# Question
Title: Using Exploratory Factor Analysis for Items That Belong to Different Scales
I have a quick question about factor analysis from different scales. Is it advisable to use, conjunctly, items from various measures? For example, say that I want to evaluate factors that most influence the mental health of a certain subpopulation. I use a combination of items from four scales that measure different mental health domains, each of which having excellent construct validity and reliability estimates. I assume no a priori factor structure so I conduct a factor analysis to determine (a) which items cling together and (b) an interpretation per each clump.

I'm severely conflicted on this. One the one hand, these scales have been shown to do a good job of measuring their domain and thus it would make intuitive sense to include them in the analyses. But on the other, wouldn't we expect them to cling together?

If this technique isn't advisable, how do we actually begin gathering items for exploratory factor analysis? Do we just take a wild guess?

# Answer
> 0 votes
This is by no means a rigorous answer, but it seems that items will not always cling to their respective scales. It makes sense to use these items as they usually have psychometric support.

Still, it is probable that many (if not most) items will still cling together, especially if the reliability estimates of the original scales are relatively high. In this case, I wonder if there's a simple way to compare similar factors. Although confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is the most rigorous approach, this technique requires MORE data and may not be practical.

Instead, it would be interesting to see if analyses on factor scores can help determine whether a set of factors are significantly different. If analyses show a lack of significant difference, it would be best via the principle of parsimony to use the scores from the original scale, as no new information seems to be established.

Still, I have no idea if this is a good approach. A comparison of means of factor scores depends on how the scores where calculated; for example, if these scores are just simply means of items, then testing mean differences may not be meaningful as the mean will depend on several arbitrary characteristics, including, but not limited to, number of items and scoring of items. If these scores are Bartlett Scores, then they are standardized and thus cannot be used in mean difference analyses. Perhaps a simple, directional ($r \geq .60$) correlational test can be used.

---
Tags: measurement, statistics, human-factors
---


# Question
Title: How do people who self-harm perceive pain and how is their pain tolerance related?
I would like to make a reference request for articles, papers or monographs that address the question of what is the experience of physical pain during self-harm, if possible, particularly in those with borderline personality disorder.

Self-harm is pervasive in BPD as it is believed to be used to help regulate emotions and manage dissociative episodes. However, my interest is not in its function nor its motivations. I would like to know if any research addresses the experience of the physical pain of the act, for the BPD individual. In particular, if the following questions can be addressed:

* Is the person self-harming conscious and aware of the physical pain during the act?
* If the physical pain is experienced like any other, is its relative magnitude to the emotions being regulated minute so as to make it perceived as tolerable or make it possible to be ignored?
* Do those that engage in self-harm build a pain tolerance, or what is the relation to their pain tolerance?

The main answer might be simple, that they experience pain in the same way as someone being accidentally injured, but the context and situation make it tolerable or possible to be ignored.

# Answer
You said,

> I would like to make a reference request for articles, papers or monographs that address the question of what is the experience of physical pain during self-harm

I would first like to point out that while you will find that lists of references indicate many articles are in suicide journals and books on suicide, self-harm — sometimes referred to as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) — is not strictly part of suicide ideation and behaviour.

Psychological research into suicide behaviour and ideation has led to the development of the Cry of Pain (CoP) model, an entrapment model of suicidality. As Rasmussen et al. (2010) points out, the CoP model

> suggests that suicidal ideation and behaviour are the end products of a perception of being trapped in a stressful situation from which there is no escape and no rescue.

Looking at the Cry of Pain (CoP) model of suicide (Williams, 2001), the CoP model and Williams & Pollock (2000; 2001) suggest that suicidal behaviour (whether the outcome is life or death) should be seen as a “cry of pain” rather than the traditional “cry for help”. However, Scoliers, et al. (2009) found that adolescents who deliberately self-harm often report both CoP and cry for help motives.

Systematic reviews (scoping, rapid, and narrative reviews, mixed method/mixed studies, and meta-analyses) tend to be great sources for more material to read after reading them.

A systematic review of studies (Kirtley, et al. 2016) found,

> The evidence suggests that there is elevated pain tolerance among those who engage in NSSI. Future prospective research should determine if altered pain tolerance is a cause or a consequence of the behaviour. The identification of psychological correlates of increased pain tolerance is a neglected area of research. It could provide opportunities for treatment/intervention development, if mediating or moderating pathways can be identified. Too few studies have directly investigated candidate explanatory mechanisms to draw definitive conclusions.

A later systematic review (Brereton & McGlinchey, 2020) found that,

> Results tentatively support the role of experiential avoidance in self-harm; some studies described phenomena similar to experiential avoidance without using the term. Poor emotion regulation was often cited as a reason for engagement in self-harm. Several gaps in the literature were identified and discussed.

## References

Brereton, A., & McGlinchey, E. (2020). Self-harm, emotion regulation, and experiential avoidance: A systematic review. *Archives of suicide research, 24*(sup1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2018.1563575

Kirtley, O. J., O’Carroll, R. E., & O’Connor, R. C. (2016). Pain and self-harm: A systematic review. *Journal of affective disorders, 203*, 347-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.05.068

Rasmussen, S. A., Fraser, L., Gotz, M., MacHale, S., Mackie, R., Masterton, G., ... & O'Connor, R. C. (2010). Elaborating the cry of pain model of suicidality: Testing a psychological model in a sample of first‐time and repeat self‐harm patients. *British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49*(1), 15-30. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466509X415735

Scoliers, G., Portzky, G., Madge, N., Hewitt, A., Hawton, K., De Wilde, E. J., ... & Van Heeringen, K. (2009). Reasons for adolescent deliberate self-harm: a cry of pain and/or a cry for help?. *Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 44*(8), 601-607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-008-0469-z

Williams, J. M. G. (2001). *The Cry of Pain*. London: Penguin.

Williams, J.M.G. & Pollock, L.R. (2000). The psychology of suicidal behaviour. In K. Hawton & K. van Heeringen (Eds.), *The international handbook of suicide and attempted suicide* (pp. 79-93). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Williams, J.M.G. & Pollock, L.R. (2001). Psychological aspects of the suicidal process. In K. van Heeringen (Ed.), *Understanding suicidal behaviour* (pp. 76- 93). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: reference-request, personality-disorder
---


# Question
Title: Simulating accuracy according to a predictor variable? (R)
I'm trying to illustrate a proof-of-concept by simulating some data in RStudio, but I'm not totally sure how to go about the first part of the simulation -- modelling response accuracy.

Basically: I have one predictor variable (X) that varies across 'trials', and I want simulated response accuracy to increase along side X (so that when X is very large, accuracy on that trial is very likely to = 1, but when X is very small, accuracy on that trial is very likely to = 0).

My initial thought was to generate a 'probability of correct response' variable that is positively correlated with X; then, I'd recode anything \> .5 as a 1, and anything \< .5 as a 0. But, I'm not totally sure if this approach is justifiable, or if there's a better way to go.

Any help would be appreciated! Thanks so much in advance.

# Answer
Some terms that might help you:

It's common for accuracy to follow a *sigmoidal* curve; the *logistic function* is one example.

Binary outcomes are modeled well using a *binomial* distribution (or Bernoulli for a single trial).

So, what you likely want to do is to:

1. choose some sigmoidal function that represents "average accuracy" over your predictor variable *x*.
2. at values of x, simulate Bernoulli trials or represent multiple Bernoulli trials with a random number from the binomial distribution, using the average probability from your chosen value of *x* and function from (1).

I won't write the R code for you, but that should be enough to get you started with some search terms for example code that works towards these steps.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, cognitive-modeling, computational-modeling
---


# Question
Title: Are there culture-specific personality disorders?
According to Wikipedia, personality disorders are "characterized by enduring maladaptive patterns of behavior, \[...\] deviating from those accepted by the individual's culture.". The APA also uses the expression "deviates from the expectations of the culture" to describe personality disorders. There has also been at least one study that found sociocultural factors in the difficulty of diagnosing autism in women, but that isn't a personality disorder.

So, this raises a question; is there a kind of personality that deviates from the expectations of a specific culture, enough to count as a personality disorder? Or, conversely, are there cultures where a personality that would otherwise be considered disordered is in fact within the usual parameters?

# Answer
> 3 votes
There are lists of culture-specific mental illnesses here, and similar examples listed here. The majority of them (such as possession and hysteria) appear to be culture-specific responses to extreme stress or trauma, though there are some exceptions (such as anorexia and geophagia).

None of the items listed are personality disorders.

That said, Wikipedia is referring to the way personality disorders are diagnosed, rather than to culture-specific disorders. For one thing, there are different diagnostic manuals used in North America (DSM) vs elsewhere (ICD). Additionally, how diagnostic criteria is evaluated can differ in a culture-specific way. For example, what Americans (where individualism is heavily emphasized) might consider narcissistic vs what East Asians (where interdependence is more important) consider narcissistic can differ substantially, and there are corresponding differences in prevalence of NPD between modern and traditional societies (eg, Paris, 2014; Jauk et al, 2021). This does suggest that some diagnosed with a personality disorder in one culture may not meet the criteria if evaluated within the context of a different culture.

---
Tags: personality, personality-disorder, cross-cultural-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Under which sub-field of neuroscience can this project be best classified?
Under which subfield of neuroscience does a project that develops a deep learning model to study long-term brain scans of Alzheimer's caregivers and draw a correlation between staying in the proximity of Alzheimer's patients and the effects it has on the brain structure fall?

# Answer
> 1 votes
I would say Brain Imaging or Neuroimaging, although each of these terms can be regarded as a group of methods instead of a subfield of Neuroscience. However, because the field has exploded since (f)MRI was developed, the discipline of Brain Imaging has its own journals and conferences. So I would suggest **Brain Imaging** or **Neuroimaging**.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I believe this would fall under the field of Social Neuroscience.

