the latest news from Psychology sites
Fri, 25 Jul 2014 Anti-inflammatory drug can prevent neuron loss in Parkinson's model
An experimental anti-inflammatory drug can protect vulnerable neurons and reduce motor deficits in a rat model of Parkinson's disease, a study has shown. The findings demonstrate that the drug, called XPro1595, can reach the brain at sufficient levels and have beneficial effects when administered by subcutaneous injection, like an insulin shot. Previous studies of XPro1595 in animals tested more invasive modes of delivery, such as direct injection into the brain.
A protein that controls when genes are switched on or off plays a key role in specific areas of the brain to regulate metabolism, researchers have found. The research potentially could lead to new therapies to treat obesity and diabetes, since the transcription factor involved – spliced X-box binding protein 1 – appears to influence the body's sensitivity to insulin and leptin signaling.
Fri, 25 Jul 2014 Brain tumor causes, risk factors elude scientists
Today, nearly 700,000 people in the U.S. are living with a brain tumor, and yet, when it comes to pinpointing causes or risk factors, scientists are still searching for answers. "Unlike the strong correlation between smoking and lung cancer, we just haven't found a specific risk factor like that for brain tumors," said a researcher. "We have determined that ionizing radiation to the head is a risk factor when received in therapeutic doses, but even in those cases, the risk of developing a brain tumor is low."
Thu, 24 Jul 2014 Klotho: neuroprotective against Alzheimer's disease
Researchers may have found a way to delay or even prevent Alzheimer's disease. They discovered that pre-treatment of neurons with the anti-aging protein Klotho can prevent neuron death in the presence of the toxic amyloid protein and glutamate. Alzheimer's disease is the most frequent age-related dementia affecting 5.4 million Americans including 13 percent of people age 65 and older and more than 40 percent of people over the age of 85.
Thu, 24 Jul 2014 Brain's dynamic duel underlies win-win choices
People choosing between two or more equally positive outcomes experience paradoxical feelings of pleasure and anxiety, feelings associated with activity in different regions of the brain, according to research. In the study, participants made choices between paired products with different or similar values. Choosing between two items of high value evoked the most positive feelings and the greatest anxiety.Scott Lilienfeld and his colleagues. The fear is that this can lead to the continued practice of ineffective, or even harmful, treatments.
The authors point out that, like the rest of us, clinicians are subject to four main biases that skew their ability to infer the effectiveness of their psychotherapeutic treatments. This includes the mistaken belief that we see the world precisely as it is (naive realism), and our tendency to pursue evidence that backs our initial beliefs (the confirmation bias). The other two are illusory control and illusory correlations - thinking we have more control over events than we do, and assuming the factors we're focused on are causally responsible for observed changes.
These features of human thought lead to several specific mistakes that psychotherapists and others commit when they make claims about the effectiveness of psychological therapies. Lilienfeld's team call these mistakes "causes of spurious therapeutic effectiveness" or CSTEs for short. The authors have created a taxonomy of 26 CSTEs arranged into three categories.
The first category includes 15 mistakes that lead to the perception that a client has improved, when in fact he or she has not. These include palliative benefits (when the client feels better about their symptoms without actually showing any tangible improvement); confusing insight with improvement (when the client better understands their problems, but does not actually show recovery); and the therapist's office error (confusing a client's presentation in-session with their behaviour in everyday life).
The second category consists of errors that lead therapists and their clients to infer that symptom improvements were due to the therapy, and not some other factor, such as natural recovery that would have occurred anyway. Among these eight mistakes are a failure to recognise that many disorders are cyclical (periods of recovery interspersed with phases of more intense symptoms); ignoring the influence of events occurring outside of therapy, such as an improved relationship or job situation; and the influence of maturation (disorders seen in children and teens can fade as they develop).
The third and final category of errors are those that lead to the assumption that improvements are causes by unique features of a therapy, rather than factors that are common to all therapies. Examples here include not recognising placebo effects (improvements stemming from expectations) and novelty effects (improvements due to initial enthusiasm).
To counter the many CSTEs, Lilienfeld's group argue we need to deploy research methods including using well-validated outcome measures, taking pre-treatment measures, blinding observers to treatment condition, conducting repeated measurements (thus reducing the biasing impact of irregular everyday life events), and using control groups that are subjected to therapeutic effects common to all therapies, but not those unique to the treatment approach under scrutiny.
"CSTEs underscore the pressing need to inculcate humility in clinicians, researchers, and students," conclude Lilienfeld and his colleagues. "We are all prone to neglecting CSTEs, not because of a lack of intelligence but because of inherent limitations in human information processing. As a consequence, all mental health professionals and consumers should be sceptical of confident proclamations of treatment breakthroughs in the absence of rigorous outcome data."
Lilienfeld, S., Ritschel, L., Lynn, S., Cautin, R., & Latzman, R. (2014). Why Ineffective Psychotherapies Appear to Work: A Taxonomy of Causes of Spurious Therapeutic Effectiveness Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9 (4), 355-387 DOI: 10.1177/1745691614535216
When therapy causes harm
Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.
2014-07-26 Link feast
Getting Over Procrastination
Maria Konnikova with an overview of some fascinating genetic research.
The End of ‘Genius’
"[T]he lone genius is a myth that has outlived its usefulness" writes Joshua Shenk.
Do You Need a Mental Health First Aider in The Office?
Mental health "first aider" Charlotte Walker explains her role.
Won’t They Help?
Dwyer Gunn for Aeon magazine looks at new programmes that are using psychological insights to combat the Bystander Phenomenon.
Dude, Where’s My Frontal Cortex?
