In his January 11, 2010 Time article, Lev Grossman describes his fear of people eating:
"I'm filled with overpowering, irrational dread by the sight or sound of another human being eating or drinking. It doesn't make any more sense to me than it does to you. But that's what a phobia is: a fear that has nothing to do with logic or common sense." (See yesterday's post for more on phobias.)
The article goes on to quote the National Institute of Mental Health on how common phobias are in the US: 8.7% of people over 18 have a specific phobia. (The first time I read that, I thought it said 87%. Now THAT scared me!)
You can easily Google "phobias" to find lists of phobias common enough to actually have names.
The Russian psychologist Ivan Pavlov (d. 1936) explained phobias as fears produced by Associative Learning's Classical Conditioning. In CC you have two kinds of stimuli (conditioned and unconditioned) and two kinds of responses (conditioned and unconditioned).
A natural (unconditioned) response (such as fear) becomes associated with something not naturally connected with it.
John Watson (d. 1958) created a phobia in the toddler, "Little Albert," by sounding a loud gong, which scared Albert (an unconditioned fear), at the same time he handed him a white rat (of which he was not originally afraid). Relatively quickly, Albert became afraid of the rat. He had learned to "associate" the rat with the loud noise, so whenever he was handed the rat he anticipated the gong and started crying as soon as he was handed the rat.
The Unconditioned Response (fear of loud noises) from the Unconditioned Stimulus (loud gong) had become associated with a Conditioned Stimulus (white rat), producing the Conditioned Response (fear of the rat).
John Watson produced the phobia in Albert, handed him back to his parents and said, "Thank you for letting us use Albert in our experiment. Good luck with him."
POP QUIZ: Take this information and use it to explain how Lev Grossman's sound-of-food-being-eaten phobia developed.
January 9, 2010
January 8, 2010
Get Off the Bus, Bob!
Phobias are irrational fears. Not fears. Irrational fears.
According to one list produced by people who study such things (Phobiologists?), the two most common phobias would really put their victim in a bind if they were both found in the same person:
Agoraphoabia - the fear of open places.
Claustrophobia - the fear of closed places.
Where is that person supposed to go?
As I pondered that, I couldn't help but picture multi-phobic Bob in the movie, What About Bob? Can't stay on the bus, can't get off the bus.
According to one list produced by people who study such things (Phobiologists?), the two most common phobias would really put their victim in a bind if they were both found in the same person:
Agoraphoabia - the fear of open places.
Claustrophobia - the fear of closed places.
Where is that person supposed to go?
As I pondered that, I couldn't help but picture multi-phobic Bob in the movie, What About Bob? Can't stay on the bus, can't get off the bus.
January 7, 2010
What Do You THINK About Your Nervousness?
Cognitive Therapy to the rescue again!
According to an article by ChiChi Madu (what a great name) in the 2010 January/February Psychology Today, research by Wendy Mendes at Harvard University suggests that what you THINK about your nervousness determines whether being nervous works against you or for you.
Being nervous is, in itself, neither positive nor negative, as far as how it affects your performance.
The research at Harvard consisted of students who were taking the Graduate Record Exam. Acceptance into graduate school depends on your score on the GRE. Believe me, as one who took it, it makes you nervous.
By random assignment, 1/2 of the students were told that their nervousness "was positive and would improve their performance." 1/2 were not told anything.
POP QUIZ: Which group did better?
"The first group did much better than their counterparts."
From your experimental research class: what was the independent variable? Whether they were told that nervousness was positive. What was the dependent variable? How well they did on the test.
Both groups were nervous. Both took the same test. The difference was cognitive - what they THOUGHT about their nervousness.
So, nervous before your first psychology test? Thinking that your nevousness will help you, will help you. Nervous before your first bull ride of the rodeo season? Thinking that your nervousness will help you, will help you. Nervous before taking the tournament-winning free throw? Thinking that your nervousness will help you, will help you.
Nervous before asking that really cute girl sitting next to you on a date? Sorry, you're on your own there. Let me know how it works out for you.
According to an article by ChiChi Madu (what a great name) in the 2010 January/February Psychology Today, research by Wendy Mendes at Harvard University suggests that what you THINK about your nervousness determines whether being nervous works against you or for you.
Being nervous is, in itself, neither positive nor negative, as far as how it affects your performance.
The research at Harvard consisted of students who were taking the Graduate Record Exam. Acceptance into graduate school depends on your score on the GRE. Believe me, as one who took it, it makes you nervous.
By random assignment, 1/2 of the students were told that their nervousness "was positive and would improve their performance." 1/2 were not told anything.
POP QUIZ: Which group did better?
"The first group did much better than their counterparts."
From your experimental research class: what was the independent variable? Whether they were told that nervousness was positive. What was the dependent variable? How well they did on the test.
Both groups were nervous. Both took the same test. The difference was cognitive - what they THOUGHT about their nervousness.
So, nervous before your first psychology test? Thinking that your nevousness will help you, will help you. Nervous before your first bull ride of the rodeo season? Thinking that your nervousness will help you, will help you. Nervous before taking the tournament-winning free throw? Thinking that your nervousness will help you, will help you.
Nervous before asking that really cute girl sitting next to you on a date? Sorry, you're on your own there. Let me know how it works out for you.
January 6, 2010
You're Invading My Space, Man!
One of my favorite Seinfeld episodes was the one about "the close talker." Elaine's new boyfriend really irritated Jerry & George because he liked to stand way too close when talking to them.
