text:
Is there scientific evidence that IQ tests measure intelligence?
IQ tests are quite popular, but they seem to be lacking a scientific proof confirming their accuracy of measuring ones intelligence.
No matter how hard I've searched I haven't been able to find a scientific paper proving the result, all I could find was some questionable statistical studies but I am not interested in such, I am looking for a more fundamental proof, one that shows the relation of this test with the actual biological processes in the brain.
My guess would be that the only thing IQ tests measure is how good someone is at IQ tests, since one can actually get a good score due to training.
Another thing to keep in mind is that, people working in mathematics, physics and related sciences tend to get better scores and this can be explained by the fact that this is what they do, this is their job and they have spent a large amount of time studying patterns, but this however does not mean that they are necessarily smarter that others they are just trained at this.
A mathematician for example, given a sequence 2,3,5,7,... can see that the next term is 11 since this is a familiar sequence to him, but to an artist it may not be familiar at all.
Having said that, do IQ tests actually measure human intelligence?
Is there a strict proof that confirms this?

If you want to test whether IQ measures intelligence, you have to measure intelligence. How do you propose to do so?

I am not an expert so I can't propose anything, this is just a question, in fact I work at something completely different, but given that we don't know how to measure intelligence then claiming that IQ tests do is absurd.

Well, one measure that the experts came up with is the IQ test. If you want to measure intelligence, you probably need some sort of test to do it, right? Otherwise  you just give up and say "can't be measured". It may be absurd (and is often misused), but it's also useful.

But how can we use something we have no proof that is works. As I said in my question, a mathematician can easily find patterns in sequences because that's it's job, so acing an IQ test could mean that you are just a mathematician.

I'd suggest reading the Wikipedia page on IQ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient I think it will show you that you're not alone in your concerns, but also explain what IQ really is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong may be worth a read as well.

I agree with @BryanKrause that this question is not well defined - ie, what proof is there that any test measures what it purports to measure?  In any case, I think this question is a duplicate of: What is the relation between measures, constructs and concepts?

@Kthamil You're suggesting a mathematician would ace an IQ test by virtue of being a mathematician. You're looking at it the wrong way, he is a mathematician because he is intelligent. So, in your example, he would be acing the IQ test due to his intelligence, not his occupation.

@NetServOps I don't agree that mathematicians in general are more intelligent that the rest of the population, they are just trained at this which makes them find some problems easier since they are familiar with them. I know this from personal experience since I myself am a mathematician currently pursuing a ph.d but I would not consider myself smarter than the next guy, I have learned some things and consequently find them easier than someone who has never seen staff like that. Returning to my previous example, a mathematician has seen many patterns so in an IQ test, he would recognize them.

@Kthamil You're doing a ph.d in mathematics, you'd be towards above average intelligence. An IQ test is not a maths test, though you do need a certain level of mathematics knowledge but the level required for an IQ test DOES NOT require you to have a degree in it.
You mention pattern recognition, well recognising patterns is a skill many people have and its something you can improve upon. So your point about mathematicians having an advantage in pattern recognition is not true. I'm not a mathematician but my IQ is high, that fact alone is enough to dispute your claim.

It's true that many people can recognize patterns, never said the opposite, but mathematicians can do so not by necessarily being smarter but because of their familiarity with patterns. Here's an example, I saw a IQ type puzzle on Facebook recently and one guy answers it using mathematics, everyone who saw it, said "man you're a genius" but this is not necessarily true, he just was a mathematician and has seen such problems a million times, this was trivial knowledge for a mathematician, it's not that he was smarter, he just knew the technique to tackle the problem. It was experience.

Also you claim that IQ tests are not math tests, although there are some verbal questions, most of them are about pattern recognition which is a huge branch of mathematics, there are many mathematical techniques used to identify patterns and I am not only talking about numbers, modern mathematics studies much much more than just numbers so in a sense,  IQ tests are math tests, but people who don't know mathematics don't see them as such.

It depends on the way intelligence is defined (which can be discipline-specific). For example, in the field of clinical psychology, intelligence is defined as a statistical correlation between different tasks that require intellectual (again, as agreed upon) effort.
If you define intelligence as correlations between different tasks that require "intellectual effort", then yes, but why would someone choose to do stuff like this for their job in the first place? Clinical psychologists/geneticists proposed (as you implied/hinted at in your post) that since the heritability of IQ increases with age, that it's as a sort-of feedback loop where people with a rough "heritable" edge seek more and more environments that reinforce those skills (Robert Plomin did work on this I believe).
For a fundemental take I would try and look up The Neuroscience of Intelligence by Richard J. Haier, one of the more "fundemental" results he found is that the people who scored better on certain IQ tests had more calory efficient brains, the heat of the brains correlated negatively with the test scores. But again, maybe that is still a post-hoc thing.

Haier also describes the abstract nature of "intelligence", of which the definition is a fundamental issue in discussions of measurement

There is no universally accepted definition of "intelligence", so there is no universally accepted measure of it. An IQ test can be argued to measure specific types of intelligence like pattern recognition, but may completely ignore other types of intelligence like creativity and social intelligence. IQ has been shown to be associated with many factors like income, educational attainment, job performance and incarceration rates, so IQ tests clearly measures something meaningful and associated with many aspects of one's life, but whether you call that "intelligence" is open to debate. It's reasonably well accepted that an IQ test can measure specific kinds of intelligence, but there is no way to even define, much less quantify, intelligence in a general sense.

What are the research papers that IQ tests clearly measure something meaningful? Can you provide some studies? My question was to provide literature.

Welcome to Psychology.SE. Please visit our site [tour]. There are a lot of bold claims in your answer without corroborated evidence. We work differently to many SE sites, where we have a strict policy that all answers should be backed up with reliable references so that the answer can be independently verified, regardless of the reader's/answerer's background. If you still have trouble with this, feel free to visit the [help] or [meta]. Unreferenced claims can be challenged and lead to deletion of your answer.


text:
Do renowned stage hypnotists and illusionists like Derren Brown have any scientific credibility whatsoever?
Illusionists and stage hypnotists like Derren Brown are well known for performing shows where they showcase their alleged expertise to make people fall into all sorts of tricks, from faith healing to Ouija board sessions.
Talking about Derren Brown specifically, I've noticed that he has been brought up on this stack in the past, in both questions and answers, but this doesn't always elicit good reactions (e.g. see this answer). Why is it so? Do renowned stage hypnotists and illusionists like Derren Brown have any scientific credibility whatsoever? Are they making use of legitimate techniques backed up by scientific evidence and research?

I'm not sure how using science-based knowledge in one's job constitutes "scientific credibility".  Many people use knowledge gained through scientific research backed by evidence in their jobs (eg, programmers, electricians, architects, politicians...).  Does that grant them "scientific credibility"?  Perhaps you are asking if the explanations that Derren Brown gives of his techniques are accurate reflections of scientific knowledge?  Or if those descriptions accurately reflect his actual performances?

@ArnonWeinberg - Yes to the last two questions. Are Derren Brown and others exploiting psychological knowledge gained through (or corroborated by) scientific research?

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
While scrolling the web page interesting effect encountered with an image....is this optic inertia?
While scrolling this web page, interesting effect encountered with the image below. Is this optic inertia? The faster the scrolling, the more wavelike figures appear on three areas in the picture.

…. more like some latency somewhere in the electronics than anything else.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Is there anything short I can read on the difference between learning something as an adult vs as a child?
Is there anything short I can read on the difference between learning something as an adult vs as a child?
Learning a language, or mathematics, or facts, whatever.

To be (too) personal: I find that I learn things a lot, lot slower now. Not just 'languages' but, as I child, I would usually only have to read and not do exercises for things to "stick". Now, as an adult, it seems to have to do exercises immediately after learning something new, and then do them again, and again to make it "stick". I'm somewhat concerned if this is normal!

I am voting to close this question because questions regarding book recommendations are off-topic here


text:
Why actual happy experiences don't have some side effects like stimulant drugs?
Science says that the mental side effects of stimulant drugs, like depression, are caused due to the overload of dopaminergic activity in the brain, but when people experience actual great things the dopaminergic overload is basically the same, but without side effects; on the contrary. Seems like the hormonal overloads aren't the central problem at all.
So why kissing a loved one for the first time doesn't cause depression like using cocaine?

Welcome to Psychology.SE. You said "Science says that the mental side effects of stimulant drugs, like depression, are caused due to..." Where? Can you please cite at least one scientific reference for your claim?

For one, drugs work on a very specific neurotransmitter activating a specific pathway, and they also come in great doses. Whereas experiences are much more complex activating different pathways in different way and deactivating others simultaneously. Another point to take is that due to this large quantity of neurotransmitters being released at once, as in the example of cocaine, this will exhaust the synapses via both down regulation of post-synaptic receptors and also depletion of presynaptic neurotransmitters.
Yet, this is an oversimplification of a hugely complex system like brain.

Welcome to Psychology.SE. Please visit our site [tour]. There are a lot of bold claims in your answer without corroborated evidence. We work differently to many SE sites, where we have a strict policy that all answers should be backed up with reliable references so that the answer can be independently verified, regardless of the reader's/answerer's background. If you still have trouble with this, feel free to visit the [help] or [meta]. Unreferenced claims can be challenged and lead to deletion of your answer.

To an extent, they do.
Opponent process theory is a neurological concept that tries to explain a wide range of human perceptual phenomena. The general idea is that after some input stimulus, the body tends to infer an "opponent process" that results perceiving the opposite stimulus. This theory has been used to explain visual afterimages, which cause you to perceive a negative color image after staring at a positive color image for a little while. This theory has also been used to examine emotional states, with experiments suggesting that strong emotions tend to be closely followed by opposite ones. Colloquially, this has been referred to as a "happiness hangover", which describes a depressed emotional state that occurs after a highly positive one, such as after returning from a vacation or after everyone at your party has gone home.

