# Question
Title: Does hypnotherapy/hypnosis, in any form, for any type of disorder, work?
Does Hypnosis Work for Treating, or Curing, any Form of any Mental Disorder?

Let's say my definition of hypnosis is related mostly to the classical way people think about it. This is subjective of course, but I've purposefully made it that way. I do realize at times it may overlap into other types of therapy as well.

If there are other forms of hypnosis I'd like to hear about those too though!

Citation/Research Wise:

* **I'd like to know if its backed by literature. I want the specific citation's abstract quoted.**
* **I'd like to know their findings, conclusions, and methodologies and your analysis of that.**
* **I'd like to know how long the treatments lasted after they stopped being hypnotized.**
* **I'd like to know how effective it was for whatever specific goals that it was used to treat. How long did the affects last if there were any?**
* **I'd like to know if you found any potential errors or flaws in the study - and you're overall analysis of that.**

---

***Citing Wikipedia is not an acceptable answer or comment as it is not a reputable source, it's citations are. If you are going to do that, pick the most compelling and valid studies (no matter the disorder), or something like a meta analysis that Wikipedia cites and then post that along with the answer to the above questions. Thanks.***

---

Anecdotally:

* **I'd like to know what it feels like to be hypnotized if you've had the experience of it.**
* **I'd like to know why if it worked really well for you then why did you stop doing it or have you actually continued?**

It can be any disorder of any kind, just as long as someone could classify it as a psychological "problem" in some context. The more angles you come at it with the better though.

# Answer
**What is Hypnosis?**

First of all, we need to define hypnosis. Hypnosis, by definition, is a natural state attained by individuals. It is the calm, place achieved by meditation, reflective thought or day dreaming. In and of itself, yes hypnosis can be beneficial to all individuals. A caveat applies to this statement, however, as to the current mental state of an individual. One could suggest that hypnosis is to the human mind, as eating vegetables is to the human body; nourishing and vital for our well being.

**What is therapeutic hypnosis?**

Hypnotherapy, which is the use of hypnosis as a therapy is another thing. It has been proven to have success. However, it's success is contingent upon the individuals willingness for change, insight, and mental capacities (as are Factors Influencing Successful Psychotherapy Outcomes). Hypnotherapy teaches the individual to use hypnosis as a therapeutic technique. Hypnotherapy has success rates in helping mental disorders. A person is more suggestible under hypnosis.

When I refer to mental capacities, I am not so much referring to intellect, as mental health. For psychotic illness, by definition, is unable to be improved with logic or reasoning, any form of therapy, other than medication to adjust the brains chemistry, after which, other therapeutic processes may assist in the individual's well being. \**note my comment about psychosis is broad; I believe it is too big a topic to detail here\*

What is Hypnotherapy and How Does it Differ From Hypnosis?

> Hypnosis is a totally natural state of mind. When under hypnosis you will feel very relaxed, just like that wonderful feeling when you are tired lying in your bed and you are so overcome with comfort that you wish the moment could last forever. Through simple hypnotic, relaxation techniques you can easily attain this state at which time it becomes easy, with the help of a trained hypnotherapist, to visualise yourself becoming healthier, happier, more confident, a non-smoker.
>
> Hypnotherapy, or self-hypnosis once you've learnt to use the tools for yourself, can be a very effective tool for asking the right kind of 'internal' questions. ..//...
>
> Many people claim that they have never been hypnotised, but they do admit to having drifted off whilst thinking about a loved one, forgetting large chunks of a car journey (commonly known as highway hypnosis), or 'going somewhere else' while reading a book. These are all examples of natural trance states. One of the great things about hypnosis is that in the hands of a reputable practitioner it is harmless and produces no damaging side effects, whilst providing positive therapeutic benefits. **(1)**

**How is hypnosis used within current therapies?**

Hypnosis is the principle used in mindfulness, a popular therapeutic technique used in a variety of therapies, including Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) and Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT); which was developed from CBT by Dr Marsha Linehan. It is specifically designed to help people with Borderline Personality Disorder.

Hypnosis is also commonly practiced to assist individuals with problems of addiction; examples being smoking and weight loss. citations to follow

It has also shown to have beneficial effects in pain management. citations to follow

---

**\- Does Hypnosis Work for Treating, or Curing, any Form of any Mental Disorder?**

This can be answered with an uncategorical Yes, as an adjunct to the therapeutic process.

It has proven useful in assisting personality disorders, addiction, pain management, phobias, anxiety and depression, as broad examples.

* > **Hypnosis, when using proven therapeutic procedures**, can be a highly effective form of treatment for many mental, psychosomatic, and physical disorders. For example, through the use of regressive techniques, an adult patient may mentally voyage back to a point in youth that was particularly troublesome, allowing the healing of old emotional wounds. Another patient can be led to understand that emotional pain has been converted to physical pain, and that the pain can be eliminated once the source has been addressed. Or, a person suffering from chronic pain can be taught to control the pain without use of medications. There are a number of techniques for correcting dysfunctional behaviors such as self-destructive habits, anxiety disorders, and even managing side effects of various medical treatments and procedures.
>
> Hypnotherapy has been used to stop self-destructive and addictive habits like smoking. It has also been used to curb the urge to eat for overeaters, to stem the disruptive actions of tics, cure insomnia , stop bed-wetting, and minimize anxiety. Excessive stress can be generated from any number of sources and can be the springboard for anxiety. Some of the more prominent sources of anxiety and stress for which people seek hypnotherapy are: public speaking, test taking, and job stress. Hypnotherapy also works well for other anxiety disorders such as phobias and has proven to be an effective treatment for mild to moderate depression. In one study, hypnotherapy was used in conjunction with traditional cognitive therapy, to assist persons who had severe aversion to needles. The treatment was necessary, because it was essential that each participant receive periodic medical injections. However, the participants would have become non-compliant without the adjunct intervention of hypnotherapy. In another case, involving care for terminally ill cancer patients, it was concluded that hypnotherapy was more effective at enhancing quality of life and relieving anxiety and depressive symptoms, when compared to others who received traditional care. **(2)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)**

---

**\- I'd like to know if its backed by literature. I want the specific citation's abstract quoted.**

There have been numerous studies demonstrating the usefulness of hypnosis within a therapeutic setting and the long term benefits.

The following links and excerpts provide citations with conclusive research about the efficacy of Hypnosis as a useful and lasting therapeutic technique. I have inserted bold to highlight the various conditions being discussed.

> It is argued (a) that the integration of techniques from **behavior modification** and hypnosis can expedite therapy for **specific disorders** and (b) that hypnosis intensifies the perceptual and cognitive factors involved in "visual voyages" or hypnagogic experiences, evocation of fantasies, feeling states, and "altered states of consciousness" to bring about behavioral changes. **(4) Hypnosis and behavior modification: Imagery conditioning.**
>
> Thus hypnosis was shown to be more effective than nonhypnotic techniques for **reducing procedural distress** in children and adolescents with cancer. **(5) Hypnosis and nonhypnotic techniques for reduction of pain and anxiety during painful procedures in children and adolescents with cancer**
>
> Hypnosis, when used by trained professionals, in other words, can allow those who suffer from **panic attacks** to learn to effectively and rapidly regulate their internal states. These techniques, in addition to **curing phobic conditions or panic attacks**, support patients, allowing them to regain the possibility of managing their own well-being and restoring their sense of self mastery, which is often lowered by these disordersibid. **(3)**

---

*I have merged the following points*

**\- I'd like to know their findings, conclusions, and methodologies and your analysis of that.**
**\- I'd like to know if you found any potential errors or flaws in the study - and you're overall analysis of that.**

I cannot analysis or critique all these studies, as there are many studies which demonstrate the effects of hypnosis. The nature of any study, is it is time consuming and requires much work and effort outside of the scope of these types of questions and answers. I agree with this answer here, to this question Striking a balance between citations and common sense in answers about providing effective answers.

The question about potential flaws, in this study, it is made clear that, given the small difference between therapeutic techniques, with or without the addition of hypnosis, there was a significant difference for patients, having hypnosis as part of their treatment.

