to get a clear image of the temporal pole using fMRI. The temporal pole is near sinuses which contain air. This air blurs the fMRI image. Because this area cannot be clearly captured by an fMRI, it is called an “artifact” and additional measures must be taken to obtain data and images from this region.
Also not specific to PPA, Dr. Hurley's presentation reminded me of a valuable lesson: to challenge what is believed, whether it is believed by me or it is believed by others. A theory is a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles ofexplanation and prediction for a class of phenomena (dictionary.com). Dr. Hurley talked about the Semantic Hub Theory, which theorizes that the temporal pole is a task dependent representation. Although this theory is believed by many, Dr. Hurley and his colleagues challenged it. They do not accept the findings of the Semantic Hub Theory simply because others believe in them. Instead, Dr. Hurley and his colleagues challenged it by developing and testing a theory of their own: the Calls Theory. Not only have they challenged the Semantic Hub Theory, they continue to challenge there own theory and findings. I, personally, am too quick to believe what I hear when it comes to research findings. I'll think, "oh that makes sense" and just stop there. This is human nature for many people as well, as discussed by Gary Marcus in "Kluge." In "Kluge," Marcus suggested ways to train our thinking so that we are less likely to fall victim to our kluge of a mind. These suggestions can be applied to my tendency to believe in research findings without considering alternatives. Dr. Hurley reminded me of the importance of Gary Marcus's suggestions: to ask further questions, challenge the results, and to think in non-conventional ways.
I am glad that I was able to hear Dr. Hurley speak. I am thankful for the new information about primary progressive aphasia, neuroimaging, and am especially grateful for the reminder to challenge research findings, no matter how much sense they may make, and to challenge the way I have evolved to think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)