> Still a young field, social neuroscience is closely related to affective neuroscience and cognitive neuroscience, focusing on how the brain mediates social interactions.\[5\]
>
> \[5\] John T. Cacioppo; Gary G. Berntson; Jean Decety (2010). Social neuroscience and its relation to social psychology. *Social Cognition. 28*(6): 675–685. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2010.28.6.675. PMC 3883133.

Quoting from the cited reference above,

> Although investigations of the role of biological factors can be found in social psychology (Cacioppo, Petty, & Tassinary, 1989), the field has emphasized the role of situational factors and, in collaboration with personality theorists, the role of dispositional factors. Because the focus of both is social behavior, social psychology and social neuroscience have the potential to be aligned and thereby potentially inform constructs and theories in each (Berntson & Cacioppo, 2008). The emphasis in each is sufficiently different that neither field is in danger of being reduced to or replaced by the other, but articulating the different levels of analysis can provide a better understanding of complex social phenomena.

## References

Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). *Handbook of motivation science*. Guilford Press ISBN: 978-1593855680

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Tassinary, L. G. (1989). Social psychophysiology: A new look. In *Advances in experimental social psychology* (Vol. 22, pp. 39-91). Academic Press. Free PDF

---
Tags: neuroscience, terminology
---


# Question
Title: Reference for "Autistic traits may only emerge when social demands exceed capacity"?
I read on Twitter that

> It is documented in the DSM that Autistic traits may only emerge when “social demands exceed capacity”

A quick search revealed that DSM probably stands for "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)", which I am afraid is too large (and specialized: my knowledge of psychology is self-taught, I am not a professional) a volume for me to peruse in search of such a statement (and its scientific basis). I asked the author of the tweet for details but thought I might also ask for scientific references here too:

**What scientific evidence (in the DSM or elsewhere) is there that "Autistic traits may only emerge when social demands exceed capacity"?**

I think it would be tremendously useful to have a better understanding of how changes in one subject's environment can trigger, at a point in time, some behavior changes to the point to make them cross the (blurry) threshold between "neuro-normality" and "neuro-divergence". As a side-note, I am curious in particular about how changes of environments related to immigration processes could act as such trigger: **in the context of a massive increase of migration patterns (due to wars or climate drifts), should one expect a massive increase in the number of occurences of autistic behaviors?**

# Answer
> 2 votes
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's page on Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) contains the following mention (in the section "*Specify* current severity"):

> "Symptoms must be present in the early developmental period (but may not become fully manifest until social demands exceed limited capacities, or may be masked by learned strategies in later life)."

This partially answers my own question, but it is more of a "definition" reference than a scientific reference: I was expecting a fixed definition of autism and some statistics about the number of people who were diagnosed late in life following some changes in their environment (but maybe that is more common in social science and unavoidable: it's not like there is an "autism gene", all diagnosis are only based on the observation of behavior patterns).

I am still curious about scientific the correlation with migration events, and anyway this partial answer might be useful to others, so I will keep this question (and my partial answer to my own question) on stack-exchange and let the administrators decide if it needs to be removed or not.

---
Tags: autism, dsm
---


# Question
Title: How do hair cells recognize frequencies?
I read that "a neuron can fire up to 1000 all-or-none impulses/sec" . But the hair cells in our ears are trimmed to recognize frequencies up to 20 kHz.

How can a hair cell detect a frequency of more than 1000 Hz? It can't be by "sampling" the signal often enough per second to do some kind of frequency analysis later on, because there could not be more than 1000 "samples" per second. So there must be a clever method to figure out the frequency.

I come from a signal processing background and know little to nothing about biology, so I hope the scope of this questions doesn't go too far for a Q&A.

Richard B. Stein, The Information Capacity of Nerve Cells Using a Frequency Code, Biophysical Journal,Volume 7, Issue 6, 1967

# Answer
**Short answer**
Population activity in auditory neurons allows rate coding of soundwaves with frequencies that exceed the firing rate limit. Place coding is, however, believed to be the most important mechanism of pitch coding in the auditory system.

**Background**
First and foremost: hair cells *do not* fire action potentials. They are analog mechanoreceptors, where the ion channels open and close in response to the 'hairs' (stereocilia) moving along with the sound waves, regardless their frequency.

The secondary neurons in the auditory system convert the analog output to the all-or-nothing spikes; these are the the spiral ganglion cells in the auditory nerve. Auditory nerve fibers are indeed not able to fire at 20 kHz; that's too fast. In fact, frequency following is believed to be sustained at at about up to 1 kHz or so in humans, perhaps somewhat higher in some other species.

The fact that the auditory nerve can still convey signals with frequencies exceeding the limit imposed by the **absolute refractory period** of auditory nerve fibers is the fact that fibers are not alone; multiple fibers in different refractory states (imposed due to stochasticity) are able to convey frequencies exceeding the frequency following limit. Consider a population of neurons that is activated (fires more) at a certain part of the soundwave's phase, and is inhibited (fires less than baseline) at the opposite phase. These neurons are in different refractory states due to stochasticity imposed by random neurotransmitter release from the hair cells and resulting random firing in the auditory nerve fibers. As a result, some fibers are activated at the stimulating phase of the sound, whereas other are unresponsive because they are in an absolute or relative refractory state. When the second period of the tone comes in, the unresponsive neurons in the previous wave can be excited, whereas the previously active ones are now refractory. The principle of this **rate coding** is explained in Fig. 1.

However, besides **rate coding**, there is another mechanism at work in the cochlea, namely that of **place coding**. Place coding operates by the fact that the cochlea is frequency tuned, meaning that high frequencies are coded basally and low frequencies apically. In turn, even when all neurons fire at the same rate, the brain can nonetheless recognize their place and hence their encoded pitch. This place coding is, arguably, the most important way of frequency coding. The tuning of the cochlea is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 1. Rate coding in the auditory nerve. source: Open University

Fig. 2. Place coding in the cochlea. source: Cochlea.eu
> 7 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, perception, neurophysiology, sensation, hearing
---


# Question
Title: Evidence for this tapping therapy - EFT (Emotional freedom technique)
I just heard or maybe I saw a clip on tv about this tapping technique. Something about tapping various points of the body for psychological treatment.

What is this EFT all about? Is there any solid evidence for EFT?

# Answer
Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) is part of the energy psychology movement which draws on various forms of alternative medicine to stimulate meridian points of the body (Gaudiano, 2000). At the moment it is considered pseudoscience because it has no effect beyond the placebo-effect in clinical psychology (Bakker, 2013).

This is an excerpt from a study by Waite & Holder (2003) that assessed the effectiveness of EFT for anxiety:

> These results do not support the idea that the purported benefits of EFT are uniquely dependent on the "tapping of meridians." Rather, these results suggest that the reported effectiveness of EFT is attributable to characteristics it shares with more traditional therapies.

And here is the abstract from another article by Bakker (2013) on energy psychology, the "field" EFT falls in:

> Proponents of energy psychology techniques, such as Thought Field Therapy and Emotional Freedom Techniques, have sought “empirically supported therapy” status despite an unsupported and implausible theoretical basis and claims in response of representing a “pseudoscientific” movement. Two major reviews of the supportive evidence which has accumulated over the past 30 years have been published recently. This current status report describes the history, theory, techniques, claims, and implications of the energy psychology movement, examines support for its theoretical base, its current outcome study support, and offers conclusions and recommendations as to its research and clinical prospects. It is concluded that there is scant support for the radical theories underlying energy psychology techniques, and that empirical support for their efficacy is methodologically weak, and has not been able to demonstrate an effect beyond nonspecific or placebo effects, or the incorporation of known‐effective elements. The only dismantling studies to date have been disconfirmatory. Further research is highly unlikely to be scientifically productive, and scientist practitioners are advised to continue to adhere to well‐established cognitive and behavioural principles.

So, overall there is little scientific evidence for the underlying assumptions of EFT, hope this answers your question!

# References

Bakker, G. (2013). The current status of energy psychology: Extraordinary claims with less than ordinary evidence. Clinical Psychologist, 17(3), 91-99. doi:10.1111/cp.12020

Gaudiano B.A., Herbert JD (2000). "Can we really tap our problems away?". Skeptical Inquirer. 24 (4). Retrieved 2019-08-20.

Waite, L.W. & Holder, M.D. (2003). Assessment of the Emotional Freedom Technique: An alternative treatment for fear. The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 2(1), 20-26.
> 7 votes

# Answer
Reading the answer from @HallsofJustice, the report from Gaudiano & Herbert JD (2000) was a *Skeptical Inquirer* report, and as the name suggests, their reports contain the extreme end of skepticism.

> For most of its existence, the Skeptical Inquirer (SI) was published by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, widely known by its acronym CSICOP. In 2006, the CSICOP Executive Council shortened CSICOP's name to the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) and broadened its mission statement (Wikipedia).

While I concede that there are elements of Jungian theory which can be questionable, I am a defender of psychological theories developed by Freud and others. Yet, some of these theories are considered pseudoscientific, and I am skeptical of reports by the Skeptical Inquirer on the basis that I wonder if they ever produce unbiased reports. I wonder how 90% of psychology would stand against their "scrutiny". See https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2248 for more on that, bearing in mind that there are even some people who are members here who consider some areas of psychology to be pseudoscientific

Without reading more works of Gary M. Bakker, I realize that I cannot fully comment on what he writes, but it seems intriguing when he is someone who

> has published in both clinical (Practical CBT) and skeptical (God: A Psychological Assessment) fields (Skeptical Inquirer).

It is a bit of an oxymoron when your work involves "scientifically studying" a psychological theory or concept on one hand, and writing about God as though He exists when in the scientific realm, He cannot be considered to exist.

Reading Bakker's 2013 paper cited in the answer by @HallsofJustice, you get a feeling that the paper is going to be totally biased against EFT right from the start.

Reviewing one paper on the subject, Bekker reports that EFT slightly outperformed diaphragmatic breathing (Wells et al., 2003, p. 958).