> These results were particularly striking because of the few procedural differences between the hypnotic and nonhypnotic treatments. **(3)**

There is also the issue, that hypnosis, as a therapy per se, is generally used as part of an integrated therapeutic approach. One example being, children undergoing treatment for cancer, are not given hypnosis in isolation, it is within a structured supportive framework. So the measure of hypnosis, per se, is difficult to quantify at times; as the willingness to use hypnosis as a therapeutic technique, also demonstrates a more holistic viewpoint in the management of the individuals health. Almost akin to natural therapies, as hypnosis is a natural tool, available to individuals and does not need to be taught to be practiced. Being a natural tool available, it can be taught to those who neglect to use it. Much like education about a healthy diet. It is a healthy practice for the mind.

---

*I have merged these questions- "I'd like to know how long the treatments lasted after they stopped being hypnotized." In these studies the hypnosis was a part of the therapeutic process, so the hypnosis continued whilst the therapy continued.*

**\- I'd like to know how long the treatments lasted after they stopped being hypnotized.**
**\- I'd like to know how effective it was for whatever specific goals that it was used to treat. How long did the affects last if there were any?**

> Effects seemed particularly pronounced for treatments of obesity, especially at long-term follow-up, indicating that unlike those in nonhypnotic treatment, clients to whom hypnotic inductions had been administered continued to lose weight after treatment ended. These results were particularly striking because of the few procedural differences between the hypnotic and nonhypnotic treatments. (6)

This paper discussed the usefulness and longer term effectiveness of hypnosis for people with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

> This research represents the first controlled treatment study of hypnosis and cognitive– behavioral therapy (CBT) of acute stress disorder (ASD). Civilian trauma survivors (N 87) who met criteria for ASD were randomly allocated to 6 sessions of CBT, CBT combined with hypnosis (CBT– hypnosis), or supportive counseling (SC). CBT comprised exposure, cognitive restructuring, and anxiety management. CBT– hypnosis comprised the CBT components with each imaginal exposure preceded by a hypnotic induction and suggestions to engage fully in the exposure. In terms of treatment completers (n 69), fewer participants in the CBT and CBT– hypnosis groups met criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder at posttreatment and 6-month follow-up than those in the SC group. CBT– hypnosis resulted in greater reduction in reexperiencing symptoms at posttreatment than CBT. These findings suggest that hypnosis may have use in facilitating the treatment effects of CBT for posttraumatic stress. **(7)**

---

> This study demonstrates that the beneficial effects of hypnotherapy appear to last at least five years. Thus it is a viable therapeutic option for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. **(8)**

---

**\- I'd like to know what it feels like to be hypnotized if you've had the experience of it.**

As to personal experience I have experienced self and therapeutic hypnosis at varying stages throughout my life. It creates a feeling of relaxation and peace. It gives me a personal power of feeling more self control and reducing distress levels.

---

**\- I'd like to know why if it worked really well for you then why did you stop doing it or have you actually continued?**

Personally, I have practiced it throughout my entire life. The times I need it the most, are the times I practice it the least. It is something I should tattoo on myself to remind me to use it more often, as it is helpful. Not a cure all, but helps me in any and every situation. It slow down my emotional reaction time and intensity and assists in making ill-timed, rash and bad judgements. It is when in a distressed state it is the hardest to practice. I am glad for this question, as it is a reminder to me, to practice this and I need to practice it daily.

To go into explanation as to why people have discontinued, would be similar to asking, how long is a piece of string. People stop therapy or positive coping techniques for a vast number of reasons. I cannot begin to address this within the scope of this answer. I have posted this question:
What are the key predictive traits of therapeutic success?

---

 (1) What is Hypnotherapy and How Does it Differ From Hypnosis? Oxford Hypnotherapy
(2) Hypnotherapy Encyclopedia ofMental Disorders
(3) PANIC ATTACKS AND PHOBIAS: HEALING WITH HYPNOSIS Milton H Erickson Institute
(4) Hypnosis and behavior modification: Imagery conditioning.
Kroger, William S.; Fezler, William D.
Oxford, England: J. B. Lippincott. (1976). xxv 426 pp.
(5) Hypnosis and nonhypnotic techniques for reduction of pain and anxiety during painful procedures in children and adolescents with cancer Richard W. Olmsted (Editor), M.D. Lonnie ZeltzerCorresponding author contact information, Ph.D. Samuel LeBaron University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas USA
(6) Hypnosis as an adjunct to cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Kirsch, Irving; Montgomery, Guy; Sapirstein, Guy Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 63(2), Apr 1995, 214-220. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.63.2.214
(7) The Additive Benefit of Hypnosis and Cognitive–Behavioral Therapy in Treating Acute Stress Disorder
Richard A. Bryant, Michelle L. Moulds, Rachel M. Guthrie, and Reginald D. V. Nixon University of New South Wales
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association 2005, Vol. 73, No. 2, 334 –340 0022-006X/05/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.2.334
Gut. 2003 Nov;52(11):1623-9.
(8) Long term benefits of hypnotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome. Gonsalkorale WM, Miller V, Afzal A, Whorwell PJ Department of Medicine, University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK. wgonsalkorale@compuserve.com
(9) Iglesias, A. & Iglesias, A. (2005). Awake alert hypnosis in the treatment of panic disorder: a case report. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 47(4), 249-256.
(10) McNeal, S.A. (2001). EMDR and hypnosis in the treatment of phobias. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 43:3/43:4, 263-274.
(11) Kirsch, I., Montgomery, G. & Sapperstein, G. (1995) Hypnosis as a adjunct to cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy: a meta analysis. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 63, 214-220.
(12) Crawford, H.J. & Barbasasz, A.F. (1993). Phobias and intense fears: facilitating their treatment with hypnosis. In J. W. Rhue, S. J. Lynn & I. Kirsch, (Eds.), Handbook of clinical hypnosis (pp.311-338) Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
(13) King, Brenda J, Michael Nash, David Spiegel, and Kenneth Jobson. Hypnosis as an intervention in pain management: A brief review. International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice 5 (2001): 97–101.
(14) Liossi, Christina and Paul White. Efficacy of clinical hypnosis in the enhancement of quality of life of terminally ill cancer patients. Contemporary Hypnosis 18 (2001): 145–160.
(15) Segal, Robert. Hypnosis in the treatment of an eating disorder. Australian Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis 29 (2001): 26–36.
(16) Yapko, Michael. Hypnosis in treating symptoms and risk factors of major depression. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 44 (2001): 97–108.

##

---
> 10 votes

# Answer
*Hypnosis* "works" only insofar as it induces1 a trance. Hypnosis is not a type of therapy. Hypnosis does not cure any disorders or do anything at all, except induce a trance.

*Hypnotherapy*, from the perspective of psychodynamic theory, utilizes this trance to directly access the subconscious. In traditional hypnotherapy (of the Victorian era), direct suggestions were "planted" in the "unprotected" subconscious; in modern Ericksonian hypnotherapy, the unconscious is stimulated to participate in the healing process.

So the question we are dealing with asks:

**Does *hypnotherapy* work for any type of disorder?**

Yes, it does. Standard works (Burrows & Dennerstein, 1980; Brown & Fromm, 1986; Cheek & LeCron, 1968; Crasilneck & Hall, 1985; Hammond, 1990; Kossak, 1989; Kroger & Fezler, 1976; Peter et al., 1991; Revenstorff, 1993; Lynn et al., 1996; Wester & Smith, 1984; Erickson, 2007-2010; O'Hanlon & Hexum, 1990) show that hypnosis has been successfully applied to a multitude of psychosomatic, psychiatric and somatic cases including:

* behavioral problems
    + nail biting
    + enuresis (bedwetting)
    + smoking
    + overweight
    + academic and athletic increase in performance
* psychoneurotic disorders
    + phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorders
    + depressive reactions
    + post-traumatic stress disorder
    + dissociative disorders
    + sleep disorders
* psychosomatic disorders
    + chronic pain
    + migraine, tension headache
    + morbus crohn, ulcers
    + asthma, hay fever
    + hypertonia (high blood pressure)
* somatic disorders
    + immunology: warts, dermatosis, ichtyosis, tumors
    + vasomotoric: bleeding control, morbus raynaud, wound healing
    + acute pain: obstetrics, dentistry, postoperative pain
    + neurology: amnesia, rehabilitation after brain lesions

In addition to case studies, there is a growing number of controlled group studies on the effectiveness of hypnotherapy which show empirically confirmed indications for this method. Meta-analyses have become the accepted method of judging the effectiveness of a therapeutic procedure, so I will confine myself to these in the following overview.

