We all know the power of role models and I have written about the effect of role modes on behaviour many times before: from the moving ‘Children See, Children Do‘ campaign to talking about the effectiveness of the pictures of death and destruction that now adorn our fag packets.

All these ideas are supported by Bandura and his Social Learning Theory which proposes that children especially learn their behaviours through the observation and imitation of role models.  Bandura demonstrated this in his 1961 research where he exposed children to aggressive role models who acted violently (both physical and verbal violence) towards an inflatable bobo-doll.

He found that children who were passive witnesses to this violent act were more likely to imitate this behaviour when given the chance.  There are many criticisms of this study but if the conclusions are right then there are implications for us all as role models.

Recent research (Albers, 2008) has been investigating the effect of parental smoking behaviour in homes on the likelihood of their children starting up the habit.  They found that parents who enforce no-smoking rules at home are less likely to have teens who experiment with cigarettes. This basic intervention implementing a household smoking ban has the potential to promote anti-smoking norms and to prevent adolescent smoking.

Albers and colleagues interviewed 2,217 Massachusetts adolescents ages 12 to 17, and followed them for four years. They discovered that teens living in households that did not ban smoking were more likely to report smoking as socially acceptable, compared to teens whose parents banned smoking.

Teens whose parents allowed smoking at home also tended to believe that a higher percentage of adults in their town smoked, compared to teens with household bans. [From Medical News Toady]

This suggests then that the behaviours in homes can have a massive effect on behaviours. As these bans send a strong message to teens that it’s not okay to smoke, and in the face of so many other external factors that may influence teens to smoke peers, advertising a home smoking policy is one thing that parents can control to some extent.

It would be naive to assume that parents smoking in the home is the only factor that influences smoking behaviour is children but it is one more thing that parents can be aware of and another piece of evidence supporting Bandura’s Social Learning Theroy.

Tags: addiction, Bandura, core studies, developmental, health, health promotion, SLT, smoking

Recently we have looked at the impressive progression in the ability of fMRI scanners to record brain activity in ‘real time’ but are we over interpreting these results?  Over the last decade-or-two more-and-more researchers have been turning to fMRI scanners to open the ‘black box’ which is the brain. These scanners measure brain activity by measuring the amount of oxygen in the different parts of specific cortical or sub-cortical areas (this is a very simplistic view of the technology).

However, there is a storm brewing about the validity of these scanners and questions being raised about the short-sightedness of using fMRI scanners to ‘pin-point’ specific areas within the brain when localising functions; asking the question are we oversimplifying the location of functions in the brain by doing this? 

[fMRI] scanners, they say, excel at measuring certain types of brain activity, but are also effectively blind when it comes to the detection of more subtle aspects of cognition. As a result, the pictures that seem so precise are often deeply skewed snapshots of mental activity. [Boston Globe via Frontal Cortex]

Could we then be basing some of the conclusions from studies that utilize fMRI (such as Maguire) on distorted data and can we really be confident in localising complex functions within the brain to just one location?

These critics stress the interconnectivity of the brain, noting that virtually every thought and feeling emerges from the crosstalk of different areas spread across the cortex. If fMRI is a window into the soul, these scientists say, then the glass is very, very dirty! 

I think it’s important to note that fMRI is one of (if not the) best imaging technique that we have at the moment and the data that it provides is invaluable to both the medical and psychological research teams that utilize it.  We just need to be aware of it’s limitations, well, actually the limitations of any brain scanning technique, in trying to pinpoint specific functions in our magnificently complex brain.

Tags: brain scanning, core studies, Maguire, Physiological, Research

Could it soon really be possible to look inside the brain in ‘real time’. Over the last three decades we have made leaps-and-bounds in developing non-invasive processes to scan brains; PET, MRI, fMRI etc. These scanning techniques have allowed psychologists an insight into the processes of the brain during specific tasks or just to investigate the size, location and use of particular brain structures, but the time needed to process the vast amount of information that is collected has meant that there’s no ‘real time’ option of seeing exactly what is happening, there-and then.

However, neuroscientist and inventor Christopher deCharms demonstrates a new way to use fMRI to show brain activity – thoughts, emotions, pain – while it is happening. In other words, you can actually see how you feel.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Is it possible that in the future we may be able to ‘control’ how we feel; the pain that we perceive. It seems that it through a similar process used by biofeedback techniques today could be employed using these new brain scanning techniques.

