State of Mind

The Power of Social Connection

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:58:00 +0000

In 2004, when researchers asked "How many confidants do you have?"

The most common response—made by twenty-five percent of the respondents—was none. One-quarter of these twenty-first-century Americans said they had no one at all with whom to talk openly and intimately.¹

con·fi·dant = a person with whom one shares a secret or private matter, trusting them not to repeat it to others

Also published in 2004, a joint study by the World Health Organization and researchers from

Harvard University found that almost ten percent of Americans suffer from depression or bipolar

disorder. They also found that binge eating and drinking are up, and that our children are medicated for depression and attention deficit disorder to an alarming degree.²

When UNICEF surveyed twenty-one wealthy nations, the United States came in second to last in

terms of the welfare of its children, with only the United Kingdom faring worse. The United States had the very worst record in terms of infant mortality rates, and second to worst in terms of exposure to violence and bullying, chaotic family structure, and troubled relationships with family and friends. Respondents to the survey from across the United States say that their families no longer have meals together. Children say that they don’t spend time talking to their parents, and that they generally don’t find their peers kind and helpful.³

For citizens of the twenty-first century, “the way things used to be”—being bound to your village,

marrying someone chosen by your family, and otherwise doing whatever your priest or your parents or your tribal elders tell you to—is not a life plan with much appeal. However, the dismal statistics above suggest that our society may have gone overboard in its emphasis on standing alone. We pay the price, not just in terms of our mental and physical health, but in terms of the strain on social cohesion and sustainable economic progress. The corollary to being “obligatorily gregarious” is being interdependent.

“Independence,” the biologist Lynn Margulis reminds us, “is a political, not a scientific term.”⁴

And yet independence is the rallying point for our culture. We have always prized vertical mobility

and accepted “horizontal mobility” as the cost of doing business—you go where the opportunities are. By the middle of the twentieth century, however, that swashbuckling independence could be better described as rootless-ness. Executive transfers had become a staple of even the most routine and regimented corporate lives, turning managers into a new species of migrant worker. The triumph of the interstate highway system, tract housing, strip development, and the automobile encouraged the creation of interchangeable landscapes, with entire “communities” mass-produced as marketable commodities. Sales people, consultants, and even academics like me became road warriors, racking up the frequent-flyer miles.

Reference:

M. McPherson, L. Smith-Lovin, and M. T. Brashears, "Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades," American Sociological Review 71 (2006): 353–375.
WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium, "Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment ofmental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys," Journal of the American Medical Association 291 (2004): 2581–90.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence, An overview of child well being in rich countries, United Nations Children’s Fund, February 13, 2007.
L. Margulis and D. Sagan, What is life? (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995).

Another Depression Post

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:20:00 +0000

Yep... this is another depression post... This is what i got after i read Atlas of Depression.

In our daily life (hail commoners..!), medication care for depression is often not optimal. This is because the symptoms of depression itself is not easily recognized especially when the patient himself suffer for another physical illness. At least, that what the research said^[1] . For example: if i suffer for stage 3 lung cancer, i'll be depressed as hell.. But my depression is covered by my lung cancer..

Source: Dagelan.co

Another reason that contributes to the difficulties in finding depression symptoms also cause by the behavior of the patient himself. Many people ignore depression symptoms as it's often viewed negatively as mental illness. Some people reluctant to admit it because of they're afraid of the possible side effect from medications, while other just trying make justification that they're on an normal condition (i.e: "Just another mental stress.. Overall, I'm okay..!)

The impact of such actions leads to mood disorder symptoms, despite some of the latest research state that there's no clear correlation

Is Depression More Common Today?

The well known Lundby Study^[2]suggest an increase of depression occurrence (up to 1000% increase) for men with the aged of 20-39 years in during 1957–1972 compared to 1947–1957. Some of recent research also suggest the same phenomenon as what Lundby suggest despite the controversies regarding the limited data and methodology.

The Verdict? You don't need all of those research... Get less stress, get less depressed be more happy... There suppose no research/scientific controversies for that statement, i suppose..

And lastly, if you're curious with the references, here they are:

Mood Disorders - Classification & Treatment (DSM-IV)

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 20:17:00 +0000

Mood disorders are characterized mainly by noticeable changes in mood that interfere with the individual’s capability to work. In genreal, mood disorders can be categorized into two groups:

Unipolar (also called depressive), which entails depression just. Unipolar is pretty common, affecting 10% of males and about 20% of females.
Bipolar disorder was formerly understood and is frequently popularly known as manic depression. When compared with unipolar disorder, bipolar happens much less often, affecting only 1% - 2% of the people and afflicting both sexes equally.

Source: http://diabeteshypertension.com

The gender disparity in depression may be an illusion, however, revealing gender differences in readiness to seek help, as opposed to a real gender difference in the prevalence of depression. The difference also reveals the existence of specific types of atypical depression that guys, including postpartum depression change.

Most patients experience multiple episodes, and mood disorders in many cases are long-term. Minimal symptoms are related to increased danger of serious impairment and subsequent episodes. Suicide tendency is also a major problem for individuals with depression, where 15% of them will commit suicide.