In a meta-analysis (Rominger, 1995) of 36 control group studies with more than 1200 patients the effect sizes ranged from g = .54 to g = .952. This corresponds (converted after Rosenthal, 1984) to a correlation between treatment and effect ranging from r = .26 to r = .44. From this a success rate (in %) can be estimated for treated and untreated patients (table 1).

```
                 Number of Studies    Success Rate    Success Rate
                                      untreated (%)   treated (%)
all studies      36                   31              69
smoking           4                   30              70
anxiety           6                   29              71
pain             14                   37              63

```

***Table 1.** Results of a meta-analysis of hypnotherapy (after Rominger, 1995).*

In a more recent meta-analysis, Bongartz et al. (1999) found comparable results in 112 studies with 5600 patients (table 2).

```
                       Number of Studies    Success Rate    Success Rate
                                            untreated (%)   treated (%)
psychotherapy (all)    85                   32              68
addiction               6                   37              63
somatoform disorders   11                   35              65
anxiety                11                   26              74
behavioral problems     4                   33              67
pain (all)             27                   35              65
pain (cancer)           6                   36              64
pain (surgery)          8                   38              62
pain (birth)            5                   36              64

```

***Table 2.** Results of a meta-analysis of hypnotherapy (after Bongartz et al., 1999).*

In a new meta-analysis (2002), Bongartz et al. again confirmed the effectiveness of hypnotherapy. The abstract recapitulates:

> From 193 studies published until 1998 that investigated the efficacy of hypnosis 43 randomized clinical studies were selected that compared a patient group treated exclusively by hypnosis with an untreated control group (or with a group of patients treated by conventional medical procedures).The 43 studies were integrated into a meta-analysis that yielded a weighted average post-treatment effect size of d=.60 (medium effect size) for hypnotic treatment of ICD-10 coded disorders (24 studies; average treatment period: 5.1 weeks) and d=.38 (small effect) for hypnosis as an adjunct for supporting medical procedures (19 studies).These estimates are conservative since all variables of a given study were used. Most of the studies employed methods of the classical approach to hypnosis. In order to obtain an estimate to which extent non-clinical factors (design-quality, way of comparison of dependent variables) have an influence on the effect sizes, effect sizes were computed for all studies of the original 193 studies that reported the necessary statistical information (N=89). For those studies with an average effect size of d=.80 a mas- sive influence of non-clinical factors was demonstrated with a range from d=.51 for randomized studies with group comparisons to d=2.0 for non-randomized studies using pre-post-comparisons.

A table listing all 43 analyzed studies and their area of application ("Störungsbild/Anwendungsbereich"), number of patients ("Patientenzahl"), type of hypnosis ("Hypnoseart"), treatment period in weeks ("Behandlungszeitraum") and effect sizes ("Effektstärke") is included in the publication which is available online at http://bscw.rediris.es/pub/bscw.cgi/d4416025/Bongartz-Effektivitat\_hypnose.pdf (in German). It gives a more discriminating view and shows the large variance in effect sizes among the studies, but does not add anything new to this overview.

All the studies included in the meta-analysis used a control group, randomized assignment of patients to the groups, and used hypnotherapy as the *only* psychotherapeutic treatment (and not in conjunction with other forms of psychotherapy), but sometimes in conjunction with the medical standard therapy. As such, from my point of view, the meta-analysis is quite flawless. Some of the studies included measurements taken some time after the end of the treatment, but these were not considered in this meta analysis, because the 193 studies from which the ones included in the meta-analysis were selected are all the studies that the authors could find in relevant databases and literature ("footnote chasing") between 1974 and 1998, and the number of studies including "longer-term" effects were apparently not enough for a separate analysis. Thus, the authors of the meta-analysis considered only the immediate post-treatment measures of all studies.

In summary, it seems to me that the effectiveness of hypnotherapy has been shown especially for behavioral, anxiety and (psycho)somatic disorders and symptoms, while it seems not to have been applied, or not successfully, to psychotic, affective, dissociative, sexual, eating, sleep, impulse control, adjustment and personality disorders.

---

Footnotes:

1 Sometimes. An attempt by a clinical psychologist and trained hypnotist to hypnotize me did not lead to any trance.

2 In an analysis of 302 meta-analyses of psychologica, pedagogical and behavioral therapies, Lipsey and Wilson (1993) found 90% of effect sizes to be above 0.10, and 85% above 0.20. A more methodically severe selection of 156 meta-analyses returned a mean effect size of 0.47.

---

Sources:

* Bongartz, W., Flammer, E., & Schonke, R. (1999). Die Effektivität der Hypnotherapie: Eine meta-analytische Studie. Vortrag auf der Jahrestagung der M.E.G., Bad Orb.
* Bongartz, W., Flammer, E., & Schonke, R. (2002). Die Effektivität der Hypnose: Eine meta-analytische Studie. *Psychotherapeut, 47*, 67-76.
* Brown, D. P., & Fromm, E. (1986). *Hypnotherapy and Hypnoanalysis*. Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
* Burrows, G. D., & Dennerstein, L. (Eds.) (1980). \*Handbook of hypnosis and psychosomatic medicine. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
* Cheek, D. B., & LeCron, L. M. (1968). *Clinical hypnotherapy*. New York: Grune & Stratton.
* Crasilneck, H. B., & Hall, J. A. (1985). Clinical Hypnosis: Principles and Applications\* (2nd ed.). New York: Grune & Stratton.
* Erickson, M. H. (2007-2010). *Collected Works* (10 vols.). Milton H. Erickson Foundation Press.
* Hammond, D. C. (ed.) (1990). *Handbook of Hypnotic Suggestions and Metaphors*. New York: Norton.
* Kossak, H. C. (1989). *Hypnose: Ein Lehrbuch*. Weinheim: PVU.
* Kroger, W. S., & Fezler, W. D. (1976). *Hypnosis and Behavior Modification: Imagery Conditioning*. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
* Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, I., & Rhue, J. W. (eds.) (1996) \*Casebook of Clinical Hypnosis. Washington, DC: APA.
* Lipsey, M, L., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. *American Psychologist, 48*, 1181-1209.
* O'Hanlon, W. H., & Hexum, A. L. (1990). *An Uncommon Casebook: The Complete Clinical Works of Milton H. Erickson*. New York: Norton.
* Peter, B., Kraiker, C., & Revenstorf, D. (eds.) (1991). *Hypnose und Verhaltenstherapie*. Bern: Huber.
* Revenstorff, D. (1993). *Klinische Hypnose* (2nd ed.). Heidelberg: Springer.
* Rominger, M. (1995). *Metaanalyse der Hypnotherapie* (Diploma thesis). University of Tübingen.
* Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research\*. London: Sage.
* Wester, W. C., & Smith, A. H. (1984). *Clinical Hypnosis: A Multidisciplinary Approach*. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
> 18 votes

---
Tags: hypnosis
---


# Question
Title: What is the relative importance of shape and color in object recognition?
Do people recognize objects faster when both shape and color are present? Can color introduce more cognitive load to identify the object? Let's say there is a row of icons. Users need to quickly (no more than 3 seconds) decide which icon to click on. Which icon configuration would lead to quicker decision making?

1. shape only (no color)
2. shape and color

Do people react to color or shape first?

# Answer
People are generally faster to find a dissimilar stimulus when it differs along two dimensions (color+shape) from the rest, but only if they are looking for those dimensions (e.g. find all objects that are red diamonds is faster than find all objects that are red). However, if they are looking for dimensions which are not present, this effect reverses (e.g. find all objects that are not blue is faster than find all objects that are not blue circles).

The reasons behind this are still a matter of debate, but one model (Buckingham et al, 2012) suggests that the best explanation is that both dimensions are processed simultaneously. See here for more information on why this model fits the data: Two perceptual anomalies explained by a statistically optimal model.

*Buckingham, S., de Gardelle, V., Avery, S., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Two perceptual anomalies explained by a statistically optimal model. Journal of Vision, 12(9), 1053-1053.*
> 4 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, perception, categorisation, recognition
---


# Question
Title: What is the most common age for developing psychosis?
**Background:** Lately I've been watching a lot of Criminal Minds and in the season that I've just finished, one of the main characters - a 20-something Dr. Spencer Reid - is worried that he might be developing some form of psychosis (as I understood it) due to his mother's long time paranoid schizophrenia. Something he said to another of the main characters made me wonder the following:

* **At what age does psychosis most commonly develop?**
* **If someone has psychosis in the immediate family but has not developed psychosis by their mid-20s, is there an age where they are more likely to develop the illness or a point where if they haven't had it by a given age, they never will?**

# Answer
There seems to be no correlation between age and onset of psychosis. The only difference between early onset and late onset psychosis, is the individual with late onset psychosis, generally, possesses better coping skills.

