viernes, 30 de noviembre de 2012

Scientists Probe Human Nature--and Discover We Are Good, After All Recent studies find our first impulses are selfless

When it really comes down to it—when the chips are down and the lights are off—are we naturally good? That is, are we predisposed to act cooperatively, to help others even when it costs us? Or are we, in our hearts, selfish creatures?
This fundamental question about human nature has long provided fodder for discussion. Augustine’s doctrine of original sin proclaimed that all people were born broken and selfish, saved only through the power of divine intervention. Hobbes, too, argued that humans were savagely self-centered; however, he held that salvation came not through the divine, but through the social contract of civil law. On the other hand, philosophers such as Rousseau argued that people were born good, instinctively concerned with the welfare of others. More recently, these questions about human nature—selfishness and cooperation, defection and collaboration—have been brought to the public eye by game shows such as Survivor and the UK’s Golden Balls, which test the balance between selfishness and cooperation by pitting the strength of interpersonal bonds against the desire for large sums of money.
But even the most compelling televised collisions between selfishness and cooperation provide nothing but anecdotal evidence. And even the most eloquent philosophical arguments mean noting without empirical data.
A new set of studies provides compelling data allowing us to analyze human nature not through a philosopher’s kaleidoscope or a TV producer’s camera, but through the clear lens of science. These studies were carried out by a diverse group of researchers from Harvard and Yale—a developmental psychologist with a background in evolutionary game theory, a moral philosopher-turned-psychologist, and a biologist-cum-mathematician—interested in the same essential question: whether our automatic impulse—our first instinct—is to act selfishly or cooperatively.
 hands joining together in the middle of a circle
This focus on first instincts stems from the dual process framework of decision-making, which explains decisions (and behavior) in terms of two mechanisms: intuition and reflection. Intuition is often automatic and effortless, leading to actions that occur without insight into the reasons behind them. Reflection, on the other hand, is all about conscious thought—identifying possible behaviors, weighing the costs and benefits of likely outcomes, and rationally deciding on a course of action. With this dual process framework in mind, we can boil the complexities of basic human nature down to a simple question: which behavior—selfishness or cooperation—is intuitive, and which is the product of rational reflection? In other words, do we cooperate when we overcome our intuitive selfishness with rational self-control, or do we act selfishly when we override our intuitive cooperative impulses with rational self-interest?
To answer this question, the researchers first took advantage of a reliable difference between intuition and reflection: intuitive processes operate quickly, whereas reflective processes operate relatively slowly. Whichever behavioral tendency—selfishness or cooperation—predominates when people act quickly is likely to be the intuitive response; it is the response most likely to be aligned with basic human nature.

 

lunes, 26 de noviembre de 2012

The Unconscious Brain Can Do Math Humans might be able to unconsciously perform complex tasks like reading and learning


 

People can process short sentences and solve equations before they're aware of the words and numbers in front of their eyes, finds new research that suggests we might not actually need full consciousness to perform rule-based tasks like reading and arithmetic.
In a series of experiments at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, more than 300 student participants were unconsciously exposed to words and equations through a research technique known as Continuous Flash Suppression (CFS). With this method, a static image appears in front of one eye while rapidly changing pictures flash in front of the other eye. The changing pictures dominate awareness at first, letting the still image register subliminally before popping into consciousness.
In the first part of the study, one eye was presented with a static phrase or sentence, which was "masked" by changing colorful shapes flashing in front of the other eye. The students were instructed to press a button as soon as they became aware of the words. It usually took about a second, but negative phrases like "human trafficking" and jarring sentences such as "I ironed the coffee" typically registered quicker than positive expressions and more coherent phrases such as "I ironed clothes," the study found.
The researchers say these results suggest that the sentences were fully read and comprehended subconsciously, and certain phrases broke out of suppression faster because they were more surprising.
In the second part of the study, the scientists examined how the unconscious brain processes math problems. Using the CFS technique again, the researchers subliminally exposed the participants to three-digit equations, such as "9 − 3 − 4," for two seconds or less. Then, the participants were shown a number (without CFS masking it) and told to say it out loud. The students were quicker to read aloud a number that was the right answer to the equation they had just subconsciously seen. For example, after being exposed to "9 − 3 − 4," they were quicker to pronounce "2" than "3."  This suggests they subconsciously worked out the problem and had the answer on their lips.
Other recent studies have shown that humans might be able to unconsciously perform tasks that have typically been associated with consciousness, such as learning and forming intuitions. The new study adds complex, rule-based operations to that list.
Psychology researcher Ran Hassin, who was involved in the study, said the results suggest current theories about unconscious processes need to be revised.
"These revisions would bring us closer to solving one of the biggest scientific mysteries of the 21st century: What are the functions of human consciousness?"
The research was published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Las neuronas espejo