Generally speaking, depression symptoms is shown by a reduction of productivity and energy, social withdrawal, pessimism, negative feelings about the self, as well as suicidal thinking. Disruptions in eating habits, which might entail either loss of appetite or excessive eating, together with decline of interest in sex may are also a regular symptoms of depression.

On the other hand, contrary symptoms such as euphoric or elevated mood happened on mania, where despair is replaced by happiness, impulsiveness, self esteem is inflated to almost delusional proportions, needs for sleep is reduced,and sexual indiscretions are also common.

Types of Depressive and Bipolar Disorder

The DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) currently recognizes the following types of depressive and bipolar disorders:

	Type of Disorder	Description
Depressive Disorders (Unipolar)	Major depressive disorder,	More severe; recurrent or chronic
	Dysthimic Disorder	Less severe; lasts at least 2 years
	Depressive Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (NOS)
Bipolar Disorders (one or more manic episode)	Bipolar I Disorder	More severe;one or more fully manic episodes
	Bipolar II Disorder	Less severe; One or more hypomanic but no manic episodes
	Cyclothymic Disorder	Less severe, with mood deflections in both directions
	Bipolar Disorder NOS
Mood Disorder Due to General Medical Condition
Substance-Induced Mood Disorder

It's the persistent nature of these episodes that causes treatment to be essential, though mania tends to be short term, depression can be long-term.

Among majority of people who have bipolar disorders (more than 70%), which are generally more serious and thus more likely to be identified by physicians than unipolar depression, almost half don't get proper treatment. Given the impact of mood disorders on the extremely raised risk of suicide, and quality of life when compared with the general population, this is terrible, particularly in light of the access to treatments that are unusually successful.

Treatment

Antidepressant medicines, by way of example, are quite successful oftentimes, and the side effects have been mostly reduced by the newer generation of medicines. The latest antidepressant drugs supply some insights that are clear concerning the factors behind depression.There's a clear pattern of brain chemistry related to depression, while it may not really be the origin of the syndrome in all instances. Variations in the available amount of two neurotransmitters, dopamine and serotonin, are connected with feelings of wellbeing.Extensively used antidepressants for example fluoxetine (sold under the trade name Prozac) function in precisely the same manner. This is the reason the drugs are called Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs).

The exact same chemical processes are also included in the cycling between depression and mania that qualifies the bipolar illnesses. The manic phase is related to raised levels of serotonin and dopamine, but creation of excessive quantities is something the neurons can just do for a small time; the consequent fall in neurotransmitter levels which follows entails a fall to below-normal levels, thereby returning the individual to a blue state.

The changes in neurotransmitter levels related to mania and depression are often brought on by changes in state of mind, yet, which is non-pharmacological treatments can be quite powerful also. Antidepressant drugs are comparatively safe and are quite powerful for many patients, but there isn't any signs that they lower the danger of return after their use is terminated.

Cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) is particularly promising as a treatment for depression, because it appears not only in order to alleviate misery even in serious depression, but in addition, it appears to significantly reduce the threat of the return of symptoms as long as it's continued or preserved. Additionally, it reduces the danger of relapse after treatment is finished. This may be because rather than just treating the symptoms, CBT calls for learning techniques to prevent falling back into a blue state. Just behavioral techniques haven’t been examined as extensively as CBT, but in addition they seem to be fairly successful for reasons that are similar. There continues to be no or little signs of the effectiveness of psychodynamically established treatments.

Bipolar disorder may also be treated effectively with drugs. Along with antidepressants, treatment of bipolar disorder typically contains anticonvulsants or mood stabilizer drugs, mainly lithium compounds, to prevent manic episodes. The utilization of psychotherapy with bipolar disorder has got much less attention from researchers than it's for depression, but what little studies have been done indicates similar guarantee for a drugs and treatment methodology.

Further Reading:
American Psychiatric Association. DSM-IV-TR: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.

Myth & Controversy of Mozart Effect

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:27:00 +0000

Among the most commonly "propagated" trending ideas in the historical events of psychology might be the Mozart effect. It is a term for the improvement in brain growth that allegedly occurs in kids when they're exposed to the music of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart prior to the time of three. This idea has become so broadly accepted that the governors of Tennessee and Georgia have both helped programs to offer a free Mozart CD to every newborn baby in their own respective states.

Given the attendant marketing in which the notion has received, and also the cost associated with these acts of philanthropy, the typical new parent may be forgiven for believing that the Mozart effect is a real deal and a valid scientific fact.

However, the public could be mistaken, as so frequently occurs with widely known emotional some ideas. The source behind the Mozart Effects is based on a study conducted in 1993 by a physicist, Gordon Shaw, and Frances Rauscher, a developmental psychologist. This result was misreported in lots of ways, likely as the claim that Rauscher and Shaw produced a 51 point improvement in SAT scores. However, it need to be realized that the job they used to acquire this kind of result is invloving paper cutting and folding, which definitely not the SAT!

