tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-45053950799931022962024-03-26T23:37:43.555-07:00Science News for WritersThe latest research that pertains to content, character and story.Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.comBlogger612125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-16094110254150385142018-11-19T11:40:00.000-08:002018-11-19T11:40:02.527-08:00Remember faces but not names? You got it wrong.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for remember face not name" height="243" src="http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/faces.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span class="irc_ho" dir="ltr" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-right: -2px; outline: none; padding-right: 2px; text-align: start; unicode-bidi: isolate;">Source: <a class="o5rIVb irc_hol i3724 irc_lth" data-noload="" data-ved="2ahUKEwiu_LGnmeHeAhXLjFQKHZxoCcYQjB16BAgBEAQ" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiu_LGnmeHeAhXLjFQKHZxoCcYQjB16BAgBEAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailyexcelsior.com%2Fremember-names-better-faces-study%2F&psig=AOvVaw3bbAfwtg1AKYS6YDzoJB-J&ust=1542742316198117" jsaction="mousedown:irc.rl;focus:irc.rl" rel="noopener" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; outline: none; text-align: start;" tabindex="0" target="_blank">Daily Excelsior</a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">So, you think you're good at remembering</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">faces, but terrible with names?</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>New research has revealed we are actually better at remembering names than faces</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>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.</b></div>
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
This cringe-worthy experience leads many of us to believe we are terrible at remembering names.<br />
<br />
However, new research has revealed this intuition is misleading; we are actually better at remembering names than faces.<br />
<br />
The authors of the study, from the University of York, suggest that when we castigate ourselves for forgetting someone's name we are placing unfair demands on our brains.<br />
<br />
Remembering a person's face in this situation relies on recognition, but remembering their name is a matter of recall, and it is already well-established that human beings are much better at the former than the latter.<br />
<br />
The researchers also point out that we only become aware that we have forgotten a name when we have already recognised the face.<br />
<br />
We rarely have to confront the problem of knowing a name, but not a face -- remaining blissfully unaware of the countless faces we should recognise, but walk straight past on the street.<br />
<br />
For the study, the researchers designed a "fair test," pitting names against faces on a level playing field.<br />
<br />
They set up an experiment to place equal demands on the ability of participants to remember faces and names by testing both in a game of recognition.<br />
<br />
The results showed participants scored consistently higher at remembering names than faces -- recognising as little as 64% of faces and up to 83% of names in the tests.<br />
<br />
Dr Rob Jenkins, from the Department of Psychology at the University of York, said: "Our study suggests that, while many people may be bad at remembering names, they are likely to be even worse at remembering faces. This will surprise many people as it contradicts our intuitive understanding.<br />
<br />
"Our life experiences with names and faces have misled us about how our minds work, but if we eliminate the double standards we are placing on memory, we start to see a different picture."<br />
<br />
For the study, participants were given an allotted period of time to memorise unknown faces and names and then tested on which ones they thought they had seen before.<br />
<br />
The researchers then repeated the test, but this time they complicated the experiment by showing participants different images of the same faces and the names in different typefaces. This was to make the test as realistic as possible, as real faces appear slightly differently, due to factors such as lighting and hairstyle, each time you see them.<br />
<br />
On average, participants recognised 73% of faces when shown the same photo and 64% when shown a different photo. On the other hand, they recognised 85% of names presented in the same format and 83% in different fonts and sizes.<br />
<br />
When the researchers presented faces and names of famous people, participants achieved a much more balanced score -- recognising a more or less the same number of faces as they did names.<br />
<br />
The results show that we are particularly bad at recognising unknown faces, but even with faces and names we have encountered before, we still don't perform better at recognising faces than names at any point. Dr Jenkins added: "Knowing someone's face, but not remembering their name is an everyday phenomenon.<br />
<br />
Our knee-jerk reaction to it is to say that names must be harder to memorise than faces, but researchers have never been able to come up with a convincing explanation as to why that might be. This study suggests a resolution to that problem by showing that it is actually a red herring in the first place."<br />
<br />
I recognise your name, but I can't remember your face: an advantage for names in recognition memory is published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.<br />
<br />
The research was funded by the European Research Council and the Economic and Social Research Council, UK.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of York. Mike Burton, Rob Jenkins, David J Robertson. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1747021818813081">I recognise your name but I can’t remember your face: an advantage for names in recognition memory.</a> <i>Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology</i>, 2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com155tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-53871545271606595912018-11-17T11:20:00.000-08:002018-11-17T11:20:06.597-08:00It tastes bitter, but we love it.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/11/181115104603_1_540x360.jpg" /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Why we shouldn't like coffee, but we do</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Weirdly, people with a higher sensitivity to bitter caffeine taste drink more coffee</b></div>
<br />
The more sensitive people are to the bitter taste of caffeine, the more coffee they drink, reports a new study. The sensitivity is based on genetics. Bitterness is natural warning system to protect us from harmful substances, so we really shouldn't like coffee. Scientists say people with heightened ability to detect coffee's bitterness learn to associate good things with it.<br />
<br />
Why do we like the bitter taste of coffee? Bitterness evolved as a natural warning system to protect the body from harmful substances. By evolutionary logic, we should want to spit it out.<br />
<br />
But, it turns out, the more sensitive people are to the bitter taste of caffeine, the more coffee they drink, reports a new study from Northwestern Medicine and QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute in Australia. The sensitivity is caused by a genetic variant.<br />
<br />
"You'd expect that people who are particularly sensitive to the bitter taste of caffeine would drink less coffee," said Marilyn Cornelis, assistant professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. "The opposite results of our study suggest coffee consumers acquire a taste or an ability to detect caffeine due to the learned positive reinforcement (i.e. stimulation) elicited by caffeine."<br />
<br />
In other words, people who have a heightened ability to taste coffee's bitterness -- and particularly the distinct bitter flavor of caffeine -- learn to associate "good things with it," Cornelis said.<br />
<br />
Thus, a bigger tab at Starbucks.<br />
<br />
In this study population, people who were more sensitive to caffeine and were drinking a lot of coffee consumed low amounts of tea. But that could just be because they were too busy drinking coffee, Cornelis noted.<br />
<br />
The study also found people sensitive to the bitter flavors of quinine and of PROP, a synthetic taste related to the compounds in cruciferous vegetables, avoided coffee. For alcohol, a higher sensitivity to the bitterness of PROP resulted in lower alcohol consumption, particularly of red wine.<br />
<br />
"The findings suggest our perception of bitter tastes, informed by our genetics, contributes to the preference for coffee, tea and alcohol," Cornelis said.<br />
<br />
For the study, scientists applied Mendelian randomization, a technique commonly used in disease epidemiology, to test the causal relationship between bitter taste and beverage consumption in more than 400,000 men and women in the United Kingdom. The genetic variants linked to caffeine, quinine and PROP perception were previously identified through genome-wide analysis of solution taste-ratings collected from Australian twins. These genetic variants were then tested for associations with self-reported consumption of coffee, tea and alcohol in the current study.<br />
<br />
"Taste has been studied for a long time, but we don't know the full mechanics of it," Cornelis said. "Taste is one of the senses. We want to understand it from a biological standpoint."<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Northwestern University. Jue-Sheng Ong, Daniel Liang-Dar Hwang, Victor W. Zhong, Jiyuan An, Puya Gharahkhani, Paul A. S. Breslin, Margaret J. Wright, Deborah A. Lawlor, John Whitfield, Stuart MacGregor, Nicholas G. Martin, Marilyn C. Cornelis. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-34713-z">Understanding the role of bitter taste perception in coffee, tea and alcohol consumption through Mendelian randomization</a>. <i>Scientific Reports</i>, 2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-56468151006847216372018-11-08T09:52:00.000-08:002018-11-08T09:54:58.332-08:00Selective amnesia<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for rat human" src="http://discovermagazine.com/~/media/import/images/e/2/f/ratbrain.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: <a class="o5rIVb irc_hol i3724 irc_lth" data-noload="" data-ved="2ahUKEwjQgpG9rcXeAhWnjVQKHRt4DksQjB16BAgBEAQ" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjQgpG9rcXeAhWnjVQKHRt4DksQjB16BAgBEAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdiscovermagazine.com%2F2012%2Fmay%2F11-jaak-panksepp-rat-tickler-found-humans-7-primal-emotions&psig=AOvVaw339xjm6b9HMM5ttEWKdxZf&ust=1541785513610301" jsaction="mousedown:irc.rl;focus:irc.rl" rel="noopener" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; outline: none; text-align: start;" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span class="irc_ho" dir="ltr" style="margin-right: -2px; padding-right: 2px; unicode-bidi: isolate;">Discover Magazine</span></a></span></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Two things in this story attracted my attention.<br />
<br />
Mammals, especially us, have the ability to selectively forget things. <br /><ol style="text-align: left;">
</ol>
Since I tend to forget things I'd rather remember, the first isn't really news. Well, it is. It's good news that we can selectively forget things. Now if I could just selectively remember things.<br />
<br />
And we're related to rats. Slimey, stinky, vermin-infested, icky, blaaah rats.<br />
<br />
Upon further consideration, this is not even a slight surprise.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Selective amnesia: How rats and humans</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">are able to forget distracting memories</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Our ability to selectively forget distracting memories is shared with other mammals, suggests new research from the University of Cambridge. The discovery that rats and humans share a common active forgetting ability -- and in similar brain regions -- suggests that the capacity to forget plays a vital role in adapting mammalian species to their environments, and that its evolution may date back at least to the time of our common ancestor.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
The human brain is estimated to include some 86 billion neurons (or nerve cells) and as many as 150 trillion synaptic connections, making it a powerful machine for processing and storing memories. We need to retrieve these memories to help us carry out our daily tasks, whether remembering where we left the car in the supermarket car park or recalling the name of someone we meet in the street. But the sheer scale of the experiences people could store in memory over our lives creates the risk of being overwhelmed with information. When we come out of the supermarket and think about where we left the car, for example, we only need to recall where we parked the car today, rather than being distracted by recalling every single time we came to do our shopping.<br />
<br />
Previous work by Professor Michael Anderson at the Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, showed that humans possess the ability to actively forget distracting memories, and that retrieval plays a crucial role in this process. His group has shown how intentional recall of a past memory is more than simply reawakening it; it actually leads us to forget other competing experiences that interfere with retrieval of the memory we seek.<br />
<br />
"Quite simply, the very act of remembering is a major reason why we forget, shaping our memory according to how it is used," says Professor Anderson.<br />
<br />
"People are used to thinking of forgetting as something passive. Our research reveals that people are more engaged than they realise in actively shaping what they remember of their lives. The idea that the very act of remembering can cause forgetting is surprising and could tell us more about people's capacity for selective amnesia."<br />
<br />
While this process improves the efficiency of memory, it can sometimes lead to problems. If the police interview a witness to a crime, for example, their repeated questioning about selected details might lead the witness to forget information that could later prove important.<br />
<br />
Although the ability to actively forget has been seen in humans, it is unclear whether it occurs in other species. Could this ability be unique to our species, or at least to more intelligent mammals such as monkeys and great apes?<br />
<br />
In a study published today in the journal Nature Communications, Professor Anderson together with Pedro Bekinschtein and Noelia Weisstaub of Universidad Favaloro in Argentina, has shown that the ability to actively forget is not a peculiarly human characteristic: rats, too, share our capacity for selective forgetting and use a very similar brain mechanism, suggesting this is an ability shared among mammals.<br />
<br />
To demonstrate this, the researchers devised an ingeniously simple task based on rats' innate sense of curiosity: when put into an environment, rats actively explore to learn more about it. When exploring an environment, rats form memories of any new objects they find and investigate.<br />
<br />
Building on this simple observation, the researchers allowed rats to explore two previously-unseen objects (A and B) in an open arena -- the objects included a ball, a cup, small toys, or a soup can. Rats first got to explore object A for five minutes, and then were removed from the arena; they were then placed back in the arena 20 minutes later with object B, which they also explored for five minutes.<br />
<br />
To see whether rats showed retrieval-induced forgetting, like humans, rats next performed "retrieval practice" on one of the two objects (e.g. A) to see how this affected their later memory for the competitor object (B). During this retrieval practice phase, the researchers repeatedly placed the rat in the arena with the object they wanted the rat to remember (e.g. A), together with another object never seen in the context of the arena. Rats instinctively prefer exploring novel objects, and so on these "retrieval practice" trials, the rats clearly preferred to explore the new objects, implying that they indeed had remembered A and saw it as "old news."<br />
<br />
To find out how repeatedly retrieving A affected rats' later memory for B, in a final phase conducted 30 minutes later, the researchers placed the rat into the arena with B and an entirely new object. Strikingly, on this final test, the rats explored both B and the new object equally -- by selectively remembering their experience with A over and over, rats had actively trained themselves to forget B.<br />
<br />
In contrast, in control conditions in which the researchers skipped the retrieval practice phase and replaced it with an equal amount of relaxing time in the rats' home cage, or an alternative memory storage task not involving retrieval, rats showed excellent memory for B.<br />
<br />
Professor Anderson's team then identified an area towards the front of the rat's brain that controls this active forgetting mechanism. When a region at the front of the rat's brain known as the medial prefrontal cortex was temporarily 'switched off' using the drug muscimol, the animal entirely lost its ability to selectively forget competing memories; despite undergoing the same "retrieval practice" task as before, rats now recognised B. In humans, the ability to selectively forget in this manner involves engaging an analogous region in the prefrontal cortex.<br />