In my mind this is an incredible advancement in this technology. Not only can we see into the brain but we don’t have to wait for computers to process the data – we can see it real time. If we can get feedback on our mental process then we can perhaps learn to control our brain on a whole new level. For example, perhaps it is possible to learn to suppress pain altogether on command?

What are your thoughts?

Tags: brain scanning, pain, pain measurement, Physiological, Research

As we’ve evolved, the human stress response has saved our lives. Today, we turn on the same life-saving physical reaction to cope with intense, ongoing stressors – and we can’t seem to turn it off. “Stress: Portrait of a Killer” reveals just how dangerous prolonged exposure to stress can be.

Is stress a saviour, tyrant or plague? This, along with many other questions are raised in a recent KPBS television programmme called ‘Stress: Portrait of a Killer’.

The video starts by looking at how it may be possible to make comparisons between wild baboons and humans and their stress responses. In the video it is argued that humans have a specific problem with stress: we don’t know how to turn it off. In the wild the stress response is designed to help in times of crisis – running for ones life – getting away from the thing that’s going to eat you.

In our lives we have the same physiological responses to that idiot in the car in front who can’t drive or the fact that we’ve lost out keys once more. The goal in life isn’t to get rid of stress but to get the right types of stress. In some cases we will pay good money to be stressed – think of theme parks and horror movies.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The video is well worth a watch and gives an excellent overview of stress research and thinking currently in psychology and clinical trials.  More importantly, it reflects on how stress is a ’secret killer’ in out society and how this can negatively affect many peoples lives. 

Along with the programme there’s a great website to accompay the show: killerstress.stanford.edu.

Thanks to Contemporary Mottled Sheep for letting me know about the show. 

Tags: A2, health, stress, video, websites

I’m often bullied into watching episodes of Grey’s Anatomy (honest – it was just on!) and occasionally I understand what McDreamy might be saying about hemispherectomies and neural-pathways; but I didn’t realise that Grey’s is raising awareness of health issues throughout the globe.  Well done Dr. Grey and cast.

According to a recent article on the CBS News site a Grey’s Anatomy episode with embedded messages about HIV awareness shifted viewers attitudes about HIV especially attitudes surrounding mothers with HIV and the chances of their baby contracting the disease.

“Health educators slipped a message about HIV-positive mothers into a story line in the popular TV show Grey’s Anatomy. Then they tested whether viewers got that message.”

Three surveys were conducted: one before the episode aired, one shortly after and a follow-up 6 weeks after.  One of the questions asked in the survey was in relation to the probability of contracting HIV from a mother who had the disease.

“As far as you know, if a woman who is HIV positive becomes pregnant and receives the proper treatment, what is the chance that she will give birth to a healthy baby, not infected with HIV?”

Before the show aired only 15% of people questioned got the correct answer (more than a 90% chance), soon after the show this went up dramatically to 61% and at the six-week follow-up 45% got the question correct.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The author of the research, Victoria Rideout, suggests that while watching television we absorb information.

“For better or worse, viewers do absorb the health information they see on TV, so it’s important for these shows to get it right … This study shows the enormous potential for entertainment television to serve as a health educator.”

This obviously raises many questions as far as health promotion goes.  Firstly, that the medium of television, and more importantly entertainment programmes can be very powerful in getting positive messages and health awareness out to the viewers.

However, this power has to be used carfully – if viewers believe that the information they are ‘absorbing’ from medical entertainment programmes are accurate (as almost 60% of viewers do) we need to ensure that there’s no false or misleading information in these programmes.  A real double-edged sword.

Tags: A2, adverts, health, health promotion, prevention, Research

Graphic pictures of diseased lungs, rotting teeth and throat cancer will be placed on cigarette packets from next week to show the health dangers of smoking.

As of next week cigarette packets will no longer have the ‘Smoking Kills’ or ‘Smoking harms you and those around you’ messages on their side but a much stronger image: diseased lungs, rotting teeth and throat cancer.  These are just some of the images that will soon appear on your favouriate brand to get the message of the dangers of smoking across to all. 