> The aims of this study were to calculate the incidence of non-affective, non-organic psychotic symptoms across the life span and to explore the contribution of different sets of risk factors in relation to age at onset. ..//..
>
> Onset of psychotic symptoms in late life is no rare event. Compared to early onset psychosis, the late-onset counterpart less often arises in a context of emotional dysfunction and negative affectivity, suggesting qualitative differences in aetiology and more effective premorbid coping styles. 1.

The incidence of psychosis is increased with factors, such as familial mental health. The following article provides a comprehensive table of high risk factors, incidence and age onset.

> These risk markers are divided into two categories: (1) precursors related to early etiological factors (family psychiatric history, perinatal and obstetric complications, neurobehavior deficits, early parental separation, institutionalization, and poor family function) and (2) precursors signaling latent mental illness (personality measurements indicating proneness to psychosis, and teacher ratings indicating emotional lability, social anxiety, social withdrawal, passivity, poor peer relations, and disruptive and aggressive behavior). Because teacher ratings have been shown to be powerful predictors of adult mental breakdown, part of this article focuses on a specific study that assesses such ratings as predictors of psychosis in a high-risk population. 2.

2.

There is some correlation with the course psychotic illness takes and the age of onset.

> A diagnosis of schizophrenia, higher antipsychotic dose, and more negative symptoms were associated with earlier onset of illness, while female sex and a more chronic course were associated with later illness onset. Furthermore, earlier onset was associated with worse performance on immediate recall and sustained attention. However, male sex, more negative symptoms, and higher antipsychotic dose mediated the effect of age at onset on memory, while negative symptoms explained its association with attention/vigilance. 3.

I cannot find studies answering your question regarding familial history of psychosis and late onset psychosis. I have drawn the following conclusions from the information provided.

**Disclaimer:** *The following are my own ideas:*

In view that the risk factors for psychosis, are also associated with the likelihood of earlier onset psychosis, one could suggest (loosely) that is psychosis was to develop from such risk factors, it would most likely be earlier rather than later. As late onset psychosis, does not seem to be correlated with such risk factors. This would be no guarantee that a late onset psychosis could not occur with individuals with familial history of psychosis; however my *guess* would be the later one with this familial history goes psychosis free, the less likely it is for that individual to develop psychosis beyond an age (perhaps mid 30s).

1. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2007 April; 42(4): 288–294. Published online 2007 March 12. doi: 10.1007/s00127-007-0171-6 PMCID: PMC1913178 Psychosis risk as a function of age at onset A comparison between early- and late-onset psychosis in a general population sample Sebastian Köhler, Jim van Os, Ron de Graaf,3 Wilma Vollebergh, Frans Verhey, and Lydia Krabbendamcorresponding author
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2012 Oct;126(4):274-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2012.01873.x. Epub 2012 May 14.
2. Risk Factors of Psychosis: Identifying Vulnerable Populations Premorbidly By Su-chin Serene Olin and Sarnoff A. Mednick Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1996
National Institute of Mental Health
3. Cognitive functioning and age at onset in non-affective psychotic disorder. van der Werf M, Köhler S, Verkaaik M, Verhey F, van Os J; GROUP Investigators. Source Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, South Limburg Mental Health Research and Teaching Network, EURON Graduate School of Neuroscience, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.
> 4 votes

# Answer
Something to keep in mind is that anything you hear on TV is that it's probably not completely accurate.

Psychosis is not a condition; it's a symptom of a condition. Psychosis can be involved in many psychopathologies, (psychological disorders) with symptoms of a psychosis involved in schizophrenia, depression, PTSD, bi-polar disorder, and many other types of conditions or even emotionally stressful times such as after the loss of a loved on. (for more see this wiki)

As far as the specific example of having a schizophrenic parent, the character has a reason for his worry. Schizophrenia has been shown to often have a genetic component, (though there are also other factors necessary) and late adolescence to mid 20s is the most likely time for males and females to first show symptoms of the disorder. Females also have another peek of diagnosis around the 50, (likely related to menopause) as you can see with this graph of diagnoses.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: developmental-psychology, psychiatry, aging, schizophrenia
---


# Question
Title: How long should I work before taking a break?
I'd like to work as effectively as possible for 8-9 hours a day, whether at work or studying.

At some point in completing my major in psych I remember hearing about the importance of taking breaks while doing work (e.g., Trougakos and Hideg, 2009 on momentary work recovery). Gopher et al (1995) discuss ultradian rhythms and working for 90 minutes for every 15 minutes of break. Some methods like the pomodoro technique suggest 25 minutes of work for every 5 minutes of break, with a 15 minute break every 4 cycles.

* **Is there recent, widely-accepted research on what work-break rhythms work best?** (Even if the research was done for specific tasks or for specific populations.)
* **How does the optimal work-break rhythm vary by task, context, or other moderating factors?**

### References

* Gopher, D., Lavie, P., & Zomer, J. (1995). Ultradian Rhythms in Prolonged Human Performance.
* Trougakos, J. P., & Hideg, I. (2009). Momentary work recovery: The role of within-day work breaks. Research in occupational stress and well-being, 7, 37-84.

# Answer
> 21 votes
It appears extended working days, such as, 16 hours are counterproductive. ***(1) Safe working hours - doctors in training a best practice issue*** examines the effects of extended working hours on performance for doctors. It is recommended that a 7-8 hour working day is more productive than extended days. One issue being the sleep deprivation that accompanies extended working days.

There is research on optimal work-break rhythms. It has been found that work performance is optimized in 90 minute time slots. This is improved by dividing this into 25 minute time slots, with short breaks. With relation to the type of work, it is suggested that breaks be taken away from the working environment, optimally, within an altogether different environment.

This is consistent with natural ultradian cycles:
Image taken from The origin of the 8 hour work day and why we should rethink it a blog by Leo Widrich

I have quoted extensively from the following article:
***(2) Best Rest Practices for Optimal Productivity and Creativity.***
This addresses your questions comprehensively and also confirms that an extended working day is counter productive.

**Timing of natural working rythms**

> Rossi champions the 20-Minute Break in his book of the same name for peak performance. And Anders et al studied in 1993 a group of violinists and discovered that the best performers practiced in 90-minute intervals and learned not to over-practice.
>
> We can break down that 90-minute rhythm even further into 25-minute spurts. Most people can pay attention to a talk for 25 minutes (hence, the brilliance of TED Talks’ 17-minute limit).
>
> Hence, another client, a highly reputed novelist and short story writer, wisely writes in three 25-minute periods—each divided with a timer. At the end of the third period, she takes a walk or switches to another activity

....

**Breaks away from the workplace**

> I recommend to clients they remove themselves from the work environment if possible.
>
> For a corporate client, I recommended he schedule a walk to another part of his vast office quarters, glance out a floor-to-ceiling window, and then return to his office room, sit in a comfortable sofa normally reserved for clients, and remember the last time he was outdoors working on his ranch—one of his favorite activities.
>
> Step outdoors if you can. I suggested that one client who gets overwhelmed with multiple tasks in the afternoon to step outdoors and sit in her garden for fifteen minutes and simply observes the colors, textures, sounds, and smells. Ideally, she would weed for fifteen minutes as the physical activity more likely will let her processor mind incubate some of her creative problems.
>
> Or step away from your work space, and read four pages from a book that brings you delight.
>
> If you can jog or bicycle for 20 minutes, even better—as you’re also increasing the chances of your hippocampus forging new neurons in your middle-aged gray matter, according to Fred Gage of the Salk Institute and other researchers who’ve examined the benefits of intentional, enjoyable cardiovascular exercise.

...

**Techniques to combat fatigue**

> DISTRACTION CAN RE-BOOT LONG-TERM FOCUS. () Here’s a mind-twister: Atsunori Ariga and Alejandro Lleras of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States questioned the assumption that loss of focus came from, say, fatigue or lack of attention. In 2010, their study published in Cognition concluded that a deliberate distraction or introduction of a second task actually can increase vigilant attention on the first task.

....

