# Question
Title: Learned dyslexia? adult predicament from childhood teacher´s incompetence?
I have a friend, over 30, who is convinced she cannot really read. Of course; she *can* read, but she struggles so much with sorting letters into words that she cannot absorb the content. Playing - say - Trivial Pursuit - she looks at the letters; pronounce the words, makes them into sentences, but (says) she does not understand the question until I either answer or say it back to her, or she reads it a second time. She is now, for other reasons, back to school, as she needs to find another profession. I am, in an unofficial capacity, her personal tutor.

The consensus during her school years was that she was extremely dyslectic, a hopeless case, and her teachers let her "get away with it": unlike other students, she did not have to read aloud in class etc (this makes me furious to think about, that they did not give her the help she needed).

She is nowhere near stupid, but insists she is, and that she is so dyslectic that there is nothing that can be done about it. Recently, she took a dyslectic-test and consistently get the worst scores possible.

My suspicion is that she is NOT half as dyslectic as she is made out to be: I think this is largely a learned thing. Since teachers gave up on her; why should *she* believe she *can*? Yes, she probably is dyslectic, but the result of incompetent teachers have made her predicament much, much worse.

Fact is; when she *has* to write things, there are not really all that many spelling mistakes, the sentences are coherent, and she is very good at the logic needed to write - say - a (slightly academic) essay, she is excellent at writing stories, petites. She does, however, have a problem extracting the essence of what she reads. I do think though, that this is largely due to the learned view "I cannot do this, I am too stupid and massively dyslectic". Interestingly, last semester she consistently got top grades in the (native) language class where both content and spelling was important.

This results in (partly learned?) dyslexia as a "gateway" to the crippling thought: "I am an idiot. Why should I try? I will simply spend my life watching television.".

We do not read single letters in words we are familiar with; we largely see the "picture" of a word and make an educated guess/reasonable assumption based on the context. She is visual enough to master this. Having given up on words; there is a possibility that she does not bother to learn them, and hence cannot recognise the word-picture.

I realise this is a very specific example, but my general question is:

1. How do you teach adults to read?
2. Is it possible to somehow measure the "I have given up" against real dyslexia?
3. How is it possible to motivate an adult other than "you will get good grades if you improve on this"? (grades, as we all know, can at times be a little arbitrary and subjective).
4. Any research on learned dyslexia?
5. Have our acceptance of dyslexia in a way gone too far? (to the point of accepting it and "giving up" on students?)
6. Anyone with experience in this?

# Answer
> 1 votes
I will answer your questions out of order. I hope that is ok.

6 I have dyslexia and other "stuff". I have been diagnosed as such by a psychologist and diagnostician multiple independant times.

2 Dyslexia is quantified as a DSM 5 Neurodevelopment Disorders subcategory Learning Disorder.

> “difficulties learning and using academic skills.”

Before DSM 5 dyslexia was identified by a difference between verbal and performance IQ which would effectively measure the severity of the dyslexia in comparison with the persons ambition. I'm sure psychiatrist have a new standard test which is able to perform such functions as well.

1 Dyslexics typically learn coping strategies at school. Without foundation of those coping strategies I know reading and writing would be even more difficult for me. I was taught to read and spell with the Scottish Rite Dyslexia method. Its basicly phonics on steroids. It seemed to work very well for myself and the others with learning disabilities though not all were dyslexics. I would recommend finding curriculum based on the framework the Masons provide and that is at least is phonetic.

3 Motivating an adult is very difficult. You might do some research on Social Influence which is ethically acceptable manipulation like what doctors use.

4 Absolutely no one knows what causes learning disabilities like dyslexia all major theories point to something biological involving the brain. Finding the source of the problem doesn't help the person. Only treating the symptoms is rational.

5 No. Your friend comes from a time just before the major push for treatment of learning disabilities in public schools. Now learning differences and disabilities are given coping strategies and other tools (primarily time and technology) to help them perform and live healthy normal lives.

---
Tags: learning, motivation, intelligence, language, educational-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Have the core CBT "Thinking Errors" been found to NOT be effective in evidence-based clinical practice?
This is his chart of the ten "thinking errors." It's taken from The Feeling Good Handbook.

> Table 3–1. Definitions of Cognitive Distortions
>
> **ALL-OR-NOTHING THINKING**: You see things in black-and-white categories. If your performance falls short of perfect, you see yourself as a total failure.
>
> **OVERGENERALIZATION**: You see a single negative event as a never-ending pattern of defeat.
>
> **MENTAL FILTER**: You pick out a single negative detail and dwell on it exclusively so that your vision of all reality becomes darkened, like the drop of ink that colors the entire beaker of water.
>
> **DISQUALIFYING THE POSITIVE**: You reject positive experiences by insisting they “don’t count” for some reason or other. In this way you can maintain a negative belief that is contradicted by your everyday experiences.
>
> **JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS**: You make a negative interpretation even though there are no definite facts that convincingly support your conclusion.
>
> a. ***Mind reading.*** You arbitrarily conclude that someone is reacting negatively to you, and you don’t bother to check this out.
>
> b. ***The Fortune Teller Error.*** You anticipate that things will turn out badly, and you feel convinced that your prediction is an already-established fact.
>
> **MAGNIFICATION (CATASTROPHIZING) OR MINIMIZATION**: You exaggerate the importance of things (such as your goof-up or someone else’s achievement), or you inappropriately shrink things until they appear tiny (your own desirable qualities or the other fellow’s imperfections). This is also called the “binocular trick.”
>
> **EMOTIONAL REASONING**: You assume that your negative emotions necessarily reflect the way things really are: “I feel it, therefore it must be true.”
>
> **SHOULD STATEMENTS**: You try to motivate yourself with shoulds and shouldn’ts, as if you had to be whipped and punished before you could be expected to do anything. “Musts” and “oughts” are also offenders. The emotional consequence is guilt. When you direct should statements toward others, you feel anger, frustration, and resentment.
>
> **LABELING AND MISLABELING**: This is an extreme form of overgeneralization. Instead of describing your error, you attach a negative label to yourself: “I’m a loser.” When someone else’s behavior rubs you the wrong way, you attach a negative label to him: “He’s a goddam louse.” Mislabeling involves describing an event with language that is highly colored and emotionally loaded.
>
> **PERSONALIZATION**: You see yourself as me cause of some negative external event which in fact you were not primarily responsible for.

Has using these errors as a therapeutic tool been found to be effective in clinical psychotherapy?

# Answer
> 5 votes
I think you should change the question a little bit to "What should be done to the Thinking Errors?" or "Just identifying and evaluating Thinking Errors might not be effective?". Yes, they may not be effective. Please be careful that all mental problems need to be treated by **professional therapist** and a very important part of their expertise involves **the diagnosis**. There are many anxiety or depressive disorders that they manifest similar "Thinking Errors" kind of thinking, but they have different underlying causes and should be treated differently. It's not to say that strategies like those described in The Feeling Good Handbook don't work, rather they work **when things are simple**. If you feel that things are more complicated you should surely seek some professional advice.

To illustrate this point to you by an example I would like to mention **Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (or OCD)**. In OCD, there are some problems in cognitive system that makes the person being constantly paralyzed by lots of **Intrusive Thoughts**. The content of these thoughts may be similar to "Thinking Errors" or could be corrected by similar strategies, but focusing on them and trying to correct them make them **stronger, more sailient, and more frequent**. People with this disorder then feel that they are compulsively correcting their erroneous thoughts, but it seems they can never get rid of them. For this disorder, another treatment strategy has been offered called **Exposure and Response Prevention (EX/RP)**. In this kind of treatment people are encouraged to face their intrusive thoughts, but don't respond to them.To try to **accept their presence** and at the same time not to let them to make them do anything, or not do anything. There is abundant evidence that EX/RP is effective for OCD.

And there are also other disorders with their idiosyncrasy. I'm not sure what kind of problem you're describing, but if you want to use self-help method (with all it's pro and cons) you could take a look at diagnostic features of OCD.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Yes they have been found to not be effective in practice. In family therapy the ideas of emotional reasoning often give a false positives/negative. Family members tend to constantly profess their love in therapy because they realize that is the correct response but can act in an otherwise hostile manner outside therapy. The ideas of emotional reasoning as a "fault" in an individual can cause a therapist to miss signs of unhealthy or abusive relationships. Not all negative or positive feelings are irrational even if they are not expressed in a manner consistent with CBT.

I'm equally sure the other sets also give false positives/negatives and lead to improper treatments.

---
Tags: clinical-psychology, metacognition
---


# Question
Title: What are some psychologically normal reasons for a parent to reject their child?
In family psychology are there any normal (not abnormal) reasons to give up and cut off communication with your child (adult or otherwise)? I would think it would be rational to have a closed adoption of a baby and communication might need to stop if the child presents a constant danger.

# Answer
> 3 votes
A cuckolded father would be likely to reject a child who is discovered to not be his own. From evolutionary perspective, men who get cuckolded and take care of a genetically-distant man's child would fail to reproduce their own genes and increase the chance of survival of the genes of the other man who did the cuckolding. Thus rejecting such a child would be an evolutionary adaptation to the problem of paternity uncertainty.

Another reason could be that the mother misjudged the commitment of the father, and mated before such bond was established. This could be in combination with a father who's mating strategy favors fertilizing high quantity of women over investing in few offspring with one woman.

