Brains On Purpose™

Rescuing the amygdala from the swamp of pop culture

Coming on the heels of my blog post Clearing up confusion: The amygdala is not the same as the reptile brain & it's probably not reserved for fear is a news release from Association of Psychological Sciences with more information which I hope will continue the cleaning up of the amygdala's reputation in the media. And clear up its role in our day-to-day to lives.

The release:

The Amygdala And Fear Are Not The Same Thing

In a 2007 episode of the television show Boston Legal, a character claimed to have figured out that a cop was racist because his amygdala activated – displaying fear, when they showed him pictures of black people. This link between the amygdala and fear – especially a fear of others unlike us, has gone too far, not only in pop culture, but also in psychological science, say the authors of a new paper which will be published in the February issue of Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

Indeed, many experiments have found that the amygdala is active when people are afraid. But it also activates at other times, for example in response to pleasant photographs and happy faces.

The misconception came from how scientists first approached studying the brain. A lot of people came to the amygdala from the study of fear, says Wil Cunningham of Ohio State University, who co wrote the new paper with Tobias Brosch of New York University. “It’s a great emotion to study because it’s very important, evolutionarily, and we know a lot about fear in animals,” Cunningham says. Almost every study of fear finds that the amygdala is active. But that doesn’t mean every spark of activity in the amygdala means the person is afraid.

Instead, the amygdala seems to be doing something more subtle: processing events that are related to what a person cares about at the moment. So if you’re in a scary situation or have an anxious personality, the amygdala might be activated by a frightening image. But hungry people have increased amygdala activity in response to pictures of food and people who are very empathetic have an amygdala response to seeing other people.

“When we’re studying emotion, people want to find specific brain parts that are associated with different

Music clearly affects the brain: Does it encourage cooperation? Facilitate social interaction?

Hear answers to those questions by listening to this very interesting video from University of California at San Diego and Association of Psychological Sciences. If you have read past posts here about music and conflict resolution, you may guess what is said about music, cooperation, and facilitated interaction in this video.

From the Web page of A Conversation About Music, Mind, and Health:

What effect does music have on the brain, and what can music teach us about the brain? In this video 24th APS Annual Convention Speaker Aniruddh Patel and music therapist Barbara Reuer speak with David Granet of the University of California’s Health Matters about music, cognition, and health.

Scientists are just beginning to understand music’s implications for language acquisition, emotions, social skills, learning, and memory. Watch the interview to learn more about music and the mind, including research published in Psychological Science showing that music and other synchronized activities encourage cooperation.

Click to read other posts about music. Click to read about the research mentioned in the video: Marching to the Beat of the Same Drum Improves Teamwork.

I'll be a featured speaker at the Arkansas ADR Conference in March

Join me in Little Rock on March 8? Click to see the schedule of excellent programs. My presentations will be

• The Mind and the Brain: 21st Century Insight for the ADR Professional (plenary session)
• Total-Brain Mediation: The Whole Brain and Nothing but the Truth

Reminder that studies may not be measuring what we think: Research merely provides clues

Do the expectations of researchers have an effect on the outcome of their studies? Sometimes, yes. That's the topic of a new post in one of Discover Magazine's blogs. From "Primed by expectations: why a classic psychology experiment isn't what is seemed":

We’ve known for over a century that scientists can very easily bias their own experiments, even in the most carefully controlled cases. “It’s a neat paper ["Behavioral Priming: It's All in the Mind, but Whose Mind?"] that re-emphasises some highly important and widely relevant warnings for everyone who might want to conduct experiments with people,” says Stafford. “Expectations – participants’ and experimenters’ – and inaccurate measurement can combine to give you biased results.” Ackerman adds, “It’s a lesson that behavioural researchers are all trained in, but one that bears repeating from time to time.”

“Our results don’t completely rule out the possibility of unconscious priming,” says Doyen, “but they point to the fact that the (generally weak) effects may also be influenced by many other factors that are almost never controlled in such studies.”

The study also serves as a good reminder about how important it is for scientists to try and repeat each others’ results. ...

Bottom line: Although I am probably sounding like a broken record, proceed with caution and skepticism when learning about research results. Find out if the research has been replicated. Read the original study yourself; you will often find a mismatch between what you are reading and what the media have reported. When you read the study, do so with a critical eye to all factors, including the procedures, the groups and numbers used as subjects and controls, the conclusions drawn. Consider yourself a detective in sleuthing out all the possible problems with any research you read.

The post is also a good reminder that objectivity is difficult. How often do you think mediations are subtly (or not so subtly) influenced by the unconscious biases of the mediator? Probably often, especially when the parties are not in the same room. This is one reason why I think mediators have a professional obligation to engage in some kind of practice that keeps their metacognition, their self-awareness, in fine, sharp condition.