<br />
"Rats appear to have the same active forgetting ability as humans do -- they forget memories selectively when those memories cause distraction," says Professor Anderson. "And, crucially, they use a similar prefrontal control mechanism as we do. This discovery suggests that this ability to actively forget less useful memories may have evolved far back on the 'Tree of Life', perhaps as far back as our common ancestor with rodents some 100 million years ago."<br />
<br />
Professor Anderson says that now that we know that the brain mechanisms for this process are similar in rats and humans, it should be possible to study this adaptive forgetting phenomenon at a cellular -- or even molecular -- level. A better understanding of the biological foundations of these mechanisms may help researchers develop improved treatments to help people forget traumatic events.<br />
<br />
<b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of Cambridge, original story is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Pedro Bekinschtein, Noelia V. Weisstaub, Francisco Gallo, Maria Renner, Michael C. Anderson. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07128-7">A retrieval-specific mechanism of adaptive forgetting in the mammalian brain.</a> <i>Nature Communications,</i> 2018.</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-15526421220930531492018-11-07T10:17:00.000-08:002018-11-07T10:17:14.095-08:00'Good guys' in superhero films more violent than villains<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<img alt="Image result for good guy violence" height="245" src="https://i2.wp.com/www.eurasiareview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/c-24.jpg?fit=830%2C510&ssl=1" width="400" /></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't want to say that screenwriters are to blame for this, but we are certainly complicit. In the quest to create the next blockbuster (while creating a upward career path), resorting to violence to resolve situations is an easy out. <br />
<br />
While we could point the finger of blame at producers, studio heads and the money people behind them also want product that makes money, and violence often attracts larger audiences. This is also true of theater owners and even merchandising company executives.<br />
<br />
There is plenty of blame to go around.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">'Good guys' in superhero films more violent than villains</span></b></div>
<i>New research found that protagonists in superhero films engage in more violent acts than the villains.</i><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>In a film genre more popular than ever, courageous superheroes wield special powers to protect the public from villains. But despite positive themes these films may offer, new research suggests superhero characters often idolized by young viewers may send a strongly negative message when it comes to violence. In fact, according to a study being presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 2018 National Conference & Exhibition, the "good guys" in superhero films engage in more violent acts, on average, than the villains.</b></div>
<br />
An abstract of the study, "Violence Depicted in Superhero-Based Films Stratified by Protagonist/Antagonist and Gender," will be presented on Monday, Nov. 5, at the Orange County Convention Center in Orlando, Fla. Researchers involved in the study analyzed 10 superhero-based films released in 2015 and 2016. They classified major characters as either protagonist ("good guy") or antagonist ("bad guy") and used a standardized tool to compile specific acts and types of violence portrayed in the films.<br />
<br />
The researchers tallied an average of 23 acts of violence per hour associated with the films' protagonists, compared with 18 violent acts per hour for the antagonists. The researchers also found the films showed male characters in nearly five times as many violent acts (34 per hour, on average), than female characters, who were engaged in an average of 7 violent acts per hour.<br />
<br />
"Children and adolescents see the superheroes as 'good guys,' and may be influenced by their portrayal of risk-taking behaviors and acts of violence," said the abstract's lead author, Robert Olympia, MD, a Professor in the Departments of Emergency Medicine & Pediatrics at Penn State College of Medicine and an Attending Physician at the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center/ Penn State Children's Hospital. "Pediatric health care providers should educate families about the violence depicted in this genre of film and the potential dangers that may occur when children attempt to emulate these perceived heroes," he said.<br />
<br />
The most common act of violence associated with protagonists in the films was fighting (1,021 total acts), followed by the use of a lethal weapon (659), destruction of property (199), murder (168), and bullying/intimidation/torture (144). For antagonists, the most common violent act was the use of a lethal weapon (604 total acts), fighting (599), bullying/intimidation/torture (237), destruction of property (191), and murder (93) were also portrayed.<br />
<br />
To help counteract the negative influence superhero films may have on children, the study's principal investigator, John N. Muller, MS, suggests families watch them together and talk about what they see.<br />
<br />
"Co-viewing these movies as a family can be an effective antidote to increased violence in superhero-based films," said Muller, a medical student at the Penn State University College of Medicine. But the key, he said, is discussing the consequences of violence actively with their children.<br />
<br />
"In passively co-viewing violent media, there is an implicit message that parents approve of what their children are seeing, and previous studies show a corresponding increase in aggressive behavior," Muller said. "By taking an active role in their children's media consumption by co-viewing and actively mediating, he said, parents help their children develop critical thinking and internally regulated values."<br />
<br />
Mr. Muller will present the study abstract, available below, from 3:34-3:42 pm EST in the Plaza International Ballroom at the Orange County Convention Center in Orlando, FL.<br />
<br />
In addition, Mr. Muller will be among highlighted abstract authors available during an informal Media Meet-and-Greet session Saturday, November 3, from 1 p.m. to 1:45 p.m. EST in room Room W208AB of the Orange County Convention Center (Press Office).<br />
<br />
Please note: only the abstract is being presented at the meeting. In some cases, the researcher may have more data available to share with media, or may be preparing a longer article for submission to a journal.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by American Academy of Pediatrics. "<u>'Good guys' in superhero films more violent than villains</u>." <i>ScienceDaily.</i> 2 November 2018. </span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-7116855685876798942018-11-01T10:14:00.002-07:002018-11-01T10:14:29.797-07:00Who lives longer? The rich or the poor? And by how much?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for life expectancy rich versus poor" height="225" src="https://i.cbc.ca/1.4795262.1534975132!/cpImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_780/aging-survey.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: cbc.ca/</span></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
Wealth is just one factor in how long people live.<br />
<br />
There's also happiness. And so on.<br />
<br />
Here's the report:<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Rich people don't live that much longer than the poor</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Economists take income mobility into account when calculating life expectancy</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Differences in how many extra years rich people live compared to poor</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>people </i><i>is only about half of what we thought, according to new research.</i></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>New research results, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), challenge previous findings of huge differences in life expectancy between the rich and those at the bottom of the income scale. In real life people don´t necessarily stay poor or stay rich, as assumed in previous research, and three economists from the University of Copenhagen have now found a way to take this mobility between income-classes into account providing a more realistic way to calculate life expectancy for people from different walks of society. Their results show that in reality the difference between the lifespan of a rich and a poor person is really not that big.</b></div>
<br />
In 2016 impressive work published in Journal of the American Medical Association by a Harvard research team showed that high-income people in the US can expect to live 6.5 years longer at age 40 than low-income individuals. This research gave rise to a substantial debate about inequality in health in the US.<br />
<br />
The existing method assumes that the poor stay poor and the rich stay rich for the rest of their lives. In reality, however, over a ten-year period half of the poorest people actually move into groups with better incomes and likewise, half of the rich leak down into lower income classes. The mortality of those who move to a different income class is significantly different from those who stay in the same class.<br />
<br />
This mobility between income classes has until now been a challenge for the ability to calculate life expectancy across different groups in the population but Danish economists Claus Thustrup Kreiner, Torben Heien Nielsen, and Benjamin Ly Serena from Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI) at the University of Copenhagen (UCPH) have now devised a method to account for this income mobility in the relationship between income and life expectancy by incorporating a classic model of social mobility from the literature.<br />
<br />
The authors demonstrated their approach by calculating life expectancy at age 40 in Denmark based on official income and mortality records of the entire population of Danish women and men spanning the period 1983-2013, which approximately halved the difference in life expectancy between people in low and high-income groups:<br />
<br />
When accounting for income mobility, life expectancy for a 40-year-old man in the upper income groups is 77.6 years compared with 75.2 for a man in poorer groups -- a difference of 2.4 years. For women the difference between high and low-income groups is 2.2 years. However, without taking the income mobility into account the life expectancy difference was twice as big -- around five years -- for both men and women. Using the method, the authors suggest that the difference in the US is three years rather than 6.5.<br />
<br />
-Our results reveal that inequality in life expectancy is significantly exaggerated when not accounting for mobility. This result is quintessential not only for our understanding of one of the most important measures of inequality in a society, namely, how long different groups can expect to live. But also by mis-measuring this type of inequality, we get to misleading conclusions about the cost and benefits of public health programs such as Medicare and social security policies. For instance, given the rich live longer, they will also benefit many more years from old-age-pension benefits, says professor Thustrup Kreiner.<br />
<br />
<b>The difference is growing</b><br />
Even though inequality in life expectancy now proves to be only half as big as earlier anticipated, the new UCPH-research funded by the Danish National Research Foundation also shows, that the difference in life expectancy between the rich and the poor has steadily increased over the 30 years represented in the data. This is despite Denmark being a country that is internationally renowned for its free health care and education as well as a finely masked welfare-system that in many respects is thought to make up for differences in income.<br />
<br />
The reason for this steady but strikingly growing difference in life expectancy is beyond the scope of this particular project, but the UCPH-economists point out that other research has demonstrated, how individuals that belong to high income/high education-groups also have proven to benefit more from new health technologies and seem to take more advantage of new types of treatment and prevention of disease.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of Copenhagen. Claus Thustrup Kreiner, Torben Heien Nielsen, Benjamin Ly Serena. <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/10/23/1811455115">Role of income mobility for the measurement of inequality in life expectancy.</a> <i>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, </i>2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-79226927662475352882018-10-25T10:37:00.000-07:002018-10-25T10:49:36.801-07:00Unhappy in a relationship? Why do you stay? <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for unhappy in a relationship" height="310" src="https://cdn.powerofpositivity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/unhappy-relationship.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: <a class="o5rIVb irc_hol i3724 irc_lth" data-noload="" data-ved="2ahUKEwjnhdTlj6LeAhW5HTQIHR7sCBgQjB16BAgBEAQ" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjnhdTlj6LeAhW5HTQIHR7sCBgQjB16BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerofpositivity.com%2F3-warning-signs-your-partner-is-secretly-unhappy%2F&psig=AOvVaw1dbl5CXxbTNJwYgvFBSVI0&ust=1540575138955185" jsaction="mousedown:irc.rl;focus:irc.rl" rel="noopener" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; outline: none; text-align: start;" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span class="irc_ho" dir="ltr" style="margin-right: -2px; padding-right: 2px; unicode-bidi: isolate;">Power of Positivity</span></a></span></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
A story that may effect the development of your romantic comedies. Why do people stay in unhappy relationships? Simply put, it's concern for the partner of the unhappy person.<br />
<br />
This research doesn't offer solutions to this situation, but does help our understanding of why people behave the way they do.<br />
<br />
NOTE: Within five minutes this post had 16 hits, the fastest hit rate of any story I've posted. Might say something of how people feel.<br />
<br />
Here's the story:<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">When you are unhappy in a relationship,</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">why do you stay? The answer may surprise you.</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Study that finds it's not just the investment of time, resources and emotion</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Why do people stay in unsatisfying romantic relationships? A new study suggests it may be because they view leaving as bad for their partner. The study, being published in the November 2018 issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, explored the possibility that people deciding whether to end a relationship consider not only their own desires but also how much they think their partner wants and needs the relationship to continue.</b></div>
<br />
"The more dependent people believed their partner was on the relationship, the less likely they were to initiate a breakup," said Samantha Joel, lead author. Joel, who was an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Utah and remains an adjunct professor at the U, is now an assistant professor at Western University in Ontario, Canada.<br />
<br />
Co-authors of the study are Emily A. Impett, University of Toronto Mississauga; Stephanie S. Spielmann, Wayne State University; and Geoff MacDonald, University of Toronto.<br />
<br />
Previous research shows the amount of time, resources and emotion invested in a relationship can be factors in deciding to end a romantic relationship. Studies also show that a person may opt to remain in an unfulfilling relationship if the alternative -- being alone, the available pool of partners, etc. -- seems less appealing.<br />
<br />
In those cases, deciding to stay or go was based on self-interest, Joel said. But the new study shows the first evidence that decisions about an unsatisfying romantic relationship may involve an altruistic component.<br />
<br />
"When people perceived that the partner was highly committed to the relationship they were less likely to initiate a break up," Joel said. "This is true even for people who weren't really committed to the relationship themselves or who were personally unsatisfied with the relationship. Generally, we don't want to hurt our partners and we care about what they want."<br />
<br />
In making that choice, the unhappy partner may be hoping that the relationship will improve, Joel said.<br />
<br />
"One thing we don't know is how accurate people's perceptions are," Joel said. "It could be the person is overestimating how committed the other partner is and how painful the break up would be."<br />
<br />
Deciding to stay based on a partner's perceived dependence on the relationship could be a double-edge sword, Joel said. If the relationship improves, it was a good decision. But if it doesn't, a bad relationship has been prolonged.<br />