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, developmental-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Is sluggishly progressing schizophrenia recognized outside of Russia?
I've been trying to look up information about *sluggishly progressing schizophrenia*, but the only source accessible to me was a Wikipedia article, that states that the term “sluggish schizophrenia” was created to diagnose political dissidents, but nevertheless, it has been also adopted in modern Russia.

I wish to know about other countries, which haven't been a part of USSR. **Is the term officially recognized in the western world? Is it considered a complete misdiagnosis? Is there some other classification, that is used for the same condition instead?**

# Answer
The idea that schizo type disorders may onset slowly is commonly accepted in the West. We do not have a separate diagnosis for this type of onset in the DSM. Psychotic episodes may happen to individuals before they experience all the symptoms of bipolar or schizo type disorders.

It is common that a patient may begin to hear voices during isolated instances without the trouble with emotions. Then develop trouble with emotions. Then progress into hallucinations. The individual may cope with the isolated psychosis until the psychosis becomes so severe that they are unable to do without medical attention. This progression sometimes takes years.

It is possible that any diagnosis of mental illness can be used for political reasons though.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, psychiatry, schizophrenia
---


# Question
Title: How do the correlations between Big 5 personality change in studies examining "faking bad"?
I have conducted several studies that get participants to complete the IPIP personality test while role play going for a job. A common finding is that the average correlation (i.e., $\bar{r}$ between big 5 personality scales increases the more you ask people to fake. For example, the rough pattern in the data is:

* Get participants to complete a personality test honesty ($\bar{r} = .25$)
* Get participants to complete do a job applicant role-play ($\bar{r} = .40$)
* Get participants to complete a job applicant role-play and explicitly tell then to fake it ($\bar{r} = .60$)

Thus, increasing the amount of faking, increases the average intercorrelation. I'm interested in what happens when participants "fake bad" (e.g., specifically try to present a negative impression such as depressed, disturbed, or socially undesirable).

* What have previous studies found to be the effect of "faking bad" on the average scale intercorrelations of Big 5 personality?
* Have any researchers offered theoretical explanations for any observed effect of faking bad on such changes average scale intercorrelations?

# Answer
I don't know any actual "faking bad" studies or theories involving the Big Five, but there are some theories about the Big Five's general factor that can both explain the common finding you mention and inform a hypothesis about potential results from a study that would address your questions. I don't expect this will be a very satisfying answer, because I'm offering it in a bit of a hurry and referencing your own questions (and answer) to provide referential substance, but here it is anyway.

As your question and answer point out, there is a general factor underlying the Big Five, an even bigger "Big One." It partly reflects social desirability, as you know from your other question, and partly reflects people's efforts to align their personalities (or at least their opinions about their own personalities) toward those more desirable poles of the dimensions. It may even reflect some adaptive advantage to being slightly toward the desirable side of average (though probably not all the way to the extreme end of that side). Whether people succeed at being these desirable, maybe better-adjusted versions of themselves in the long term is immaterial. They try in the short term, and tell themselves it's working for various reasons, including self-serving bias and self-perceptive processes in identity (that inform judgments with recent behaviors).

People have some intuitive sense of the desirability of being sociable, stable, friendly, responsible, and curious (not to mention other aspects of each trait). If asked to act like a professionally desirable (i.e., hire-worthy) applicant, they will bias their answers in these socially desirable directions. These biases (whether intentionally deceptive or unconsciously ego-defensive) partly overlay some of the natural, independent variation with an internally consistent personality profile that suits the social consensus of what is desirable. Therefore people seem more uniform and correlations strengthen. Maybe you know other explanations of this finding as well; this may be one explanation, but I doubt it's the only.

I think this explanation could apply equally well if people were asked to "fake bad." Again, a socially **undesirable** personality profile is socially salient and consensual enough to overlay natural, independent variation with a relatively uniform pattern of bias. Most people know you're probably less likely to get hired if you act shy, edgy, hostile, impulsive, and stubborn (again, among other things that generally point in the same overall directions more often than not). Therefore I'd expect increased correlations in the "faking bad" scenario too.

Not a well-researched theory here I'm afraid; just a hypothesis or half-educated guess. I hope it's helpful nonetheless, and would be happy to look further into it and edit if anyone's interested enough to comment on a pseudo-answer that's nine months late. I can definitely offer some references for at least some of the instrumental points of theory I offer here without explicit support if that's socially desirable enough!
> 2 votes

---
Tags: personality, io-psychology, social-desirability
---


# Question
Title: What causes some women to have repeated abortions?
Fisher et al. (2005) studied the characteristics of women who have repeated abortions. The study was conducted in countries where reliable contraception and education about birth control are readily available. There appears to be a link between a history of physical or sexual abuse and women who have repeated abortions.

However, not all women having repeated abortions have been abused. Another factor must come into play for non-abused women having repeated abortions.

Thus, my question is:

**What other factors besides physical and sexual abuse cause some women to have repeated abortions?**

Some examples might include poor living skills, lack of education, low self esteem, self abuse, socioeconomic conditions, a true desire to have a baby, ambiguity about wanting a child, fear of being a bad parent, fear of being tied to an abusive partner, lack of responsibility etc. This list is by no means exhaustive.

### References

# Answer
It is certain that a desire to have sex without contraception and a lack of desire to be a parent cause women to have multiple abortions. (precluding rape)

1. A certain amount of a desire to have sex is natural. Causes for increased sexuality are so numerous that is not tenable to search.
2. Risk taking behaviour is associated with sex without contraceptions. A stable long term relationship might be one reason to have sex without protection where the risk is perceived to be less based on the lack of infidelity. A lack of responsibility could also motivate someone to consistently not use protection. Peer pressure by the male or even religion is also possible.
3. Finally there are many reasons people decide not to be a parent. Primarily they are unable to be a mentor and they are incapable of nurturing. There are many additional reasons at this link about why certain reasons to have children are irrational. However it should be stated that just because one is incapable of being a good parent doesn't leave abortion as the only option. The child can be given up for adoption however that is not popular.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, developmental-psychology, sexuality, health-psychology
---


# Question
Title: The effect of proper food intake on emotions and brain function
Recently I wasn't eating at the proper time and I often skipped meals. I was angry, stressed before taking my meal, and suddenly, I felt good after having my dinner. I have felt the same way many times.

Does food have that much effect on brain activity and emotions?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Part of the issue is maintaining blood-glucose concentration, which one doesn't always sense is crashing until it's already low and still crashing. As @BennySkogberg's answer implies, disruptions in the energy supply threaten cognitive function. This implies a loss of functional capacity and efficiency (which, when lacking, increase the probability of frustrating outcomes), as well as implying some disinhibition of impulses. Impulsivity relates to negative emotionality (including anger and stress), and interferes with attention. Reductions in the ability to focus attention on practical problems and address them planfully (problem-focused coping, which also relates to impulsivity, but negatively) would likely result; trouble envisioning solutions to problems might then decrease confidence and increase stress.

Another part of the issue is the homeostatic equilibrium between the sympathetic ("fight-or-flight") and parasympathetic ("rest-and-digest") nervous systems. Even before getting the post-digestion blood-glucose boost, one might achieve relaxation by simply having something to digest. Food in the stomach triggers parasympathetic activation, which facilitates relaxation and dulls the senses somewhat. An increasingly urgent lack of food in the stomach might (don't actually know) trigger the sympathetic system, as hunger implies some need to wake up and act assertively to correct it and prevent starvation. Sympathetic activation promotes aggression (and thus anger) and emotional arousal (and thus stress, which is negatively valent emotional arousal).

For a particularly extreme example of the effects of starvation, you might find the results of the Minnesota Starvation Experiment interesting. Food definitely has profound effects on psychological function; what you've felt may be a lesser shade of what these research participants reported after more prolonged deprivation. Also, FWIW, I've noticed the same effects you describe in myself and others I know well when starving (if only in the "first world problems" sense of being really hungry, having waited a couple hours too long to fix a meal). One doesn't need to prolong it to start seeing effects, especially when there's some violation of implicit expectations or customary levels of need satisfaction. Our bodies adapt to how well or how poorly we're fed on a regular basis, so those of us who are used to eating regularly may have exacerbated reactions to the rare violations of our habits, as our bodies haven't had the chance to adapt to deprivation gradually when the onset is sudden and unusual.

**Edit:** BTW, you might also find this question interesting (I've answered it similarly):
How is fasting related to insomnia?

# Answer
> 2 votes
There are numerous of commercials exploring this fact, and I can only listen to my eight-year-old daughter when she gets cranky from not eating her breakfast. If you don't eat or you eat wrong kind of food, your emotions will suffer.

> # Malnutrition and the Brain
>
> Another way not eating can affect the brain is through malnutrition. The cells of your brain rely on energy from food just like any other cell in the body. Without the nutrition that food supplies, both your neural function and brain chemistry can be negatively impacted. This in turn affects just about every facet of your bodily function that the brain is involved in, including concentration, memory, sleep patterns, **mood** and your motor skills.

Source: How Does Not Eating Affect the Brain?

---
Tags: emotion, physiology
---


# Question
Title: What would be the result if a color-sound synesthete were to go color blind due to diabetes?
Color blindness may be caused by diabetes. Would a color-sound synesthete lose her/his ability to hear two different tones when he/she is watching, let's say, magnets: ?

