Age-at-death forecasting – A new test predicts when a person will die. It’s currently accurate within a few years and is getting more accurate. What psychological impacts might knowing your approximate (± 6 months) death time mean for otherwise healthy people? Does existing research with terminally ill or very old persons shed light on this? What would the social and political implications be? What if a ‘death-clock’ reading became required for certain jobs (elected positions, astronauts, roles requiring expensive training and education, etc.) or decisions (whom to marry or parent children with, whether to adopt, whether to relocate, how to invest and manage one’s finances, etc.)?
Check the details on our Monday, Feb 5, 2018 discussion meeting: https://www.meetup.com/abq_brain_mind_consciousness_AI/events/248166633/
A Guardian article last October brings the darker aspects of the attention economy, particularly the techniques and tools of neural hijacking, into sharp focus. The piece summarizes some interaction design principles and trends that signal a fundamental shift in means, deployment, and startling effectiveness of mass persuasion. The mechanisms reliably and efficiently leverage neural reward (dopamine) circuits to seize, hold, and direct attention toward whatever end the designer and content providers choose.
The organizer of a $1,700 per person event convened to show marketers and technicians “how to manipulate people into habitual use of their products,” put it baldly.
subtle psychological tricks … can be used to make people develop habits, such as varying the rewards people receive to create “a craving”, or exploiting negative emotions that can act as “triggers”. “Feelings of boredom, loneliness, frustration, confusion and indecisiveness often instigate a slight pain or irritation and prompt an almost instantaneous and often mindless action to quell the negative sensation”
Particularly telling of the growing ethical worry are the defections from social media among Silicon Valley insiders.
Pearlman, then a product manager at Facebook and on the team that created the Facebook “like”, … confirmed via email that she, too, has grown disaffected with Facebook “likes” and other addictive feedback loops. She has installed a web browser plug-in to eradicate her Facebook news feed, and hired a social media manager to monitor her Facebook page so that she doesn’t have to.…It is revealing that many of these younger technologists are weaning themselves off their own products, sending their children to elite Silicon Valley schools where iPhones, iPads and even laptops are banned. They appear to be abiding by a Biggie Smalls lyric from their own youth about the perils of dealing crack cocaine: never get high on your own supply.
If you read the article, please comment on any future meeting topics you detect. I find it a vibrant collection of concepts for further exploration.
We’ve come to appreciate Ed Berge’s thoughtful posts on consciousness, metaphorical thinking, etc. Check out his fun, informative blog, Proactive Progressive Propagation. (Where I work, that would definitely become ‘P3.’)
(This is copied from the Meetup site. Thanks again to Brent for hosting.)
Empathy is the ability to put yourself in another person’s shoes and understand how they feel- to be them, even for a second. It’s the link between self and others: how we connect, heal, and relate. Considering its importance in every aspect of our lives, we are taking a deeper look at the neuroscience behind empathy.
Recommended Preparation Info.
The Neuroscience of Empathy | Article | 5 minutes (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201310/the-neuroscience-empathy)
The Neuroscience of Compassion | Video | 20 min (https://youtu.be/n-hKS4rucTY)
Jeremy Rifkin: The empathic civilization | Video | 10 min (https://www.ted.com/talks/jeremy_rifkin_on_the_empathic_civilization)
A CALM LOOK AT THE MOST HYPED CONCEPT IN NEUROSCIENCE – MIRROR NEURONS | Article | 5 min (https://www.wired.com/2013/12/a-calm-look-at-the-most-hyped-concept-in-neuroscience-mirror-neurons/)
Empathy for others’ pain rooted in cognition rather than sensation | Article | 5 min (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160614100237.htm)
Thomas Lewis: “The Neuroscience of Empathy” | Video | 60 min (https://youtu.be/1-T2GsG0l1E)
Suggested Additional Info.
Feeling Others’ Pain: Transforming Empathy into Compassion | Article | 5 min (https://www.cogneurosociety.org/empathy_pain/)
Structural basis of empathy and the domain general region in the anterior insular cortex | Study | 20 min (http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00177/full)
Neurobiology of Empathy and Callousness: Implications for the Development of Antisocial Behavior | Study | 20 min (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2729461/)
The Science Behind Empathy and Empaths | Article | 5 min (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-empaths-survival-guide/201703/the-science-behind-empathy-and-empaths)
Study challenges perception that empathy erodes during medical school | Article | 5 min (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170909194039.htm)
Here is a link to an excellent article arguing against a myopic focus on empathy.
