Both mental and physical effort rise from deep sub-cortical structures.

Schmidt et al. show that a common motivational system within the basala ganglia underlies performance of both mental and physical efforts.

Mental and physical efforts, such as paying attention and lifting weights, have been shown to involve different brain systems. These cognitive and motor systems, respectively, include cortical networks (prefronto-parietal and precentral regions) as well as subregions of the dorsal basal ganglia (caudate and putamen). Both systems appeared sensitive to incentive motivation: their activity increases when we work for higher rewards. Another brain system, including the ventral prefrontal cortex and the ventral basal ganglia, has been implicated in encoding expected rewards. How this motivational system drives the cognitive and motor systems remains poorly understood. More specifically, it is unclear whether cognitive and motor systems can be driven by a common motivational center or if they are driven by distinct, dedicated motivational modules. To address this issue, we used functional MRI to scan healthy participants while performing a task in which incentive motivation, cognitive, and motor demands were varied independently. We reasoned that a common motivational node should (1) represent the reward expected from effort exertion, (2) correlate with the performance attained, and (3) switch effective connectivity between cognitive and motor regions depending on task demand.

The ventral striatum fulfilled all three criteria and therefore qualified as a common motivational node capable of driving both cognitive and motor regions of the dorsal striatum. Thus, we suggest that the interaction between a common motivational system and the different task-specific systems underpinning behavioral performance might occur within the basal ganglia.

Liljeholm and O'Doherty also offer context and perspective on this work.

Young blood enhances repair of old brains.

In a Neuroscience perspective in Science Redmond and Chan summarize work of Ruckh et al. showing that factors present in the blood of younger mice (introduced by joining the circulatory systems of a young and old mouse) enhance repair of the myelin sheath around neuronal axons in the older mice. Here is a graphic from the summary:

Legend - The circulatory system of an “old” mouse (gray) with a demyelinated lesion was surgically joined with that of a healthy “young” mouse (white. The old mouse exhibited enhanced remyelination relative to the control, an old-old mouse pair. Remyelination depended on the recruitment of circulatory factors from the young mouse, including macrophages. Resident “old” oligodendroglia retain remyelination potential even as they age, but macrophage-mediated clearance of inhibitory myelin debris from the lesion may become impaired.

John Cleese on creativity

For the second time, I've come across some engaging comments by the British actor John Cleese, and I though I would pass them on. Cleese's model for creativity centers on the interplay of two modes of operating – open, where we take a wide-angle, abstract view of the problem and allow the mind to ponder possible solutions, and closed, where we zoom in on implementing a specific solution with narrow precision.  In the 10 minute video, he stresses the role of the unconscious. 

-Space ("You can't become playful, and therefore creative, if you're under your usual pressures.")

-Time ("It's not enough to create space; you have to create your space for a specific period of time.")


-Time ("Giving your mind as long as possible to come up with something original," and learning to tolerate the discomfort of pondering time and indecision.)

-Confidence ("Nothing will stop you being creative so effectively as the fear of making a mistake.")
 -Humor ("The main evolutionary significance of humor is that it gets us from the closed mode to the open mode quicker than anything else.")

Further points:

Creativity is not a talent. It is a way of operating.

We need to be in the open mode when pondering a problem – but! – once we come up with a solution, we must then switch to the closed mode to implement it. Because once we've made a decision, we are efficient only if we go through with it decisively, undistracted by doubts about its correctness.

To be at our most efficient, we need to be able to switch backwards and forward between the two modes. But – here's the problem – we too often get stuck in the closed mode. Under the pressures which are all too familiar to us, we tend to maintain tunnel vision at times when we really need to step back and contemplate the wider view. This is particularly true, for example, of politicians. The main complaint about them from their nonpolitical colleagues is that they've become so addicted to the adrenaline that they get from reacting to events on an hour-by-hour basis that they almost completely lose the desire or the ability to ponder problems in the open mode. Cleese concludes with a beautiful articulation of the premise and promise of his recipe for creativity:

This is the extraordinary thing about creativity: If just you keep your mind resting against the subject in a friendly but persistent way, sooner or later you will get a reward from your unconscious.