Past posts on priming:

• Scent of fairness in the air? Mediation running hot or cold? The importance of subtle environmental cues
• Can forming implemention intentions counteract priming on your road towards goals?
• Music may cause an attitude: A clue about conflict resolution?
• At the mercy of our brains? An antidote to priming is metacognition

Ever use SWOT? This pair of experts says the strategy leads the brain to a "mental dead end"

Have you run into SWOT? Used it? It's a method some people claim will assist in strategic analysis. SWOT stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats, and the theory is that looking at each of those factors can help with strategy creation.

Does it work? Not according to this professor duo of Harold E. Klein (Fox School of Business at Temple University) and Mark D'Esposito (Henry H. Wheeler Jr. Brain Imaging Center, University of California, Berkeley). A couple of years ago, they wrote an article to explain.

Abstract:

The most widely used (and taught) protocols for strategic analysis—Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT)and Porter's (1980) Five Force Framework for industry analysis—have been found to be insufficient as stimuli for strategy creation or even as a basis for further strategy development. We approach this problem from a neurocognitive perspective. We see profound incompatibilities between

Notes of resolution: The impact of music on conflict

Because the amount of research on the impact of music on the brain continues to grow, as does the collaboration between musicians and neuroscientists, I grow ever more optimistic about the benefits and usefulness of music in the resolution of disputes. (Click to read some of my past posts about music and dispute resolution.)

We are already learning that knowledge about the brain can help us in resolving conflict. The number of conflict resolution practitioners utilizing brain knowledge has grown since I first started this blog nearly five years ago. The use of music in our arena is not yet common but I don't think that scarcity will continue much longer. Music affects most of the brain and I firmly believe it can be harnessed to facilitate agreement, or help make wise decisions not to agree.

From "Scientists study music's effects on our brains and bodies" (Isthmus-The Daily Page):

[I]t turns out that music is a good subject for brain research because it affects so many neurological pathways.

The combination of music and neuroscience is a hot topic these days, and there is an exciting convergence happening between neuroscientists and musicians. Old walls have broken down, and the bridge between the disciplines can be crossed without suspicion. Researchers use music to give us insight into time, emotion, healing and language — a glimpse into our human nature.

And that's what is at the heart of conflict and its resolution: Time, emotion, healing, language, human nature. Music may be able to yield insight about why we disagree, and will likely help to quell tension and lessen contention, disharmony, and discord.

In addition to the research I've been doing about music in the last couple of years, I am in conversation with a few people who are experts in both music and conflict to create some musical tools for conflict professionals. 2012 will be the birth year of music playing a big part in mediation. Listen for it!

Note: Here is a blog post with a link to the program mentioned in the article linked to above: In this program, neuroscience meets jazz, mindfulness, and improv (idealawg).

Clearing up confusion: The amygdala is not the same as the reptile brain & it's probably not reserved for fear

The amygdala gets lots of attention in conflict resolution circles these days, but not all of what is said is accurate. For example, the amydala's role in fear seems often to be the sole focus. Therefore, I was very glad to see Wray Herbert write a post refining the idea of the role of the amygdala beyond just being the "fear center."  From "Fleeing the Brain’s Fear Center" (Association for Psychological Science blogs).

Cunningham and Brosch conducted a thorough review of the vast literature on amygdala function, and their analysis also reveals a lot of individual variation in amygdala activity. Some subjects respond more to positive and negative stimuli than to neutral stimuli; others mostly to negative stimuli; and still others to positive information. In other words, amygdala activation may not have the same meaning for everyone; it may instead reflect the psychological state of the individual. The amygdala appears initially to evaluate the relevance of stimuli, and then to tune the individual’s overall cognitive and emotional response.

These varying responses may reflect personality to some degree. ...

...

All of these recent findings, taken together, call into question the whole idea of brain modules that govern specific, universal emotions like fear, sadness, disgust and surprise. The new and more dynamic view of the amygdala—and the brain—raises doubts about such an emotional taxonomy. ...

I urge you to read the whole post, which includes an interesting section on racial prejudice.

I believe what we can say about the amygdala is that it

Mind, Brain, and Education: Implications for Educators

In several past posts, we have considered the role of learning in conflict resolution. Today I want to bring your attention to the autumn edition of Mind, Brain, and Education [pdf] because it contains several interesting articles about learning, including

• The Need for a Deeper Exploration and Conceptual Understanding: The Critical Role of Creativity and Collaboration in Real-World Learning
  R. Keith Sawyer
• Mind, Brain and Education: The Impact of Educational Neuroscience on the Science of Teaching
  David A. Sousa
• Brain, Mind, and the Organization of Knowledge for Effective Recall and
  Application
  O. Roger Anderson
• Mind, Brain and Education: The Birth of a New Science
  Michel Ferrari & Hazel E. A. McBride
• Executive Function in the Classroom: Neurological Implications for Classroom Intervention
  Harriet Greenstone
• We Feel, Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education
  Mary Helen Immordino-Yang & Antonio Damasio
• The Power of Mindset in Shaping Student Success
  Megan Webster & Nathalie Bossé

Click to read these and many other articles. Related blog post: "Exploring the brain in the Bay Area: Join us in February?"