# Answer
To whatever extent colorblindness is a consequence of sensation loss, perceptual loss should necessarily follow. If colorblindness results from diabetes solely due to retinal damage, this means diabetes prevents these two colors from causing different sensory stimulation. If the sensory stimulation is truly the same, it should be perceived the same. A signal (red) that cannot be discriminated from another signal (green) in terms of the basic sensation information received at the retina (stimulation of the same sets of cones, for lack of a more specially sensitive alternative) cannot be better discriminated in perceptual processes that occur thereafter in the brain, unless there's some other source of discriminating information involved in that perceptual process (I doubt there is in this case).

To answer @ChuckSherrington's expansion of the question, common cases of genetic colorblindness involve abnormal function at the retina as well, so there is likely to be some similarity. I'm unaware of any inherited conditions resulting in colorblindness through abnormal perceptual function (in the brain). However, the Wikipedia page draks linked lists quite a variety of manifestations for genetic colorblindness, so there probably are some subtle differences between the consequences of some genetic abnormalities and the consequences of diabetes. For instance, it seems genetically-based loss of color vision can affect one or more colors, partially or completely. Maybe diabetes-based symptoms are similarly various at certain stages! It is a degenerative process that can result in complete blindness, but which aspects of visual sensation are the first to go may vary across individual cases.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: color, synesthesia
---


# Question
Title: Why is "breaking a car" considered a sort of therapy?
I've heard this several times. People breaks things to feel more relaxed, less depressed or is there some other reason? What do you call this effect?

# Answer
I believe you're referring to Catharsis. According to Freud, expressing anger serves to relieve it. However, a few more recent researchers have argued that expressing anger serves to reinforce aggressive behavior.

@Chuck Take a look at this study and this book excerpt.
> 5 votes

# Answer
It was (is?) widely believed that a good way to reduce aggression was to just get it out of your system by, for example, punching a pillow, screaming or watching somebody else behave aggressively on the athletic field, in the boxing ring, on TV or in a movie, and so forth. The idea is to blow off steam, to vent, which was termed catharsis by Freudian psychoanalysts. Catharsis was an idea adapted by Sigmund Freud and others, as a sort of hydraulic model in which emotional pressures build and build until finally you release them by behaving aggressively or by watching other people do it for you.

However, Albert Bandura and others after him have shown that contrary to the catharsis hypothesis, aggression begets aggression. This was shown in the Bobo Doll Experiment (video).The experiment was focused on social learning theory, and its results showed that observing aggression simply led to more aggression. While the experiment was focused on children, it has been replicated in different forms and carried out on different audiences, and the results have shown that the hypothesis is equally valid for adults. The hypothesis that aggression leads to more aggression directly contradicts the catharsis hypothesis and both schools of thought continue.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, clinical-psychology
---


# Question
Title: What is this method used in the "it's not your fault" segment of Good Will Hunting and why does it work?
I mean the "it's not your fault" part at the end of this movie segment. Could anybody explain this method and why it works?

What happens if the psychologist didn't get any reaction (like crying) from the case (Will), doesn't he look like a jerk repeating the same words 9 times?

# Answer
> 4 votes
An addition to the other answers:

We must remember that we are watching a *movie*. Movies are often called "dramatizations", a term that makes very clear what this type of movie does: it creates drama. It was not made to educate the viewers about how a therapy works, but rather to evoke intense emotions in the viewers. We should even assume that this movie does not faithfully depict any actual therapy but rather takes up the ideas that most viewers have of what would be helpful and reflects them back at them, because reinforcing a belief that you already hold will create the strongest emotional echo.

What do most people do in a situation like that in the movie? They tell their friend that "it is not your fault". Most therapists don't do that. Telling a patient how he or she should feel often has adverse effects: the person begins to defend his or her emotions from the devaluing judgment that they perceive the therapist's suggestion to be. What happens is that the belief in their own guilt gets cemented and harder to overcome.

A good therapists helps a patient to arrive at the conclusion by themselves. The most powerful ideas, when it comes to changing yourself, are those insights that you have yourself. A therapist might use questions ("Why do you think ...?") or careful suggestions ("Do you think it is possible that ...?") to direct the thinking of the patient, or the example of himself or a group of other patients with similar experiences (in a group therapy). Another component is psychoeducation, i.e. explaining to the patient that feelings of guilt are common symptoms and why patients experience them.

*I cannot view the video, so my examples probably don't fit the situation at hand. Please always provide a short summary.*

# Answer
> 2 votes
Its a self-esteem technique used to decrease emotional abuse caused by internal turmoil from blaming oneself irrationally. Not all blame is irrational of course but even rational blame can move into an irrational amount and importance. Victims tend to blame themselves for the traumas they endure especially as children. For instance its very common for children whose parents divorce to take the blame for their parents failed relationship. People who are abused emotionally or physically often think it is their fault for setting off an episode of abuse. Some unhealthy religions variants and social groups blame people with mental illnesses or poverty for their situations.

Most changes are small and internal unlike the movie depicts. While an immediate reaction to psychotherapy is gratifying to psychologist most changes don't happen that way. Only people under an extreme burden of blame will respond with such strong emotions when that burden is removed. I've heard that sex offenders typically cry in response to this kind of psychotherapy because they often have been sexual abused themself but I cannot verify that.

# Answer
> 2 votes
In the scene, it looks like the therapist is confronting a correctly identified repressed belief. As he tries to bring it to the patient's consciousness, the patient's defense mechanisms attempt to keep it repressed. You see him first deny it, then get angry, and then, finally, as the therapist breaks through all the defenses, you see relief and acceptance.

The danger would come if the therapist did not identify the belief correctly and tried to confront it -- that would certainly create an awkward situation. However, in this situation, the therapist is experienced and does not make that mistake.

---
Tags: clinical-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Is there some effect that forces humans to judge things and people according to the conception of their own image?
I remember of having read that such effects do exist, but I don't remember where.

If that is true or if the hypothesis exist, I'd like to have references about it.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Egocentrism may be the more general answer. The fundamental nature of conscious human experience is individualized, such that everyone's perspective is anchored to oneself in many ways. One such way is through the influence of our senses, which receive information about life from points within our bodies (obviously). This is probably the majority of the information we have about life, so needless to say, it's influential. Since we basically always accompany our sensory organs, we are ourselves our own most familiar stimuli in many ways. Familiarity again implies influences on our own judgments about other things that might involve comparison to the information we have about the rest of the world, and the especially rich information we have about ourselves. This extends to more abstract aspects of ourselves such as behavior, cognitive features, personality, etc.: we observe our own much more often than we observe others, so we know it best. This provides us with a somewhat biased pool of information that disproportionally represents our own natures (or at least, our images thereof), yet this is the only pool of information we possess and can use to inform our judgments, so bias due to subjectivity and egocentricity is somewhat ubiquitous and inevitable.

Our attention is also anchored to our own concerns via our emotional systems and self-senses (e.g., hunger, fatigue, pain, comfort) in ways that we can't fully control or ignore. These facts inevitably bias our judgments to involve more complete information about our own concerns than about anyone else's. Even if one were to give no higher priority to one's own concerns despite this (most people usually do prioritize their own needs above others somewhat; this is probably adaptive and even pragmatically prosocial to some extent), one's concerns would still bias the pool of information one uses to judge others' concerns via over-representation in that pool of info. Our emotions and natural senses prevent us from ignoring our own concerns, and also encourage us to try to address them, whereas we lack this directly consequential connection to others' concerns. We can ignore them more easily and willfully, or we can simply remain ignorant of others' concerns passively by never seeking information about them that is independent of information we have about ourselves. Both of these pathways lead to further reinforcement of natural, partly inevitable egocentrism in motivation, values, goals, attitudes, beliefs, etc.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Judging something by your standard is evaluating another's culture based on your shared and differing experiences. Its commonly called ethnocentrism. Originating in the field of anthropology, the word is equally used in psychology as a bias for many theories originating in America and the West.

> Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture. Ethnocentric individuals judge other groups relative to their own ethnic group or culture, especially with concern for language, behavior, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and subdivisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.\[2\] Ethnocentrism may be overt or subtle, and while it is considered a natural proclivity of human psychology, it has developed a generally negative connotation. -wikipedia

---
Tags: perception, bias
---


# Question
Title: Computational model of biological object recognition
The human brain can achieve a remarkable ability to recognize visual patterns in an Invariant, selective and fast manner. The human visual system is quite powerful. It has an exquisite selectivity that allows us to distinguish among very similar objects. In addition, iy also allows Robustness (Invariance) to transformations.

In the model (Ventral stream pathway and architecture proposed by Poggio's group) shown in the image below, why the model is selective in S layers and invariant in C layers ? I didn't understand well why the S layer achieves selectivity and C layer achieves invariance. Please can someone explain to me in details why the model is selective in S and Invariance in C layers?

And who know the HMAX model, the model is called "Hierarchical Model and X". why X? what was meant by "X" ?

This figure is from Serre et al.'s A quantitative theory of immediate visual recognition. Prog Brain Res. 2007.

Any help will be very very appreciated.

# Answer
The question is resolved :

**The name HMAX** ( Hierarchical Model And X ) was coined by “Mike Tarr”, who wrote the “News and Views” accompanying the paper in Nature Neuroscience.