Swarm Intelligence - The Simpleton Ant and the Intelligent Ants

Another posting from my scan of responses to the edge.org annual question "What is your favorite deep elegant or beautiful explanation?" In his essay, Robert Sapolsky does a curious stroll through several candidate beautiful stories he considered (the double helix, the work of Hubel and Wiesel on how the visual brain extracts features, how the GI tract moves stuff along…) and comes to rest on this selection:

...emergence and complexity, as represented by "swarm intelligence."

Observe a single ant, and it doesn't make much sense, walking in one direction, suddenly careening in another for no obvious reason, doubling back on itself. Thoroughly unpredictable.

The same happens with two ants, a handful of ants. But a colony of ants makes fantastic sense. Specialized jobs, efficient means of exploiting new food sources, complex underground nests with temperature regulated within a few degrees. And critically, there's no blueprint or central source of command—each individual ants has algorithms for their behaviors. But this is not wisdom of the crowd, where a bunch of reasonably informed individuals outperform a single expert. The ants aren't reasonably informed about the big picture. Instead, the behavior algorithms of each ant consist of a few simple rules for interacting with the local environment and local ants. And out of this emerges a highly efficient colony.

Ant colonies excel at generating trails that connect locations in the shortest possible way, accomplished with simple rules about when to lay down a pheromone trail and what to do when encountering someone else's trail—approximations of optimal solutions to the Traveling Salesman problem. This has useful applications. In "ant-based routing," simulations using virtual ants with similar rules can generate optimal ways of connecting the nodes in a network, something of great interest to telecommunications companies. It applies to the developing brain, which must wire up vast numbers of neurons with vaster numbers of connections without constructing millions of miles of connecting axons. And migrating fetal neurons generate an efficient solution with a different version of ant-based routine.

A wonderful example is how local rules about attraction and repulsion (i.e., positive and negative charges) allow simple molecules in an organic soup to occasionally form more complex ones. Life may have originated this way without the requirement of bolts of lightening to catalyze the formation of complex molecules

. And why is self-organization so beautiful to my atheistic self? Because if complex, adaptive systems don't require a blue print, they don't require a blue print maker. If they don't require lightening bolts, they don't require Someone hurtling lightening bolts. 

Two different ways of making choices in two brain areas.

Kolling et al. note brain correlates of two different ways of making decisions. They use fMRI of humans to examine neural correlates of foraging, which involves a choice of whether or not to engage with options as they are encountered (which is different from the sort of binary choice between currently available options studied by behavioral economics.) Here is their abstract:

Behavioral economic studies involving limited numbers of choices have provided key insights into neural decision-making mechanisms. By contrast, animals’ foraging choices arise in the context of sequences of encounters with prey or food. On each encounter, the animal chooses whether to engage or, if the environment is sufficiently rich, to search elsewhere. The cost of foraging is also critical. We demonstrate that humans can alternate between two modes of choice, comparative decision-making and foraging, depending on distinct neural mechanisms in ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) using distinct reference frames; in ACC, choice variables are represented in invariant reference to foraging or searching for alternatives. Whereas vmPFC encodes values of specific well-defined options, ACC encodes the average value of the foraging environment and cost of foraging.

More on why exercise is so good for us...

Many studies show that egular physical activity confers enormous fitness benefits. Exercise training enhances muscular endurance and strength, expends calories, and combats the development of common diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. The effects of exercise are systemic and seemingly cannot be explained solely by the expenditure of calories in muscle.  Daniel Kelly writes a perspective on recent work showing how a new protein messenger named irisin (after Iris, the Greek messenger goddess) is released during muscle activity and triggers remodeling and energy expenditure in distant subcutaneous fat tissue deposits. Here is a summary figure of the muscle cell (myocyte) - fat cell (adipocyte) connection. 

Figure: The proposed irisin messenger system is depicted for humans [but was characterized in mice]. Exercise and energy expenditure induces the transcriptional regulator PGC-1α in the skeletal myocyte, which in turn drives the production of the membrane protein FNDC5. The circulating factor irisin, cleaved from FNDC5, activates thermogenic programs in white adipose tissue (“browning”), including mitochondrial biogenesis and the expression of uncoupling protein 1 (UCP1), leading to mitochondrial heat production and energy expenditure.

Seeing the whole reduces access to its parts.