> They suggested (p. 961) that the EFT effect is unlikely to have been a placebo effect because, in their experience “many people are initially skeptical” about EFT.

Reviewing another 2 papers:

> two EFT studies were unpublished small “partial replications” of the Wells et al. (2003) study (Baker & Siegel, 2005; Salas, 2001). Baker and Siegel (2005) used a “supportive interview” control instead of diaphragmatic breathing, and again EFT performed better on subjective measures but not on heart rate change or on follow-up.

Bekker went on to state that *"despite such sparse and methodologically weak evidence"*, Feinstein (2008) concluded that the Wells et al. (2003) study helped to bring energy psychology past the threshold formulated by Division 12 Task Force of the American Psychological Association, establishing EFT as a *probably efficacious* treatment for specific phobias (page 210).

Bekker concluded that EFT along with Energy Psychology should be considered pseudoscientific as it is in the same vain as faith healing etc.

When you look at the whole picture, Gary Craig’s EFT (Craig & Fowlie, 1995) does not just involve tapping and the basic idea is given in his website along with a free copy of the theory behind it in PDF format and for Kindle. EFT uses positive affirmations to counteract negative thinking patterns.

When you combine this with Sebastian & Nelms (2017), you mentioned in the comments along with Wells et al. (2003) plus Baker & Siegel (2005) and Salas, (2001). There is strong evidence to suggest EFT is effective.

As I pointed out in a meta post here and in my blog article on pseudoscience in psychology, which expands on the meta post, just because the effects cannot be scientifically measured, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is not effective when patients are consistently reporting significant benefits.

## References

Bakker, G. (2013). The current status of energy psychology: Extraordinary claims with less than ordinary evidence. Clinical Psychologist, 17(3), 91-99. doi: 10.1111/cp.12020

Craig, G., & Fowlie, A. (1995). Emotional freedom techniques: The manual (with video and audio tapes). Sea Ranch, CA: Author.

Feinstein, D. (2008). Energy psychology: A review of the preliminary evidence. *Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 45*(2), 199–213. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.45.2.199

Gaudiano B.A., & Herbert J. D. (2000). Can we really tap our problems away?. *Skeptical Inquirer. 24*(4). Retrieved from: https://skepticalinquirer.org/2000/07/can\_we\_really\_tap\_our\_problems\_away/

Salas, M. M. (2001). The effect of an energy psychology intervention (EFT) versus diaphragmatic breathing on specific phobias. Unpublished master’s thesis. Kingsville: Texas A & M University.

Sebastian, B., & Nelms, J. (2017). The effectiveness of Emotional Freedom Techniques in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis. *Explore, 13*(1), 16-25. doi: 10.1016/j.explore.2016.10.001 pubmed: 27889444

Wells, S., Polglase, K., Andrews, H. B., Carrington, P., & Baker, A. H. (2003). Evaluation of a meridian-based intervention, Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT), for reducing specific phobias of small animals. *Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59*(9), 943–966. doi: 10.1002/jclp.10189.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I was skeptical that such a seemingly pseudoscientific technique could work but a recent systematic review of randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses found that EFT was in fact an evidence based treatment. It was published in Frontiers in Psychology which is, to my knowledge, a quite reputable peer-reviewed journal.

Clinical EFT as an evidence-based practice for the treatment of psychological and physiological conditions: A systematic review

The main Results:

> RCTs have found EFT treatment to be effective for (a) psychological conditions such as anxiety, depression, phobias, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD); (b) physiological issues such as pain, insomnia, and autoimmune conditions; (c) professional and sports performance; and (d) biological markers of stress. Meta-analyses evaluating the effect of EFT treatment have found it to be “moderate” to “large.”

In the conclusion:

> These find Clinical EFT to be efficacious for a range of psychological and physiological conditions. Comparatively few treatment sessions are required, treatment is effective whether delivered in person or virtually, and symptom improvements persist over time. Treatment is associated with measurable biological effects in the dimensions of gene expression, brain synchrony, hormonal synthesis, and a wide range of biomarkers.

As of 2022, I believe it is now more likely to be effective than pure pseudoscience. I haven't read any of the articles extensively, but perhaps it is similar to meditations in a way. A sort of controlled, predictable, self-induced placebo.
> 3 votes

# Answer
There is strong evidence for EFT for depression. A metaanalysis Nelms & Castel (2016) found 20 studies including 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 outcome studies. 461 participants were studied in the outcome studies with over 398 in the RCTs. There were significant reduction in depressive symptoms found in this meta-analysis across multiple patient populations in a variety of different settings.

> Cohen׳s d for RCTs was 1.85 and for outcome studies was 0.70. Effect sizes for follow-ups less than 90 days were 1.21, and for ≥ 90 days were 1.11

EFT is also effective for anxiety. A meta-analysis by Clond (2016) found 14 studies with 658 subjects examined (293 EFT, 365 control). The meta-analysis found significant improvement in anxiety in the trials and

> effect size for the EFT treatment group was 1.23 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.64; p \< 0.001), whereas the effect size for combined controls was 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.67; p = 0.001)

The studies included in the meta-analysis were across a range of populations from children and adolescents, to university students and adults covering a range of anxiety disorders from test anxiety, phobias, PTSD and fibromyalgia with anxiety.

PTSD is further discussed in another question - Evidence for EFT (Emotional Freedom technique) for PTSD

The possible biological mechanisms for how EFT works is discussed here - How does Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) work?

* Nelms, J. A., & Castel, L. (2016). A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Trials of Clinical Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) for the Treatment of Depression. EXPLORE, 12(6), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2016.08.001
* Clond, M. (2016). Emotional Freedom Techniques for Anxiety: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 204(5), 388–395. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000000483
> 2 votes

---
Tags: therapy, pseudoscience, emotional-freedom-technique
---


# Question
Title: Faithfully recounting the events of the day
Let us say that a person $x$ can *faithfully recount* day $d$ if $x$ can mention at least $2$ things she did in the first half of the day, and the same for the second half of the day.

I suppose we could agree that an average, healthy person can faithfully recount the events of the current day at the end of the day - and probably the same is true for the previous day.

Is there any consensus of how many days back an average, healthy person should be able to faithfully recount the events?

# Answer
The *thing* recalled in your definition of *faithfully recount* seems to need sharpening since any successful pattern completion of such a thing (episodic event) is conditioned on its distinct pattern separation during its initial encoding and storage. In psychology the right term should be engram (aka memory trace). Simply mentioning mundane things or events such as brushing teeth and washing face won't be useful for your purpose to be qualified as faithful recount of the whole day $d$.

Another difficulty here is usually our hippocampus is adequate to very quickly store today or yesterday's most episodes which are ready anytime to be further retrieved for working memory use, but to form long term memory, system consolidation needs weeks, months, even years of retrieval and rehearsal as confirmed by this online source which cites several references as sampled below. Thus it's not uncommon that $x$ cannot recall 2 things of $d$ of this past week but can recall clearly for a day $d'$ of last year! Thus it's hard to apply the definition formulated in OP in practical experiments.

Finally for your purpose under further narrower assumptions such as ignore long term memory effect and for an average healthy person there're at least 2 distinct episodic events occur every day (time is not wasted in vein), then according to above reference such person may on average *faithfully recount* up to several weeks and its variance could be as large as several months even years as reflected by the hyperthymestic syndrome.

---

Reference:

Dudai, Y. (2004). "The Neurobiology of Consolidations, Or, How Stable is the Engram?". Annual Review of Psychology. 55: 51–86. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142050. PMID 14744210.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: memory, time
---


# Question
Title: Have psychologists recognized how some people feel more embarrassment?
Is there a personality subtype where it’s really common to feel embarrassed about one's past self, like cringing about something you said, wrote, or did some time ago? It may change over time, but I think some people just naturally have this inclination, like a propensity towards social anxiety.

Is this a known phenomenon?

# Answer
Positive and negative self-criticism plays out in many different ways and can depend on the person's mental health or state. It can induce guilt, shame, and sometimes embarrassment. A Google Scholar search for *self-criticism* came up with a great deal of research, including Petrocchi, et al. (2019),

> Results support the growing evidence that not all positive self‐relating processes exert the same protective function against psychopathological consequences of self‐criticism. Implications for psychotherapy and the validity of using compassion‐focused interventions with clients with self‐critical issues are discussed.

Mills, et al. (2007),

> Paranoid beliefs are associated with negative and malevolent views of others. This study, however, explored hostile and compassionate self‐to‐self relating in regard to paranoid beliefs

and Whelton, et al. (2005)

> When Self-Critics and Controls were induced into a dysphoric mood and asked to criticize themselves and to respond to the criticism, the Self-Critics were judged to be more contemptuous and less self-resilient than the Controls. The Self-Critics and Controls both expressed self-critical thoughts, but the Self-Critics expressed them with greater contempt. The Self-Critics were also found to be less self-resilient to the criticism than the Controls.

## References

Mills, A., Gilbert, P., Bellew, R., McEwan, K., & Gale, C. (2007). Paranoid beliefs and self‐criticism in students. *Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 14*(5), 358-364. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.537

Petrocchi, N., Dentale, F., & Gilbert, P. (2019). Self‐reassurance, not self‐esteem, serves as a buffer between self‐criticism and depressive symptoms. *Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 92*(3), 394-406. https://doi.org/10.1111/papt.12186

Whelton, W. J., & Greenberg, L. S. (2005). Emotion in self-criticism. *Personality and individual differences, 38*(7), 1583-1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.024
> 2 votes

# Answer
Shame, guilt and embarrassment, and other emotions closely linked to self-evaluation come under the general category of **self-conscious emotions**. Some people are indeed more predisposed to self-conscious emotions than others, see the SCAII\[1\]. This can be associated with many personality and/or developmental factors, for example:

\[1\] Tangney, J. P. (1990). Assessing individual differences in proneness to shame and guilt: Development of the Self-Conscious Affect and Attribution Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 102–111.
> 0 votes

# Answer
Yes, this is called neuroticism.

Embarrassment as a personality trait can be measured using the Embarrassability Scale (ES), Susceptibility to Embarrassment Scale (SES), Acceptance of Shame and Embarrassment Scale (ASES), among others. A comprehensive list of scales used to measure embarrassment, guilt, and shame as traits can be found in Robins, Noftle, & Tracy (2007).

