Brains On Purpose™

Adding "neuro" to a word supposedly adds credibility but often signals neurohype

Listen to Christian Jarrett, neuroscientist turned science writer, describing the many myths about the brain covered in today's media (kuow.org). The interview of Jarrett is less than 10 minutes long and worth a few minutes of your time. Jarrett has a new book coming out in the fall titled Great Myths of the Brain. I am looking forward to the read.

Wish to learn more about learning? Two new books on changing the brain through learning

T-shirt from this year's APS conference

Does resolving conflict require learning? Typically, yes, of course. If no one in the dispute learns anything new, the conflict will probably remain unresolved. That's one of the reasons learning is often mentioned here at BonP.

In May, I attended the 26th annual convention of the Association of Psychological Science; some of the presentations I chose among the multitude offered included learning as a focus. One of my favorite programs, and certainly the most entertaining, was one copresented by APS past-president Henry Roediger who is the author of a new book on learning titled Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. This week I have been reading the book for the first time. I say "first time" because I know I will be reading it again: it contains so much of value about teaching and learning. The book is one I will continue to recommend often.

If you want to both learn and be amazed, watch Dr. Roediger's APS program (about which I have already blogged at idealawg.)

While we are on the topic of books (a topic which many of my friends and colleagues think I talk about very, very, very frequently) I have just learned of a title, another one on learning, that will be out in less than a week. This book is called Multiple Pathways to the Student Brain: Energizing and Enhancing Instruction by Janet Zadina (Brainfacts.org). I believe you can get a preview of Professor Zadina's Multiple Pathways Model here.

Now what about you? What books do you recommend on learning and the brain?

Highly recommended exchange of views about left/right and top/bottom brain

Here's an exchange between Iain McGilchrist, author of The Master and His Emissary, and Wayne Miller, coauthor of the new Top Brain, Bottom Brain. Dr. McGilchrist was kind enough to post the exchange on his Web site. if you are interested in the brain, you will want to read this short conversation.

It begins:

Kosslyn and Miller are researchers I admire. They are quite right to take issue with what they call dated and crude ideas of hemisphere difference. So do I. ‘Dated’ and ‘crude’ are by definition bad. Agreed, management jargon about almost entirely fictional differences between the hemispheres are a hurdle one has to get over: I wrote a book taking such ideas to task. But that is quite different from suggesting we would be wrong to think in terms of hemisphere difference at all.

They write, as if it is some revelation, that ‘the brain doesn’t work one part at a time, but rather as a single interactive system, with all parts contributing in concert, as neuroscientists have long known’. Who, one feels like asking, do they think their readers are?

It is not that they are wrong to point to ‘top-bottom’ differences in the brain: in fact the idea is so plainly right, and has been known to be the case for so long, that I cannot imagine who it is they think might disagree with them. ...

Click to read the rest.

H/T: Bonnie Badenoch.

 

Cognitive complexity: How can reading a novel help you to be a better mediator?

Getting Inside Your Head: What Cognitive Science Can Tell Us about Popular Culture

Because the cognitive complexity levels of each of the parties and of the mediator can create either effective matches or unproductive clashes in conflict resolution, I recently have posted on my blogs several times about those levels. (See links below.)

Theories about what increases cognitive complexity are numerous. Most of the theorists seem to agree that developing higher complexity takes time; it also involves experiencing situations which enable a person to feel more and more comfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. The benefits of complexity include the ability to take multiple perspectives, the already-mentioned comfort with ambiguity, skill in strong and complete analysis, and self-awareness. All of those benefits are helpful in conflict resolution; disparate levels of these traits in the people involved (including the mediator) can hamper or prevent resolution. Therefore it is important for mediators to understand these differences, assess them, and know what to do when they are driving behavior.

And now a surprise: Another method of promoting cognitive complexity may be reading fiction! If you want to learn more,

Working with zombies to learn about our brains

I know many of us teach our mediation or therapy or coaching clients about the brain (and the mind), but I am guessing very few of us enlist the assistance of zombies. (Write me if you do!)

Here are four lesson plans written for teachers to use on the topic of neuroscience (PBS). They compare the normal human brain to the zombie brain to make the learning more engaging. Maybe we can get an idea or two from the lessons plans for talking about neuroscience with our clients? From the description:

The following lessons about neuroscience have been inspired by the book, “The Zombie Autopsies”, written by Steven C. Schlozman, M.D., and are intended to compliment it.  “The Zombie Autopsies” was inspired by George Romero’s 1968 cult-classic horror film “Night of the Living Dead”.

These original lessons build upon each other and have an accompanying plot line where the world is fighting a zombie apocalypse and the best and the brightest young people are being trained as medical students – with a specialty in neuroscience – with the hopes that they will be able to provide a cure to this terrible epidemic and save humanity.  For a richer experience have the students read the book in class and as homework (see suggested reading schedule) along with the class activities.

I have blogged about Dr. Schlozman several times in the past, including here and here.

