Friday, October 26, 2007

How The Brain Generates The Human Tendency For Optimism

ScienceDaily (Oct. 25, 2007) — A neural network that may generate the human tendency to be optimistic has been identified by researchers at New York University. As humans, we expect to live longer and be more successful than average, and we underestimate our likelihood of getting a divorce or having cancer. The results, reported in Nature, link the optimism bias to the same brain regions that show irregularities in depression.


The study was conducted by a team of researchers from the laboratory of NYU Professor Elizabeth Phelps. The lead author is Tali Sharot, now a post-doctoral fellow at University College London.

The NYU researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine brain function while participants thought of possible future life events (such as "winning an award" or "the end of a romantic relationship").

"When participants imagined positive future events relative to negative ones, enhanced activation was detected in the rostral anterior cingulate and amygdala, which are the same brain areas that seem to malfunction in depression," said Sharot. "Activation of the rostral anterior cingulate was correlated with trait optimism, with more optimistic participants showing greater activity in this region when imagining future positive events."

The team found that participants were more likely to expect positive events to happen closer in the future than negative events, and to imagine them with greater vividness.

"Our behavioral results suggest that while the past is constrained, the future is open to interpretation, allowing people to distance themselves from possible negative events and move closer toward positive ones," said Phelps, a professor of psychology and neural science. "Understanding optimism is critical as optimism has been related to physical and mental health. On the other hand, a pessimistic view is correlated with severity of depression symptoms."

The brain imaging findings offer a possible mechanism mediating the behaviorally observed optimism bias. The rostral anterior cingulate has previously been shown to be involved in the regulation of emotional responses. The current results suggest that in healthy individuals this region may help integrate and regulate emotional and autobiographical information to generate a positive view of the future.

The research was supported by the National Institutes for Mental Health, the Seaver Foundation, and a Margaret and Herman Sokol Postdoctoral Fellowship.

Adapted from materials provided by New York University.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

7 Reality Checks

From Psychology Today/ How to Handle Rejection
By:Carlin Flora

If you anticipate rebuffs and overreact when they occur, you're operating under the influence of cognitive biases and false beliefs. Here's how to straighten out your thinking.

  1. Expect Rejection

    Belief: Everyone should like me, and if someone doesn't, it's a catastrophe.

    Reality Check: Inevitably, some people will not like you. "I tell people to ask themselves, 'What are all the things I can still do if so-and-so doesn't like me?' " says Robert Leahy, psychologist and author of The Worry Cure. "The answer is always that there is nothing they can't do."

  2. Learn from Playground Politics

    Belief: Popular people never get turned down.

    Reality Check: What distinguishes the popular kids in the school yard from the less popular ones is not the number of rebuffs they get, but how they handle them.

  3. It's Not Always About You

    Belief: Slights reflect poorly on me and everybody will remember them.

    Reality Check: Someone may snub you because you remind him of an old friend with whom he had a bitter falling out, or because he's about to be evicted and is in a state of panic. Even if your behavior is the problem, other people won't likely notice or remember.

  4. The Thing They Hate May Be The Thing You Love

    Belief: There must be something inherently wrong with me.

    Reality Check: You may be disliked because someone disagrees with the very values you cherish.

  5. Learn to live with Shades of Gray

    Belief: People should have only one feeling about me—either they accept me, or they don't.

    Reality Check: It's natural for others to feel ambivalent about you. You may do or say something that a friend doesn't like, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't also love and respect you.

  6. Avoid the Overthinking Trap

    Belief: If I keep chewing on my worries, I can figure them out and I will feel better.

    Reality Check: When you are ruminating, your snowballing negative thoughts crush your ability to come up with good solutions to your problems. First distract yourself with a pleasant activity such as meditating or gardening, says Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, author of Eating, Drinking, Overthinking, and then take concrete action to improve your situation. If you're worried about getting fired, ask for some feedback and change accordingly.

  7. Don't Rush to Judgment

    Belief: If I think I've been dissed, I should immediately seek reassurance from and/or confront the offender.