However, it turns out that many emotion traits, including embarrassment, guilt, and shame, correlate with each other in a manner that shares an underlying factor. Thus, personality inventories typically do not need to measure embarrassment specifically, as individuals high in embarrassability tend to score high in other personality sub-facets that share this factor.

In personality psychology, anxiety, embarrassment, guilt, and shame, fall under the trait of neuroticism \- one of the Big 5 traits:

> For example, in the Big Five approach to personality trait theory, individuals with high scores for neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness.

Embarrassment belongs under the neuroticism sub-facet of self-consciousness (as mentioned in another answer), and in fact, embarrassment scales are often validated against self-consciousness.

These emotions are also more broadly included in the trait of negative affectivity:

> Negative affectivity subsumes a variety of negative emotions, including anger, contempt, disgust, guilt, fear, and nervousness. ... Trait negative affectivity roughly corresponds to the dominant personality factor of anxiety/neuroticism that is found within the Big Five personality traits as emotional stability.

Also worth mentioning, the tendency to obsess over past experiences and stress is called "rumination":

> State rumination, which involves dwelling on the consequences and feelings associated with the failure. State rumination is more common in people who are pessimistic, neurotic, and who have negative attributional styles.

Rumination can also be measured as a personality trait using a variety of scales.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, emotion, personality, anxiety
---


# Question
Title: What are the effects of casual sex on men versus women?
There is a lot of research citing that men are more physically primed for sex than women. Graziottin (2004) discusses this difference and other differences of strength and vulnerabilities between the sexes:

> The clinical correlate of the neurobiological condition is that men have a stronger, more biologically and genitally focused sexual drive, expressed more as lust (7). Women tend to have a romantically driven sexual drive with a more relational expression and emphasis on intimacy (6,7). Women have a stronger oestrogen priming of two other basic emotions command systems, the fear- anxiety and the panic with separation-distress, which contribute to and modulate their parenting abilities and social bonding skills (2,19). The gender-based different biological modulation of seeking pathways in men and women may be an important contributor to different desire vulnerability in the sexes, both in the early phases of a relationship and later stages of a long-term relationship (34,35).

Is it really fair to say that men are more inclined to benefit by casual sexual encounters than women, or is this a presumption stemming from social-stereotyping?

# Answer
One factor that should be considered is the culture surrounding casual sex and the social judgments that men and women may experience as a result of casual sex. Conley, Ziegler, and Moors (2012) report a series of experiments conducted on an American university campus that show that women who accept offers of casual sex are perceived more negatively on a variety of dimensions than men. In their experiments:

* Subjects judged women who accepted offers of casual sex as being "less intelligent, less mentally healthy, more promiscuous, less competent, and more risky" than men who accepted offers of casual sex.
* When subjects imagined a hypothetical offer of casual sex, men were more likely to accept than women. Subjects were given a series of questionnaires to examine their attitudes towards offers of casual sex. A mediation analysis indicated that "part of the reason that women are less likely to accept casual offers than men is that women perceive that they will be evaluated more negatively for accepting the offer (or more positively for rejecting the offer) than men do."
* Similar results were found when subjects recalled a recent offer of casual sex, and imagined the reactions of people had they accepted the offer.

Thus, social stigma seems to play a significant role in how men and women perceive casual sex, which may explain the relative willingness of men and women to engage in casual sex. This particular set of social stigmas will certainly not be universal across cultures, and the point of this answer is not to suggest that the experiences of American college students are universal. What is likely to be universal is the idea that the culture surrounding casual sex will have a direct impact on how men and women choose to engage in casual sex.
> 8 votes

# Answer
**My point** I find that it is fair to say men benefit from casual sex encounters more than women.

---

**Evidence** In the Penguin publication the "Red Queen" by Matt Ridley, he writes:

> Throughout our evolutionary history, men and women have faced different sexual opportunities and constraints. For a man casual sex with a stranger carried only a small risk - infection, discovery by the wife - and a potentially enormous reward: a cheap addition of an extra child to his genetic legacy. Men who seized such opportunities certainly left behind more descendants than men who did not. Therefore, since we are by definition descended from prolific ancestors rather than barren ones, it is a fair bet that men possess a streak of sexual opportunism. Virtually all male mammals and birds do, even those that are mainly monogamous... men are more likely to be tempted by an opportunity for casual sex than women.

So, Ridley states that because men who were more promiscuous left more offspring. Modern men too posses a streak of sexual opportunism inherited from their ancestors. On the other hand, he writes of women:

> Women are likely to be different. Having sex with a stranger not only encumbered a Pleistocene woman with a possible pregnancy before she had won the man's commitment to help rear her child, but it also exposed her to probable revenge from her husband if she had one, and to possible spinsterhood if she did not. These enormous risk were offset by no great reward. Her chances of conceiving were just as great if she remained faithful to one partner and her chance's of losing the child without a husband's help were greater. Therefore women who accepted casual sex left fewer rather than more descendants, and modern women are likely to be equipped with a suspicion of casual sex.

This provides an evolutionary explanation as to why the two sexes behave differently. However, Ridley does account for social pressures writing:

> A modern women is exposed to pressure from men to be sexually uninhibited, but she is also exposed to the same pressure from other women. Likewise, men are under constant pressure to be more 'responsible', sensitive and faithful - from other men as well as well as from other women.

So he also acknowledges that this could be skewed by people pressuring women to be more promiscuous and men to be less so. However, I found conflicting evidence to one of Ridley's assertions: that men are not as pressured by other men to avoid casual sex. Personally, I agree with the conflicting evidence, which can be found here under the title: "Social Psychology and Human Sexuality: Essential Readings", page 156. I quote:

> Of particular interest was the fact that the male peer groups agreed to support each other in their efforts to obtain sexual experiences during the vacation, whereas the female peer groups were more likely to agree to support each other in refraining from sex.

---

**Discussion of above evidence** Taking the arguments and research above into account, I would say that in terms of genetic legacy men benefit more in that they are able to have more offspring from casual sex, without having to raise them. Socially it is difficult to say, for example, women, who are caught having casual sex, may be rejected by their partners, who don't want to raise a child that isn't there own, and thus have no support in raising the potential offspring. Also, looking at the evidence above, it seems that their friends don't support casual sex and thus they may be scolded or even rejected by them. However, I have inferred this from the evidence and cannot say with certainty. There could also be repercussions for males, for example, would a prospective female partner want to reproduce with a male whom she knows has had casual sex with multiple women? What's to say they won't do it again? So, it is possible that social repercussions also would happen for men.

**Conclusion** As a final concluding argument, I will say: casual sex has more genetic benefits for men, as it is an easy opportunity to extend their genetic legacy. The full social repercussions are unclear for both sexes, however, it is likely both sexes face negative repercussions, if found out. Both sexes can potentially face negative consequences but the male will always earn the greatest potential benefit from casual sex: new offspring, with no parental investment on his part.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I did not see anyone mention violence. Women who have gone home with men casually have on occasion ended up, murdered or raped. And that with the possibility of becoming pregnant and having an unwanted pregnancy certainly changes the calculations. That was especially true before birth control and abortion were easily available. We now see that abortion may not be easily available. Women are actually more likely to get aids, and STDs and encounters. Women have many more reasons to think before they act. In addition, in this culture in the US women have many more ways of connecting intimately, other than sexually. Because so many men don’t have those channels, maybe some revert to sexual intimacy as a mean way to feel intimacy in their lives I have graduate degrees in both counseling and social work and worked with many couples, families, adolescents, individuals and children.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, emotion, sexuality, sex-differences
---


# Question
Title: Why are mass shooters in America so much more likely to be male than female?
Is there any scientific research on why this is so? I got this statistic from an article titled "Why Are Almost All Mass Shooters Men?" on The Violence Project.

However, their reasoning for the "why" is, in my opinion, not at all concrete.

# Answer
The Violence Project does hold statistics on this, as you found. If you search for why most shooters are men, you'd get something like this:

> "Men just are generally more violent," said the group's president, Jillian Peterson, a forensic psychologist and professor of criminology and criminal justice at Hamline University. "There are many theories as to why that is."

> As NPR has reported, researchers say that men, more than women, tend to externalize their problems and look for others to blame, which can translate into anger and violence. And when women do choose violence, guns are not typically their weapon of choice.

Therefore, to investigate why this is so, you will find research on male socialization useful, specifically on its effect on how anger is expressed, and so on. I found a few related research papers: \[1\], \[2\], \[3\]. Basically, what you want to find is the research that backs up the above statement.
> 4 votes

# Answer
Here is another possibly helpful answer. If you look at shame research the situations that cause one to feel shame and the negative responses to shame differ largely by gender. My sources on shame are Brene Brown ("Men, Women and Worthiness: The experience of shame and the power of being enough" should suffice). Men feel shame when we feel weak, useless, or ineffective; while for women the emotion comes about when one is unable to meet a large net of mutually competing expectations. Moreover, when men feel shame and do not display resilience we largely react with aggression. Women are more likely to react by withdrawling or people pleasing. These types of negative reactions are referred to by Brene Brown as "shame screens".

One of the major demographics in shootings are "incels", and the other are domestic terrorists (see https://womenspolicy.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb1076/files/Ruth%20Darlene\_Presentation%20Slides.pdf for information about the incel threat, along with stories like https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/us/mass-shootings-misogyny-dayton.html from the Times and https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/06/03/why-so-many-mass-shooters-young-angry-men/ in the Post). Incels are primarily men who are having trouble with their romantic relationships and react with a large violent shame screen of a shooting. Because the constructs around the emotion of shame primarily evoke aggression in men, we make up almost all of these individuals.