There are a lot of bold claims in your answer without corroborated evidence. We work differently to many SE sites, where we have a strict policy that all answers should be backed up with reliable references so that the answer can be independently verified, regardless of the reader's/answerer's background. If you still have trouble with this, feel free to visit the [help] or [meta]. Unreferenced claims can be challenged and lead to deletion of your answer.


text:
Viability of low THC cannabis for C-PTSD with past dissociation episodes
Passie, et al. (2012) says cannabis helps against post-traumatic-stress disorder.
In the case of C-PTSD (complex post traumatic stress disorder) combined with past dissociation episodes, is low THC Cannabis Ruderalis varieties a good choice?
Or is it risky?
References
Passie, T., Emrich, H. M., Karst, M., Brandt, S. D., & Halpern, J. H. (2012). Mitigation of post‐traumatic stress symptoms by Cannabis resin: A review of the clinical and neurobiological evidence. Drug testing and analysis, 4(7-8), 649-659. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.1377

I will have a look at Passie et al tomorrow to see what they were saying


text:
What is verbal memory useful for?
A friend of mine did the Verbal Memory Test at http://humanbenchmark.com/ and got an extremely high score (almost 300 words). English is not his first language and he knew the meaning of only about two thirds of the words (if that's something to take into account).

About the test
This test measures how many words you can keep in short term memory at once.
The number of words you need to remember grows continually, until you can't keep them in your head anymore.
Go as long as you can. You have 3 strikes until game over.
Your score is how many turns you lasted.

Does this have any practical use or influence in other areas of cognition?

I included the information provided by humanbenchmark in the question. They don't seem to provide more than that, so this may be a random test without any experimental backing. Given the description of the question (and associated distribution graph), I am now wondering what 300 words means. The score is the number of rounds people last, and nobody scored 300.

Thank you for your edit, the graph does not show the highest results. There are several videos on YouTube with a score of 200+. When he did 300 (295 or something if I remember correctly) the site displayed "99.99 percentile".  But this might indeed be just a random test

Note that this test is for recognition only, not for recall. If your friend were asked to write down those 300 words, how many would he be able to remember?

I have no idea, this was just recognition as you said

This is one of several variations of the word span test, used in many studies of working and short-term memory.  It is a type of memory span test:

... memory span is the longest list of items that a person can repeat
back in correct order immediately after presentation ... Items may
include words, numbers, or letters.

Short-term memory is a cognitive capacity that is a component of verbal intelligence.  However, the simple word span is not a great measure of verbal intelligence:

... memory span with digits and words is only weakly related to
performance in complex cognitive tasks such as text comprehension,
which are assumed to depend on short-term memory.

Performance on verbal memory tests can vary substantially based on the parameters of the test, the effect of practice and training, and the testing environment.
Nonetheless, research suggests that strong performance on the word span task - in particular, the non-word span variation which uses "pseudowords" that sound like real words but aren't - is indicative of superior secondary language acquisition capability (Juffs & Harrington, 2011).  There is also some evidence that word span may be predictive of ability to follow complex instructions (Kim, Bayles, & Beeson, 2008; Jaroslawska et al, 2016).  Of course, these results may not be applicable to the word span recognition variation of the task.

Thank you for your answer, I think this is the best we can find on the subject

This is by no mean a proof but you might find interesting that he is indeed quite into languages learning


text:
Different psychophysiological systems will turn on when dealing with things voluntary instead of involuntary
I heard somewhere that different psychophysiological systems will turn on when dealing with things voluntary instead of involuntary.

If you compose a stressor on two groups of people.
On one group the stressor is imposed involuntary and on the other
group the stressor is picked up voluntary.
The people that picked up the stressor voluntary use a whole different
psychophysiological system to deal with it. It uses the system
associated with approach and challenge and not the system that is
associated with defensive aggression and withdrawal.
The system associated with challenge is much more associated with
positive emotions and less associated with negative emotions.
And it is also less hard on you, because the defensive system, the
pray animal system, when that thing kicks in it is an all systems go
for you. Its peddle to the metal with the brakes on. You are using
future resources that you could be storing for future use, using it
right now in preparation for emergency.

– Jordan B. Peterson, Biblical Series XI: Sodom and Gomorrah, 2017-08-14
I am struggling to find more data/researches/studies about this. It is a very interesting topic. And it is clearly something we all know in the back of our heads (deal with things now).
Anyone has a good link to data/research/study that supports this?

Peterson is notorious for using imprecise language and failing to provide sources for claims.  For example, there aren't multiple "psychophysiological systems" - there's just ... psychophysiology.  Similarly, there aren't well-defined psychophysiological response patterns of "challenge" or "withdrawal" (though see fight-or-flight for something vaguely related).  However, in lectures like this, Peterson is playing the role of a motivational speaker, rather than a science communicator, so there is no expectation that evidence should support his claims - basically, if his presentation motivates you in a positive direction, then enjoy it.  Anyway, let's just ignore Peterson's description then, and ask more broadly:
What happens when people undertake stressful challenges either voluntarily or involuntarily?
Well, as is often the case with broad questions like this, the answer is ... it depends.  This question is common in the sphere of education, where educators contemplate whether to make programs compulsory to increase participation, or whether doing so will reduce the benefits of those programs.
A well-studied example is service-learning, in which students either volunteer, or are required to volunteer, for community service that ideally supports their learning goals.  Service-learning can certainly be challenging and stressful, but research suggests that it has a wide variety of benefits for students and their community.  How are those benefits affected by the voluntary nature of participation?
Schmidt, Shumow, & Kackar (2007) for example, found no difference:

Participation in any service is associated with positive outcomes
whether service is voluntary or required.

Similarly, Flanagan et al (2015) report:

... we found no differences ... between those youth who were mandated
to do community service versus those who engaged in service
voluntarily ...

From Henderson, Brown, & Pancer (2012):

Mandated community service experiences are not significantly different
from those entered into willingly.

And similar results from additional studies (eg, Hart et al, 2007; Henderson et al, 2007; Metz & Youniss, 2005).  However, other studies did find some notable differences in outcomes (Kackar-Cam & Schmidt, 2014; Horn, 2012; Kim & Morgül, 2017).
There are also studies on voluntary vs involuntary participation in extra-curricular activities that are too numerous to review here, but suffice to say that results do not clearly favour voluntary participation.
Additional notes:

Studies of this nature inevitably suffer from the self-selection bias: Of groups offered the choice, those who have greater competence are more likely to volunteer.  Thus, in cases where voluntary participants outperform involuntary participants on some measure, it is not always clear if the reason for this is due to the voluntary nature, or to pre-existing competence.  As an example, a study by Rodriguez-Aflecht et al (2017) on voluntary vs involuntary participation in a math tutoring game, found that the volunteer players had higher pre-existing math skills and interest than those who did not volunteer.  Nonetheless, involuntary participants outperformed them on many measures.
Studies of this nature often situate results within self-determination theory (SDT) - a general theory of motivation.  SDT predicts that higher levels of autonomy result in greater engagement and improved performance, supporting the assertion that voluntary participation is superior to involuntary.  So why does this theoretical prediction not play out in the results exampled above?  Well, volunteering is but one small decision in a long series of decisions that participants might make during the course of the program.  Indeed, many studies on service-learning find that the program's effectivness depends much more on its content - particularly the level of autonomy afforded to participants within the program, the level of competence that students attain, and the level of social support that they receive - than it does on the initial participation decision.
Studies of this nature rarely incorporate any physiological measures.  For obvious and practical reasons, blood samples are not collected from students participating in service-learning, nor is their brain scanned, etc.  In general, psychophysiological studies are typically done in-lab, and use relatively simple, well-controlled manipulations that would not usually be expected to translate well to complex, dynamic, ecological situations.  As such, it would be out of context to use such research to support assertions about handling real-life challenges.

"[Jordan] Peterson is notorious for using imprecise language and failing to provide sources for claims." If only I had a dollar, let alone a british pound, for each time I have seen an inaccuracy put across by him in questions...


text:
Can our beliefs change without reassessment or new evidence?
Can our beliefs change without reassessment or new evidence?
I think the strength of our beliefs can change, say from 90-95% as the day wore on. But do people, people with or without psychosis, start and stop believing things without reasons?
Suppose when I stop and think I always know something is impossible. Does that mean, even in the throes of some irrational behaviour (I sleep with my cheating wife again), I know it is, at least without encountering new evidence to the contrary?

As has been pointed out, how we feel about things may change without new evidence, and our feelings can change what we believe. Does that mean we have to "reassess" something in order to be overwhelmed by emotion and new belief?

Appraisal theory is the theory in psychology that emotions are
extracted from our evaluations (appraisals or estimates) of events
that cause specific reactions in different people. Essentially, our
appraisal of a situation causes an emotional, or affective, response
that is going to be based on that appraisal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appraisal_theory
So e.g. if my newly discovered emotions of desire for my wife cause me to believe in her fidelity, is that always from an appraisal or reappraisal of some possibility (her fidelity, our future together...)

Anyone can choose to change their beliefs without reassessment or new evidence at any time.
These choices can be made without reasons, assessment and reassessment but at the same time, they can involve reasons, assessment and reassessment. Again, there is a choice on whether to assess and/or reassess.
There are many cognitive biases and heuristics which can be in play.
As an example, you can be presented with evidence contradicting preconceived ideas and initially change your beliefs. But, if you later apply, say, confirmation bias —

The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions

because you maybe don't want to believe the opposite, you may stick with the previous beliefs and go on the search for evidence to back up your preconceptions.
See the full list of cognitive biases and heuristics which can be in play because:

Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of deviation from norm and/or rationality in judgment.

