Showing posts with label neuroscience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label neuroscience. Show all posts

Monday, December 29, 2014

Buddhism 101 with Rick Hanson, PhD: The Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path

Rick Hanson, author of Buddha's Brain (2009), Just One Thing: Developing a Buddha Brain One Simple Practice at a Time (2011), Hardwiring Happiness: The New Brain Science of Contentment, Calm, and Confidence (2013), is a neuropsychologist, Senior Fellow of the Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley, and a practicing Buddhist.

Dr. Hanson has been a trustee of Saybrook University and served on the board of Spirit Rock Meditation Center for nine years, where is a regular teacher. 

Over the last couple of months, Dr. Hanson posted a series of articles on the basic premises of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths. These are those posts, along with an older article on the Noble Eightfold Path.

In essence, this is Buddhism 101, and if we could master just these principles, we would be very successful on our spiritual paths.

The First Noble Truth – The Noble Truth of Suffering

posted on: November 17th, 2014 

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Michael Brooks - Men Can Be Just as "Maternal" As Women, According to Neuroscience

http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u187208/fathersnewstatesman.jpg

"Sometimes science needs to state the bleeding obvious." Indeed, that about sums it up. But the "bleeding obvious" around this topic is not widely believed in the U.S. Women are still considered better care-givers, more emotionally attuned, and more nurturing. Those of us who know single fathers know this is not true.

By the way, this comes from The New Republic, via The New Statesman.

The researchers scanned the brains of parents while they watched videos of their own interactions with their children. What they found is that brain activity increases in two areas (the article did not name the areas and the study is pay-walled):
One is an emotional network that deals with social bonding, ensures vigilance and coordinates responses to distress, providing chemical rewards for behaviors that maintain the child’s well-being. The other network is concerned with mental processing. It monitors the child’s likely state of mind, emotional condition, and future needs, allowing for planning.
In the secondary care-giver, the activity is stronger in the 2nd area, the one focused on planning and monitoring the child's state of mind. In the primary care-giver, the social bonding and distress response area is most active.

Here's the aha! moment: the above was true no matter who was the primary caregiver, the mother or the father (if the father does not have a female partner). In fathers with female partners, whether they are primary or secondary caregivers, "the relative size of the of emotional and thinking responses varied according to how much time they spend looking after the child."

Take home message: "Neuroscience tells us that children who are raised by two fathers experience the same care-giving environment as those raised by a mother and a father."

Support the Anti-Bulling Campaign
Dan Savage (right), his husband Terry (left) and their son, DJ (middle).

Well, damn, this IS bleeding obvious.

Men Can Be Just as "Maternal" As Women, According to Neuroscience

By Michael Brooks
July 25, 2014

Occasionally, scientific research comes up with banal findings that should nonetheless stop us in our tracks. For example, researchers recently published a study showing that a father’s brain will change its hormonal outputs and neural activity depending on his parenting duties. The conclusion of the research is, in essence, that men make good parents, too. Surely this is not news.

Yet it does provide evidence that is sadly still useful. Those involved with issues of adoption, fathers’ rights, gay rights, child custody, and religion-fueled bigotry will all benefit from understanding what we now know about what makes a good parent.

The biggest enemy of progress has been the natural world, or at least our view of it. Females are the primary caregivers in 95 percent of mammal species. That is mainly because of lactation. Infants are nourished by their mothers’ milk, so it makes sense for most early caring to be done by females.

Human beings, however, have developed more sophisticated means of nourishing and raising our offspring. Should the circumstances require a different set-up, we have ways to cope. It turns out that this is not just in terms of formula milk, nannies or day care: We also have a flexible brain.

The new study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, scanned the brains of parents while they watched videos of their interactions with their children. The researchers found that this stimulated activity in two systems of the brain. One is an emotional network that deals with social bonding, ensures vigilance and coordinates responses to distress, providing chemical rewards for behaviors that maintain the child’s well-being. The other network is concerned with mental processing. It monitors the child’s likely state of mind, emotional condition, and future needs, allowing for planning.

In mothers who are the primary caregivers, the emotional system was most active. Fathers who are secondary to a female caregiver were more engaged as thinkers and planners. But men raising a child without a female partner were found to have the same level of emotional response as a mother and the same thinking and planning response as the secondary father. In other words, they are able to perform both roles.

What’s more, for men in both primary and secondary roles, the relative size of the of emotional and thinking responses varied according to how much time they spend looking after the child. To give the child the best care, the brain changes its output depending on circumstances.

Neuroscience tells us that children who are raised by two fathers experience the same care-giving environment as those raised by a mother and a father. Similar studies still need to be conducted on single mothers, non-parents raising children and dual-mother parents but the likelihood is that they, too, will display similar plasticity.

Oregon State University’s Sarina Saturn writes that this will one day be regarded as a landmark study. That is a little depressing—we shouldn’t need scientific research to tell us this. Yet she is right. It will help dispel prejudice, just as the discovery of homosexual activity among animals helped to dispel the myth that this is somehow unnatural. We now know that the brain “is flexible enough to keep up with the times”, as Saturn puts it. Hurrah. Sometimes science needs to state the bleeding obvious.

~ This piece first appeared on newstatesman.com.

