Thursday, 23 October 2014

How reminders of money affect people's expression and perception of emotion

Bank robbers and gamblers will tell you what people are prepared to do for the sake of money. But money also has more subtle influences. Back in 2006, researchers showed that mere reminders of money made people more selfish (although note a later attempt failed to replicate this result).

In the latest research in this field, a team led by Yuwei Jiang have shown that exposing people to pictures of money, or to money-related words, reduces their emotional expressivity and makes them more sensitive to other people's expressions of emotion. The researchers think the effect occurs because money primes a business mindset, and in business the cultural norm is to conceal emotion.

There were six studies in all, involving a mixture of dozens of undergrads in Hong Kong, and dozens of US adults recruited via the Amazon Mechanical Turk website. In every case some participants were exposed to money and some weren't. The money exposure was either via looking at pictures of cash and coins, ostensibly to judge the clarity and lighting of the pictures (control participants saw pictures of sea shells, furniture or green leaves), or through rearranging words into sentences, many of which pertained to money (control participants only dealt with neutral sentences).

Being exposed to pictures of money or money-related words led participants to say they were less keen on sharing their emotions; to actually convey less negative emotion when asked to write a negative review about a product they were unhappy with; to convey less positive emotion when asked to write a description of a funny movie clip; to perceive other people's facial expressions of emotion as more intense; and to have less desire to interact with a smiley or angry person. In each case these effects were shown in comparison with control participants who were not exposed to money.

A couple of details to consider. Jiang and his colleagues said these effects weren't simply related to motivation. For example, on the writing tasks, the money condition participants wrote just as many words and for just as long as the control participants; the specific difference was that they included less emotion in their writing. Also, there were ways to reduce the effects of money. For example, when money-exposed people were told that other people's emotions were being displayed in private, they no longer rated those people's emotions as more intense - this is consistent with the idea that money primes a business mindset that has implications for the public, but not private, expression of emotion.

The researchers said their findings have several practical implications. "... if a consideration of money increases individuals' perception that the public expression of emotion is inappropriate," they explained, "it may decrease the desirability of using money as a medium of exchange when strong feelings are being conveyed." They also added that more research is needed to see if the effects they reported will apply in nations or cultures that are less commercialised than the US and Hong Kong.

_________________________________ ResearchBlogging.org

Jiang, Y., Chen, Z., & Wyer, R. (2014). Impact of money on emotional expression Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 228-233 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2014.07.013

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Wednesday, 22 October 2014

Can a brain scan tell us anything about the art of creative writing?

When an accomplished creative writer gets on with their craft, their brain operates in a somewhat different way to a novice's. A new imaging study suggests that the expert approach may be more streamlined, emotionally literate, and initially unfiltered.

Katharina Erhard with her colleagues from the German universities of Greifswald and Hildesheim asked participants to read a fragment of a story, to brainstorm what could continue the narrative, and then, for two minutes, to write a continuation of the story. Their brains were scanned throughout. This is an improvement on previous studies that have simply involved participants imagining a story while lying in a scanner.

Participants were 20 experts - students on competitive creative writing courses with over 10 years experience and a weekly average of 21 hours practice - and 28 novices practicing less than an hour per week. Independent judges considered the experts' writing significantly more creative: "unmade laundry, unloved days" was how one expert closed his response to an account of a bitter bachelor killing himself in a laundry, whereas a tale of a violinist losing his instrument in the snow conjured this image: "the glacier, winding its tongue around the sounds, suddenly gulped the violin". The differences between expert and novice brain activation during the writing phase offers some tantalising clues to how such quality emerges.

In the frontal cortex, expert brains showed greater activity in areas crucial to language and goal selection, including across the inferior frontal gyri (IFG). Verbal creativity has been associated with left IFG activation many times before, but involvement of the right IFG was unexpected. The area is associated with emotional language processing, such as interpreting expressive gestures, so this may suggest that experts are attending more deeply to the emotional currents of text and their ideas. Together with recent evidence that metaphor comprehension recruits the right temporal lobe, this suggests a role for processes housed in the right hemisphere when a verbal task is more abstract and less factual.

Expert writing also involved more activation in the left caudate. This is part of the basal ganglia, long known to be critical to learning and expert performance, and seems to reflect ordinarily cortical cognitive processes becoming automatised and bundled together within the deeper brain. In this case, these may be to do with visually processing text, as the experts showed less activation in occipital areas involved in visual and perceptual processing.

One final finding: during brainstorming, expert brains showed increased activation relative to novices in several regions associated with speech production. Taking these findings together, they paint a picture of expert creative writers: ideas bubble within them, already on the road from concept to expression, readily communicable, almost rising into their throats. These are handled by neural systems streamlined to take care of the basics, while the writer devotes greater attention to the emotional interpretation of their text. It will be down to future researchers to verify or reject this characterisation - and hopefully, some great future writers to tell us about it. Maybe you.

