Category: Behavior/Psychology Page 21 of 28

Aphasia: Acceptance, Hope, Purpose

On March 11, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Neuroscience, Science Communication & Education

By Sonal Gagrani

Imagine having a head full of things to say, but not being able to articulate them. This is the life of Carl McIntyre.

courtesy of aphasiathemovie.com

There is a three-hour window of opportunity after the initiation of a stroke in which it can be effectively treated. However, when a stroke hit Carl McIntyre, those three hours passed before he could be safely withdrawn from danger. His ability to speak and understand became heavily impaired, a condition known as aphasia. In order to raise awareness of this condition that affects not only him, but almost 40% of the people who suffer a stroke, he starred as himself in a film called Aphasia. Carl McIntyre came himself to speak at Duke for Brain Awareness Week following a screening of his film.

Aphasia is a group of communication disorders that affect the language centers of the brain causing impairments in speech, speech comprehension, reading and writing. It tends to arise with damage of some part of the brain, often due to a stroke, brain tumors, or neurodegenerative diseases.

McIntyre expressed powerfully that, “what happens to one, happens to two.” The aphasia affects not only him but his entire family. Life felt as if it was over, loving was difficult; he felt “trapped inside of his head.” Having a reservoir full of thoughts that he was unable to empty due to this inability to communicate could be eternally frustrating. Aphasia patients often are cognitively intact, but have trouble expressing what they want to say. McIntyre occasionally used a whiteboard to write down words he was struggling to say or stumbled on the first sounds of words.

Carl McIntyre But rather than letting the aphasia control the way that he lived, McIntyre worked hard to restore his language capabilities and spread awareness of the challenges that inflicted individuals must face. Most importantly, McIntyre expressed the importance of keeping hope.

He explained that the first step to having a positive outlook on his condition was to accept the “old Carl was dead.” The next was to keep hope that his life could continue as normal as possible – that the condition would not impair his lifestyle. Last, he expressed the importance of having a sense a purpose by picking up hobbies and not losing all meaning in life. Carl strives to have a strong sense of self despite the adversities he and his family has had to face and inspires others to understand and do just this.

My Brain and Your Brain Speak Different Languages

By Clara Colombatto

On March 5, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Faculty, Lecture, Medicine, Neuroscience, Science Communication & Education

By Clara Colombatto

The fact that “different people speak language differently” is one of the major challenges in uncovering the neural basis of language. Brain structure and function differ highly among individuals, and this is the core of the new discipline of cognitive neurolinguistics. Duke professor Edna Andrews explained the fascinating complexity of language research at the Regulator Bookshop on Tuesday, March 4.

Edna Andrews gives an overview of the new field of cognitive neurolinguistics at the Regulator Bookshop for Brain Awareness Week Credit: Clara Colombatto

Edna Andrews gives an overview of the new field of cognitive neurolinguistics at the Regulator Bookshop for Brain Awareness Week (Photo: Clara Colombatto)

A linguist by training, Edna Andrews is the Nancy & Jeffrey Marcus Distinguished Professor of Slavic & Eurasian Studies, Chair of the Linguistics Program and holds appointments in Cultural Anthropology and the Duke Institute for Brain Sciences. Over time, Andrews’s research interests led her to neuroscience — so she went back to the classroom, studied as a beginning student with neurobiologist Gillian Einstein and shadowed a team of neurosurgeons at Duke Hospital.

This range of disciplines is fundamental for Andrews’ pioneering work in the field of cognitive neurolinguistics. Observations of brain-damaged patients led to a 19^th century model that held that language centers are mainly in the left hemisphere of the brain. In particular, language was thought to be dependent on grey matter, the part of the brain that contains mostly cell bodies and is responsible for information processing, as opposed to white matter, which contains mainly long-range connection tracts (axons) and is responsible for information communication. Researchers realized this understanding was an oversimplification when surgeons started to notice that cutting white matter tracts alone significantly impaired linguistic abilities. New methods, such as electrical stimulation of the brain during surgeries in awake patients, led to the realization that the whole brain is involved in language.

White matter fiber tracts of a human brain visualized with a Tensor Imaging technique. The U-shaped fibers connect the two hemispheres. The finding that these tracts are essential for language revolutionized the field of neurolinguistics because language was previously thought to be localized to gray matter in the left hemisphere. Credit: Thomas Schultz via Wikimedia Commons

White matter fiber tracts visualized with a tensor imaging technique. Findings that the fibers connecting the two hemispheres are essential for language revolutionized the field of neurolinguistics.
(Photo: Thomas Schultz via Wikimedia Commons)

When theoretical linguists such as Andrews joined the conversation, they merged empirical data with theory to answer questions such as, is language learned or innate? Are there specific structures and localized circuits in the brain responsible for language? And are there critical periods where our brain is particularly sensitive to changes?

The picture is complicated by the fact that “most of the world population is bi or multilingual,” and “one could argue that in fact there are no monolinguals.” In our daily lives, we use different languages at school, at work and at home (Learn more about this hypothesis here). Andrews’ current work addresses these complexities by looking at changes in neural activity as individual speakers acquire Russian as a second or third language. Her latest book “Neuroscience and Multilingualism,” coming out at the end of the year from Cambridge University Press, is an exploration of the neuroscientific modeling of multilingualism.

The lecture was part of Brain Awareness Week, a global campaign to encourage public interest in the progress and benefits of brain research. Not to miss: Michele Diaz on “Language and the Aging Brain” on Thursday, 3/5 at 7:30pm, and Richard Mooney on “Music and the Brain” on Friday, 3/6 at 6 pm at Motorco Music Hall.

Krause Hopes to Improve Sexual Misconduct Reporting Process

By sa160@duke.edu

On March 3, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Students

By Nonie Arora

Carly Krause, graduate student in public policy and business. Credit: Carly Krause

Carly Krause is determined to figure out why some students formally report sexual misconduct while others don’t. Krause is a dual-degree graduate student studying public policy at the Stanford School of Public Policy and the decision sciences at the Fuqua School of Business.

Krause, a California native originally from Los Angeles, received a bachelor’s in business administration from the University of California, Berkeley and has been at Duke for three years. At Berkeley, Krause was heavily involved with the women’s community: she was the president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) at Berkeley.

When the time came to decide upon a topic for her master’s thesis, Krause decided to reengage with women’s issues and approached the Duke University Women’s Center as a client for her project. From then-director Ada Gregory, Krause learned that the Women’s Center was deeply interested in learning why only some students choose to report sexual misconduct through the formal process. They also wanted to know what factors bring students in to the Women’s Center or keep them from using their services.

Krause began digging deeper into these issues. In the past, these types of questions had only been asked through surveys. Krause knew there was only so much information that could be gleaned from a survey without follow-up questions, and that students generally did not answer the free response questions. Instead of a survey, she chose to do in-depth interviews with about twenty students that she sought out by advertising on campus mailing lists and posting fliers in women’s restrooms. Krause said that her data set of twenty interviews meets the criteria for a solid qualitative study. According to Krause, the sample size also sends a signal to the university that this issue is important to the student body.

Duke University Women’s Center. Credit: Duke Student Affairs

After her research report is completed this year, it will go to the Women’s Center. From there, a distilled set of recommendations will hopefully be brought before the university administrators, Krause explained. Krause hopes that the Women’s Center will be able to make some of the changes that have come up. These will be things that students want but may not be on the Women’s Center radar quite yet, according to Krause. “I really hope that if there are recommendations that they feel are worthwhile, they will have the resources and manpower to implement them,” Krause said.

“On university side, I hope that administrators understand that the current process is re-traumatizing and disincentives students from coming forward to the point where we are only getting the select few that are so upset and traumatized that this is their only resort. I think that the process is really doing a disservice to the students,” Krause said.

Krause emphasized that when the university designs policies for sexual misconduct there are multiple competing tensions, including protecting students, creating an equitable environment for everyone and promoting the idea of a safe campus environment.