"Social Neuroscience: How a Multidisciplinary Field Is Uncovering the Biology of Human Interactions"

Excerpt:

Editor’s note: Studying only the biological or social aspects of a species can cause researchers to overlook many of the complex elements at work within and among organisms. The interdisciplinary field of social neuroscience serves to close the gaps left by such singularly focused research. Social neuroscientists boost our knowledge of the biology of animal and human interactions in areas as diverse as drug abuse, pair-bonding, and social isolation. As the field continues to grow, we will better understand the social, biological, and cognitive factors that determine how we relate to others.

...

If the solitary computer is a metaphor for cognitive neuroscience, the Internet is a metaphor for social neuroscience.

Click to read the rest of "Social Neuroscience: How a Multidisciplinary Field Is Uncovering the Biology of Human Interactions" (Cerebrum - Dana Foundation).

Although there's no certain and fool-proof way to persuade, people keep looking for the magic manipulator

How we are persuaded is individual and situational, so beware of anyone trying to sell you a surefire way to successfully convince, cajole or persuade. Nevertheless, human beings continue looking for that elusive brainwashing soap that always works. The search will probably continue as long as we are on this planet.

Speaking of soap, here's a very entertaining and informative article about some of the efforts in the world of marketing made over the years to discover the persuasion key. From "Retail therapy: How Ernest Dichter, an acolyte of Sigmund Freud, revolutionised marketing" (The Economist):

Between the late 1930s and 1960s Dichter became famous for transforming the fates of businesses such as Procter & Gamble, Exxon, Chrysler, General Mills and DuPont. His insight changed the way hundreds of products were sold, from cars to cake mix. He pioneered research techniques such as the focus group, understood the power of word-of-mouth persuasion and earned startling fees for his theories. By the late 1950s his global business reached an annual turnover of $1m ($8m today), and he enjoyed a reputation as the Freud of the supermarket age.

Dichter’s radical approach to goading shoppers, called “motivational research”, was considered so successful that he was even accused of threatening America’s national well-being. Americans have become “the most manipulated people outside the Iron Curtain,” complained Vance Packard, a

"Neuroscience, Normativity, and Retributivism"

Abstract:

Advocates for the increased use of neuroscience in law have made bold and provocative claims about the power of neuroscientific discoveries to transform the criminal law in ways large and small. Perhaps the boldest and most provocative of these claims are made in an influential article by Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen. They claim that neuroscience will reveal that criminal defendants are not morally responsible for their actions and that this revelation will thereby undermine retributivist justifications for criminal punishment. In the process of resolving previously intractable debates between consequentialism and retributivism, neuroscience will also, they contend, resolve age-old debates about free will. In this essay, we discuss several serious problems with their argument. We maintain that no neuroscientific discoveries will lead to the sorts of changes predicted by Greene and Cohen and, even if they did, those changes would not be the product of neuroscientific insight but result from unwarranted and problematic inferences which ought to be resisted.

Click to download the rest of "Neuroscience, Normativity, and Retributivism" (SSRN-THE FUTURE OF PUNISHMENT, Thomas Nadelhoffer, ed., Oxford University Press, Forthcoming-U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1968552).

Respect mediation? Love it? Prove it, shove it, move it: Mix things up, break the patterns

If someone were to take video tapes (with no audio) of your mediations, how different would one look from the other? We all tend to get into both personal and professional patterns. For example, we typically drive to errands on the same routes over time. Do we drive the same routes in mediations?

This study linked to below, another one about how our bodies may affect our cognition, reminds us that much more is going on in any session than we might guess. To circumvent or drive through roadblocks to resolution, change the routes, change the roads, change the physical positions and environment.

In previous posts, I have suggested ways to get out of ruts and to see the conflict resolution process with fresh eyes, artistic eyes, sometimes even jester eyes. Those new eyes are the hallmark of a 21st-century mediator. Re-spect means look again. Re-spect your methods of mediation.

Try this: Think of a mediation as a game of jacks; they never fall the same way and you and the parties can use lots of ways to pick them up. Positions in the circle around the game can and probably should change; the bodies of the players are just as important as the minds.

And don't forget to change the ball to get a new bounce!

Here's that reminder of how much is going on in the room beyond what's in our skulls: "Leaning to the Left Makes the Eiffel Tower Seem Smaller: Posture-Modulated Estimation" (Psychological Science). Abstract: