While thinking about what to write for this blog I thought, "Hey, why not write about something you know plenty about!" So that is what I'm going to do.
Insulin: what is it, what does it do, and what is its role in diabetes?
When we eat carbohydrates, they are eventually converted into a simple sugar, glucose, which is used for energy. Insulin is a hormone secreted by the pancreas that breaks down glucose, which in excess would be toxic to the body. Insulin allows the excess glucose to absorb into the liver and muscle cells which then use it for energy, the muscle energy we use for hard exercise.
I remember a couple summers ago, Camp Darom spent the Fourth of July with Henry S. Jacobs Camp, a Reform Jewish summer camp. While were there we had a musical guest. I can't remember his name, but I do remember him singing a song about a cranky pancreas (don't ask me why, I have no idea) and my brother, Ethan, turning to me and remarking, "Well, I definitely have a cranky pancreas."
And yes, he certainly does. Type 1 diabetes occurs when a person's pancreas produces very low levels of insulin or even stops making insulin altogether. (Type 2 diabetics are different in that, put simply, they still make insulin but their bodies don't properly absorb it). Type 1 diabetics must make up for the insulin that is not being produced by injecting it into their bodies themselves and monitoring their blood sugar level (normal levels are loosely around 70-140). Since carbs turn into glucose and glucose must be broken down by insulin, diabetics must keep track of how many carbs they are putting into their bodies and then calculate how much insulin is needed to break the carbs (glucose) down.
In simple terms, if a person injects too much insulin, their blood sugar levels become too low and can result in shakiness, change in emotions, and in extreme cases, loss of consciousness and even seizures. High blood sugar levels (resulting from too little insulin) are not as life threatening short term, but prolonged high blood sugar can result in increased risk of heart disease and stroke, kidney disease, vision problems, and nerve problems, problems usually found in older diabetics who never properly managed their diabetes.
As you can see, insulin is not only essential in controlling our hunger, but when it comes to diabetics, it is essential in keeping them alive and healthy.
Monday, January 13, 2014
What motivates behavior?
We learned a few different theories of what motivates behavior.
We learned about the instinct theory - which said that there's a fixed pattern throughout a species that is unlearned. It was saying that behavior is directed toward a goal found within ourselves.
We learned about the drive-reduction theory - that behavior's directed to maintain equilibrium and reach homeostasis.
We learned about the optimum level of arousal theory - that we seek optimum levels of arousal beyond fulfilling our basic needs - so much so that we'll even take risks to achieve it.
We learned about Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs pyramid - it explains what we focus our attention on. As soon as one level is attained, we go to the next level. It goes from physiological needs to security needs to social needs to esteem needs and finally to self actualizing needs.
Which one do you prefer? It's a pretty hard question when you think about it. You start to drift toward one theory and then you realize oh wait, no, this one makes more sense. And keep going til you've drifted from theory to theory to theory. But they all interact with one another and build on one another - similar to the other things we've seen in psychology.
The theories of things that motivate us: money, happiness, etc. all fall into these theories. I found a really cool and interesting video on youtube that explains what motivates us.
We learned about the instinct theory - which said that there's a fixed pattern throughout a species that is unlearned. It was saying that behavior is directed toward a goal found within ourselves.
We learned about the drive-reduction theory - that behavior's directed to maintain equilibrium and reach homeostasis.
We learned about the optimum level of arousal theory - that we seek optimum levels of arousal beyond fulfilling our basic needs - so much so that we'll even take risks to achieve it.
We learned about Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs pyramid - it explains what we focus our attention on. As soon as one level is attained, we go to the next level. It goes from physiological needs to security needs to social needs to esteem needs and finally to self actualizing needs.
Which one do you prefer? It's a pretty hard question when you think about it. You start to drift toward one theory and then you realize oh wait, no, this one makes more sense. And keep going til you've drifted from theory to theory to theory. But they all interact with one another and build on one another - similar to the other things we've seen in psychology.
The theories of things that motivate us: money, happiness, etc. all fall into these theories. I found a really cool and interesting video on youtube that explains what motivates us.
Which of the theories we learned about do you find within this video?