<br />
There also is the question of whether staying for a partner's sake is really a prosocial thing to do.<br />
<br />
"Who wants a partner who doesn't really want to be in the relationship?" Joel said.<br />
<br />
<b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of Utah. Samantha Joel, Emily A. Impett, Stephanie S. Spielmann, Geoff MacDonald. How interdependent are stay/leave decisions? <u>On staying in the relationship for the sake of the romantic partner.</u> (Link to original research unavailable.) <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,</i> 2018.</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-56667078659789618362018-10-19T09:05:00.000-07:002018-10-19T09:05:21.650-07:00Going to bed with your ex might not be as bad you think<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for exes" height="300" src="https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5a3a3d96b0bcd5331a8b5f43-750-563.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: <a class="o5rIVb irc_hol i3724 irc_lth" data-noload="" data-ved="2ahUKEwiZ4sqo8JLeAhXMz1QKHbq2D7AQjB16BAgBEAQ" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiZ4sqo8JLeAhXMz1QKHbq2D7AQjB16BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Ffriends-exes-psychopath-2017-12&psig=AOvVaw3jVqZ_nflTiU0AV9efSo0R&ust=1540051238631584" jsaction="mousedown:irc.rl;focus:irc.rl" rel="noopener" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; outline: none; text-align: start;" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span class="irc_ho" dir="ltr" style="margin-right: -2px; padding-right: 2px; unicode-bidi: isolate;">Business Insider</span></a></span></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Going to bed with your ex might not be as bad you think</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Pursuing sex with an ex-partner does not always hinder breakup recovery</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Conventional wisdom holds that people set themselves up for even greater heartache when they jump into bed with their ex-partner after a breakup. However, according to the findings of a study in Springer's journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, having sex with an ex doesn't seem to hinder moving on after the breakup. This is true even for those who continue to pine for their ex, says lead author Stephanie Spielmann of Wayne State University in the US.</b></div>
<br />
For Spielmann, studying the potential costs of sleeping with an ex is of broad interest because sexual experiences with ex-partners are quite common across all age groups and relationship types. Together with her colleagues Spielmann devised two studies.<br />
<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>In one, the researchers analysed the daily experiences of 113 participants who had recently experienced a breakup. Two months later these participants completed a further online survey. The survey questions asked whether participants had tried to have any physical contact with their former partners, how emotionally attached they still were, and how they felt after each day. </li>
<li>In a second study, 372 participants reported their actual and attempted sexual engagement with their ex-partner, as well as whether they were still emotionally tied to them.</li>
</ol>
<br />
The researchers found that pursuing sex with an ex did not seem to stand in the way of people's subsequent recovery from a breakup on a daily basis or over the course of two months. Most participants who pursued sex did end up in bed with their ex, but this did not influence how someone managed to get over the end of their relationship. Those pining after their ex-partner more often sought out sexual activity, potentially as a way of fostering closeness and connection. However, doing this did not leave them distressed or feeling depressed. In fact, it left them feeling more positive in everyday life.<br />
<br />
"This research suggests that societal handwringing regarding trying to have sex with an ex may not be warranted," says Spielmann, who believes that the findings challenge common beliefs. "The fact that sex with an ex is found to be most eagerly pursued by those having difficulty moving on, suggests that we should perhaps instead more critically evaluate people's motivations behind pursuing sex with an ex."<br />
<br />
Spielmann says that although only exploratory, the findings highlight how important it is to study the nature of breakups over a longer period of time. It also underlines the multifaceted nature of how people recover from breakups. She believes it is an important subject to research because of the consequences it could have on someone's mental health, how distressed they remain, and whether they are able to move on.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Springer. Stephanie S. Spielmann, Samantha Joel, Emily A. Impett. <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10508-018-1268-6">Pursuing Sex with an Ex: Does It Hinder Breakup Recovery?</a> <i>Archives of Sexual Behavior</i>, 2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-11682599463464987512018-10-18T09:50:00.001-07:002018-10-18T09:50:24.572-07:00Selfish people earn less money<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for selfish people" height="224" src="https://www.womenworking.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/5-Ways-to-Deal-with-Selfish-People-1.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Source: womenworking.com</b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
There is hope for us after all.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">* * * * *</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Selfish people have fewer children and earn less money</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>What happens to those who behave unselfishly and make sacrifices for the sake of others? According to an interdisciplinary study by researchers from Stockholm University, the Institute for Futures Studies and the University of South Carolina, unselfish people tend both to have more children and to receive higher salaries, in comparison to more selfish people. The results have now been published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</b></div>
<br />
"The result is clear in both the American and the European data. The most unselfish people have the most children and the moderately unselfish receive the highest salaries. And we also find this result over time -- the people who are most generous at one point in time have the largest salary increases when researchers revisit them later in time," says Kimmo Eriksson, researcher at the Centre for Cultural Evolution at Stockholm University and one of the authors of the study "Generosity pays: Selfish people have fewer children and earn less money."<br />
<br />
The result is contrary to theories that selfish people manage to get their hands on more money through their selfishness, as suggested in previous research.<br />
<br />
Previous psychological and sociological research has shown that unselfish people are happier and have better social relationships. The study "Generosity pays: Selfish people have fewer children and earn less money" focuses on unselfishness from an economical and evolutionary perspective. In this collaboration with the Institute for Futures Studies and the University of South Carolina, researchers at Stockholm University have looked at how selfishness relates to income and fertility. Selfishness was measured partly through attitudes and partly through reported behaviors. The results are based on analyses of four major studies of Americans and Europeans.<br />
<br />
"In a separate study, we examined the expectations of ordinary people to see if their expectations aligned with our data. The results of this study showed that people generally have the correct expectation that selfish people have fewer children, but erroneously believe that selfish people will make more money. It is nice to see that generosity so often pays off in the long run," says Pontus Strimling, a researcher at the Institute for Futures Studies, who is also one of the authors behind the study.<br />
<br />
The authors themselves believe that improved social relationships may be the key to generous peoples' success from an economic perspective, but note that their research does not definitely answer this question.<br />
<br />
"Future research will have to delve deeper into the reasons why generous people earn more, and look at whether the link between unselfishness, higher salaries and more children also exists in other parts of the world. And it is of course debatable how unselfish it really is to have more children," says co-author Brent Simpson of University of South Carolina.<br />
<br />
Story Source: Materials provided by Stockholm University. Kimmo Eriksson, Irina Vartanova, Pontus Strimling, Brent Simpson.<a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fpspp0000213"> Generosity pays: Selfish people have fewer children and earn less money.</a> <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</i>, 2018.</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-84005704217888929182018-10-15T10:42:00.000-07:002018-10-15T10:42:43.730-07:00Climate change could cause global beer shortages<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for Beer drinker surprised" height="300" src="https://www.craftbrewingbusiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/dreamstime_xxl_55595820.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Source: www.craftbrewingbusiness.com/</b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: left;">O! M! G! Now it's going too far. We must do something about climate change today. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Forget what I said yesterday about climate change being a hoax. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
This means war!</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>How climate change could cause global beer shortages</b></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Severe climate events could cause shortages in the global beer supply, according to new research. The study warns that increasingly widespread and severe drought and heat may cause substantial decreases in barley yields worldwide, affecting the supply used to make beer, and ultimately resulting in 'dramatic' falls in beer consumption and rises in beer prices.</b></div>
<br />
Beer is the most popular alcoholic drink in the world by volume consumed. Although the frequency and severity of drought and heat extremes increase substantially in a range of future climate scenarios, the vulnerability of beer supply to such extremes has never been assessed.<br />
<br />
In recent years, the beer sector has consumed around 17% of global barley production, but this share varies drastically across major beer-producing countries, for example from 83% in Brazil to 9% in Australia. Results from the new study reveal potential average yield losses ranging from 3% to 17%, depending on the severity of the conditions. Decreases in the global supply of barley lead to proportionally larger decreases in barley used to make beer.<br />
<br />
During the most severe climate events, the results indicate that global beer consumption would decline by 16%, or 29 billion litres -- roughly equal to the total annual beer consumption in the US -- and that beer prices would on average double. Even in less severe extreme events, beer consumption drops by 4% and prices rise by 15%.<br />
<br />
The findings, published today in Nature Plants, suggest that total beer consumption decreases most under climate change in the countries that consumed the most beer by volume in recent years. For example, the volume consumed in China -- today the largest consuming country -- falls by more than any other country as the severity of extreme events increases, and by 4.34 billion litres in the most severe.<br />
<br />
In the UK, beer consumption could fall by between 0.37 billion and 1.33 billion litres, while the price could as much as double. Consumption in the US could decrease by between 1.08 billion and 3.48 billion litres.<br />
<br />
Co-ordinator of the research and lead UK author Dabo Guan, professor of climate change economics at UEA's School of International Development, said: "Increasingly research has begun to project the impacts of climate change on world food production, focusing on staple crops such as wheat, maize, soybean, and rice.<br />
<br />
"However, if adaptation efforts prioritise necessities, climate change may undermine the availability, stability and access to 'luxury' goods to a greater extent than staple foods. People's diet security is equally important to food security in many aspects of society.<br />
<br />
"Although some attention has been paid to the potential impacts of climate change on luxury crops such as wine and coffee, the impacts on beer have not been carefully evaluated. A sufficient beer supply may help with the stability of entertainment and communication in society."<br />
<br />
Prof Guan added: "While the effects on beer may seem modest in comparison to many of the other -- some life-threatening -- impacts of climate change, there is nonetheless something fundamental in the cross-cultural appreciation of beer.<br />
<br />
"It may be argued that consuming less beer isn't itself disastrous, and may even have health benefits. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that for millions of people around the world, the climate impacts on beer availability and price will add insult to injury."<br />
<br />
The international study involved researchers from the UK, China, Mexico, and the US, who identified extreme climate events and modelled the impacts of these on barley yields in 34 world regions. They then examined the effects of the resulting barley supply shock on the supply and price of beer in each region under a range of future climate scenarios.<br />
<br />
Some countries with smaller total beer consumption face huge reductions in their beer consumption: the volume of beer consumed in Argentina falls by 0.53 billion litres, equivalent to a 32% reduction, during more severe climate events. Even in the least severe climate events, total beer consumption in Argentina and Canada decreases by 0.27 billion litres (16%) and 0.22 billion litres (11%) respectively.<br />
<br />
Countries where beer is currently most expensive, for example Australia and Japan, are not necessarily where future price shocks will be the greatest. Changes in the price of beer in a country relates to consumers' ability and willingness to pay more for beer rather than consume less, such that the largest price increases are concentrated in relatively affluent and historically beer-loving countries.<br />
<br />
The researchers suggest that changes in barley supply due to extreme events will affect the barley available for making beer differently in each region, as the allocation of barley among livestock feed, beer brewing, and other uses will depend on region-specific prices and demand flexibilities as different industries seek to maximize profits.<br />
<br />
Their findings show that global and country-level barley supply declines progressively in more severe extreme event years, with the largest mean supply decreasing by 27-38% in some European countries, such as Belgium, the Czech Republic and Germany.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of East Anglia. Wei Xie, Wei Xiong, Jie Pan, Tariq Ali, Qi Cui, Dabo Guan, Jing Meng, Nathaniel D. Mueller, Erda Lin, Steven J. Davis. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41477-018-0263-1">Decreases in global beer supply due to extreme drought and heat</a>. <i>Nature Plants</i>, 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-66280212502538720442018-10-10T11:32:00.000-07:002018-10-10T11:32:34.562-07:00Have ADHD? You're More Creative Than The Average Bear<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for thinking outside the box" height="320" src="https://philmckinney.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Depositphotos_118476080_m-2015-760x608.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Source: <a href="http://philmckinney.com/">philmckinney.com</a></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Thinking outside the box:</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Adults with ADHD not constrained in creativity</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>People often believe those with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder face challenges that could hinder future employment, but a new study found that adults with ADHD feel empowered doing creative tasks that could help them on the job.</b></div>
<br />
The tendency of individuals with ADHD -- a mental disorder commonly diagnosed at childhood -- to resist conformity and ignore typical information may be an asset in fields that value innovative and nontraditional approaches, such as marketing, product design, technology and computer engineering, said study author Holly White, a researcher in the U-M Department of Psychology.<br />
<br />
White studied a group of college students with and without ADHD who were compared on lab tasks of creativity. The imagination task allowed a person to invent a new example of a common category that is different from existing examples. In the "alien fruit" invention task, a person must create an example of a fictional fruit that might exist on another planet but is different from a fruit known to exist on Earth.<br />
<br />
In doing this task, non-ADHD participants often modeled their creations after specific common fruits -- such as an apple or strawberry. Those creations were less innovative, White said.<br />
