Image: ktsimage
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
We tend to believe that our brains work as well as they can.
Thus, we assume that if you are good at math, it means that your brain is superior to the brains of those who find math more challenging. Of course, we have come to realize that people are better at some things than at others. Being better in math does not mean being smarter at everything. But we assume that, at least within a given domain, better behavioral performance implies superior brains, because we take it for granted that the brain is working as well as it can to optimize behavior.
However, a growing number of instances in clinical neurology and a growing body of research in cognitive neuroscience reveal that this assumption is incorrect. (Many are discussed in “The Paradoxical Brain,” a new book edited by Narinder Kapur and coming out next year from Cambridge University Press.)
For example, if the brain optimizes behavior, disruption of normal brain activity ought to lead to a loss of function, and never to enhancement. And yet, in some instances, disruption of brain activity with noninvasive transcranial magnetic stimulation or transcranial direct current stimulation -- both methods that use devices outside the skull to affect the workings inside -- can result in a paradoxical behavioral improvement.
Take a recent example: In the November 23 issue of Current Biology, researchers led by Roi Cohen Kadosh of Oxford University report that noninvasive brain stimulation can promote the “number sense.”
Nearly one in every five people has a developmental disability that makes it difficult for them to process and understand numbers, and others acquire similar difficulties from a stroke, traumatic brain injury or a degenerative disease like Alzheimer’s disease. Therapies for disorders in numerical competence are lacking.
Cohen Kadosh’s team concluded that noninvasive brain stimulation may be a valuable therapeutic intervention in patients with numerical disabilities. Substantially more work is needed before this conclusion is actually supported by data. Studies in patients are critically needed, because the results in normal subjects may be very different from those obtainable in patients. Regardless, the findings are extremely interesting and reveal fundamental and surprising aspects about human brain function.
How the study worked: Over six days, 15 adult subjects were asked to learn the association between nine arbitrary symbols without knowing the quantity that had been assigned to them. The learning phase lasted for nearly two hours each day, and for the first 20 minutes of each daily session, subjects were exposed to transcranial direct current stimulation of their parietal lobes.
The parietal lobes are thought to be critical regions in the processing of magnitudes and the representation of numbers. Individuals who have difficulties with numbers have been found to have anomalies of the right parietal lobe, and the right parietal lobe is also thought to be critical for the development of numerical understanding during childhood.
At the end of the learning phase, the subjects’ newly created number sense was measured using various tests. The goal of the study was to assess whether modifying activity in the parietal lobes affected the acquisition of number competence.
If the brain functions by optimizing behavior, it might be possible to worsen numerical competence by disrupting parietal function, but it should not be possible to enhance it that way. However, that is precisely what Cohen Kadosh's team found. Remarkably, this improvement was still present six months after the training.
What are we to make of this? It has become increasingly apparent that complex brain functions -- such as coordinated movement, memory, language, or mathematical thinking -- depend critically on dynamic interactions between brain areas. This is the concept of “functional connectivity networks” — distributed brain regions transiently interacting to perform a particular neural function.
Abnormalities in the interactions of network components play a critical role in common and devastating disorders ranging from epilepsy to depression. Damage to specific networks can lead to distinct neurological syndromes. Furthermore, both the deficits and recovery after damage are a function of the architecture and adaptability of these networks.
Behavior after damage, or after the modulation of activity in a given brain area, reflects the capacity of the brain and its networks to adapt to the disruption. The final behavioral consequence of a brain injury may be worsened performance, but also, paradoxically, improved performance, or even recovery from the deleterious consequences of a pre-existing insult or disease.
Consistent with such notions of distributed, plastic brain networks, we have learned that the effects of noninvasive stimulation depend on the connections between the regions we are targeting and the rest of the brain. The stimulation changes local brain activity, but also changes activity in distant structures. It is thus possible to use noninvasive stimulation to systematically explore “paradoxical facilitation” -- disruption that leads to improved performance -- in healthy subjects and in patients with a variety of neuropsychiatric conditions. We can even consider trying to use it -- cautiously -- for neurological or psychiatric therapeutics, just as Cohen Kadosh’s team propose for numerical competence.
Certainly the pursuit of such potential therapeutic applications of non-invasive brain stimulation is exciting and promising. Already, studies in recent years showed that noninvasive stimulation can improve attention in normal subjects, and this phenomenon can be applied to patients with a stroke and enable them to recover from “neglect,” the inability to pay attention to one part of their world. Similarly, studies found that it is possible to promote motor learning in normal subjects by coupling noninvasive brain stimulation with practice, and similar approaches are showing promise in promoting recovery of motor function after a stroke.
Clinical medicine aside, these types of results offer important insights into normal brain function. In 1620, the Spanish playwright Lope de Vega wrote in the dedication of “La Viuda Valenciana” (The Widow from Valencia): “La gala del nadar es saber guardar la ropa” (The pride of swimming is knowing how to guard the clothes). This plays on a Spanish proverb dating back to the Middle Ages: “No se puede nadar y guardar la ropa” (You cannot swim and guard the clothes).
Indeed, jumping in a river or a lake for a swim, while keeping a watchful eye on your own clothes to prevent them from being stolen, must not have been easy. The proverb is still in widespread use in Spain and indicates the need to commit to a task, give it your all, without holding back.
