Chapter 13. Memory, Learning, and Development
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, or subscribe to our mailing list, to receive news updates. Learn more.
By RUTH PADAWER At first, everything about L.'s baby boy seemed normal. He met every developmental milestone and delighted in every discovery. But at around 12 months, B. seemed to regress, and by age 2, he had fully retreated into his own world. He no longer made eye contact, no longer seemed to hear, no longer seemed to understand the random words he sometimes spoke. His easygoing manner gave way to tantrums and head-banging. “He had been this happy, happy little guy,” L. said. “All of a sudden, he was just fading away, falling apart. I can’t even describe my sadness. It was unbearable.” More than anything in the world, L. wanted her warm and exuberant boy back. A few months later, B. received a diagnosis of autism. His parents were devastated. Soon after, L. attended a conference in Newport, R.I., filled with autism clinicians, researchers and a few desperate parents. At lunch, L. (who asked me to use initials to protect her son’s privacy) sat across from a woman named Jackie, who recounted the disappearance of her own boy. She said the speech therapist had waved it off, blaming ear infections and predicting that Jackie’s son, Matthew, would be fine. She was wrong. Within months, Matthew acknowledged no one, not even his parents. The last word he had was “Mama,” and by the time Jackie met L., even that was gone. In the months and years that followed, the two women spent hours on the phone and at each other’s homes on the East Coast, sharing their fears and frustrations and swapping treatment ideas, comforted to be going through each step with someone who experienced the same terror and confusion. When I met with them in February, they told me about all the treatments they had tried in the 1990s: sensory integration, megadose vitamins, therapeutic horseback riding, a vile-tasting powder from a psychologist who claimed that supplements treated autism. None of it helped either boy. Together the women considered applied behavior analysis, or A.B.A. — a therapy, much debated at the time, that broke down every quotidian action into tiny, learnable steps, acquired through memorization and endless repetition; they rejected it, afraid it would turn their sons into robots. But just before B. turned 3, L. and her husband read a new book by a mother claiming that she used A.B.A. on her two children and that they “recovered” from autism. © 2014 The New York Times Company
Link ID: 19913 - Posted: 08.02.2014
By Fredrick Kunkle The way older people walk may provide a reliable clue about how well their brain is aging and could eventually allow doctors to determine whether they are at risk of Alzheimer’s, researchers have found. The study, involving thousands of older people in several countries, suggests that those whose walking pace begins to slow and who also have cognitive complaints are more than twice as likely to develop dementia within 12 years. The findings are among the latest attempts to find and develop affordable, inexpensive diagnostic tools to determine whether a person is at risk for dementia. Last month, researchers attending the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference in Copenhagen presented several studies focused on locating biomarkers of dementia in its earliest stages. Among other things, scientists reported a connection between dementia and sense of smell that suggested a common scratch-and-sniff test could be used to help identify onset of dementia, while other researchers suggested that eye scans could also be useful someday be able to detect Alzheimer’s. Different studies found a new abnormal protein linked to Alzheimer’s and a possible link between sleep disorders and the onset of dementia. Now, researchers at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University and Montefiore Medical Center say that a simple test to measure a patient’s cognitive abilities and walking speed could provide a new diagnostic tool to identify people at risk for dementia. It could be especially important tool in low- and middle-income countries with less access to sophisticated and costly technology, the scientists said.