Finding Order in Insect and Orc Swarms

By Olivia Zhu

On February 18, 2014

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Physics, Visualization

Ouellette’s model of insect swarming

By Olivia Zhu

Dr. Nicholas Ouellette looks for the organization in disorder.

Ouellette, associate professor in the mechanical engineering department at Yale University, studies collective motion in animal systems. On February 17, he presented his models of swarming of Chironomus riparius, the non-biting midge, as part of Duke’s Physics Colloquium. Ouellette ultimately hopes to pin down fundamental laws of biology through his physics research.

In the lab, Ouellette has found that Chironomus insects swarm in a columnar, teardrop shape in the center of their container. They only live in their flying state for two to three days, during which they mate, lay eggs and die. During this period, swarming affords them protection from predators and the opportunity to mate.

Ouellette and his lab have devised various methods of modeling the insects’ swarming. They found that the insect density remains constant, and that the “scattering,” or collisions of insects, mirrors that of an ideal gas over long periods of time. Interestingly, the graph of individual insect speed follows a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, even though the lab did not track the usual factors that create such a distribution, like temperature.

The most pressing question Ouellette would like to answer is which factors create a swarm—he has determined that close insect-insect repulsion contributes to swarming, but distant insect-insect attraction does not. To pursue this question, Ouellette is testing how many insects it takes to make a swarm.

Wildebeest stampede modeled in The Lion King

Other animals that exhibit collective motion are mackerel, wildebeests and starlings. Some familiar examples of collective motion modeling are visible as the Orcs storm the castle in Lord of the Rings and as the wildebeests charge the canyon in The Lion King.

Inside the Monkey Brain

By Ashley Mooney

On February 12, 2014

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Field Research, Neuroscience

By Ashley Mooney

Both in the lab and on a tropical island, primate behaviors can shed light on social-decision making.

To fully understand the biology of social-decision making, Michael Platt, director of the Duke Institute for Brain Science, conducts lab work at Duke and field research an island off the coast of Puerto Rico called Cayo Santiago. His research focuses on understanding both the physiological and social aspects of decision making.

“Our brains are exquisitely tuned to making [social] decisions and acquiring the information to inform them,” Platt said. “When these processes go awry, as occurs in disorders like autism, schizophrenia or anxiety disorders, the consequences can be devastating.”

Courtesy of Lauren Brent.

Platt’s group uses rhesus macaques as model animals because of their strong behavioral, physiological and neurobiological similarity to humans. But understanding how the monkey brain—and thus the human brain—works requires both laboratory-based biological information and social studies in a natural environment.

Researchers can combine the knowledge they gain from lab and field studies to create a holistic picture of the biological basis of behavior, said Lauren Brent, associate research fellow at the University of Exeter who did her post-doc with Platt at Duke.

Lab studies are best suited for quantitative, repeatable studies in which variables can be precisely controlled, Platt said. On the other hand, field studies emphasize external validity and an animal’s response in its natural conditions, but are not suitable for determining precise measurements of internal processes.

In the lab, Platt’s group studies the neural mechanisms that mediate prosocial and antisocial decisions, Platt said. They can also study the ways in which humans can enhance prosocial decisions using pharmacological or behavioral interventions.

On Cayo, the researchers are exploring the genetic factors that shape individual differences in social behavior and decision-making in free-living monkeys. They use observations, behavioral experiments and blood and fecal samples to study the monkeys non-invasively.

“The project on Cayo and the work that goes on the lab are complementary in the best sense because we can do things on Cayo that we can’t do in the lab,” Brent said. “For example, we have hundreds of monkeys, of known pedigree, interacting with each other in a purely spontaneous and naturalistic fashion. You can’t get that in a lab.”

Lauren Brent conducting behavioral observations on Cayo. Courtesy of Lauren Brent.

Although working with free-ranging monkeys can produce more naturalistic results, Brent noted that there are drawbacks to working in the field.