_________________________________ ResearchBlogging.org

Erhard, K., Kessler, F., Neumann, N., Ortheil, H., & Lotze, M. (2014). Professional training in creative writing is associated with enhanced fronto-striatal activity in a literary text continuation task NeuroImage, 100, 15-23 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.076

Post written by Alex Fradera (@alexfradera) for the BPS Research Digest.

Tuesday, 21 October 2014

Five-year-olds can see through your bravado

Imagine you wanted to lie to a five-year-old. "The toy shop is closed Billy," you say, "it always closes at 2pm on a Monday." You reason that if you make this announcement with confidence, then Billy is sure to believe you.

It's not a bad strategy. In a new study involving nearly a hundred kids aged four to five, they were more likely to believe statements made by a woman who spoke and gestured with confidence, than those made by a woman who was hesitant and uncertain. In this case, the women's comments weren't about a toy shop, they were about the names of rare animals shown in pictures to the children (including a lanternfish and an Iberian lynx). These children had no prior experience with the women, so the women's confidence was an important cue to whether they knew what they were talking about.

But the bluster strategy has a weakness. If you've lied or been inaccurate in the past, then your bravado is likely to be ineffective. The child, especially if aged 5 and upwards, will see through your confident facade and focus instead on your reputation for being wrong. "You said that about the sweet shop last week, Mummy, but when I went and checked, they were actually open. Therefore I don't believe you now".

The researchers Patricia Brosseau-Liard and her colleagues demonstrated this childhood ability by showing a new group of children short videos of two women making bold or hesitant statements about four animals the children were familiar with - including a duck and a whale. One woman was consistently confident but inaccurate, for example she said whales live in the ground. The other woman was consistently hesitant but accurate. After this experience, the children heard the same women telling them the names of four unfamiliar animals - each woman made a different claim about the correct name and the children had to choose who to trust. The women sustained the same confident or hesitant style throughout.

The four-year-olds were often swayed by the woman who had bravado, even though they'd just seen her get her facts wrong about four familiar animals. With each extra month of wisdom, however, there was a clear developmental trajectory in the sample, so that the older children were far more likely to trust the hesitant woman with a history of being right, than the confident woman with a record for being wrong.

This isn't the first time that researchers have investigated children's sensitivity to the confidence and past accuracy of speakers. But it's actually only the second study ever to look at what happens when these cues collide. "Around the time of their fifth birthday children appropriately grant greater weight to someone's prior reliability over that person's current level of confidence," the researchers said. "This form of emerging skepticism will serve them well as they navigate through a world selecting 'better' from 'worse' sources of information."
_________________________________

  ResearchBlogging.orgBrosseau-Liard, P., Cassels, T., & Birch, S. (2014). You Seem Certain but You Were Wrong Before: Developmental Change in Preschoolers’ Relative Trust in Accurate versus Confident Speakers PLoS ONE, 9 (9) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108308

--further reading--
Young children trust kindness over expertise
Toddlers won't bother learning from you if you're daft

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Monday, 20 October 2014

Decades of lie detection research has been unrealistic

According to decades of psychology research, most people, including law enforcement professionals, are useless at detecting lies. But in a new paper, a team led by Tim Levine argues that nearly all previous research has been unrealistic. The field has been dominated by studies that place the "lie detector" in a passive role, tasked with spotting "tells" leaked by the liar. But this just isn't how deception detection works in real life, say Levine and his team. Rather, the interrogator interacts with the suspect and asks strategic questions to extract the truth. In this context, the researchers predicted that expert lie detection performance would be high.

To test this, they first invited 33 students to take part in a difficult quiz with cash prizes for correct answers. They played in pairs with what they thought was another student but was really an accomplice of the researchers. When the researcher left the room for a short spell, the student participants had a chance to cheat by looking at the answer sheet. Four of them cheated in this way.

After the quiz, all the students were interviewed about what had happened during the quiz. Unbeknown to the students, their questioner was an expert interrogator, qualified in the Reid Technique and a trainer of the police and military in interrogation techniques.

The interviews lasted about four minutes, during which time the questioner asked the students how they knew the answers they'd got right. They were also asked, if someone were to cheat, how they would have gone about it. They were also told that their partner would be interviewed next, and asked what they thought he/she would say. The questioner threatened an investigation if the student had cheated to sabotage the study, but told them that it wouldn't be so bad if they'd cheated for money.

All four of the cheaters confessed about their transgression before the end of the interview. There were no false confessions. Unsurprisingly perhaps, the questioner achieved 100 per cent accuracy after the interviews when asked to identify the cheaters from among the 33 interviewees.