**What was meant by Hierarchical?**

The model has a hierarchical architecture : it contains different stages (layers).

-- Increase in receptive field size and complexity in unit feature preferences along the
hierarchy.

**What was meant by X?**

I think it is the pooling operation (it refers to the MAX).

**Selectivity in S layer**

The activity of each S unit is highest if all the afferents have the specified values.

**Invariance in C layer**

In contrast to S units, the C cells pool over their afferents, and the response is high if one of the afferents is high. This increases invariance if the afferents are tuned to the same feature, but at different positions or scales.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: vision, cognitive-neuroscience, computational-modeling, theoretical-neuroscience, neural-network
---


# Question
Title: Why do people blame others rather than take responsibility?
In business classes we are told to be responsible and take responsibility for our action. Get mugged? Well, lock your door next time. That sort of thing.

But that's not how most humans behave. Humans blame others for their mistakes and problems they could have prevented. Why?

What's the benefit of blaming others compared to taking responsibility?

# Answer
> 2 votes
The Abilene Paradox is one of the situations in which individuals may blame others for their actions because that is how they perceived the situation. Consider this anecdote (video):

> On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch, until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene \[53 miles north\] for dinner. The wife says, "Sounds like a great idea." The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, "Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go." The mother-in-law then says, "Of course I want to go. I haven't been to Abilene in a long time." The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad as the drive.
>
> They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted. One of them dishonestly says, "It was a great trip, wasn't it?" The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home, but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, "I wasn't delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you." The wife says, "I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that." The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored. The group sits back, perplexed that they together decided to take a trip which none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably, but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon.

Nobody wanted to go, yet the group decision was contrary to everyone's personal opinion since every individual perceived that another individual had taken a decision, arguing against which would simply result in discord.

When the decision turns out to be bad, then everybody simply states what they initially believed which was that another individual of the group had clearly wanted to go, and they had simply consented to the decision. This of course, is one scenario, in which individuals may blame another (specific) person for a group decision.

The benefits of this can be explained in many ways. One of the ways to analyze the benefit is by using cognitive dissonance theory. In simple terms, when our behavior (or thinking) does not match up with our belief, it results in mental stress due to the incongruity of the situation. To counter or save ourselves from that incongruity, we either adjust our belief or alter our behavior(thinking). In this case, the act of taking the trip was against our belief, and hence taking responsibility (agreeing that the decision was yours) for the action would be incongruous. Therefore, we blame another individual for the group decision, as that is easier to process (congruent) and less mentally stressful.

---
Tags: social-psychology, attribution
---


title: Gain EQ for Introverted Person

text:
# Question
Title: Gain EQ for Introverted Person
What method and/or technique is recommended to make an introverted person to gain high emotional intelligence, social skills and social competence in his/her personality?

What I have seen the method is to train specific Japanese martial arts (not all Japanese martial arts), read books, staying in a big city for instance capital city etc.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Basically an introverted or shy person is caught in a viscious circle:

1. you don't interact with people much because often you don't feel the need
2. because of this you don't have much practice in interacting with other people
3. so if you try to interact when you do feel the urge, you feel that you don't interact very successfully or even "fail"
4. this in turn reinforces your wish to not interact

What you need to do is break out of this self-reinforcing circle. But how?

If you want to become better at speaking a foreign language, reading books about language learning is not going to help you much. What you need to do is *practice* that language.

**The only thing that will help you gain social competence is practice your social skills.**

Cognitive-behavioural therapy for pathologically shy people consists of many components, such as psychoeducation (understanding the causes, stabilizing factors, and symptoms of your trait) and correction of dysfunctional beliefs (you are not worth less, on the contrary there are positive aspects of being introverted), which, in self-help, you can do with a book or through meditation, but the one central methodology, and the only thing that will instigate a change, is getting into the situation that you are afraid of: exposition (facing what you fear to lose your fear by realizing nothing bad is happening) and behavior training (building a new habit and competence).

If you want to help youself, you can of course read books on your problem to better understand what is going on and what you might do, but then you need to get out and do it. I would do:

* define your ultimate goal (e.g. I want to be able to talk in front of an audience without stuttering)
* break this mountain of a goal down into small, manageable goals (e.g. if you are afraid of approaching attractive girls, start with old ladies)
* all goals, the ultimate and the subordinate goals, must be concrete and measurable (e.g. not "I want to be more extroverted", but "I want to smile back next time Paul smiles at me"); it must be absolutely clear and unmistakeable when you are in the situation you want to change and when you have achieved your goal; nothing vague and general that no-one can meet
* practice regularly (e.g. consciously smile at every person you encounter on your way to work, every day)
* this may be hard, so don't force yourself to be friendly to everybody all the time, note that even extroverted people don't interact with everybody always, and certainly are not always friendly; give yourself breaks and allow yourself to rest from your exercises (e.g. plan to not smile on your way home)
* slowly increase difficulty (e.g. in week two start to say "hi" to those people that smile back; in week three, mention the wonderful weather; etc.)
* accept that you are not extroverted, i.e. don't expect yourself to become what you are not comfortable with; be content with gaining confidence and competence to be outgoing whenever you feel like it, but allow yourself to remain by yourself when that is what you want; just try to observe yourself and take note of when you really want to be alone and when you are only afraid of socializing
* accept that not everyone will love you; competent extroverts experience many refusals, they just have many prositive encounters to balance them; you aren't interested in everybody either, are you? so don't take it personal, move on to the next person and see if he is more welcoming -- one of the next persons will be
* write a diary of what you did, what happened, any changes in your feeling and behaviour and in the reactions of the other people, and plan the next step
* ask yourself: "What would I do if I weren't afraid?", then do that

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, social-psychology, personality, extraversion
---


# Question
Title: Why does society interpret "manliness" differently?
If, by definition, manliness is "the traditional male quality of being brave and strong," why does most of society perceive it differently? For example, a person who watches *My Little Pony* and is not afraid to admit it, thus being brave. However, society would think of this person as not manly because he is watching a show meant for little girls. Do our minds perceive being manliness based on what other people think of as manly? Is this why society thinks of manliness differently than what it really is? And, if so, why do we base our opinions on those of others? Also, is manliness what it is defined as or what we have made it to be through society?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Most of society can't agree entirely on how to define manliness. Two broad ways come to mind as to how it might be done though. The `first way` would be to use gender or sex (depending on one's reasons for asking, I suppose) as a criterion variable for exploratory analysis of related variables. A statistical analysis like multiple logistic regression could be used to identify what information about people's other characteristics can help predict whether they're men or women. This would be the more objective, empirical way of defining what it means to be a man (or woman), at least probabilistically. The `second way` is by defining gender roles, as @caseyr547 did.

The second way definitely implies a choice to attend primarily to social constructs rather than empirical reality. It's important to appreciate that gender roles do not define the actual behavior of people, so the extent to which people really follow their gender roles is limited; the first way I mentioned would produce a better description of actual behavioral profiles and sex/gender differences.

However, it's also important to appreciate that gender roles are, by definition, socially normative expectations based on gender, and therefore society imparts causal force to these constructs. People generally (society) want other people to fulfill their expectations, so gender roles also define what is socially desirable. Socially normative attitudes about what behaviors are desired, not merely expected, may even define gender roles, depending on whom you ask. People have very many ways of motivating others to care about their opinions, and to ultimately agree with and adopt/"internalize" them, so there is overlap in and feedback between the empirical reality of sex differences and the cultural context of gender roles. That is, gender roles, being defined as expectations, change to suit how the genders actually behave, and people change the ways they behave to suit their cultures' gender roles. Thus some overlap is maintained dynamically, but still limited by human error, among other factors.

Besides human error (failing to calibrate expectations to reality, and failing to calibrate behaviors to expectations), one major factor that limits the overlap of expectations and reality is cross-cultural variation. Gender roles may vary widely across cultures, but mostly operate within cultures (due to too much ethnocentrism and not enough travel, among other factors), so each culture's specific gender roles may generalize poorly to other cultures realities, and influence them very weakly. If I had to choose one reason to bet you're right in saying "most of society" perceives manliness differently, it would be cultural differences. Still, there are other reasons.

Another major factor that limits the applicability of gender roles is counterculture, which does not simply represent the alternatives that society rejects. Counterculture is better defined as representing those who reject their cultural norms for various reasons. When imperfect norms are especially popular, their popularity may actually reinforce the popularity of the opposition as well, because exposure to an idea increases opportunities to become opinionated, explore counterarguments, and either agree or disagree rather than remaining neutral by default. Therefore subpopulations of intentional norm-violators are also maintained dynamically. Some may disagree simply because they like to disagree or differentiate themselves from others. Others may have principled objections to specific norms; their viewpoints gain popularity among dissenters when the majority exerts conforming pressure (which it pretty much always does). In this way, countercultural movements can become very stable and widely influential.

However, many may only be as stable as the norms they oppose. If the norm changes (and not necessarily for the better), the opposition may change in the opposite way to remain directly defiant. This may not suit the original principles of the opposition, but when such movements are dominated by leaders who focus more on defiance than their principles, they may sacrifice integrity to maintain popularity through their parasitic relationship with the mainstream. This sort of power motivation further reinforces a limited amount of norm violation regardless of what norm is in question. Note also that power carries sex appeal, so even if women didn't have other reasons to find effeminate men attractive, they would be attracted to effeminate men who belong to a powerful counterculture (and vice versa regarding men's attraction to masculine women). This (and other influences) means countercultures find support among people who may nevertheless adhere to norms in their own behaviors (e.g., feminine men may attract women regardless of the women's own femininity).