<br />
In this study, participants with ADHD created "alien fruits" that differed more from typical Earth fruit, and were more original, compared to non-ADHD participants.<br />
<br />
The second task required participants to invent labels for new products in three categories without copying the examples provided. The ADHD group created labels that were more unique and less similar to the examples provided, compared to the non-ADHD group.<br />
<br />
White said the results suggest that individuals with ADHD may be more flexible in tasks that require creating something new, and less likely to rely on examples and previous knowledge.<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"As a result, the creative products of individuals with ADHD may be more innovative, relative to creations of non-ADHD peers," she said.</li>
<li>Individuals with ADHD may be less prone to design fixation, which is the tendency to get stuck in a rut or stick closely to what already exists when creating a new product, White said.</li>
</ul>
<br />
"This has implications for creative design and problem solving in the real world, when the goal is to create or invent something new without being overly constrained by old models or ways of doing things," she said.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source:</b> Materials provided by University of Michigan. Holly A. White. <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jocb.382">Thinking “Outside the Box”: Unconstrained Creative Generation in Adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. </a><i>The Journal of Creative Behavior,</i> 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-80171805628545338172018-10-08T09:47:00.003-07:002018-10-08T09:47:56.380-07:00What do Trump's tweets say about his personality?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<img alt="Image result for Trump" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/Donald_Trump_official_portrait.jpg/220px-Donald_Trump_official_portrait.jpg" /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">What do Trump's tweets say about his personality?</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Researchers analyze tweets of Donald J. Trump and </b><b>compare</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>his personality traits with other influential business leaders</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>The Twitter messages of Donald J. Trump, the entrepreneurial businessman turned US president, show that he is creative, competitive and a rule-breaker, but also has neurotic tendencies. An analysis of Trump's tweets and what implications his personality traits have for political leadership are the focus of a new study.</b></div>
<br />
Since joining the social media platform Twitter in 2009 to May 2017, Trump has issued more than 35,000 messages. This amounts to about twelve tweets a day. With 30 million followers, he is the second most followed politician on Twitter after his predecessor, Barack Obama, who on average tweeted about four times a day.<br />
<br />
The researchers, Martin Obschonka from the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, and Christian Fisch from Trier University in Germany analyzed how aspects of Trump's personality are revealed in the language he used in 3200 tweets issued by October 2016 (before he became president). They used established software for assessment of language and text for psychological purposes. Trump's language use and online personality were also compared with that of 105 other influential and famous business managers (including Google's Eric Schmidt, HP's Meg Whitman, and Apple's Tim Cook) and entrepreneurs (including Tesla's Elon Musk, Dell's Michael Dell, and Amazon's Jeff Bezos) who are not on the political stage.<br />
<br />
Their results indicate that Trump is indeed a distinct type of person who shows strong features of a so-called Schumpeterian personality that is said to be typical of successful entrepreneurs. This personality was described by Joseph Schumpeter in the 1930s as being very creative, change-orientated, competitive and rule-breaking. The analysis further indicates that Trump has neurotic tendencies, and experiences underlying low well-being.<br />
<br />
"These traits are rather untypical for entrepreneurs since working as an entrepreneur may not only require emotional stability and optimism but also be able to increase happiness due to procedural utility," explains Obschonka, who adds that neuroticism isn't necessarily all bad, for it can also stimulate competitiveness.<br />
<br />
"Maybe this high neuroticism is a major motivator to succeed in Trump's entrepreneurial projects in his business life, but also in his role as political leader," speculates Fisch.<br />
<br />
"If social distinction is a core principle of the entrepreneurial personality, then we clearly see this principle reflected in his unusual personality profile," says Fisch. "Many experts agree that really successful entrepreneurs not only dare to be different -- they are different."<br />
<br />
The researchers speculate that having entrepreneurial personality traits could be advantageous in leading and governing an entrepreneurial society as a top-down process. But they stress that leading a company is very different from leading a country and it is unclear whether political leaders with an extremely entrepreneurial personality can indeed act strictly entrepreneurially in their highly responsible role.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Springer. Note: Content may be edited for style and length. Martin Obschonka, Christian Fisch. <u>Entrepreneurial personalities in political leadership. </u><i>Small Business Economics</i>, 2017</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-10073244722000208032018-10-06T12:25:00.002-07:002018-10-06T12:25:47.222-07:00Character Development: Where does personality come from?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<img alt="Image result for Personality: Where does it come from and how does it work?" height="266" src="https://img.purch.com/rc/300x200/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzA1OS80MDUvb3JpZ2luYWwvcHV6emxlLWhlYWQuanBn" width="400" /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Personality: Where does it come from and how does it work?</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>How do our personalities develop? What do we come with and what is built from our experiences? Once developed, how does personality work? These questions have been steeped in controversy for almost as long as psychology has existed.</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
In an article in Psychological Review, Carol Dweck tackles these issues. She proposes that our personalities develop around basic needs, and she begins by documenting the three basic psychological needs we all come with: </div>
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>the need to predict our world, </li>
<li>the need to build competence to act on our world, and, because we are social beings, </li>
<li>the need for acceptance from others. (She also shows how new needs emerge later from combinations of these basic needs.)</li>
</ul>
<br />
Infants arrive highly prepared to meet these needs -- they are brilliant, voracious learners on the lookout for need-relevant information. Then, as infants try to meet their needs, something important happens. They start building beliefs about their world and their role in it: Is the world good or bad, safe or dangerous? Can I act on my world to meet my needs? These beliefs, plus the emotions and action tendencies that are stored with them, are termed "BEATs." They represent the accumulated experiences people have had trying to meet their needs, and they play a key role in personality -- both the invisible and the visible parts of personality.<br />
<br />
The invisible part of personality consists of the needs and BEATs. They form the basis of personality and they drive and guide the visible part. The visible part happens when the needs and BEATs create the actual goals people pursue in the world -- what people actually do.<br />
<br />
Take the following example. Some people are conscientious; they actively pursue achievement and exercise self-discipline and perseverance. That's the visible part. Everyone has a need for competence, but how people pursue competence-whether they do so in a conscientious manner -- will depend on their BEATs (the invisible part, such as their beliefs).<br />
<br />
Research shows that some people hold the belief that their abilities are simply fixed traits. When they are confronted with a challenging task, they may choose an easier one instead because the challenging task carries a risk. It could expose their fixed ability as deficient; it could undermine their sense of competence. However, other people believe that their abilities can be developed. They are more likely to welcome the challenging task and stick to it in the face of setbacks in order to develop their competence. They display the hallmarks of conscientiousness. In other words, underlying BEATs can have a pronounced effect on the visible "personality" people display as they pursue their goals.<br />
<br />
Temperament can also be important. For example, if children are shy or fearful it can make certain needs (such as the need for predictability) stronger than others and it can affect the way they react to things that happen to them -- both of which can mold the BEATs they develop and carry forward.<br />
<br />
What are the implications of this theory? First, it means that our personality develops around our motivations (our needs and goals) and is not simply about traits we're born with. The theory also reveals the invisible parts of personality and shows how we can identify and address important BEATs (particularly beliefs) to promote personality change.<br />
<br />
In short, like large, classic theories of the last century, the current theory brings together our motivations, our personality, and our development within one framework and helps shed light on processes that contribute to well-being and human growth.<br />
<br />
Story Source: Materials provided by American Psychological Association. Carol S. Dweck. <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Frev0000082">From needs to goals and representations: Foundations for a unified theory of motivation, personality, and development.</a> <i>Psychological Review</i>, 2017</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-24870219214412165812018-10-04T10:29:00.000-07:002018-10-04T10:29:12.882-07:00New tool helps scientists better target the search for alien life<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/10/181002113956_1_540x360.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;">Credit: Claudio Grimaldi/EPFL </span></div>
<br /><div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: small;">Schematic view of the Milky Way showing six isotropic extraterrestrial emission processes</span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><div style="text-align: left;">
forming spherical shells filled by radio signals. The outer radii of the spherical shells are </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
proportional to the time at which the signals were first emitted, while the thicknesses are</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
proportional to the duration of the emissions. In this example, the Earth is illuminated by</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
one of these signals.</div>
</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">New tool helps scientists better target the search for alien life</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Could there be another planet out there with a society at the same stage of technological advancement as ours? To help find out, EPFL scientist Claudio Grimaldi, working in association with the University of California, Berkeley, has developed a statistical model that gives researchers a new tool in the search for the kind of signals that an extraterrestrial society might emit. His method -- described in an article appearing today in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences -- could also make the search cheaper and more efficient.</b></div>
<br />
Atrophysics initially wasn't Grimaldi's thing; he was interested more in the physics of condensed matter. Working at EPFL's Laboratory of Physics of Complex Matter, his research involved calculating the probabilities of carbon nanotubes exchanging electrons. But then he wondered: if the nanotubes were stars and the electrons were signals generated by extraterrestrial societies, could we calculate the probability of detecting those signals more accurately?<br />
<br />
This is not pie-in-the-sky research -- scientists have been studying this possibility for nearly 60 years. Several research projects concerning the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) have been launched since the late 1950s, mainly in the United States. The idea is that an advanced civilization on another planet could be generating electromagnetic signals, and scientists on Earth might be able to pick up those signals using the latest high-performance radio telescopes.<br />
<br />
<b>Renewed interest</b><br />
Despite considerable advances in radio astronomy and the increase in computing power since then, none of those projects has led to anything concrete. Some signals without identifiable origin have well been recorded, like the Wow! signal in 1977, but none of them has been repeated or seems credible enough to be attributable to alien life.<br />
<br />
But that doesn't mean scientists have given up. On the contrary, SETI has seen renewed interest following the discovery of the many exoplanets orbiting the billions of suns in our galaxy. Researchers have designed sophisticated new instruments -- like the Square Kilometre Array, a giant radio telescope being built in South Africa and Australia with a total collecting area of one square kilometer -- that could pave the way to promising breakthroughs. And Russian entrepreneur Yuri Milner recently announced an ambitious program called Breakthrough Listen, which aims to cover 10 times more sky than previous searches and scan a much wider band of frequencies. Milner intends to fund his initiative with 100 million dollars over 10 years.<br />
<br />
"In reality, expanding the search to these magnitudes only increases our chances of finding something by very little. And if we still don't detect any signals, we can't necessarily conclude with much more certainty that there is no life out there," says Grimaldi.<br />
<br />
<b>Still a ways to go</b><br />
The advantage of Grimaldi's statistical model is that it lets scientists interpret both the success and failure to detect signals at varying distances from Earth. His model employs Bayes' theorem to calculate the remaining probability of detecting a signal within a given radius around our planet.<br />
<br />
For example, even if no signal is detected within a radius of 1,000 light years, there is still an over 10% chance that Earth is within range of hundreds of similar signals from elsewhere in the galaxy, but that our radio telescopes are currently not powerful enough to detect them. However, that probability rises to nearly 100% if even just one signal is detected within the 1,000-light-year radius. In that case, we could be almost certain that our galaxy is full of alien life.<br />
<br />
After factoring in other parameters like the size of the galaxy and how closely packed its stars are, Grimaldi estimates that the probability of detecting a signal becomes very slight only at a radius of 40,000 light years. In other words, if no signals are detected at this distance from Earth, we could reasonably conclude that no other civilization at the same level of technological development as ours is detectable in the galaxy. But so far, scientists have been able to search for signals within a radius of "just" 40 light years.<br />
<br />
So there's still a ways to go. Especially since these search methods can't detect alien civilizations that may be in primordial stages or that are highly advanced but haven't followed the same technological trajectory as ours.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source:</b> Materials provided by Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. Original written by Sarah Perrin. Claudio Grimaldi, Geoffrey W. Marcy. <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/09/25/1808578115">Bayesian approach to SETI.</a> <i>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,</i> 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-19170678157545971012018-10-03T11:07:00.002-07:002018-10-03T11:07:47.274-07:00Character Development: The 'dark core of personality'<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img height="265" src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/09/180926110841_1_900x600.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Credit: © canjoena / Fotolia <br /><span style="font-size: small;">Egoism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, sadism and spitefulness are often grouped together. Those who exhibit one of these traits are more likely to exhibit others from this list.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