The messages are obviously there to get the health message across to smokers and there’s a lot of psychology behind them.  But, have the cigarette manufacturers and government gone too far this time?  

Yerks-Dodson would have us believe that there’s an optimum level of arousal that will ensure the best effect or best performance on a task.  The messages that currently adorn our cigerette packets have been around since 2003 and almost wash over smokers now, they have habituated to the messages they provide. 

The have even become the but of jokes (man: “I just make sure that I get the ’causes low birth weight’”) or even a whole new set of ‘cover-’em-up’ stickers.  Maybe it is time that we have some more shocking messages to inform the smoker of the potential (actual?) dangers of smoking. 

Even with the amount of money being spent by the NHS on it’s quit smoking campaigns, not being able to smoke in pubs and bars and many companies not allowing smoking on site over 10 million people still smoke in the UK and it’s estimated that over half of them will die early as a result. 

Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, said: “I welcome the introduction of picture warnings on tobacco product packaging, which show smokers the grim reality of the effects smoking can have on their health. This will help to maintain the momentum of the increasing number of people who have given up smoking following England going smoke free in 2007.

“Written health warnings have encouraged many smokers to stop smoking. These new stark picture warnings emphasise the harsh health realities of continuing to smoke. I hope they will make many more think hard about giving up, and get the help they need to stop smoking for good.” 

Have we gone too far? How do you explain to your child what those pictures are on the side of your fag packet… and it’s always going to be fun going to the news agents now to be faced with a wall of death, cancer and suffering as you pay for your morning paper. 

And for those readers who do smoke, a little light-hearted relief from the legend that was Bill Hicks… 

Click here to view the embedded video.

Tags: A2, addiction, adverts, health, health promotion, news commentary, smoking

In these days of interactive games, brain training, and other make ‘yourself better’ programs Mind Habits brings something to the table that is supported by research and looks at stress, self-esteem and confidence in a fun and practical way.

Worrying about your next date or the big presentation to your boss? Feeling low? Instead of running to the closest book-store to find a trendy self-help book, get MindHabits. Find relief at the click of a mouse. A video game that is actually good for you? Now, that’s a concept!

Based on social intelligence research conducted at McGill University, these stress busting, confidence boosting games use simple, fun-to-play exercises that help players develop and maintain a more positive state of mind.

I’ve spent the last two weeks playing around with MindHabits and it’s been great fun. There’s loads of different types of ‘games’ that track many different aspects of ‘you’ and shows you trends and differences over time.  Some of the games are a little repetitive but you can see yourself improving over time really quickly – especially as you go through the levels.  My only annoyance with the software, and it is a little one, is the little ‘helper’ that pops up telling you what to do – sometimes you just want to get on with it.

As well as the game there’s a detailed website that goes along with it (MindHabits.com) which has a wealth of information on the science behind our ‘mind habits‘ and the research that has supported the game.  Much of which is quite readable and accessible.

Here are a few screen shots of the software in action. But if you’re still wanting more you can pop over to the MindHabits website and try their on-line demo to see what the game is like.

From a teaching point of view I can see how this game could be great for teaching stress and stress management. It’s interactive and fun. Also, there’s plenty of stuff to get students thinking about how and why the system works. There’s some great research behind the software and you might also want your students to have a read of this.

Considering the cost of most interactive ’self-help’ games, at only $19.99 (around £10) for the full version it’s well worth having a copy of Mind Habits around to play with or use as a demonstration in class.  PsychBLOG recommended for fun, learning and self-education.

This was an unpaid review but I did receive a full copy of the game to have a play on from MindHabits. Thanks.

Tags: 4Teachers, games, resources, review, stress

We all experience pain in different ways depending on individual differences, arousal at the time and habituation to chronic pain.  Some good examples of this is recent research which has shown that doctors can actually ‘turn off’ parts of their brain which would react to seeing others in pain.

What is central to future research into pain and pain experience is that we’re aware:

Although we typically associate pain with physical damage to the body, thinking only in terms of physical damage is counter-productive. We also need to tackle the psychology and neuroscience of pain both to fully understand it and to help people affected by it. [Mind Hacks]

Going even further we could even look at the sociological influences on pain perception.  Recent research reported in the May 2008 issue of The Lancet (via Providentia) has found some interesting factors that are associated with perception of pain (or it could be argued the ability to cope with pain).  Using a representative stratified sample of over 10,000 Americans were contacted (of which just shy of 4,000 responded) to inquire about their experience of pain or chronic (pain experienced for over three months) pain.