“Working with monkeys in the field is painstaking,” Brent said. “You need to be physically fit, but moreover it is a mentally demanding thing to do because you need to pay close attention to everything that is going on in the group at all times so that the data are as finely detailed and accurate as possible.”

Brent found that a monkey’s position in its social network is heritable and can impact the survival of its infants. She determined a monkey’s social connections using grooming and spatial proximity, or how long one monkey spends sitting next to other monkeys.

“Regardless of how big your family is, monkeys who are better connected in the grooming network have greater reproductive success,” Brent said. “Together, these results suggest that social interactions have adaptive benefits and are something on which selection has acted.”

Advice in the "Love Market" from Dan Ariely

By Olivia Zhu

On February 11, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Business/Economics, Faculty, Lecture

In a simulation in which he doled out five dollars to every audience member, Ariely demonstrated that a small gender inequality leads to an enormous balance of power. One gender would be competing, in this case paying, for a partner of the opposite sex, and thus expending all of their resources supply and demand-style.

By Olivia Zhu

With Valentine’s Day approaching—ripe with the promise of love for some and fraught with the bitter reminder of love unfulfilled for others—Duke professor Dan Ariely shared what he’s learned about the “love market” by analyzing romance from a behavioral economic perspective.

Starting with the premise of assortative mating—the principle that “hot” people date “hot” people, and “not hot” people date others who are “not hot”—Ariely asked how the “not hot” psychologically cope with their “unattractive” partners. His answer: “not hot” people “reframe what is important to them” and focus on non-physical qualities, like humor.

Using regression-based labor analysis, Ariely discovered that the most attractive quality in men was height. In fact, for a 5’ 9” man to be equally attractive to a 5’ 10” man, he would have to make $40,000 more in salary per year. Not to fear—men were equally shallow. The most attractive quality in a woman was BMI, with the optimal being 18.5 (slightly underweight). No amount of money could make up for a woman’s BMI; men didn’t care about a woman’s salary or her graduate degree.

Ariely also discussed the pitfalls of online dating. Online dating often ends in repeated disappointment, he said, not only because of embellished profiles, but because your imagination fills in the gaps of a potential date’s personality with ideal, untrue qualities. Moreover, online dating is inefficient, with an exchange rate of six hours of talking for one coffee date.

To improve your online dating experience, Ariely suggested “going and doing stuff together,” even if in an online environment, and asking provoking questions about past relationships and sexual fantasies rather than sticking with mundane, interview-style dates. He also found that too many online “options” decreased one’s happiness by making one pickier. Perhaps we shouldn’t have so much freedom in our love lives, after all.

Why Cute Babies are a Cognitive Illusion

By sa160@duke.edu

On February 11, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Lecture, Neuroscience

By Nonie Arora

Daniel Dennett, Co-Director Center for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University, spoke last week to a packed room at Duke University’s annual Mind, Brain, and Behavior lecture. He said that The Hard Problem of Consciousness, which describes how we have subjective conscious experiences, rests on a series of straightforward mistakes.

“The Hard Problem is a cognitive illusion,” Dennett said.

Cartesian Theater. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Dennett’s conclusion rests on two tenets: (1) there is no Cartesian theater and (2) there is no second transduction. The Cartesian theater is an image of a place where the show happens; Dennett said it is where the decisions get made, according to some philosophers.

The second transduction is the idea that the nervous system first converts outer stimuli to neural signals and then the brain translates these signals to some other medium of consciousness, as originally suggested by Descartes. Some theorists still believe that there is a second transduction into a physical medium in the brain that has not been identified, but according to Dennett’s book Kinds of Minds, this idea is a myth.

Dennett said that the features in our brain are more similar to DVDs than to cinema films. They are not iconic. If you show a caveman a DVD, what will he think? He’ll think: where are the mini pictures, where is the sound? Anybody who thinks that there is a Hard Problem is making the analogous naive error about consciousness, Dennett explained.

Depiction of consciousness. Credit: New Yorker 1969 Saul Steinberg

We are the “unwitting creators of fiction,” he said. “Babies are not inherently cute. They’re cute because we adore them. Shapes of babies faces stimulate nurturing behavior… This is an evolved adaptation. We misinterpret an inner reaction as an outer cause,” he said.