Regardless of their statement that their work was misrepresented, Shaw and Rauscher recognized their work had spawned a market, and have joined the flooding of entrepreneurs trying to propagate the Mozart effect message. Their Music Intelligence Neural Development Institute (M.I.N.D.) sells computer software that claimed to be able to enhance children's spatial temporal reasoning, by way of example. The business enterprises of Rauscher and Shaw are smalltime efforts, however, compared with the job of online entrepreneur Don Campbell. Campbell has actually trademarked the phrase “the Mozart Effect” and operates many business enterprises built around it, including Mozarteffect.com, where concerned parents may purchase a wide range of books and CDs, including many multi-volume series. Instead of limit his market to worried parents with discretionary income, nevertheless, Campbell also promises that "The Mozart Effect shows how music may be used to enhance memory and learning, boost productivity, soothe jangled nerves, fortify endurance, unlock creative impulses, sound away pain, and cure your body from the tons of ailments"

The scientific reliability of Campbell's thoughts may be best evaluated by considering his claim he caused a blood clot in his own brain to 'evaporate' using a treatment consisting of listening to classical musics. Despite the dearth of evidence for the Mozart effect (or any one of the related phenomena that Campbell writes about), thousands of people now consider it to be scientific fact instead of the myth that it is, and Campbell is becoming widely known as an "expert" on the effect, with regular speaking engagements and interview requests within the mainstream media.

Further Reading:
Campbell, R. T. “Mozart Effect.” In The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Hoboken,NJ: Wiley, 2003, pp. 233–235, also see www.skepdic.com; Mozart Effect Resource Center. “Don Campbell’s organization.” www.MozartEffect.com, 2004.

Do You Believe in Astorology?

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:22:00 +0000

Astrology is among the oldest personality description system in the world. The fundamental hypothesis of astrology is pretty simple: it is based on the notion that the positions and mobility of celestial objects, including sun and moon as well as the stars and planets, at the moment of birth wield a unfathomed influence on personality and the course of one’s life. The concept of Astrology can be tracked back to Chaldeans' and Assyrians' society, centuries ago; A time when mankind hardly know the characteristic of celestial object.

That twelve-sign zodiac, commonly known as as sun-sign astrology, continues to be the most common form of traditional western astrology, different from various Asian astrological systems such as the one often seen by Americans on Chinese cafe place mats, that have almost no connection to the western format. A horoscope is basically a map of the heavens over Earth at the time of one’s birth, split into 12 zones, or signs of the zodiac.

The signs of the Zodiac, shown here, are named for
the shapes the ancients perceived in the stars

Horoscope is also a term presented to a projection centered upon that map. Each sign symbolizes the estimated position in the sky (in medieval times) of each zone’s namesake constellation. The paths of the sun, moon, and major planets are then tracked into the zodiac, and their countries at the specific event of childbirth noticed. Astrologers state that, this data pinpoints key factors of a one’s personality and works extremely well to develop projections about that their possible future.

Criticism: Precession of the Equinox

Considering a formal science, criticism to astrology is most likely originated from physics and astronomy As most people know, our cosmos is in a dynamic and functioning in 'forever-moving state'. The resulting changes in bodies’ positions relative to each other are slow and subtle, but they add up over time. One of the evidence is what we recognize as precession of the equinox, where the position of the constellations in sky have changed for about 30 degrees westward in the last 2,000 years. This phenomenon result in an undeniably fact, that the constellations which are used in the zodiac is no longer represent the same map that was designed in the era of ancient Babylonian.

However, this kind critics are often considered as irrelevant, especially when we willing to look deeper about astrology. The terminology used in astrology is ‘sign of the zodiac’, not ‘constellation of the zodiac’. These are two very different things, and that the signs of the zodiac doesn't align with the constellations through which the ecliptic passes.

The signs of the zodiac are simply a method of portraying ecliptic longitude. The first 30 degrees circling westward are labeled Aries 0 – 30. For example, the 12th degree of Gemini would be ecliptic longitude 72 degrees and the 2nd degree of Sagittarius goes along to ecliptic longitude 242 degrees. This approach began since the ancient time and was used in scientific literature in the 19th century.

Empirical Evidence

Yet another objection arises from psychological science: given the up-to-date human personality understanding, astrological proposition that everyone is purely belongs to one of 12 specific types for both personality and course of life just simply sketchy. Based on psychological perspective, the astrology hype is because most people feel that it actually 'works' , which is explained in Forer effect or Barnum effect.

Taken from Wikipedia:

Barnum effect is observation that shows individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people.
This effect can provide a partial explanation for the widespread acceptance of some beliefs and practices, such as astrology, fortune telling, graphology, and some types of personality test.

Such phenomena have been proven plenty of times. One of them is experimental study where a class is informed that a professional astrologer has been drawn up for each single student, and they will get a written personality profiling. After that, all of the student are asked to evaluate the accuracy (on a scale of 1-5) of their zodiac profiling. Most students give 5 scale of their received profile. However, they didn't realize that all of the written personality profile is just generic 'fake' profile.

The other empirical studies involves real astrologers whom asked to match up the horoscope to the appropriate personality profiles. This kind of task should be a 'piece of cake' for professional astrologers like them. However, the reliability shown that they can't consistently pick accurate horoscope reading

Regardless of the reality that there is hardly a trustworthy of scientific evidence in its outcome, astrology remains to stay extremely desirable.