Monday, July 14, 2014

Denise Cummins - Why Some People Seem to Lack Empathy

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6q0ntngPzy2AAcGTGIg8TPvJ613e9BbatSBtHZPrbwBlH-YNVgTMAjmXBfCVuIYfnr96fgcWz9G3w2t44UUPtMe3bjbpiy1RpXZx-F0Aj_-5XlPQqoEo_dsC-Daua2vs5HLA3WOqygaVY/s400/Empathy.png

Between men and women, men usually get the bad rap for not being very good about expressing empathy, unfairly I would suggest.

This post from Psychology Today's Good Thinking blog, by Denise Cummins, Ph.D., offers some insight into people (not just men) seem to lack empathy - and it's a study of women only (no men).



Why friends sometimes shun each other when they should be there instead.

Published on June 23, 2014 by Denise Cummins, Ph.D. in Good Thinking

"You OK? You seem distracted", asks Alice's coworker.


"Yes, I'm OK", Alice responds. "It's just that my mother is in the hospital again, and I'm not sure she's going to make it this time." Alice's voice cracks, and she reaches for a tissue to wipe her tears. When she looks up, she is surprised to find her coworker has vanished.

To make matters worse, her coworker avoids her for the rest of the day. He is even hostile when Alice asks for information she needs to complete a report.

Later that evening, her coworker sends her an email that simply says, "Sorry. Couldn't take it."

Most of us have had interactions like this that leave us scratching our heads. We can reverse the sexes in the above scenario, or have both parties be the same sex. It doesn't matter. It still surprises and chagrins us when people we consider friends—decent, kind people—seem to abandon us when we most need emotional support. They are clearly not sadists who delight in the suffering of others or psychopaths who are indifferent to it. So their behavior is perplexing.

This kind of interaction can lead to anger, judgment, and recriminations—the "you don't care about me" outrage response. But here is the problem: Both parties feel their feelings have been trampled.


The Empathy Response Can Lead to Emotional Overwhelm

Consider what happens inside us when we view the suffering of others. When we experience physical pain or emotional distress ourselves, a neural circuit becomes activated (anterior cingulate cortex—or ACC--and insula).  Neuroscientific research shows this same circuit gets activated when we see others suffer pain or emotional distress. So seeing the suffering of others causes us to suffer as well.
Although this response is crucial for social interaction, it is indeed unpleasant. If that circuit is hit too frequently (excessive sharing of others' negative experiences), it can lead to emotional burnout.

And so people develop strategies for protecting themselves. Some do what Alice's coworker did—put physical and emotional distance between themselves and the suffering person. Some stay present but emotionally dissociate, which the sufferer usually experiences as emotional abandonment.

Coping with the Emotional Overwhelm of Empathy

A crucial part of socialization is learning how to protect oneself from being overwhelmed by the suffering of others while still giving them the support they need and deserve.

Research suggests that the answer to this dilemma may be compassion training. Compassion is defined as a feeling of concern for the suffering of others (rather than experiencing distress in the face of the suffering of others.) Programs aimed at training compassion have been found to foster prosocial (helping) behavior while evoking a feeling of emotional well-being.

Recent research led by Max Planck scientist Olga Klimicki showed that compassion training actually affects which neural circuits are activated when viewing the suffering of others. 

This was the basic design of the experiment:


Compassion study design
The design of an fMRI study on compassion training

The affect group viewed three blocks of video clips that consisted of a high-emotion and a low-emotion video clip (10-18 seconds long). The clips were taken from newscasts or documentaries. The high-emotion video showed people suffering physical or emotional distress. The low-emotion vides showed everyday scenes that did not include suffering. fMRI brain scans were taken while the women viewed the videos. After each video, the women rated how much empathy, positive feelings and negative feeling they had experienced while seeing the video. They were told that "empathy" meant how much they shared the emotion of the persons in the video clips.

The first session was the baseline—the women simply viewed the videos and their natural responses were recorded. Following this pre-training viewing session, the women received "empathy training" to enhance their empathetic responses. This training consisted of instructing them to focus on resonating with the suffering they were viewing. The second viewing session followed this training. Following this, they received "compassion training" which consisted of a meditation for directing love and compassion toward themselves and others. They then viewed the third and final set of videos. (A control group completed a memory task that consisted of learning lists of neutral words.)

The results were quite striking: As expected, the women showed more distress to the high-emotion clips than the low-emotion ones, both in their fMRI scans and their own ratings. The scans showed activation of the "empathy circuit" (ACC and insula). Their distress was enhanced following empathy training—greater activation in their empathy circuitry, higher negative emotion ratings, and lower positive emotion ratings.

But importantly, compassion training reversed these effects: Negative emotion ratings returned to baseline levels, positive emotion ratings surpassed baseline levels, and a brain circuit associated with reward and affiliation became activated (medial orbitofrontal cortex and striatum).

The researchers concluded that compassion can be trained as a coping strategy to overcome empathic distress and strengthen resilience. Rather than feeling overwhelmed by the suffering of others, those trained in compassion can offer help while simultaneously deriving peace and satisfaction from reducing the suffering of others.

Final note: You may be wondering why only women served as participants in the study. The answer can be found here.

Copyright June 23, 2014 Denise Cummins, PhD

Dr. Cummins is a research psychologist, a Fellow of the Association for Psychological Science, and the author of Good Thinking: Seven Powerful Ideas That Influence the Way We Think.

More information about me can be found on my homepage
And my author page.
Follow me on Twitter.
And on Google+.