Forget dated ideas about left & right hemispheres-New research provides more nuanced view of the brain

Excerpt from "A New Map of How We Think: Top Brain/Bottom Brain" (Wall Street Journal), an article extracted from a forthcoming book:

Who hasn't heard that people are either left-brained or right-brained—either analytical and logical or artistic and intuitive, based on the relative "strengths" of the brain's two hemispheres? How often do we hear someone remark about thinking with one side or the other?

A flourishing industry of books, videos and self-help programs has been built on this dichotomy. You can purportedly "diagnose" your brain, "motivate" one or both sides, indulge in "essence therapy" to "restore balance" and much more. Everyone from babies to elders supposedly can benefit. The left brain/right brain difference seems to be a natural law.

Except that it isn't. The popular left/right story has no solid basis in science. The brain doesn't work one part at a time, but rather as a single interactive system, with all parts contributing in concert, as neuroscientists have long known. ...

. . .

There is a better way to understand the functioning of the brain, based on another, ordinarily overlooked anatomical division—between its top and bottom parts. We call this approach "the theory of cognitive modes." Built on decades of unimpeachable research that has largely remained inside scientific circles, it offers a new way of viewing thought and behavior ... .

Click to read the rest. See the book's Web site. And watch an interview with coauthor Stephen Kosslyn.

New (to me) book on the brain, conflict resolution, and dance

Click to learn about a book published in September titled The Choreography of Resolution: Conflict, Movement, and Neuroscience. You may read at that link the book's Table of Contents, Acknowledgments, Foreword, and Introduction. From the American Bar Association Web site:

This work invigorates connections between somatic knowledge and conflict transformation. Taken together, the chapters address this question: How does the nexus of movement and conflict inform and deepen understandings and generate new questions and insights about conflict geography and the choreography of resolution? Juxtaposing autobiographical and practice experiences with diverse cultural, historical and social realities highlights both challenges and breakthroughs in this burgeoning area.

The chapters also reveal the importance of symbolic and non-literal language in expressing and addressing the true toll of trauma on an individual or community. The contributors describe how physical movement enables more holistic access to decoding emotions that are invariably physiological, containing both mental and embodied nuances. As the body and mind are in constant conversation, it is understood then that emotions begin with physical sensations. When the emotions and energy are blocked by conflict, it then attributes to physical changes. This book illuminates the physical, emotional, and relational intelligence that relate to conflict resolution and takes you on a journey toward reshaping and developing your own mind, as well as your approach to conflict resolution.

I have not read the book and, in fact, only learned of it today (thanks, Merrilyn Astin Tarlton). Have you read it? If so, what were your thoughts? Did it inspire you to try something new?

Free ebook by neuroscientist on science and compassion

From the Web site featuring the ebook:

What is the difference between empathy and compassion? Is it possible to train compassion? Can it be measured? How useful is compassion training in schools, clinical settings, and end-of-life care? Can the brain be transformed through mental training?

The free eBook: Compassion. Bridging Practice and Science by Tania Singer and Matthias Bolz describes existing secular compassion training programs and empirical research as well as the experiences of practitioners. The state-of-the-art layout of the eBook includes video clips and a selection of original sound collages by Nathalie Singer, and artistic images by Olafur Eliasson

Click to read more about the book (Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences) and the story behind it (Science).

All mediation is brain-based: It's impossible to resolve conflict without a brain (And other Friday-the-13th reflection)

To write the title of this post, I have paraphrased a sentence in an article from PopSci: "[A]ll education is brain-based. It is impossible to learn without a brain." That statement is true for education—and my version fits for mediation.

The article, one I highly recommend to you, is titled "Everything You've Been Told About How You Learn Is A Lie" and it describes three myths about learning: left brain-right brain, learning styles, and a catch-all the author labels "__ Will Make You Smarter." Perhaps a bit of the writer's frustration comes through in the article, or perhaps I am only imagining that because my frustration grows with the use of some "brain science" I see being applied to mediation. But you have heard me talk about that frustration many times before here or perhaps in one of my programs.

To introduce another source of my frustration (somewhat related to the one mentioned above), here's another paraphrase for you, from a very good book I am reading: "Under no circumstances should [conflict resolution] be reduced to a technique." The actual sentence, from A Guide to Third Generation Coaching, reads "coaching" instead of "conflict resolution."

The technique-driven approach is common in mediation. Yes, we have learned from neuroscience a few, and let me stress few, techniques that may be helpful sometimes, with some people, in some situations. (Click to read more about the Maxim of SIN: Situational, Individual, Now.) That's part of the reason I attend conferences such as the annual meeting of Association for Psychological Science: to learn new research and see when it might be helpful in conflict resolution—and, more frequently, when it probably won't. For example, I still have posts pending from the May APS conference on such topics as:

• the potential pathology of the group approach to problems
• the malleability of personality traits
• the explosion of emotion regulation research and how much we still don't know

In addition to criticism of a technique focus, much of the rest of the book A Guide to Third Generation Coaching also can apply to the process of dispute resolution.

For example, the book's author Reinhard Stelter presents three stages or generations of coaching and posits we are now in the third stage.