Further Reading:
Carlson, S. “A Double-Blind Test of Astrology.” Nature, 318 (1985):419–425; Clarke, D., and Gabriels, T. “Astrological Signs as Determinants of Extroversion and Emotionality: An Empirical Study.” Journal of Psychology, 130(2) (1996): 131–141.

Scalar Quantities Vs Vector Quantities

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:04:00 +0000

Physics involves measuring and predicting various quantities (or physical values) like force. mass. and velocity.These values can be classified into those having only magnitude and those having both magnitude and direction. A quantity that has magnitude without a direc tion is referred to as a sea/or quantity. Mass is a scalar quantity. Energy and work are also scalar quantities.

On the other hand. force is a value with a direction. You can see that from the fact that the motion of an object changes if you apply force from a different direction.

A quantity that has a direction is called a vector. Velocity and acceleration and momentum are also vector quantities, as they have direction. You may forget the terms scalar and vector, but you should keep in mind that there are two types of values in physics:

Those with just a magnitude
Those with both a magnitude and a direction

Vector: Basics

A vector is represented using an arrow.The length of the arrow represents the magnitude of the vector. and the point represents its orientation. or direction.Two vectors with the same magnitude and direction are equivalent to one another. even if they do not have the same origin.

Also note that the magnitude of a vector (represented by the length of the arrow) can be noted with absolute value symbols, like |a| or simply as a.

The sum of two vectors (a + b) is shown by joining the head of vector a to the tail of vector b. and then extending a line from the tail of a to the head of b, as shown in the figure. As this vector is a diagonal of the parallelogram in the figure, it is obvious that it is also equivalent to b + a. Therefore, we know that the following is true:

Commmunitative Law: a + b = b + a

Negative Vector

Vector -a or a preceded by a minus sign, yields a sum of zero when added to Vector a. In an equation, the relationship looks like this: a + (-a) = 0

In terms of geometry, Vector -a is simply vector of the same magnitude as Vector a, but in the exact opposite direction. The 0 on the right side of this equation represents zero as a vector, referred to as a zero vector. When vectors cancel each other out in this way. an object is said to be in equilibrium.

Difference between Two Vectors

The difference between two vectors (a - b) can be defined as follows:

Commmunitative Law: a - b = a + (-b)

Thus, we can find the result of the equation using the same process for summing vectors:

Multiplying Vectors By Scalars

Doubling vector -a means doubling its magnitude without changing its direction. The result is represented as 2a.

Generally, k multiplied by a (k.a) represents vector with magnitude k times greater than a but in the same direction.

nb: this is a nostalgic note of mine from a book Manga Guide to Physics

It's Your Mood..! Let's See how We Can Manage it

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:54:00 +0000

What you'll receive from life heavily relied on your effort, and your emotional states aka moods. By the time you are in a positive mood, everything just seem perfect - you can be more productive, doing an effective multi-tasking, and any obstacle you face just feels like nothing. But when you are in a bad mood, you tend to perceive much of everything in negative ways - even a barking dog can turns you into a grumpy cat. So, most people will agree if I say that mood gives a significant effects on your daily life.

So, if such a thing gives a significant impact to our life, how can we control it? How can we stabilized our emotional states? Many people think that mood is created by external events. When things go as your positive expectation, you are in a good mood, but when things go awfully unexpected you're going to be in a bad mood, right?

Actually, the statement is neither a valid argument, nor fact. Robert Thayer, a psychologist and the author of Calm Energy, said that mood develops from internal events rather than external events. Robert also said that

Events are random. Even if you try to plot them down in to a good looking chart, you will find that the correlation between an event and your emotional states is little to none.

What Affecting Our Mood at Most and How We Can Manage it

Mood is significantly affected with our routines and lifestyle, such as, the way we sleep, the frequency of our physical exercise, and our circadian rhythms. Those are some factors that also directly affect our biological function, starting from fluctuation of our hormones to the level of neurotransmitter. By the time you are exhausted or tired, your biological function will hardly adjust to your work load, thus, making you easier to perceive events in negative ways which create your 'bad mood.'

So, to manage such a things you can try these tips:

Figure out what type of person you are

Stop Getting 'Overloaded'
When you feel a tense fatigue, take the advice that a mother give to her two-years-old baby: sleep aka take a break and rest for a while . Rest is the only way to handle your tense fatigue. A short nap after lunch can divert your body's energy stream from tense fatigue to soft fatigue.
Use Caffeine Wisely
By the time you feel a wave of tense fatigue to your body, you might feel the temptation for an instant energy booster. However, you need to understand that artificial burst of energy will be followed by a downside reaction that diminishes your energy for a much longer period.

Remember that the key to a stable mood is within ourselves. Stop blaming external events that you can't control for your grumpy behavior ;)

Biofeedback At A Glance

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 11:58:00 +0000

In essence, biofeedback is an approach to work with tension/stress of which pertains supervising which aims to apply elective regulation over unconscious physical activities just like pulse rate, blood pressure level, skin conductance, and even muscular tension.

