Most Recent Links
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, or subscribe to our mailing list, to receive news updates. Learn more.
HOW would you punish a murderer? Your answer will depend on how active a certain part of your brain happens to be. Joshua Buckholtz at the University of Harvard and his colleagues gave 66 volunteers scenarios involving a fictitious criminal called John. Some of his crimes were planned. In others, he was experiencing psychosis or distress – for example, his daughter’s life under threat. The volunteers had to decide how responsible John was for each crime and the severity of his punishment on a scale of 0 to 9. Before hearing the stories, some of the volunteers received magnetic stimulation to a brain region involved in decision-making, called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), which dampened its activity. The others were given a sham treatment. Inhibiting the DLPFC didn’t affect how responsible the volunteers thought John was for the crimes, or the punishment he should receive when he was not culpable for his actions. But they meted out a much less severe punishment than the control group when John had planned his crime (Neuron, doi.org/7rh). “By altering one process in the brain, we can alter our judgements,” says Christian Ruff at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. In the justice system, the judgment stage to determine guilt is separated from sentencing, says James Tabery at the University of Utah. “It turns out that our brains work in a similar fashion.” © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
By Martin Enserink AMSTERDAM—Is being a woman a disadvantage when you're applying for grant money in the Netherlands? Yes, say the authors of a paper published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) this week. The study showed that women have a lower chance than men of winning early career grants from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), the country's main grant agency. NWO, which commissioned the study, accepted the results and announced several changes on Monday to rectify the problem. "NWO will devote more explicit attention to the gender awareness of reviewers in its methods and procedures," a statement said. But several Dutch scientists who have taken a close look at the data say they see no evidence of sexism. The PNAS paper, written by Romy van der Lee and Naomi Ellemers of Leiden University's Institute of Psychology, is an example of a classic statistical trap, says statistician Casper Albers of the University of Groningen, who tore the paper apart in a blog post yesterday. (In Dutch; a shortened translation in English is here.) Albers says he plans to send the piece as a commentary to PNAS as well. Van der Lee and Ellemers analyzed 2823 applications for NWO's Veni grants for young researchers in the years 2010, 2011, and 2012. Overall, women had a success rate of 14.9%, compared with 17.7% for men, they wrote, and that difference was statistically significant. But Albers says the difference evaporates if you look more closely at sex ratios and success rates in NWO's nine scientific disciplines. Those data, which Van der Lee and Ellemers provided in a supplement to their paper, show that women simply apply more often in fields where the chance of success is low. © 2015 American Association for the Advancement of Science
By Simon Makin Most people associate the term “subliminal conditioning” with dystopian sci-fi tales, but a recent study has used the technique to alter responses to pain. The findings suggest that information that does not register consciously teaches our brain more than scientists previously suspected. The results also offer a novel way to think about the placebo effect. Our perception of pain can depend on expectations, which explains placebo pain relief—and placebo's evil twin, the nocebo effect (if we think something will really hurt, it can hurt more than it should). Researchers have studied these expectation effects using conditioning techniques: they train people to associate specific stimuli, such as certain images, with different levels of pain. The subjects' perception of pain can then be reduced or increased by seeing the images during something painful. Most researchers assumed these pain-modifying effects required conscious expectations, but the new study, from a team at Harvard Medical School and the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, led by Karin Jensen, shows that even subliminal input can modify pain—a more cognitively complex process than most that have previously been discovered to be susceptible to subliminal effects (timeline below). The scientists conditioned 47 people to associate two faces with either high or low pain levels from heat applied to their forearm. Some participants saw the faces normally, whereas others were exposed subliminally—the images were flashed so briefly, the participants were not aware of seeing them, as verified by recognition tests. © 2015 Scientific American
A 26-year-old man who is paralysed in both legs has walked for the first time in five years – just by thinking about it. He is the first person to have his brain activity recorded and used to control a muscle-stimulating device in his legs. Every year, 250,000 to 500,000 people worldwide suffer spinal cord injuries, which can leave them partially or completely paralysed below the site of damage. Many rehabilitation clinics already offer functional electric stimulation (FES) devices, which activate the nerves that innervate leg muscles at the push of a button. But people with upper-body paralysis are not always able to operate the FES in this way. The new system bypasses the button and returns control to the brain. “We want to re-establish the connection between the brain and the leg muscles, to bring back the function that was once present,” says Zoran Nenadic at the University of California Irvine. To do that, Nenadic and his colleagues combined an FES system with a brain-computer interface. The team developed an electrode cap that picks up the brainwaves created when a person thinks specifically about walking or standing still. They tailored the device to pick up brain signals from their volunteer – a man who has had little sensation below his shoulder blades for five years. © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
