The Journal of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience is here and it’s open access. This Wikipedia article gives a good overview of this developing field. And here‘s a Psychology Today article applying it to healthy adult development. From the latter:
“The first guiding principle is that it is necessary to ‘quiet the limbic system’ (van der Kolk et al., 2005) to help emerging adults achieve a greater sense of safety. Quieting techniques facilitate attachments by promoting self-soothing and regulation. This is especially relevant when challenges are associated with trauma, anxiety disorders, and emotional/self-inhibition. Emotional and cognitive learning cannot take place in a state of fear. This also includes protecting the brain from the neurotoxic effects of excess alcohol and substances, lack of sleep or nutrition, and the distorting effects of untreated psychiatric symptoms such as depression, anxiety, or psychosis.
“The second guiding principle is the belief that it is essential to support the psycho-neurobiological development of a coherent self, an organized self, and a self-regulated self (Schore, 2008; Siegel, 1999; Gedo & Goldberg, 1973). This principle puts an emphasis on the processes of self-informed agency, self-directed empowerment, and an adaptive balance of vulnerability, collaboration, and boundaries for self-protection. This second pillar emphasizes the self-actualizing and motivational patterns of the developing individual.
“The third and last precept is drawn from neurocognitive modes of decision-making (Noel et al., 2006); therapeutic experiences of processing and problem-solving through emotional states of activation that occur in real-time within meaningful relationships are essential for achieving growth and change. Such experiences exercise and grow the networking between the limbic system and pre-frontal cortex which are naturally primed to sprout through emerging adulthood. Using mindfulness techniques such as “Reaction & Reflection,” while in relation, promote neurocognitive growth and, in turn, facilitate the further development of mindfulness, cognitive and executive functions, and competent self-governance.”
The paper can be found here. The abstract follows:
Enlightenment has had broadly different definitions is the East and West. In the East it is seen as an individual accessing meditative states that transcend the world of form in a metaphysical reality. In the West it is more about individual development to abstract reasoning, which can accurately represent empirical reality but is itself an a priori, metaphysical capacity. Enlightenment in either case is based on metaphysical individual achievements. However the postmetaphysical turn has questioned such premises, instead contextualizing both meditative states and abstract reasoning within broader socio-cultural contexts. Enlightenment itself has thereby been redefined within this orientation and is seen more as a collective endeavor that is collaboratively enacted.
Another study adds weight to findings that mental health declines as Facebook usage increases. The effect is thought mainly to result from involuntary judgments we make about ourselves in comparison with others whose social media presence is carefully curated and filtered to paint unrealistically positive pictures of their lives. Another possible contributing factor is that online usage (averages over one hour per day for Facebook users) detracts from time available for in-person socializing, which is known to contribute mental health.
There will be no meeting in December, due to low availability of members.
The next meeting will be on Tuesday, 17 January 2017. Three spots are left. You can sign up (RSVP “Yes”) at the following page:
A NY Times article reports on research conducted by Keith Stanovich and others that (a) finds intelligence and rationality are different qualities, (b) they are only weakly positively correlated, and (c) one’s rationality can be improved through targeted training but not one’s intelligence. Moreover, Stanovich proposed a rationality quotient (RQ) and that standardized tests be devised to assess one’s RQ.
Read more: Clever Fools: Why a High IQ Doesn’t Mean You’re Smart
Ten energetic folks met last night at Albuquerque’s North Domingo Baca Multigenerational Center to discuss the malleability of memory and its implications. Research findings increasingly indicate that our memories are not explicit copies of the events they represent.
Research increasingly indicates that our memories are not explicit, unchanging recordings. Sensory-perceptual processes filter what is initially stored. Each time you recall a memory, it is modified. Counterintuitively, frequently recalled memories—especially those we compare with others’ tellings and media representations—change over time.
Resources we had reviewed before the discussion included the following:
The following questions guided our discussion:
- Are there memorable events you and others experienced when you were young that the others remember significantly differently than you do? Is your memory more accurate (less biased or altered) than theirs?
- Have you ever encountered evidence that one of your long-held memories was inaccurate? Can you share an example?
- What, if any, evolutionary value might there be to having a highly malleable memory?
- If illusory memories are so common, what implications might there be for
– criminal justice, eye-witness testimonies, etc.?
– personal relationships?
– self-perception (of current vs remembered selves, for example)
Welcome to the community site of the Albuquerque Brain, Mind, Consciousness and Artificial Intelligence (BMCAI) discussion group!