Here is a link to a free ebook that is entitled Compassion: Bridging Science and Practice. The book is the culmination of research findings in social neuroscience studies conducted by Tania Singer and others. There are multiple formats for download.
Here is a link to an article about Tania Singer’s research in Science Magazine.
From the link: “Patterns associated with empathic care, for instance, overlapped with systems in the brain associated with value and reward, such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and the medial orbitofrontal cortex. In contrast, patterns of empathic distress overlapped with systems in the brain known for mirroring, such as the premotor cortex and the primary and secondary somatosensory cortices, which help an individual simulate or imagine what another person is feeling or thinking.”
Here’s another one I just read: “Brain imaging reveals neural roots of caring. http://neurosciencenews.com/caring-neural-roots-6870/
From the conclusion: “Shared representations of affective states are activated from the top down in more cognitive forms of empathy, which recruit additional executive and visuospatial processes. However, the literature overestimates distinctions between emotional and cognitive empathy, following traditional practices to dichotomize in science and philosophy. Despite each
having unique features, affective and cognitive empathy both require access to the shared representations of emotion that provide simulations with content and an
And this article. Abstract: “Recent research on empathy in humans and other mammals seeks to dissociate emotional and cognitive empathy. These forms, however, remain interconnected in evolution, across species and at the level of neural mechanisms. New data have facilitated the development of empathy models such as the perception–action model (PAM) and mirror-neuron theories. According to the PAM, the emotional states of others are understood through personal, embodied representations that allow empathy and accuracy to increase based on the observer’s past experiences. In this Review, we discuss the latest evidence from studies carried out across a wide range of species, including studies on yawn contagion, consolation, aid-giving and contagious physiological affect, and we summarize neuroscientific data on representations related to another’s state.” https://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v18/n8/full/nrn.2017.72.html
Jimmy Kimmel in this video highlights a lot of what we talked about tonight. Yes, we need to feel empathy for those killed an injured in the Las Vegas shooting, but we also need to DO something about it. Meaning gun legislation. He highlights those in Congress who are making it easier instead of harder to obtain the kind of automatic weapons used in this mass murder. The reality is we must make such guns illegal, for it acts on our empathy and morality in a way that protects and serves us. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruYeBXudsds
Several of us met on Labor Day with the goal of identifying topics for at least five future monthly meetings. (Thanks, Dave N, for hosting!) Being the overachievers we are, we pushed beyond the goal. Following are the resulting topics, which will each have its own article on this site where we can begin organizing references for the discussion:
- sex-related influences on emotional memory
- gross and subtle brain differences (e.g., “walls of the third ventricle – sexual nuclei”)
- “Are there gender-based brain differences that influence differences in perceptions and experience?”
- epigenetic factors (may need an overview of epigenetics)
- embodied cognition
- computational grounded cognition (possibly the overview and lead-in topic)
- neuro-reductionist theory vs. enacted theory of mind
- “Could embodied cognition influence brain differences?” (Whoever suggested this, please clarify.)
- brain-gut connection (relates to embodied cognition, but can stand on its own as a topic)
- behavioral priming and subliminal stimuli (effects on later behavior)
- incremental theory – “The Dark Side of Malleability”
- creative flow as a unique cognitive process
- Eastern philosophies and psychology – a psychology of self-cultivation
- neuroscience of empathy – effects on the brain, including on neuroplasticity (discussed October 2017)
- comparative effects of various meditative practices on the brain
- comparative effects of various psychedelics on the brain
- effects of childhood poverty on the brain
- neurocognitive bases of racism
If I missed anything, please edit the list (I used HTML in the ‘Text’ view to get sub-bullets). If you’re worried about the formatting, you can email your edits to email@example.com and Mark will post your changes.
Studies find that people with higher numeracy and understanding of the scientific method and its tools are more likely to challenge or twist the results of scientific studies that challenge their ideologies. For example, it’s the more scientifically competent persons on the political right (those who are most identified with a free-market ideology) who mount the most vehement assaults against claims of human contributions to global warming.
This article delves into the extent of cognitive biases against facts (rigorously validated knowledge claims) and the apparent variables affecting when those biases are triggered. It also raises possible ways to mitigate biases.
Here’s an interesting interview with an author whose book explains his concept of neurocapitalism, or cognitive capitalism, which is the result of the ongoing feedback between us and the increasingly penetrating technologies we adopt.