The content of our conscious experience is automatically dictated by higher level stages of visual processing, which are associated with the representation of more abstract and meaningful interpretations. Poljac et. al. show that the ability to form a more abstract representation of a given visual input (in terms of a particular object) does not simply mean that the details of this stimulus are not immediately or automatically accessible to conscious perception, but that these details become fundamentally less accessible. The whole decreases access to the parts.

The experiments used computer generated walking dot figures of humans, both upright (easy to form the gestalt as human walking), and upside-down (more difficult to form the gestalt), as well as random stationary or moving dots. The rates of changes in dot colors were not perceived as well in the upright walking figures which generated the clearest gestalts.

They suggest that the rapid extraction of a perceptual Gestalt, and the inaccessibility of the parts that make up that Gestalt, may in fact reflect two sides of the same coin whereby human vision provides only the most useful level of abstraction to conscious awareness. This whole point is explained very beautifully in Metzinger's book, "The Ego Tunnel." (I did a series of five daily posts on this post, starting on 6/30/09)

Clothes can invade our body and brain...

Adam and Galinsky offer an interesting variant of studies on embodied cognition, a topic that MindBlog has frequently visited (35 postings, see left column) - showing that clothing can invade our body and brain, putting us into a different psychological state. After citing numerous studies of how clothes we wear have power over others, they do a discrete experiment to demonstrate a power of clothing over ourselves, specifically the power and accuracy of our attention:

We introduce the term “enclothed cognition” to describe the systematic influence that clothes have on the wearer's psychological processes. We offer a potentially unifying framework to integrate past findings and capture the diverse impact that clothes can have on the wearer by proposing that enclothed cognition involves the co-occurrence of two independent factors—the symbolic meaning of the clothes and the physical experience of wearing them. As a first test of our enclothed cognition perspective, the current research explored the effects of wearing a lab coat. A pretest found that a lab coat is generally associated with attentiveness and carefulness. We therefore predicted that wearing a lab coat would increase performance on attention-related tasks. In Experiment 1, physically wearing a lab coat increased selective attention compared to not wearing a lab coat. In Experiments 2 and 3, wearing a lab coat described as a doctor's coat increased sustained attention compared to wearing a lab coat described as a painter's coat, and compared to simply seeing or even identifying with a lab coat described as a doctor's coat. Thus, the current research suggests a basic principle of enclothed cognition—it depends on both the symbolic meaning and the physical experience of wearing the clothes.

When two heads are worse than one - the cost of collaboration

An interesting bit in Psychological Science from Minson and Mueller, who demonstrate that joint decision making exacerbates rejection of outside information and lowers accuracy of the effort:

Prior investigators have asserted that certain group characteristics cause group members to disregard outside information and that this behavior leads to diminished performance. We demonstrate that the very process of making a judgment collaboratively rather than individually also contributes to such myopic underweighting of external viewpoints. Dyad members exposed to numerical judgments made by peers gave significantly less weight to those judgments than did individuals working alone. This difference in willingness to use peer input was mediated by the greater confidence that the dyad members reported in the accuracy of their own estimates. Furthermore, dyads were no better at judging the relative accuracy of their own estimates and the advisor’s estimates than individuals were. Our analyses demonstrate that, relative to individuals, dyads suffered an accuracy cost. Specifically, if dyad members had given as much weight to peer input as individuals working alone did, then their revised estimates would have been significantly more accurate.

Why Curry, Wine And Coffee Cure Most Ails

A nice brief essay from Murali Doriaswamy:

What makes an explanation beautiful? Many elegant explanations in science are those that have been vetted fully but there are just as many beautiful wildly popular explanations where the beauty is just skin deep. I want to give two examples from the field of brain health.

When preliminary mice studies showed that an ingredient in dietary curry spice may have anti-Alzheimer effects, I suspect every vindaloo lover thought that was a beautiful explanation for why India had a low rate of Alzheimer's. But does India really have a low Alzheimer's rate after adjusting for life span and genetic differences? No one really knows..Likewise when an observational study in the 1990s reported wine drinkers in Bordeaux had lower rates of Alzheimer's, there was a collective "I knew it" from oenophiles...The latest observational findings now link coffee drinking with lower risk for Alzheimer's, much to the delight of the millions of caffeine addicts.

In reality, neither coffee nor wine nor curry spice have been proven in controlled trials to have any benefits against Alzheimer's. Regardless, the cognitive resonance these "remedies" find with the reader far exceeds the available evidence. One can find similar examples in virtually every field of medicine and science.