**Utilising multi tasking to break mental fatigue.**

> Pay attention to when you need to introduce a quick second task. Maybe sending off an email or text message will free up mental bandwidth and get you re-committed to the high-thinking task. Do this in tandem with the “Break with Rhythm” suggestions above.

....

**The benefits of a daily nap**

> Some students took no naps. Some students took catnaps. And some students took full-fledged 90-minute naps complete with REM dreams...//... students who took the full REM-level naps showed boosts in creative problem-solving performance.

....

**The concept that a longer working day is counter-productive**

> Schedule non-digital time in the evenings, especially 45 minutes before sleep. Set up a bi-weekly schedule of evening rhythms: One Monday as “reading night,” One Tuesday as “date night,” et cetera. If you must work some evenings, schedule work evenings. Make them the exception instead of the rule.

<sub> (1) Safe working hours - doctors in training a best practice issue ANDREW LEWIS Andrew Lewis is Senior Industrial Relations Adviser with the Australian Medical Association Victoria
(2) Best Rest Practices for Optimal Productivity and Creativity How and when to break from creative work. Published on April 30, 2012 by Jeffrey Davis, M.A. in Tracking Wonder
The Seattle Longitudinal Study K. Warner Schaie, Ph.D. and Sherry L. Willis, Ph.D. UW Medicine
Life In The Middle Life in the Middle: Psychological and Social Development in Middle Age edited by Sherry L. Willis, James B. Reid
Recovering from Work: Interview with Sabine Sonnentag Brief and rare mental ‘‘breaks’’ keep you focused: Deactivation and reactivation of task goals preempt vigilance decrements Atsunori Ariga, Alejandro Lleras University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States
The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance K. Anders Ericsson, Ralf Th. Krampe, and Clemens Tesch-Romer Psychological Review 1993, Vol. 100. No. 3, 363-406 Copyright 1993 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0033-295X/93/S3.00 </sub>

---
Tags: neuroscience, motivation, performance, io-psychology, well-being
---


# Question
Title: Does long-term alcohol use permanently change one's thought processes?
Is long-term alcohol use really capable of permanently changing one's thought processes?

In what ways is this possible, and through what physical changes in the brain does this occur?

# Answer
I am only addressing the extreme end of the spectrum of chronic alcohol abuse:
One syndrome that is known to develop from chronic alcohol abuse id Korsakoff's syndrome or Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome.
It causes memory loss and a form of dementia. An irreversible brain damage that permanently disables the individual. The individual is unable to function within society and carry out the daily tasks necessary for functional living. It can also include psychosis.

> Korsakoff syndrome is most commonly caused by alcohol misuse,...//...
>
> Korsakoff syndrome causes problems learning new information, inability to remember recent events and long-term memory gaps. Memory problems may be strikingly severe while other thinking and social skills are relatively unaffected. For example, individuals may seem able to carry on a coherent conversation, but moments later be unable to recall that the conversation took place or to whom they spoke.
>
> Those with Korsakoff syndrome may "confabulate," or make up, information they can't remember. They are not "lying" but may actually believe their invented explanations. Scientists don't yet understand why Korsakoff syndrome may cause confabulation. (1)
> ....
> Scientists don't yet know exactly how Korsakoff syndrome damages the brain. Research has shown that severe thiamine deficiency disrupts several biochemicals that play key roles in carrying signals among brain cells and in storing and retrieving memories. These disruptions destroy brain cells and cause widespread microscopic bleeding and scar tissue. (1)

....

> Lack of vitamin B1 is common in people with alcoholism....//..
> Korsakoff syndrome, or Korsakoff psychosis, tends to develop as Wernicke symptoms go away. Wernicke encephalopathy causes brain damage in lower parts of the brain called the thalamus and hypothalamus. Korsakoff psychosis results from permanent damage to areas of the brain involved with memory. (2)
> ....
> Symptoms of Wernicke encephalopathy include:
> \- Confusion and loss of mental activity that can progress to coma and death
> \- Loss of muscle coordination (ataxia) that can cause leg tremor
> \- Vision changes such as abnormal eye movements (back and forth movements called nystagmus), double vision, eyelid drooping
> Alcohol withdrawal Symptoms of Korsakoff syndrome:
> \- Inability to form new memories
> \- Loss of memory, can be severe
> \- Making up stories (confabulation)
> \- Seeing or hearing things that are not really there (hallucinations) (2)

<sub> (1) Korsakoff Syndrome
Alzheimer's Association
(2) A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia.
Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome
Korsakoff psychosis; Alcoholic encephalopathy; Encephalopathy - alcoholic; Wernicke's disease
Last reviewed: February 27, 2013.</sub>
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-neuroscience, alcohol
---


# Question
Title: Why do we not remember things from the first couple of years of childhood?
As parents of a soon-to-be three-year-old, my wife and I spend a lot of time planning activities and trips for our son. However, my wife wanted to hold off on some of the big ones (i.e. Disney World), until he was "old enough to remember".

She explained that she was taught (she has a background in Psychology, but has been working in more administrative roles than clinical for quite some time) that people cannot remember things that occur before they are somewhere around 3-4 years old.

What is the mechanism behind this? Is it safe to assume that some developmental cognitive milestone(s) that must be reached before memories persist?

# Answer
> 10 votes
Well, I have some few memories of my very early childhood, but it is undisputable (and the articles quoted by PEEJWEJ don't dispute it either) that most children don't remember most things from their earliest years. The number of events that adults remember from their childhood, and the memory span of a child, clearly increases with the age of the child:

*Maximum memory span in weeks (on y-axis) by age in months (x-axis) for operant conditioned tasks. From chapter 5.2 in the German edition of Berk, L. (2010). Development through the Lifespan (5th ed.), Pearson.*

As for why, the reason is very probably four-fold:

(1) At birth, the brain is not yet fully developed. Areas which play a role in memory (like the frontal lobe), are still growing.

(2) Memory needs understanding. We don't just memorize sensory input, but the results of the processing of these inputs. If we don't yet understand the world and cannot process the sensory input, it cannot be "elaborated" and memorized. Another similar opinion is that we need a sense of self that we can relate our experiences to, and small children lack this sense of self.

(3) Because small children cannot yet speak, their memory is purely non-verbal. Adult memory is in large parts verbal. This discrepancy might make it difficult for the adult brain to access those non-verbal childhood memories that are in fact still there. \[I don't believe this, because much of my mental processes today are non-verbal. Maybe I am different than the average person in this, but verbal thought does not play such an overwhelming part in my brain.\]

(4) During later childhood and adolescence large parts of the neural structure are being degenerated (around age 6) and restructured (adolescence). During these processes, information that is not used, gets lost. \[Anecdotally: I clearly remember a childhood memory I still had during my teens. I could "see" the scene in my mind's eye. Today, that memory is either lost or unaccessible to me. I only have a memory of the memory.\]

---

This is what I remember from and looked up in some text books on developmental psychology. All of them are a few years old and not completely up to date with recent research, so there might be more and different information in journal articles. Anyway, I guess this can serve as a starting point for other answers.

*If you have the English edition of the book by Berk, feel free to replace that image. Wanted to post another graphic that shows the development of different functions of the brain, but there is too much German text in it to make it useful for an international audience. Again, feel free to supply images of your own and edit them in, if you have any.*

# Answer
> 7 votes
It seems this "fact" is becoming more debatable. This article and this article might clear up some misconceptions and confusion about this issue.

It's incredibly difficult to say anything about memory that applies to all situations. Each person will remember different things for different lengths of time, but often it is not based on some aspect of development or age. It seems to be based more on how often the individual recalls the memory, essentially cementing it and exercising the brain's pathways to that memory.

The following may be more of my opinion than anything, but it seems the reason most people don't recall anything before 3 is not an issue of being unable to remember, but that the way a 2 or 3 year old experiences something is not memorable to older individuals. The second of the above articles talks about people who do remember things from very early, and it's things like

> ""One child remembered playing peek-a-boo with her grandfather around her mother's pregnant round belly," Peterson told LiveScience. Another remembered waiting for a bus with her mom and there was a flower growing up through a crack in the sidewalk."

Not exactly the most enthralling memory that someone would share with their friends or family. Since memories, similar to skills or abilities, generally fall in the "use it or lose it" category, It seems reasonable to think that the reason most people don't remember early memories is simply because they don't have a reason to remember those memories.