For any writer building the personality of a character, this report provides excellent insight into how some flaws exhibit in a person. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Psychologists define the 'dark core of personality'</b></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Egoism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, sadism, spitefulness, and others are among the traits that stand for the malevolent dark sides of human personality. As results from a recently published German-Danish research project show, these traits share a common 'dark core'. So, if you have one of these tendencies, you are also likely to have one or more of the others.</b></div>
<br />
Both world history and everyday life are full of examples of people acting ruthlessly, maliciously, or selfishly. In psychology as well as in everyday language, we have diverse names for the various dark tendencies human may have, most prominently psychopathy (lack of empathy), narcissism (excessive self-absorption), and Machiavellianism (the belief that the ends justify the means), the so-called 'dark triad', along with many others such as egoism, sadism, or spitefulness.<br />
<br />
Although at first glance there appear to be noteworthy differences between these traits -- and it may seem more 'acceptable' to be an egoist than a psychopath -- new research shows that all dark aspects of human personality are very closely linked and are based on the same tendency. That is, most dark traits can be understood as flavoured manifestations of a single common underlying disposition: The dark core of personality. In practice, this implies that if you have a tendency to show one of these dark personality traits, you are also more likely to have a strong tendency to display one or more of the others.<br />
<br />
As the new research reveals, the common denominator of all dark traits, the D-factor, can be defined as the general tendency to maximize one's individual utility -- disregarding, accepting, or malevolently provoking disutility for others -- , accompanied by beliefs that serve as justifications.<br />
<br />
In other words, all dark traits can be traced back to the general tendency of placing one's own goals and interests over those of others even to the extent of taking pleasure in hurting other's -- along with a host of beliefs that serve as justifications and thus prevent feelings of guilt, shame, or the like. The research shows that dark traits in general can be understood as instances of this common core -- although they may differ in which aspects are predominant (e.g., the justifications-aspect is very strong in narcissism whereas the aspect of malevolently provoking disutility is the main feature of sadism) .<br />
<br />
Ingo Zettler, Professor of Psychology at the University of Copenhagen, and two German colleagues, Morten Moshagen from Ulm University and Benjamin E. Hilbig from the University of Koblenz-Landau, have demonstrated how this common denominator is present in nine of the most commonly studied dark personality traits:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><b>Egoism</b>: an excessive preoccupation with one's own advantage at the expense of others and the community</li>
<li><b>Machiavellianism</b>: a manipulative, callous attitude and a belief that the ends justify the means</li>
<li>Moral disengagement: cognitive processing style that allow behaving unethically without feeling distress</li>
<li><b>Narcissism</b>: excessive self-absorption, a sense of superiority, and an extreme need for attention from others</li>
<li>P<b>sychological entitlement:</b> a recurring belief that one is better than others and deserves better treatment</li>
<li><b>Psychopathy</b>: lack of empathy and self-control, combined with impulsive behaviour</li>
<li>Sadism: a desire to inflict mental or physical harm on others for one's own pleasure or to benefit oneself</li>
<li><b>Self-interest</b>: a desire to further and highlight one's own social and financial status</li>
<li><b>Spitefulness</b>: destructiveness and willingness to cause harm to others, even if one harms oneself in the process</li>
</ul>
<br />
In a series of studies with more than 2,500 people, the researchers asked to what extent people agreed or disagreed with statements such as "It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there.," "It is sometimes worth a little suffering on my part to see others receive the punishment they deserve.," or "I know that I am special because everyone keeps telling me so." In addition, they studied other self-reported tendencies and behaviors such as aggression or impulsivity and objective measures of selfish and unethical behaviour.<br />
<br />
The researchers' mapping of the common D-factor, which has just been published in the academic journal Psychological Review, can be compared to how Charles Spearman showed about 100 years ago that people who score highly in one type of intelligence test typically also score highly in other types of intelligence tests, because there is something like a general factor of intelligence.<br />
<br />
"In the same way, the dark aspects of human personality also have a common denominator, which means that -- similar to intelligence -- one can say that they are all an expression of the same dispositional tendency," Ingo Zettler explains.<br />
<br />
'For example, in a given person, the D-factor can mostly manifest itself as narcissism, psychopathy or one of the other dark traits, or a combination of these. But with our mapping of the common denominator of the various dark personality traits, one can simply ascertain that the person has a high D-factor. This is because the D-factor indicates how likely a person is to engage in behaviour associated with one or more of these dark traits', he says. In practice, this means that an individual who exhibits a particular malevolent behaviour (such as likes to humiliate others) will have a higher likelihood to engage in other malevolent activities, too (such as cheating, lying, or stealing).<br />
<br />
The nine dark traits are by no means the same, and each can result in specific kinds of behaviour. However, at their core, the dark traits typically have far more in common that actually sets them apart. And knowledge about this 'dark core' can play a crucial role for researchers or therapists who work with people with specific dark personality traits, as it is this D-factor that affects different types of reckless and malicious human behaviour and actions, often reported in the media.<br />
<br />
'We see it, for example, in cases of extreme violence, or rule-breaking, lying, and deception in the corporate or public sectors. Here, knowledge about a person's D-factor may be a useful tool, for example to assess the likelihood that the person will reoffend or engage in more harmful behaviour', he says.<br />
<br />
Fact box:<br />
<br />
<b>Dark personality traits studied in the research project</b>:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Egoism</li>
<li>Machiavellianism</li>
<li>Moral disengagement</li>
<li>Narcissism</li>
<li>Psychological entitlement</li>
<li>Psychopathy</li>
<li>Sadism</li>
<li>Self-interest</li>
<li>Spitefulness</li>
</ul>
<br />
Story Source: Materials provided by University of Copenhagen. Morten Moshagen, Benjamin E. Hilbig, Ingo Zettler. <a href="http://www.jneurosci.org/content/early/2018/09/26/JNEUROSCI.1206-18.2018">The dark core of personality..</a> <i>Psychological Review,</i> 2018;</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-39173067335393924912018-09-24T10:21:00.000-07:002018-09-24T10:21:47.340-07:00Writing a 'thank you' note is more powerful than we realize<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<img alt="Image result for thank you note jimmy fallon" height="286" src="http://i.imgur.com/TGGst.jpg" width="400" /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Thanks to all of the thousands that follow my humble little blog. Your support means so very much to me.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
- <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><i>Jim</i></span></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Writing a 'thank you' note is </b></span><b style="font-size: x-large;">more</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b style="font-size: x-large;">powerful than we realize, study shows</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>New research proves writing letters of gratitude, like Jimmy Fallon's 'Thank You Notes,' is a pro-social experience people should commit to more often. The gesture improves well-being for not only letter writers but recipients as well.</b></div>
<br />
Published in Psychological Science, research conducted by assistant professor of marketing in the McCombs School of Business at UT Amit Kumar and Nicholas Epley at The University of Chicago asked participants, in three different experiments, to write a letter of gratitude to someone who's done something nice for them and then anticipate the recipient's reaction. In each experiment, letter writers overestimated how awkward recipients would feel about the gesture and underestimated how surprised and positive recipients would feel.<br />
<br />
"We looked at what's correlating with people's likelihood of expressing gratitude -- what drives those choices -- and what we found is that predictions or expectations of that awkwardness, that anticipation of how a recipient would feel -- those are the things that matter when people are deciding whether to express gratitude or not," said Kumar.<br />
<br />
Kumar says anxiety about what to say or fear of their gesture being misinterpreted causes many people to shy away from expressing genuine gratitude.<br />
<br />
"I don't think it's a societal thing," said Kumar. "It's more fundamental to how the human mind works and a well-established symmetry about how we evaluate ourselves and other people. When we're thinking about ourselves, we tend to think about how competent we are, and whether we are going to be articulate in how we're expressing gratitude."<br />
<br />
Kumar says what is significant about the research and its results is that thank-you notes and letters of gratitude should be written and sent more often.<br />
<br />
"What we saw is that it only takes a couple of minutes to compose letters like these, thoughtful ones and sincere ones," said Kumar. "It comes at little cost, but the benefits are larger than people expect."<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of Texas at Austin. Amit Kumar, Nicholas Epley. Undervaluing Gratitude: <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797618772506">Expressers Misunderstand the Consequences of Showing Appreciation.</a> <i>Psychological Science</i>, 2018; </span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-1821850852594334422018-09-20T10:43:00.000-07:002018-09-20T10:43:14.700-07:00Yes, Colonel, We Can Handle the Truth.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for you can't handle the truth" src="http://www.samatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Colonel-Jessup.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The famous line, "You can't handle the truth," delivered by Jack Nicholson, from A Few Good<br />Men, 1992, directed by Rob Reiner and starring Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson, and Demi<br />Moore, with Kevin Bacon, Kevin Pollak, Wolfgang Bodison, James Marshall, J. T. Walsh<br />and Kiefer Sutherland in supporting roles. It was adapted for the screen by Aaron Sorkin from<br />his play of the same name with contributions by William Goldman.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">People can handle the truth (more than you think)</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Most people value the moral principle of honesty. At the same time, they frequently avoid being honest with people in their everyday lives. Who hasn't told a fib or half-truth to get through an awkward social situation or to keep the peace?</b></div>
<br />
New research from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business explores the consequences of honesty in everyday life and determines that people can often afford to be more honest than they think.<br />
<br />
In the paper, "You Can Handle the Truth: Mispredicting the Consequences of Honest Communication," Chicago Booth Assistant Professor Emma Levine and Carnegie Mellon University's Taya Cohen find that people significantly overestimate the costs of honest conversations.<br />
<br />
"We're often reluctant to have completely honest conversations with others," says Levine. "We think offering critical feedback or opening up about our secrets will be uncomfortable for both us and the people with whom we are talking."<br />
<br />
The researchers conclude that such fears are often misguided. Honest conversations are far more enjoyable for communicators than they expect them to be, and the listeners of honest conversations react less negatively than expected, according to the paper, published in the Journal of Experiment Psychology: General.<br />
<br />
For purposes of the study, the researchers define honesty as "speaking in accordance with one's own beliefs, thoughts and feelings."<br />
<br />
In a series of experiments, the researchers explore the actual and predicted consequences of honesty in everyday life.<br />
<br />
In one field experiment, participants were instructed to be completely honest with everyone in their lives for three days. In a laboratory experiment, participants had to be honest with a close relational partner while answering personal and potentially difficult discussion questions A third experiment instructed participants to honestly share negative feedback to a close relational partner.<br />
<br />
Across all the experiments, individuals expect honesty to be less pleasant and less social connecting than it actually is.<br />
<br />
"Taken together, these findings suggest that individuals' avoidance of honesty may be a mistake," the researchers write. "By avoiding honesty, individuals miss out on opportunities that they appreciate in the long-run, and that they would want to repeat."<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u><b>Story Source</b></u>: Materials provided by University of Chicago Booth School of Business. Emma E. Levine, Taya R. Cohen. <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fxge0000488">You can handle the truth: Mispredicting the consequences of honest communication.</a> <i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,</i> 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-64967876987755877282018-09-19T09:47:00.003-07:002018-09-19T09:47:53.689-07:00Good news! Lazy is NORMAL. Oh Frabjous Day.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/09/180918090849_1_540x360.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="font-size: 12.8px;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Credit: UBC Media Relations </span></b><span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> </span></div>
<br /><span style="font-size: small;">The researchers asked volunteers to react to simple stick drawings depicting scenes of physical <br />inactivity and physical activity, and discovered that brain activity differed depending on the scene.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
This is such good news. I thought it was just me. No, it's just everybody.<br />
<br />
What a relief. Now I can practice sloth without the guilt.<br />
<br />
Here's the story:<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * * </b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Hardwired for laziness? </span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Tests show the human brain must work hard to avoid sloth</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i style="text-align: center;">"The research findings suggest that our brains may simply be wired to prefer lying on the couch."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i style="text-align: center;"><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>If getting to the gym seems like a struggle, a University of British Columbia researcher wants you to know this: the struggle is real, and it's happening inside your brain. Society has encouraged people to be more physically active, yet we are actually becoming less active. This new study offers a possible explanation: Our brains may be innately attracted to sedentary behavior. Electroencephalograms showed that test subjects had to summon extra brain resources when trying to avoid physical inactivity.</b></div>
<br />
The brain is where Matthieu Boisgontier and his colleagues went looking for answers to what they call the "exercise paradox": for decades, society has encouraged people to be more physically active, yet statistics show that despite our best intentions, we are actually becoming less active.<br />
<br />
"Conserving energy has been essential for humans' survival, as it allowed us to be more efficient in searching for food and shelter, competing for sexual partners, and avoiding predators," said Boisgontier, a postdoctoral researcher in UBC's brain behaviour lab at the department of physical therapy, and senior author of the study. "The failure of public policies to counteract the pandemic of physical inactivity may be due to brain processes that have been developed and reinforced across evolution."<br />
<br />
For the study, the researchers recruited young adults, sat them in front of a computer, and gave them control of an on-screen avatar. They then flashed small images, one a time, that depicted either physical activity or physical inactivity. Subjects had to move the avatar as quickly as possible toward the pictures of physical activity and away from the pictures of physical inactivity -- and then vice versa.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, electrodes recorded what was happening in their brains. Participants were generally faster at moving toward active pictures and away from lazy pictures, but brain-activity readouts called electroencephalograms showed that doing the latter required their brains to work harder.<br />