How Psychology can be Used as "Mind Control"
As we all have started realizing, knowing Psychology is so useful. We begin to see it in our everyday lives, and use it to evaluate our world more and more. However, what can happen when other powerful, influential people take this knowledge and use it against us? Consider this one example of how human nature can be used to make some people rich at the expense of others:
There is a theory of motivation similar to the Arousal theory, called the opponent-process theory of motivation. In sum, this theory is an explanation for addictive behaviors. It states that people tend to comfortably sit at a normal, baseline level. However, occasionally we do things that move us from this "happy medium" state. In this case, take for example the act of smoking a cigarette. A person might do this because they wish to feel a short-lived sense of pleasure. However, because of the opponent-process theory, the person would feel a need to return back to that baseline state. One example of this might be a heavy smoker realizing they need to curb their smoking habit because they feel too jittery. However, with addictive substances also comes withdrawal, which is an even more powerful urge that also moves us away from baseline. Because long-time smokers have become accustomed to the amount of nicotine in their system, their body adjusts and their baseline changes. So, a smoker may then feel off-baseline without a certain amount of nicotine in their system, they must continue to smoke to return to their "normal" levels. This is what leads addiction, and is why it makes quitting a hard habit so, well, hard. Not only are cigarettes and other harmful, yet addicting substances likeable, fun, and pleasing to a person, but they also become "necessary" over a high amount of exposure. This is where people with bad intentions and a desire for lots of money come in the picture. People who know that human bodies react like this use this knowledge to make substances addicting, which guarantees them more profit. Yet another catch to this already dismal issue is that, if left unchecked, a person's amount of addiction will continue to rise. A person that smokes one pack a day may eventually rise to two packs a day, and so forth. This type of "scientific research" is unfortunate, and yet widespread in this day in age. This highlights why knowledge of Psychology is so important- it can help you evaluate the issues that are out there in the world today, and avoid such risks.
There is a theory of motivation similar to the Arousal theory, called the opponent-process theory of motivation. In sum, this theory is an explanation for addictive behaviors. It states that people tend to comfortably sit at a normal, baseline level. However, occasionally we do things that move us from this "happy medium" state. In this case, take for example the act of smoking a cigarette. A person might do this because they wish to feel a short-lived sense of pleasure. However, because of the opponent-process theory, the person would feel a need to return back to that baseline state. One example of this might be a heavy smoker realizing they need to curb their smoking habit because they feel too jittery. However, with addictive substances also comes withdrawal, which is an even more powerful urge that also moves us away from baseline. Because long-time smokers have become accustomed to the amount of nicotine in their system, their body adjusts and their baseline changes. So, a smoker may then feel off-baseline without a certain amount of nicotine in their system, they must continue to smoke to return to their "normal" levels. This is what leads addiction, and is why it makes quitting a hard habit so, well, hard. Not only are cigarettes and other harmful, yet addicting substances likeable, fun, and pleasing to a person, but they also become "necessary" over a high amount of exposure. This is where people with bad intentions and a desire for lots of money come in the picture. People who know that human bodies react like this use this knowledge to make substances addicting, which guarantees them more profit. Yet another catch to this already dismal issue is that, if left unchecked, a person's amount of addiction will continue to rise. A person that smokes one pack a day may eventually rise to two packs a day, and so forth. This type of "scientific research" is unfortunate, and yet widespread in this day in age. This highlights why knowledge of Psychology is so important- it can help you evaluate the issues that are out there in the world today, and avoid such risks.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Listening Through The Noise
This past week, we learned about the basics of motivation. There are four main theories on motivation that can help explain why exactly we do what we do. As you can probably tell from the title of this post, I will be talking about eating/hunger, weight loss, and eating disorders. In general, eating can be explained through the drive-reduction theory. This theory states that we eat to maintain homeostasis in our bodies. Eating also fits into Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid at the lowest level: physiological needs. These most basic needs of food, water, and shelter must be met before the higher level needs can even be thought about or met.
Now, what's a good blog post without a little TED? I found this awesome TEDx Talk earlier today. In this talk, Dr. Laura Hill further explains the biological and psychological causes and effects of anorexia. If you have 20 minutes, I encourage you to watch the video because her reenactment of what happens in the brain is quite powerful.