Link ID: 19910 - Posted: 08.02.2014
By PAULA SPAN Call me nuts, but I want to talk more about sleeping pill use. Hold your fire for a few paragraphs, please. Just a week after I posted here about medical efforts to help wean older patients off sleeping pills — causing a flurry of comments, many taking exception to the whole idea as condescending or dismissive of the miseries of insomnia — researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Johns Hopkins published findings that reinforce concerns about these drugs. I say “reinforce” because geriatricians and other physicians have fretted for years about the use of sedative-hypnotic medications, including benzodiazepines (like Ativan, Klonopin, Xanax and Valium) and the related “Z-drugs” (like Ambien) for treating insomnia. “I’m not comfortable writing a prescription for these medications,” said Dr. Cara Tannenbaum, the geriatrician at the University of Montreal who led the weaning study. “I haven’t prescribed a sedative-hypnotic in 15 years.” In 2013, the American Geriatrics Society put sedative-hypnotics on its first Choosing Wisely campaign list of “Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question,” citing heightened fall and fracture risks and automobile accidents in older patients who took them. Now the C.D.C. has reported that a high number of emergency room visits are associated with psychiatric medications in general, and zolpidem — Ambien — in particular. They’re implicated in 90,000 adult E.R. visits annually because of adverse reactions, the study found; more than 19 percent of those visits result in hospital admissions. Among those taking sedatives and anxiety-reducing drugs, “a lot of visits were because people were too sleepy or hard to arouse, or confused,” said the lead author, Dr. Lee Hampton, a medical officer at the C.D.C. “And there were also a lot of falls.” © 2014 The New York Times Company
|By Annie Sneed It's easy to recall events of decades past—birthdays, high school graduations, visits to Grandma—yet who can remember being a baby? Researchers have tried for more than a century to identify the cause of “infantile amnesia.” Sigmund Freud blamed it on repression of early sexual experiences, an idea that has been discredited. More recently, researchers have attributed it to a child's lack of self-perception, language or other mental equipment required to encode memories. Neuroscientists Paul Frankland and Sheena Josselyn, both at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, do not think linguistics or a sense of self offers a good explanation, either. It so happens that humans are not the only animals that experience infantile amnesia. Mice and monkeys also forget their early childhood. To account for the similarities, Frankland and Josselyn have another theory: the rapid birth of many new neurons in a young brain blocks access to old memories. In a new experiment, the scientists manipulated the rate at which hippocampal neurons grew in young and adult mice. The hippocampus is the region in the brain that records autobiographical events. The young mice with slowed neuron growth had better long-term memory. Conversely, the older mice with increased rates of neuron formation had memory loss. Based on these results, published in May in the journal Science, Frankland and Josselyn think that rapid neuron growth during early childhood disrupts the brain circuitry that stores old memories, making them inaccessible. Young children also have an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex, another region of the brain that encodes memories, so infantile amnesia may be a combination of these two factors. © 2014 Scientific American
|By Jillian Rose Lim and LiveScience People who don't get enough sleep could be increasing their risk of developing false memories, a new study finds. In the study, when researchers compared the memory of people who'd had a good night's sleep with the memory of those who hadn't slept at all, they found that, under certain conditions, sleep-deprived individuals mix fact with imagination, embellish events and even "remember" things that never actually happened. False memories occur when people's brains distort how they remember a past event — whether it's what they did after work, how a painful relationship ended or what they witnessed at a crime scene. Memory is not an exact recording of past events, said Steven Frenda, a psychology Ph.D. student at the University of California, Irvine, who was involved in the study. Rather, fresh memories are constructed each time people mentally revisit a past event. During this process, people draw from multiple sources — like what they've been told by others, what they've seen in photographs or what they know as stereotypes or expectations, Frenda said. The new findings "have implications for people's everyday lives —recalling information for an exam, or in work contexts, but also for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced periods of restricted or deprived sleep," said Frenda, who noted that chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise. In a previous study, Frenda and his colleagues observed that people with restricted sleep (less than 5 hours a night) were more likely to incorporate misinformation into their memories of certain photos, and report they had seen video footage of a news event that didn't happen. In the current study, they wanted to see how a complete lack of sleep for 24 hours could influence a person's memory. © 2014 Scientific American