<br />
"We knew from previous studies that people are faster at avoiding sedentary behaviours and moving toward active behaviours. The exciting novelty of our study is that it shows this faster avoidance of physical inactivity comes at a cost -- and that is an increased involvement of brain resources," Boisgontier said. "These results suggest that our brain is innately attracted to sedentary behaviours."<br />
<br />
The question now becomes whether people's brains can be re-trained.<br />
<br />
"Anything that happens automatically is difficult to inhibit, even if you want to, because you don't know that it is happening. But knowing that it is happening is an important first step," Boisgontier said.<br />
<br />
Boisgontier is also affiliated with the University of Leuven (Belgium) and the Research Foundation -- Flanders (FWO). He led this study with Boris Cheval of the University of Geneva, and their international team of researchers from the University of Oxford (Eda Tipura), the University of Geneva (Nicolas Burra, Jaromil Frossard, Dan Orsholits), and the Université Côte d'Azur (Rémi Radel).<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of British Columbia. Boris Cheval, Eda Tipura, Nicolas Burra, Jaromil Frossard, Julien Chanal, Dan Orsholits, Rémi Radel, Matthieu P. Boisgontier. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393218303981?via%3Dihub">Avoiding sedentary behaviors requires more cortical resources than avoiding physical activity: An EEG study.</a> <i>Neuropsychologia</i>, 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-88484126558631007772018-09-18T10:10:00.000-07:002018-09-18T10:10:04.416-07:00Character Development: Simpler, Four-part Personality Model Introduced <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/09/180917111612_1_540x360.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Credit: Northwestern University </b></span><span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> </span></div>
<br /><span style="font-size: small;">The four newly determined personality types are based on five widely-recognized character traits.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
While the authors suggest that this study will be of most interest to hiring managers and mental health professionals, I feel it will be a major help to authors and screenwriters. A four personality type model makes it easier to develop consistent characters, sort of a checklist of how people's personalities fall into groups.<br />
<br />
Here's the report:<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Scientists determine four personality types based on new data</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Comprehensive data analysis dispels established paradigms in psychology</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Researchers have sifted through data from more than 1.5 million questionnaire respondents and found at least four distinct clusters of personality types exist: average, reserved, self-centered and role model. They are based on the five widely accepted basic personality traits: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness. The findings challenge existing paradigms in psychology and potentially could be of interest to hiring managers and mental health care providers.</b></div>
<br />
"People have tried to classify personality types since Hippocrates' time, but previous scientific literature has found that to be nonsense," said co-author William Revelle, professor of psychology in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences.<br />
<br />
"Now, these data show there are higher densities of certain personality types," said Revelle, who specializes in personality measurement, theory and research.<br />
<br />
Initially, however, Revelle was skeptical of the study's premise. The concept of personality types remains controversial in psychology, with hard scientific proof difficult to find. Previous attempts based on small research groups created results that often were not replicable.<br />
<br />
"Personality types only existed in self-help literature and did not have a place in scientific journals," said Amaral, the Erastus Otis Haven Professor of Chemical and Biological Engineering at Northwestern Engineering. "Now, we think this will change because of this study."<br />
<br />
The new research combined an alternative computational approach with data from four questionnaires with more than 1.5 million respondents from around the world obtained from John Johnson's IPIP-NEO with 120 and 300 items, respectively, the myPersonality project and the BBC Big Personality Test datasets. The questionnaires, developed by the research community over the decades, have between 44 and 300 questions. People voluntarily take the online quizzes attracted by the opportunity to receive feedback about their own personality. These data are now being made available to other researchers for independent analyses.<br />
<br />
"The thing that is really, really cool is that a study with a dataset this large would not have been possible before the web," Amaral said. "Previously, maybe researchers would recruit undergrads on campus, and maybe get a few hundred people. Now, we have all these online resources available, and now data is being shared."<br />
<br />
From those robust datasets, the team plotted the five widely accepted basic personality traits: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness.<br />
<br />
<b>After developing new algorithms, four clusters emerged</b>:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><b>Average</b> Average people are high in neuroticism and extraversion, while low in openness. "I would expect that the typical person would be in this cluster," said Martin Gerlach, a postdoctoral fellow in Amaral's lab and the paper's first author. Females are more likely than males to fall into the Average type.</li>
<li><b>Reserved</b> The Reserved type is emotionally stable, but not open or neurotic. They are not particularly extraverted but are somewhat agreeable and conscientious.</li>
<li><b>Role Models </b>Role Models score low in neuroticism and high in all the other traits. The likelihood that someone is a role model increases dramatically with age. "These are people who are dependable and open to new ideas," Amaral said. "These are good people to be in charge of things. In fact, life is easier if you have more dealings with role models." More women than men are likely to be role <b>models.</b></li>
<li><b>Self-Centered</b> Self-Centered people score very high in extraversion and below average in openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness. "These are people you don't want to hang out with," Revelle said. There is a very dramatic decrease in the number of self-centered types as people age, both with women and men.</li>
</ul>
<br />
The group's first attempt to sort the data used traditional clustering algorithms, but that yielded inaccurate results, Amaral said. "At first, they came to me with 16 personality types, and there's enough literature that I'm aware of that says that's ridiculous," Revelle said. "I believed there were no types at all." He challenged Amaral and Gerlach to refine their data.<br />
<br />
"Machine learning and data science are promising but can be seen as a little bit of a religion," Amaral said. "You still need to test your results. We developed a new method to guide people to solve the clustering problem to test the findings."<br />
<br />
Their algorithm first searched for many clusters using traditional clustering methods, but then winnowed them down by imposing additional constraints. This procedure revealed the four groups they reported.<br />
<br />
"The data came back, and they kept coming up with the same four clusters of higher density and at higher densities than you'd expect by chance, and you can show by replication that this is statistically unlikely," Revelle said. "I like data, and I believe these results," he added. "The methodology is the main part of the paper's contribution to science." To be sure the new clusters of types were accurate, the researchers used a notoriously self-centered group -- teenaged boys -- to validate their information.<br />
<br />
"We know teen boys behave in self-centered ways," Amaral said. "If the data were correct and sifted for demographics, they would they turn out to be the biggest cluster of people."<br />
<br />
Indeed, young males are over-represented in the Self-Centered group, while females over 15 years old are vastly underrepresented.<br />
<br />
Along with serving as a tool that can help mental health service providers assess for personality types with extreme traits, Amaral said the study's results could be helpful for hiring managers looking to insure a potential candidate is a good fit or for people who are dating and looking for an appropriate partner.<br />
<br />
And good news for parents of teenagers everywhere: As people mature, their personality types often shift. For instance, older people tend to be less neurotic yet more conscientious and agreeable than those under 20 years old.<br />
<br />
"When we look at large groups of people, it's clear there are trends, that some people may be changing some of these characteristics over time," Amaral said. "This could be a subject of future research."<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Northwestern University. Martin Gerlach, Beatrice Farb, William Revelle, Luís A. Nunes Amaral. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0419-z">A robust data-driven approach identifies four personality types across four large data sets</a>. <i>Nature Human Behaviour</i>, 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-50848031244149008662018-09-15T09:20:00.001-07:002018-09-15T09:21:39.115-07:00The Science Behind the Art of Storytelling<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img height="400" src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/09/180913113822_1_900x600.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="300" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Credit: McMaster University </b></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">A figure showing the brain scans of study participants<br />who were asked to tell stories using different forms.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">The art of storytelling</span>:</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Researchers explore why we relate to characters</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>For thousands of years, humans have relied on storytelling to engage, to share emotions and to relate personal experiences. Now, psychologists at McMaster University are exploring the mechanisms deep within the brain to better understand just what happens when we communicate.</b></div>
<br />
New research published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, suggests that no matter how a narrative is expressed -- through words, gestures or drawings -- our brains relate best to the characters, focusing on the thoughts and feelings of the protagonist of each story.<br />
<br />
"We tell stories in conversation each and every day," explains Steven Brown, lead author of the study, who runs the NeuroArts Lab at McMaster and is an associate professor in the Department of Psychology, Neuroscience ang Behaviour. "Very much like literary stories, we engage with the characters and are wired to make stories people-oriented."<br />
<br />
An important question researchers set out to answer was how, exactly, narrative ideas are communicated using three different forms of expression, and to identify a so-called narrative hub within the brain.<br />
<br />
For the study, researchers scanned the brains of participants using fMRI and presented them with short headlines. For example, "Surgeon finds scissors inside of patient" or "Fisherman rescues boy from freezing lake."<br />
<br />
They were then asked to convey the stories using speech, gestures or drawing, as one would do in a game of Pictionary. The illustrations were created using an MRI-compatible drawing tablet which allowed the participants to see their drawings.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Researchers found that no matter what form of story telling the participants used, the brain networks that were activated were the "theory-of-the-mind" network, which is affected by the character's intentions, motivations, beliefs, emotions and actions.</blockquote>
"Aristotle proposed 2,300 years ago that plot is the most important aspect of narrative, and that character is secondary," says Brown. "Our brain results show that people approach narrative in a strongly character-centered and psychological manner, focused on the mental states of the protagonist of the story."<br />
<br />
Next, researchers hope to compare narration and acting to determine what happens when we tell stories in the third-person or portray characters in the first-person.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source:</b> Materials provided by McMaster University. Ye Yuan, Judy Major-Girardin, Steven Brown. <a href="https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/jocn_a_01294">Storytelling Is Intrinsically Mentalistic: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Narrative Production across Modalities</a>. <i>Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience</i>, 2018;</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-19514760872065922282018-09-11T10:36:00.001-07:002018-09-11T10:36:45.028-07:00Eating Probiotics Makes One More Likely to Vote for Trump. Really.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Let's face it, as a society we're suckers for every new fad to wander down the interweb.<br />
<br />
Take probiotics. The miracle food<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">‽</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">No. Quite the obverse. This cute, cuddly little research project shows that eating probiotics tends to make one foggy, addle-patted and significantly confused. And fatter.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">"This is not good," as said the crazy Nazi author in The Producers. Right before the dynamite touched off.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">So it could be that probiotic use prior to 2016 is a direct link to Trump being elected. And is anyone investigating the food supplement industry? Is Mueller conducting an investigation to election meddling by vegans?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">Makes you think, don't it?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">Here's the report.</span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><b>* * * * *</b></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Probiotic use is a link between brain fogginess, severe bloating</span></b></div>
<br />
Probiotic use can result in a significant accumulation of bacteria in the small intestine that can result in disorienting brain fogginess as well as rapid, significant belly bloating, investigators report.<br />
<br />
In a published study of 30 patients, the 22 who reported problems like confusion and difficulty concentrating, in addition to their gas and bloating, were all taking probiotics, some several varieties.<br />
<br />
When investigators looked further, they found large colonies of bacteria breeding in the patients' small intestines, and high levels of D-lactic acid being produced by the bacteria lactobacillus' fermentation of sugars in their food, says Dr. Satish S.C. Rao, director of neurogastroenterology/motility and the Digestive Health Clinical Research Center at the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University.<br />
<br />
D-lactic acid is known to be temporarily toxic to brain cells, interfering with cognition, thinking and sense of time. They found some patients had two to three times the normal amount of D-lactic acid in their blood. Some said their brain fogginess -- which lasted from a half hour to many hours after eating -- was so severe that they had to quit their jobs.<br />
<br />
The report in the journal Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology appears to be the first time the connection has been made between brain fogginess, bacterial overgrowth in the small intestine, high levels of D-lactic acid in the gut and probiotic use, Rao says.<br />
<br />
"What we now know is that probiotic bacteria have the unique capacity to break down sugar and produce D-lactic acid. So if you inadvertently colonize your small bowel with probiotic bacteria, then you have set the stage for potentially developing lactic acidosis and brain fogginess," Rao says.<br />
<br />
While probiotics can be beneficial in some scenarios, like helping a patient restore his gut bacteria after taking antibiotics, the investigators advised caution against its excessive and indiscriminate use.<br />
<br />
"Probiotics should be treated as a drug, not as a food supplement," Rao says, noting that many individuals self-prescribe the live bacteria, which are considered good for digestion and overall health.<br />
<br />
Others have implicated probiotics in the production of D-lactic acid -- and brain fogginess -- in patients with a short bowel so their small intestine does not function properly, and in newborns fed formula containing the popular product. Short bowel syndrome results in a lot of undigested carbohydrates that are known to cause small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, or SIBO, and the high levels of D-lactic acid. Severe liver and kidney problems can produce similar problems.<br />