Image Sources: http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk

The basic concept is originated from animal testing (using laboratory rat) performed approximately five decades ago of which demonstrating that rats can adjust their own pulse rate if presented positive neurological stimulus each time their own heart beat accelerated or lowered. The approach that: "Thoroughly unconscious physical processes can get adjusted through controlled environment" was barely unique; Ivan Petrovich Pavlov had already shown this a long time ago, by monitoring and measuring salivation process of his own pet. Nevertheless, knowing the prospective healing utilization of the particular concept for stressed humans was completely new, thus, demanded cutting-edge devices, which leads to biofeedback technology that we know today.

So how does biofeedback work?

To simplify things, let's take a real example of biofeedback usage to overcome severe headache. Normally, a user needs to put on head sensor; which is used to capture muscle tension on the head. The head sensor sending the muscle tension data (in a form of signal) to the receiver device, then display the data along with quantified parameters so it can be monitored and analyzed. Based on what displayed on the receiver device, the user needs to achieve certain limit based on those particular parameters until it reach a desirable result. By the time the user try to achieve it, they also learn how to control muscle tension which caused that severe headache.

The Result

Based on plenty of studies carried out within more than 1 decades (1970s-1980s), it is shown that biofeedback gives positive result, allowing users to control their heart beat rate, blood pressure and many others physical function such as muscle tension. With a large number of studies which give a positive result, the National Institutes of Health came to conclusion that biofeedback is an reliable treatment for tension headaches. However, it's necessary to realize biofeedback helps with monitoring and measurement, while the key to successful treatment is the users relaxation techniques. Further Reading:

A systematic review of the effectiveness of exercise, manual therapy, electrotherapy, relaxation training, and biofeedback in the management of temporomandibular disorder.

Self-Esteem Based on Popular Psychology Perspective

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 10:44:00 +0000

While it is not really the same thing, self esteem is often considered as self confidence where both terms signify how an individual value and evaluate himself.

High self esteem indicated by positive perspective of self-assessment, while low self esteem indicated by negative perspective of self-assessment. It is believed that self esteem level is significantly impact our quality of life in many areas - with the assumption that the higher level of self-esteem we have, the better quality of life we get.

However, facts show us that it 'adjusts' perception rather than reality, and the majority belief (about self esteem) is mostly based around anecdotal evidence, not based on solid scientific studies

What Makes The Hype

Just like many kinds of pseudo science, the public interest is mainly driven by authorities. In 1986, California legislature gave enormous amount of money for the purpose of increasing self esteem level of California citizens. The authority believed that there are many California citizen that has low self esteem level, with assumption that low level of self esteem contributes to many social problem just like crime, welfare dependency, schoold failure etc.

Nevertheless, classic psychological researches have demonstrated that cognitive and motivational processes (including self esteem) are highly related with self-serving bias - a condition where we connecting our achievements to personal factors, yet connecting failures to external conditions.

Empirical Evidence

An extensive research has been conducted by American Psychological Society to assess the correlation between self esteem level and its contribution to quality of life. It shows a different result than what most people expected:

Achievement produces self esteem, but there's no sign that high level of self esteem contributes neither to achievement nor quality of life.

In a smaller scale, researchers also found that most American have high level of self esteem, and consider themselves better than others despite their race, sex or even social condition.

How about social problems such as crimes or bullies? It still doesn't make any difference. In fact, studies show that criminals, in many times, have higher level of self esteem compared to the victims. This means, a high level of self esteem can stimulate criminal behavior, rather than suppress it.

Further Reading:
Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., and Vohs, K. D. “Does High Self-Esteem Cause Better Performance, Interpersonal Success, Happiness,or Healthier Lifestyles?” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1) (2003).

Popular Myth: "We Only Use 10% Of Our Brain Capacity"

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:09:00 +0000

One of the most popular myth in science history is a statement that we only utilize 10% of our brain capacity. This myth makes most people to believe that there are 90% more capabilities that are still waited to be used. Just to mention a few, telepathy, super-human regeneration or even x-ray vision.

Even though this myth is often attributed to William James (the father of Americam psychology) and Albert Einstein, it's still unclear how this all begin. However, public were already aware of this myth in late 1930s. And just like many other pseudoscience, some authorative figures also helped the spread of this false information. During 1950s, this misleading informarion was widely (and wildly) used in many self improvement industries, even in some Dale Carnegie's works..!

10% brain capacity might be true if we're talking about Homer
Simpson who lives in The Simpson Universe

It could be very possible that this myth is triggered by misinterpretation on neurological studies conducted in 1930s. At that time, it was well-known that there are many researchers used electrical stimulation to figure out corelation between physical functions and brain cortex. When a certain area of animals' cortex is stimulated, a physical response will occur. This phenomenon also happens on human. However, there are wide area of brain cortex that don't induce physical/motoric reaction. At that time, researchers call those area as silent cortex, which possibly misinterpreted by the myth starter(s) as part of brain that are left unused or still not activated.

The Facts

There were neither neurologist nor researchers who interpret the phenomenon as what those myth starters thought. In fact, the silent cortex hold function for other important things rather than motoric response; such as linguistic, logical processing, and perceptions. With the current technology advancement, this 10 % myth is easily debunked. Modern brain imaging shows that every part of brain is continuously active. Certain tasks increase activity levels in particular brain area, but even we are sleeping there is no part of our brain that is inactive; unless the brain sufferring tissue damage.