These dynamic processes make manliness very hard to pin down by the `second way` that focuses on gender roles. To recap, reality influences them somewhat, so they reflect reality somewhat, and real people try to follow them somewhat, so reality reflects them somewhat...but some people also try not to follow them. This all plays out somewhat independently within separate cultures, so plenty of "errors" in the accuracy and influence of gender roles arise naturally from these two factors alone (not to mention others). Thus plenty of disagreement exists, and even gives rise to bizarre inversions of the normative archetype, such as the brave and (not so) thoroughly manly Brony meme, which like many countercultures is commonly, thoroughly misunderstood.

Nevertheless, this is not to say psychologists haven't tried to pin down gender roles. A fair amount of consensus may even exist on some essential aspects, especially in Western culture (probably because America and Europe have particularly active psychology programs). An interesting list of gender-linked traits by a philosophy author with a fairly sophisticated perspective on gender-personality literature gives a decent picture of how gender roles might be measured in detail (among other ways, which probably are less detailed), as well as an opportunity to assess one's own alignment with Western gender roles. There are also Wikipedia pages on masculine and feminine psychology, which may be of interest. If nothing else, I find it funny that the masculine psychology page is tagged with disputes that suggest an egotistical tone, and the feminine psychology page is tagged for cleanup in a way that suggests scatter-brained writing. Both "egotistical" and "scatter-brained" fall under Park's respective lists of "regrettable" gender-linked personality traits! I'll let you decide whether you think they're manifesting on Wikipedia through real differences in the writing, or maybe through some other influence like stereotyping and confirmation bias (maybe even on my own part)!

# Answer
> 2 votes
Let me give you some background to your question first. You're asking a question about anthropology, sociology and psychology. Anthropology basically studies culture. Culture is all the learned behaviours we practice because of our development and training by our family and society in general. Sociology focuses more on society itself, any group of humans functioning together. Psychology is all about behaviours of individuals and sometimes groups.

Now to your question. Though a social, biological and psychological evolution traits for males and females has been ascribed, they are commonly referred to as gender roles. A set of social norms (behavior with is acceptable) for guys and girls.

Gender typing is the process by which children identify their genders and begin taking on the traits of others who are also of their gender types, mainly their parents or other guardians.

One could argue that the origin of the aggressive male is biologically linked to our primal origins. Our increased testosterone and muscle mass because at one time males were responsible for defending the family in addition to hunting and killing meat products. Females with increased estrogen and direct link to offspring are biologically designed to nurture children, at least until they have teeth. (Such theories have obvious flaws pointed out by modern psychology but the idea in general is well accepted.)

So watching *My Little Ponies* is not a culturally typical behavior for masculine males fulfilling Western gender roles because it is not aggressive. In addition it was specially designed to fill the gender role of females. It would be acceptable behavior for effeminate males in Western society. There is some argument that the Western male gender roles are becoming less of a polar opposite from the female roles, but that has not played out in general society.

While it may be brave to be counterculture; society tends to reject said groups.

---
Tags: social-psychology, sex-differences, norms, social-desirability
---


# Question
Title: Can tinnitus be measured with EEG or MEG?
* Can tinnitus be measured with EEG or MEG (magnetoencephalography)?
* Is it visible in a power spectrum?
* In an ERP/ERF?

# Answer
Michelle Heijblom's (2009) master thesis on Visualising tinnitus with fMRI and EEG mentions the following:

> Different studies report that tinnitus is characterised by an increase in slow-wave activity (0.5- 4Hz: delta activity) and a decrease in alpha activity (8-12 Hz) at temporal regions. Recently it has been suggested that this loss of alpha power is related to an increase in gamma power. \[Weisz 2005, Weisz 2007, Lorenz 2009, Ashton 2007, Wienbruch 2006\]. Weisz et al. state that the alpha decrease and delta increase resemble the state during slow wave sleep. This supports the idea that the changes in spontaneous brain activity might be mediated by sensory deprivation (hearing loss).
> 6 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, perception, clinical-psychology, neuroimaging, eeg
---


# Question
Title: What is a scientifically plausible method by which people might in the future be able to read minds?
I am writing a book. It will be post-apocalyptic, and the apocalypse I'm thinking of will involve people being able to read each other's mind. Can any of you give me a slightly plausible reason that this would happen / be possible?

# Answer
> 4 votes
If you don't need the mind readers to actually know the exact "words" of the person's thoughts, you could have people who are extremely well versed in "reading" another person's facial expressions, body posture, tone of voice etc. It is a fact that those outward behaviors reflect your internal state, and in fact we all read these signs with more or less accuracy, but there are a few people (and maybe you can train that) who are better than others to deduce how you feel and what you might be thinking from these. (see "cold reading")

If you need actual mind readers, we are currently arriving at a point where we begin to be able to interpret fMRI images. There are some experiments where researchers were able to tell which images a test subject was looking at or which body parts they were moving from looking at their brain activity alone. I'm sure that our understanding of what goes on in the brain will progress and the technology to measure brain activity will get smaller and more exact, so you could have people use a device that reads minds. It is quite likely that such a device will exist in the not too far future.

If, finally, you want real telepathy (which, just to cause no misunderstanding, cognitive scientists believe does not exist) you might base it on:

* an organ in human beings sensitive to magnetic or electric fields, sensing (like EEG) the brain states of another human being; there are animals who can sense electricity or magnetism, but the problem with this is that magnetism surrounding us is stronger than that coming out of the brain and will make it impossible to "feel" a brain from farther than a few centimetres away
* this organ might be in the skin (actually not one organ but many receptors) so the reader could cover the head of the person to be read with his hands, much like an EEG cap
* the reader would need to be trained with people telling them what they think while he "feels" their brain, so that he can learn which "sensations" in his hands correspond to which thoughts and cognitions
* maybe its possible to clone human beings with specific animal genes so that humans grow electrically or magnetically sensitive receptors, e.g. in their hands (research animals with electric and magnetic senses and how their receptors work)

I'm just trying to extrapolate (my understanding of) current research, here. I cannot foresee future discoveries either technological or psychological, so I'm keeping this within the realm of the possible as much as seems plausible to me. Again: We don't think telepathy in the traditional sense (concentrating your mental powers and knowing what someone thinks) exists. If you want that, I don't see how it could be possible.

---

There seems to be some evidence of magnetoperception in humans:

It is easy to imagine that this sensitivity to the earth's magnetic field might develop to discern even the much weaker magnetic fields of the brain. After all, the other senses show a huge variety between species, too. For example, the silk moth can detect single molecules of a female's pheromones. The current sensory ability of humans is not a fixed limit for how sensitive a sense can be. If the magnetism of the brain can be measured by an artificial detector, then it can potentially be measured by a biological detector.

# Answer
> 1 votes
My idea was similar to what "what" said; however, instead of the reader needing to be **trained** to the thoughts of other people and/or having to **clone** humans with these genes, the OP could have it to where the post-apocalyptic world in which the book is set in features humans that have evolved into what they are now, with having these receptors in their skin included. Similar to your statement about body language detection, some people's electroencephalographic receptors might be better at detection, much like our eyes and other organs.

# Answer
> 1 votes
As @what wrote, the state of our knowledge on Mind reading is low but it is an on-going research. The current research uses EEG and MRI techniques to retro-engineer (read and decipher) our thoughts and actions: see the Introduction To Modern Brain-Computer Interface Design linked to the EEGLAB software, or the Brain computer interface wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain–computer\_interface).

The most straightforward way to get to the apocalypse you described would be, in my opinion, the desire of human beings to **enhance their cognitive abilities** (called Transhumanism, see Could neuroscientific knowledge and techiques be used to optimise peoples' education and learning?). This would be realised by having some **stimulation electrodes in the brain** (we actually do that for Parkinson). However, these **electrodes could be hacked and be used as EEG readers**. Smartphones would be an ideal candidate for such a hack (see how smartphones can already be coupled with EEG, http://milab.imm.dtu.dk/eeg).

---
Tags: social-psychology, perception, philosophy-of-mind, metacognition, theory-of-mind
---


title: Women in red-lipstick/darker shades?

text:
# Question
Title: Women in red-lipstick/darker shades?
Can an observer of women in **red lipstick** or more darker shades interpret anything related to their psychology?

# Answer
Rarely does one find oneself wearing lipstick unintentionally, I'd venture to guess. Therefore, one can at least conclude simply, "They want their lips to look redder or darker." There is added information in this conclusion, however sparse, about the motives of such women.

You might then wonder, "Why would women want their lips to appear redder or darker?" You might also note that most lipsticks have this effect, or add gloss to lips that are often paler and more matte naturally. Therefore you could probably consider the function of lipstick in general, not only red and dark shades, because this already includes most. Here's a recent article you might want to check out...