Link ID: 21437 - Posted: 09.24.2015
By Jessica Schmerler Selfies, headshots, mug shots — photos of oneself convey more these days than snapshots ever did back in the Kodak era. Most digitally minded people continually post and update pictures of themselves at professional, social media and dating sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook, Match.com and Tinder. For better or worse, viewers then tend to make snap judgments about someone’s personality or character from a single shot. As such, it can be a stressful task to select the photo that conveys the best impression of ourselves. For those of us seeking to appear friendly and trustworthy to others, a new study underscores an old, chipper piece of advice: Put on a happy face. A newly published series of experiments by cognitive neuroscientists at New York University is reinforcing the relevance of facial expressions to perceptions of characteristics such as trustworthiness and friendliness. More importantly, the research also revealed the unexpected finding that perceptions of abilities such as physical strength are not dependent on facial expressions but rather on facial bone structure. The team’s first experiment featured photographs of 10 different people presenting five different facial expressions each. Study subjects rated how friendly, trustworthy or strong the person in each photo appeared. A separate group of subjects scored each face on an emotional scale from “very angry” to “very happy.” And three experts not involved in either of the previous two ratings to avoid confounding results calculated the facial width-to-height ratio for each face. An analysis revealed that participants generally ranked people with a happy expression as friendly and trustworthy but not those with angry expressions. Surprisingly, participants did not rank faces as indicative of physical strength based on facial expression but graded faces that were very broad as that of a strong individual. © 2015 Scientific American
Link ID: 21436 - Posted: 09.24.2015
By Kristin Ozelli Four years ago writer and producer Jon Palfreman was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. He has chronicled his experience and that of many other “Parkies,” as patients sometimes call themselves, in two books, the latest of which is Brain Storms: The Race to Unlock the Mysteries of Parkinson’s Disease, published this year by Scientific American / Farrar, Straus and Giroux, which traces some of the recent progress of medical researchers in treating this disease. He shared with Scientific American MIND senior editor Kristin Ozelli some of the insights he gleaned while working on this book. You wrote an earlier book about Parkinson’s and produced a prize-winning documentary, The Case of the Frozen Addicts, and have experienced the disease personally. While you were researching Brain Storms, was there anything new you learned about the disease that really surprised you? What is truly surprising is just how long biomedical research takes to deliver life-changing therapies. The promising therapies around when I wrote my first book 20 years ago, like neural grafting and growth factors—therapies designed to replace, revive or protect dopamine neurons—well they haven’t panned out. On the other hand, since my first involvement with Parkinson’s, there have been some extraordinary advances in basic science. In a sense, the disease has been rebranded from a movement disorder (resulting from damage to a very small part of the brain) to a systemic condition involving not only tremor and rigidity but also a whole host of symptoms—from depression to sleep disorders, from constipation to dementia. Indeed, there’s an entirely new theory of the disease that sees it as being driven by a protein alpha-synuclein that goes rogue and, prionlike, jumps from neuron to neuron creating havoc. © 2015 Scientific American
Link ID: 21435 - Posted: 09.23.2015
Erin Wayman Priya Rajasethupathy’s research has been called groundbreaking, compelling and beautifully executed. It’s also memorable. Rajasethupathy, a neuroscientist at Stanford University, investigates how the brain remembers. Her work probes the molecular machinery that governs memories. Her most startling — and controversial — finding: Enduring memories may leave lasting marks on DNA. Being a scientist wasn’t her first career choice. Although Rajasethupathy inherited a love of computation from her computer scientist dad, she enrolled in Cornell University as a pre-med student. After graduating in three years, she took a year off to volunteer in India, helping people with mental illness. During that year she also did neuroscience research at the National Centre for Biological Sciences in Bangalore. While there, she began to wonder whether microRNAs, tiny molecules that put protein production on pause, could play a role in regulating memory. She pursued that question as an M.D. and Ph.D. student at Columbia University (while intending, at least initially, to become a physician). She found some answers in the California sea slug (Aplysia californica). In 2009, she and colleagues discovered a microRNA in the slug’s nerve cells that helps orchestrate the formation of memories that linger for at least 24 hours. © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2015.