The most simple yet way to counter this myth is what we can get from observing stroke or alzheimer victims, where small damage happened on small areas of the brain, yet giving a disastrous impact. Stroke victims lost about 1% of their total brain mass, while Alzheimer victims experience 10-20% cortex damage, which then lead to a complete memory and/or senses loss.

Regardless of the facts, this 10% myth is still firmly believed by the Transcendental Meditation moevement and Scientology. So, unless you are part of those beliefs, please stop saying that our brain only use 10% of its capacity.

Further Reading:
Beyerstein, B. L. “Whence Cometh the Myth That We Only Use 10% of Our Brains?” In S. Della Sala, ed. Mind Myths: Exploring Popular Assumptions about the Mind and Brain. New York: Wiley, 1999, pp. 3–24.

What Happen When Our Brain Gets Bigger?

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Tue, 05 Nov 2013 09:25:00 +0000

Not only are the ‘laws of brain-size evolution’ consistent with massive modularity,but they also give the latter some independent support. Striedter (2004)reviews a wide range of comparative and evolutionary data, and is able to extract a number of robust generalizations about what happens to brains when their absolute size increases, within a certain lineage (see also Geary, 2005). One is that larger brains become significantly more modular in their organization. This is because, as the total number of neurons increases, the density of dendrite connectivity amongst neurons significantly decreases. (This is, no doubt, partly because of the energetic costs associated with building and maintaining neural connections—Aiello and Wheeler, 1995; and partly because of the constraints imposed by slow speeds of signal propagation within and between neurons.) The result is that neurons tend to maintain more of their local connections, while giving up a greater proportion of their long-distance ones, resulting in an architecture that appears significantly more modular.

Another (related) generalization described by Striedter (2004) is that an increase in the size in a given brain region tends to be accompanied by increases in functional differentiation amongst its sub-regions. And this generalization holds good, not only for local brain regions, but also for the brain as a whole.

In particular, the lateralization of brain functions increases as the overall size of the brain goes up, no doubt because of the costs of maintaining neural connections between the two hemispheres. What we should predict, then, as a result of the fourfold increase in brain size that occurred through the evolution of hominids, is that the brains (and presumably the minds) of humans became much more modular—containing many more functionally distinct processing systems—than the brains of our great-ape ancestors. Since I have previously argued the minds of apes and other non-human animals are already massively modular in organization, this is likely to mean that the transition to Homo sapiens will have seen the addition of many new mind / brain adaptations.

Should the resulting systems count as adaptations, however? Aren’t they rather side-effects of some general Bauplan governing increases in brain size? Initially, perhaps, some of them may have been. But exaptation is actually a form of adaptation. Where systems are shaped and maintained by natural selection they can count as adaptations, even if the processes through which they initially arose weren’t targeted on them in particular. (The penguin’s ‘wings’ are an adaptation for swimming, although they are exapted from limbs once designed for flight.) And such shaping and maintaining is likely to apply to most of the brain systems underlying the human mind, since cognition is just too important for survival and reproduction for it to be otherwise.

There is one other ‘law of brain evolution’ described by Striedter (2004) that is worth mentioning here. This is that as the size of one brain region increases relative to another, the extent of the neural projections from the larger to the smaller also increases. The result is that the relatively enlarged human neocortex has culminated in unusually extensive projections from the neocortex to the motor neurons in the medulla and spinal chord. This may give us a partial explanation of our species’ impressive abilities for fine-grained motor control, not only involving movements of the hands, but also the lips, tongue, and respiratory system necessary for the control of speech.

Neural Proliferation and Pruning

I have replied to the argument that the ‘laws of brain evolution’ rule out massive modularity. Buller (2005) claims that massive mental modularity is inconsistent with what is known about the processes of brain development, however. He suggests that we can, on the contrary, see just a single novel adaptation underlying human uniqueness. This is the process of neural overproliferation, and subsequent pruning in response to experience, that sculpts our brain organization during the course of development. Let me review some of the pertinent facts, following Webb et al. (2001).

Almost all of the neurons that the brain will ever contain are produced before birth, during the first seven months of development. These continue to grow connections and build synapses with one another for the first two years after birth, with the maximum total number of brain synapses occurring at around two years of age. Thereafter there are two major periods of ‘pruning’, during which both neurons and their synapses are lost in response to patterned experience (or rather, caused by the lack of it). One occurs in the third and fourth years of life, followed by a ‘plateau’ through the childhood years, after which there is another period of pruning in early adolescence.

Around 40% of the neurons created in the first seven months of life die by the time that children reach adulthood, and likewise the same percentage of the total synapses present at two years of age are lost by the age of sixteen. The process of pruning itself appears to obey the old adage, ‘use it or lose it.’ Neural connections that aren’t functional, or that are rarely used, are lost, whereas those that are frequently employed are retained. Are these facts inconsistent with, or otherwise problematic for, the thesis of massive mental modularity, as Buller (2005) alleges? By no means. First of all, it is important to stress that the initial placement of neuronal connections in the brain isn’t at all random. On the contrary, neurons migrate to their eventual positions within the brain, and send out their axons to quite specific locations,guided by a range of chemical gradients and other forms of signaling (Korsching,1993; Thoenen, 1995).