I would like to suggest two conditions that might render an explanation unusually beautiful: 1) a ring of truth, 2) confirmation biases. We all favor explanations and test them in a manner that confirms our own beliefs (confirmation bias). A small amount of factual data can be magnified into a beautiful fully proven explanation in one's mind if the right circumstance exist—thus, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. This may occur less often in one's own specialized fields, but we are all vulnerable in fields in which we are less expert in.

Given how often leading scientific explanations are proven wrong in subsequent years, one would do well to bear in mind Santayana's quote that "almost every wise saying has an opposite one, no less wise, to balance it". As for me, I love my curry, coffee and wine but am not yet counting on them to stop Alzheimer's.

How curriculum reform can decrease learning.

In the Editor's choice section of Science Magazine, McCartney reviews an interesting article in the Physics Education Journal:

Since 1975, the same Prior Knowledge Test (PKT) has been given to incoming students studying physics at the University of Bristol, UK. Designed to identify areas of math and physics that might need extra attention in the curriculum, PKT scores remained constant through 1991, decreased dramatically between 1992 and 2000, and stabilized after 2001, suggesting a clear change in the ability of students in the tested subjects. Barham argues that the decrease in scores was caused by modularization of the secondary education curriculum, which resulted in students learning the material required for each module examination and failing to retain it afterward. This highlights the dangers of a “learn and forget” approach to physics and math, and the author suggests that university faculty adapt their teaching methods to allow for the changes in preparedness of incoming students, particularly in math, where large parts of multistage calculations should not be skipped over. Furthermore, he argues for encouraging the understanding that physics and math are coherent disciplines, wherein material taught at all levels must be retained for a complete understanding of the subject.

Our brain structure changes after two hours of learning.

Sagi and colleagues have provided the first evidence that rapid structural plasticity can be detected in humans after just 2 hr of playing a video game. To assess brain structure they used diffusion magnetic resonance imaging, a technique sensitive to the self-diffusion of water molecules that depends on tissue architecture (how freely water diffuses depends on the space between the objects such as neurons, glia, and blood vessels, that it is moving through). They showd that only two hours of learning can cause a mean diffusivity reduction in the human hippocampus. In a similar supporting study on rats, the authors were able to show that changes in brain derived neurotropic growth (BDNF) factor correlated with the structural change measured by MRI. I'm passing on the abstract, and for those of you who like data, one of the figures from their paper.

The timescale of structural remodeling that accompanies functional neuroplasticity is largely unknown. Although structural remodeling of human brain tissue is known to occur following long-term (weeks) acquisition of a new skill, little is known as to what happens structurally when the brain needs to adopt new sequences of procedural rules or memorize a cascade of events within minutes or hours. Using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), an MRI-based framework, we examined subjects before and after a spatial learning and memory task. Microstructural changes (as reflected by DTI measures) of limbic system structures (hippocampus and parahippocampus) were significant after only 2 hr of training. This observation was also found in a supporting rat study. We conclude that cellular rearrangement of neural tissue can be detected by DTI, and that this modality may allow neuroplasticity to be localized over short timescales.

Figure (Click on figure to enlarge it) - Structural Remodeling of Brain Tissue, Measured by DTI as Changes in MD after 2 hr of Training on a Spatial Learning and Memory TaskThe following statistical analyses were employed: paired t tests between the MD maps before and after the task in the learning group (A and F); planned comparisons analysis of the learning versus control groups with respect to scan time with predicated effect in the learning group only (B and G); and linear effect between groups (C and H) as well as a group by time interaction following ANOVA (D and I). The effects were found in the left hippocampus (A–D) and right parahippocampus (F–I). The parametric maps in these images were generated at a significance level of p less than 0.005 (uncorrected). The enlarged subset in those images indicates the significant voxels following correction for multiple comparisons (p less than 0.05, corrected). In the enlarged subset the corrected p value color scale is between 0.005 and 0.05. L indicates the left side of the brain. (E) and (J) show the MD values in the clusters in the subset of (A) and (F) (mean ± SEM). (K) shows the correlation analysis between subjects' improvement rates (see Figure 1) and decrease in MD in the right parahippocampus (of the cluster in F).

The happiest countries? I'm confused.