Above all, you cannot change your beliefs without wanting to.
For example, a devout Christian would not want to disbelieve something written in the Bible. But, if they were presented with contradictory evidence, they have a choice.
Do they just shrug it off and disbelieve that false information is in the good book? Or, do they at least start to doubt it's accuracies?
If they start to doubt the Bible, do they look at the evidence and believe it, or do they try to discredit it with stronger evidence, which backs the biblical account?
If they don't find it, what do they believe?
There may be unconscious biases in play with some beliefs (Marcelin, et al. 2019, Fiarman, 2016, Page, 2009) but, ultimately there are choices involved.
References
Fiarman, S. E. (2016). Unconscious bias: When good intentions aren’t enough. Educational Leadership, 74(3), 10-15. http://files.partnership-academy.net/200002623-049ce0690e/Unconscious%20Bias_Educational%20Leadership.pdf
Marcelin, J. R., Siraj, D. S., Victor, R., Kotadia, S., & Maldonado, Y. A. (2019). The impact of unconscious bias in healthcare: how to recognize and mitigate it. The Journal of infectious diseases, 220(Supplement_2), S62-S73 https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiz214
Page, A. (2009). Unconscious bias and the limits of director independence. University of Illinois Law Review, 237-294. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/unilllr2009&div=9&id=&page=

This brings us to the question: what make a choice? What is the relationship between choice and belief? Would under a new, different social norm, new choice forms? I'm thinking about the theory of planned behavior here. (Just some quick questions reading your answer. Perhaps they need to be on a different question post)

Philosophically speaking, you believe something because you think it's true. So if there is a reason for you to think it's true, its truthfulness will always attract you, regardless of what you choose to believe. The cognitive dissonance leaves you no choice but to keep thinking about it I suppose

@anon - If you feel you need a paper on the fact you choose what you believe, look at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802367


text:
Can unconscious wishes be fulfilled via actions based on conscious or unconscious identification?
Suppose I unconsciously want to sleep with my mother (I'm not sure I do: it's just a hypothetical). Can that unconscious wish to do so be fulfilled by sleeping with yours, if I consciously or unconsciously identify with you?
What is the word for that process?

This sounds like you may be basing your question on Freud; Freud is not particularly scientific; though there are some modern aspects of psychoanalysis that are more interested in being evidence based, and though Freud is highly influential in psychology, he also just plain made a lot of stuff up.

Catharsis is the technical term for the "release" of an unconscious conflict.
According to the definition, conflict may or may not be "resolved" if acted upon. For instance, consider someone who is primarily homosexual, has a brief homosexual encounter after coming out of the closet, but then proceeds to marry someone of the opposite sex (because that is what their family wants them to do).

are you talking about unconscious attraction to the same sex there?

@anon The example is intended to illustrate whether (or not) an unconscious conflict is resolved when experienced or acted upon.

oh right. why think that that conflict is unconscious in these cases. I guess it could be?

@anon A little more nuanced than simply committing to either unconscious, conscious, or sub-conscious. Same goes for the example you proposed of a parent-child incest relationship. For example, in my example what is conscious is later repressed (or dissociated from) into sub-conscious. Whereas, your example seems to be conveying unconscious to conscious.

yeah that makes sense. I remember reading the unconscious is out of time, actually. so what we repress was never full conscious?


text:
How is the memory compressed when moving from the hippocampus to the PFC?
I have recently been intrigued by memory. I found that the hippocampus stores new memories.
In sleep, the newly formed memories are moved to the neocortex.
I was curious about how this transition occurred, so I searched it up, and got this result.
The website says that there is a part in the hippocampus called CA1, that compress the memory before it is transferred through connections to the prefrontal cortex. This can happen in Sleep or during Awakeness with Sharp-wave-ripples.
Please correct me if my interpretation is wrong.
I would also like to know how the memory is compressed. And when the PFC receives the signal, I would also like to know how they expand the memory again.
Thank you.

Asking about compression in this manner it seems you may be over-applying a computer analogy to the brain. The computer model of the brain is an existing resource here that I recommend reading.
As far as this paper itself, it's talking about associative memory in particular, which the hippocampus is highly involved in. The paper you link to is specifically talking about sequence replay, which is where an association (=memory) is built out of a sequence of neuronal activations. For example, you might represent a path through a maze or grocery store as a sequence of spatial navigation steps: moving straight through a corridor, taking a left turn at the milk, following the trail of eggs to the cheese.
In hippocampus, you'll see "replay" of the neural signatures of these sorts of steps. If you look at activity in hippocampus while a rodent runs through a maze, you'll find those same patterns of activity repeat later on when the rodent is just sitting there passively, or while they sleep.
However, these replay events need not take place at the same time scale as the original behavior. You can play this in your own memory, too: maybe it takes you 2-3 minutes to walk into the grocery store and find the cheese, but if you're retracing your steps later you can probably think about the path you took over just a couple of seconds. You also need not think about it in the forward sequence, you can just as well work backwards from your destination and "retrace your steps"; replay in the hippocampus will do this as well.
When these authors talk about compression in ripple events, this is the type of compression they mean: time compression, not a data compression algorithm like Lempel-Ziv. Of course, time is quite a valuable resource in the brain or two a behaving animal, so time compression can also be important for reasons of efficiency, but it's not the sort of thing that necessarily needs to be "decompressed" back to something useful. The associations you might form over several minutes doing some task can be transmitted between brain areas in just seconds or milliseconds. Here's a paper they cite about the "fast-forward" compression:
Euston, D. R., Tatsuno, M., & McNaughton, B. L. (2007). Fast-forward playback of recent memory sequences in prefrontal cortex during sleep. science, 318(5853), 1147-1150.
The paper you link to is a research paper; when learning about a new concept I'd highly recommend looking at relevant review papers, which combine many research results together in a form that's usually more digestible for someone new to the field. Research papers themselves often refer to earlier review papers to ground their results. Here are some of those from this paper that you might look at:
Diekelmann, S., & Born, J. (2010). The memory function of sleep. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 114-126.
Dudai, Y., Karni, A., & Born, J. (2015). The consolidation and transformation of memory. Neuron, 88(1), 20-32.
Eichenbaum, H. (2017). Prefrontal–hippocampal interactions in episodic memory. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(9), 547-558.

and some groundbreaking original papers as well, where you might first focus on their introductions to understand thinking in the field, and then look at their specific results next:
Jahnke, S., Timme, M., & Memmesheimer, R. M. (2015). A unified dynamic model for learning, replay, and sharp-wave/ripples. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(49), 16236-16258.
Karlsson, M. P., & Frank, L. M. (2009). Awake replay of remote experiences in the hippocampus. Nature neuroscience, 12(7), 913-918.
Kenet, T., Bibitchkov, D., Tsodyks, M., Grinvald, A., & Arieli, A. (2003). Spontaneously emerging cortical representations of visual attributes. Nature, 425(6961), 954-956.
Peyrache, A., Khamassi, M., Benchenane, K., Wiener, S. I., & Battaglia, F. P. (2009). Replay of rule-learning related neural patterns in the prefrontal cortex during sleep. Nature neuroscience, 12(7), 919-926.

(paper that prompted this question)
Liu, X., & Kuzum, D. (2019). Hippocampal-Cortical Memory Trace Transfer and Reactivation Through Cell-Specific Stimulus and Spontaneous Background Noise. Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 13, 67.

Thank you! It was very useful!


text:
Why do we "Freeze" in an Adrenaline Rush?
I heard that Adrenaline stimulates the "Fight-Flight-Freeze" reaction. This is because our brains still think that we are in the wild and there are lions that want to eat us.
But why is there a "Freeze" in the "Fight-Flight-Freeze"?
If some of our ancient ancestors were attacked by lions, and they Freezed, they would be eaten by the Lion!
Why wouldn't have Natural Selection filtered out the "Freeze"?

I spoke about the fight/flight response [calling it the 5F (fright/flight/fight/freeze/fawn) response] at https://psychology.stackexchange.com/a/19143/7604. A lot of people cannot understand the "fawn" response and https://drarielleschwartz.com/the-fawn-response-in-complex-ptsd-dr-arielle-schwartz gives a good write-up on it.

The freeze response is still there for a reason. One hypothesis for its adaptive value is that in cases where the probability of either winning the fight or successfully escaping is believed by the subject to be too small, staying still, i.e. freezing, improves the outcome. Indeed, moving may elicit additional attacks from a predator, while immobility may cause the predator to believe the prey is dead and let it loose, providing a better chance of escape. This paper examines the freeze response and links to other relevant research.


text:
Why don't we wake up from thirst?
Usually, we sleep up to 7-10 hours. A healthy human drinks 2-3 cups per hour. Why don't we wake up from thirst if during the day, it is normal to drink so much?
I don't think that this is because you are paralysed during sleep. Your cells still need to stay alive, make ATP and proteins!

"A healthy human drinks 2-3 cups per hour."  — That's between 7 and 12 litres per day. I don't think I myself drank more an 1L today. I guess I'm not very healthy then.  Why do you claim that people drink so much?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/how-much-water-should-you-drink#:~:text=If%20you're%20wondering%20how,if%20you're%20sweating%20heavily.
I searched it up.

That reference says "Most people need about four to six cups of water each day."

@RayButterworth I think the confusion is from the fact that it says later in the same section that "a general rule of thumb for healthy people is to drink two to three cups of water per hour, or more if you're sweating heavily."