By DOUGLAS QUENQUA Like Pavlov’s dogs, most organisms can learn to associate two events that usually occur together. Now, a team of researchers says they have identified a gene that enables such learning. The scientists, at the University of Tokyo, found that worms could learn to avoid unpleasant situations as long as a specific insulin receptor remained intact. Roundworms were exposed to different concentrations of salt; some received food during the initial exposure, others did not. Later, when exposed to various concentrations of salt again, the roundworms that had been fed during the first stage gravitated toward their initial salt concentrations, while those that had been starved avoided them. But the results changed when the researchers repeated the experiment using worms with a defect in a particular receptor for insulin, a protein crucial to metabolism. Those worms could not learn to avoid the salt concentrations associated with starvation. “We looked for different forms of the receptor and found that a new one, which we named DAF-2c, functions in taste-aversion learning,” said Masahiro Tomioka, a geneticist at the University of Tokyo and an author of the study, which was published in the journal Science. “It turned out that only this form of the receptor can support learning” in roundworms. While human insulin receptors bear some resemblance to those of a roundworm, more study is needed to determine if it plays a similar role in memory and decision-making, Dr. Tomioka said. But studies have suggested a link between insulin levels and Alzheimer’s disease in humans. © 2014 The New York Times Company
Sara Reardon Broad population studies are shedding light on the genetic causes of mental disorders. Researchers seeking to unpick the complex genetic basis of mental disorders such as schizophrenia have taken a huge step towards their goal. A paper1 published in Nature this week ties 108 genetic locations to schizophrenia — most for the first time. The encouraging results come on the same day as a US$650-million donation to expand research into psychiatric conditions. Philanthropist Ted Stanley gave the money to the Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The institute describes the gift as the largest-ever donation for psychiatric research. “The assurance of a very long life of the centre allows us to take on ambitious long-term projects and intellectual risks,” says its director, Steven Hyman. The centre will use the money to fund genetic studies as well as investigations into the biological pathways involved in conditions such as schizophrenia, autism and bipolar disorder. The research effort will also seek better animal and cell models for mental disorders, and will investigate chemicals that might be developed into drugs. The Nature paper1 was produced by the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) — a collaboration of more than 80 institutions, including the Broad Institute. Hundreds of researchers from the PGC pooled samples from more than 150,000 people, of whom 36,989 had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. This enormous sample size enabled them to spot 108 genetic locations, or loci, where the DNA sequence in people with schizophrenia tends to differ from the sequence in people without the disease. “This paper is in some ways proof that genomics can succeed,” Hyman says. © 2014 Nature Publishing Group
Most of the genetic risk for autism comes from versions of genes that are common in the population rather than from rare variants or spontaneous glitches, researchers funded by the National Institutes of Health have found. Heritability also outweighed other risk factors in this largest study of its kind to date. About 52 percent of the risk for autism was traced to common and rare inherited variation, with spontaneous mutations contributing a modest 2.6 percent of the total risk. “Genetic variation likely accounts for roughly 60 percent of the liability for autism, with common variants comprising the bulk of its genetic architecture,” explained Joseph Buxbaum, Ph.D., of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS), New York City. “Although each exerts just a tiny effect individually, these common variations in the genetic code add up to substantial impact, taken together.” Buxbaum, and colleagues of the Population-Based Autism Genetics and Environment Study (PAGES) Consortium, report on their findings in a unique Swedish sample in the journal Nature Genetics, July 20, 2014. “Thanks to the boost in statistical power that comes with ample sample size, autism geneticists can now detect common as well as rare genetic variation associated with risk,” said Thomas R. Insel, M.D., director of the NIH’s National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). “Knowing the nature of the genetic risk will reveal clues to the molecular roots of the disorder. Common variation may be more important than we thought.”