Those with lower income or less education spent a higher proportion of time in pain and reported higher average pain than did those with higher income or more education. The average pain rating increased with age, although it reached a plateau between the ages of about 45 years and 75 years, with little difference between men and women. Satisfaction with life or health and the pain indicators tended to move in opposite directions. [from Krueger & Stone, 2008 abstract]

This could be seen in two ways: are those on lower incomes experiencing more pain or are they just not as good as coping with it?  Also, it seems to suggest that we either become more sensitive to pain as we age or again we are less able to cope with pain as we age.  It seems that this research asks more questions that it answers but it raises some great questions.

Krueger and Stone used a 6-point likert scale to measure their participants perception of pain which raises more issues as to the reliability and validity of such simple rating scales for a complex thing as pain perception.  Maybe they should have used something more sophisticated like this example from Scrubs.

Click here to view the embedded video.

If you’re still wanting more on pain then you could pop over to the How to Cope with Pain blog and read their May Pain Carnival where there’s links to loads more great articles on pain, pain perception and current thinking in the area.

Tags: A2, health, pain, pain measurement

One of the most talked about studies, both here on PsychBLOG and throughout popular psychology, is Milgram’s study of obedience.  Here he asked a volunteer sample of men from the New Haven area to administer increasingly powerful electric shocks to another person (a confederate).  How many people, both teachers and students alike asked themselves the same question: would I pull that switch?

The results from his study (well what was actually a series of studies) can force one to reflect heavily on the behaviour of the participants in the study, but also a lot closer to home.  A recent article in the New York Times titled ‘Decades Later, Still Asking: Would I Pull That Switch?’ puts a great perspective on the research as a whole.

Consider the psychologist Stanley Milgram’s obedience studiesof the early 1960s that together form one of the darkest mirrors the field has held up to the human face. In a series of about 20 experiments, hundreds of decent, well-intentioned people agreed to deliver what appeared to be increasingly painful electric shocks to another person, as part of what they thought was a learning experiment. The “learner” was in fact an actor, usually seated out of sight in an adjacent room, pretending to be zapped…

… In short, the Milgram experiments may have shown physical, biological differences in moral decision making and obedience, as well as psychological ones. Some people can be as quick on the draw as Doc Holliday when they feel something’s not right. Others need a little time to do the right thing, thank you, and would rather not be considered sadistic prison guards just yet.

It is amazing that a peice of research that is over 50 years old still has such a powerful hold over our understanding of obedience and other social behaviours.

Tags: AS, Milgram, news commentary, Social, video

Could social influence be having a positive effect for once?

It’s easy to blame those people around us when we try to rationalise why some take up habits.  It’s just easy to say that the behaviour is learned from those around us – social learning theory – who’s behaviour is imitated.  I have been one of those people myself; turning to social learning theory to explain why children might learn negative behaviours or even placing part of the blame for violent behaviour on children playing video games.

However, one concept that I touched on when looking at the ‘Children See: Children Do’ video clip, was that we need to be good role models.  More support for this has come from research published last month that suggests that quitting smoking can be triggered by those around you quitting themselves.

The urge to smoke is contagious, but quitting apparently is, too. A team of researchers who showed that obesity can spread person-to-person has found a similar pattern with smoking cessation: A smoker is more likely to kick the habit if a spouse, friend, co-worker or sibling did. Christakis, 2008

Christakis’ findings back up previous studies showing that peer influence plays a key role in people’s decision to stop lighting up and provide evidence that the “buddy system” used by smoking cessation, weight loss and alcoholism programs to change addictive behaviour works.

[The researchers] examined the social lives of 12,067 people in the Framingham Heart Study, which has been tracking the health of residents of that Boston suburb from 1971 to 2003. They were able to reconstruct people’s ties to one another since participants had to list contact information for their family, friends, co-workers and neighbours so researchers would not lose track of them over the years. The prevalence of smokers in the Framingham study over the years mirrored national trends.