@EmmaGao Could you please incorporate that reference in your question? It makes it a better question, that can lead to you getting an answer sooner! The current comment thread would have been unnecessary. Whenever you have sources for your claims, please cite/link them! ;)


text:
What makes a neural pathway relevant to a memory?
When a neural network is created for a certain memory, what makes that neural network relevant to the memory? In other words, what property of the neural network stimulates the retrieval of the memory?

Does this answer your question?

"An attractor network is a graph like ours, which invariably tends toward an attractor. A simple model of memory that is an attractor network is the Hopfield network. Once retrieval has been initiated, the population of neurons will eventually settle on a single memory."
No, this doesn't answer my question. I am looking for "What is the connection between a memory and a neural pathway", not "How does the memory settle in a neural pathway". Thanks anyways!

Can you maybe elaborate a bit on what you mean by "what property of the neural network stimulates the retrieval of memory"? Memory retrieval is initiated externally by setting the initial state of neurons in a neuron assembly to something slightly similar to the actual memory, and then the assembly converges to the fully accurate memory: such a system is called autoassociative memory.

I think I didn't phrase it clearly. Let's say we have a neural network that stores the memory of the taste of orange juice. If I damage one neuron in that pathway, and then replace it with a new one, will this pathway still store the taste of orange juice? If not, what caused it to change?

You can think of it like a lock and key but sloppier. In this many-factor approximation, the more of the pertaining input neurons activated (and less of the wrong neurons), the more likely and more certain the memory is to activate. Sub-threshold would put the memory or mental object into perceptive set while crossing the threshold would bring the object into conscious awareness.


text:
Does all motivation and desire originate in the limbic system?
My current understanding is that subcortical structures in the limbic system determine what we desire, and that the prefrontal cortex is essentially an uncaring tool utilized by the limbic system to determine how to get what it wants. Whether we want to eat a cookie or become a billionaire, any action we take is ultimately driven by the limbic system's desire for reward. The prefrontal cortex may restrain the limbic system's immediate impulses in order to obtain greater reward in the future (delayed gratification), but the ultimate goal is still to satisfy the limbic system. This would imply that higher parts of the brain play no role in deciding what we want, they just model the world and determine the best way to get what the limbic system decides that it wants.
I have a feeling I'm misinterpreting or improperly extrapolating from what I've read, so I'm interested in feedback on this idea. In particular, is it really the case that the most rational parts of the brain ultimately have no ability to determine their own goals and desires? This seems to contradict our normal intuitions.

@Michael Thanks for your comment! I haven't learned about that distinction, but it makes sense to me, as does your explanation. I am a bit confused though by your statement that the limbic system is the accelerator and the higher layers are the steering wheel. Wouldn't it be the other way around? I.e. the limbic system determines where you want to go, and the higher layers enable you to get there quickly/efficiently? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the analogy.

I agree that analogy is vague. Indeed the higher layers would also be the brakes. But the thing about instrumental goals is they are often indirect, in fact for humans very indirect at times. So the higher layers are basically saying "let's go on a detour" because no appropriate or wise direct path is known or available.

@Michael Got it! Thank you so much.

@Michael - please don't answer questions in comments; comments are reserved to comments (clarifications, tips and tricks for OP to improve original post), answers are reserved for answers. If you don't feel up to answering, then please refrain from doing so, including in the comments.

Welcome to Psychology.SE. We work differently to many SE sites, where we have a strict policy that all questions should show evidence of prior research. Please help us to help you and [edit] your question to provide more information on what you have read on this subject, what made you ask this question, and any problems you are having understanding your research. If you found nothing, what did you Google? This helps to provide an answer which will be more helpful.

Providing prior research helps others learn too. For example, Whether we want to eat a cookie or become a billionaire, any action we take is ultimately driven by the limbic system's desire for reward." This backs Freud's "Drive Theory". Can you please provide links to this in your question? Also, can you provide citations for "The prefrontal cortex may restrain the limbic system's immediate impulses in order to obtain greater reward in the future (delayed gratification)"?


text:
Is chess a good game for recovering addicts?
I asked this question in Chess Stack Exchange and they sugested me to ask it here:
In this interview to FIDE Master and psychologist Maria Rodrigo the interviewer asked her about chess and addictions:

XL. There are those who are not able to prioritize and get hooked.
M.R. Yes, because the dopamine rush during a game can be brutal. And that is something you have to learn to control. If you don't, you start a game, and then another, and another… And there is no one to stop. You lose hours of sleep… The problem of addiction is more typical in men than in women. Men are more hooked on video games and women on social networks.

I read articles like this one on Chessbase where it is said they started a cognitive training through chess at a therapeutic community "recovering the cognitive functions (attention, memory, etc.) deteriorated by drug use, with the help of chess". But maybe this is focused on teaching how to play chess to people that didn't play lots of online chess while consuming drugs. And dopamine plays a role in addictions.
It is clear chess is good to treat other mental diseases like schizophrenia, and it looks good to teach recovering addicts how to play chess to recover the cognitive functions damaged by drug abuse (according to Chessbase article), but is chess good for a recovering addict that played chess before his treatment started? Can it bring the patient closer to a relapse in drug use?

It's a logical error to expect averages to apply to everyone equally; it may be that chess is good on average and also that chess is bad for some individuals. That's one reason that individualized care in medicine and psychiatry is important: doctors and psychologists may use population-based data to guide their first steps, but after that they monitor response and vary the approach accordingly. It's fine to ask the population questions here, but personal advice is off-topic, and if you're wanting to figure out what to do personally you should consult with professionals who know you.

I'd recommend filtering out the aspects of this question that pertain to you specifically if you'd like it to remain open for answering here, and also to realize that answers based on a population may not be the right answers for you, and that "playing a game" is distinct from "playing a game obsessively/to detriment" much like using alcohol, cannabis, or any drug is distinct from abusing those substances.

I took the liberty to edit the question to make it fit this site better. I think the question still stands also without the personal content.

I'm unsure what this question is asking.  Therapists generally encourage healthy behaviours over unhealthy ones.  If a recovering drug addict enjoys physical exercise, then physical exercise would likely be encouraged, even though physical exercise can be addictive too.  If a recovering drug addict has a co-addiction to gambling, then of course gambling should not be encouraged as a substitute for drugs.  This is just common sense.  It seems to me that the original (self-help) question was just based on a disagreement about whether the patient's prior chess playing should be considered ...

... obsessive or not.  Once that disagreement is sorted out, the way forward is obvious, is it not...?


text:
Is there a term for grief triggered from merely seeing, or remembering, places that a griever enjoyed with loved ones?
The loved ones don't have to be dead. The may simply be too ill or senile.  The griever may be anticipating grief. I am not asking about nostalgia or wistfulness  — the bleakness, forlornness are much gloomier here.
Consider an adult who — whenever he happens upon, or remembers, a  venue that he as a child used to frequent with his parent — instantly gets sad and doleful because he no longer is a child, and his parent is much older. Examples can be past homes of theirs where they lived happily together, schools where his parents took him,  places of recreation (a shopping mall or park or restaurant) that they frequented, and even streets and roads that they walked and drove together on. Upon sight, the same location triggers the adult to forthwith VIVIDLY remember and envision his parents with him. But then the adult saddens, because those memories hailed from a happier time. Perhaps now they can no longer enjoy those shared memories in the same way, shape, or form with their parents. Perhaps the aging parent can no longer be physical, walk, move, or drive. Again, the parent may still be alive.
Further, consider a graver case where the adult cannot even bear or stomach seeing, revisiting or even envisaging these places. I have heard of patients who must muster up the courage to move to a new city, simply because almost everywhere in their old community triggers them to envision and remember themselves  with their loved ones  — and these envisages and remembrances  trigger too much disconsolateness and grief!
My question may be similar to — but ISN'T —  Is it okay to move away from a town or area because you have a lot of bad memories associated with it? Has moving to another city/state ever helped you get out of your depression/anxiety? Should I leave a city when there are too many bad memories and toxic circle of friends?
Why not? Because my question involves a clear determinate cause of the grief and woe — seeing or remembering places that you experienced with loved ones in the past.
I apologize if I am rambling, but I am unschooled in psychology and do not know the correct terms. Please do not hesitate to edit and improve my post.

Desiderium, saudade.
Desiderium being dragged into English by Thomas Aquinas from the works of Aristotle: an intense desire or longing for that which is lost (such as a time) which may never be regained.
Saudade being adopted from Portuguese, first usage uncertain: a profound melancholic longing for someone or something cared about or loved, again carrying repressed knowledge that the object of longing may never be had again.

The suffering coming from a happy memory.


text:
Can somnambulism be self-induced?
Can somnambulism be self-induced? By "self-induced" I mean when a person starts in the waking state, induces sleep, and then takes themselves down into a deep sleep where somnambulism occurs, not when they start in the waking state and induce lucid dreaming in REM sleep.
George Estabrooks opens Chapter 3 of his book Hypnotism (1943) by saying

"There is a rule in hypnotism that everything we get in trance can
also be obtained by means of the post-hypnotic suggestion. Also, that
anything we find in either can be found in autosuggestion".

That would include somnambulism, a phenomenon that is found in deep trance, which can of course be induced by hypnotism, but he does not actually say anything about how this phenomenon in particular can result from autosuggestion, or give any examples.

Just noting that hypnosis (though not necessarily hypnotherapy) is generally considered pseudoscience.  This makes this question impossible to answer, as there is no way to reliably distinguish these various states.