The concept of "personal space" is considered to be culturally determined because in some cultures people stand really close together when socially interacting. In other cultures the "social circle" around an individual is much greater. In America, "social space" is about 48". Inside that are found "personal space" and "intimate space." (You're going to love this: one textbook says that two things are reserved for intimate space: making love & wrestling.)
Some recent research reported in the December 2009 Monitor on Psychology suggests that the amygdala may also influence this sense of personal space. The amygdala is that part of our mid brain involved in controlling fear and processing emotion.
The research at the California Institute of Technology started with a patient who had Urbach-Wiethe disease that caused her amgydala to malfunction. One symptom of her disease is that she liked to stand "too close" to people when she interacted with them.
According to the article, researchers "used fMRI to examine amygdala activation among control group members as they heard that an experimenter stood nearby or far away. The normal participants' amygdala activity increased when they believed a researcher stood nearby, even though they could not see, feel or hear him."
Their conclusion? "The amygdala is involved in regulating social distance, independent of specific sensory cues." In other words, my amygdala fires, creating fear or another "avoid" emotion, when someone "invades my space."
The researchers suggest that their findings might provide a clue to the cause of the high anxiety experienced by autistic children when they are surrounded by people. The wiring of their amygdala may be messed up.
The concept of "personal space" is considered to be culturally determined because in some cultures people stand really close together when socially interacting. In other cultures the "social circle" around an individual is much greater. In America, "social space" is about 48". Inside that are found "personal space" and "intimate space." (You're going to love this: one textbook says that two things are reserved for intimate space: making love & wrestling.)
Some recent research reported in the December 2009 Monitor on Psychology suggests that the amygdala may also influence this sense of personal space. The amygdala is that part of our mid brain involved in controlling fear and processing emotion.
The research at the California Institute of Technology started with a patient who had Urbach-Wiethe disease that caused her amgydala to malfunction. One symptom of her disease is that she liked to stand "too close" to people when she interacted with them.
According to the article, researchers "used fMRI to examine amygdala activation among control group members as they heard that an experimenter stood nearby or far away. The normal participants' amygdala activity increased when they believed a researcher stood nearby, even though they could not see, feel or hear him."
Their conclusion? "The amygdala is involved in regulating social distance, independent of specific sensory cues." In other words, my amygdala fires, creating fear or another "avoid" emotion, when someone "invades my space."
The researchers suggest that their findings might provide a clue to the cause of the high anxiety experienced by autistic children when they are surrounded by people. The wiring of their amygdala may be messed up.
January 5, 2010
Try Reading This One Eye At A Time
Kim Peek died on December 19 at age 58. Mr. Peek was a megasavant who inspired Dustin Hoffman's character in the movie, Rain Man.
According to the Time article on his death, "he could read both facing pages of a book - one with each eye - in seconds and could instantly tell you everything from the day of the week for a bygone date to esoteric facts about sports history or Shakespeare's canon."
"Savant" is French for "skill." Savants use to be called "Idiot Savants." Idiot is the French word for "unlearned," so with idiot savants you have "unlearned skills." "Idiot" has come to have other primary meanings today, so we now use the term, "Austic Savant" because most savants are also autistic.
Rewind to, "he could read both facing pages of a book - one with each eye."
That ability was based on a birth defect. He was born without a corpus callosum, the bundle of nerves that connects the brain's two hemispheres so they can communicate with each other.
Roger Sperry became famous in the 1970s for severing a cat's corpus callosum, covering one of it's eyes and teaching it to navagate a maze. He then moved the eye-patch to the cat's other eye and the cat did not recognize the maze. That became known as "split-brain" research and resulted in people being described as either "right-brained" (artists or women) or "left-brained" (accountants or men). That is over-statement, of course, but is based on the physiology of the brain.
The optic nerve from each eye splits at the optic chiasm and goes to both hemispheres. The hemispheres share information through the corpus callosum. When it is severed or, as in Mr. Peek's case, missing, the two hemispheres have to work independently. The result in Mr. Peek was that he could process the information from both eyes at once because each eye was using a different hemisphere.
The down side of his birth defect? According to his obituary, "He never learned to brush his hair or button his shirt without help."
According to the Time article on his death, "he could read both facing pages of a book - one with each eye - in seconds and could instantly tell you everything from the day of the week for a bygone date to esoteric facts about sports history or Shakespeare's canon."
"Savant" is French for "skill." Savants use to be called "Idiot Savants." Idiot is the French word for "unlearned," so with idiot savants you have "unlearned skills." "Idiot" has come to have other primary meanings today, so we now use the term, "Austic Savant" because most savants are also autistic.
Rewind to, "he could read both facing pages of a book - one with each eye."
That ability was based on a birth defect. He was born without a corpus callosum, the bundle of nerves that connects the brain's two hemispheres so they can communicate with each other.
Roger Sperry became famous in the 1970s for severing a cat's corpus callosum, covering one of it's eyes and teaching it to navagate a maze. He then moved the eye-patch to the cat's other eye and the cat did not recognize the maze. That became known as "split-brain" research and resulted in people being described as either "right-brained" (artists or women) or "left-brained" (accountants or men). That is over-statement, of course, but is based on the physiology of the brain.
The optic nerve from each eye splits at the optic chiasm and goes to both hemispheres. The hemispheres share information through the corpus callosum. When it is severed or, as in Mr. Peek's case, missing, the two hemispheres have to work independently. The result in Mr. Peek was that he could process the information from both eyes at once because each eye was using a different hemisphere.
The down side of his birth defect? According to his obituary, "He never learned to brush his hair or button his shirt without help."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