Hill, S. E., Rodeheffer, C. D., Griskevicius, V., Durante, K., & White, A. E. (2012). Boosting beauty in an economic decline: mating, spending, and the lipstick effect. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103*(2), 275–291. Available online, URLs: http://gatorlog.com/handout/handouts/Hill\_Rodeheffer\_Lipstic\_Effect.pdf, http://personal.tcu.edu/sehill/LipstickEffectMS20March2012.pdf. Retrieved January 7, 2014.

It mostly discusses beauty products in general, and uses lipstick as a particular operationalization of bueaty products, which might even be cause for some concern about their conclusions. In any case, it should give a decent introduction to how some psychologists think about the implications of lipstick in general. I agree with @KasperBruhn that you're unlikely to hear about any good empirical research about why women choose the colors they do, but you might...This question is already the fourth hit for a "lipstick shade psychology" Google search! Also, the first hit is pretty informative about the psychology of men viewing women with lipstick:

> Research has reasserted a strong link between males' perceptions of female attractiveness and red lipstick. Specifically, men are not only most drawn to a woman's lips, but, they spend the most time (7.3 seconds) fixated on a woman's lips when she is wearing red lipstick (as reported by the Daily Mail). Other research has similarly asserted perception of power is related to lipstick, again with red in particular.

You've got to suspect that women know that they're doing this to us...The author clearly does! As for the Daily Mail's original contribution to the discussion:

> Scientists found that in the ten seconds after meeting a lady for the first time, the average chap will spend more than half his time gazing at her mouth. If she’s applied lipstick, he’ll find it difficult to look away, with a dash of pink holding his attention for 6.7 seconds and red keeping him fixated for 7.3 seconds. The study, carried out by scientists at Manchester University, involved tracking the eye movements of 50 men as they were presented with images of different women. When the women wore lipstick, the men gazed at their lips for an average of seven seconds – spending just 0.95 seconds looking at their eyes and 0.85 seconds studying their hair. But when they went without make-up, the men tired of looking at their lips after 2.2 seconds, instead devoting 2.97 seconds to admiring their eyes and 2.77 seconds to studying their noses. Full lips were deemed to be the most attractive feature, but the appeal of thin lips increased by more than 40 per cent once make-up had been applied.
>
> Dr Geoff Beattie, who led the research, said: ‘This study proves that lips represent one of the most sensual aspects of a woman’s body and play a critical role in human sexual attraction. Full and red lips combined deliver the perfect pout to achieve male fixation, but women who simply wear lipstick – regardless of their lip type – secure significantly greater levels of attraction than those who do not. For centuries, women have painted their lips red to enhance their appeal, with this practice dating back as far as the Ancient Egyptians who commonly used red lipstick and rouge to enhance their attractiveness. The research suggests that red lips and perceived attractiveness are still inextricably linked, with red lipstick proving to be the most powerful attractor and significantly increasing visual fixation.’
> 3 votes

# Answer
Forgive me if I over analyze, but I assume that you refer to the fact that red lipstick in some places are commonly known to be a symbol of the woman trying to gain attraction.

In that case it doesn't say anything about her "psychology" rather her state of mind. But yet again everyone perceives these signals independently and it would therefore be a bit of a harsh conclusion to conclude anything from it.

According to the different shades of red, i don't think there's made any scientific conclusions that prove it has any connection to the woman's psychology. I believe it's a simple matter of what her taste is like.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, personality
---


# Question
Title: Does procrastination imply knowledge of what is being delayed?
When someone says he is procrastinating, does that imply that he knows which exact action is better than the action that he is currently doing?

Is it called procrastination when you know that your current course of action is not optimal, but you don't know exactly what course of action would be better than your current course of action?

# Answer
No. A person may claim to be procrastinating without putting any real thought into specific alternatives that are known to be better. For example, one might also claim this because one is aware of more socially desirable alternatives, which aren't necessarily better, or because one has been told by someone else (who isn't necessarily right) that one's behavior is procrastinatory.

A more general definition of procrastination may be found in the intro section of the Wikipedia article on procrastination, or on the tag wiki. I don't think the case you describe fits either definition, because not knowing a better approach implies that one's choice of approach (delay, presumably) isn't necessarily needless, but one may still choose this approach for purely rational reasons that have nothing to do with anxiety.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I understand procrastination as something where you delay a task, and the fact that you delay the task enhances it.

A basic example could be cleaning the dishes. You know that you could do it another time, but by delaying it there is even more dishes when you finally decide to do so, and therefore you have "procrastinated".
> 0 votes

---
Tags: procrastination
---


# Question
Title: What triggers people to do competitive activities?
From my past I have seen some people who like to compete in games and try to be first(by games I mean all kind of games or hobbies such as video-games, sports etc. in which competition is included). I assume this kind of activity is needed when people have the need to know that they are equal with the others or to stay above average and be satisfied for what they can achieved.

What is your research is there about this and what actually triggers some people to compete more than others. Is it a nature or a nurture thing?

---

This obviously has to do with psychological matters which can't be analyzed to a detail and is some kind of a philosophical question but even though which is your opinion also links and studies on this matter will be greatly appreciated.

# Answer
> 3 votes
Culture, psychology and physiology (gender) all play an important role is determining ones willingness and ability to compete.

In one sense your nationality influences your desire to compete. Competition and conflict does not originate with Americans but we have fostered via our culture a society of those who compete. Human nature outside of modern social forces was largely communal and cooperative based.

Psychologically speaking on an individual basis what techniques you know to handle competition will help you perform under the stress of competition but will not itself cause you to be a better performer. It seems the challenge or resistance causes development; not competition.

Testosterone and the male gender roles make competition easier for men. Men are less anxious to start competition. Being easier to start will cause more men to engage in competitive behavior than woman. (Even though women are equally competitive once they begin). Men also outperform women on higher competitive test like college entrance exams where as women outperform men on high school exit exams.

> (a) attitudes toward competition (although men may feel comfortable performing in a competitive setting, women may be more anxious about such prospects), (b) beliefs about relative performance (men may be more confident that they are among the highest-performing participants and thus be more inclined to compete), and (c) risk and feedback aversion (the tournament is not only competitive but is also more uncertain and provides more information about relative performance than the piece-rate scheme; if women are more averse to such factors, they may be less inclined to select competitive compensation).

-Gender and Competition: Why do woman shy away from competition.

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, social-psychology, consciousness
---


# Question
Title: How many calories do we burn when we try to understand mathematical proofs?
While thinking we burn calories. For comparison: "And if it’s the right wood and the right chess grand masters in the middle of a tournament, they are going through 6,000 to 7,000 calories a day thinking" from here...

How many calories do we burn when we try to understand mathematical proofs? How does it depend on the representation of the proof? For example, there are plenty of proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, even some without words...

# Answer
Not many.

> Although firing neurons summon extra blood, oxygen and glucose, any local increases in energy consumption are tiny compared with the brain's gluttonous baseline intake. So, in most cases, short periods of additional mental effort require a little more brainpower than usual, but not much more. Most laboratory experiments, however, have not subjected volunteers to several hours' worth of challenging mental acrobatics.

-Scientific America Does Thinking Really Hard Burn More Calories?

> Our results conclude that the measured Ff,ATPase reflects the oxidative phosphorylation rate in resting rat brains, that this flux is tightly correlated to the change of energy demand under varied brain activity levels, and that a significant amount of ATP energy is required for “housekeeping” under the isoelectric state. These findings reveal distinguishable characteristics of ATP metabolism between the brain and heart, and they highlight the importance of in vivo 31P MT approach to potentially provide a unique and powerful neuroimaging modality for noninvasively studying the cerebral ATP metabolic network and its central role in bioenergetics associated with brain function, activation, and diseases.

-PNAS Tightly coupled brain activity and cerebral ATP metabolic rate
> 5 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, learning, mathematical-ability
---


# Question
Title: What's the percentage of people that are mental calculator prodigies?
I want to reply to this comment:

What's the percentage of people that are mental calculator prodigies? How do they spread over the different parts of the world?

# Answer
There are two common ways someone can become a mental calculator via high iq or by savant ability. In exceptional cases someone may develop this ability while having only a average IQ but the level of dedication to such abilities is pathological interfering with normal development on the order of OCD.

Assuming the mental calculator abilities are the function of a savant ability. 62 out of every 10,000 are autistic and 10% of all autistic person have a savant ability finally half of all savants are autistic so multiply the number of autistic savants by two. Which gives you 12/10,000 as a maximum amount of mathematical savants.

About 1/1,000 people are geniuses with iq of 145 but i suspect it takes an Exceptionally Gifted person with an iq above 160 1/10,000 to have the capacity to become mental calculators.

So by my high estimations between 1 and 5 people out of 10,000 are capable of being mental calculators. Because savantism, autism and iq occur semi randomly (due as best we know to genetics) you should expect their to be an equal distribution among all populaces.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: intelligence, mathematical-ability, cross-cultural-psychology, savant-syndrome
---


title: Can bipolar develop in childhood?

text:
# Question
Title: Can bipolar develop in childhood?
Is it possible to develop bipolar in childhood? Does the same diagnostic criteria for bipolar in adults apply for children?

# Answer
Yes but it is referred to as Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder in DSM 5 and is characterized by persistent irritability and frequent episodes of extreme, out-of-control behavior.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, developmental-psychology, psychiatry, bipolar-disorder
---


# Question
Title: Are representations of unattended objects "bound"?
In our phenomenal experience, different features of an object, like shape and color, seem to be "bound" together into a single percept, even though those features are represented in different parts of the brain. Explaining this phenomenon is known as the "binding problem."