@ArnonWeinberg - 1/2 - I find your comment extremely confused. Hypnosis is not generally considered "pseudoscience"; the Wikipedia page you link to does not support that view (all it says is that either currently or in the past it has been so characterised "by academics or researchers"); the distinction between "science" & "pseudoscience" does not matter to this question; a fortiori a choice of 1 of those 2 characterisations would not make the question impossible to answer; [cont.]

2/2 - [cont.] somnambulism (sleepwalking) has for millennia been a known "state" that differs from both the waking state & normal sleep; and nowadays it is known to occur usually during deep (stage 3) non-REM sleep. It is easy to gen up on the distinctions between different stages of sleep, which today's scientists define by EEG patterns. It was surely not necessary for me to refer to this in a question posted on an "expert Q&A" site asking for light to be thrown on a statement made in a book about hypnotism by a chair of Colgate University's psychology department who specialised in that area.

That's right, it was not necessary.  However, if I understand the question correctly, suppose someone is sleepwalking, then we need to be able to tell (eg, using EEG) not only that they are in fact asleep, but also why it happened - ie, did it happen "naturally", or as a result of hypnosis, or due to autosuggestion.  So, if you can provide a reference showing the standard by which you wish to tell apart "trance", "post-hypnotic", and "self-induced/autosuggested", from "normal" state using whatever instrument, independently from sleep state, then the question becomes potentially answerable.


text:
Does education improve 'g'?
It is, I believe, well known that education improves iq scores. Does it improve 'g'?

the association of education with improved cognitive test scores is
not mediated by g, but consists of direct effects on specific
cognitive skills.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4445388/
This does, I assume, mean "no"? Is there any counter evidence or claims?


text:
Question regarding inferiority complex

"The more one has feelings of inferiority, the more one has a power attitude, and the more one has a power attitude, the more one has feelings of inferiority"

This above paragraph was said by Carl Gustav Jung.
I observed that some people try to show that they are more powerful and always wants attention in group of people and for that purpose they humiliate others and make them feel incomplete means they knowingly & unknowingly makes other person also inferior.
Question 01 : Is such things are the symptoms of inferiority complex?
Because they feel inferiority in their minds so there may be possibility that want to remove their inferiority in their mind by showing their power.
Question 02 : How to deal with such people and what are the cure of such complex?

"Inferiority complex" is an old idea from non-scientific study of psychology.
If you look for recent papers, you'll find that most are either in very low-quality journals, occur as literary or similar analyses rather than real human psychology, or are puns/jokes/references to the concept rather than actually about "inferiority complex" in psychology. For example, this one:

Assimon, M. M., Cutter, G. R., & Bargman, J. M. (2022). The Non-Inferiority Complex: What Do Non-Inferiority Trials Tell Us?. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 33(4), 674-676.

A non-inferiority trial is a type of statistical design where instead of testing a null hypothesis that two treatments are not different and declaring a statistically significant result when you observe a difference larger than expected by the null hypothesis, you test a null hypothesis that two treatments are different by at least some margin, and declare a statistically significant result when you observe a difference smaller or in the other direction as expected by chance if the null hypothesis is true. This has nothing to do with "inferiority complex" in psychology, of course, but the author gave the paper a cute name making reference to the old-fashioned idea.
The idea of the inferiority complex goes back to Alfred Adler, a contemporary of Freud. Reading about Jung, Freud, and other similar past figures in the field might be useful to understanding the history of psychology, but just like we don't use Galen or Aristotle in treating modern medical patients, I'd highly recommend against using Jung or Freud to understand actual psychology.

I observed that some people try to show that they are more powerful and always wants attention in group of people and for that purpose they humiliate others and make them feel incomplete means they knowingly & unknowingly makes other person also inferior.

It sounds like you are describing bullying behavior. There are lots of explanations for bullying, but generally the attempts to scientifically link perpetration of bullying to low-self esteem are mixed or show very modest associations, for example:
Tsaousis, I. (2016). The relationship of self-esteem to bullying perpetration and peer victimization among schoolchildren and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and violent behavior, 31, 186-199.

"I'd highly recommend against using Jung or Freud to understand actual psychology" From my understanding of psychoanalytical theory, I totally disagree. You need a fully balanced understanding of both psychoanalytical and non-psychoanalytical theory to fully understand where the concepts come from and how they were developed and still being adjusted. https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2248/7604 An inferiority complex could very well be in play in the scenario put forward and you completely downplayed it.

@ChrisRogers , i agree with your statement. Inferiority complex is very big problem among teenagers and most of suicide are probably done by teenager because they think they are unimportant, useless and feel inferior..., We should not ignore such things...., When we read the suicide notes of those teenager then we can easily understand that inferiority complex was there

@ChrisRogers To be scientific one would need to back this up with systematic evidence, not just thinking about it and writing it down on the page or basing things on single anecdotes.


text:
Does dissociative amnesia bring any evolutive advantage?
Dissociative amnesia may appear after you have experienced a threat where you are unable to produce either fight or flight response.
Can we ascribe any evolutive advantage to this course of events or is it just nothing more than a case of brain failure?


text:
Can psychosis and dissociation coexist in a single episody?
Internet is plentifull of information about the differences between dissociation and psychosis, but I don't find any article that say if they can coexist in a single episody.

Psychosis is when people lose some contact with reality. This might involve seeing or hearing things that other people cannot see or hear (hallucinations) and believing things that are not actually true (delusions).
Source:nhs.uk

Dissociation is often explained as a response of the brain when you cannot fight or fly against a threat.

Dissociation is a break in how your mind handles information. You may feel disconnected from your thoughts, feelings, memories, and surroundings. It can affect your sense of identity and your perception of time.
Source: webmd.com

Are people suffering from a dissociation episody often psychotic aswell?

First of all Dissociation is not a form of psychosis.
Dissociation is similar, but different to psychosis, however they can often be confused for each other.

Someone going through a dissociative episode may be thought to be having a psychotic episode, and in some cases, dissociation may be the initial phase to having a psychotic episode.
The difference between the two is that, while dissociation causes a disconnection from reality (i.e., loss of memory and sense of identity), psychosis causes some kind of additional experience (i.e. seeing and hearing things that don’t exist) (MedicineNet, 2022).

When you look at my answer to What is dissociation? that can also be confusing, as dissociation can involve seeing and hearing things which are not there (in a dream-like state). But, in psychotic episodes, you are not in a dream-like state.

[Psychosis] occurs when there’s a disruption in your thoughts that makes you unable to tell the difference between what's real and what isn’t (MedicineNet, 2022).

With dissociation, you know you are disconnecting from yourself, and therefore you know that your dissociative state is not a real state.
So, to your question,

Are people suffering from a dissociation episody often psychotic aswell?

The simple answer to your question is "No, not necessarily".  The APA Dictionary points out that dissociation can be a psychological defence mechanism, so, you can be just as dissociative and be mentally healthy prior to the dissociation as you can be dissociating while having a psychotic mental health condition, or taking dissociative drugs.
References
MedicineNet. (2022). Is Dissociation a Form of Psychosis? https://www.medicinenet.com/is_dissociation_a_form_of_psychosis/article.htm

Despite the fact that they might not always coexist, there is evidence that dissociation is associated with psychotic symptoms. It is the pathology behind them that distinguishes psychosis from dissociation. A dissociation is a disconnection from reality, while a psychosis is an additional experience.
There is a possibility that psychotic patients will experience dissociation. While dissociation can also cause psychotic-like symptoms in severe cases.


text:
How can someone enjoy something without dopamine?
In this video, Andrew Huberman says people and even animals with depleted dopamine levels can still enjoy stuff.
How does one enjoy without dopamine? Isn't it the pleasure chemical?
Can serotonin, oxytocin etc. contribute to pleasure experience like dopamine?

It might refer to studies like https://www.science.org/content/article/study-takes-pleasure-out-dopamine

OTOH those studies are also a bit misleading considering other evidence https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1811878116

It is oversimplifying things that a single compound mediates complex human behavior. To nuance things a bit, there are more neurotransmitters and modulators that mediate feelings of pleasure, as you already indicate.

Dopamine, indeed, is associated with feelings of pleasure, and most notably that in response to reward. It also mediates reinforcement, and unfortunately the euphoria associated with addictive dopaminergic psychoactive drugs, like heroine and cocaine.
But there are more neurochemicals mediating pleasure, such as serotonin, that is increased after working out ('runner's high') and after exposure to sunlight, for instance.
Endorphins are a group of protein neuromodulators with a diverse set of functions, from killing pain to the feelings of bliss after sex.
Lastly, there is oxytocin, the 'love' hormone. We produce oxytocin when we’re excited by our sexual partner, and when we fall in love.
So there is more to pleasure than dopamine alone.

What you are referring to, an absence of pleasure, is referred to as anhedonia, this is not simply due to an absence of dopamine, but is one of the possible symptoms of depression and other mental illnesses, like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It can even show up with Parkinson's disease, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and in substance abuse. While schizophrenia and Parkinson's are intimitely linked to dopamine, others are, apparently, not.

Also, I think technically that "dopamine deficiency" would leave dopamine receptors intact, meaning that any non-endogenous agonist can still elicit similar reactions as well, no?

@ArnonWeinberg yep, I can only agree with that prediction, though it's all kind of hypothetical


text:
In the face of sexual trauma, do sufferers tend to avoid relationships with the other sex?
People who suffer trauma tend to avoid talking about their traumatic events: I am wondering if this happens in sexual trauma.
My concern is that the brain should not evolve features leading to the  avoidance of sex, because practicing sex is a primary evolutionary advantage (e.g. it is the second level in Maslow's Pyramid).

Does the brain fail to adopt the most efficient genes replication tendency or
is the brain's reaction in such a context an exception to the typical trauma response in other contexts?