<br />
Whether there was also a connection when the gut is intact was an unknown. "This is the first inroad," says Rao.<br />
<br />
All patients experiencing brain fogginess took probiotics and SIBO was more common in the brain fogginess group as well, 68 percent compared to 28 percent, respectively. Patients with brain fogginess also had a higher prevalence of D-lactic acidosis, 77 versus 25 percent, respectively.<br />
<br />
When brain-foggy patients stopped taking probiotics and took a course of antibiotics, their brain fogginess resolved.<br />
<br />
Movement of food through the gastrointestinal tract was slow in one third of the brain foggy patients and one fourth of the other group. Slower passage, as well as things like obesity surgery, can increase the chance of bacterial buildup, or SIBO.<br />
<br />
"Now that we can identify the problem, we can treat it," Rao says. Diagnosis includes breath, urine and blood tests to detect lactic acid, and an endoscopy that enables examination of fluid from the small intestines so the specific bacteria can be determined and the best antibiotics selected for treatment.<br />
<br />
Normally there is not much D-lactic acid made in the small intestines, but probiotic use appears to change that. SIBO, which was present in most with brain fogginess, can cause bacteria to go into a feeding frenzy that ferments sugars resulting in production of uncomfortable things like hydrogen gas and methane that explain the bloating.<br />
<br />
Probiotics added to that feeding frenzy the bacterium lactobacillus, which produces D-lactic acid as it breaks down sugars, The acid get absorbed in the blood and can reach the brain.<br />
<br />
All those with brain fogginess, SIBO and/or D-lactic acidosis, were given antibiotics that targeted their bacterial population and asked to discontinue probiotics. Those without SIBO were asked to halt probiotics and stop eating yogurt, which is considered one of the best sources of probiotics. Those with SIBO and D-lactic acidosis but no brain fogginess also took antibiotics.<br />
<br />
Following treatment, 70 percent of patients reported significant improvement in their symptoms and 85 percent said their brain fogginess was gone. Those without brain fogginess but with SIBO and high levels of D-lactic acid reported significant improvement in symptoms like bloating and cramping within three months.<br />
<br />
Abdominal pain was the most common symptom in both groups and before treatment, six of those with brain fogginess reported a tremendous increase in their abdominal size within just a few minutes of eating.<br />
<br />
All patients received extensive examination of their gastrointestinal tract, including a motility test, to rule out other potential causes of their symptoms. They filled out questionnaires about symptoms like abdominal pain, belching and gas and answered questions about related issues like antibiotic and probiotic use as well as food fads and yogurt consumption.<br />
<br />
They were given carbohydrates followed by extensive metabolic testing looking at the impact on things like blood glucose and insulin levels. Levels of D-lactic acid and L-lactate acid, which results from our muscles' use of glucose as energy and can cause muscle cramps, also were measured.<br />
<br />
Probiotic use may be particularly problematic for patients who have known problems with motility, as well as those taking opioids and proton pump inhibitors, which reduce stomach acid secretion and so the natural destruction of excessive bacteria.<br />
<br />
Probiotics are supposed to work in the colon and not the small intestines or stomach, Rao says, so motility issues can result in problems with probiotic bacteria reaching the proper place. A wide variety of problems, from conditions like diabetes to drugs like antidepressants and minerals like iron, can slow movement and increase the possibility that probiotics will remain too long in the upper gut where they can cause harm, he says.<br />
<br />
Probiotics definitely can help, for example, people who have gastroenteritis, or stomach flu, or are left with diarrhea and other problems after antibiotics wipe out their natural gut bacteria, Rao says.<br />
<br />
"In those situations, we want to build up their bacterial flora so probiotics are ideal," he says.<br />
<br />
Rao's pursuit of a possible connection between probiotics, brain fogginess and bloating started with a memorable patient who developed significant amounts of both problems within a minute of eating.<br />
<br />
"It happened right in front of our eyes," Rao says of the dramatic abdominal distention. They knew the woman had diabetes, which can slow motility. When they looked in the blood and urine at a variety of metabolic compounds, they found the high levels of D-lactic acid and soon learned the patient used probiotics and regularly ate yogurt.<br />
<br />
Next steps include additional studies in which the investigators better quantify and characterize the brain fogginess reported by patients and following patients for longer periods to ensure their problems remain resolved. Some patients in the current study required a couple of rounds of antibiotics, Rao notes.<br />
<br />
Good food sources of probiotics include yogurt, sauerkraut, kimchi, kefir and dark chocolate, which are generally safe because of the small amounts of bacteria present, Rao says.<br />
<br />
The 19-foot long small intestine has been a bit of an understudied organ, likely in part because it's hard to visualize via the mouth or anus, Rao says. "I think the small bowel can be a source of huge mystery," Rao says.<br />
<br />
Your helpful gut bacteria, or microbiome, which are essential to things like a well-functioning immune system and general health, are largely in the large intestine and colon.<br />
<br />
Story Source:<br />
<br />
Materials provided by Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.<br />
<br />
Journal Reference:<br />
<br />
Satish S. C. Rao, Abdul Rehman, Siegfried Yu, Nicole Martinez de Andino. Brain fogginess, gas and bloating: a link between SIBO, probiotics and metabolic acidosis. Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology, 2018.</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-9814680158718546042018-09-06T09:19:00.000-07:002018-09-06T09:19:17.012-07:00Don't Bother Me With Truth, Facts or Evidence.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz8YK0ez7j75q3WmxzyFp0sVPO3IwiudiZVKZ8pwnaP9a6ja01hoVDa19MzquptUoW1xuMeMRLeWpRr3vTjg-p_Lgx-AD3KwwUhLYZBeZCvFqLvAofv22hhC-nUpJTRMDI-QVkhLQkfNFq/s1600/Denial.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="565" data-original-width="850" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz8YK0ez7j75q3WmxzyFp0sVPO3IwiudiZVKZ8pwnaP9a6ja01hoVDa19MzquptUoW1xuMeMRLeWpRr3vTjg-p_Lgx-AD3KwwUhLYZBeZCvFqLvAofv22hhC-nUpJTRMDI-QVkhLQkfNFq/s400/Denial.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
If you've yet to read "The True Believer" by Eric Hoffer, you'd best get on it.<br />
<br />
In a world ruled by True Believer ignorance and hutzpah, the more you know about this self-perpetuating phenomena, the better off you'll be. Not happier or more content, rather less frustrated and ready to scream.<br />
<br />
As to why people ignore facts, truth or science in what they believe, read on.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Why we stick to false beliefs: Feedback trumps hard evidence</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
New study finds that feedback rather than hard evidence makes us more confident that we're right</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Ever wonder why flat earthers, birthers, climate change and Holocaust deniers stick to their beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary? New findings from researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, suggest that feedback, rather than hard evidence, boosts people's sense of certainty when learning new things or trying to tell right from wrong.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
Developmental psychologists have found that people's beliefs are more likely to be reinforced by the positive or negative reactions they receive in response to an opinion, task or interaction, than by logic, reasoning and scientific data.<br />
<br />
Their findings, published in the online issue of the journal Open Mind, shed new light on how people handle information that challenges their worldview, and how certain learning habits can limit one's intellectual horizons.<br />
<br />
"If you think you know a lot about something, even though you don't, you're less likely to be curious enough to explore the topic further, and will fail to learn how little you know," said study lead author Louis Marti, a Ph.D. student in psychology at UC Berkeley.<br />
<br />
This cognitive dynamic can play out in all walks of actual and virtual life, including social media and cable-news echo chambers, and may explain why some people are easily duped by charlatans.<br />
<br />
"If you use a crazy theory to make a correct prediction a couple of times, you can get stuck in that belief and may not be as interested in gathering more information," said study senior author Celeste Kidd, an assistant professor of psychology at UC Berkeley.<br />
<br />
Specifically, the study examined what influences people's certainty while learning. It found that study participants' confidence was based on their most recent performance rather than long-term cumulative results. The experiments were conducted at the University of Rochester.<br />
<br />
For the study, more than 500 adults, recruited online through Amazon's Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform, looked at different combinations of colored shapes on their computer screens. They were asked to identify which colored shapes qualified as a "Daxxy," a make-believe object invented by the researchers for the purpose of the experiment.<br />
<br />
With no clues about the defining characteristics of a Daxxy, study participants had to guess blindly which items constituted a Daxxy as they viewed 24 different colored shapes and received feedback on whether they had guessed right or wrong. After each guess, they reported on whether or not they were certain of their answer.<br />
<br />
The final results showed that participants consistently based their certainty on whether they had correctly identified a Daxxy during the last four or five guesses instead of all the information they had gathered throughout.<br />
<br />
"What we found interesting is that they could get the first 19 guesses in a row wrong, but if they got the last five right, they felt very confident," Marti said. "It's not that they weren't paying attention, they were learning what a Daxxy was, but they weren't using most of what they learned to inform their certainty."<br />
<br />
An ideal learner's certainty would be based on the observations amassed over time as well as the feedback, Marti said.<br />
<br />
"If your goal is to arrive at the truth, the strategy of using your most recent feedback, rather than all of the data you've accumulated, is not a great tactic," he said.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of California - Berkeley. Original written by Yasmin Anwar. Louis Martí, Francis Mollica, Steven Piantadosi, Celeste Kidd. <a href="https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/opmi_a_00017">Certainty Is Primarily Determined by Past Performance During Concept Learning.</a> <i>Open Mind</i>, 2018</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-81448683673118937892018-09-04T08:12:00.000-07:002018-09-04T08:12:45.176-07:00Does helping people affect your brain?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for helping someone" height="266" src="https://ravishly-9ac9.kxcdn.com/cdn/farfuture/QxLcnknJ6UCgn3TfzoAplOCysQ_Rcj1J6TTnJYCEpHo/mtime:1486665392/sites/default/files/ThinkstockPhotos-514504806.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: Ravishly</span></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
Yes, it does.<br />
<br />
For the better.<br />
<br />
Next question.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">How does helping people affect your brain? </span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Study shows neurobiological effects of giving social support</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Providing "targeted" social support to other people in need activates regions of the brain involved in parental care- which may help researchers understand the positive health effects of social ties, reports a study in Psychosomatic Medicine: Journal of Biobehavioral Medicine, the official journal of the American Psychosomatic Society.</b></div>
<br />
By comparison, providing "untargeted" support such as giving to charity does not have the same neurobiological effects, according to the new research by Tristen K. Inagaki, PhD, and Lauren P. Ross, BA, of University of Pittsburgh. "Our results highlight the unique benefits of giving targeted support and elucidate neural pathways by which giving support may lead to health," the researchers write.<br />
<br />
Study May Show 'Neural Pathway' By Which Providing Support Improves Health<br />
<br />
The researchers performed a pair of experiments to evaluate brain responses to providing different kinds of social support. In the first study, 45 volunteers performed a "giving support" task where they had a chance to win rewards for someone close to them who needed money (targeted support), for charity (untargeted support), or for themselves. As predicted, participants felt more socially connected, and felt that their support was more effective, when giving targeted social support.<br />
<br />
The subjects then underwent an emotional ratings task including functional MRI scanning to assess activation of specific brain areas when giving social support. Providing support, regardless of who received the support, was linked to increased activation of the ventral striatum (VS) and septal area (SA) -- regions previously linked to parental care behaviors in animals. However, only higher activation of the SA when people gave targeted support was associated with lower activity in a brain structure called the amygdala -- sometimes linked to fear and stress responses.<br />
<br />
In the second study, 382 participants provided information on their behavior in giving support (prosocial behavior) and underwent a different emotional ratings task with functional MRI scanning. Once again, those who reported giving more targeted support to others also showed reduced activity in the amygdala. In both studies, giving untargeted support (such as giving to charity) was unrelated to amygdala activity.<br />
<br />
"Humans thrive off social connections and benefit when they act in the service of others' well-being," according to the authors. A previous study by Dr. Inagaki, also published in Psychosomatic Medicine, found that giving social support has positive effects on brain areas involved in stress and reward responses. That study suggested that providing support -- not just receiving it -- may be an important contributor to the physical and mental health benefits of social support.<br />
<br />
The new study adds further evidence that giving targeted support may be uniquely beneficial. Both targeted and untargeted support are linked to increased SA activity, supporting the "warm glow" theory of providing support: we help others, directly or indirectly, simply because it "feels good."<br />
<br />
But the link between increased SA activation and decreased amygdala activity "suggests a neural pathway by which giving support ultimately influence health that is specific to targeted forms of support-giving, such as giving to specific people we know are in need," Dr. Inagaki and Ms. Ross write. The authors note that their study cannot show a cause-and-effect of providing support on activation of the SA or amygdala. They also point out that providing targeted social support does not always lead to improved health -- for example, prolonged caregiving for an ill family member can be detrimental to health.<br />
<br />
The study adds to previous evidence that providing social support to others "may be an overlooked contributor to the well-known link between social ties and health," Dr. Inagaki and Ms. Ross write. They conclude: "Giving targeted support to an identifiable individual in need is uniquely associated with reduced amygdala activity thereby contributing to understanding of how and when giving support may lead to health."<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Wolters Kluwer Health. Tristen K. Inagaki, Lauren P. Ross. <a href="https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00006842-900000000-98689">Neural Correlates of Giving Social Support.</a> <i>Psychosomatic Medicine</i>, 2018</div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-68580695726915796452018-08-30T08:58:00.000-07:002018-08-30T08:58:49.215-07:00Goats prefer happy people<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img height="400" src="https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/08/180828204901_1_900x600.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">Credit: Alan McElligott. </span></div>
<br /><span style="font-size: small;">Dr Alan McElligott with a goat. The goat likes him. Dr McElligott is happy.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
I love science. You never know what type of earthshaking factoid may rear its weird head on any given day. <br />
<br />
Like two days ago.<br />
<br />
When it was announced that goats like happy people.<br />
<br />