Robert Sapolsky describes the advantages and disadvantages of the "unique" teenage brain.
Hundreds of Genes and Link to Immune System Found in Largest Genetic Schizophrenia Study
Michael O'Donovan explains the implications of the findings from the recent study he co-authored.
What’s Up With That: Why Does Sleeping In Just Make Me More Tired?
Nick Stockton for WIRED on the perils of too much sleep.
How Tests Make Us Smarter
Psychologist Henry L. Roediger III on the implications of his findings for educational policy.
Detecting Dementia: The First Steps Towards Dignity
Tania Browne explains why in future opticians may have an important role to play in detecting dementia.
Is One of the Most Popular Psychology Experiments Worthless?
Olga Khazan at The Atlantic asks whether its time to retire the "trolley problem" used in so many moral psychology experiments.
Post compiled by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.
2014-07-25 How our judgments about criminals are swayed by disgust, biological explanations and animalistic descriptions
Beatrice Capestany and Lasana Harris focused on two main factors - the disgust level of a crime, and whether or not the perpetrators' personality was described in biological terms. Seventeen participants were presented with pairs of crime vignettes, with each crime in a pair matched for severity in terms of US Federal sentencing guidelines, but one crime high in disgust value, the other low. For example, one vignette described a man pulling a gun on a love rival, taking aim and missing. The matching vignette described a man who stabbed his boss with scissors, once in the neck and once in the back, causing serious blood loss.
Each vignette concluded with a personality description that was either trait-based (e.g. Gerald has an impulsive personality) or biological (e.g. Terry has a gene mutation that makes him impulsive). These contrasting personality descriptions were always irrelevant to the crime - so, in the aforementioned impulsivity examples, the crime in question was pre-meditated.
Capestany and Harris found that participants recommended more serious punishments for crimes that were more disgusting. This sounds like emotion clouding judgment. But in a sense, greater disgust made participants more reliable decision makers because when disgust levels were high, the participants' recommendations more closely matched Federal sentencing guidelines. Perhaps, the researchers surmised, this is because the US legal system is rooted in historical moral judgments that were guided by disgust reactions.
Capestany and Harris also scanned the brains of their participants. This revealed greater engagement of brain regions involved in logical reasoning when participants were presented with crimes higher in disgust. In other words, a stronger emotional reaction to the crime actually led to greater activation of neural areas involved in logic.
When it came to the influence of the personality descriptions, participants judged criminals to be less culpable when they'd been described in biological terms, presumably because biological factors are perceived as deterministic and reduce the sense that the criminal has control over their behaviour. The brain scans showed greater recruitment of logical reasoning centres when vignettes included trait (non-biological) descriptions of the criminal's personality, so perhaps participants jumped to conclusions when given biological information.
"Biological personality descriptions dehumanise the person, reducing them to a mechanistic, biological organism and not a human being whose mental states are highly unique and salient during responsibility judgments," the researchers said.
Another way that a suspect can be dehumanised is by describing their actions in animalistic terms. This is what happened in the the UK with the real life case of Raoul Moat in 2010, after he shot three people in England. He was described in the media as a "brute" and like "an animal in the wild" when he went on the run.
A team led by Eduardo Vasquez has investigated people's sentencing decisions when criminal acts are described in animalistic terms (e.g. "... the perpetrator slunk onto the victim's premises ... He roared at the victim before pounding him with his fists") versus in non-animalistic terms, but with wording matched for seriousness (e.g. "the perpetrator stole onto the victim's premises ... He shouted at the victim before punching him with his fists").
Seventy-six participants recommended more serious sentences (one to two years extra duration) for criminals whose behaviour was described in animalistic terms. A follow-up study suggested this was because criminals described in animalistic terms were predicted to be more likely to re-offend.
Vasquez and his colleagues said their results "add to a growing body of literature examining the consequences of dehumanisation". They admitted that the implications for actual trials are unclear - after all, the descriptions they used are rarely heard in court. Nonetheless, they said there could be real-life relevance: "Media reports influence legal proceedings and most people rely on the media for information about criminal justice... People exposed to these [animalistic] descriptions may vote for harsher policies to address crime."
Capestany, B., & Harris, L. (2014). Disgust and biological descriptions bias logical reasoning during legal decision-making Social Neuroscience, 9 (3), 265-277 DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2014.892531
Vasquez, E., Loughnan, S., Gootjes-Dreesbach, E., & Weger, U. (2014). The animal in you: Animalistic descriptions of a violent crime increase punishment of perpetrator Aggressive Behavior, 40 (4), 337-344 DOI: 10.1002/ab.21525
Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 Cognitive Daily Closes Shop after a Fantastic Five-Year Run
Five years ago today, we made the first post that would eventually make its way onto a blog called Cognitive Daily. We thought we were keeping notes for a book, but in reality we were helping build a network that represented a new way of sharing psychology with the world. Cognitive Daily wasn’t the first…
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 Both musicians and non-musicians can perceive bitonality
Take a listen to this brief audio clip of “Unforgettable.” Aside from the fact that it’s a computer-generated MIDI performance, do you hear anything unusual? If you’re a non-musician like me, you might not have noticed anything. It sounds basically like the familiar song, even though the synthesized sax isn’t nearly as pleasing as the…
Thu, 14 Jan 2010 Synesthesia and the McGurk effect
We’ve discussed synesthesia many times before on Cognitive Daily — it’s the seemingly bizarre phenomenon when one stimulus (e.g. a sight or a sound) is experienced in multiple modalities (e.g. taste, vision, or colors). For example, a person might experience a particular smell whenever a given word or letter is seen or heard. Sometimes particular…