So the initial organization of the cortex certainly isn’t some sort of equipotent set of neural connections that is then sculpted into shape entirely by experience, as Buller contrives to suggest. On the contrary, a number of recent interventionist studies have found that the brains of animals will develop normally up to the time of birth, at least, in the absence of any relevant experience whatsoever (relevant to the formation of the brain regions under study, that is) (Miyashita-Lin et al., 1999; Verhage et al., 2000; Molnar et al., 2002). In fact it seems likely that the subsequent role of experience in brain development (in the first instance, at least) is to add precision to the inherently vague and noisy chemical signaling systems that guide the placement of initial synaptic connections, on a highly local basis.

Since neurons that perform the same function are generally arranged together in banks, by making the eventual placement of synaptic connections both activity-dependent and competitive, the brain can ensure that boundaries between systems are drawn much more precisely than would otherwise happen. A second point is that a significant amount of the neural sculpting that takes place, at least within some systems, is produced by endogenously produced signals, rather than by experience of the environment. In early visual cortex in mammals, for example, neurons are organized into sequences of columns corresponding to each of the two eyes. It has long been known that depriving cats of post-natal visual experience disrupts the formation of these columns (Hubel and Wiesel, 1970). But it is now known that these ocular dominance columns develop in stages, the first of which is guided by spontaneous neural activity produced by the two retinas prior to birth.

The basic structure of the cortical circuits is laid down in advance of any externally produced visual experience (Katz et al., 2000). And we now know that something similar is true in connection with the face-recognition system, likewise (Bednar, 2003). Moreover, a great deal of the role of experience in sculpting brain circuits isn’t well characterized as a form of learning on the basis of experience, as Buller (2005) himself acknowledges. Indeed, Katz and Shatz (1996) argue that much of the later role of experience is best seen as an extension of the work of the earlier endogenously produced stimuli, namely preparing cortical circuits to engage in learning. For in many cases all that is required is some experience or other, or experience of some very general (module-specific) type, such as face-like shapes, or object boundaries.

What a cortical circuit requires, in order for its neural components to be ‘pruned’ appropriately, is experience of the general type that falls within its intended domain. At this early stage the system isn’t so much learning in response to experience, as using that experience to distinguish itself functionally from surrounding modules. None of this is to deny, of course, that experience and learning can cause neuronal changes of various sorts to occur, some of which involve alterations in the local wiring patterns within cortical circuits. Indeed, we are beginning to discover how learning can trigger cascades of gene expression within particular groups of neurons, causing new dendrites to grow and new synapses to be formed (Ridley, 2003; Marcus, 2004). But even where this is appropriately thought of as the formation of a new brain system or the reconfiguring of an old one (as opposed to the laying down a specific memory, for example), it turns out that it isn’t inconsistent with massive modularity.

For remember that the thesis of massive mental modularity, as I am understanding it, doesn’t require modules to be genetically pre-specified. And it is still possible for the resulting system to count as an adaptation. For natural selection can rely on the presence of reliably recurring features of the environment (such as the presence of faceshaped stimuli) when selecting for particular developmental programs (Griffiths and Gray, 2001;West-Eberhard, 2003; Barrett, 2006). Moreover, I have argued in any case that some modules are a product of experience and learning, without their modular status thereby being compromised. I conclude, then, that the processes by means of which brains develop and form their cortical circuits are fully consistent with massive mental modularity, just as we earlier found for the processes through which brains evolve.

NB:
This post is taken from The Architecture of the Mind by Peter Carruthers (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Maryland, College Park). If you get benefits from reading this, please consider to buy his original work.

Migraine - All In Your Head

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 08:50:00 +0000

Pain from migraine headaches is typically
located on only one side of the head, behind the eye

The damage caused by headaches is eye-popping. About 45 million Americans suffer them regularly, and about half of the sufferers find the pain severe and sometimes disabling. The result: lost time from work, play, the day-to-day stuff of life. Count ing only the 30 million who suffer migraine headaches-one of the 150 described categories of headaches-American vic tims lose 157 million work days each year.

All In Your Head

Victims often describe the pain as throbbing or pounding. Other related symptoms include sensitivity to light, sound, and odor. Some experience nausea, abdominal pain, or vomiting, and some sufferers report seeing auras or streaks of light shortly before the pain begins. Young victims may also complain of blurred vision, fever, dizziness, and upset stomach. A few children get migraines about once a month accompanied by vomiting; such headaches are sometimes referred to as abdominal migraines. About 5 percent of children younger than 15 report having had migraines, compared with 15 percent who experienced tension headaches.

Anatomy Of Migraine

Headaches occur when nerve cells that are pain sensitive, for reasons that are still not clearly understood, begin sending pain signals to the brain . These nociceptor cells often act in response to stress, tension, hormonal changes, or the dilation of blood vessels. Migraines are particularly devastating because of their severity and recurrence . They begin with impulses in hyperactive nerve cells. These impulses tell blood vessels in the head to constrict, and then to dilate. The process releases sero tonin, prostaglandins, and other chemicals that inflame nerve cells surrounding the blood vessels in the brain. Specifically targeted are the trigeminal cra nial nerve and its connections to the upper spinal cord and brain stem. The result: pain. Researchers long believed migraines arose from the narrowing and expanding of blood vessels on the surface of the brain; now, the most com mon theory traces migraines to hereditary abnormalities of the brain itself.