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 21434 - Posted: 09.23.2015
Rachel Ehrenberg If not for a broken piece of lab equipment and a college crush, Steve Ramirez might never have gone into neuroscience. As an undergraduate at Boston University his interests were all over the place: He was taking a humanities course and classes in philosophy and biochemistry while working several hours a week in a biology lab. When the lab’s centrifuge, a device that spins liquids, broke, Ramirez had to use one in another lab. “I was trying to make small talk with this girl who was using the centrifuge, ‘What’s your major?’ kind of thing,” Ramirez recalls. Hearing of his myriad interests, the student suggested that Ramirez talk with neuroscientist Paul Lipton. That led to a conversation with Howard Eichenbaum, a leading memory researcher. Eichenbaum told him that everything Ramirez was interested in was about the brain. “Everything from the pyramids to putting a man on the moon, it’s all the product of the human brain, which is kind of crazy when you think about it,” Ramirez says. Studying “the most interdisciplinary organ in existence,” as Ramirez calls it, was a natural fit. While working in Eichenbaum’s lab, Ramirez got turned on to how the brain forms memories. Those explorations led to a Ph.D. program at MIT in the lab of Nobel laureate Susumu Tonegawa, where Ramirez focused on the individual brain cells that hold specific memories. © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2015.
By Virginia Morell Standing 2 meters tall and weighing as much as 1000 kilograms, European bison (Bison bonasus) are impressive animals. These cousins of the American bison—nearly driven to extinction in the last century—are being reintroduced in small herds across Europe, leading some farmers and forest managers to worry that the large herbivores will destroy their habitat. To better understand how the bison decide when and where to move, scientists studied a herd of 43 individuals in the Reserve Biologique des Monts-d’Azur in the Alpes-Maritimes region of France. They recorded the animals’ movements for 4 hours daily, identifying leaders, what type of action led others to follow, and where the herd moved. The herd wasn’t guided by a single leader, the scientists report in the November issue of Animal Behaviour. Instead, any individual regardless of sex or age could prompt the group to move, although most decisions were made by adult females—as is the case with most ungulates. A bison shows that it plans to change its location by taking at least 20 steps without stopping or lowering its head to graze. A potential leader was most likely to be followed if it walked in the direction that most of the others were facing—suggesting that bison vote with their feet. The researchers suspect that most leaders are adult females because they require higher quality food when lactating or pregnant. Wildlife managers can use this research to reduce human-bison conflicts, the scientists say. They need only identify a herd’s leaders, fit them with GPS collars, and install a virtual fence of alarms and electrical shocks. It should then be possible to control the leaders’ movements—and, thus, those of the entire herd.
Keyword: Sexual Behavior
Link ID: 21432 - Posted: 09.23.2015
David Cyranoski A dispute has broken out at two of China’s most prestigious universities over a potentially groundbreaking discovery: the identification of a protein that may allow organisms to sense magnetic fields. On 14 September, Zhang Sheng-jia, a neuroscientist at Tsinghua University in Beijing, and his colleagues published a paper1 in Science Bulletin claiming to use magnetic fields to remotely control neurons and muscle cells in worms, by employing a particular magnetism-sensing protein. But Xie Can, a biophysicist at neighbouring Peking University, says that Zhang’s publication draws on a discovery made in his laboratory, currently under review for publication, and violates a collaboration agreement the two had reached. Administrators at Tsinghua and Peking universities, siding with Xie, have jointly requested that the journal retract Zhang’s paper, and Tsinghua has launched an investigation into Zhang’s actions. The dispute revolves around an answer to the mystery of how organisms as diverse as worms, butterflies, sea turtles and wolves are capable of sensing Earth’s magnetic field to help them navigate. Researchers have postulated that structures in biological cells must be responsible, and dubbed these structures magnetoreceptors. But they have never been found. In research starting in 2009, Xie says that he used a painstaking whole-genome screen to identify a protein containing iron and sulfur that seems, according to his experiments, to have the properties of a magnetoreceptor. He called it MagR, to note its purported properties, and has since been examining its function and structure to determine how it senses magnetic fields. © 2015 Nature Publishing Group,
Keyword: Animal Migration
Link ID: 21431 - Posted: 09.22.2015