However, as Lope de Vega points out, true accomplishment lies in achieving both: swimming and guarding the clothes at the same time. It appears that our brain is designed to do just that. There are many examples that illustrate the fact that our nervous system works with a “functional reserve”. Under certain circumstances we are quite capable of better performance, faster reactions, stronger force generation, more efficient learning. A critical question, though, is what the cost of such 'supra-normal' performance might be.
See what we're tweeting about
13 Comments
Add CommentVery well written article with clearly stated constraints of current findings rather than some fantastic promotional extension...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever, the external external DC stimulation (or is it EM?) is referred to as both "noninvasive brain stimulation" and "disrupting parietal function". It's then questioned how the disruption of an optimized (biological chemical/electrical) process could produce enhancement of function.
Is stimulation necessarily disruptive? It seems that the external source of electron flow could amplify internal electrical processes rather than simply disrupt them.
It would be interesting to precisely monitor the neuronal flow of electrons while performing the assigned tasks, with and without external stimulation.
Very interesting research. Would like to know how this relates to disorders such as autism and the instances in which people with autism have savant like abilities in math, art and music. It seems that disruption of function in some areas of brain may "free-up" energy to devote to brain areas that are involved with the savant ability.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery interesting research. Would like to know how this relates to disorders such as autism and the instances in which people with autism have savant like abilities in math, art and music. It seems that disruption of function in some areas of brain may "free-up" energy to devote to brain areas that are involved with the savant ability.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPatrick Flanagan's "Neurophone" technology...(Google)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for the insightful comment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIndeed, the neurobiological effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as in the Cohen-Kadosh et al study, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or other forms of transcranial stimulation, are unclear. Different stimulation parameters appear to exert different effects, suppressing or enhancing activity in the targeted brain region, and the effects in any case appear dependent on the state of brain activity at the time of stimulation. So, as you say, monitoring brain activity during the stimulation would be extremely valuable and is in fact possible by combining stimulation with brain imaging methods.
There are indeed carefully designed, ongoing studies exploring the potential utility of transcranial stimulation in autism spectrum disorders. Some results are very promising indeed, but the work does need to be done with care and appropriate controls are essential before widespread clinical use is encouraged.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI will gladly volunteer for any form of non-invasive brain stimulation or disruption that will help me focus on doing my job instead of reading Sci-Am articles and commenting on them.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt has always been known that the brain can compensate for a weakness in one area by being superior in another, like saviants who are mathmatical geniuses but can't button up their own shirts. Also some people may be bad at math with less parietal function; yet have more socially adept verbal skills with greater temporal lobe processing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt the neocortex level the brain seems to yeild some gift if and only if certain brain regions are zoned in upon without scattered patterns.
The most interesting thing to find would be to see how regions near the brain stem affect organizational stimulation in the neocortex.
The brains performance level in correlation to stress level is said to look like an upside down "U". Where too much or too little stress yeilds lower performance but at just the right stress level peak performance is reached.
Perhaps regions in the brain stem or limbic system play a larger role in how someone deals with stress during a task.
The person who can create a greater range of stress tolerance while in peak performance may be brighter or more superior in more tasks than others.
The creative geniuses enjoy a specific task and excel not because they are good at it but because they are pulled by the act of turning stress into reward until the level of challenge becomes extremely complex and great.
The female that believes she is not good at math may just create a self fulfilling prophecy. If she tries to do math she is either bored because she doesnt understand it, or too stress because she doesnt think she is good at it. All the while the mathmatical genius can meet right in the middle without any self doubt.
Perhaps its the limbic brain that creates the gift, not the thinking part.
Me too!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery bad written article and, maybe, research. It is never explained what the authors means, if there is any meaning, with the word "optimized behavior". If 'optimize' means to reduce information entropy, this is certainly stupid because every selection process (like evolution or economics) tries to increase information entropy and, at the same time, to decrease mean costs. And it is well known that brain works based on selection processes. Anyway, I'm a researcher in math, but, at the same time, I'm very bad with numbers and calculations. So, the next time I must do some calculation, I'll try to beat my head against the wall.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConcluding,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm beyond bad at maths.
I'm repeating for the 2nd time my high school year.
All, because of maths and physics. I'm having as much as 10 hours of math per week. +45 min every weeks for helping me. It's school support.
Not counting, when i'm at home. I usually check a bit more.
The thing is, i do pay attention, i do try to exercise.
Yet, i can't simply follow mathematical reasoning no matter what.
My brain just freezes with numbers. I always had problems with maths. Since childhood.
Too point,
Is by doing therapeutical non-invasive brain stimulation, that "might"/is going to change a thing?
I'm just curious. It has so much text.
I wonder if it will work so "linear".
I see no reason to expect that the brain be optimizing for thinking about stuff like mathematics. It has been doing that for how long? Hundreds of years? A few thousands? Not enough to evolve this ability (optimization).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissmoore35 said:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe brains performance level in correlation to stress level is said to look like an upside down "U". Where too much or too little stress yeilds lower performance but at just the right stress level peak performance is reached.
My question why a "U" (try 'n'o?)
My nickname is melliw and I am an old fart badly in need
of mental stimulation in computer work such as programming. It helps if the tasks gets rather difficult and adrenalin starts to flow it wakes me up as from drinking coffee, it lasts about as long.
Then again hormones affect the brain circuits that
particular experiment is worth more research to check
among other things what hormones are doing.
Regards