Moreover, gender constructs around aggression and anger disincentivize women from acting aggressively while they incentivize men to. As a result, most domestic terrorists are also male.

I want to be clear in saying that **neither domestic terrorism or incel violence are the work of mental illness**. Even in schizophrenia, which has been heavily demonized, violence only increases 1% when one normalizes for other factors influencing violence in collecting statistics (this was in a Harvard study that I cannot find). However, mentally ill people are 10 times more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators (see https://www.mentalhealth.gov/basics/mental-health-myths-facts). Also, while the Secret Service report linked above displays that 2/3 of individuals have "mental health symptoms" that does not mean that they have a diagnosis in the DSMIV or DSMV or that a psychiatric professional would diagnose them with a diagnosis after observing them.

In short, when it comes to shooting and violence, many culture's gender norms make it so primarily men are the perpetrators.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I think you have to look at the larger picture of gender and violence. Men appear more competitive than women. It seems that just about anything can become a competition. They seem more concerned with pride and proving themselves, and seem to have more of a tendency towards dominance They start almost all the wars. They are the rapists. Even in junior high, you don’t see girls dunking each other’s heads in the toilets. Males have quite a range of violent behavior and need for dominance. You do see women verbally arguing with each other, and on rare occasions fighting which rarely ends in serious physical danger or murder. You do see women caring for children and their elderly relatives, and very aware of their needs more than you see this in men. Carol Gilligan, a Harvard professor wrote about the gender difference as justice versus care, where men seek justice. So each has a role in preserving and protecting society, Ironically, men may seek justice through the violence of war. Men’s violence is more excused. Concepts like boys will be boys, football, wrestling, and “taking it outside“ allow men sanctioned violence. It seems when we say our society is or has become more violent, we tend to blame that violence on all of society, rather than noting that it is men who take assault weapons into crowds and murder large numbers of people in malls, schools and churches. The serial killers seem to be men. It looks like there is a genetic component, a socialization component, and a society willing to attribute men’s violence to the whole society, rather than focusing on that specific group, so it might be more properly addressed. The same genetics that lead men to be destructive, seem to often lead them to be heroic. There are many men who rush into burning buildings and hostage situations. Maybe women have fewer opportunities, as they are not often firefighters or police officers,
> -1 votes

---
Tags: criminology
---


# Question
Title: Would it be worthwhile/has anyone tried to produce a machine that measured intoxication by pupil dilation while doing arithmetic?
Recently many states have legalized cannabis. While alcohol intoxication is easy to measure, intoxication by cannabis is not. Cannabis can stay in the blood for several months, whereas the underlying individual is most likely no longer intoxicated after several hours (see https://americanaddictioncenters.org/marijuana-rehab/how-long-system-body for information as to how long cannabis can be detected in the bloodstream).

In **Thinking Fast and Slow** Daniel Kahneman describes how one can measure cognitive load while doing arithmetic problems via pupil dilation. I am a mathematician by training and not a neuroscientist. However, I would like to conjecture that if one could measure pupil dilation effectively enough then the rate at which one's pupils would dilate while doing an such arithmetic tasks might differ sufficiently during cannabis intoxication that one could effectively measure whether a driver was intoxicated by a "roadside arithmetic test" in which one would wear a special pair of glasses and perform such arithmetic tasks. There would be potential obstacles depending on the numeracy of various people, however if it would work such a test would be far fairer to drivers than conventional methods. Has an effort been put into creating such a test? Would such effort be worthwhile and if so, would anyone on this forum know someone who would be interested in approaching this problem?

# Answer
This has been studied.

Via https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073820304217 :

Cannabis users show consistently weakened responses in pupillary light reflex tests.

The method is suitable for on-site detection:

> The measurements were taken using a developed version of the previous described puillograph, the F2D2 (AMTech/Dossenheim, Germany) - a portable device, which is more suitable to be used during routine police check-points.

The method is fairly reliable (cohort size of 41, demographic factors controlled for, efficacy confirmed with blood tests).

> Abstract

> Driving under the influence of alcohol (DUIA) and drugs (DUID) is considered an elevated risk for traffic safety. When assessing a driver's fitness to drive, standardized and objective measurement methods are still required, in order to clarify the question whether an individual is under the influence of substances acting on the central nervous system (CNS). We exposed healthy test subjects (n = 41) as well as persons who were under the influence of cannabis after repeated inhalation to multiple light stimuli using infrared technology and measured the pupillary light reflex (PLR).

> Toxicological tests of blood samples taken from every subject followed. The aims of this study were to assess the differences in pupillography response between cannabis consumers after a washout period and no cannabis consumers as well as the dose related effects on pupillography parameters of cannabis in cannabis consumers. All four pupillary parameters changed according to a weakened pupil function after acute administration of cannabis in all test subjects. Furthermore, it could be observed that habitual cannabis consumers showed an altered pupillary function just before the first dose was taken, suggesting that the long-term effects and addiction also have to be taken into account, when effects of the CNS are discussed. The results of the present study show that almost all pupil parameters could be reliable indicators for the detection of subjects under the acute effect of cannabis.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: motor, behavioural-neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: Are IQ scores above 200 statistically meaningful?
IQ scores are supposedly put on a normal distribution with a standard deviation of 15.

The population of the world is about 7,674,000,000.

So, if I know my statistics and made no numerical errors, the smartest person in the world (even given the unrealistic assumption that we could measure everybody's intelligence), would only have an IQ of 194.8083.

Double the population of the world and the max measurable IQ only goes to 196.4.

Given this, why do I see occasional reports of measured IQs above 200? A 200 IQ, statistically, would require a population of at least 76 billion people, ten times more than there are humans now. A 220 IQ would require 10,000 times as many people as that.

Does the math and statistics just get ignored for those high scores, or is the scale different somehow?

# Answer
Most "professional" IQ tests are capped at around 160 points (Mensa: 162, Stanford Binet: 160, WAIS-IV: 160), so scores above 200 are not relevant in analysis using data from those.

There's also a logical flaw in your claim that an IQ above 195 *should not* be measurable "statistically": even if it's extremely unlikely, it's *possible* by the definition of a continuous normal distribution.

Score outliers above 195 are typically measured by non-standard IQ tests or subjectively evaluated. They should not be considered as data points in the context of statistical analysis.
> 2 votes

# Answer
Your math appears to be correct. If one understands the relation between reliability and validity, one understands that an IQ upwards of 160 would be practically impossible to measure. This is because validity is limited by reliability. We cannot create a measure of IQ that could identify someone over 160 because we can't locate enough people to reliably create such a test. We cannot obtain a normative sample of a large enough size to get a handful of people with an IQ of 175, 5 SDs above the mean. Just remember, a measure can't be valid if it isn't reliable.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: statistics, iq
---


# Question
Title: Neuroligins, neurexins and synaptic gaps
Further to Are all synapses "gappy", and what exactly is in the gap?, I found an open access article (Biswas et al. 2008) pointing out that

> Vertebrate studies show neuroligins and neurexins are binding partners in a trans-synaptic cell adhesion complex, implicated in human autism and mental retardation disorders.

First of all, I looked more into what neuroligins and neurexins are in the abstract of https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823672-7.00008-9 then skimming through the introduction of Biswas et al, the article points out that research implicates

> human neuroligins and neurexins in neuro-developmental psychiatric disorders where an imbalance in E/I ratio \[excitatory/inhibitory ratio\] is thought to occur. Numerous studies have localised mutations to *neuroligin 3* and *4* in families affected by autism, Aspergers syndrome and X-linked mental retardation \[39\]–\[42\]. The disease mutations in *neuroligin 3* and *4* lead to loss of neurexin binding, loss of synaptogenic capability and retention in the endoplasmic reticulum \[43\], \[44\]. Recent studies have also identified a high frequency of neurexin structural variants in families affected with autism and schizophrenia \[45\], \[46\].

First of all, I'd like to be pointed in the direction of literature (where available) which indicates what neuro-developmental psychiatric disorders there are where an imbalance in E/I ratio is thought to occur.

Are autism spectrum disorders part of them?

I am happy to separate the 2 following interrelated queries from this question if it would make the answer too long, but I also wonder, does the E/I imbalance cause the neuro-developmental psychiatric disorders or do the neuro-developmental psychiatric disorders cause the E/I imbalance? If E/I imbalances are involved in autism, is the imbalance towards excitory or inhibitory, and does the imbalance get worse?

## Reference

Biswas, S., Russell, R. J., Jackson, C. J., Vidovic, M., Ganeshina, O., Oakeshott, J. G., & Claudianos, C. (2008). Bridging the synaptic gap: neuroligins and neurexin I in Apis mellifera. *Plos one, 3*(10), e3542. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003542

# Answer
## Excitatory/Inhibitory (E/I) balances

The Max Planc Florida Institute (MPFI) for Neuroscience describes this balancing act within the brain.

> Neurons communicate through electrical currents called action potentials, which are either excitatory or inhibitory. Excitatory currents are those that prompt one neuron to share information with the next through an action potential, while inhibitory currents reduce the probability that such a transfer will take place. It typically takes more than one excitatory connection to generate an action potential, but as you might expect, hundreds of electrical signals are constantly converging on any given neuron.
>
> The measured effect of all excitatory and inhibitory currents received by one cell is known as global excitatory/inhibitory (E/I) balance. Although there are many more excitatory neurons in the cortex, inhibitory neurons are a diverse and influential group that regulate the activity of their excitatory counterparts. They are considered balanced when the ratio between E/I activity remains approximately constant, even under a wide range of conditions. Neuroscientists are interested in E/I balance because it is essential for stable brain function—in particular, our brain’s ability to faithfully capture information about the world and integrate it with our existing knowledge.