Claudia Dreifus Cornelia Bargmann, a neurobiologist at Rockefeller University in New York, studies how genes interact with neurons to create behavior. Two years ago, President Obama named Dr. Bargmann, who is known as Cori, a co-chairwoman of the advisory commission for the Brain Initiative, which he has described as “giving scientists the tools they need to get a dynamic picture of the brain in action.” I spoke with Dr. Bargmann, 53, for two hours at the Manhattan apartment she shares with her husband, Dr. Richard Axel, a neuroscientist at Columbia University. Our interview has been edited and condensed. Q. As an M.I.T. graduate student, you made a discovery that ultimately led to the breast cancer drug Herceptin. How did it happen? A. What I did was discover a mutated gene that triggered an obscure cancer in rats. Afterwards, it was discovered — by others — that this same gene is also altered in human breast cancers. Since our work in the rat cancer showed that the immune system could attack the product of this gene, Genentech developed a way to deploy the immune system. That’s Herceptin. It is an antibody against the gene that sits on the surface of a cancer cell. It can attack the cancer cell growing because of that gene. Currently, you spend your time trying to understand the nervous system of a tiny worm, C. elegans. Why do you study this worm? Well, the reason is this: Understanding the human brain is a great and complex problem. To solve the brain’s mysteries, you often have to break a problem down to a simpler form. Your brain has 86 billion nerve cells, and in any mental process, millions of them are engaged. Information is sweeping across these millions of neurons. With present technology, it’s impossible to study that process at the level of detail and speed you would want. © 2015 The New York Times Company
by Laura Sanders Like every other person who carries around a smartphone, I take a lot of pictures, mostly of my kids. I thought I was bad with a few thousand snaps filling my phone’s memory. But then I talked to MIT researcher Deb Roy. For three years, Roy and a small group of researchers recorded every waking moment of Roy’s son’s life at home, amassing over 200,000 hours of video and audio recordings. Roy’s intention wasn’t to prove he was the proudest parent of all time. Instead, he wanted to study how babies learn to say words. As a communication and machine learning expert, Roy and his wife Rupal Patel, also a speech researcher, recognized that having a child would be a golden research opportunity. The idea to amass this gigantic dataset “was kicking around and something we thought about for years,” Roy says. So after a pregnancy announcement and lots of talking and planning and “fascinating conversations” with the university administration in charge of approving human experiments, the researchers decided to go for it. To the delight of his parents, a baby boy arrived in 2005. When Roy and Patel brought their newborn home, the happy family was greeted by 11 cameras and 14 microphones, tucked up into the ceiling. From that point on, cameras rolled whenever the baby was awake. © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2015
Steve Connor A painkiller widely used to treat rheumatoid arthritis has been shown to reverse the symptoms of dementia in the brains of laboratory mice, raising hope that there may soon be an effective treatment for Alzheimer’s disease, scientists have said. The drug, salsalate, is a licensed pain killer but in mice with a form of dementia similar to Alzheimer’s it reversed the changes to a key protein in the brain that builds up in patients with the debilitating neurological disease, they found. The researchers said it is the first time any drug has been shown to have an effect on the “tau” protein that accumulates in the brain of people with Alzheimer’s and a range of similar dementias known as “tauopathies”. It could lead to an effective therapy even for patients in the later stages of disease, the researchers said. “We identified for the first time a pharmacological approach that reverses all aspects of tau toxicity," said Li Gan, PhD of the Gladstone Institutes, a non-profit research organisation affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco. “Remarkably, the profound protective effects of salsalate were achieved even though it was administered after disease onset, indicating that it may be an effective treatment option,” said Dr Gan a senior co-author of the study published in the journal Nature Medicine. As many as 800,000 people in Britain are already affected by Alzheimer’s disease and a new study has suggested that as many as one in three babies born this year will get dementia in their lifetime, largely as a result of people living longer. Age is the biggest risk factor for the disease. © independent.co.uk
Link ID: 21428 - Posted: 09.22.2015
By John Pavlus The “brain in a vat” has long been a staple of philosophical thought experiments and science fiction. Now scientists are one step closer to creating the real thing, which could enable groundbreaking experiments of a much more empirical kind. Research teams at Stanford University and the RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology in Japan have each discovered methods for coaxing human stem cells to form three-dimensional neural structures that display activity associated with that of an adult brain. By applying a variety of chemical growth factors, the RIKEN researchers transformed human embryonic stem cells into neurons that self-organized in patterns unique to the cerebellum, a region of the brain that coordinates movement. The Stanford team worked with induced pluripotent stem cells derived from skin cells and chemically nudged them to become neurons that spontaneously wired up into networks of 3-D circuits, much like the ones found in the cerebral cortex—the wrinkled gray matter of the brain that supports attention, memory and self-awareness in humans. “For years people have used mouse embryonic stem cells to generate teratomas—things that look like they could be organs,” says David Panchision, a neuroscientist at the National Institutes of Health, which supported the Stanford research. “But it's not organized and systematic, the way a developing brain needs to be to function.” In contrast, the Stanford team's neural structures not only self-assembled as cortexlike tissue, the neurons also sent signals to one another in coordinated patterns—just as they would in a brain. The cerebellar tissue generated by the Japanese scientists did, too. © 2015 Scientific American