This could be explained in terms of social comparison (of which I talked about in relation to obesity a few months ago).  Now that smokers are being marginalised – being made to stand in the rain at pubs, having to ‘excuse’ themselves from friends to only have to be in the cold with the other smokers – could it be that we’re looking around us and thinking that it’s the time to quit?

However, the researchers are careful and state that it’s hard to tease out whether social influence is mainly responsible for a whole group kicking the habit. Other factors such as public bans on smoking or studies highlighting the harmful effects of smoking may also play a role.

What do you think? Any recent quitters around? Why did you give up the habit?

Tags: A2, addiction, health, health promotion, SLT

Back in January I talked about a fascinating video from a TED conference where Vilayanur Ramachandran discussed a new ‘treatment’ for phantom limb pain that he had come up with: the mirror box. I’m fascinated by phantom limb pain as I feel that it provides massive support for the thesis that pain perception is a psychological perception rather than a purely physiological phenomenon.Well over the last few months there has been a few really interesting posts from around the web that concern phantoms that I will summarise here. All these pieces of research can be used in the A2 Psychology of Pain topic.

Inspired by Ramachandran’s talk at TED a group of military hospitals researched the ‘mirror box’ concept that he put forward on 22 patients with amputated lower limbs and found some impressive results. After 4 weeks of treatment, 100% of patients in the mirror group reported a decrease in pain [and] two patients had brief reactions (<2 minutes) of grief on viewing the reflected intact lower limb.

If you want to read more about this then you can go over the CNN coverage of the research.

More on phantoms and the brains perception of the body comes from an edition of ABC’s National Opinion programme where they John Bradshaw discusses how our perception and ownership of our body can break down after brain injury – leading to disorders where we think our limbs are someone else’s, where we feel there’s a phantom body behind us, or where we think we’ve been cloned. [From Mind Hacks]

Finally, and most strangely, an article on phantom penises:

Since male-to-female transsexuals typically feel themselves to be ‘a woman in a man’s body’, Ramachandran and McGeoch reasoned that their response to penectomy might well be different from that of other patients. And so it proved: while 58% of men who have undergone penectomy for other reasons reported sensation in a phantom penis afterwards, only 30% of those who had done so as part of gender reassignment had a similar experience. So people who felt that a penis was not part of their true body image were much less likely to experience a phantom penis after removal.

Stranger still, perhaps, 62% of a group of female-to-male transsexuals reported having had phantom penis sensations before any surgery. In many cases the sensations dated back for years: in others, they did not occur until hormone treatment had begun. No non-transsexual women, unsurprisingly, reported the sensation of having a phantom penis (’even when prompted’ as the researchers say). [From Conscious Entities via Dr. X]

Well a wide-ranging selection of articles there. As I mentioned at the beginning of the post I am a big believer in the idea of a cognitive body image that has a profound effect on the way that we perceive our body and the senses that we get from it. From pain perceived in a limb that is not present to having sensations in a penis that has been removed it is all compelling evidence for the cognitive and psychological influence of the mind on our perceptions.

Tags: A2, health, pain, phantom

It’s widely accepted that when a person suffers from stress this has massive negative effects on that person; both psychologically and physically.  Much research has provided support to the idea that a being stressed can effect our immune system quite drastically making us prone to illness.  However, could being exposed to a stressed parental environment cause the same problems vicariously onto the children of stressed parents?

Recent research has suggested that stressed parents might not just be effecting their own health but actually having a negative impact on their children’s too.  Caserta et al. (2008) found that children of parents who suffered from stress are more likely to get sick.  Through a longitudinal study of 3 years following family groups (169 children aged 5-10) it was found that those children of stressed parents were more likely to have raised illness through parental self-reports.

Caserta’s team found that the total number of illnesses, both with and without fever, was significantly higher in the children of parents who reported high levels of emotional stress. The team also measured the levels of immune cells in the children, and found those with highly stressed parents were much more likely to have heightened immune activity – a sign that they were working hard to fend off infection. [from NewScientist]

This research could raise an interesting debate about the situation of stress: does stress have it’s roots in situational or dispositional psychology?  This research followed families who were all genetically related therefore it could have been that there was a genetic disposition to being stressed that was passed down from parents to children which would suggest that it’s not the situation that is causing the stress.  One has to be careful not to be too deterministic here though as the situation and environment that a child is raised in obviously has massive impact on their personality and ability to cope with stress.