The first generation he describes as having "a problem and goal perspective": Helping "the coachee address his or her

Resources to help us evaluate research and thus be more credible and helpful

 

DANGER: THIN ICE

As neuro-foolishness and psych-silliness continue to seep into both mainstream media and mediation presentations, resources to help us be discerning users of neuroscience and psychology are needed more and more. In the past, I have recommended some resources to increase discernment when reading press releases or encountering news from the mass media or even reading research papers. For example, I urge people to read Psychology's Ghosts: The Crisis in the Profession and the Way Back and The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts.

 

Recently I saw a Tweet swim by on my stream recommending some research and thought that the studies did not sound very credible and certainly not of much help outside of the environment in which the research was conducted. I asked one of my colleagues, a cognitive psychologist, about the research and he too was skeptical, mentioning demand characteristics as one reason for his skepticism.

For those of us citing or applying research in our work and presentations, a knowledge of that phenomenon and other possible effects of the researcher's expectations is wise, probably essential. To increase that knowledge, here are two quick overviews: "Interpersonal Expectancy Effects: A 30-Year Perspective" (Current Directions of the American Psychological Society) [link no longer works so click here] and the Wikipedia page on demand characteristics. Enjoy learning or reviewing.

The more we know, the more quickly we can cull out, blog about, Tweet, and use in practice only that which is likely to be useful to facilitating the resolution of conflict, understanding behavior, and serving clients.

Note [added June 20, 2016]: See also "Why Smart People Believe Dumb Things," a free chapter from
When Can You Trust the Experts? How to Tell Good Science from Bad in Education.

Using neuroscience in your personal or professional life? Reading this book may make you more discerning—and accurate

I often warn about the neuroscience I see and hear in the field of conflict resolution because some (maybe much) of it ranges from mildly inaccurate to wildly outlandish. Now, if I want to inject some caution in the conversation, I can recommend a new, easy-to-read book: Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience.

When I was at the annual conference of Association for Psychological Science (APS) last month, I heard the book's coauthor Dr. Scott Lilienfeld speak. However, he was not the only presenter warning about the prevalence of neuromyths; for example, Professor Daniel Willingham talked about how rampant inaccurate brain "science" is in the field of education. Flaky, fluffy, false neuroscience seems to be infiltrating many arenas in addition to conflict resolution.

An excerpt from a Wall Street Journal book review of Brainwashed:

[N]euroscientific techniques—fMRI is one of many—provide plenty to be excited about. The authors of "Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience," while sharing in this enthusiasm, offer a more skeptical take. At issue for psychiatrist Sally Satel and clinical psychologist Scott Lilienfeld is "neurocentrism," or "the view that human experience and behavior can be best explained from the predominant or even exclusive perspective of the brain." In their concise and well-researched book, they offer a reasonable and eloquent critique of this fashionable delusion, chiding the premature or unnecessary application of brain science to commerce, psychiatry, the law and ethics.

Click to read a Salon excerpt from the book. Also an excerpt from Slate.

Yes, I have been a neurocurmudgeon for several years but now, in 2013, perhaps books such as this and presentations like I heard at APS will bring a new level of discernment and accuracy to the use of neuroscience in conflict resolution. I can hope . . .

Note: I call my above photo "Jumbled Science."

What is the biggest, scariest mediation monster of all?

Before I venture an answer to the question in the title of this post, let me put forth a definition of monster, one of which I am particularly fond:

Monster derives from the Latin word monstrum, which in turn derives from the root monere (to warn). To be a monster is to be an omen.

--Stephen T. Asma, On Monsters: An Unnatural History of Our Worst Fears

Then let me tell you what got me thinking about monsters in the context of mediation. Recently I found an article written about a mediation training at which I assisted back in 1988. The lead trainer was Gary Friedman whom I had invited to New Mexico to conduct the seminar. In reading the article written so long ago, I was reminded of what is often missing in the mediation of today.

The article included several principles of the mediation model being taught at this Santa Fe seminar:

• "The most important aim of mediation, Friedman said, is 'empowering the parties.' He encouraged mediators to resist every attempt by parties to burden the mediator with the responsibilities that the parties themselves need to assume."
• "The voluntariness of mediation is one of its most empowering aspects, he said. The fact that either party may leave at any time is crucial to the process."
• "'Bringing in law relevant to a particular case requires the mediator to walk a thin line between, on the one hand, viewing law as determining outcome, and, on the other hand, viewing it as irrelevant,' he explained." The role it will play is up to the disputants.
• "The mediator needs 'inner freedom' to help the parties, Friedman indicated. That freedom is achieved by the mediator's awareness of his or her own reaction and biases." Both introspection and self-awareness are very important to the skill of a mediator and the success of the process.

Click to read the whole article: "Mediation Course for Lawyers Stresses Empowerment Of Parties" (BNA's ADR Report).

These four factors—party empowerment; voluntariness; law as, at the most, only one factor to be considered in resolution; and mediator self-awareness—probably have not increased in the field of mediation since 1988. In fact, there are many who would say they have decreased, and that the process has become more