If I look at a red apple, the internal representations of its red-ness and its apple shape are bound together. But what if I am not looking at the red apple -- what if my visual attention is not on the red apple? In that case, are the object's "redness" and "appleness" still bound together? Or does binding require attentional focus? Does it require consciousness?

# Answer
Assuming that the perception enters consciousness as a gestalt with all attributes bound, then when attention is diverted and the apple no longer present, then the decay of memory sets in. The two models neural-net, and "holographic" suggest different parameters for how to approach a measurement.

Under a "holographic" model, the connection might become more vague, but I think it could still be recalled, perhaps with the assistance of a tertiary related stimulus: viz. recalling a memory from an scent.

In a weighted-feedback neural-net model, you'd be looking for the moment when the physical link between the attributes decays, I think. Literally, the moment it becomes subliminal.

I'm thinking of McCulloch/Pitts nets specifically, as described in Marvin Minsky, *Finite and Infinite Machines*, a classic, but not recent source.

A cortex would be connected through layers to shape detectors and redness detectors, and these would connect to associative areas. The strength of the association would be dependant upon the weights of the neural connections between the two areas, and would begin to decay after the stimulus is discontinued.

... Or maybe I'm rationalizing with big words to save face after being foiled at a snarky answer?? Does any of this make sense? Does it help? I'm sleepy.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: vision, attention
---


# Question
Title: Mulitiple partners: macho man vs. easy woman?
I sometimes hear from my friends that a man who has many female sexual partners is regarded as macho. But on the other hand, a woman with a lot of one-night stands is thought to be easy and desperate (without even mentioning harsher words).

So what's the reason for this? What are the psychological roots? I would say two most important factors are *biological* and *social* but how do they affect our opinions on this matter?

# Answer
> 2 votes
There are two very broad domains of theory that commonly address the *double standard* regarding *promiscuity*. Haven't got the time to lay it all out at the moment (would be happy to edit later to elaborate if you like; just comment on what aspects you'd like expanded!), but as you suspected, both biological and social factors pertain in ways that are essential to consider. In some senses the theories that focus on each oppose each other, as is a common consequence of any myopic discussion of an issue this complex and *multidetermined*. One answer focuses on one aspect, another answer focuses on another aspect, conflicting explanations and predictions arise, and hopefully the debate incorporates this...but unfortunately often, the original theorists who focus on one (their) side of the issue become invested and entrenched in their perspective, and dismissive of others (another example with which I'm personally familiar arose as the *person-situation debate*). Keep this in mind if you choose to read further into the literature on these theories. The best answer is often the one that is informed by both, or more accurately, **all** sides.

*ary psychology* is the side that argues for explanations in terms of biological factors. Evolutionary theories pertaining to *polygny* and *monogamy* are not hard to find; even from a male perspective, there are competing motives to address here. Meanwhile, has a lot to say about the influence of culture on *social norms* regarding promiscuity, particularly in *women's studies*. Again, a quick Google search on "women's studies sexual double standard" will give you more than you have time to read about that perspective. Bear in mind, these two are not the only ways to address the issue; they're just the most popular and most inclined to address this issue as a focal topic.

Enjoy, stay open-minded, and "trust no one \[completely\]!" :)

# Answer
> 0 votes
Anthropology is the study of cultures what learned behaviour we receive from our environment and the physical biology of cultures and subcultures. (The show Bones on television is a forensic anthropology based drama that gives many interesting facts mostly centered on the biology side.) Culture includes things like music, art, religion, social structure. Norms are the behaviours which are acceptable for a person fulfilling a role in a culture. Gender roles are the set of norms acceptable for a gender. Now within America or any other nation there is a mainstream culture which is shared by the majority and subcultures which exist inside mainstream or outside of mainstream. Some subcultures are even counterculture. Holding a completely different set of norms than the mainstream culture.

Our culture as Americans in a male centric because of our root in Western European countries. Likewise it's also the reason the mode of our music is scaled and its the reason we still find female breasts sexualy attractive. Until World War I, men worked at a job while the women were required to work in a less appreciated role mainly child care, food and house management. Women were not allowed to study beyond a certain level. They could not even vote until suffrage was granted in 1929. If you think that was bad the history of female sexuality is more harsh. While mainstream American culture did at one time require men to be somewhat chaste but never to the degree which women were required. Throughout all American history female prostitutes have played an hidden and despised but accepted role in society. Only recently have male prostitutes become available for women. In the 1920s casual sex become available for women but it was very counterculture.

The sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s changed mainstream America in many ways. It normalized casual sex and many other things. It brought feminism and other changes for female and male sexuality. At that point women who had multiple partners were no longer social outcast or had to keep their sexuality hidden for fear of complete ostracism. Still though there remains a stigma to female sexuality as it is not as liberal in mainstream culture as male sexuality.

In female centered cultures, (Matriarchal rather than Patriarchal) female sexulaity is treated very differently. The Mosuo Matriarchy in southern China have a very liberal sexual attitude where sex is very frequent they have no marriage (except that which is used as a threat to children). They sometimes have monogamous relations as long as they love each other then they move on to other partners.

Other functioning societies have non monogamous relationships with a single woman and multiple male husbands called Polyandry.

Biology gives women many incentives to have multiple partners. Women are far more evolved than men in terms of ability to have multiple partners and receive pleasure. Males have only the primary sexualy pleasing organs of penis, scrotum and prostate. Women have their breasts, labia, G-spot (vagina) and the highly evolved for pleasure clitoris. Most men are physically incapable of multiple orgasms without sexual stimulants like viagra because of the biologically mandated refractory period. Women have an undetectable refractory period and after they have one male partner they can easily be stimulated by another. You can read this psychology article about the comparative feelings of the pleasure organs.

---
Tags: social-psychology, emotion, evolution
---


# Question
Title: How far can we train mental calculation?
> Mental calculators are people with a prodigious ability in some area of mental calculation, such as multiplying large numbers or factoring large numbers.

Unfortunately I forgot where I heard it, but I remember that it was said that they use parts of the brain that are responsible of motion. So factoring for them is like hitting the light switch or walking.

Assuming that this is correct, isn't it possible to train this ability by performing arithmetics while walking?

From a computer scientist's view, I think this is comparable to the use of the graphic card's CPU to speed up computation. Mental calculators just have the right software to run their GPU. Or do they have a different hardware, and is there no way for the rest of us to achieve this?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Yes the brain is plastic and expands certain areas while shrinking other areas. The more intense the training regiment the more likely it is to destroy the person's normality. Essentially increasing the power, overclocking and short circuiting the brain are possible through mental illness or the correction of mental illnesses. In America many professionals and college students go to psychiatrist to improve their performance. Commonly prescribed performance enhancing drugs are SSRI's which induce hypomania, ADHD drugs which increase dopamine as well as anti-anxiety drugs like the benzodiazepines.

OCD with the ritual of mathematics will cause further specialization at the cost of ability to control responses to anxiety. Psychosis can cause people to be extremely focused on a single topic and their brain the work abnormally fast at the cost of their attachment to reality (It also can diminish intelligence over time). Hypergraphia will allow them to communicate the inspirations of psychosis in great detail. Finally Mania will endow the person with the ability to sleep a minimal amount and give an abundance of energy at the expense of impulse management.

Examples of mental illness induced greatness are very numerous. Many advances in science and art happen because most geniuses in addition to having an high IQ are also mentally ill. Extreme creativity and productivity are linked to mental illness. Such greats include Einstein, Darwin, John Forbes Nash, Jr. Michelangelo and Vincent van Gogh. Many great works of literature especially religious writings are caused by compulsions to share ie Hypergraphia. OCD can lead to perfectionism and questioning of validity of that which is known. Hypomania allows a person to be more productive than when they have full blown mania. Inducing hypomania (with caffeine and the like) is extremely common in academia as a means of studying or "cramming". Students often go long periods of time with very little sleep and high energy qualify for manic disorder. Psychosis can be slow onset beginning with isolated episodes and developing into a major psychotic break. A sick person may cope with extreme levels of dopamine in their system without anti-psychotics. It is common to be psychotic (having special revelations, hallucinations, hearing voices and bizarre in behaviour) and be a religious important person. Not all spiritual/religious people are psychotic of course.

---
Tags: intelligence, cognitive-neuroscience, brain-training, mathematical-ability, savant-syndrome
---


# Question
Title: What causes students not to be interested in problem solving?
Sometimes students lack the drive for problem solving. One might say that they are bored.

However, is there a scientific account on what causes ignorance of problem solving, when they simply are not interested in solving any problem? Like when they think that it is the grown-up's task to solve problems, not theirs.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Nature supplies each of us with a Homo Sapien type brain with 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion synapses. However the brain is plastic and can change its structure based on the way it is programmed psychologically.

Not all people are capable of solving all problems. Our abilities mental and physical are based on what we spend our time doing. Even the banal task that one could imagine is quite exhilarating to another person with a brain which was trained and programmed differently.