He believes that we project our innate predispositions into the manifest world. Thus, we have a propensity to think that babies are cute. “We have expectations about our expectations,” he said. “Not only do we feel the urge to reach out and cuddle, we expect to feel that urge. Our satisfaction of that expectation confirms our perception of cuteness of the baby.”

Interested in hearing more from Dennett?

Learn more about the illusion of consciousness or why babies aren’t actually cute.

Learn to Fly a Drone in Three Minutes

By Erin Weeks

On January 29, 2014

In Behavior/Psychology, Computers/Technology, Engineering, Faculty, Lecture, Visualization

By Erin Weeks

Missy Cummings has accomplished a lot of difficult things in her life — she was one of the Navy’s first female pilots, after all — but being a guest on The Colbert Report, she said, was hard.

Cummings told the story of her journey from Naval lieutenant to media drone expert last week at the Visualization Friday Forum seminar series in a talk (video archived here) titled “Designing a System for Navigating Small Drones in Tight Spaces.”

Missy Cummings joined Duke as an associate professor of mechanical engineering and materials science last semester.

Last semester, Cummings moved her renowned Humans and Automation Lab from MIT to Duke University. She’s wasted no time immersing herself in the new university and volunteered for the semester’s first seminar to introduce herself and her lab’s latest work to Duke’s visualization community.

Cummings’ research over recent years has centered on the development of a smartphone interface through which, she said, anyone can learn to pilot a one-pound drone in three minutes. The technology could be a boon to the U.S. Army, which now issues smartphones to its personnel and mostly relies on cumbersome, gas-powered drones.

The lab tested the technology by asking volunteers to maneuver a drone through an obstacle course both in the field — where they learned wind and cold temperatures are not a drone’s friend — and in simulated environments.

One of the things they discovered in both cases was that individuals who performed well in a spatial reasoning test were more likely to complete the obstacle course. Moreover, these performances tended to be gendered, with men scoring higher than women in spatial reasoning. Interestingly, Cummings noted, other studies have shown women tend to perform better piloting drones in long-term, “boring” scenarios with little action.

Cummings is interested in teasing out the reasons for these results, which could have significant implications for the U.S. Army or companies one day interested in hiring drone pilots.

As Stephen Colbert confirmed, you may be able to fly a drone with three minutes’ training, but that doesn’t mean you can fly it well.

Cummings talks to a full house at the Visualization Friday Forum on January 24.

Passion, Determination Drive Liu's Research Forward

By Karl Bates

On January 10, 2014

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Guest Post, Science Communication & Education, Students

Guest post by Madeleine Gonzalez, NC School of Science and Math

Long before she was a scientist, Irene Liu was an animal lover, cutting coupons for food for the cats and dogs that she wished she had, admiring birds, and even subscribing to the famous Ranger Rick magazine. Naturally her interest would stem from this passion, leading to her exciting career in evolutionary biology.

Irene Liu gently handling a captured bird during some fieldwork in a mangrove swamp. (Photo courtesy of Irene Liu)

Today she uses birds to answer questions that are applicable across different systems and organisms. At the University of Maryland, she began with questions like, “Do birds have dialects?” and today, as a graduate student at Duke University, she investigates the extra-pair mating habits of blackbirds.

“We know that birds are famous for infidelity,” she says. ” Within one breeding season you can see mom and dad and baby birds. They look like they are one family, but actually mom and dad are off mating with other individuals and will then raise together these chicks in this nest,” she describes. Irene Liu works to understand the benefits of infidelity in bird populations, exploring how patterns vary on frequency.

Between the fieldwork, the lab work, and the occasional, tedious computational work, Irene Liu has had some extraordinary experiences.

Working around the people with similar drive and interests, she has thrived as a young scientist.