    Reality Check: Most explanations for others' behaviors are quite benign. Give people the benefit of the doubt, or you may push them away with your desperation or hostility.

Original source: http://www.psychologytoday.com/rss/pto-20070723-000013.html

The Science Of Collective Decision-making

Source: Association for Psychological Science
Date: September 21, 2007

Science Daily — Why do some juries take weeks to reach a verdict, while others take just hours? How do judges pick the perfect beauty queen from a sea of very similar candidates? We have all wondered exactly why we did not win a certain award. Now, new psychological research explains how groups come to a collective decision.

Jean-François Bonnefon, a University of Toulouse psychologist, conducted the first empirical investigation of the "doctrinal paradox." This occurs when judges, say a hiring committee or a jury, must evaluate several factors about a candidate, (e.g. a possible employee or a defendant in a trial) and come to a majority decision. When different opinions arise, the way they conduct the majority vote can be more important than the opinions themselves.

For example, a seven-judge committee must decide whether to promote a candidate to a position requiring a young, trilingual person. Each judge estimates whether the candidate is young, and whether she is trilingual. In the end, 4 out of 7 judges think she is young and 4 out of 7 think that she is trilingual, but only two of the judges think she is both. How should the committee proceed? They can all vote on the profile, and reject the candidate, or they can vote separately on each criterion and promote the candidate.

Bonnefon investigated which voting procedure was preferred by judges, and how this preference could change in different contexts. He presented the aforementioned situation to over 1.000 participants. Their responses, which are outlined in the September issue of Psychological Science, showed that profile-voting was preferred for simplicity reasons. The preference declined when the criteria were not likely to be simultaneously met by the candidate and the judges were then more likely to adopt criteria-voting.

Bonnefon also points out that "Just as jurors tend to eschew conviction when they lack a clear majority, judges showed some tendency to adopt whichever of the voting procedures that yielded the most lenient decision."

Bonnefon writes that the doctrinal paradox is a "shadowy aspect of the majority rule," and that while the majority rule may be appealing to reach a quick decision, it is also critical to investigate its potential for inconsistencies.

Article: "How Do Individuals Solve the Doctrinal Paradox in Collective Decisions? An Empirical Investigation."

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Association for Psychological Science.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Mind Your Body: A Higher Road to Relaxation

From: Psychology Today
By:Stephanie Gold

You're under pressure. Deadlines are looming. Everyone is making demands on your time. Your anxiety level is rising. Your stomach is in knots. So you do what you've been well-trained to do. You make sure you get in your gym time.

But if neuroscientist Steven W. Porges is right, there's an even better way to counter stress. Exercise has its uses, but as a stress fighter it works primarily at a visceral level—and the operative word is fight. You're basically combating excess levels of cortisol, the hormone that spreads news of danger through your body and readies it to fight or flee.

You're better off working through higher—and more direct—channels, like the brain. The most efficient stress-reducer might just be a smile. Engaging socially with others triggers neural circuits that calm the heart, relax the gut, and switch off fear, Porges says.

The path from sociability to tranquillity is paved by the vagus nerve, the main route of the parasympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system. The vagus wanders from brain stem to body, carrying signals to organs like the heart, lungs, and intestines, and regulating a number of facial muscles to boot. The vagus influences heart rate and breathing. It is intimately involved in how we perceive, react to, and recover from stress. When the vagus nerve is activated, heart rate slows, blood pressure drops, and the body enters a state of physical calm.

Over time, nature has elaborated a three-tier system of wiring to enable us to respond to immediate risk, says Porges, director of the Brain-Body Center at the University of Illinois.

All three are concerned with sorting out safety from danger, friend from foe. When we feel unsafe, we generally activate the fight-or-flight response, which conducts its business through the other half of the autonomic system, the sympathetic branch. Activation of sympathetic pathways is the physiological equivalent of pushing the panic button.