In essence, Dr. Hill suggests that anorexia nervosa is both a biological and a psychological problem. She claims that fMRI scans have shown that there are fundamental differences between the neural pathways in normal people and the neural pathways in anorexics, specifically where eating is concerned. In normal people, hunger motivates (and sends signals) to the body to go acquire and eat food. Then, as you're eating the food, the brain releases dopamine, which makes the brain and body want more. This is the body's way of positively reinforcing eating. However, in anorexics, there is no motivation to eat and eating does not cause a release of dopamine. Instead, eating causes an abnormal amount of anxiety and nervousness. Much of the anxiety comes from the mental noise.
"You look fat! You're ugly. Food is gross. Why would you want to eat? What's wrong with you? You're fat." Imagine trying to function normally with a loop of that playing in your head every time you try to eat. That's what anorexics go through. When it comes to eating and functioning at the same time, normal daily functions takes precedence. For example, if an anorexic has to take a test and the doctor asks her to eat breakfast, the anorexic might plead with the doctor saying that she can't think through the mental noise that comes about as a result of eating breakfast. To me, this makes anorexia as a disorder much more profound than a distorted body image. It becomes your behavior and dictates how you live. Yes, I knew these facts before, but never to this extent. Beating the illness is also much more than just gaining the weight back. It's about silencing the voices so that you can live.
Now, what's a good blog post without a little TED? I found this awesome TEDx Talk earlier today. In this talk, Dr. Laura Hill further explains the biological and psychological causes and effects of anorexia. If you have 20 minutes, I encourage you to watch the video because her reenactment of what happens in the brain is quite powerful.
In essence, Dr. Hill suggests that anorexia nervosa is both a biological and a psychological problem. She claims that fMRI scans have shown that there are fundamental differences between the neural pathways in normal people and the neural pathways in anorexics, specifically where eating is concerned. In normal people, hunger motivates (and sends signals) to the body to go acquire and eat food. Then, as you're eating the food, the brain releases dopamine, which makes the brain and body want more. This is the body's way of positively reinforcing eating. However, in anorexics, there is no motivation to eat and eating does not cause a release of dopamine. Instead, eating causes an abnormal amount of anxiety and nervousness. Much of the anxiety comes from the mental noise.
"You look fat! You're ugly. Food is gross. Why would you want to eat? What's wrong with you? You're fat." Imagine trying to function normally with a loop of that playing in your head every time you try to eat. That's what anorexics go through. When it comes to eating and functioning at the same time, normal daily functions takes precedence. For example, if an anorexic has to take a test and the doctor asks her to eat breakfast, the anorexic might plead with the doctor saying that she can't think through the mental noise that comes about as a result of eating breakfast. To me, this makes anorexia as a disorder much more profound than a distorted body image. It becomes your behavior and dictates how you live. Yes, I knew these facts before, but never to this extent. Beating the illness is also much more than just gaining the weight back. It's about silencing the voices so that you can live.
Unmotivated
When we started learning chapter 8, all about motivation, I immediately thought about my motivation, or lack there of to do homework, especially this year. Tonight, as usual, I was surfing around the internet trying to find an interesting topic for my psych blog, and there it was, why are teens so unmotivated to do homework?
Don't get me wrong, there are many teens out there who do their homework without any motivation issue, maybe because they are scared of failure, or don't want their parents to yell at them. But, I think that more than those teens, there are the teens that are unmotivated to do homework. I found this interesting article online in which child behaviorist psychologist explained that it's not that teens aren't motivated at all, they are just motivated to do things that they are interested in and find joy in. They are more motivated to do what they want, and not what they are told to do.
Many teens, including all of us, probably agree that we have higher priorities right now in life besides sitting at home every night spending countless hours on homework and information that we probably won't remember 3 years from now. I know that since I was just elected to serve on regional board of my BBYO region, I don't want to do homework more than ever because BBYO is something that I enjoy doing and homework is most definitely not.
There are also many reasons around the home that teens are not motivated to do their homework. One of the most prominent ones is parents nagging them to do homework. The more someone tells you to do something that you don't want to do, the least likely it is to get done. According to the article, clinical psychologist, Anthony E. Wolf, says that it is better to negotiate then nag. If a parent makes the teen understand that they will stop bugging them, but they still expect the homework to get done, that is another stress weight lifted off the teen's shoulders. That can even include giving incentives whether they were positive or negative.