En la década de los noventa, un grupo de nuerocientíficos hizo un experimento con monos macacos, donde se descubrió que existían unas neuronas conocidas como "neuronas espejo". Durante las siguientes décadas se habló mucho de estas células cerebrales.
Las neuronas espejo, o neurona especular, están correlacionadas con objetivos específicos. Se activan en todo animal o persona tanto al realizar una acción como al observar esa misma acción, algo que indica un proceso de asimilación y aprendizaje sobre nuestro entorno: la adaptación, y por ende, la evolución.
Algunos científicos dijeron que podrían estar relacionadas con la empatía, mientras que otros aseguraron que son muy importantes para algunas capacidades humanas (por ejemplo, el habla).
Otros alegan que gracias a estas neuronas se podrían delinear tratamientos para los trastornos mentales. Por ejemplo, Marco Iacoboni, de la Universidad de California en Los Ángeles (UCLA), creó una teoría llamada "hipótesis del espejo roto".
Dentro de esta teoría se habla de que el mal funcionamiento de las neuronas espejo causa la falta de empatía, razón por la cual se desarrollan condiciones como el autismo.
Así, desde que empezaron a circular las teorías de las neuronas espejo, se dice que generan acciones centrales que influencian el funcionamiento del cerebro.
Sin embargo, para Ben Thomas, investigador de Scientific American, existe la probabilidad de que sólo desempeñen funciones auxiliares, y si es así, se han estado buscando soluciones para el autismo y para los problemas del habla en el lugar equivocado. Según Thomas, las neuronas espejo no responden a gestos sin sentido o a sonidos al azar. Están diseñadas para responder a acciones con objetivos claros.
Y es que para muchos especialistas, estas neuronas son las que nos permiten comprender las acciones de otras personas. En caso de que esta hipótesis sea cierta, Iacobini puede estar cerca de crear un tratamiento para el autismo y para los problemas del habla.
Greg Hickok, de la Universidad de California, especialista en ciencias cognitivas, dijo a SA que las neuronas espejo no tienen un papel central en la empatía, el habla, el autismo y la comprensión. Según él, las neuronas espejo proporcionan el mecanismo neutral para la fijación de significados a las acciones motoras.
Para Hickok, Iacaboni y otros científicos están confundiendo dos cuestiones independientes: el control del motor y la comprensión conceptual. El científico asegura que las neuronas espejo ayudan a codificar los movimientos pero no tienen la capacidad de crear conceptos semánticos.
Por ejemplo, los bebés entienden el significado de muchas palabras a pesar de no tener la habilidad motora para pronunciarlas. Por lo tanto, los bebés y los humanos entendemos el significado de las palabras debido a las experiencias anteriores que hemos tenido con la misma.
Las neuronas espejo no codifican el significado de la palabra, pues la comprensión de las acciones no es una función del sistema motor.
Sea cual sea el camino que las investigaciones abran en los estudios de las neuronas especulares, es claro una cosa: podrían develar algunos misterios del cerebro humano, y por lo tanto, los mecanismos de su evolución.