Beware that many behaviors (e.g. suicide!) do not give an evolutionary advantage, yet do exist: the fact that a behavior does not yield any evolutionary advantage is not enough to rule out its possibility!

I am not a specialist, but I think that 1) Maslow's pyramid of need is not so well established (there are alternative theories) and that 2) you do not really need it to argue that the sex drive is "important, evolutionary speaking" ;o)

SHORT ANSWER:
The fact that victims of sexual trauma would tend to avoid sex because it is associated to their trauma would not be contradicting evolutionary theory.
Natural selection is strong, but it is not omnipotent!
LONGER ARGUMENT:

Many trauma reactions are counter productive, evolutionary speaking: Take any victim of any trauma, who might be showing any kind of post traumatic disorder: the behaviors induced can be self-harming and anti-social, and are often counter productive in term of survival and reproduction, and are counter selected by natural selection.
Saying that "X should not exist, because it is counter productive, evolutionary speaking" is akin (apologizing for the caricature here) to say that your arm should not break when you fall from a cliff, because it is not helping you to survive and/or to reproduce, so natural evolution should have selected for stronger arms in humans.
Any feature has advantages and drawbacks, and evolution is about balancing those two sets: Having stronger bones might require more nutrients to build them and to move a heavier body. A better resilience to sexual trauma might mean less emotional sensitivity.
And if some contexts (e.g. falling from a cliff, being abused sexually) occurs with a low enough probability, natural selection will not select for paying the price to better react to those contexts.


text:
What brain chemical(s) is attributed to the deep satisfaction of achieving an important, meaningful, or long-term goal?
What brain chemical(s) is attributed to the deep satisfaction of achieving an important, meaningful or long-term goal?
My understanding is that the shallow satisfaction of achieving an unimportant or short-term goal, such as

Getting a handful of likes on social media
Completing a mission in a video game
Correctly answering a question in a classroom

is mostly attributed to dopamine.
Do larger-scale successes, such as

Breaking a world record after $1000$ hours of unsuccessful attempts
Winning a large chess tournament
Learning a new skill

correspond to a different chemical or set of chemicals?

Serotonin and Dopamine
Serotonin contributes to satisfaction [0], and tends to have more background-level effects (so something that would be present while working on your project as well as after) than dopamine, while dopamine is associated with accomplishment in general [1], big or small (it's the "reward mechanism").
The most significant increase at the moment of accomplishment would be in dopamine, but serotonin would also increase.
[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4449495/
[1] https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-01589-6


text:
Mesolimbic pathway
I am trying to gain a better understanding of the etymology of terms used in neuroscience as that helps me remember things. In this case I am trying to understand the phrase "mesolimbic pathway".
My understanding is the mesolimbic dopamine pathway includes projections from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) in the brainstem to the nucleus accumbens in the ventral striatum.
Questions:

Is it called the mesolimbic pathway as it projects from the mesencephalon (i.e. midbrain) to the limbic region of the brain?

Is the nucleus accumbans usually considered part of the limbic system?

Is the projection from the VTA to the nucleus accumbans considered part of the "mesolimbic pathway" as the outer region of the nucleus accumbens forms part of the amygdala, hence part of the limbic system?

Thank you for any assistance.

Hi and welcome! "Meso" is Greek for "middle" and it is used because the pathway originates from the VTA of the midbrain. I trust you can answer all of your questions by consulting with the related Wiki articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopaminergic_pathways#Pathways, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesolimbic_pathway.

@vkehayas Thank you for your reply. I must admit I don't find your comment overly helpful nor does it make me feel particularly welcome at this forum when someone says you can just work it out yourself by reading several links. I had read these links prior to posting my question here and it did not fully clear up my confusion. If my queries were answered by those links I would not have posted here. I would really appreciate it if you (or someone else) could flesh out short answers to my questions rather than just posting links and say work it out yourself.

My comment was not meant as a reprimand. I found answers to all three of your questions by reading through those links so I do not see the point in pasting quotes from them as an answer. For example, the first question is answered in the first link: "[...] from the ventral tegmental area (VTA), which is located in the midbrain [...] The "meso" prefix in the word "mesolimbic" refers to the midbrain".

If you still have unanswered questions after you read those links please let us know what remains unclear.  Please keep in mind that on StackExchange sites we expect you to show us your prior work when posting a question, otherwise face the risk of your question getting closed or downvoted. You should take my comments as an opportunity to improve the question or answer it yourself.


text:
Sylvius 4 like software
Good afternoon, I was hoping if someone could suggest a software akin to Sylvius that is free to use. An open source program. Any and all suggestions are welcome.


text:
Factor Analysis yielded The Big Five Personality: Were other statistical methods ever applied?
It is known that Factor Analysis performed on personality survey data yielded what we know today as the Big Five. However, is Factor Analysis the only possible statistical method here? In particular, I am asking because FA assumes a linear relationship, which may not capture all relationships in the data.


text:
AI vs Human brains
Note: I'm new to neuroscience and AI.
I've read few articles about AI and studied them further.
So I have a question:
Human neurons release NT. The amount of NT released changes the frequency the next neuron is stimulated.
AI uses sigmoid neurons. Sigmoid neurons are continuous, so AI can change weights to each neuron by calculating the direction of $- \nabla C$. AI learns that way, so continuity of neurons are important.
My question:

Can human neurons be interpreted as a combination of perceptron neurons and sigmoid neurons?
Human neurons have threshold values, which resembles perceptron neurons, and control the amount of nt, which resembles sigmoid neurons.
If neurons can be interpreted as a combination of those two neurons, what makes the human brain and AI so different? Why do experts predict that AI will outsmart humans when (currently) the human brain can compute faster than AI?

Similar to: Is a neuron's information processing more complex than a perceptron?, What is the difference between biological and artificial neural networks?, and What do the weights of an artificial neural network represent in biological neurons?


text:
Emotional Intelligence and perceiving emotions
One of the components of Emotional Intelligence is to be able perceive emotions in oneself:
"Salovey and Mayer's conception of EI strives to define EI within the confines of the standard criteria for a new intelligence. (...) However, after pursuing further research, their definition of EI evolved into "the capacity to reason about emotions, and of emotions, to enhance thinking. It includes the abilities to accurately perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth."
(Wikipedia)
But to my understanding, theories of emotions know consider that an emotion involve the appraisal, so that you can not have an emotion without being aware of it.


text:
Does growing up with digital technology make it easier to integrate with it?
I was watching a documentary called "Was geht noch ohne Internet" on the ARDmediathek, and in it, was discussed how it is difficult for old people to become internet literate. There were also exampls of how there are apparently pushbacks in other countries, for eg: Spain.
A comonly said thing in the documentary is that, for the young people the digital technologies are easier to use as they grew up with it, while it's difficult for old people because they didn't.
Does this common saying have a scientific basis, in sense that, it is more difficult for adult and older people to integrate with digital technology/learn usage of devices?

There are several tangled issues in this. Do you mean to ask about learning in general when you're older, or is the question to do with learning to use something you're unfamiliar with or to do with learning to use technology specifically? Could you focus your question a bit, and show some prior research.


text:
Looking for the name of the cognitive skills test that includes a memory test involving the names of cartoon aliens
I took a cca. 60-minute-long cognitive test about 10 years ago but I can't remember its name (haha...) But I can remember a part that was a memory test involving cartoon aliens and another part when I had to listen to and tell apart very slightly different-sounding gibberish words. I don't have contact anymore with the psychologist who administered the test and I couldn't identify the test based on my memories. My guess is that it could have been a subset of the Woodcock-Johnson but I'm not sure.
Can you recognize the test based on my rather incomplete description?


text:
What're the best ways to improve hand-eye coordination/motor skills especially aiming "games"?
Aiming in video games, is a prime example of a fine motor skill, & maybe hand-eye coordination "idk? I'm no neuroscientist", but the community of aim practice & improvement "for video games like cs-go for example" is full of pseudo scientific concepts, like muscle memory, with some people recommending sticking on a certain mouse sensitivity "edpi" & never changing it otherwise it'd ruin your "muscle memory", others say that the use of a sensitivity randomizer, or different sensitivities is better, as it forces your brain to focus more, or work harder, or that training the tracking aiming for example on a higher sens will make you more accurate when you play on your normal sens & so on, another thing is advising of training till exhausting or while exhausted claiming that the brain is best able to learn & retain motor skill when exhausted, o using repetition & so on , what does actual research that has been done in this area say about all of this, & what're the best ways to learn, refine & retain a motor skill such as video games aiming?


text:
Does an extrovert have an advantage over an introvert on the WAIS-IV Arithmetic subtest?
I guess yes, because an extrovert gets more exposure to verbal conversation and then is more able to remember what the proctor said on the Arithmetic subtest. However, someone else said that this is not true and that attention control stays constant despite having more exposure to verbal conversations. Who is correct?
Would the arithmetic subtest score be deflated for someone who doesn't go out and speak to others as much as the average person?
The arithmetic subtest consists of spoken math word problems and the testee answers the proctor in 30 seconds with a repeat of the question if the testee asks. This is a WMI subtest on the WAIS IV.


text:
Statistical analyses for framing effect study
I am running a study to determine if women are more influenced than menby the framing effect.
I designed a survey with three overall questions, each with a "positive frame" and a "negative frame". Each participant would be randomly chosen to answer either the positive or negative frame, and each frame would have a 1-6 Likert scale where each participant rates whether or not they would choose one of two options presented in the questions' scenarios (i.e. rate 1 for definitely choosing drug A and rate 6 for definitely choosing drug B). I already compared the means of the positive frame and negative frame for each gender using a two-sample t-test (see table below), and I was wondering how I would go about analyzing whether or not women are more influenced by the framing effect.
I have a few questions:

Using this scale, can I assume that the scale is linear - i.e. is the change from 5 to 6 the same as from 1 to 2 or from 2 to 3?
Can I use t-tests and means to report and interpret the results of the experiment?
In comparing the male and female differences in the two frames (i.e comparing the statistical significance between 0.592 and 0.724), should I consider a difference in the absolute level (i.e. F-M, so 0.724-0.592 = 0.132) or a difference in magnitude (F/M = 0.724/0.592 = 1.223)? How would I run statistical tests to determine significance for either approach?
The original question - how I would go about analyzing whether or not females are more influenced by the framing effect?


text:
Retaining study participants in a longitudinal research study
Which methods can be followed to retain participants in a longitudinal research study?
We tried to retain participants by sending reminder messages, and also a bonus at the second time point, but none of these two methods worked so far. Only half of the participants came back to take part in the second time point. It hampers the counterbalancing of different variables. Would you please share your experiences to retain the participants?


text:
Which brain disorders cause better second language learning?
I heard that people with some types of synaesthesia may have advantage
for learning second language. I don't know it is true or not. But in general which kind of brain disorders cause better second language learning especially in adults?