The last thing that the article explains is that some of the lack of motivation stems from need for control. When a teen is told what to do, they don't do it purposely to annoy the adult. The article suggests that giving teens choices and making them realize what it mean to succeed in life is the best route to go to get the motivation going.
I hope you have found this blog helpful in learning about you lack of motivation. And remember, do your homework, kids!
http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/causes-teens-not-homework-7807.html
Don't get me wrong, there are many teens out there who do their homework without any motivation issue, maybe because they are scared of failure, or don't want their parents to yell at them. But, I think that more than those teens, there are the teens that are unmotivated to do homework. I found this interesting article online in which child behaviorist psychologist explained that it's not that teens aren't motivated at all, they are just motivated to do things that they are interested in and find joy in. They are more motivated to do what they want, and not what they are told to do.
Many teens, including all of us, probably agree that we have higher priorities right now in life besides sitting at home every night spending countless hours on homework and information that we probably won't remember 3 years from now. I know that since I was just elected to serve on regional board of my BBYO region, I don't want to do homework more than ever because BBYO is something that I enjoy doing and homework is most definitely not.
There are also many reasons around the home that teens are not motivated to do their homework. One of the most prominent ones is parents nagging them to do homework. The more someone tells you to do something that you don't want to do, the least likely it is to get done. According to the article, clinical psychologist, Anthony E. Wolf, says that it is better to negotiate then nag. If a parent makes the teen understand that they will stop bugging them, but they still expect the homework to get done, that is another stress weight lifted off the teen's shoulders. That can even include giving incentives whether they were positive or negative.
The last thing that the article explains is that some of the lack of motivation stems from need for control. When a teen is told what to do, they don't do it purposely to annoy the adult. The article suggests that giving teens choices and making them realize what it mean to succeed in life is the best route to go to get the motivation going.
I hope you have found this blog helpful in learning about you lack of motivation. And remember, do your homework, kids!
http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/causes-teens-not-homework-7807.html
Hunger Habits of a Space Barbie
If there's anything that can bring the GMSG closer..a bond we all share..it has something to do with hunger, so I thought the least I could do was dedicate my first blog post of the year to the incredible phenomena of hunger. After all, without hunger we'd never want to eat and can you imagine a world lacking food?
There are many interesting aspects of hunger and weight. Of course it all seems pretty obvious since we go through this process of hunger multiple times in a day, but its good to know the specifics of what our body actually goes through. When we get hungry, hormones like insulin (when it has no more glucose to break down), orexin, and ghrelin are secreted by the lateral hypothalamus. When we are full, hormones like obestatin, PYY, and leptin are secreted by the ventromedial hypothalamus. All of these hormones work together to make sure we eat when our body needs nourishment and we stop eating when our body just can't take it anymore. Unfortunately, it doesn't work as perfectly as we'd like it to. The psychological aspects can lead to eating disorders. Eating disorders indicate unhealthy eating habits, whether you are eating too much or too little. Anorexia occurs when an individual drops 15% or more below what is considered normal weight. Bulimia occurs when a person binges and then purges. Both are extremely dangerous and can have serious physical consequences. When a person has anorexia, their perception is skewed. They have a distorted view of their own body image and usually have a perfectionist mentality. Bulimia has to do more with being in control and is less noticeable since you are not necessarily gaining or losing weight.
Now that we've gone through the basics of hunger and eating disorders, I want to direct your thoughts to one of the most bizarre stories of 2013. This is the story of the internet sensation, Valeria Lukyanova. If you haven't heard of this Ukrainian nutball, then you're really in for a surprise. Valeria is a human barbie. That does not mean that she dresses up like Barbie and goes to kids birthday parties. She actually has turned herself into a doll. Her waistline measures 50 centimeters. She wears tons of makeup, contact lenses, and got breast implants so she could turn herself into a human doll. And let me tell you, she is as crazy as it gets. Don't even ask me what she says about human Ken...
Just so you can understand the magnitude of her craziness, here is a quote from her upcoming documentary (called Space Barbie):
"The aim of my life is to come to this planet to help people to realize that is it necessary to move form the role of the 'human consumer' to the role of 'human demi-god.' Everything is love. Love is God. I am you and you are me."