---
Tags: memory, developmental-psychology, long-term-memory
---


title: The genetics of handedness

text:
# Question
Title: The genetics of handedness
In response to these questions:
Are there benefits to learning to write with your non-dominant hand?
Spontaneous change of handedness

I used myself as an example for spontaneous handedness change.

---

**Example:**

I began as a left hander. I spontaneously changed to a semi-ambidextrous right hander.
Two of my three children are true left handers, the other is a true right hander (their father and his family are all right handed).
My parents and siblings are right handed.
My maternal grandmother was ambidextrous.

---

**Question:**

What are the genetics of handedness?

# Answer
> 3 votes
There appears to be a higher correlation with environmental influences affecting handedness, as opposed to the genetic factors; although there is conclusive genetic evidence, it is not the major contributing factor in determining handedness.

I quote from the link @what provided in the comments.

> Handedness displays a complex inheritance pattern. For example, if both parents of a child are left-handed, there is a 26% chance of that child also being left-handed.\[8\] A large study of twins from 25,732 families by Medland et al. (2006) has indicated that the heritability of handedness is roughly 24%.\[9\] This leaves about three quarters of the effect to be explained by environmental factors.
>
> To date, two theoretical single gene models have been proposed to explain the patterns of inheritance of handedness, the first by Dr. Marian Annett\[10\] of the University of Leicester and the second by Professor Chris McManus\[8\] of UCL.
>
> Both models propose that there is a variant in a single gene that has two alleles. Carriers of one allele are more likely to be right-handed, and the other allele does not specify the direction of handedness, instead leaving it to chance. They differ on the precise effect of the 'right-shift' allele, but both models provide similar fits to data on the inheritance of handedness. Oxford University psychiatrist Professor Tim Crow has taken the single-gene model one step further, and proposed that mutations in the gene PCDH11X were responsible for the evolution of handedness, cerebral asymmetry, language, susceptibility to schizophrenia, and was the speciation event that created Homo sapiens.\[11\]
>
> Although single-gene models can be fitted to the data, a number of genetic linkage studies have been performed, all of which have provided evidence for different regions of the genome contributing to variation in handedness.\[12\]\[13\] \[14\]\[15\] Only one of these studies has led to the identification of a specific gene that is proposed to contribute to variation in handedness. \[16\]\[17\]
>
> Medland et al.\[18\] found a gene that is positively correlated with left-handedness in females, and negatively correlated in males. This may help to explain why there are more left-handed men than women (around 12% in men versus 10% in women globally).

It is, also, important to define handedness, or types of handedness, and the variability between self-reporting and objective evidence.

> However, genes influencing sidedness remain elusive. We measured direction and consistency of hand, foot, and eye preference in 584 Mexican-Americans from families participating in the San Antonio Family Diabetes/Gallbladder Study. Using maximum-likelihood-based variance components methods, we estimated weak (.11 ≤ h2≤.17) but significant heritability for foot preference, eye preference, several hand preferences (writing, drawing, throwing, using scissors, using spoon, striking match), and a composite hand preference trait. Self-reported handedness was significantly heritable (h2=.57), whereas hand preference for opening a box or using a toothbrush or knife was not. Many trait pairs had significant genetic correlations, and all had significant environmental correlations.

(Heritability and linkage analysis of hand, foot, and eye preference in Mexican Americans Diane M. Warrena\*, Michael Sternb, Ravindranath Duggiralac, Thomas D. Dyerc & Laura Almasyc DOI:10.1080/13576500600761056)

There is also the concept that handedness is on a continuum and that there is not, necessarily, a definitive left or right handedness, bit rather where the individual sits on the contiuum of cerebral dominance. This study also examines the genetic modelling versus the environmental factors, and the unreliability of self-reporting. It also, introduces the idea the people may under-report left handedness. This also demonstrates that left handedness is inherited maternally.

> Whereas many assume there is a true incidence of left-handedness, the RS theory suggests that degrees of hand preference map onto a continuous baseline of asymmetry that can be cut at any point to represent observed incidences of left-handedness. The parameters of the RS genetic model were derived from findings for speech lateralization in aphasics, supporting the argument that the relevant genetic locus is “for” cerebral dominance, not handedness. Genetic predictions are given for two levels of parental left-handedness (10% and 20%). Studies of family handedness distinguishing for sex in both generations gave generally good fits where handedness was assessed by self-report, but more variable fits for indirect report of relatives' handedness. The tendency to find a higher proportion of left-handed children born to left-handed mothers than left-handed fathers is not likely due to X-linked inheritance, but rather to slightly stronger expression of the RS+ gene in females than males, and also under-reporting of left-handedness in mothers by right-handed children.

(The genetic basis of lateralization Marian Annett dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576744.006)

There has been research demonstrating that the LLRTM1 gene contributes to handedness. This gene has also been linked with increased incidence of schizophrenia. An interesting observation, given the historic "demonisation" of left handers. Could this be, because there was a perceivable increased incidence of "insanity" amongst the left handers? *(note, my own theory)*

> Left-right asymmetrical brain function underlies much of human cognition, behavior and emotion. Abnormalities of cerebral asymmetry are associated with schizophrenia and other neuropsychiatric disorders..... This is the first potential genetic influence on human handedness to be identified, and the first putative genetic effect on variability in human brain asymmetry. LRRTM1 is a candidate gene for involvement in several common neurodevelopmental disorders, and may have played a role in human cognitive and behavioral evolution.

LRRTM1 on chromosome 2p12 is a maternally suppressed gene that is associated paternally with handedness and schizophrenia. Francks C, et al.

---

So, given my example, it is not surprising that:

1. The left handed family members were all on the maternal side.
2. The incidence of left handedness was low.

---
Tags: developmental-psychology, personality, cognitive-neuroscience, motor, lateralization
---


# Question
Title: Are there benefits to learning to write with your non-dominant hand?
There are some articles on the web that recommend learning to write with your non-dominant hand to get in touch with your inner child or a higher power, increase your creativity and be more open-minded or some such thing. I don't usually believe random stuff from the internet, but:

One of my drawing teachers told us to try drawing with the non-dominant hand. What I discovered was that I was very much better at getting proportions right with the non-dominant hand. I only had to use the dominant hand to clean up the shaky lines, because my non-dominant hand has poor fine motor control.

So there is obviously something that happens, when I use the "other" hand, something that has to do with how my perceptions are processed and my hand movement is controlled. But these "switches" while I draw are just temporary. What is sometimes recommended on some websites is a more fundamental change: to switch hands for *all* tasks.

**Is there research on the effects of switching hands for all or certain tasks?**

*I have no idea which tags I should select. Please edit my tags, if you feel you know better.*

# Answer
Yes, there are benefits, but I don't think it requires long-term switches. Studies have used this as a manipulation to try and increase self control and have found that it decrease aggression. Based on this, once one has mastered using the non-dominant hand, it seems like the benefit of continuing to use that hand might be over (as it no longer requires effort).

See: Denson, T. F., Capper, M. M., Oaten, M., Friese, M., & Schofield, T. P. (2011). Self-control training decreases aggression in response to provocation in aggressive individuals. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(2), 252–256. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.001
> 12 votes

---
Tags: perception, personality, cognitive-neuroscience, motor, lateralization
---


# Question
Title: What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
I am slated to teach an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course next year and I am not sure which textbook to use. This would be an entry-level course (no pre-requisites) primarily intended for students in psychology and biology. There seem to be a lot of books on the market, so I'm hoping people will share their experiences (either as students or instructors) with whatever books they've used, especially why they liked or didn't like a particular book. Advice about strategies for selecting a book would also be helpful.

# Answer
> 3 votes
I'm in an undergraduate course on Cognitive Neuroscience and have found the textbook we chose, Principles of Neural Science, to be helpful and illustrative. Strictly speaking, *cognitive* neuroscience is the subject of but one of the book's sections, but if you are not requiring prerequisites I think it is appropriate to have the basics (and some possible extensions) included.

# Answer
> 2 votes
There might be a new edition, but this one is good:

Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind by Michael Gazzaniga, Richard B. Ivry, and George R. Mangun.

---
Tags: reference-request, teaching-of-psychology, cognitive-neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: Descriptive models of different types of consciousness
In behavioral experiments we get the first-person responses of the participants. The third-person perspective is available through the collected data. There is a second-person perspective collected through interviews.