Keyword: Development of the Brain
Link ID: 21427 - Posted: 09.21.2015
By MATTHEW HUTSON ANGER is a primal and destructive emotion, disrupting rational discourse and inflaming illogical passions — or so it often seems. Then again, anger also has its upsides. Expressing anger, for example, is known to be a useful tool in negotiations. Indeed, in the past few years, researchers have been learning more about when and how to deploy anger productively. Consider a forthcoming paper in the November issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Researchers tested the effectiveness of expressing anger in three types of negotiations: those that are chiefly cooperative (say, starting a business with a partner), chiefly competitive (dissolving a shared business) or balanced between the two (selling a business to a buyer). In two experiments, negotiators made greater concessions to those who expressed anger — but only in balanced situations. When cooperating, hostility seems inappropriate, and when competing, additional heat only flares tempers. But in between, anger appears to send a strategically useful signal. What does that signal communicate? According to a 2009 paper in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, anger evolved to help us express that we feel undervalued. Showing anger signals to others that if we don’t get our due, we’ll exert harm or withhold benefits. As they anticipated, the researchers found that strong men and attractive women — those who have historically had the most leverage in threatening harm and conferring benefits, respectively — were most prone to anger. The usefulness of anger in extracting better treatment from others seems to be something we all implicitly understand. A 2013 paper in the journal Cognition and Emotion found that when people were preparing to enter a confrontational negotiation, as opposed to a cooperative one, they took steps to induce anger in themselves (choosing to listen to aggressive versus happy music, for example). © 2015 The New York Times Company
Link ID: 21426 - Posted: 09.21.2015
William Sutcliffe Most epidemics are the result of a contagious disease. ADHD – Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder – is not contagious, and it may not even be a genuine malady, but it has acquired the characteristics of an epidemic. New data has revealed that UK prescriptions for Ritalin and other similar ADHD medications have more than doubled in the last decade, from 359,100 in 2004 to 922,200 last year. In America, the disorder is now the second most frequent long-term diagnosis made in children, narrowly trailing asthma. It generates pharmaceutical sales worth $9bn (£5.7bn) per year. Yet clinical proof of ADHD as a genuine illness has never been found. Sami Timimi, consultant child psychiatrist at Lincolnshire NHS Trust and visiting professor of child psychiatry, is a vocal critic of the Ritalin-friendly orthodoxy within the NHS. While he is at pains to stress that he is “not saying those who have the diagnosis don’t have any problem”, he is adamant that “there is no robust evidence to demonstrate that what we call ADHD correlates with any known biological or neurological abnormality”. The hyperactivity, inattentiveness and lack of impulse control that are at the heart of an ADHD diagnosis are, according to Timimi, simply “a collection of behaviours”. Any psychiatrist who claims that a behaviour is being caused by ADHD is perpetrating a “philosophical tautology” – he is doing nothing more than telling you that hyperactivity is caused by an alternative name for hyperactivity. There is still no diagnostic test – no marker in the body – that can identify a person with ADHD. The results of more than 40 brain scan studies are described by Timimi as “consistently inconsistent”. No conclusive pattern in brain activity had been found to explain or identify ADHD. © independent.co.uk
Link ID: 21425 - Posted: 09.21.2015
By Michael Balter Are some animals smarter than others? It’s hard to say, because you can’t sit a chimpanzee or a mouse down at a table for an IQ test. But a new study, in which scientists tested wild robins on a variety of skills, concludes that they do differ in the kind of “general intelligence” that IQ tests are supposed to measure. General intelligence is usually defined as the ability to do well on multiple cognitive tasks, from math skills to problem solving. For years, researchers have questioned whether measurable differences exist in humans and nonhumans alike. In humans, factors like education and socioeconomic status can affect performance. When it comes to animals, the problem is compounded for two main reasons: First, it is very difficult to design and administer tests that pick up on overall smarts instead of specific skills, such as the keen memories of food-hoarding birds or the fine motor skills of chimpanzees that make tools for finding insects in trees. Second, differences in animal test scores can depend on how motivated they are to perform. Because most experiments award would-be test-takers with food, an empty (or a full) stomach might be all it takes to skew the results. Thus, even studies that suggest variations in intelligence among mice, birds, and apes all carry the caveat that alternative explanations could be at play. To get