Real inspiring, right? Anyway, Valeria is basically trying to defy everything we know about the norms of humanity. Her goal in life is to perfect her appearance by looking as doll-like as possible. So, how does she keep her body so incredibly, inhumanely skinny? Well, she has been on a liquid diet for about a year, but thankfully she hasn't been feeling so hungry lately so she is thinking that she's reached the final stage before she can "subsist on air and light alone." Another time she told a reporter that she eats only fruits and her ultimate goal is to be powered by solar energy and completely reject food.
What do you guys think about Valeria? It all baffles me. Does her ghrelin not secrete like crazy? Is this even considered anorexia? It seems too extreme for that.. Maybe she got her lateral hypothalamus cut out. This story would probably have been better to post during our Kohelet days, but its just as crazy when you think about how hunger works and eating disorders. Anyway, I guess its good to see people like this every so often and just be thankful for a moment that you aren't that crazy.
The Hungry Games- ADHD Version
Chapter 8b primarily focuses on motivation and its impact. I was most interested in understanding the hunger aspect of motivation. What motivates hunger? There are both physiological and psychological factors involved with hunger. These factors determine when we feel hungry and when we feel satisfied.
On the physiological side, there are hormones that cause hunger, like insulin, which breaks down the food that contains glucose, orexin, which triggers the body to want food, ghrelin, which is secreted when the stomach is empty to indicate hunger, and the lateral hypothalamus, which secretes orexin. Each of these hormones is directly related to causing us to feel hunger, whether secreted by the edocrine system, the stomach, or the brain.
The hormones that cause us to feel full are also secreted by different parts of the body. Obestatin is secreted by the stomach when full, PYY is secreted by the digestive system when full, leptin is secreted by fat cells to lower the rewarding feeling of food, and the ventromedial hypothalamus, which secretes obestatin and leptin.
Another part of the physiological side is the set point and settling point. The set point is the old idea that an individual's "weight thermostat", meaning every person's body has a certain weight that they are supposed to get at and stay at. If your weight is below or above your set point, you either release more hunger hormones or more full hormones. Nowadays, many believe that instead of having a set point that you're born with, we have a settling point. Once you gain a certain amount of weight, your settling point changes. At that level, the body responds to the balance between caloric intake and energy expenditure. Basal metabolic rate is the body's resting state of energy expenditure, or simply, what your body does naturally.
As we were learning about these ideas, I was struck with a sudden question. A few people in my family have ADD and ADHD, and they take medicine in order to remain focused. However, their medicine causes them not feel as hungry during the day. I wondered why this would be, so I did some research. I found on additudemag.com that Larry B. Silver, M.D., a clinical professor of psychiatry at Georgetown, says that the main group of medications that are used to treat ADHD are psycho-stimulants. These drugs, Ritalin, Dexadrine, and Adderall, can cause a loss of appetite. These drugs can cause you to feel full. Although I couldn't find the specific reason as to why they cause you to feel full, I can only assume that they stimulate the secretion of full hormones. ADHD medicine also has an effect on sleep, which is directly linked to the secretion of hunger and full hormones, so that could be a factor as well.
On the physiological side, there are hormones that cause hunger, like insulin, which breaks down the food that contains glucose, orexin, which triggers the body to want food, ghrelin, which is secreted when the stomach is empty to indicate hunger, and the lateral hypothalamus, which secretes orexin. Each of these hormones is directly related to causing us to feel hunger, whether secreted by the edocrine system, the stomach, or the brain.
The hormones that cause us to feel full are also secreted by different parts of the body. Obestatin is secreted by the stomach when full, PYY is secreted by the digestive system when full, leptin is secreted by fat cells to lower the rewarding feeling of food, and the ventromedial hypothalamus, which secretes obestatin and leptin.
Another part of the physiological side is the set point and settling point. The set point is the old idea that an individual's "weight thermostat", meaning every person's body has a certain weight that they are supposed to get at and stay at. If your weight is below or above your set point, you either release more hunger hormones or more full hormones. Nowadays, many believe that instead of having a set point that you're born with, we have a settling point. Once you gain a certain amount of weight, your settling point changes. At that level, the body responds to the balance between caloric intake and energy expenditure. Basal metabolic rate is the body's resting state of energy expenditure, or simply, what your body does naturally.