The tapes of the interviews were then shown to 136 more student participants who were asked to identify the cheaters. They achieved 92.7 per cent accuracy. This is consistent with the idea that strategic questioning can provoke "diagnostic answers" that anyone can interpret because they reveal the truth about what happened.

A follow-up study was similar but this time there were five expert interrogators (one woman), all of them federal agents in the US. They each had different styles of questioning and the interviews varied from 3 minutes to 18 minutes. This time, 40 of the 89 students who played the quiz cheated, or their partner did (remember, they didn't know it but their partner was actually a research assistant).

During the ensuing interviews, confessions about cheating were obtained for 34 out of 40 of the cheating episodes. There were no false confessions. The interviewers' accuracy at correctly detecting whether cheating had occurred varied from 100 per cent (for three of them) to 94.7 per cent. The interviewers identified the specific true culprit (the student or their partner) in 95.5 per cent of interviews. When the video clips were played to 34 more students, these students achieved 93.6 per cent accuracy in judging whether cheating had occurred.

"These findings suggest that high levels of deception detection may be possible," the researchers said, "but require that the right questions are asked the right way in a situation where message content is useful and where the solicitation of honesty is a viable strategy."

_________________________________ ResearchBlogging.org

Levine, T., Clare, D., Blair, J., McCornack, S., Morrison, K., & Park, H. (2014). Expertise in Deception Detection Involves Actively Prompting Diagnostic Information Rather Than Passive Behavioral Observation Human Communication Research, 40 (4), 442-462 DOI: 10.1111/hcre.12032

--further reading--
Just how good are police officers at detecting liars?
Forget good cop, bad cop - here's the real psychology of two-person interrogation
Skilled liars make great lie detectors

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Friday, 17 October 2014

"Place cells" discovered in the rat brain

John O'Keefe
Image: Nobelprize.org

This month John O'Keefe, May-Britt Moser and Edvard Moser were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work identifying the brain's "GPS system" - the internal maps that allow us to understand our position in space. The Moser's discovery of grid cells this century built upon O'Keefe's earlier accomplishment at UCL in London, the discovery of place cells in the brain. Here, we look back to his 1971 "Short Communication" in the journal Brain Research which presented his preliminary evidence for place cells in rats.

Earlier research had suggested that damage to a rat's hippocampus (a bilateral brain structure in the temporal lobes) causes it to become confused when attempting spatial tasks. O'Keefe wanted to look in detail at what different hippocampal regions were up to when a rat moves around, specifically to see whether there was a neural system "which provides the animal with a cognitive, or spatial, map of its environment".

Together with student Jonathan Dostrovsky, O'Keefe inserted microelectrodes through the skulls of 23 rats, each arriving at a slightly different position in the hippocampus. Each rat could then explore its limited environment - a 24cm by 36cm platform - while the experimenters recorded neural activity from the electrodes.

In all, the study took recordings from 76 different positions in the hippocampus. Some turned out to fire in response to particular behaviours, such as walking, eating, or grooming; some while the rat was aware of something; some during sleep; some for no detectable reason at all. But electrodes at eight locations only gave their full response "when the rat was situated in a particular part of the testing platform facing in a particular direction" (italics in original). This was the first ever discovery that different brain cells represent unique location and orientation information.

O'Keefe and Dostrovsky attempted to find straightforward explanations for this spatial sensitivity. But eliminating sound cues (by silencing fans and other unmoving sound sources) and olfactory ones (by rotating the testing platform) had no effect on the neural activity of these eight “place cells*”. This solidified the possibility that the eight weren't responding to information arriving through the senses from "out there", but from a representation of space that existed within the brain.

Our findings "suggest that the hippocampus provides the rest of the brain with a spatial reference map," concluded O'Keefe and Dostrovsky. As explained by Hugo Spiers in next month’s Psychologist magazine, this evidence opened up investigations into spatial memory and cognition, which began to demand some kind of coordinate system feeding into the place cells themselves. That idea was finally cashed out by the Mosers, who established that the entorhinal cortex, a key interface between the hippocampus and the neocortex, contains grid cells that perform this function by encoding atop space grids of hexagons in a honeycomb fashion familiar to anyone who has played too many wargames.

A systematic investigation into the through-lines between neural activity, cognition and behaviour, the body of work by O’Keefe and the Mosers is groundbreaking, genuinely surprising, and provides fertile ground for continued exploration, not only of rats, but of ourselves: minds within bodies within space.
_________________________________

  ResearchBlogging.orgO'Keefe, J., & Dostrovsky, J. (1971). The hippocampus as a spatial map. Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat Brain Research, 34 (1), 171-175 DOI: 10.1016/0006-8993(71)90358-1

*note the term "place cell" was not used in this paper.

Post written by Alex Fradera (@alexfradera) for the BPS Research Digest.