around some of these limitations, a team led by Rachael Shaw, an animal behavior researcher at Victoria University of Wellington, turned to a population of New Zealand North Island robins for a new round of experiments. The robins live at the Zealandia wildlife sanctuary, a 225-hectare nature paradise in Wellington where more than 700 of the birds live wild and protected from predators in the middle of the city. © 2015 American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Mo Costandi The human brain is often said to be the most complex object in the known universe, and there’s good reason to believe that this old cliché is true. Even the apparently simple task of compiling a census of the different types of cells it contains has proven to be extremely difficult. Researchers still can’t agree on the best way to classify the numerous sub-types of neurons, and different methods produce different results, so estimates range from several hundred to over a thousand. Basket cells illustrate this neuronal identity crisis perfectly. They are currently sub-divided into multiple different types, according to their shape, electrical properties, and molecular profiles. After nearly ten years of detective work, researchers at King’s College London now reveal them to be masters of disguise. In a surprising new study, they show that these cells can dynamically switch from one identity to another in response to neuronal network activity. Basket cells are a type of interneuron, which are found scattered throughout the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, and cerebellum, and make up about 5% of the total number of cells in these brain regions. They form local circuits with each other and with pyramidal neurons, the much larger and more numerous cells that transmit information to distant parts of the brain, and synthesize the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA, which dampens pyramidal cell activity when released. These enigmatic cells are thought to exist in more than twenty different types, the best known being the fast-spiking ones, which respond rapidly to incoming signals, and slower ones, which respond after a delay. During brain development, immature forms of all types of basket cells are created in a structure called the medial ganglionic eminence, along with various other types of brain cells. They then migrate into the developing cerebral cortex, before going on to form synaptic connections with other cells. © 2015 Guardian News and Media Limited
Keyword: Development of the Brain
Link ID: 21423 - Posted: 09.20.2015
By BENEDICT CAREY Fourteen years ago, a leading drug maker published a study showing that the antidepressant Paxil was safe and effective for teenagers. On Wednesday, a major medical journal posted a new analysis of the same data concluding that the opposite is true. That study — featured prominently by the journal BMJ — is a clear break from scientific custom and reflects a new era in scientific publishing, some experts said, opening the way for journals to post multiple interpretations of the same experiment. It comes at a time of self-examination across science — retractions are at an all-time high; recent cases of fraud have shaken fields as diverse as anesthesia and political science; and earlier this month researchers reported that less than half of a sample of psychology papers held up. “This paper is alarming, but its existence is a good thing,” said Brian Nosek, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, who was not involved in either the original study or the reanalysis. “It signals that the community is waking up, checking its work and doing what science is supposed to do — self-correct.” The authors of the reanalysis said that many clinical studies had some of the same issues as the original Paxil study, and that data should be made freely available across clinical medicine, so that multiple parties could analyze them. The dispute itself is a long-running one: Questions surrounding the 2001 study played a central role in the so-called antidepressant wars of the early 2000s, which led to strong warnings on the labels of Paxil and similar drugs citing the potential suicide risk for children, adolescents and young adults. The drugs are considered beneficial and less risky for many adults over 25 with depression. © 2015 The New York Times Company
We all have our favourite movie moments, ones we love to watch again from time to time. Now it seems chimpanzees and bonobos, too, have the nous to recall thrilling scenes in movies they have previously seen and anticipate when they are about to come up. The results suggest apes can readily recall and anticipate significant recent events, just by watching those events once. Rather than use hidden food as a memory test, Japanese researchers made short movies and showed them to apes on two consecutive days. “We showed a movie instead, and asked whether they remember it when they only watch an event once, and an event totally new to them,” says Fumihiro Kano of Kyoto University in Japan. “Their anticipatory glances told us that they did.” Plot moment Kano and his colleague Satoshi Hirata made and starred in two short films. Another of the characters was a human dressed up as an ape in a King Kong costume who carried out attacks on people, providing the key plot moment in the first movie (see video). Both films were designed to contain memorable dramatic events, and the researchers deployed laser eye-tracking technology to see if the animals preferentially noticed and remembered these moments. © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 21421 - Posted: 09.20.2015