Important to note for parents or parents-to-be: if you’re finding yourself struggling to cope with stress get support from your GP or on-line from the BBC or NHS Direct.  Alternatively there’s this useful stress reduction tool!

Tags: A2, health, stress

I have written about Health Promotion a bit in the past but over the last few months there’s been quite a lot of talk about it so here I am going to collate it into another carnival of research.

1) Increase the costs to get them doing it.
The Health Belief Model states that we need to evaluate the costs involved before performing a health behaviour – is there threat a percieved risk? Only if we percieve the risk as being high will we then perform a cost-benefit analysis on the health behaviour. Consequently, one way of improving a health behaviour is to make the perceived risk higher and this can be achieved easily by just emphasising what will happen if you don’t do it.

This philosophy is now being applied to the MMR vaccine following research conducted by Purva Abhyankar (research abstract) who thinks that it’s more important to emphasise the protection that is lost by not having the jab. He suggests that we can use prospect theory to understand this:

Prospect theory – our willingness to take risks in the context of possible losses, in contrast to our aversion to taking risks in the context of possible gains. In other words, because people tend to see the MMR vaccine as risky, Prospect Theory suggests it is better to promote the vaccine in terms of what will be lost if that risk isn’t taken, rather than in terms of what might be gained – a prediction that is supported by the current results. [quote]

2) Health promotion going too far?
There’s a fine line between getting people’s attention through advertising campaigns and actually over arousing them so that they just ignore the message and I’ve raised this before. This time it’s an advert to alert the issues surrounding anorexia.

Isabelle Caro, age 27, has suffered with anorexia for 15 years and weighed just 31 kilograms (approximately 71 pounds) at the time of the photo. The actress from France told Italian Vanity Fair that she began starving herself as a child to please her mother, who disapproved of her escalating weight. Now in recovery, she wants to bring this issue to the masses.

You can see the two advertisements here and here – but be warned the pictures may disturb some readers. What are your thoughts on the pictures? Getting the message across or just going too far?

3) Entertainment for some, education for others.
What do you get when you combine AID’s awareness with Bollywood? Well these videos will give you the answer.

Condom Awareness Video

Click here to view the embedded video.

AID’s Awareness Video

Click here to view the embedded video.

These videos, produced by the Nrityanjali Academy, a non-profit voluntary organization that has been working to help those in small villages in Southern India deal with STD’s, HIV, and AIDs, are being used to educate villagers about how to recognize and prevent sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDs.

4) Anti-smoking ads: more harm than good?
Could anti-smoking campaigns actually be causing more teens to turn to smoking rather than their intended effect? Could teenagers actually see the message behind the adverts and see a clear way to rebel against public opinion and their parents? As we learn about in the AS course (and showed recently in Children see, children do) it seems that children are more influenced by their role models which at their age is likely to be peers.

Paek said the data showed middle school students are more likely to be influenced by the perception of what their friends are doing, and that anti-smoking campaigns should be more focused on peer relations. Rather than saying, ‘Don’t smoke,’ it is better to say, ‘Your friends are listening to this message and not smoking. [Quote]

Maybe this should be kept in mind when advertisers are putting together ad campaigns in the future.

Hope you’ve enjoyed the carnival!

Tags: A2, adherence, adverts, Carnival, health, health promotion, video

The influence of our role models on behaviour is something of particular interest to psychologists and we study it through the entire psychology course. More specifically we look at the research conducted by Bandura and his work into Social Learning Theory (SLT) in the imitation of aggression. In a television advertisement called “Children See. Children do” which was actually aired in Australia a few year ago a powerful message is passed across to the viewer.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The message in the video is clear: children imitate behaviour that they see around them: talking on a phone, body language … smoking, violence, so make sure that you’re setting a good example. There’s plenty of psychology behind this and it can be related to many areas that we cover: AS, crime and health behaviours, and we’ll look at how this links in to it all now.

Although SLT is a concept that you came across in the first year in relation to children and learned aggression we can apply the same theory to criminality. In the Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) study it was found that boys would imitate an aggressive act of a male role model showing physical aggression towards an inflatable ‘Bobo’ doll. SLT simply states that a person will imitate the behaviour of a role model, and this behaviour will continue if they receive positive reinforcement of that behaviour.