Having just done a post on March 2 on an article in the Economist reporting most happiness in poor and middle income countries (most Europeans less happy than rest of world), now appears a "World Happiness Report" (PDF here, Summary by lead author Helliwell here) prepared for a United Nations conference on happiness, that rates developed Northern European countries as having highest happiness. Compare the graphic below with the one in the March 2 post.  Helliwell: "the richest countries are a lot happier than the poorest."  The Economist: "the highest levels of self-reported happiness is not in rich countries."  I guess the way you ask the questions is rather crucial, and also sample size,  but at the moment I'm not patient enough to figure out what is going on.  Maybe a helpful reader will resolve all in a comment on this post.

Homophobic? Maybe you're Gay!

Two of the authors of an interesting study of homophobia summarize their article in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in a New York Times piece. They ask why political and religious figures who campaign against gay rights so often implicated in sexual encounters with same-sex partners and find solid evidence that homophobia can result from suppression of same-sex desires. Their:

...paper describes six studies conducted in the United States and Germany involving 784 university students. Participants rated their sexual orientation on a 10-point scale, ranging from gay to straight. Then they took a computer-administered test designed to measure their implicit sexual orientation. In the test, the participants were shown images and words indicative of hetero- and homosexuality (pictures of same-sex and straight couples, words like “homosexual” and “gay”) and were asked to sort them into the appropriate category, gay or straight, as quickly as possible. The computer measured their reaction times.

The twist was that before each word and image appeared, the word “me” or “other” was flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds — long enough for participants to subliminally process the word but short enough that they could not consciously see it. The theory here, known as semantic association, is that when “me” precedes words or images that reflect your sexual orientation (for example, heterosexual images for a straight person), you will sort these images into the correct category faster than when “me” precedes words or images that are incongruent with your sexual orientation (for example, homosexual images for a straight person). This technique, adapted from similar tests used to assess attitudes like subconscious racial bias, reliably distinguishes between self-identified straight individuals and those who self-identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual. 

Individuals who self identified as highly straight but indicated some same sex attraction (i.e. 'me' with gay related words most rapidly) were more likely than other participants to favor anti-gay policies,  assign harsher punishments to petty crimes though to be perpetrated by gay people, and be raised by parents perceived to be controlling, less accepting and more prejudiced against homosexuals.

Colored brains carpet bomb the web.

I got very excited by two articles in the current issue of science, was about to do a long writeup,  and then realized such an effort would be incredibly redundant, because descriptions of the work were sprouting like mushrooms all over the blogosphere.   It reminds me of driving through small Texas towns with my grandmother when I was very young, and on asking "what do the people do here?" Her response: "They take in each other's laundry."

Anyway, Chen et al. do an analysis of the genetic topography of the cortex, and Wedeen et al. show fiber pathways in the brain. The studies find unifying hierarchical and geometric rules behind the organizational details that demonstrate overlapping grid structures. Here are just a few of the reviews, from Science, from Discover Magazine, from Time, from Medical News Today.

Innovation relies on the obscure.

McCaffrey suggests that a "generic-parts technique" enhances creative problem solving. He uses a toy insight problem - the two rings problem - as an example. The participant has to fasten together two weighty steel rings using only a long candle, a match, and a 2-in. cube of steel. Melted wax is not strong enough to bond the rings, so the solution relies on noticing that the wick is a string, which can be used to tie the rings together. Once people notice this, they easily devise a way to extricate the wick from the wax (e.g., scrape away the wax on the edge of the cube). Here is his abstract, followed by his description of the generic-parts technique:

A recent analysis of real-world problems that led to historic inventions and insight problems that are used in psychology experiments suggests that during innovative problem solving, individuals discover at least one infrequently noticed or new (i.e., obscure) feature of the problem that can be used to reach a solution. This observation suggests that research uncovering aspects of the human semantic, perceptual, and motor systems that inhibit the noticing of obscure features would enable researchers to identify effective techniques to overcome those obstacles. As a critical step in this research program, this study showed that the generic-parts technique can help people unearth the types of obscure features that can be used to overcome functional fixedness, which is a classic inhibitor to problem solving. Subjects trained on this technique solved on average 67% more problems than a control group did. By devising techniques that facilitate the noticing of obscure features in order to overcome impediments to problem solving (e.g., design fixation), researchers can systematically create a tool kit of innovation-enhancing techniques.