Older and more rudimentary among response strategies is total shutdown—freezing and immobilization. It's accomplished through an older version of the vagus nerve. So primitive is this vestigial channel, a holdover from our invertebrate past, that it lacks a protective coating of myelin, the fatty substance that sheathes most nerves in mammals, speeding the transmission of impulses.

Then there's the myelinated vagus, which serves as the pinnacle of our evolved capabilities. Linking the cranial nerves serving face, voice, and ears with the heart, lungs, and gut, it gives facial expressions and vocalizations privileged access to the circuitry modulating our visceral reactions. It is normally activated only under conditions of safety, but it provides the body with a much less taxing, and far more rewarding, escape from anxiety than fighting or fleeing.

When we scan our surroundings for risks, sweet smiles with gentle eye contact and soft voices with rhythmic inflections cue the brain structures that regulate the vagus nerve. The viscera lighten up: Heart rate slows, breathing eases. Stress switches off. You feel safe enough to move closer. Intimacy is now possible. Think of the vagus nerve as a social engagement system. And it works two ways. Social engagement creates the sense of safety that calms the viscera. And released from gut-wrenching anxiety, your insides now enable you to advance your social agenda, which further calms you.

Social interactions are very important in our experience as human beings, Porges says, and the social engagement system determines the quality of those interactions. Further, he calls the power of this system "amazing" both in terms of its effects on behavior and mental state and the speed with which it works. Not only do coping strategies like exercise tackle stress primarily at the visceral level, they actually work against deployment of the higher system. You may think exercise is curative, Porges says, but the calm you get from jogging 10 miles is more analgesic than therapeutic.

Exercise actually turns off the social engagement system by stimulating the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system, which dampens the function of the vagus. Among its effects: blocking sensitivity to social cues. Distraction by some novelty may seem alluring at times of stress, but it bypasses the vagus nerve entirely and works at cross purposes to it. If your gut's in a knot, new and strange input will only aggravate the jitters. You're better off with old friends or favorite tunes than experimental sounds or the party where you don't know a soul. A skittish nervous system is really requesting familiarity and predictability, which is a metaphor for safety, Porges says.

Porges contends that our reaction to challenge is organized hierarchically, and that the evolutionarily newer neural circuits inhibit the older ones. We use the newer circuit to promote calm states, to soothe ourselves, and to engage with others. When this doesn't work, we mobilize for fight-or-flight behaviors. And if that doesn't do it, we resort to the old vagal system and freeze.

Our reaction to danger and the mobilization of defensive systems, rather than the engagement system, happens automatically, Porges observes. It's not a voluntary choice. It's as if our nervous system has betrayed us. But that doesn't mean we're stuck. "The mantra I use," Porges says, "is when your nervous system fails you, use behavior." To cope with such betrayals, we can learn to compensate—by moving into a quiet room or moving into social relationships rather than away from them.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Sarcastic Masters: When to Take The Edge Off

By:Elizabeth Svoboda

From: Psychology Today


Yes, you're sharp. But are you cutting too deep? Here's how to ensure people don't take what you say the wrong way.

  • Know your audience.

    People have as wide a range of tolerance for sarcasm as they do for liquor. "If the person at the receiving end of sarcasm knows it's meant as a joke, the reaction may be more positive," Joakim says. "But I try not to be sarcastic with total strangers. That's usually not pretty."

  • Scan before you send.

    It's best to avoid snarkiness in e-mails and text messages. Sarcasm is highly dependent on tone, while people tend to take typed notes more literally. As silly as those smiley-face emoticons are, use one if there is any possibility that your message could be misinterpreted.

  • Examine your motivations.

    Some people resort to over-the-top sarcasm in an attempt to shore up their own self-image. Consider whether you yourself harbor feelings of inadequacy. Once you feel comfortable with who you are, you won't need to hide behind a veil of sarcasm.

  • Err on the side of caution.

    If you're unsure how the target of your statement will respond, it's best not to unleash sarcasm at all, as Mosteller has learned. "If I'm around my husband's boss, I hold my tongue," she says. "I know that once I open my mouth, things are just going to keep coming."