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer.


text:
Time duration of the scanning (nifti file, .nii)
How to calculate/read the information about the time duration of the particular .nii file? Such information is not stored in the header (I checked the header with MATLAB niftiinfo function).
Thanks!
M


text:
What decides which pathway-forming neurons relate to a given thought or behavior?
So I know pathways of neuron connections are what store or “activate” behaviors, memories, information, etc and relate to specific thoughts and other brain functions occurring, and that when we learn something new we form (or strengthen) new connections/pathways. But among all the neurons in the brain, or even just those within a certain section, what decides which of those individual neurons are the ones to form a path that corresponds to encoding a particular memory or information?
Is every neuron distinct in the information it “holds” or signals? Is it just a matter of transmitters and receptors? And could we (or a molecule), in search of the pathways for a certain memory or thought, identify a particular neuron that should be connected to it—aka if every neuron IS unique, is that expressed in its structure (or genes, proteins, etc)?


text:
QUEST Staircase Resolution and Accuracy
I am flickering letters on and off to participants, controlled by a flicker rate which I am restricting to integer values.
If I want to implement a QUEST staircase to determine the final threshold estimate of the flicker rate, is it possible for the threshold estimate to be of a higher resolution than the grain size of 1 that I have chosen? Phrased differently, how precise will the estimate be? QUEST would be more efficient than method of constant stimuli; however, I do not want to use QUEST if in exchange I have to sacrifice the accuracy of the final threshold.


text:
Which Parameters should be reported in a multiple linear regression model in accordance with APA guidelines?
I have conducted a multiple linear regression analysis in R, standardising the values of the predictors prior to analysis. The R output:R default outputprovides information on the coefficient estimate, the standard error, the t values, the p value, the residual standard error, the df's, the F value and the respective t value, the R square and the adjusted R square. The default APA regression table (apa.reg.table) function: APA regression tableprovides the b and respective CI, beta and respective CI, rs square and respective CI, r and R square. I now wonder which of these values I should include in my table and in the text to be best comprehensible while parsimonious.
Thanks in advance!


text:
Effects of Grading on Students' Beliefs About Productivity
For lack of a teaching stackexchange, I hope this is a suitable place to ask:
I've encountered a number of adult individuals who feel bad if they're not "being productive" or are "producing low quality work" and I wonder if these feelings are exacerbated by having been in the grading-focused environment of schools. I imagine this being very hard to do formal research on (perhaps by looking at students' grades or exposure to messages about the importance of getting good grades or comparing with home-schooled students), but are there any studies or theoretical works on the effects of grading on beliefs about productivity?


text:
What is Core Affect?
Can someone explain what is core affect however for a person without much understanding in psychology? I have a book which mentions that core affect generally can tell you for example if you are OK or not OK -- but does it take into account also your thoughts? Or it is purely based on being OK from physical standpoint? e.g. if it senses some physical danger then core affect goes into negative state. But if we are in a situation with negative thoughts for example -- is core affect also related to this?


text:
What peer-reviewed evidence supports Procatalepsis?
I copy pasted the transcript of How to win a negotiation, with former FBI hostage chief Chris Voss, starting at 3:39.

So knowing that fear of loss is probably going
to drive someone's decision-making more than anything else,
tactically, I want to diffuse those fears.
I want to get them out of that fear-based thinking,
and I want to get them really in a more rational,
open frame of mind as quickly as I can,
which is why, tactically and empathy,
I wanna address their fears first. Well, labeling is the best way to practice tactical empathy:
In its strictest form, it's just saying, or writing,
"it seems like, it sounds like, it looks like,"
putting a label on the dynamic.
And science is showing us now, that if we label a negative,
it diminishes it. [my emphasis]
I'll actually say to somebody ahead of time,
"Look, this is gonna sound really harsh,
and there's a really good chance
that when I get done saying what I'm gonna say,
you're not gonna like me at all."
And then I'll say what I have to say,
and they'll say, "Wow, that wasn't that bad."
So I know I can take a very preemptive approach
to negative thinking because I know what a barrier it is
to decision-making in business.

What "science" was Chris Voss referring to? Please cite peer-reviewed evidence?

I'm uncertain if the "highfalutin term for this is procatalepsis", or apophasis?

I'm leery of Procatalepsis, because My unsympathetic reading of the phrase "no offense" is that its user is trying to pre-emptively escape blame for saying something obviously offensive.

Chris Voss's statement about science showing that labeling a negative diminishes it likely refers to research in psychology related to emotional regulation and affect labeling. Affect labeling refers to putting feelings into words, which can help people regulate their emotional experiences.
One study, "Putting Feelings into Words: Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity to Affective Stimuli" (Hariri et al., 2006) published in the journal Psychological Science, found that labeling emotions can reduce the response of the amygdala, a part of the brain that plays a key role in processing emotional reactions. This implies that affect labeling, such as identifying and naming a fear, can help lessen the intensity of the emotion.
Another study, "Affect Labeling Enhances Exposure Effectiveness for Public Speaking Anxiety" (Niles et al., 2015) published in the journal Behaviour Research and Therapy, found that affect labeling can enhance exposure therapy outcomes for people with public speaking anxiety. This research supports the idea that labeling an emotion can help reduce its intensity and improve coping mechanisms.
As for the rhetorical terms you mentioned, both procatalepsis and apophasis are indeed highfalutin terms for rhetorical strategies, but they refer to different tactics:
Procatalepsis is a figure of speech in which the speaker raises an objection to their own argument and then immediately answers it. By doing so, they hope to strengthen their argument by dealing with possible counter-arguments beforehand.
Apophasis, on the other hand, is a rhetorical device where the speaker or writer brings up a subject by either denying it, or denying that they should talk about it. The effect is to bring the subject up in the minds of the audience without the speaker appearing to have done so.
In the context of the quote from Chris Voss, it could be argued that he's using a form of apophasis when he says "Look, this is gonna sound really harsh, and there's a really good chance that when I get done saying what I'm gonna say, you're not gonna like me at all." He's introducing a negative idea (that the listener might not like him) while seeming to dismiss it or distance himself from it. He then mitigates the impact of his subsequent statement by having already labeled and acknowledged the potential negative reaction.

Can you please provide a link to the Hariri et al. (2006) paper?  The title and author don't seem to match for me.


text:
Is there a Lawrence of Arabia Syndroome
Let's call Lawrence of Arabia syndrome the following:

Maximizes the faults of one's own culture
Minimizes the achievements of one's own culture
Minimizes the faults of another culture
Maximizes the achievements of another culture

Have psychologists already named this syndrome?
Two contemporary people that can be described as having this would be Noam Chomsky and Roy Casagrande. Lt Dunbar in the fictional Dances of Wolves would be another.

Did you mean to reverse 3 and 4? I don't think there is a specific term for this. In general, the affix "philia" (love/fetish) is used, as in: "Arabophilia" (what Lawrence had), "Anglophilia" (England), "Japanophilia" (Japan; aka weaboo), "Philosemitism" (Jews), etc.

yes, I did, thanks for pointing that out.  No, adding the -philia wouldn't do it, because a Francophile, for example, can love both their own culture and French culture, but one who has Lawrence of Arabia syndrome would have to necessarily hate their own culture.

I've tried patriomania, but the usage doesn't seem to fit. Yours may just end up being a cut-and-fit for any particular situation/country without any standard versions yet coined or accepted by dictionaries.