By HENRY L. ROEDIGER III TESTS have a bad reputation in education circles these days: They take time, the critics say, put students under pressure and, in the case of standardized testing, crowd out other educational priorities. But the truth is that, used properly, testing as part of an educational routine provides an important tool not just to measure learning, but to promote it. In one study I published with Jeffrey D. Karpicke, a psychologist at Purdue, we assessed how well students remembered material they had read. After an initial reading, students were tested on some passages by being given a blank sheet of paper and asked to recall as much as possible. They recalled about 70 percent of the ideas. Other passages were not tested but were reread, and thus 100 percent of the ideas were re-exposed. In final tests given either two days or a week later, the passages that had been tested just after reading were remembered much better than those that had been reread. What’s at work here? When students are tested, they are required to retrieve knowledge from memory. Much educational activity, such as lectures and textbook readings, is aimed at helping students acquire and store knowledge. Various kinds of testing, though, when used appropriately, encourage students to practice the valuable skill of retrieving and using knowledge. The fact of improved retention after a quiz — called the testing effect or the retrieval practice effect — makes the learning stronger and embeds it more securely in memory. This is vital, because many studies reveal that much of what we learn is quickly forgotten. Thus a central challenge to learning is finding a way to stem forgetting. © 2014 The New York Times Company
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 19861 - Posted: 07.21.2014
By Meeri Kim Babies start with simple vowel sounds — oohs and aahs. A mere months later, the cooing turns into babbling — “bababa” — showing off a newfound grasp of consonants. A new study has found that a key part of the brain involved in forming speech is firing away in babies as they listen to voices around them. This may represent a sort of mental rehearsal leading up to the true milestone that occurs after only a year of life: baby’s first words. Any parent knows how fast babies learn how to comprehend and use language. The skill develops so rapidly and seemingly without much effort, but how do they do it? Researchers at the University of Washington are a step closer to unraveling the mystery of how babies learn how to speak. They had a group of 7- and 11-month-old infants listen to a series of syllables while sitting in a brain scanner. Not only did the auditory areas of their brains light up as expected but so did a region crucial to forming higher-level speech, called Broca’s area. A year-old baby sits in a brain scanner, called magnetoencephalography -- a noninvasive approach to measuring brain activity. The baby listens to speech sounds like "da" and "ta" played over headphones while researchers record her brain responses. (Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences, University of Washington) These findings may suggest that even before babies utter their first words, they may be mentally exercising the pivotal parts of their brains in preparation. Study author and neuroscientist Patricia Kuhl says that her results reinforce the belief that talking and reading to babies from birth is beneficial for their language development, along with exaggerated speech and mouth movements (“Hiii cuuutie! How are youuuuu?”). © 1996-2014 The Washington Post
Tania Browne As a teenager, I lost my grandfather. But he wasn't dead. He still had his favourite music, he still loved to walk in the woods and name the flowers and plants, and he loved his soap operas. He was alive, but gone. A dignified man, a former aircraft engineer and oil company salesman, reduced to the status of a bewildered toddler lost in a shopping centre. When he died, our family felt an odd mix of relief, then guilt at the relief. The man we loved had left his body years before the body gave out. This was 30 years ago. But while a cure is still far away, two new techniques may at least be able to forewarn us of dementia, and allow us to plan treatment for ourselves or loved ones before any outward symptoms are apparent. According to Alzheimer's Research UK, my experience is currently shared by 24m relatives and close friends of the 800 000 diagnosed dementia sufferers in the UK. In December last year, a G8 summit was told by Alzheimer's Disease International that the worldwide figure was 44m and set to treble by 2050, as the life expectancy of people in middle and lower income countries soars – precisely the countries who have either depleted or non-existent healthcare systems. Dementia is a serious time bomb. “Dementia” covers about 100 conditions, all resulting from large scale brain cell death. People often think that when they're diagnosed they're in the early stages. Yet cell death can be occurring for 10-15 years or more before any outward symptoms occur, and by the time they're diagnosed many dementia patients have already lost one fifth of their memory cells. © 2014 Guardian News and Media Limited
Link ID: 19856 - Posted: 07.21.2014