As we were learning about these ideas, I was struck with a sudden question. A few people in my family have ADD and ADHD, and they take medicine in order to remain focused. However, their medicine causes them not feel as hungry during the day. I wondered why this would be, so I did some research. I found on additudemag.com that Larry B. Silver, M.D., a clinical professor of psychiatry at Georgetown, says that the main group of medications that are used to treat ADHD are psycho-stimulants. These drugs, Ritalin, Dexadrine, and Adderall, can cause a loss of appetite. These drugs can cause you to feel full. Although I couldn't find the specific reason as to why they cause you to feel full, I can only assume that they stimulate the secretion of full hormones. ADHD medicine also has an effect on sleep, which is directly linked to the secretion of hunger and full hormones, so that could be a factor as well.
Our Pleasure In Others' Misfortune
Hello all! I welcome everyone to this new year of 2014. May this year bring plenty more chances for you all to ignore my many blogposts (amen). Now: let us begin. This week's blog post was inspired by the NYT article entitled "Our Pleasure in Others' Misfortune," which you can read by clicking here. This is actually somewhat of a book review for Richard H. Smith's new book The Joy of Pain.
Have you ever felt a sense of hidden glee when something bad happened to somebody? Let's say something bad happens to somebody you're jealous of in some way... do you feel secretly happy because of it? Schadenfreude, or "harm joy," is the German term that describes this sensation. Schadenfreude is the pleasure we feel derived from another's misfortune. According to Dr. Smith, this seemingly "perverse" emotion serves an adaptive function: we are hard-wired to make social comparisons, which allow us to asses our talents and determine our status in the social order. Apparently even monkeys and dogs measure themselves against their peers. Do you ever feel like you're measuring yourself against your peers? Or maybe somebody your own age that you don't even know? Celebrities? It's completely normal, so don't feel embarrassed..
According to some psychologists, schadenfreude provides a glimpse into "the most basic conflict in the human psyche"- the friction between our selfish impulses and self-control. We're not trying to be bad people when we experience this delight, but we can't help it! Cheryl Stayred wrote, "We are all savages inside. We all want to be the chosen, the beloved, or the esteemed." Have you ever felt this desire? Or does this (apparently universal) desire seem too petty to you?
Let me be clear: in the case of schadenfreude, you are not doing anything to cause harm to another... it happens by happenstance. The article (as you know, because you read it) talks a lot about the downfall of Tiger Woods. Many people were jealous of Woods' seemingly perfect life: the beautiful wife and family, the flawless reputation. People compared themselves to Tiger and felt inadequate. When that whole scandal happened, people were happy because it brought Tiger closer to their level; people felt better about themselves. How did you feel when you saw Tiger's life falling apart? (No, not Tiger of the GMSG.)
Think about reality television. Dr. Smith writes that "we watch [reality TV] for those awkward scenes that make us feel a smidgen better about our own little unfilmed lives." Have you ever watched reality TV? If so- doesn't it make you feel better about your life?
So... What are your thoughts on schadenfreude?
So long as it remains passive, schadenfreude can enhance our self-worth and serve as a reminder that even the most enviable people are fallible- just like us.
BONUS! Compare this to the adaptation-level phenomenon or relative deprivation.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Discovering New Ways to Solve Problems Can Be Glorious
Problem-solving. What a wondrous concept. One tribute to our rationality is our problem-solving skills in novel situations. Some problems we solve through trial and error. For other problems, we use algorithms, methodical, logical rules or procedures that guarantee solving a particular problem. It contrasts with the usually speedier-but also more error-prone-use of heuristics, the simple thinking strategies that often allow us to make judgments and solve problems efficiently. By using heuristics and then applying trial and error, we may hit upon the answer.
Sometimes, no problem-solving strategy seems to be at work at all, and we arrive at a solution to a problem with insight, or a sudden and often novel realization of the solution to a problem. It contrasts with strategy-based solutions. Teams of researchers have identified brain activity associated with sudden flashes of insight. When people were given a problem, researchers mapped the problem solver’s brain activity using fMRIs or EEGs. In the first experiment, about half the solutions were brought about by a sudden Aha! insight, which was typically preceded by a burst of activity in the right temporal lobe, just above the ear. When the “Eureka moment” hits us, we feel a sense of satisfaction, of happiness.