Another problem is that I do not know whether TE Lawrence was anti-british, but there are certainly other intellectuals that fit the bill.  There's the term self-hating, but self-hating does not necessarily imply that you love someone else.


text:
Equation 8.39 to 8.41 in the book Neuronal Dynamics
In the book neuronal dynamics chapter 8.4 (https://neuronaldynamics.epfl.ch/online/Ch8.S4.html), the authors derive the Fokker-Planck equation for a noisy neuron. Starting from equation 8.39:
$ p(u, t+\Delta t) = [1- \Delta t \sum_{k} v_k(t)] e^{\Delta t / \tau} p(e^{\Delta t / \tau} u, t) + \Delta t \sum_k v_k(t) [p(u-w_k, t) - p(u,t)] $
First, they do a Taylor approximation of $ \Delta t  $ around 0. Doing it myself,
$ p(e^{\Delta t / \tau} u, t) \approx p(u, t) + u \Delta t \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u, t) $
$ e^{\Delta t / \tau} \approx 1 + \frac{\Delta t}{\tau} $
Ignoring all the terms with $ \Delta t^2 $, I reach the following result
$ \frac{\partial}{\partial t} p(u, t) = \frac{1}{\tau} p(u, t) + u \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u,t) - \sum_k v_k ( p(u-w_k, t) - p(u, t)) $
However, the book claims that there is a factor of $ \frac{1}{\tau} $ multiplying $u \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u,t)$. In equation 8.40,
$ \frac{\partial}{\partial t} p(u, t) = \frac{1}{\tau} p(u, t) + \frac{1}{\tau} u \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u,t) - \sum_k v_k ( p(u-w_k, t) - p(u, t)) $
More interestingly, this term somehow disappears when going from 8.40 to 8.41. The goal is to approximate the equation once more with Taylor expansion with $w_k$ going to 0, keeping the terms up to $w_k^2$. When I assume 8.40 to be true and use the expansion:
$p(u-w, t) = p(u, t) - w\frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u,t) + \frac{1}{2} w^2 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial u^2} p(u,t)$
I reach the following solution:
$\tau \frac{\partial}{\partial t} p(u, t) \approx u \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u, t) - \frac{\partial}{\partial u} [-u + \tau \sum_k v_k(t) w_k] p(u, t) + \frac{1}{2}[\tau \sum_k v_k(t) w_k^2] \frac{\partial^2}{\partial u^2} p(u, t) $
The solution in the book (equation 8.41) omits the term $u \frac{\partial}{\partial u} p(u, t)$:
$\tau \frac{\partial}{\partial t} p(u, t) \approx - \frac{\partial}{\partial u} [-u + \tau \sum_k v_k(t) w_k] p(u, t) + \frac{1}{2}[\tau \sum_k v_k(t) w_k^2] \frac{\partial^2}{\partial u^2} p(u, t) $
I would appreciate any help showing where I'm being mistaken.

Thanks for your interesting post; I've taken the liberty to migrate it to our experts in math. I bet the Q will receive better attention over there than at Psy&Neurosci


text:
Cases of experienced psychoanalytics to stop taking supervisions
What are the examples of famous psychoanalysts, which were supervisors and did take supervisions themselves - i.e. consulted with colleagues on their own (supervisor's) clients. And what are the examples of those who did not and relied only their own opinion?


text:
What are the technical terms for inner narrative in neuroscience?
This is about neurological function and more along the lines of physical interaction in our brains.  Less so about psychology.
What do we call, in neuroscience, the "Inner Narrative"?  But I don't mean specifically the phenomenon where we are talking to ourselves (the "inner monologue"), but more along the lines where the brain is constructing, from all of our sensory input, the full and coherent story of what is happening in our immediate presence at the present time.
So the notion of an "elephant in the room" taken a little more figuratively is that as we move about and do things, we are expecting certain reactions and consequences from our environment that we expect to perceive with our senses, but when something significant is perceived differently from what we expect, from our inner narrative, then this reality is compared, perhaps in the cerebellum, to the story we had been constructing right up to the present, and then that difference is processed and acted on.
Sorta like when we're driving on an uneventful multilane highway and some jerk suddenly pulls into our lane directly in front of us, causing us to react quickly.  Or, for humans 20,000 years ago, when we're foraging and suddenly hear the growl from the saber-tooth tiger, we might react in a manner that might save one's life.
Or here's a humorous example:

What is that part of our brain that is creating the narrative of our present moment (in juxtaposition with past moments and expected future moments), a story that makes sense from our recent physical senses.  And then what is the part of the brain comparing that narrative of the present to the actual sensed reality at present and, based on the difference, reacting?
Someone else can add tags to this.  I dunno which are the correct ones to add.

Closing question as it doesn't show evidence of prior research, use of language appropriate for the field, or provide references for premises it's based on. I'm struggling to understand what is being asked, but maybe you are interested in predictive coding?

The funny thing is that I'm an electrical engineer and a signal processing person and we have our version of predictive coding.  I didn't know about this, nor would have ever guessed it.  As for evidence of prior research, I have never claimed that I knew diddley about neurophysiology.  I wouldn't know where to begin, but I learned that there a "brain comparator", but it was for simpler physical movement like reaching, not for more complex stories. It looks like your recommendation is a good place for me to begin.


text:
How to estimate calcium concentration from fluorescence images
Is there a way to get a rough estimate of a [Ca2+] based on fluorescence microscopy images (obtained using GCaMP for example)? Usually what we get is the ratio f/f0, but is there a way to estimate the absolute value of [Ca2+]? I found an old paper on this subject, but using their formula, there are still paramewters which I wouldn't know how to access experimentally.


text:
How to calculate latency between two different brain region in Steinmetz dataset?
I am new to Computational Neuroscience and recently, I came across to Steinmetz dataset and looking into the dataset, I had an idea of calculating the latency between two brain regions in terms of passing information.
Initially, I have this idea to calculate the latency by analysing the time difference between visual stimuli and response time but, it won't give me latency answer for middle regions which come between visual and motor cortex. And it made me more curious.
Btw, I am an AI researcher, with a background in Image processing and Reinforcement learning. Trying to get into Brain Machine Inspired models (BMI). It'll be really helpful, if someone could guide me


text:
Looking for a term for acting on incorrect information
I'm looking for a term to describe one of my favorite aphorisms:  "It's not what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you think you know that's wrong."
Is there a term for this in the dictionary of cognitive biases?
Thanks,
Max

See mind projection fallacy, psychic equivalence, and availability heuristic.


text:
Is there any research on what people with antisocial personality disorder think of each other?
Is there any research on how they perceive each other? Do they feel a sense of relating to one another?


text:
I'm looking for research institutions focusing on coaching
Please tell me about universities and research institutes conducting research on coaching. Ideally, I'm looking for places that have researchers, publish papers, and engage in academic activities like presenting at conferences. If you have information on the departments, disciplines, or lab names, that would be appreciated.

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer.


text:
Correlation of Gene Expression with Dynamic Imaging Phenotypes
I've been researching the process of performing a spatial correlation between gene expression in the brain and particular imaging phenotypes such as structural white matter connectivity. My research thus far has been on functional imaging phenotypes rather than structural, but when reading G.Z Wang et al. 2016, which performs a correlation between gene expression and rs-fMRI in the default-mode network I noticed that the authors specifically note their choice to use resting-state data was because "it might be difficult to meaningfully relate brain gene expression to brain activity measured during specific task-based paradigms" due to the postmortem nature of transcriptome data collection. This seems to effectively discount most functional imaging phenotypes as viable for correlation with gene expression such as MEG response latency—either they have to be static or display static trends over a period of time. Is this generally true as far as linking transcriptomics withe neuroimaging, or is this specific to the author's method of analysis?


text:
What is the correlation coefficient between household wealth and educational attainment?
Educational attainment being years of education. I'm looking for r or r^2. Preferably in a western, anglophone country like the US or England.


text:
What differences are between behavioralism and functionalism?
Is it correct that behavioralism and functionalism are similar in that they both treat brain or something else as a blackbox, and are only concerned about the relationships between inputs and outputs for the blackbox?
What are their differences?
Was behavioralism influenced by functionalism?


text:
BCI research labs
I am fairly new to the community, so I hope I am going about it the right way. I am an undergraduate student from India with an interest in BCI research. Specifically, I am interested in researching mental disorders by utilising engineering resources, as I have majored in ECE.
I wanted to know how I can join research labs to gain more experience in the field of BCI. I eventually plan to join grad school, so I also wanted to how I can better prepare myself to make me a good candidate for BCI-related programs. Thanks!


text:
What exactly makes us find something disgusting and something else cute?
Most people find insects disgusting and most people find cats so cute. What is the reason? What exactly makes us find something disgusting and something else cute?

Related: Why baby animals seem "cute" to us?


text:
Is Observational Guidance in Research a Must? (Requires Research Advice)
I have a problem with a research. The variable I study is coping and the approach I take is qualitative. Usually, in qualitative research, the use of interview and observation guides is a must in my college.
However, in my opinion, observations cannot be made with coping variables in the context of research on social media users. This is then supported by Lazarus' statement that considers coping as a response to situational stressors. So, the form of coping strategies that a person does may always change. The use of coping strategies on social media may not be the same as coping strategies on family settings, for example.
Then, I tried to remove the observation guide from my research, but my supervisor said that the observation guide was a must. Are there any experts or people involved in research in this forum? Is observational guidance in research a must?


text:
Statistical outcomes from motivational literature
I am thinking about doing a research about potential harm and benefits of motivational literature from the statistical learning perspective. I hence wonder if there is any existing  research on this topic.
I guess what I have in mind is a study that includes two similar groups of people. The group A will be given some motivational literature to read, whereas another group will not be provided with such literature and controlled to never have an exposure to it. Those groups will then be monitored for several years to make analysis about their average success.
I perfectly understand that such a study is practically impossible, so I was wondering if anything at leasta a bit along those lines was done.

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer.


text:
Do neurons have any cognition-related continuous-domain effects on other cells?
While the inputs and operation of neurons appears to be a rather continuous and complicated process, the output of a neuron is typically thought of as a "spike."  This is a highly discrete kind of output.  At any moment there is a spike, or there is no spike, and there is little ambiguity (to my knowledge).
Are there any outputs of neurons which are more continuous in nature?  I'm looking for signals that act outside of the cell, shaping the behavior of other cells, which flow smoothly and are not encoded using such electrical spikes.
I'm looking at this from a modeling perspective.  Neuron spiking is complicated enough, but I'd hate to miss an entire channel of communication by focusing too hard on the communication built on spiking.