Emily A. Holmes, Michelle G. Craske & Ann M. Graybiel How does one human talking to another, as occurs in psychological therapy, bring about changes in brain activity and cure or ease mental disorders? We don't really know. We need to. Mental-health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), eating disorders, schizophrenia and depression, affect one in four people worldwide. Depression is the third leading contributor to the global burden of disease, according to the World Health Organization. Psychological treatments have been subjected to hundreds of randomized clinical trials and hold the strongest evidence base for addressing many such conditions. These activities, techniques or strategies target behavioural, cognitive, social, emotional or environmental factors to improve mental or physical health or related functioning. Despite the time and effort involved, they are the treatment of choice for most people (see ‘Treating trauma with talk therapy’). For example, eating disorders were previously considered intractable within our life time. They can now be addressed with a specific form of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)1 that targets attitudes to body shape and disturbances in eating habits. For depression, CBT can be as effective as antidepressant medication and provide benefits that are longer lasting2. There is also evidence that interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is effective for treating depression. Ian was filling his car with petrol and was caught in the cross-fire of an armed robbery. His daughter was severely injured. For the following decade Ian suffered nightmares, intrusive memories, flashbacks of the trauma and was reluctant to drive — symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). © 2014 Nature Publishing Group,
By Emily Anthes The women that come to see Deane Aikins, a clinical psychologist at Wayne State University, in Detroit, are searching for a way to leave their traumas behind them. Veterans in their late 20s and 30s, they served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Technically, they’d been in non-combat positions, but that didn’t eliminate the dangers of warfare. Mortars and rockets were an ever-present threat on their bases, and they learned to sleep lightly so as not to miss alarms signaling late-night attacks. Some of the women drove convoys of supplies across the desert. It was a job that involved worrying about whether a bump in the road was an improvised explosive device, or if civilians in their path were strategic human roadblocks. On top of all that, some of the women had been sexually assaulted by their military colleagues. After one woman was raped, she helped her drunk assailant sneak back into his barracks because she worried that if they were caught, she’d be disciplined or lose her job. These traumas followed the women home. Today, far from the battlefield, they find themselves struggling with vivid flashbacks and nightmares, tucking their guns under their pillows at night. Some have turned to alcohol to manage their symptoms; others have developed exhausting routines to avoid any people or places that might trigger painful memories and cause them to re-live their experiences in excruciating detail. © 2014 Nautilus,
Fearful memories can be dampened by imagining past traumas in a safe setting. The "extinction" of fear is fragile, however, and surprising or unexpected events can cause fear memories to return. Inactivating brain areas that detect novelty prevents relapse of unwanted fear memories. Traumatic and emotional experiences often lead to debilitating mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In the clinic, it is typical to use behavioral therapies such as exposure therapy to help reduce fear in patients suffering from traumatic memories. Using these approaches, patients are asked to remember the circumstances and stimuli surrounding their traumatic memory in a safe setting in order to "extinguish" their fear response to those events. While effective in many cases, the loss of fear and anxiety achieved by these therapies is often short-lived—fear returns or relapses under a variety of conditions. Many years ago, the famous Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov noted that simply exposing animals to novel or unexpected events could cause extinguished responses (such as salivary responses to sounds) to return. Might exposure to novelty also cause extinguished fear responses to return? In a recent study (Maren, 2014), rats first learned that an innocuous tone predicted an aversive (but mild) electric shock to their feet. The subsequent fear response to the tone was then extinguished by presenting the stimulus to the animals many times without the shock. After the fear response to the tone was reduced with the extinction procedure, they were then presented with the tone in either a new location (a novel test box) or in a familiar location, but in the presence of an unexpected sound (a noise burst). In both cases, fear to the tone returned as Pavlov predicted: the unexpected places and sounds led to a disinhibition of fear—in other words, fear relapsed. © 2014 Publiscize
Obese women may have a "food learning impairment" that could explain their attitude to food, research from Yale School of Medicine suggests. Tests on groups of obese and healthy-weight people found that the obese women performed worst when asked to remember a sequence of food picture cards. Writing in Current Biology, Yale researchers tested 135 men and women. The findings could lead to new ways to tackle obesity, the study says. Study author Ifat Levy, assistant professor at Yale School of Medicine, said the difference in the performance of the obese women compared with the other groups was "really striking" and "significant". The tests looked at an individual's ability to learn and predict the appearance of pictures of food or money on coloured cards. The participants were told they would be given whatever appeared on these "reward" cards. In the first phase, the reward cards always followed a particular coloured card in a sequence. Later, the order was changed and the reward cards appeared following a different coloured card. During this time, participants were asked to predict the likelihood of a reward card appearing as the cards were shown one by one. The results showed that obese women performed worst because they overestimated how often the pictures of food, including pretzels or chocolate, appeared. Even after researchers had accounted for other factors, there was still a large difference in their learning performance. Prof Levy said: "This is not a general learning impairment, as obese women had no problem learning when the reward was money rather than food. BBC © 2014