First the brains structure is made up of the connections the neurons make. My favorite study which shows this is the Cab Drivers Brain Experiment. It showed that after years of labor (and compared to a control group) London taxi drivers had enlarged in structure posterior hippocampus giving the cabbies the ability to store large amount of navigational data in their brain. (That is not to say that the cabbies all enjoyed driving though.) Another example of this includes changes to accommodate musical ability. Exploiting neural plasticity has led to treatments for dyslexia. Likewise also everyone who uses the internet has seen ads for Luminosity but not everyone knows that it doesn't work well.

People who are mentally ill have connections in their brain that lead them to illness. These connections can be caused by physical or by self-psychological training. That is to say chemical imbalances are often the result of a structural or physical malformations. A brain may for whatever reason produces too much or little neurotransmitter or have many connections to an incorrect part of the brain. If the brain was a terrane the paths traveled more often would eventually become "paved" (somewhat permanent). It take medication and counseling to break up those bad pathways and form new and healthy pathways.

Nature or nurture has resulted in the group of people which I think you describe as somewhat dependent or ADHD. Only proper counselling and perhaps even some medication will be able to free them from their lack of motivation. Even with proper treatment some people will for whatever reason never want to act in the way you see fit. Homework will always be at times left undone. This is a truth no matter how advanced the teacher is in academia or how driven and motivated the pupil.

# Answer
> 1 votes
When you want to study Psychology in Germany, there is currently a numerus clausus of 1.3 (with 1 being the best mark and 6 being the worst). That means that only the best few percent of high school students are admitted to study Psychology (marks are approximately normally distributed between 1 and 4). We have tested the intelligence of our psychology students and found that it ranges from around 100 to around 140, with the majority scoring around 110 to 120. In fact their distribution looks like a 100 to 140 segment of the intelligence bell curve, with only a very few students scoring more than 130. This means that despite them being the top ranking students by school graduation marks, they don't rank among the top intelligent of the population!

Now, if you remember that **intelligence is defined as general cognitive problem-solving skill**, you cannot be surprised that at least for students of Psychology their problem-solving skills are only mildly above average. That they are not much interested in performing in a field they don't excel at, is not surprising.

With our students, I see the same thing you see with yours. Only a small number of people have this personality trait to an extent that they will excel in any academic discipline. The majority of students are in fact cull: they happen like sawdust. Which is a problem of bad admission selection based on irrelevant characteristics like school marks and memory capacity, which causes good marks in test like the GMAT or high school graduation, but not new ideas in research.

Basically and to sum up, my answer would be: Most students are too stupid to solve problems and are only at a university because better admission selection would cost too much money and because a harsher selection contradicts the current ideology of equality.

---
Tags: motivation, problem-solving
---


# Question
Title: Fear of things that look like or resemble humans
I remember reading this a while back. To be clear, I'm not talking about a phobia such as Automatonophobia (Fear of inanimate objects that resemble humans, such as dolls) or Pediophobia (Fear of dolls).

Instead, what I read about seems to be something we are all programmed to feel. What I read was that people naturally fear things that look human, but at the same time, are not quite human. A good example I once read about is a game called LSD. Now if you guys Google this and take a look at the screenshots, the game doesn't look scary at all does it? How could it when it has such out dated and hilarious graphics. If you tried to play the game however, you'll soon find yourself becoming jumpy at every little thing in the game which sooner or later, you will start to see as really creepy.

I read that this seems to be a reason why some people find old horror games with old graphics much more frightening than newer games where character models look much more realistic and humanoid. This might also be unrelated, however looking at the horror genre overall, aren't we mainly scared of things that look human? Jason and Freddy are pretty deformed, however in essence human's in shape. Vampires look exactly like humans, but with paler skin and fangs. Zombies look just like humans, albeit with rotting flesh. etc

Is there a scientific name and reasoning behind all this? I mean if you think about it, the further you create something away from a humans shape, the less frightening it becomes (a blob monster for example). Slap on a pair of red eyes on a human however or fangs, and he instantly becomes pretty scary.

# Answer
Might be Uncanny Valley

> The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of human aesthetics which holds that when human features look and move almost, but not exactly, like natural human beings, it causes a response of revulsion among some human observers. Examples can be found in the fields of robotics, 3D computer animation,\[2\]\[3\] and in medical fields such as burn reconstruction, infectious diseases, neurological conditions, and plastic surgery.\[4\] The "valley" refers to the dip in a graph of the comfort level of humans as subjects move toward a healthy, natural human likeness described in a function of a subject's aesthetic acceptability.
> 5 votes

# Answer
I think the word you're looking for is Xenophobia with ingroups being humanity and outgroups being humanoid non-humans.

> Xenophobia is the irrational or unreasoned fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange. It comes from the Greek words ξένος (xenos), meaning "stranger," "foreigner," and φόβος (phobos), meaning "fear."
>
> Xenophobia can manifest itself in many ways involving the relations and perceptions of an ingroup towards an outgroup, including a fear of losing identity, suspicion of its activities, aggression, and desire to eliminate its presence to secure a presumed purity. Xenophobia can also be exhibited in the form of an "uncritical exaltation of another culture" in which a culture is ascribed "an unreal, stereotyped and exotic quality".

-wikipedia
> 1 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, philosophy-of-mind, fear
---


# Question
Title: What is the lifetime of the synapse in the mature brain?
I know there is synaptic plasticity in the mature brain. There is a great number of plasticity mechanisms like LTD and LTP, acting on different time scales. Apart from the synaptic weight change, there is constant rewiring. New spines are being born, those who find a synaptic bouton can even expel the previously connected spine to that bouton.

What I don't know is the specific time constant associated with the rewiring. I also don't know the net effect of this plasticity. What is the average lifetime of the synapse? What percent of the synapses are rewired, say, in a day? The motivation behind my question is to understand, how volatile is the brain and how fast does it change. For example, are my distant memories of childhood written in the synapses that never changed since their creation or have they been already rewritten several times?

I understand that the answer depends on the species, brain area and type of activity. Ideally it would be , say, human broca's area in normal lifestyle. But I'll be happy to know answers for other circumstances as well.

# Answer
In adult mouse cortex, synaptic spines can last anywhere from days to months.

I'm not sure that any such work has been done on human Broca's area, but keep in mind that many synapses are experience dependent. One study found that fear conditioning and fear extinction lead, respectively, to synapse formation and elimination. So the lifetime of a synapse could depend largely on environmental conditions.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, memory, plasticity
---


title: Is handwriting style heritable?

text:
# Question
Title: Is handwriting style heritable?
My daughter (11), wife, and mother in-law all have extremely similar handwriting.

Why is this? Is handwriting a inheritable trait?

# Answer
> 2 votes
Your discussing the cog sci called graphology. It doesn't really work in general cases but its a nice idea. I would say its a happy accident that they look alike. My letter R look like my father's R because I wanted to please him at that age so I mimicked his handwriting.

> Graphology is the study of handwriting. As a theory or practice for inferring a person's character, disposition, and attitudes from their handwriting, graphology is generally considered pseudoscience.
>
> Graphology has been controversial for more than a century. Although supporters point to the anecdotal evidence of thousands of positive testimonials as a reason to use it for personality evaluation, most empirical studies fail to show the validity claimed by its supporters.

-wikipedia

# Answer
> 2 votes
Thing is, when we look at something for a while, it influences us to, in some ways, follow it. If I am not mistaken, a similar principle works for yawning and how a person can yawn just by looking at someone else who does. I wish to elucidate with a personal experience. In my high school, there was this girl with amazing handwriting. I got down with the pox so I used her notes to study. And soon, I realized I have started writing a bit like her. My letter were slightly tilted (hers was at a precise 80 degrees and was consistent across the page) and more cursive. My work became more neat like hers and far more presentable. And I wasn't making a conscious effort to mimic her handwriting at all. It just happens.

---

This might help to explain what I am trying to say a bit better, although it is not about writing, I think it can be extrapolated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NpG4F9yq00

---

# Answer
> 2 votes
I don't know of any particular research that's looked at this, but based on general principles, I'd conjecture:

* If a mother teaches their child to write, then it makes sense that they could share a handwriting style.
* Within a society, there may be shared educational practices about how handwriting is taught, which could lead to similar writing styles. That said, such practices appear to change over generations.
* I imagine that writing style is culturally specific. That said, some traits that are heritable might be relevant to writing style. For example, various abilities often have a genetic component. In particular, various forms of fine motor control might be relevant to writing ability and style.
* Why any two people have similar handwriting could just be a coincidence.

---
Tags: parenting, writing, nature-nurture
---


# Question
Title: Can working memory actually be improved?
I'm skeptical of the claim that brain training (dual-n back) can improve working memory; the improvement seems to be task-specific rather than generalize.

The average human being can only keep 7 things in his or her mind at one time. Brain training claims to be able to increase this capacity, but as said above, I am skeptical. Are there any studies that have have shown that the 7-limit short term memory capacity can be increased? Of course, we can abstract and have an mnemonic stand for seven things, but we are still only holding one thing (the mnemonic) in our minds..

# Answer
> 4 votes
No program has been definitively proven to increase working memory in any generalizable way.

> The authors conclude that memory training programs appear to produce short-term, specific training effects that do not generalize. Possible limitations of the review (including age differences in the samples and the variety of different clinical conditions included) are noted.However, current findings cast doubt on both the clinical relevance of working memory training programs and their utility as methods of enhancing cognitive functioning in typically developing children and healthy adults.

-Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review.

---
Tags: working-memory
---