## Are autism spectrum disorders included in the group of psychiatric disorders where an imbalance in E/I ratio is thought to occur?

The short answer is yes.

Bruining, et al. (2020) points out that

> In clinical terms, disruption of E/I balance has become a dominant theory on the pathogenesis of various neurodevelopmental disorders, and perhaps most explicitly in autism spectrum disorder (ASD)3,4,5,6\<
>
> 3. Dickinson, A., Jones, M., & Milne, E. (2016). Measuring neural excitation and inhibition in autism: different approaches, different findings and different interpretations. *Brain Research, 1648*, 277-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2016.07.011
> 4. Nelson, S. B., & Valakh, V. (2015). Excitatory/inhibitory balance and circuit homeostasis in autism spectrum disorders. *Neuron, 87*(4), 684-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.07.033
> 5. Rubenstein, J. L. R., & Merzenich, M. M. (2003). Model of autism: increased ratio of excitation/inhibition in key neural systems. *Genes, Brain and Behavior, 2*(5), 255-267. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1601-183X.2003.00037.x
> 6. Uzunova, G., Pallanti, S., & Hollander, E. (2016). Excitatory/inhibitory imbalance in autism spectrum disorders: implications for interventions and therapeutics. *The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, 17*(3), 174-186. https://doi.org/10.3109/15622975.2015.1085597

However, Bruining et al points out that methods to measure E/I ratios in human brain networks are lacking, so they developed a method to quantify a functional E/I ratio (fE/I) from neuronal oscillations, and validate it against children with ASD and children without ASD.

> ASD is characterized by alterations in critical brain dynamics To test the hypothesis that E/I imbalances characterize ASD 4,41, we applied the algorithm to eyes-closed rest EEG recordings in non-medicated children with ASD (ASDall; *n* = 100, 7–15 years) and age-matched typically developing children (TDC; *n* = 29) (Table 1 and Supplementary Table S1). The children with ASD had lower total IQ (*p* \< 0.001) than TDC (Table 1). As with the CROS-model activity, we analyzed relative power (RP), LRTC, and *fE/I* in the alpha band of the EEGs. The topography of RP showed the characteristic occipito-parietal distribution of eyes-closed rest recordings both in TDC and ASD without between-group differences in mean or variance of whole-brain averages (Fig. 4a; Wilcoxon rank-sum test, mean ± SEM; *RP*ASDall = 26.8 ± 1.1% and *RP*TDC = 27.2 ± 2.1% *p* = 0.84; Levene’s test of variance: *p* = 0.82). The scalp distribution of LRTC quantified by DFA was also similar between TDC and ASD, but whole-brain average and variability were both larger in ASD (Fig. 4b; βASDall = 0.70 ± .01, and βTDC = 0.65 ± 0.01 *p* = 0.01; Levene’s test: *p* = 0.001). The scalp topography of *fE/I* of alpha oscillations showed similar distributions in ASDall and TDC. A pronounced variability of *fE/I* was evident in ASDall (Fig. 4c; Levene’s test: *p* = 0.04), characterized by more extreme values of *fE/I* in both directions away from the balance point although between-group differences of whole-brain average *fE/I* were not significant (Fig. 4c; *fE/I*ASDall = 1.03 ± 0.02 and *fE/I*TDC = 1.01 ± 0.02, *p* = 0.65).
>
> **Figure 4**
> Alpha oscillations in ASD are characterized by strong LRTC and large variability in *fE/I*. Grand-average topographies for the EEG biomarkers are shown for TDC (first column), ASD (second column), and for ASD-minus-TDC (third column). (**a**) Relative power (RP) showed the characteristic occipito-parietal distribution both in TDC and ASD. (**b**) Whole-brain average and variability of LRTC quantified by the DFA exponent were both larger in ASD compared to TDC. (**c**) A pronounced variability of whole-brain *fE/I* was evident in ASD. White circles on the topographies represent significant channels (i.e., *p*-value \< 0.05, using Wilcoxon rank-sum test and FDR correction). The fourth column shows individual-subject values, boxplots, and mean and SEM for TDC (*blue circles*) and ASD (*red squares*). Comparisons represented in boxplots were based on the average value of the EEG biomarkers across all 64 electrodes, each data point represents one subject (whole-head average; *p*-values are from Wilcoxon rank-sum test (mean)/Levene’s test (variability).
>
> 41. Rubenstein, J. L. (2010). Three hypotheses for developmental defects that may underlie some forms of autism spectrum disorder. *Current opinion in neurology, 23*(2), 118-123. https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0b013e328336eb13

**Please Note: While Bruining et al mentioned that children with ASD in their study had lower total IQ than typical developing children, IQ is not a covariate in cognitive studies of neurodevelopmental disorders** – see Dennis, M., et al. (2009).

## References

Bruining, H., Hardstone, R., Juarez-Martinez, E. L., Sprengers, J., Avramiea, A. E., Simpraga, S., ... & Linkenkaer-Hansen, K. (2020). Measurement of excitation-inhibition ratio in autism spectrum disorder using critical brain dynamics. *Scientific reports, 10*(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65500-4

Dennis, M., Francis, D. J., Cirino, P. T., Schachar, R., Barnes, M. A., & Fletcher, J. M. (2009). Why IQ is not a covariate in cognitive studies of neurodevelopmental disorders. *Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15*(3), 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617709090481
> 1 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, cognitive-neuroscience, autism
---


# Question
Title: Can brain improve "non-active" functions?
I'm from computer science background and this question struck me when learning about neural networks as they are initially filled with random values.

Can brain improve "non-active" functions such as senses? Let's say there's a child (for the sake of plasticity), with health eyes but part of part of brain that processes visual information is jumbled mess, although healthy and undamaged. The child is not aware of how normal vision should look like.

**Would it be possible for the child to somehow improve visual functionality and eventually see objects and distance?**

I don't see how this would work, "active" functions that we do on our will, such as motor functions, we "plan" beforehand and can point out what we exactly did wrong, in contrast "non-active" functions don't involve planning. Moreover the child doesn't know what normal vision is like, so probably no "guided learning"

# Answer
> 1 votes
**Short answer**
The brain excels in making something from nothing ('jumbled messes'), barred there's enough practice involved.

**Background**
A good example are cochlear implant (CI) recipients; a CI (Fig. 1) bypasses the degenerate hair cells in the inner ear (cochlea) and stimulates the auditory nerve directly electrically. It receives its input from a speech processor typically worn behind the ear that translates acoustic signals into electrical pulse trains. A wireless radio link takes care of data and energy transfer to the internal parts.

All good, yet CIs feature only about 14-24 electrodes, whereas healthy inner ears contain about 3,500 inner hair cells. The electric currents of those electrodes tend to overlap to the extent that just about 7 channels remain. Hence, the frequency resolution is downgraded to such an extent that CI recipients basically are left with temporal information only, encoded in pulse train variations. As a result, they have to go through an arduous rehabilitation program to learn to recognize speech again, which requires intensive guidance by rehab specialists and a sturdy safety net from partner and family and friends who are willing to support and help in speech recognition training.

Nonetheless, despite their severely degraded hearing capabilities, CI recipients are able to understand speech very well in quiet environments. Oftentimes they are even able to use the phone, i.e., understand speech without the aid of lip reading (!), which is remarkable. The steep learning curves involved are the result of neural plasticity in the brain.

> Moreover\[,\] the child doesn't know what normal vision is like, so probably \[they cannot deploy\] "guided learning"

Of course they can, just like a child develops to produce speech, it will parrot their parents in doing so. Arnon already brought up sensory substitution, a great example; blind folks for instance can learn to navigate using the **BrainPort** (Fig. 2) that converts camera images into tactile representations on the tongue (Stronks *et al*., 2016). Another successful vision aid for the blind is the vOICe, where visual images are transferred to 2D 'soundscapes'. People can learn to make sense of it, mainly by using it and learning to interpret what they hear and relate that to their surroundings. For blind people that will require training; for the BrainPort rehab programs exists, at least in Pittsburgh what I am aware. vOICe is open source and people can download the app on their phones and its highly popular.

One of the prerequisites is that implantation occurs without the patient being deaf for too long. Congenitally deaf born kids are normally implanted within months, to allow full speech recognition and hence speech production to develop. If a person remains sensory deprived for too long, the brain is grossly restructured, and re-developing the lost sense becomes progressively more difficult, in adults and kids alike.

**References**
**-** Lee *et al*. *Front Hum Neurosci* (2014); **8**: 291
**-** Stronks *et al*., *Exp Rev Med Dev* (2016); **13**(10): 919-31

Fig. 1. CI. source: Mayo Clinic

Fig. 2 BrainPort Vision Device (Lee *et al*. (2014)

---
Tags: neuroscience, perception, learning, brain, plasticity
---


# Question
Title: What are the most effective psychological techniques for unlearning information
**What are the most effective psychological techniques for unlearning information?**

Let me given you a simple example for clarity's sake: In high school, you learn that electrons orbit around a nucleus, whereas in reality electrons are actually at every point of the orbit at the same time. How would you go about unlearning the initial fact learnt in high school? It seems that the earlier fact is retrieved subconsciously since it has become a habit.

In the case of this simple example, it seems to be easier to replace the earlier fact. However, this appears to be problematic when dealing with more advanced concepts such as unlearning a simplified version of how fMRI functions.

# Answer
From the book memory the following extract might be helpful:

> …, the association between a stimulus and a trace will be weakened whenever that trace is retrieved inappropriately. In effect, the bond between the cue and the target gets “punished”. For example, suppose that you try to retrieve the new password to your e-mail account. According to the unlearning view, if you recall your old password and realize the mistake, the association between the cue password and the original password will get weakened, decreasing the chances that it will pop up again in the future. If the old password is punished often enough, the association might grow so weak that it will no longer activate that trace; stimulus will be decoupled from the response.