She loves her field work. “Getting out to these isolated places that most people don’t get to see is a real privilege, and seeing nature just happening as if I am not even there.” She plays a fun game of catching and outsmarting the birds as she collects samples and records her observations, which may not always be particularly easy. In fact, certain obstacles have been particularly devastating.

One time while returning from the Bahamas, her summer collections were seized and incinerated at the airport after failing to comply with US regulations and not being informed of the necessary permits beforehand. However, she returned in the following year to collect an even better sample, thoroughly learning a lesson the hard way.

A redwing blackbird that fell into Irene’s clutches sports his new ankle band.

“I have become the obsessive person that will call the government agencies and check,” she says. It has made her the permit expert within the department and inspired a seminar.

For other young or aspiring scientists, Liu advises, “Pick something that makes you want to get out of bed every morning, but being happy does not mean denying that there are going to be challenges and obstacles in the way.”

Even though an event such as her experience in the Bahamas can be utterly discouraging and disappointing, it is the passion that will drive the progress and ambition. It is important to remember that there is a time to worry about the future and there is a time to work, Liu said. The future is overwhelming sometimes with a given task at hand, but it’s important to not lose perspective. Even for basic research, sometimes people demand tangible immediate benefits, but that is not guaranteed.

“Our solutions to the world’s greatest problems will surely come from the most unexpected places. You don’t have linear consequences,” Liu said.

Mady Gonzales interviewed Irene Liu and wrote this post as part of a Science Communication seminar led by NCSSM Dean of Science Amy Sheck.

Fish Need Hugs Too!

By Karl Bates

On December 18, 2013

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Guest Post, Neuroscience

Guest post by Lauren Burianek, Doctoral Candidate in Cell Biology

In humans, massages are used for stress relief and relaxation. Tight wraps called Thundershirts can be used on dogs to reduce anxiety from thunderstorms or separation, and giant rolling brush machines are used in the milk industry to calm and comfort dairy cows. Physical touch can have some beneficial roles, but who knew that fish respond to touch, too?

Researchers at the Duke-NUS Graduate School in Singapore studied the effects of physical sensations on fear behaviors in zebrafish.

The zebrafish Danio rerio, workhorse of the lab, is the sensitive type. (public domain photo from Wikimedia Commons)

Zebrafish become afraid when they smell pheromones released by injured fish, and they respond by freezing in place, darting around quickly, or sinking. Why do the fish respond this way? Researcher Annett Schirmer explains, “species develop a sensitivity to these chemicals throughout the course of evolution such that these chemicals can trigger an automatic response, such as fear.”

In other words, by becoming afraid when a nearby fish is injured, the fish can escape or hide from predators more quickly, leading to an increased chance of survival.

Schirmer said that as a kid, her father would claim that his fish enjoyed being petted. “I never believed him,” she said. Instead of petting the fish, however, the scientists used moving water as a non-social physical touch. They wanted to see if physical touch could reduce fear responses in fish, similar to how physical touch can comfort humans and other animals.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxzl54tUi2U?rel=0]

The zebrafish were exposed to the fear-inducing pheromone and then were either placed in a tank with still water or a tank with a water current for two minutes. The fish exposed to the water current showed fewer fear behaviors and lower levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, than the fish that were placed in the non-moving water. It seemed that the moving water helped to calm and reduce anxiety in the fish.

Fish have a sense of touch for feeling movement and changes in water pressure that comes from cells along the sides of their body called lateral line cells. When fish with damaged lateral line cells were put through the same study, the fish exposed to the water current did not show as large of a decrease in fear behaviors, suggesting that they really are responding to physical sensations from their sense of touch.

Fish swimming in schools feel movement from nearby fish and the current of the water as they are swimming through it. These sensations may reduce fear responses in a similar manner. Schirmer adds, “Current stirs up water and brings nutrients and oxygen. So I think that in the water, touch is a rich emotional stimulus that is, to some degree, also socially relevant.”

CITATION: Tactile Stimulation Reduces Fear in Fish, Annett Schirmer, Suresh Jesuthasan, and Ajay S. Mathuru. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. Online Nov. 22, 2013. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00167