Why Are Yawns Contagious?

fakescience:

Why Are Yawns Contagious?



Contrary to popular belief it has very little to do with carbon-dioxide or oxygen, but everything with hitherto mysterious mirror neurons that seem to be flow enablers I bet. While their function of inducing copied behaviour has been investigated over a range of human behaviours and activities, including such shared experiences as smiling, body-language and learning, I predict that the proof will be known as soon as the researchers get bored with the testing rest.

If research proves me right it will also provide unequivocal proof that our nature provide for shared enthused actively, and uses the same method to inform our peers of experiences that are not worthy of mutual pursuit.

Truth, the good and bad.

Research show that statements that are untrue, basically lies, are experienced as unpleasant or downright disgusting. It confirms related findings that suggest what was previously considered to be rational decisions, are in fact mediated by emotional response. According to the article “Good and bad are thereby associated with pleasure and pain.”

With the exception of the author’s unfortunate choice of words above, it is an interesting take on the science of belief. In using the words “good and bad” the authors unwittingly yet inadvertently trigger an emotional response resulting in mediation of the readers rational ability, something that could have been averted by choosing words like “right and wrong”.

The findings support related research about how the brain works, and gives plausible cause for some of the vernacular that is common to various cultures, such as experiences being described as “leaving a bad taste in the mouth”, or the ritual spitting that is common in some cultures if they see something to which they strongly object.

It also supports the belief held by some, that mankind is by nature good. That truth is more than a choice, but an inherent principle encoded into our evolutionary design.

scinerd: Brain’s Network of Bottlenecks May Limit Multitasking Personal note: Are we truly the pinnacle of evolution, the last stop? Of course not, and these neuroscientists explain faults with information processing coupled with the benefits of them to let you, the reader, decide on whether we need advancements or not. Although the human brain is a very complex structure, it’s still not big or efficient enough to process every single thing we see, hear and do. Sometimes this limitation is a good thing, since it forces our brains to filter out minor details that we don’t need to dwell on. Other times it’s more of a hassle, since it interferes with how we process information. Researchers previously thought that different processes in the brain were subject to separate bottlenecks. For example, the process of reading a map might be limited by a very different mechanism than the act of evaluating ideas and forming opinions. However, new research in PNAS suggests that a “unified” bottleneck may restrict our ability to perform very different cognitive processes simultaneously. The paper focuses on two tasks. Recognizing new information in your surroundings and incorporating it into your view of the world is referred to as “encoding,” while reacting to stimuli and making decisions is termed “response selection.” They’re distinct processes, but they utilize some of the same parts of the brain, so it’s possible that the brain can have trouble if asked to perform both of these processes at once or in very close succession. In this study, the researchers used fMRI data to determine whether there is a common bottleneck for both perception and decision making. Subjects were asked to perform several tasks while inside an fMRI machine. In the first part of the experiment, they had to respond vocally to a tone, respond manually to an image, or perform both of these tasks at once. Not surprisingly, the participants responded faster and more accurately when they only had to concentrate on one task. When the participants had to do both at once, the brain was overloaded; structures that the fMRI revealed to be particularly active at this point were potential bottlenecks for the encoding process. Then, the researchers performed a similar test to look for bottlenecks in response selection. In these experiments, the participants were quickly presented with one or more letters that they had to recall after fourteen seconds. Here, the overload occurred when they had to remember several letters as opposed to just one; researchers searched for areas of the brain that limited this process. Read More
Pop-upView Separately

scinerd:

Brain’s Network of Bottlenecks May Limit Multitasking

Personal note: Are we truly the pinnacle of evolution, the last stop? Of course not, and these neuroscientists explain faults with information processing coupled with the benefits of them to let you, the reader, decide on whether we need advancements or not.

Although the human brain is a very complex structure, it’s still not big or efficient enough to process every single thing we see, hear and do. Sometimes this limitation is a good thing, since it forces our brains to filter out minor details that we don’t need to dwell on. Other times it’s more of a hassle, since it interferes with how we process information.

Researchers previously thought that different processes in the brain were subject to separate bottlenecks. For example, the process of reading a map might be limited by a very different mechanism than the act of evaluating ideas and forming opinions. However, new research in PNAS suggests that a “unified” bottleneck may restrict our ability to perform very different cognitive processes simultaneously.

The paper focuses on two tasks. Recognizing new information in your surroundings and incorporating it into your view of the world is referred to as “encoding,” while reacting to stimuli and making decisions is termed “response selection.” They’re distinct processes, but they utilize some of the same parts of the brain, so it’s possible that the brain can have trouble if asked to perform both of these processes at once or in very close succession. In this study, the researchers used fMRI data to determine whether there is a common bottleneck for both perception and decision making.

Subjects were asked to perform several tasks while inside an fMRI machine. In the first part of the experiment, they had to respond vocally to a tone, respond manually to an image, or perform both of these tasks at once. Not surprisingly, the participants responded faster and more accurately when they only had to concentrate on one task. When the participants had to do both at once, the brain was overloaded; structures that the fMRI revealed to be particularly active at this point were potential bottlenecks for the encoding process.

Then, the researchers performed a similar test to look for bottlenecks in response selection. In these experiments, the participants were quickly presented with one or more letters that they had to recall after fourteen seconds. Here, the overload occurred when they had to remember several letters as opposed to just one; researchers searched for areas of the brain that limited this process.

Read More

(via scinerds)

Top