So if the old information is punished many times it will start to loose its strength, and if at the same time the new information is rewarded, the new information will replace the old.

**Reference:**

Melton, A., & Irwin, J. (1940). The influence of degree of interpolated learning on retroactive inhibition and the overt transfer of specific responses. American Journal of Psychology , 53, 173-203.
> 3 votes

# Answer
Replacing memories with similar memories immediately after learning them appears to disrupt the consolidation/reconsolidation processes (and hence "erases" the memory: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3677482/

This paper supports that mechanism in the context of erasure of a fear response in the amygdala: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1223006
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, learning, perceptual-learning
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to erase problematic memories?
This question is inspired by a question I answered on Health.

> **Can we erase problematic memories to aid recovery from depression?**

A depressed person asked how to erase specific unpleasant memories in order to manage his depression. My answer was basically "that's impossible, here is how you deal with these memories instead". And then somebody asked in the comments why it is impossible.

I thought of tackling this question and realized I can't do it well. My best attempt was something like, "First, you have to find out which millions of neurons (out of the billions the person has) light up together to represent 'a memory', and we don't have a method for brain imaging with that resolution. Second, you have to stop them from activating in exactly that combination, while preserving their ability to activate in any other combination, and we have no idea how to achieve that". But this level of explanation does not satisfy me. It is very vague, and I'm not even certain it's correct.

To our best knowledge, what would we have to do if we wanted to erase a specific memory of an event happening to a person? And how far is our technology from achieving each of the steps needed?

# Answer
> 7 votes
The notion of "selective memory loss" as erasing problematic memories presumes the existence of **engrams**, which is a theoretical localized, biological basis for memory. Despite exhaustive searching, we have not found any evidence of engrams in any animal with a nervous system, however. To the best of our knowledge, it's therefore impossible to erase memories, because there is nothing to erase―we have more or less concluded that engrams do not exist. Bruce (2001) aptly summarized Karl Lashley's seminal findings on the matter:

> In his well-known article “In Search of the Engram” published in 1950, Karl Spencer Lashley summarized his 33 years of research and theory on memory and the brain. **He concluded that (1) memories are not localized but are instead distributed within functional areas of the cortex and (2) memory traces are not isolated cortical connections between inputs and outputs.** Though not the first time he had expressed such convictions, their reiteration in this article was backed by Lashley's estimable reputation and expressive power and they have taken firm root in the collective knowledge of today's memory and neuropsychological research community.

We cannot have "selective memory loss", at least not in the sense of erasing individual memories, because there is no such thing as "a memory" in any tangible sense. In modern cognitive science, such as Baddeley's multi-modal model, memory is not so much considered a neural warehouse of remembrances as it is a distributed and generative process. It's not a question of technology.

## References

* Bruce, D. (2001). Fifty years since Lashley's In search of the Engram: refutations and conjectures. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences, 10(3), 308-318.

# Answer
> 7 votes
A phenomenon called "memory reconsolidation" has received considerable attention over the last 15 years. This is about activation (retrieval) causing memories to temporarily enter a labile state in which they can be manipulated, even erased. Most of the research has been with animals, especially rodents, but there are a number of studies on humans and there has been great interest in the possibility of developing therapies for anxiety-related disorders like PTSD and for self-destructive behaviors like drug addiction.

Memories are believed to be encoded by the strengthening of synapses between the members of a population of neurons. According to reconsolidation theory, when a memory is recalled, the corresponding synapses enter a labile state in which they can be manipulated by different kinds of intervention, including certain drugs and also exposure to new information that may update or contradict the original memory.

To the extent that this line of research leads to practical therapies, it is interesting to note that the experimenter/therapist doesn't need to know which neurons are being manipulated.

Here are a few entry points into the reconsolidation literature:

**A good overview of the field:** Hardt, O., Einarsson, E. Ö., & Nader, K. (2010). A bridge over troubled water: reconsolidation as a link between cognitive and neuroscientific memory research traditions. Annual review of psychology, 61, 141–167.

**In Humans:** Schiller, D., & Phelps, E. A. (2011). Does Reconsolidation Occur in Humans? Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 5. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2011.00024

**The study that ignited the recent wave of interest in reconsolidation:** Nader, K., Schafe, G. E., & Le Doux, J. E. (2000). Fear memories require protein synthesis in the amygdala for reconsolidation after retrieval. Nature, 406(6797), 722–726. http://doi.org/10.1038/35021052

# Answer
> 2 votes
## Chemical Methods

There is a little bit of research going into selective erasure of traumatic memories (targeted at people with severe anxiety disorders such as PTSD) by targeting synaptic plasticity. This has a long timeline on human use but has interesting potential.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28648820/

> Synapse-specific long-term plasticity underlying memory involves the targeting of plasticity-related proteins (PRPs) to activated synapses. If distinct tags and PRPs are used for different forms of plasticity, one could selectively remove distinct forms of memory. Using a stimulation paradigm in which associative long-term facilitation (LTF) occurs at one input and non-associative LTF at another input to the same postsynaptic neuron in an Aplysia sensorimotor preparation, we found that each form of LTF is reversed by inhibiting distinct isoforms of protein kinase M (PKM), putative PRPs, in the postsynaptic neuron. \[...\] Thus, the activity of distinct PRPs and tags in a postsynaptic neuron contribute to the maintenance of different forms of synaptic plasticity at separate inputs, allowing for selective reversal of synaptic plasticity and providing a cellular basis for developing therapeutic strategies for selectively reversing maladaptive memories.

https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.1144334

> In the rat cortex, long-term associative memories vanished rapidly after local application of an inhibitor of the protein kinase C isoform, protein kinase M zeta (PKMζ). The effect was observed for at least several weeks after encoding and may be irreversible. In the neocortex, which is assumed to be the repository of multiple types of long-term memory, persistence of memory is thus dependent on ongoing activity of a protein kinase long after that memory is considered to have consolidated into a long-term stable form.

There are also some other chemicals that, when interrupted, hinder memory consolidation and reconsolidation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nn.2271

> We found that oral administration of the β-adrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol before memory reactivation in humans erased the behavioral expression of the fear memory 24 h later and prevented the return of fear.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4023488/

> Memories formed through association with methamphetamine (METH), but not associations with foot shock or food reward, were disrupted by a highly-specific actin cycling inhibitor when infused into the amygdala during the post-consolidation maintenance phase. This selective effect of depolymerization on METH-associated memory was immediate, persistent and did not depend upon retrieval or strength of the association. Inhibition of non-muscle myosin II also resulted in a disruption of METH-associated memory.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2008.08.027

> By employing an inducible and reversible chemical-genetic technique, we find that transient alphaCaMKII overexpression at the time of recall impairs the retrieval of both newly formed one-hour object recognition memory and fear memories, as well as 1-month-old fear memories

https://doi.org/10.1111/JABR.12031 (meta-analysis that "suggests that disruption of glutamate signaling under reconsolidation parameters is sufficient to erase drug-related memories")

## Electroconvulsive therapy has also been used with some success

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25093782/ (removes memories of traumatic car crash, n=1)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24362759/

> Despite accumulating evidence for a reconsolidation process in animals, support in humans, especially for episodic memory, is limited. Using a within-subjects manipulation, we found that a single application of electroconvulsive therapy following memory reactivation in patients with unipolar depression disrupted reactivated, but not non-reactivated, memories for an emotional episode in a time-dependent manner. Our results provide evidence for reconsolidation of emotional episodic memories in humans.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.160.3827.554 (the first study that showed some potential for electroconvulsion -\> memory erasure, in rats)

## Behavioral

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3677482/ (memories reconsolidation can be interrupted by distraction and/or replacing memories with incorrect memories)

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223006

> Thus, as previously demonstrated in rodents, fear memory suppression resulting from behavioral disruption of reconsolidation is amygdala-dependent also in humans, which supports an evolutionarily conserved memory-update mechanism.

##### This is not a conclusive list of memory erasure experiments, but it should provide an overview of the some of the methods that are being investigated

Some of these papers have been mentioned above, but I include them here for completeness.

---
Tags: memory, cognitive-neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: Can this concentration exercise improve cooperation between the left and right hemisphere?
> This exercise aims to stimulate and practice the communication between both hemispheres of the brain, thereby increasing the "processing power" of your conscious activity.
>
> https://thiaoouba.com/concentration-exercise/

The task is to look at the two circles cross-eyed so they overlap in the middle, and to concentrate on that image.

If you try it, you'll see that the middle circle is unstable, with one of the two circles overlapping the other, but the goal is to see both of them at once. Since the right visual field goes to the left brain and vice versa, being able to combine the two conflicting images into one circle with a cross should improve the communication between the two brain hemispheres.

Is there any validity to this?

# Answer
> 3 votes
I doubt there is much about this specific situation, but see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain\_training for a broader discussion:

> Scientific investigation into the effectiveness of brain training activities have concluded that they have no impact on intelligence or everyday cognitive ability, and that most programs had no peer reviewed published evidence of their efficacy.

This is not well-referenced on Wikipedia, but I think there is a very clear lesson: if someone wants to make a claim that something they offer is useful, **they need to provide evidence**. No one else needs to bother to show it *doesn't* work, and if the person trying to sell you on something doesn't bother to actually study the thing they're claiming, then *they don't have any idea whether it works, either*.

It's important that any evidence provided actually tests the claim being made. Generally speaking, you can "train" your brain doing any task, and more time spent on a task will tend to make you better at that task. So, if you design a visual task that requires both hemispheres to be involved, and requires some communication between them, you can probably design an experiment to measure that activity and that communication. Does that mean "communication between hemispheres improved?" Not necessarily, it just means you've found a task where both hemispheres are involved. If you train your brain to cross your eyes, will it get easier to cross your eyes? Probably. Will it help you solve math problems? Probably not. If someone says "increasing the "processing power" of your conscious activity" you should be thinking "How do they define 'processing power'? What practical use have they connected this to? What actual benefit has been demonstrated?" The phrase is meaningless without definition.