Here is his description of the generic parts technique (GPT)

...two questions are continually asked as a person creates a parts diagram (see figure below). For each description a participant creates, he or she should ask, “Can this be decomposed further?” If so, the participant should break that part into its subparts and create another hierarchy level in the diagram. The second question to ask is “Does this description imply a use?” If so, the participant should create a more generic description based on material and shape. This procedure results in a tree, in which the description in each leaf (i.e., the bottom level of the tree’s hierarchy) does not imply a use and involves the material and shape of the part under consideration. Further, because the parts become smaller as the hierarchy levels progress, this process also calls attention to the size of each of the parts. In essence, the GPT helps subjects think beyond the common functions associated with an object and its parts.

Feeling the moves - motor empathy with expert performance

Jola et al. make the interesting observation that experienced viewers of ballet, even without physical training, covertly simulate the movements for which they have acquired visual experience, their empathic abilities heighten motor resonance during dance observation - activating the same brain motor pathways actually being used by the dancers:

The human “mirror-system” is suggested to play a crucial role in action observation and execution, and is characterized by activity in the premotor and parietal cortices during the passive observation of movements. The previous motor experience of the observer has been shown to enhance the activity in this network. Yet visual experience could also have a determinant influence when watching more complex actions, as in dance performances. Here we tested the impact visual experience has on motor simulation when watching dance, by measuring changes in corticospinal excitability. We also tested the effects of empathic abilities. To fully match the participants' long-term visual experience with the present experimental setting, we used three live solo dance performances: ballet, Indian dance, and non-dance. Participants were either frequent dance spectators of ballet or Indian dance, or “novices” who never watched dance. None of the spectators had been physically trained in these dance styles. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to measure corticospinal excitability by means of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in both the hand and the arm, because the hand is specifically used in Indian dance and the arm is frequently engaged in ballet dance movements. We observed that frequent ballet spectators showed larger MEP amplitudes in the arm muscles when watching ballet compared to when they watched other performances. We also found that the higher Indian dance spectators scored on the fantasy subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the larger their MEPs were in the arms when watching Indian dance. Our results show that even without physical training, corticospinal excitability can be enhanced as a function of either visual experience or the tendency to imaginatively transpose oneself into fictional characters. We suggest that spectators covertly simulate the movements for which they have acquired visual experience, and that empathic abilities heighten motor resonance during dance observation.

The Righteous Mind

I want to point to two reviews of Jonathan Haidt's new book, which has the title of this post. It brings exceptional clarity to the definition of contemporary liberals and conservatives, and argues that it is the liberals who are not getting the point. First, some clips from Kristof's comments:

Jonathan Haidt, a University of Virginia psychology professor, argues that, for liberals, morality is largely a matter of three values: caring for the weak, fairness and liberty. Conservatives share those concerns (although they think of fairness and liberty differently) and add three others: loyalty, respect for authority and sanctity...Those latter values bind groups together with a shared respect for symbols and institutions such as the flag or the military...This year’s Republican primaries have been a kaleidoscope of loyalty, authority and sanctity issues...Americans speak about values in six languages, from care to sanctity. Conservatives speak all six, but liberals are fluent in only three...Moral psychology can help to explain why the Democratic Party has had so much difficulty connecting with voters.

From Saletan's review:

Haidt argues that people are fundamentally intuitive, not rational. If you want to persuade others, you have to appeal to their sentiments...We were never designed to listen to reason. When you ask people moral questions, time their responses and scan their brains, their answers and brain activation patterns indicate that they reach conclusions quickly and produce reasons later only to justify what they’ve decided...The problem isn’t that people don’t reason. They do reason. But their arguments aim to support their conclusions, not yours. Reason doesn’t work like a judge or teacher, impartially weighing evidence or guiding us to wisdom. It works more like a lawyer or press secretary, justifying our acts and judgments to others...Haidt invokes an evolutionary hypothesis: We compete for social status, and the key advantage in this struggle is the ability to influence others. Reason, in this view, evolved to help us spin, not to help us learn. So if you want to change people’s minds, Haidt concludes, don’t appeal to their reason. Appeal to reason’s boss: the underlying moral intuitions whose conclusions reason defends.