Kelly Servick If you’re a bird enthusiast, you can pick out the “chick-a-DEE-dee” song of the Carolina chickadee with just a little practice. But if you’re an environmental scientist faced with parsing thousands of hours of recordings of birdsongs in the lab, you might want to enlist some help from your computer. A new approach to automatic classification of birdsong borrows techniques from human voice recognition software to sort through the sounds of hundreds of species and decides on its own which features make each one unique. Collectors of animal sounds are facing a data deluge. Thanks to cheap digital recording devices that can capture sound for days in the field, “it’s really, really easy to collect sound, but it’s really difficult to analyze it,” say Aaron Rice, a bioacoustics researcher at Cornell University, who was not involved in the new work. His lab has collected 6 million hours of underwater recordings, from which they hope to pick out the signature sounds of various marine mammals. Knowing where and when a certain species is vocalizing might help scientists understand habitat preferences, track their movements or population changes, and recognize when a species is disrupted by human development. But to keep these detailed records, researchers rely on software that can reliably sort through the cacophony they capture in the field. Typically, scientists build one computer program to recognize one species, and then start all over for another species, Rice says. Training a computer to recognize lots of species in one pass is “a challenge that we’re all facing.” © 2014 American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 19849 - Posted: 07.19.2014
|By Nidhi Subbaraman and SFARI.org A team at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, is set to launch a $40 million clinical trial to explore stem cells from umbilical cord blood as a treatment for autism. But experts caution that the trial is premature. A $15 million grant from the Marcus Foundation, a philanthropic funding organization based in Atlanta, will bankroll the first two years of the five-year trial, which also plans to test stem cell therapy for stroke and cerebral palsy. The autism arm of the trial aims to enroll 390 children and adults. Joanne Kurtzberg, the trial’s lead investigator, has extensive experience studying the effectiveness of cord blood transplants for treating various disorders, such as leukemia and sickle cell anemia. Most recently, she showed that cord blood transplants can improve the odds of survival for babies deprived of oxygen at birth. A randomized trial of the approach for this condition is underway. “To really sort out if [stem] cells can treat these children, we need to do randomized, controlled trials that are well designed and well controlled, and that’s what we intend to do,” says Kurtzberg, professor of pediatrics and pathology at Duke. “We firmly believe we should be moving ahead in the clinic.” Early animal studies have shown that stem cells isolated from umbilical cord blood can stimulate cells in the spinal cord to regrow their myelin layers, and in doing so help restore connections with surrounding cells. Autism is thought to result from impaired connectivity in the brain. Because of this, some groups of children with the disorder may benefit from a stem cell transplant, Kurtzberg says. © 2014 Scientific American
Associated Press The rate of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias is falling in the United States and some other rich countries - good news about an epidemic that is still growing simply because more people are living to an old age, new studies show. An American over age 60 today has a 44 percent lower chance of developing dementia than a similar-aged person did roughly 30 years ago, the longest study of these trends in the U.S. concluded. Dementia rates also are down in Germany, a study there found. "For an individual, the actual risk of dementia seems to have declined," probably because of more education and control of health factors such as cholesterol and blood pressure, said Dr. Kenneth Langa. He is a University of Michigan expert on aging who discussed the studies Tuesday at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference in Copenhagen. The opposite is occurring in some poor countries that have lagged on education and health, where dementia seems to be rising. More than 5.4 million Americans and 35 million people worldwide have Alzheimer's, the most common form of dementia. It has no cure, and current drugs only temporarily ease symptoms. A drop in rates is a silver lining in the so-called silver tsunami - the expected wave of age-related health problems from an older population. Alzheimer's will remain a major public health issue, but countries where rates are dropping may be able to lower current projections for spending and needed services, experts said. © 2014 Hearst Communications, Inc.