In a recent study, I analysed the response to affective audio files that have not been recognized by the participants to belong to the emotions they were depicting. Thus the first-person perspective failed. At the same time we were recording the electrodermal responses to these stimuli and received closer results to the stimuli's affective quality. The second-person interviews result was also similar to the first-person perspective. In terms of consciousness, I guess, the electrodermal responses fall under the unconscious (non-conscious) level, while the first-person and second-person perspectives are conscious.

Are there models that accommodate all these levels of analysis?

# Answer
> 1 votes
Studies examining unconscious perception usually rely on the experimental logic known as the dissociation paradigm (Reingold & Merikle, 1990), whereby the presence of subliminal perception is supported by a dissociation between two measures of perception. One measure is assumed to provide an index of subliminal perception whereas the other is assumed to index conscious awareness. The presence of subliminal processing is supported when changes in a critical stimulus effect the measure of subliminal processing, but the observer is unaware of either the presence or the changes in the critical stimulus.

For example, in the widely used masked priming paradigm, a lower case word is briefly presented (40 miliseconds) and replaced by a target word in capitals. Although the first word is rarely consciously perceived (measure of consciousness), recognition of the second word is faster when the two words are identical (e.g., star -\> STAR), compared to when they are different (cope -\> STAR). This pattern of results suggests that the first word is processed subliminally, and that this processing produces savings in how long it takes to process the target word.

Measures of conscious awareness are divided broadly into subjective and objective measures. Subjective measures are typically verbal reports of the observers' perceptual awareness during or after the task. Subjective reports can either be obtained with a direct question, or through a series of graded questions that gradually probe more specific aspects of an observers awareness. An experimenter might ask participants at the end of an experiment whether they were aware of any briefly presented stimuli, whether they noticed any patterns in the stimuli, or whether they developed particular strategies throughout the task. Objective measures are obtained through tasks and provide a numerical estimate of whether an observer was aware of a stimulus or implicit structure of a task. For example, observers might be asked to make a forced choice decision about a briefly presented stimulus to assess how visible the materials are.

Subjective measures are generally regarded to be unreliable, as participants may indicate that they are aware of a stimulus only when they are highly confident. This means that participants may neglect to mention instances where awareness was only partial. Another problem faced with subjective measures is that direct questioning during an experiment may draw participants attention toward the subliminally presented materials. Alternatively, participants may forget that they were aware of the critical stimulus if consciousness is assessed at the end of the testing session.

Although seen as more reliable, objective measures are associated with a number of limitations. Reingold and Merikle (1990) argue that a good measure of consciousness should be both exhaustive and exclusive. That is, the measure should index all components of conscious awareness (exhaustive), and should not index unconscious processes (exclusive). It is unclear whether objective measures are able to satisfy both of these criteria, as objective measures may only index a subset of the contents of consciousness (depending on the task instructions), and may also tap into unconscious processing. Another practical issue concerns how a lack of consciousness is estimated. Support for a lack of consciousness is obtained by showing that objective performance is at chance (e.g., guessing). This criterion is undesirable as this involves accepting the null hypothesis that participants were not aware, instead of rejecting the null hypothesis that participants were aware. Moreover, it cannot be guaranteed that participants will maintain motivation during a difficult task that consists mostly of guessing. In these cases participants may 'give up' and simply press buttons without considering the stimuli.

References E. Reingold, P. Merikle. (1990). Using direct and indirect measures to study perception without awareness, Perception & Psychophysics, 44, pp. 563–575

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, methodology, experimental-psychology, consciousness
---


# Question
Title: Does fluency on a psychomotor task result from practice and a focus on accuracy?
I know this formula, and I don't know where did I read it (or maybe heard about):

> Conscious accuracy + continuous practice = spontaneous fluency

It's an educational technique for long-term learning processes which require the learner to develop motor-skills, like playing piano, touch-typing, martial arts, etc.

This formula in brief says that:

1. You don't have direct control over your brain, and it's a black box to you
2. Your only duty is to provide content for you brain
3. Every action you do during learning process should be consciously accurate
4. You should practice more and more (PMP)
5. You should not care about becoming fluent, as it's not under your direct control
6. After a while, you brain reaches fluency
7. The more you provide accuracy for your conscious mind, and the more you practice, the more fluency you'll get from it

I Googled this formula and to my surprise I found almost nothing related. So, I have this question:

Is this a subject of cognitive sciences? And if so, is it valid? Do we have a theory regarding these arguments for developing motor-skills?

# Answer
I have never heard of this formula, but from a cognitive psychology point of view you might look the *theory of expert performance* (Ericsson et al., 1993). In this theory it is argued that an important factor in the aquisition of expert performance is what the authors call *deliberate practice*. What is meant by this is an activity, wherein someone actively tries to improve his skills in some domain. Deliberate practice is not neccessarily an enjoyable activity, as it requires effort, concentration and persistence. It is definitely conscious.

There is quite a bit of evidence from different domains. Ericcson and Charness (1994) report findings from chess, mental multiplicaiton and music. There even is a handbook of expertise and expert performance that sums up the field, if you are interested to go deeper (Ericcson et al., 2006).

The formula that you mentioned very much reminds me of the concept of deliberate practice. I would argue that the two things basically refer to the same processes.

References:
<sub> Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. *Psychological Review*, 100(3), 363–406. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363 PDF
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. *American psychologist*, 49(8), 725. PDF
Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Hoffman, R. R., & Feltovich, P. J. (Eds.).(2006). *The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance.* New York: Cambridge University Press. </sub>
> 6 votes

---
Tags: consciousness, motor
---


title: Failing to recognise one's own work

text:
# Question
Title: Failing to recognise one's own work
**Disclaimer:** *This is not a self help question, I am using myself as an example to illustrate my question.*

---

**Example:**

I have posted many questions and answers on this site within a relatively short time. Frequently (and with my blessing) our Mod Jeromy will edit my question titles. He does not edit *all* of the titles.

I find myself browsing through the site, looking to upvote older questions, looking for unanswered questions. Sometimes (and too often) I come across a question and think, that's interesting, only to realise I posted the question. I do this with answers also. I think that's interesting and see I've posted it.

---

I can surmise, it is because of the sheer volume, perhaps stress and the inability to process memory. I am wondering if this is a known condition.

**Question:**

What causes this phenomena of failing to recognise one's own work?
Is it a recognised condition?
Which part of our brain is responsible for this?

# Answer
I would like to add a bit of terminology to @what's answer. Of course memory is a pretty big topic with different and sometimes conflicting theories and I would not consider myself an expert. Having this said, the distinction between *Long Term Memory (LTM)* and *Working Memory* is widely used, so I will use it, too.

The problem that you describe in your question refers to LTM. Even if @what does not actually use the term LTM in his answer, everything he says does refer to LTM. Furthermore he refers to two procceses that play a role in memory: *encoding* and *retrieval*.

**Encoding vs. Retrieval**

*Encoding* is the process of getting something from Working Memory into LTM. A stimulus is not remembered "as is", but rather it is processed. It might, for instance, be perceived as belonging to a certain category or it might have a strong emotional value (as @what suggested). This opens the door for quite a few theories of why some things are remembered better or faster than others.

*Retrieval* is the process of getting something from LTM back into Working Memory, so that it can be used there. It is possible that one has something in LTM, but for some reason is not able to retrieve it. (In fact, it has been said that we don't actually forget things, but there are things that we cannot retrieve, as @what said.)

**LTM vs. Working Memory**

To get back to your question: Not being able to recognise something might be because of either one of those things. Either there was a problem with encoding, or there is/was a problem with retrieving. In any case, in my opinion it is not possible to explain this phenomenon using the concept of Working Memory, as you did in your answer.
> 5 votes

# Answer
*I'm using your example, because another example would lead to a different interpretation. Using your example is not meant to help you, just to illustrate my answer.*

The normal situation is to forget things. There are people who dispute this, believing that you store any and all information you ever encountered (after all, what would the famous 90% unused brain be for?), but from a more scientific perspective, most of the info that goes into your sensorium is simply lost after it was used. Because you don't need to remember the color of the car that just passed.

So the question is, why and when do we actually store stuff in our memories? Short answer: when it appears important. Usually, because it is connected to an emotion. If you care about something, you remember it, if you don't, you won't. This does not mean that you only forget stuff that is unimportant, though. If you are stressed or distracted, important things are *momentarily* unimportant.

