Brain structure predicts risky behavior

Credit: Patrick J. Lynch

Some people avoid risks at all costs, while others put their wealth,
health, and safety at risk without a thought. Researchers at Yale 
School of Medicine find that the volume of the parietal cortex 
in the brain could predict where people fall on the risk-taking spectrum.

The debate about whether human behavior is learned or results from genetic programming impacts the way a writer structures character in their stories.  It's accepted at least in the film industry that characters that learn and grow from their experiences in a story are the most appealing to audiences, and that those films do better in the box office.  Examples range from Jerry Maguire to Casablanca to A Christmas Carol, films in which the main character becomes a better person over the arc of the story.

 But, if some human behavior is genetic in origin, can people with certain behaviors actually change?  That is at the core of the Nature vs. Nuture debate.  Based on this research which shows a basic brain structure difference between people who are risk takers and those who are not, you can make the argument that once a risk taker, always a risk taker.  

 What's interesting about this and other research, researchers point out that they're not sure whether the brain structure causes the behavior, or if the behavior causes the brain structure.  Sounds to me as if we have the power to change the structure of our brain, while the structure of our brain does predispose behavior.

 This makes my brain hurt.

 Here's the story: 

"We could use millions of existing medical brain 
scans to assess risk attitudes in populations."

Some people avoid risks at all costs, while others will put their wealth, health, and safety at risk without a thought. Researchers at Yale School of Medicine have found that the volume of the parietal cortex in the brain could predict where people fall on the risk-taking spectrum.

Suggest reading
click on image
Led by Ifat Levy, assistant professor in comparative medicine and neurobiology at Yale School of Medicine, the team found that those with larger volume in a particular part of the parietal cortex were willing to take more risks than those with less volume in this part of the brain. The findings were published in the Sept. 10 issue of the Journal of Neuroscience.

Although several cognitive and personality traits are reflected in brain structure, there has been little research linking brain structure to economic preferences. Levy and her colleagues sought to examine this question in their study.

Study participants included young adult men and women from the northeastern United States. Participants made a series of choices between monetary lotteries that varied in their degree of risk, and the research team conducted standard anatomical MRI brain scans. The results were first obtained in a group of 28 participants, and then confirmed in a second, independent, group of 33 participants.

"Based on our findings, we could, in principle, use millions of existing medical brains scans to assess risk attitudes in populations," said Levy. "It could also help us explain differences in risk attitudes based in part on structural brain differences."

Levy cautions that the results do not speak to causality. "We don't know if structural changes lead to behavioral changes or vice-versa," she said.

"Risk aversion increases as people age, 
and we know that the cortex thins with age."

Levy and her team had previously shown that risk aversion increases as people age, and we scientists also know that the cortex thins substantially with age. "It could be that this thinning explains the behavioral changes; we are now testing that possibility," said Levy, who also notes that more studies in wider populations are needed.

Related posts:
*  *  *  *  *
Story Source:  Materials provided by Yale University, original article was written by Karen N. Peart.  "Brain structure could predict risky behavior." ScienceDaily, 9 September 2014. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Being Humble: E.B. White was Right in Charlotte's Web

Image
It seems the best authors have a knack for accurately describing the personality traits of their characters.  For example, the character change experienced by Ebenezer Scrooge in Dickens A Christmas Carol is considered by research psychologists to be spot on for how the process of change works. How true to life was Scrooge's change? Is this ability to describe a character strictly from watching others?  Business writer Peter Drucker says in his semi-autobiographical book, Adventures of a Bystander that he and many of the other writers he knows are essentially bystanders, observing what is going on around them. Another example of a writer getting it right is E.B. White's popular children's book, Charlotte's Web.  Research psychologist Peter Samuelson and his team are researching the deeper meaning of humility.  Among their conclusions?  E.B. White displayed insight into humility and its underlying attributes. Here's the story : *  *  *  *  * The Two
Read more

Workout supplements: An emerging eating disorder in men?

Image
therewontbeanydoves.wordpress.com When developing a fictional character, you may not think about the character using large amounts of over-the-counter dietary supplements.  Especially a man who uses large amounts of workout supplements. While there has been widespread publicity on the dangers of the non-prescribed use of anabolic steroids, not much is said about legal, over-the-counter supplements.  Are there risks?  And if so, what are they?  There are several things the writer should consider. Supplement use is becoming an eating disorder with many men who use them to prepare for and recover from a workout. There is growing evidence of a link between muscle-building supplements and testicular cancer. There is evidence that over-the counter medications and supplements are the most common causes of drug-induced liver failure (a rare event, but still a risk.)  There is even evidence that, “certain popular herbal and dietary supplements can also cause liver damage,"
Read more

How laughter leads to love.

Image
James Cagney rubs a grapefruit half in the face of Mae Clarke  in the classic flick, Public Enemy (1931), written by Kubec Glasmon and John Bright, adaptation for the screen by Harvey Thew.  Funny? Yes.  A rom-com?  Not really.  Great scene, though. Between romance novels and rom-com movies and television, there is a never ending, ever growing market for romance.  So what leads to romance?  Of everything, it is laughter.  Not at, but with.  So here's how it works:  Boy meets girl.  Boy gets the girl to laugh.  (Add a few tasty comedic or dramatic interludes), and viola, girl catches boy (after boy makes a complete horse's ass of himself,) and the happy couple goes giggling into the sunset.   Formulaic?  Very much so.   Greatly entertaining?  Very much so. Until kids, mortgage and divorce. . . but that's a story for later. Here's a report on laughter in romance, with a link to the full study in the attribution. *  *  *  *  * Laught
Read more

Remember faces but not names? You got it wrong.

Image
Source:   Daily Excelsior So, you think you're good at remembering faces, but terrible with names? New research has revealed we are actually better at remembering names than faces The cringe-worthy experience of not being able to remember an acquaintance's name leads many of us to believe we are terrible with names. However, new research has revealed this intuition is misleading; we are actually better at remembering names than faces. With the Christmas party season fast approaching, there will be plenty of opportunity to re-live the familiar, and excruciatingly-awkward, social situation of not being able to remember an acquaintance's name. This cringe-worthy experience leads many of us to believe we are terrible at remembering names. However, new research has revealed this intuition is misleading; we are actually better at remembering names than faces. The authors of the study, from the University of York, suggest that when we castigate ourselves f
Read more

M.I.T. Research Explains How Will Rogers Observation Works

Image
Finally it appears that MIT has gotten involved in proving Will's syllogism, "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." Read his statement carefully.   ONE learns by reading.   A FEW who learn by observation. Then there's the rest of us. The reason for this, it turns out, is a special circuit in the brain that you or I need to have a functioning version of to actually learn by observing others.  Based on how we all behave, it is a circuit most of us must be missing.   Or perhaps it shorted out the first time we peed on an electric fence and it has yet to grow back.   *  *  *  *  * Brain circuit helps us learn by watching others Scientists pinpoint neural interactions that are necessary for observational learning Researchers have identified a brain circuit required to learn by watching others. This circuit,
Read more