When Princeton mathematician Andrew Wiles was able to come up with the solution to Fermat’s last theorem, the moment demonstrates creativity, the ability to produce novel and valuable ideas. Studies suggest that a certain level of aptitude is necessary but not sufficient for creativity. Intelligence tests, which demand a single correct answer, require convergent thinking. Creativity tests require divergent thinking. Injury to the left parietal lobe damages the convergent thinking required by intelligence test scores and for school success, but injury to certain areas of the frontal lobe can leave reading, writing, and arithmetic skills intact, yet destroy imagination.
Robert Sternberg and his colleagues have identified five components of creativity. The first, expertise, is a well-developed base of knowledge and furnishes the ideas, images and phrases we use as mental building blocks. The more blocks we have, the more chances we have to combine them in novel ways. The second is imaginative thinking skills, which provide the ability to see things in novel ways, to recognize patterns, and to make connections. Having mastered a problem’s basic elements, we redefine or explore it in a new way. The third, a venturesome personality, seeks new experiences, tolerates ambiguity and risk, and perseveres in overcoming challenges. Venturing encounters with different cultures also fosters creativity. The fourth is intrinsic motivation, which is being driven more by interest, satisfaction, and challenge than by external pressures. Creative people focus less on extrinsic motivators than on the pleasure and stimulation of the work itself. The fifth, a creative environment, sparks, supports, and regulates creative ideas. Creativity-fostering environments often support contemplation.
We seek evidence confirming our ideas more eagerly than we seek evidence that might refute them. This tendency, known as confirmation bias, or searching for information that supports our preconceptions and ignoring or distorting contradictory evidence, can hinder problem solving. Once we incorrectly represent a problem, it’s hard to restructure how to approach it. Fixation is the inability to see a problem from a new perspective. Two examples of fixation are mental set, the tendency to approach a problem in one particular way, often a way that has been successful in the past, and functional fixedness, or the tendency to think of things only in terms of their usual functions. As a perceptual set predisposes what we perceive, a mental set predisposes how we think. Sometimes, a mental set based on what worked in the past prevents us from finding a new solution to the problem. Functional fixedness is demonstrated when a person may scour the house for a screwdriver when a coin would have turned the screw.
I encountered an interesting video on Ted-Ed that explains Vedic math, an ancient Indian method. The principle behind Vedic math is (10a+b)(10+1), which translates into 110a+10(a+b)+b (a is the coefficient). In the video, several ideas are introduced, such as the Base Method used to multiply numbers close to the powers of ten, which includes cross-subtraction and cross-addition. The other idea, mental squaring, is also very similar. The principle that underlies this is (x+a)(x+b)=x(x+a+b)+ab. X=base10,100. Another is the Vertically & Crosswise Pattern for 2 Digits.
The question posed at the end was also something to think about: Whether you want math to be dull and boring or fun and interesting, the choice is yours.
This was a very enlightening video that really requires you to think deeper than the usual problem-solving methods. It really shows how we can quite literally be "stuck" in solving a problem rather than realizing the world of possibilities that lie beyond our usual thinking strategies.
For your viewing pleasure, the video is below:
I encourage you to watch it. It might evoke an "ooh" or an "aah" at some point.
Sometimes, no problem-solving strategy seems to be at work at all, and we arrive at a solution to a problem with insight, or a sudden and often novel realization of the solution to a problem. It contrasts with strategy-based solutions. Teams of researchers have identified brain activity associated with sudden flashes of insight. When people were given a problem, researchers mapped the problem solver’s brain activity using fMRIs or EEGs. In the first experiment, about half the solutions were brought about by a sudden Aha! insight, which was typically preceded by a burst of activity in the right temporal lobe, just above the ear. When the “Eureka moment” hits us, we feel a sense of satisfaction, of happiness.
When Princeton mathematician Andrew Wiles was able to come up with the solution to Fermat’s last theorem, the moment demonstrates creativity, the ability to produce novel and valuable ideas. Studies suggest that a certain level of aptitude is necessary but not sufficient for creativity. Intelligence tests, which demand a single correct answer, require convergent thinking. Creativity tests require divergent thinking. Injury to the left parietal lobe damages the convergent thinking required by intelligence test scores and for school success, but injury to certain areas of the frontal lobe can leave reading, writing, and arithmetic skills intact, yet destroy imagination.