Tuesday, 14 October 2014

High Emotional Intelligence linked with more delinquency among young women (but not men)

If, as research suggests, the psychological trait of sensation seeking is the catalyst for youthful delinquency, might high emotional intelligence (EI; having empathy for other people's emotions and good control over one's own) act as a calming restraint? That was the question Alison Bacon her colleagues posed in their study of 96 undergrads (average age 20; 48 women).

Their "surprising and unprecedented" discovery was that for women, not only did high EI not moderate the link between sensation seeking and delinquency, in fact high EI went hand in hand with higher rates of self-reported delinquency, including playing truant from school, taking drugs and violence.

Why should this be? The researchers are left speculating. They think high EI might fuel acts of indirect aggression like "psychological bullying, deliberate social exclusion or malicious gossip" that tend to be performed more by young females than males. Unfortunately the researchers' measure of delinquent behaviour didn't include these kinds of behaviours, but they reasoned perhaps the same young women who perform these less visible acts were also more likely to commit the forms of delinquency that were on the scale, such as rowdy behaviour and smoking cannabis. If so, this would help explain the high EI / delinquency link in women.

"A high level of trait EI may facilitate an enhanced ability to present Machiavellian behaviour in a positive light, understand victims’ emotions and predict likely responses in order that social manipulations are successful," Bacon and her team said.

What about the male students? Their answers were more in line with the researchers' predictions. For men, higher EI acted as a moderator, weakening the link between sensation seeking traits and delinquency. High EI also had its own direct inverse relationship with delinquency - that is, men with higher EI tended to be less rebellious.

"Trait EI is known to predict a wide array of positive, practical and health-related life outcomes," the researchers concluded. "Understanding how the perpetration of negative behaviours is linked to trait EI may be an important step towards promoting well-being."

_________________________________ ResearchBlogging.org

Bacon, A., Burak, H., & Rann, J. (2014). Sex differences in the relationship between sensation seeking, trait emotional intelligence and delinquent behaviour The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 25 (6), 673-683 DOI: 10.1080/14789949.2014.943796

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Monday, 13 October 2014

Evolutionary psychologists expose the "shoddy" treatment of their discipline by textbooks

The Gendered Society contained 12 errors
about evolutionary psychology, more
than any other book in this evaluation. 
Evolutionary theory is universally accepted among the mainstream science community. And yet, when the evolutionary perspective is applied to human behaviour, the approach continues to meet with resistance, and in some cases outright disdain.

A team led by Benjamin Winegard thinks part of the reason is because of the misrepresentation of evolutionary psychology in textbooks, especially social science textbooks on the topics of sex and gender. Based on their analysis of eight types of error in 12 widely used books in this genre, the researchers conclude that the treatment of their subject is "shoddy".

Winegard and his colleagues chose to focus on sex and gender textbooks that were published since 2005 and that are used widely on sociology and psychology university courses in the US. Among the books studied: The Psychology of Gender (4th ed.) by V.S. Helgeson and Gender Roles: A Sociological Perspective (5th ed.) by L. Lindsey.

The categories of error that the researchers looked for included the claim that evolutionary psychologists think biology determines or explains all of behaviour, or that evolutionary psychologists think some phenomena are influenced by nature while others are influenced by nurture (rather than reflecting an interaction between the two). Other error categories: that evolutionary psychologists have a conservative ideological agenda; that they endorse the "naturalistic fallacy" (that the natural way of things is morally desirable); and that evolutionary psychologists think people consciously attempt to boost their "evolutionary fitness" and are aware of the "evolutionary logic" of their behaviour, an error known as the "intentionalistic fallacy".

There was an average of 5.75 errors per book and all contained at least one error. The most common type of error was miscellaneous and placed into a general "straw man" category (for example, the mistaken claim that evolutionary psychology ignores and cannot account for homosexuality). The next most common type of error related to biological determinism and nature/nurture, and after that came the Naturalistic and Intentionalistic Fallacies.

For each error, the researchers provide examples from the texts they studied, and then they provide refutational evidence, either citing from works by evolutionary psychologists, or by pointing out straight facts, such as that there are many female evolutionary psychologists (countering the claim in one textbook that the field is androcentric), and that a survey of evolutionary psychologists found their political views matched those of social scientists in general (countering the claim that the field has a conservative agenda).

Winegard and his team said their analysis has furnished "a well-defined catalog of errors in the presentation of evolutionary psychology and [demonstrated] that these errors occur frequently in undergraduate sex and gender textbooks." They added: "Evolutionary psychologists have frequently addressed these errors, but our results demonstrate that, despite these efforts, errors persist."

_________________________________ ResearchBlogging.org

Winegard BM, Winegard BM, & Deaner RO (2014). Misrepresentations of evolutionary psychology in sex and gender textbooks. Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior, 12 (3), 474-508 PMID: 25299988

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Google+