And since goats don't appear to be following me around, I must not be happy.<br />
<br />
Go figure.<br />
<br />
I thought I was.<br />
<br />
Here's the report. It explains why goats may or may not be following you around.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">* * * * *</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Goats prefer happy people</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Goats can differentiate between human facial expressions and prefer to interact with happy people, according to a new study led by scientists at Queen Mary University of London. The study, which provides the first evidence of how goats read human emotional expressions, implies that the ability of animals to perceive human facial cues is not limited to those with a long history of domestication as companions, such as dogs and horses.</b></div>
<br />
Writing in the journal Royal Society Open Science, the team describe how 20 goats interacted with images of positive (happy) and negative (angry) human facial expressions and found that they preferred to look and interact with the happy faces.<br />
<br />
Dr Alan McElligott who led the study at Queen Mary University of London and is now based at the University of Roehampton, said: "The study has important implications for how we interact with livestock and other species, because the abilities of animals to perceive human emotions might be widespread and not just limited to pets."<br />
<br />
The study, which was carried out at Buttercups Sanctuary for Goats in Kent, involved the researchers showing goats pairs of unfamiliar grey-scale static human faces of the same individual showing happy and angry facial expressions.<br />
<br />
The team found that images of happy faces elicited greater interaction in the goats who looked at the images, approached them and explored them with their snouts. This was particularly the case when the happy faces were positioned on the right of the test arena suggesting that goats use the left hemisphere of their brains to process positive emotion.<br />
<br />
First author Dr Christian Nawroth, who worked on the study at Queen Mary University of London but is now based at Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology, said: "We already knew that goats are very attuned to human body language, but we did not know how they react to different human emotional expressions, such as anger and happiness. Here, we show for the first time that goats do not only distinguish between these expressions, but they also prefer to interact with happy ones."<br />
<br />
The research has implications for understanding how animals process human emotions.<br />
<br />
Co-author Natalia Albuquerque, from the University of Sao Paulo, said: "The study of emotion perception has already shown very complex abilities in dogs and horses. However, to date, there was no evidence that animals such as goats were capable of reading human facial expressions. Our results open new paths to understanding the emotional lives of all domestic animals."<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Queen Mary University of London. Christian Nawroth, Natalia Albuquerque, Carine Savalli, Marie-Sophie Single, Alan G. McElligott. <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/08/21/1808647115">Goats prefer positive human emotional facial expressions</a>. <i>R. Soc. open sci.</i>, 2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-61666499085241376992018-08-13T12:12:00.002-07:002018-08-13T12:12:53.446-07:00Laziness helped lead to extinction of Homo erectus<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="Image result for lazy cavemen" height="228" src="https://st2.depositphotos.com/1724125/11980/v/950/depositphotos_119800710-stock-illustration-lazy-cartoon-caveman.jpg" width="400" /></div>
<br />
<br />
I am a great fan of laziness in all its many forms. <br />
<br />
An enthusiastic practitioner of lethargy and ennui. <br />
<br />
Sloth becomes me.<br />
<br />
Always looking for the easiest way to avoid anything remotely like effort or expending energy.<br />
<br />
Now it turns out that while this may a personally gratifying life strategy for the individual, it does not bode well for the species. <br />
<br />
Rats.<br />
<br />
So it's not survival of the fattest.<br />
<br />
Who knew? <br />
<br />
Too late to change now.<br />
<br />
Here's the report:<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">* * * * *</span></b></div>
<br />
<b style="text-align: justify;">An archaeological excavation of ancient human populations in the Arabian Peninsula during the Early Stone Age, found that Homo erectus used 'least-effort strategies' for tool making and collecting resources. This 'laziness' paired with an inability to adapt to a changing climate likely played a role in the species going extinct, according to lead researcher Dr Ceri Shipton of the ANU School of Culture, History and Language.</b><br />
<br />
"They really don't seem to have been pushing themselves," Dr Shipton said.<br />
<br />
"I don't get the sense they were explorers looking over the horizon. They didn't have that same sense of wonder that we have."<br />
<br />
Dr Shipton said this was evident in the way the species made their stone tools and collected resources.<br />
<br />
"To make their stone tools they would use whatever rocks they could find lying around their camp, which were mostly of comparatively low quality to what later stone tool makers used," he said.<br />
<br />
"At the site we looked at there was a big rocky outcrop of quality stone just a short distance away up a small hill.<br />
<br />
"But rather than walk up the hill they would just use whatever bits had rolled down and were lying at the bottom.<br />
<br />
"When we looked at the rocky outcrop there were no signs of any activity, no artefacts and no quarrying of the stone.<br />
<br />
"They knew it was there, but because they had enough adequate resources they seem to have thought, 'why bother?'."<br />
<br />
This is in contrast to the stone tool makers of later periods, including early Homo sapiens and Neanderthals, who were climbing mountains to find good quality stone and transporting it over long distances.<br />
<br />
Dr Shipton said a failure to progress technologically, as their environment dried out into a desert, also contributed to the population's demise.<br />
<br />
"Not only were they lazy, but they were also very conservative," Dr Shipton said.<br />
<br />
"The sediment samples showed the environment around them was changing, but they were doing the exact same things with their tools.<br />
<br />
"There was no progression at all, and their tools are never very far from these now dry river beds. I think in the end the environment just got too dry for them."<br />
<br />
The excavation and survey work was undertaken in 2014 at the site of Saffaqah near Dawadmi in central Saudi Arabia.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by Australian National University. Ceri Shipton, James Blinkhorn, Paul S. Breeze, Patrick Cuthbertson, Nick Drake, Huw S. Groucutt, Richard P. Jennings, Ash Parton, Eleanor M. L. Scerri, Abdullah Alsharekh, Michael D. Petraglia. <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200497">Acheulean technology and landscape use at Dawadmi, central Arabia. </a><i>PLOS ONE</i>, 2018.</span></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4505395079993102296.post-43203408635904310382018-08-08T11:43:00.003-07:002018-08-08T11:43:50.577-07:00Eat Crickets? Good For You, Safe In High Doses, and Yummy.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Image result for eating crickets" height="266" src="https://worldsfairnano.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Chopstick-eating-crickets-3.6.13.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="400" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Source: <a class="o5rIVb irc_hol i3724 irc_lth" data-noload="" data-ved="2ahUKEwi4g-ypsNzcAhUBOn0KHYaxCPgQjB16BAgBEAQ" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi4g-ypsNzcAhUBOn0KHYaxCPgQjB16BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fworldsfairnano.com%2Fcould-crickets-be-the-cuisine-of-the-future%2F&psig=AOvVaw3r0Pm4w2udH2Ku97vrq2MT&ust=1533780643610194" jsaction="mousedown:irc.rl;keydown:irc.rlk" rel="noopener" style="background-color: #222222; color: #d6d6d6; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; outline: none; text-align: start;" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span class="irc_ho" dir="ltr" style="margin-right: -2px; padding-right: 2px; unicode-bidi: isolate;">Worlds Fair Nano</span></a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
They're especially good for you if you catch your own. Which means running around like a head with its chicken cut off, in the back yard, like Rocky trying to catch a chicken to improve his footwork. trying to snare them using chopsticks like Mr. Muyagi in The Karate Kid.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2e/Pat-Morita_%28Karate_Kid%29.jpg/250px-Pat-Morita_%28Karate_Kid%29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Image result for Mr. MiyAGI" border="0" height="200" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2e/Pat-Morita_%28Karate_Kid%29.jpg/250px-Pat-Morita_%28Karate_Kid%29.jpg" width="155" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;">Mr. Miyagi is a fictional karate</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;">master played by Japanese-</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;">American actor Pat Morita.</span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
No, Seriously.<br />
<br />
Crickets are great protein.<br />
<br />
It appears you cannot overeat them.<br />
<br />
They're great for your gut.<br />
<br />
They reduce inflammation.<br />
<br />
They may even reduce depression and help prevent cancer.<br />
<br />
What more do you want??<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>* * * * *</b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Eating crickets can be good for your gut</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>A new clinical trial shows that consuming crickets can help support the growth of beneficial gut bacteria and that eating crickets is not only safe at high doses but may also reduce inflammation in the body.</b></div>
<br />
Researcher Valerie Stull was 12 when she ate her first insect. "I was on a trip with my parents in Central America and we were served fried ants," she says. "I remember being so grossed out initially, but when I put the ant in my mouth, I was really surprised because it tasted like food -- and it was good!"<br />
<br />
Today, Stull, a recent doctoral graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, is the lead author of a new pilot clinical trial published in the journal Scientific Reports that looks at what eating crickets does to the human microbiome.<br />
<br />
It shows that consuming crickets can help support the growth of beneficial gut bacteria and that eating crickets is not only safe at high doses but may also reduce inflammation in the body.<br />
<br />
"There is a lot of interest right now in edible insects," Stull says. "It's gaining traction in Europe and in the U.S. as a sustainable, environmentally friendly protein source compared to traditional livestock."<br />
<br />
More than 2 billion people around the world regularly consume insects, which are also a good source of protein, vitamins, minerals and healthy fats. The research team was interested in documenting for the first time via clinical trial the health effects of eating them.<br />
<br />
"This study is important because insects represent a novel component in Western diets and their health effects in human populations haven't really been studied," says co-corresponding author Tiffany Weir, a professor of food science and human nutrition at Colorado State University. "With what we now know about the gut microbiota and its relationship to human health, it's important to establish how a novel food might affect gut microbial populations. We found that cricket consumption may actually offer benefits beyond nutrition."<br />
<br />
Raising insects for protein not only helps protect the environment, but also offers a more healthful option than meat in many wealthy countries with high-meat diets, says co-author Jonathan Patz, director of the UW-Madison Global Health Institute, where Stull will begin a postdoctoral research position in the fall.<br />
<br />
Crickets, like other insects, contain fibers, such as chitin, that are different from the dietary fiber found in foods like fruits and vegetables. Fiber serves as a microbial food source and some fiber types promote the growth of beneficial bacteria, also known as probiotics. The small trial probed whether insect fibers might influence the bacteria found in the gastrointestinal tract.<br />
<br />
For two weeks, 20 healthy men and women between the ages of 18 and 48 ate either a control breakfast or a breakfast containing 25 grams of powdered cricket meal made into muffins and shakes. Each participant then ate a normal diet for a two-week "washout period." For the following two weeks, those who started on the cricket diet consumed a control breakfast and those who started on the control diet consumed a cricket breakfast.<br />
<br />
Every participant served as their own control for the study and the researchers were blinded with respect to which diet each participant was on at any given time.<br />
<br />
The researchers collected blood samples, stool samples and answers to gastrointestinal questionnaires immediately before the study began, immediately following the first two-week diet period and immediately after the second two-week diet period.<br />
<br />
Participants' blood samples were tested for a host of health measures, like blood glucose and enzymes associated with liver function, and also for levels of a protein associated with inflammation. The fecal samples were tested for the byproducts of microbial metabolism in the human gut, inflammatory chemicals associated with the gastrointestinal tract, and the overall makeup of the microbial communities present in the stools.<br />
<br />
Participants reported no significant gastrointestinal changes or side effects and the researchers found no evidence of changes to overall microbial composition or changes to gut inflammation. They did see an increase in a metabolic enzyme associated with gut health, and a decrease in an inflammatory protein in the blood called TNF-alpha, which has been linked to other measures of well-being, like depression and cancer.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the team saw an increase in the abundance of beneficial gut bacteria like Bifidobacterium animalis, a strain that has been linked to improved gastrointestinal function and other measures of health in studies of a commercially available strain called BB-12.<br />
<br />
But, the researchers say, more and larger studies are needed to replicate these findings and determine what components of crickets may contribute to improved gut health. "This very small study shows that this is something worth looking at in the future when promoting insects as a sustainable food source," says Stull.<br />
<br />
Stull is co-founder of an award-winning startup and research collaboration called MIGHTi, the Mission to Improve Global Health Through Insects. In the future, MIGHTi hopes to provide home-use insect-farming kits to communities that already consume insects, including many in southern Africa. Insects require far less water to farm than traditional livestock and can help improve food security in impoverished communities while providing economic opportunities to women.<br />
<br />
"Most of the insects consumed around the world are wild-harvested where they are and when they are available," says Stull, who has eaten insects -- including caterpillars, cicadas, grasshoppers and beetle larvae -- all over the world. "People love flying termites in Zambia, which come out only once or twice a year and are really good; they taste like popcorn and are a crunchy, oily snack."<br />
<br />
She hopes to promote insects as a more mainstream food in the United States, and though the industry is currently small, the rise of edible insect producers and companies using insects in their food products may make this possible.<br />
<br />
"Food is very tied to culture, and 20 or 30 years ago, no one in the U.S. was eating sushi because we thought it was disgusting, but now you can get it at a gas station in Nebraska," she says.<br />
<br />
The study was funded by a multistate Hatch project (W3122: Beneficial and Adverse Effects of Natural Chemicals on Human Heath and Food Safety), the Karen Morris-Fine New Investigator Success Fund, the Climate Quest competition, and the Clinical and Translational Science Award program of the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR000427). Entomo Farms donated a portion of the cricket powder used in the study.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Story Source</b>: Materials provided by University of Wisconsin-Madison, original by Kelly April Tyrrell. Valerie J. Stull, Elijah Finer, Rachel S. Bergmans, Hallie P. Febvre, Colin Longhurst, Daniel K. Manter, Jonathan A. Patz, Tiffany L. Weir. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-29032-2">Impact of Edible Cricket Consumption on Gut Microbiota in Healthy Adults, a Double-blind, Randomized Crossover Trial</a>. <i>Scientific Reports</i>, 2018; </span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<br /></div>
Jim Fisherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563688818199726793noreply@blogger.com2