Robert Sternberg and his colleagues have identified five components of creativity. The first, expertise, is a well-developed base of knowledge and furnishes the ideas, images and phrases we use as mental building blocks. The more blocks we have, the more chances we have to combine them in novel ways. The second is imaginative thinking skills, which provide the ability to see things in novel ways, to recognize patterns, and to make connections. Having mastered a problem’s basic elements, we redefine or explore it in a new way. The third, a venturesome personality, seeks new experiences, tolerates ambiguity and risk, and perseveres in overcoming challenges. Venturing encounters with different cultures also fosters creativity. The fourth is intrinsic motivation, which is being driven more by interest, satisfaction, and challenge than by external pressures. Creative people focus less on extrinsic motivators than on the pleasure and stimulation of the work itself. The fifth, a creative environment, sparks, supports, and regulates creative ideas. Creativity-fostering environments often support contemplation.
We seek evidence confirming our ideas more eagerly than we seek evidence that might refute them. This tendency, known as confirmation bias, or searching for information that supports our preconceptions and ignoring or distorting contradictory evidence, can hinder problem solving. Once we incorrectly represent a problem, it’s hard to restructure how to approach it. Fixation is the inability to see a problem from a new perspective. Two examples of fixation are mental set, the tendency to approach a problem in one particular way, often a way that has been successful in the past, and functional fixedness, or the tendency to think of things only in terms of their usual functions. As a perceptual set predisposes what we perceive, a mental set predisposes how we think. Sometimes, a mental set based on what worked in the past prevents us from finding a new solution to the problem. Functional fixedness is demonstrated when a person may scour the house for a screwdriver when a coin would have turned the screw.
I encountered an interesting video on Ted-Ed that explains Vedic math, an ancient Indian method. The principle behind Vedic math is (10a+b)(10+1), which translates into 110a+10(a+b)+b (a is the coefficient). In the video, several ideas are introduced, such as the Base Method used to multiply numbers close to the powers of ten, which includes cross-subtraction and cross-addition. The other idea, mental squaring, is also very similar. The principle that underlies this is (x+a)(x+b)=x(x+a+b)+ab. X=base10,100. Another is the Vertically & Crosswise Pattern for 2 Digits.
The question posed at the end was also something to think about: Whether you want math to be dull and boring or fun and interesting, the choice is yours.
This was a very enlightening video that really requires you to think deeper than the usual problem-solving methods. It really shows how we can quite literally be "stuck" in solving a problem rather than realizing the world of possibilities that lie beyond our usual thinking strategies.
For your viewing pleasure, the video is below:
Friday, January 10, 2014
Criminal Motivation.
An important thing to find out about every criminal is what their motive was. What caused them to commit the crime. In the olden days people believed that a bad spirit would fall on them causing them to do wrong. With our advanced science we have a better understanding to what causes people to commit crimes.
Some crimes that are committed we have an easy time understanding why it was done. We know that the man was short of money therefore he robbed the store.We know that the girl wanted that dress but couldn't afford it, therefore she shoplifted. But when the crimes get more complex the reasons behind them to do. Many times it takes teams of psychologist to figure out the motive to why a crime was committed. It is important to know criminals motives so we can try to prevent others from doing the same thing.
There are many theories about what motivates criminals to commit a crime. Almost every criminal falls under at least one of them.
- Rational Choice Theory. People act in their own self interest. They way out the negatives effects of getting caught versus the positive effects that they can get from committing the crime. They decide it is worth is to commit the crime.
- Social Disorganization Theory. People are influenced by the people around them. If they live in a place where crime is seemed as not something so bad they will think that is really is ok.
- Strain Theory. Society places certain expectations on people. We need to make money and work. If we cannot achieve those goals through a regular way the strain from society will cause someone to go about an illegal way to try and make themselves look like they do have money or a job.
- Social learning Theory. People develope motives and skills to commit crimes by watching others.
- Social control Theory. People who feel like they are being controlled like in school or work will use that as a motive to do something against that control.
- Labeling Theory. We label people all the time. If we label someone as a criminal they often will act like one then.
- Biology, genetics and evolution. As with everything people are sometimes biologically made to be more prone to committing crimes. Poor diet, mental illness, bad brain chemistry and voluntary rewards are all reasons why people are motivated to commit crimes.
People have and will be forever committing crime. Hopefully if we understand their motives better we can help people before they commit the crime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)