---
Tags: neuroscience, concentration
---


# Question
Title: How are people able to wake themselves up after a pre-specified amount of time?
Auto-suggestion seems to work. Several people I know seem to be able to tell themselves "I'll wake up after 'N' hours/minutes", and do so within a minute or two of that duration.

I thought for a moment that it might be that the duration defined is typical to the person, but even defining a weird figure (e.g., 23 minutes), it appears to work just as well as that person's regular duration of 15 minutes.

Personally it works for me sometimes (usually when I'm under pressure), other times it does not.

How does the brain/body know to power-up after N minutes?

# Answer
There is quite a lot of research on self-awakening (see this search on Google Scholar for self awakening). Hopefully someone else more familiar with this literature can add a more authoritative answer about the mechanisms of self-awakening. In the interem I briefly extract some relevant points from Ikeda and Hashi (2012). The study does not directly address biological mechanisms. However, understanding the reliability of self-awakening and the correlates of the ability to self-awaken is presumably relevant to forming such an understanding.

First they summarise some existing research:

> Both the accuracy and success rate of self-awakening have been experimentally examined. More than half of the people who have the ability to self-awaken suc- cessfully awakened within 30 minutes of the predetermined time. For example, seven participants succeeded on nine of 14 days (64%) in a sleep laboratory, and 15 participants succeeded on 35 of 44 nights (80%) at their homes. Survey studies indicate that many people habitually self-awaken in daily life; for example, 52% of 269 adults (aged 21−84 years) and 10.3% of 643 university students6 reported habitu- ally self-awakening. **People who have a habit of self-awakening in the morning have regular sleep/wake schedules, tended to have a morningness chronotypology, awakened comfortably in the morning, and had less daytime dozing**.

In their own study they found:

> The present study investigated self-awakening, both habitual and inconsistent, compared to awakening by external means in relation to sleep/wake schedules for five consecutive years in 362 students (starting at mean age 15.1 ± 0.3 years). Students who self-awakened consistently for five consecutive years (5% of all students) went to bed earlier than those who inconsistently self-awakened (mixed group, 40%) or consistently used forced awakening by external means (56%). Awakening during sleep was more frequent and sleep was lighter in the consistently self-awakened group than in the mixed and consistently forced-awakened groups. However, daytime dozing was less frequent and comfort immediately after awakening was greater for the consistently self-awakened group than for the mixed and consistently forced-awakened groups.

### Reference

* Ikeda, H., & Hayashi, M. (2012). Longitudinal study of self-awakening and sleep/wake habits in adolescents. Nature, 4, 103-109. PDF
* Bell CR. Awakening from sleep at a pre-set time. Percept Mot Skills. 1980;50(2):503–508.
* Lavie P, Oksenberg A, Zomer J. “It’s time, you must wake up now.” Percept Mot Skills. 1979;49(2):447–450.
* MoorcroftWH,KayserKH,GriggsAJ.Subjectiveandobjectiveconfir- mation of the ability to self-awaken at a self-predetermined time without using external means. Sleep. 1997;20(1):40–45.
* ZepelinH.REMsleepandthetimingofself-awakenings.BullPsychon Soc. 1986;24(4):254–256.
* Zung WW, Wilson WP. Time estimation during sleep. Biol Psychiatry. 1971;3(2):159–164.
* Matsuura N, Hayashi M, Hori T. Comparison of sleep/wake habits of university students with or without a habit of self-awakening. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2002;56(3):223–224.
> 5 votes

# Answer
The short answer is that this is unknown. However, there are a few potential leads.

One hint is that people are able to estimate the passage of time fairly reliably, and this ability seems to persist during sleep (Ukraintseva, Liaukovich, & Shilov, 2021; Aritake-Okada et al, 2010):

> The notion that \[time estimation ability\] operates in the brain even during sleep is supported by, for example, “self-awakening” ... and “anticipated sleep termination” ... This research found that ... subjective elapsed time during sleep was very close to actual sleep time ...

Furthermore, the ability to estimate time during sleep can vary substantially. Moorcroftl & Breitenstein (2000) review current speculation:

> **Source of self-awakening ability**
>
> In addition to imputed read-out of an internal biological clock, speculation about the source of this awareness of time during sleep has also included light sleep with frequent awakenings and periodic REM sleep. ... Bell has proposed that the ability to self-awaken consists of two components: the ability to induce more frequent awakenings coupled with the ability to use these awakenings to mark the passage of time.

Accordingly, successful self-awakening is associated with factors that increase "arousal" (alertness) during sleep such as lighter sleep, shallower sleep phases (ie, REM), lower waking threshold, increased brain activity, reduced sleep inertia (grogginess), and higher sleep quality (Ikeda & Hayashi, 2012; Matsuura & Hayashi, 2009; Malloggi et al, 2022). This presumably increases both time estimation accuracy and ease of waking. Hayashi, Matsuura, & Ikeda (2010) summarize current findings with this schematic:

Additionally, one study suggests that successful self-awakening is associated with increased brain activity particularly in the right prefrontal cortex, which incidentally, is involved in time estimation (Aritake et al, 2012).
> 1 votes

---
Tags: sleep, physiology
---


title: Is Mensa IQ test real

text:
# Question
Title: Is Mensa IQ test real
I'd like to ask is Mensa IQ test real, is Mensa even real. If so why are countries like Nigeria not a member, because there are a lot of smart people there who would like to join, like me for instance. Please give me your feedback.

# Answer
> 2 votes
The Mental Age tests are calibrated by country/culture:

> Mental age is a concept related to intelligence. It looks at how a specific individual, at a specific age, performs intellectually, compared to average intellectual performance for that individual's actual chronological age (i.e. time elapsed since birth).(...) The score achieved by the individual is compared to the median average scores at various ages, and the mental age (x, say) is derived such that the individual's score equates to the average score at age x.

The (modern) Intellectual Quotient (IQ for short) of a child is then computed by dividing the Mental Age by the chronological age and multiplying by 100.

Mensa's criteria of "being in the top 2%" matches a proportion of the population for ANY measure of ANY criteria distributed in a normal distribution. If you label as "clever people" the "top 2%" of a population on a test measuring math, logic, vocabulary and visualization skills, by definition there are "clever people" in every country, and by definition also, they form 2% of the population.

Albeit one can join the Mensa International association, the objective is for members to gather and socialize for which national groups are more convenient (the name itself, "Mensa", means table (among other things)!):

> Mensa means table in Latin as is symbolized in the organization’s logo. The organization says the word mensa has a triple meaning in Latin: mind, table and month, suggesting a monthly meeting of minds around a table. “The name chosen, according to the organization, to suggest a ’round table’ type group”. constellationsofwords.com/mensa

The fact that there is no Mensa national group and hence test in some countries (e.g. Nigeria, Chile, etc.) has more to do with the cost of creating and maintaining an association than with "having clever people", but people from those countries can join Mensa International with a mere IQ test from a psychologist of their country.

I hope it helps! (Beware of formulating your questions on stack exchange as debates: those questions will be very quickly closed, we aim to answer questions, not to be a forum for opinions.)

---
Tags: learning
---


# Question
Title: Is emotional detachment a maladaptive coping mechanism, an important skill for people thrust into extreme situations or both?
Reading the Wikipedia article about Emotional detachment raised my eyebrow.

It says:

> Emotional detachment is a **maladaptive** coping mechanism, which **allows a person to react calmly to highly emotional circumstances**. Emotional detachment in this sense is a **decision to avoid engaging emotional connections, rather than an inability or difficulty in doing so**, typically for personal, social, or other reasons. In this sense **it can allow people to maintain boundaries, and avoid undesired impact by or upon others, related to emotional demands**. As such it is a **deliberate** mental attitude which avoids engaging the emotions of others.
>
> This detachment **does not necessarily mean avoiding empathy**; rather, it **allows the person to rationally choose whether or not to be overwhelmed or manipulated by such feelings**. Examples where this is used in a **positive sense** might include **emotional boundary management, where a person avoids emotional levels of engagement related to people who are in some way emotionally overly demanding**, such as difficult co-workers or relatives, or is adopted to aid the person in helping others.

(Emphasis mine)

This is weird, to say the least. First Wikipedia claims that emotional detachment is a *maladaptive* coping mechanism. Then it immediately proceeds to list its numerous traits that seem decidedly positive, if not even needed in certain situations. According to this description one could reason that emotional detachment is all but necessary for anyone thrust into extreme circumstances, as it enables such a person to react properly to such situations. Wikipedia itself stresses that this detachment is not forced upon an individual, but rather it just gives them new options how to react; the individual may chose to use or not to use this new option, depending on situation.

In this light it would even seem to be an important *skill* all those in extreme professions (such as soldiers at war) must eventually learn, as well as all those who are thrust into toxic relationships.

Then how is it *maladaptive*?

Am I failing to understand something obvious or is Wikipedia spitting out BS, as it often does?

# Answer
> 0 votes
It may well be that the author miswrote, but if it was actually his intention to write "maladaptive" then the word *could* be interpreted as fitting its context in the following sense, highlighting detachment's abnormal or counter-intuitive aspect compared with 'normal' engagement:-

Maladaptive as in "not adjusting adequately or appropriately to the environment or situation." So 'appropriately' would be normal, engaged emotional response. Since the subject here is 'detached' (non-response) it is 'maladaptive' from a naïve perspective, as in not responding 'normally'.

**Maladaptive.** Latin *male* (adv.) "badly"; Late Latin *adaptare* "to adjust," from *ad* "to" + *aptare* "to join," from *aptus* "fitted". So, badly-fitted, abnormal, even if emotion detachment is actually for the best in a particular circumstance.

---
Tags: emotion, dissociation
---