Interpreting your example from this perspective, we could infer that you did not much care about those questions you wrote, at least not individually, because you asked them for other purposes (passing the time, gaining reputation, socializing in a community), or that you have other more important stuff going on in your life and that you ask questions here as a distraction, while part of your mind is still elsewhere.

But then, there is another phenomenon: If you have a thought and want to remember it, it blocks your mind. I'm sure you have noticed how trying not to forget the great sentence that you want to begin your next novel with keeps you from having any other ideas. That's why writers carry notebooks: they jot down the sentence, and immediately forget it, freeing their minds to new ideas.

So when you write your question here, you are actually telling your mind: "Okay, that's done, now let's think of something else." And your mind complies, discards that idea, and starts thinking of other things, forgetting any former thoughts.
> 5 votes

# Answer
I agree with @what. I was going to edit his answer, but thought it would be better to post this as an adjunct to his answer.

**Disclaimer:**
*The conclusions I have drawn here are my own ideas.*

For individuals who are in the full-time occupation of deep concentration, through work, study, interests, their working memory is getting very little downtime.

> Working memory is your brain's Post-it note, says Tracy Packiam Alloway, PhD, assistant professor of psychology at the University of North Florida in Jacksonville, Florida. “It makes all the difference to successful learning,” she says.
>
> You can think of working memory as the active part of your memory system. It's like mental juggling, says H. Lee Swanson, PhD, distinguished professor of education with the Graduate School of Education at the University of California, Riverside. “As information comes in, you're processing it at the same time as you store it,” he says. A child uses this skill when doing math calculations or listening to a story, for example. She has to hold onto the numbers while working with them. Or, she needs to remember the sequence of events and also think of what the story is about, says Swanson.
>
> Brief by design, working memory involves a short-term use of memory and attention, adds Matthew Cruger, PhD, neuropsychologist with the Learning and Diagnostics Center at the Child Mind Institute in New York City. “It is a set of skills that helps us keep information in mind while using that information to complete a task or execute a challenge,” he says. Working memory is like a foundation of the brain's executive function. This is a broad and deep group of mental processes. They allow you to do things like plan ahead, problem solve, organize and pay attention.1
>
> “Working memory helps us stay involved in something longer and keep more things in mind while approaching a task,” says Cruger. “And, how can you plan ahead if you don't use working memory to keep your goal in mind, resist distractions and inhibit impulsive choices?”

(What Is Working Memory and Why Does It Matter? By Annie Stuart)

An individual engrossed in mental tasks is going to be coming in and out of states where the working memory is, potentially, overloaded. So, for instance, coming to a site like this, may serve as a distraction from learning or working (This answer discusses the value of distraction as beneficial to work productivity); however a great deal of attention is required to focus effectively on the site.

So if an individual chooses a mentally demanding "distraction" (as in this example posting on a Cognitive Sciences site; for others it may be another form of intellectual hobby), they are flitting from one state of deep concentration, with an occupied working memory, to another. I would suggest that the focus upon one mentally demanding task and an alternate, less mentally consuming, distraction task would alleviate this overload.

> The term working memory refers to a brain system that provides temporary storage and manipulation of the information necessary for such complex cognitive tasks as language comprehension, learning, and reasoning. This definition has evolved from the concept of a unitary short-term memory system. Working memory has been found to require the simultaneous storage and processing of information. It can be divided into the following three subcomponents: (i) the central executive, which is assumed to be an attentional-controlling system, is important in skills such as chess playing and is particularly susceptible to the effects of Alzheimer's disease; ....

(Working memory. Baddeley A.)

**Although working memory itself, is not the same as long term memory,** I am suggesting that an overloaded working memory, would interfere with the ability to multi task from one mentally demanding task to another completely different mentally demanding task.

This does not touch upon the effects of stress on memory, nor does it discuss the effects of attention on memory, as I think the notion of working memory being in a constant overloaded state would explain this phenomena.

**Edit:**

After feedback, I would like to make my point clearer.

* I am proposing that a working memory, that is being fully utilised, is not so easy to "clear" to create a concentrated focus on another mentally consuming task.
* I have stated clearly that WM is different to long term memory (which stores the memory)
* I am suggesting (if the problem isn't the actual storage of the memory, ie within long term memory) and given the description of the problem, that it could be the limitations of working memory.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: perception, memory, performance, cognitive-neuroscience, working-memory
---


# Question
Title: How do people develop abstract thought processes?
By abstract thinking, I am referring to not only notions of self and identity, but also aspects that can not be directly observed and 'thinking outside of the box'. Essentially, from my own experience as a teacher, where a student gradually develops the ability to go beyond 'concrete' thinking (based on what they can sense), to be able to incorporate abstract ideas and knowledge (based on what can not be sensed).

An example of this is learning chemistry, it has been my experience in the classroom that junior science students don't always get the notion of atomic structure because they can not see or adequately visualise the details necessary; however, the can understand what happens in chemical reaction as it is clear to see.

What cognitive processes occur that allow a person to be able to think and problem solve abstractly?

# Answer
> 3 votes
A 2013 book tackles this subject : Surfaces and Essences, written by Douglas Hofstadter and Emmanuel Sander. They mostly cite anecdotal evidence (not only, Emmanuel Sander worked on this subject for years), but the theory is very convincing, and quite beautiful. The book received praise from some big names (including Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Loftus).

So, their theory in a nutshell : we naturally reason by analogy. Analogy is defined here as "recognizing something perceived as identical to something stored in memory" - a very large definition, that encompasses categorization. We are bad at purely abstract thinking (as the famous Wason (1966) task shows, or most tasks used in reasoning psychology), but we are very good at making abstract links between concrete things, without noticing it.

The book is filled by loads of examples, a striking one is comptuer science vocabulary. Even though computers brought loads of new "things", few new names have been invented. For example : desktop, file, directory, keyboard, window, program, application... all those words existed before computers, they have been used by analogy. When one makes such an analogy between a real, concrete desktop and a computer one, one extends the meaning of the word "desktop" - before, desktop refered to the piece of furniture ; after the analogy, desktop acquires a new, more abstract sense that encompasses the 2 concrete (furniture and computer) : a desktop is a working space... where you can store files, etc.

So, for your question : it seems that we extract abstract structures as we encode concrete examples - we can't (or at least it's much harder) directly understand the abstract knowledge. Providing good analogies is probably a very good way to teach something - if there are no such analogies, the domain remains very hard to grasp (statistics, probabilites and quantum physics are probably good examples of that).

---
Tags: cognitive-modeling
---


# Question
Title: Descriptions of human behavior should be extensible and reducible. Why?
In *Prometheus Rising*, Robert Anton Wilson explains Timothy Leary's theory of personality types, the "interpersonal grid", the diagrammatic representation of which consists of a circle divided by the two dimensions of friendly/hostile and strong/weak, into four quadrants (friendly strength, hostile strength, friendly weakness, and hostile weakness), with each quadrant containing sixteen subquadrants. Wilson begins by explaining that each person is born with a genetic predisposition for one of these four personality types, and after explaining them briefly reminds his readers:

> Remember again that all these categories are for *convenience* and that nature has not employed the sharp boundaries that we use in our models of nature. Thus, with Leary's 1957 schemata, we can further sub-divide our 4 types into 16 types with 4 degrees of each, for a total of 64 sub-types.
>
> In the next section, to simplify what may be growing too complex, we will reduce everything again just to the interactions of the first two cirtuits.
>
> **Any system for decribing human behavior should be flexible enough to be extended indefinitely, and should also still contain meaning when reduced back to its fundamentals.** (p. 81, bold emphasis added)

Leary's system fulfills these criteria because the grid, which categorizes personalities, can be extended by subdividing cells or simplified by merging cells. But to me, the criteria make no sense, since I think that every description could be extended or reduced.

**Is there an example of a description of human behavior that does not fulfill the criteria of extensibility and reducability?**

# Answer
> 5 votes
I would say that in the present context Wilson does not use his ad-hoc criteria to differentiate two types of models of human personality – those that fulfill his criteria, and those that don't –, but that this is a pseudo-argument, legitimizing his momentary disregard of the model's complexity and allowing him to focus on only the four basic dimensions in his argumentation.

I call the criteria "ad-hoc", because he appears to make them up on the spot and not motivate them in any way. In my opinion, the whole book is filled with this kind of normative setting of dogmata.

---
Tags: developmental-psychology
---