We acquire morality the same way we acquire food preferences: we start with what we’re given. If it tastes good, we stick with it. If it doesn’t, we reject it. People accept God, authority and karma because these ideas suit their moral taste buds. Haidt points to research showing that people punish cheaters, accept many hierarchies and don’t support equal distribution of benefits when contributions are unequal...You don’t have to go abroad to see these ideas. You can find them in the Republican Party. Social conservatives see welfare and feminism as threats to responsibility and family stability. The Tea Party hates redistribution because it interferes with letting people reap what they earn. Faith, patriotism, valor, chastity, law and order — these Republican themes touch all six moral foundations, whereas Democrats, in Haidt’s analysis, focus almost entirely on care and fighting oppression. This is Haidt’s startling message to the left: When it comes to morality, conservatives are more broad-minded than liberals. They serve a more varied diet.

Is income inequality immoral? Should government favor religion? Can we tolerate cultures of female subjugation? And how far should we trust our instincts? Should people who find homosexuality repugnant overcome that reaction?..Haidt’s faith in moral taste receptors may not survive this scrutiny. Our taste for sanctity or authority, like our taste for sugar, could turn out to be a dangerous relic. But Haidt is right that we must learn what we have been, even if our nature is to transcend it.

Haidt's book references a number of experiments noted in MindBlog posts, on differences in the psychologies and autonomic nervous system reactivities of conservatives and liberals.

By the way, in this same vein, I might point to Chris Money's comments on his book "The Republican Brain," which he almost called "The Science of Truthiness," which asks why very intelligent Republicans deny scientific realities such as evolution and climate change.

Everything Is The Way It Is Because It Got That Way

An interesting summary of some core ideas in developmental psychology by Paul Bloom:

This aphorism is attributed to the biologist and classicist D'Arcy Thompson, and it's an elegant summary of how Thompson sought to explain the shapes of things, from jellyfish to sand dunes to elephant tusks....this insight applies to explanation more generally—all sciences are, to at least some extent, historical sciences. 

I think it's a perfect motto for my own field of developmental psychology. Every adult mind has two histories. There is evolution. Few would doubt that some of the most elegant and persuasive explanations in psychology appeal to the constructive process of natural selection. And there is development—how our minds unfold over time, the processes of maturation and learning. 

While evolutionary explanations work best for explaining what humans share, development can sometimes capture how we differ. This can be obvious: Nobody is surprised to hear that adults who are fluent in Korean have usually been exposed to Korean when they were children or that adults who practice Judaism have usually been raised as Jews. But other developmental explanations are rather interesting.

There is evidence that an adult's inability to see in stereo is due to poor vision during a critical period in childhood. Some have argued that the self-confidence of adult males is influenced by how young they were when they reached puberty (because of the boost in status caused by being bigger, even if temporarily, than their peers). It's been claimed that smarter adults are more likely to be firstborns (because later children find themselves in environments that are, on average, less intellectually sophisticated). Creative adults are more likely to be later-borns (because they were forced to find their own distinctive niches.) Romantic attachments in adults are influenced by their relationships as children with their parents. A man's pain-sensitivity later in life is influenced by whether or not he was circumcised as a baby.

With the exception of the stereo-vision example, I don't know if any of these explanations are true. But they are elegant and non-obvious, and some of them verge on beautiful.

Handedness affects the coding of affective information.

Interesting correlates from Brunyé et al.:

The body specificity hypothesis posits that the way in which people interact with the world affects their mental representation of information. For instance, right- versus left-handedness affects the mental representation of affective valence, with right-handers categorically associating good with rightward areas and bad with leftward areas, and left-handers doing the opposite. In two experiments we have tested whether this hypothesis can: extend to spatial memory, be measured in a continuous manner, be predicted by extent of handedness, and how the application of such a heuristic might vary as a function of informational specificity. A first experiment demonstrated systematic and continuous spatial location memory biases as a function of associated affective information; right-handed individuals misremembered positively- and negatively-valenced locations as further right and left, respectively, relative to their original locations. Left-handed individuals did the opposite, and in general those with stronger right- or left-handedness showed greater spatial memory biases. A second experiment tested whether participants would show similar effects when studying a map with high visual specificity (i.e., zoomed in); they did not. Overall we support the hypothesis that handedness affects the coding of affective information, and better specify the scope and nature of body-specific effects on spatial memory.