Triggers

Emotional stress, anxiety, changes in weather, depression, lights, loud noises, alterations in sleep routines, and foods and beverages have been identified as migraine triggers . Stress causes the release of so-called fight or flight hormones, which can prompt changes in blood vessels that bring on headaches. Chemicals in foods and food additives also are commonly linked to the onset of migraines. These include choco late, aged cheese, red wine, yeast, monosodium glutamate, wheat, tea, meat containing sodium nitrates, coffee, oranges, milk, and corn syrup.

Genetics Matter

Family genetics tell the tale:

When one parent suffers migraines, his or her child has a 25 to 50 percent chance of befalling the same fate, but when both parents are victims, their child's risk rises to 70 percent.

Then there's the genetics of the two sexes. Boys who suffer from migraines tend to outgrow them by the time they get to high school. Girls, however, are more likely to see their migraines become more frequent after they enter puberty because of body changes related to female hormones. Teenage girls are three times more likely than teenage boys to suffer migraines

Prevention

Eliminating or reducing severe stress and the intake of risky foods may help stop migraines from returning. In addition, physicians may prescribe regular doses of antidepressants, anti-seizure medi cine, and cardiovascular drugs to ward off migraines. Migraines that are mild may respond to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs, such as ibuprofen or naproxen sodium. Stronger migraines may respond to drugs containing acetaminophen, aspi rin, caffeine, or triptans, which mimic the neurotransmitter sero tonin . Even when taken under a physician's care, these drugs can have unpleasant side effects. Doctors often advise patients to stop taking them as soon as possible.

Treatment

Biofeedback also has shown prom ise for some sufferers as a treat ment, and particularly as an early response to the onset of a migraine. A headache sufferer who has learned biofeedback techniques monitors vital body signals and then attempts to control them through "mind over matter." Biofeedback methods often help reduce stress or anxiety; among headache suf ferers, a common technique aims to alter the pulse or raise the tem perature of one or both hands, diverting blood there and helping restore circulatory balance to the head. However, some researchers believe biofeedback works bet ter with other forms of headaches than with migraines. Showing new promise in lowering the pain and frequency of migraines, according to a study in the journal Headache is a mix of yoga, relaxation techniques, and breathing exercises.

Research

The link between body chemistry and migraines was underscored by a study associating migraines with depression. The study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System, found that compared with people who are free from headaches, migraine sufferers are five times more likely to develop major depression. Likewise, people who began the study suffering from depression were three times as likely to develop migraines as those who weren't depressed. Researchers concluded that the two disorders are biologically related, perhaps through hormones or neurochemistry. If one disease exists, they say, doctors should be on the lookout for the other.

IQ Test Doesn't Define Your Intelligence

noreply@blogger.com (Ultra Sandhy) — Sat, 02 Nov 2013 17:08:00 +0000

During the last 50 years, there might be no scientific literatures that invites controversy as much as the book written by Charless Murray and Richard Hemstein in 1994. They write a book titled The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, which point out that intelligence attaches to genetic properties of human, and it also determines one's social success.

Their proposed statement implies that our social roles and achievement is predetermined since the day we were born, which then leads us the a better understanding of the term 'intelligence' itself.

Studies of identical twins have shown that certain regions of the brain are highly inheritable,
affecting overall intelligence

What is Intelligence?

The controversy that emerged from Charless and Richard's is highly related with our definition of intelligence - which most of us relate this with IQ and social success. However, neuroscientists hardly accept that kind of understanding, especially when it comes to other parameters that determines one's success in society, such as motivation, persistence, and social skills - which can't be measured with IQ test. Even some of them argue that the score only indicates how well an individual accomplish an IQ test instead of indicating their intelligence level...!

So, when we talk about intelligence (in the context of its contribution towards social success) that should include various aspects, not limited to the function of education and memory that's measured by 'mere' IQ test. Personally, I believe that there's no accurate measurement for a universal intelligence rather than life itself, however, in terms of better definition of intelligence, I found that fluid intelligence, which indicates one's mental ability and efficient neural functioning, is the most appropriate one. Fluid intelligence affects many capabilities such as logical reasoning, memory, mathematical calculations and even linguistic processing.

Genetics & Other Contributing Factors

Neuroscientist found that fluid intelligence is mostly correlated with the size of our prefrontal cortex. But the size of prefrontal cortex doesn't solely related with biological properties (genetics). This phenomena has been shown in various experiment, where on of them involving twins who are separated at birth and raised separately in equivalent environments. In the end, genetics count only 72% in correlation with intelligence.

This means that intelligence is not solely 'predetermined' as stated in Richard and Charless' work. Our brain grows, it has the ability to construct and rewire neural cells which enhance our mental function. Rather than blaming our genetics factor, we can keep on challenging our brain, learning new expertise for a better mental function.