Over the past few months, we have seen an increase in people who believe in conspiracy theories. These individuals, like followers of QAnon to COVID-deniers, have always fascinated researchers. Now, we may have a greater understanding of these individuals.
Bowes, Costello, Ma, and Lilienfeld (2020) used community (Amazon’s Mechanical Turk) and student participants to examine conspiratorial ideation. Through the course of four studies, the researchers found the explanation was complex, multifaceted.
They found some correlates — both positive and negative. In their own words: “A mixture of narcissism and undue intellectual certainty, on the one hand, conjoined with poor impulse control, angst, interpersonal alienation, and reduced inquisitiveness, on the other hand, may provide a personological recipe for a tendency to impetuously latch on to spurious but confidently held causal narratives that account for one’s distress and resentment. To the persons fitting this portrait, positing a world populated by malevolent actors hatching secret plots may be comforting, as it may afford at least a partial explanation for their otherwise inexplicable negative emotions” (pg. 12).
Two different studies have correlated individuals having trouble smelling peanut butter with potential Alzheimer’s disorder. As reported on alzheimers.net, a test for this disease may be to cover your right nostril, open a jar of peanut butter a few inches away, and try to smell it. Trouble smelling it? It could be an indication of the disease.
Autism
A multinational research team, which published their results in eLifehere, found individuals with varying Autism-Spectrum Quotient (QD) did not focus on the same aspects of this image (credit to the publishers and Discover Magazine):
For the last half a decade, politics in the United States have been extremely polarizing. Numerous events have occurred during this time that further illustrate the divide in the country. Last Wednesday, we saw the changing of the guards and a potential shift in the future of the USA. As we start to focus on the future, I wanted to reflect back on a little-known study with an interesting finding.
Four years ago, the election of President Trump caused significant distress to many individuals across the country. Some individuals disturbed by the 2016 election results experienced a loss of appetite, trouble sleeping and concentrating, and have become easily annoyed; whereas, other individuals equally disturbed by the election did not experience similar symptoms of depression. Tashjian and Galvan (2018) examined the stress from a neuroscience perspective, finding that both an individual’s brain and their social support structure impacted their stress levels.
I am not a neurologist or a neuro-psychologist. From what I recall from previous study, the mesolimbic pathway transmits dopamine to the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) and amygdala. The NAcc is believed to be involved or associated with pleasure seeking and addictive behavior. The NAcc and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), which is involved or associated with the production of sounds, have a connection. Tashjian and Galvan (2018) found “greater activation in the NAcc and stronger connectivity between the NAcc and mPFC were associated with less depression for affected individuals even under conditions of high election-related distress” (pg. 2895). Previous studies have also seen a connection between NAcc and mPFC in relation to motivational state and reinforcer magnitude.
We already know that brain design/chemistry/genetics/neurological structure can make individuals more susceptible to depression. However, a strong social support structure may help to mitigate this genetic predisposition. Not knowing if I have a neurological structure more susceptible to depression or depressive behavior, I should focus on fostering a strong support structure so I can reduce distress for future trauma. And, who doesn’t like having more friends.
Every Introduction to Psychology and Social Psychology course has a discussion about the bystander effect. And, inevitably, the phenomenon is coupled with the story about Kitty Genovese. Kitty was a New York City bartender who was killed near her residence. According to the story, multiple people heard Kitty’s screams for help, but they did nothing.
The Bystander Effect is when the presence of other people discourages others from acting. We see this happen all the time. We regularly pass people on the highway who are stranded and need help. (I know this is simplistic, as there are many other factors at work, but this is a legit example.) Typically, the bystander effect occurs when there is an emergency situation or a bully.
Despite the neatness of the Kitty Genovese story in illustrating this phenomenon, the story is largely inaccurate. The New York Times had originally posted that 37 witnesses saw or heard the attack (later corrected to 38 witnesses). Further research has found this number to be inaccurate. The story usually continues by discussing how no one called police. That is also incorrect. There were several individuals who called the police during the attack. Kitty was killed. People did witness, and some did act to help her. Others did not help. The responsiveness of the police likely also contributed. It was a series of cascading failures that led to Kitty’s murder, not just bystander apathy.
Interestingly, the internet and social media have become mediums to mitigate this phenomenon. “Karens” are being recorded and broadcasted so people can shame them. Is is working? I’m not sure, but we are seeing regular recordings of people standing up to racist bullies. It would be interesting to see if these videos are helping people combat the bystander effect.
I remember the first time I heard someone speaking a
language other than English. I was eight years old. My family and I were
visiting Kansas City’s Country Club Plaza, and we had stopped by the Classic
Cup Café to have a refreshment. As we sat together on the patio, I heard the
people at the table next to me speaking a different language. I loved that
experience.
As I studied other languages, I have often used the Pimsleur method since I have had great
success with this program. One of the secrets to Paul Pimsleur’s methods is that
he designed the courses to include cognitive
shortcuts in order to maximize retention. These shortcuts can be utilized
in any form of education, including eLearning.
pixabay.com
Among the many techniques or hacks people can use to better
remember information is spacing. Spacing utilizes “spaced” repetition in order
to achieve maximized memorization. Instead of focusing on the same
concept/topic/idea for a set period of time (e.g., rout memory), you would
focus on the subject then focus on something else. After a set period of time,
you would need to recall the previous information.
I utilize spacing when I am designing fact-heavy material.
For example, as I design training on the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPAA), I will present a fact (e.g., “HIPAA was enacted in
1996 and provides data privacy for safeguarding medical information”), move on
to something else (e.g., my company has a 99.97% HIPAA compliance rate; there
are various HIPAA additional rules including the Privacy Rule and HITECH; etc.),
and then focus back on the original information in the form of a short survey
question. I will continue doing this until I get to the end of the module, in
which I will have a graded measure. Typically, learners will do well on this
measure due to the spacing of information.
Another hack I use in complex topics involves the elearner
to “train” someone else. This hack promotes information retrieval. While it is
easier to do in a classroom or lecture-based course, there are some interesting
ways to do this in instructional design. I prefer to have the learner write out the
main components or learning objectives in a way that a 5-year old could
understand it. This focuses the learner to engage with their creative faculties.
This can be challenging for many, but it does go to demonstrate if the learning
objectives have been met. What I have done in the past is for the learner to write
their answer in a private forum. After I review/grade it, I then make it public
for other learners in the class to see.
There are so many other cognitive hacks that can be used.
What have you had success with?
You must be logged in to post a comment.