Link ID: 19838 - Posted: 07.16.2014
By PAULA SPAN What we really want, if we’re honest, is a pill or a shot that would allow us to stop worrying about ever sinking into dementia. Instead, what we’re hearing about preventing dementia is, in many ways, the same stuff we hear about preventing other kinds of illnesses. Healthy lifestyles. Behavioral modification. Stress reduction. At the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference in Copenhagen this week, researchers from Montefiore Medical Center and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine were among the scientists presenting findings that had little to do with amyloid in the brain and a lot to do with how people feel and act and cope with life. “A number of people have been interested in modifiable lifestyle factors for years,” said Richard Lipton, a neurologist at the college and director of the Einstein Aging Study, which has tracked cognition in elderly Bronx residents since the 1980s. But interest has increased lately, he said: “It’s at least in part a reflection of disappointing drug trials.” Medications have failed, over and over, to prevent or cure or substantially slow the ravages of dementing diseases. What else might help? Dr. Lipton and his colleagues, who monitor about 600 people aged 70 to 105, have been exploring the impact of stress. More specifically, they have been measuring “perceived stress,” a metric not so much about unpleasant things happening as how people respond to them. They use a scale based on the answers to 13 questions like, “In the past month, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems?” and “In the past month, how often have you felt difficulties were piling up so high you could not overcome them?” © 2014 The New York Times Company
Link ID: 19837 - Posted: 07.16.2014
By BENEDICT CAREY The 8-year-old juggling a soccer ball and the 48-year-old jogging by, with Japanese lessons ringing from her earbuds, have something fundamental in common: At some level, both are wondering whether their investment of time and effort is worth it. How good can I get? How much time will it take? Is it possible I’m a natural at this (for once)? What’s the percentage in this, exactly? Scientists have long argued over the relative contributions of practice and native talent to the development of elite performance. This debate swings back and forth every century, it seems, but a paper in the current issue of the journal Psychological Science illustrates where the discussion now stands and hints — more tantalizingly, for people who just want to do their best — at where the research will go next. The value-of-practice debate has reached a stalemate. In a landmark 1993 study of musicians, a research team led by K. Anders Ericsson, a psychologist now at Florida State University, found that practice time explained almost all the difference (about 80 percent) between elite performers and committed amateurs. The finding rippled quickly through the popular culture, perhaps most visibly as the apparent inspiration for the “10,000-hour rule” in Malcolm Gladwell’s best-selling “Outliers” — a rough average of the amount of practice time required for expert performance. Scientists begin to shed light on the placenta, an important organ that we rarely think of; virtual reality companies work out the kinks in their immersive worlds; research shows that practice may not be as important as once thought. The new paper, the most comprehensive review of relevant research to date, comes to a different conclusion. Compiling results from 88 studies across a wide range of skills, it estimates that practice time explains about 20 percent to 25 percent of the difference in performance in music, sports and games like chess. In academics, the number is much lower — 4 percent — in part because it’s hard to assess the effect of previous knowledge, the authors wrote. © 2014 The New York Times Company
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 19835 - Posted: 07.15.2014