Applying this to criminality, we can ignore all of the more complex arguments that would have us believe that criminality is down to biology, genes, neurotransmitters or such else – it’s simply a learned behaviour, imitated from role models. When a person sees a role model performing a behaviour and then receives positive feedback this is remembered. If that person has the chance to imitate this behaviour they will. If they then get positive reinforcement for this imitation then the chance of them repeating this behaviour is increased.

Although this theory does seem to account for many people becoming a criminal, especially petty crime and nuisance offences, it doesn’t take into account those people who become offenders without any apparent poor role models. For example, some crimes are kept secret (white collar crimes – fraud, embezzlement) so people wouldn’t have a role model to copy. This theory also ignores the cognitive element of offending: we all have a choice when it comes to committing an offence.

We can also see the links with health promotion and how some children may ‘learn’ unhealthy behaviours such as smoking or even just eating unhealthily (think back to the parents in those ‘Jamie’s School Dinners‘ TV programmes.)

Overall, I think that the video is an excellent example of using psychology to provoke awareness of a very serious problem.

Your thoughts in the comments: what do you think about the video?

You can get a better quality version (Quicktime) here.

Tags: A2, aggression, AS, Bandura, crime, crime prevention, developmental, health, health promotion, news commentary, SLT, video

In the A2 health module we look at pain perception and what can affect this. One of the most fascinating disorders within pain (well in my opinion at least) is phantom limb pain. Phantom limb pain is when pain is perceived in a limb (although it can be experienced in other parts of the body too – there’s been writing on phantom menstrual pains in women who have had hysterectomies) which has been amputated.

As psychologists this type of pain is important as it provides massive evidence that pain perception is influenced massively by psychological factors: it’s a top-down process. This must be the case in phantom sufferers as there is no physiology there to send any signals (as specific theory suggests) to the brain so the brain must be ‘creating’ the pain signal itself.

Whilst stumbling recently I came across TED – Inspired talks by the world’s greatest thinkers and doers – where there are some excellent videos (some general science interest and others specifically linked to psychology and neurology). One video in particular caught my attention: A journey to the center of our minds.

In a wide-ranging talk, Vilayanur Ramachandran explores how brain damage can reveal the connection between the internal structures of the brain and the corresponding functions of the mind. He talks about phantom limb pain, synesthesia (when people hear color or smell sounds), and the Capgras delusion, when brain-damaged people believe their closest friends and family have been replaced with imposter’s.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Not all of the video is relevant to OCR (still excellent viewing) but the part in the middle regarding phantom limb pain and possible remedies is superb (email and rss subscribers – you may have to visit the site to view the video). This video is one in a series called “How the Mind Works“. One other video of note in this series is Susan Savage-Rumbaugh’s (new to OCR 2008) where she asks whether uniquely human traits, and other animals’ behaviours, are hard-wired by species (an article on this to follow).

Personally, I believe that this video provides even more support for the thesis that phantom limb pain is very much a psychological process (well as far as the perception of it goes). Obviously, I am not saying that there is no physiological processes going on – in most cases there has to be the physiological nauseous event to trigger the pain – but maybe our minds are more instrumental in pain perception that some think.

Tags: A2, health, pain, phantom, resources, video

Which gender experiences the most pain? The age old question is still rife: what hurts more, child birth or being kicked in the … well .. man bits?  I try to raise this question when talking about measuring pain in the Health section of the A2 using the McGill Pain questionnaire to quantify – well at least in part – the pain experienced at different times.

A recent piece of research has found that at 5 out of 12 pressure points men’s pain threshold was higher than womens.  However, we have to note that individual differences are rife in perception of pain.  Men may have just been more likely to report that the pain wasn’t there to prove their ‘butch man persona’.  Maybe we could have used some form of physical measure to attempt to get a more objective idea of the perception of pain.

You can read Christian’s comments on the study over at the BPSRD or go find the original study and see what you think.

Garcia, E., Godoy-Izquierdo, D., Godoy, J.F., Perez, M. & Lopez-Chicheri, I. (2007). Gender differences in pressure pain threshold in a repeated measures assessment. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 12, 567-579.   Hat tp to the BPSRD.

Tags: A2, health, pain

Social Comparison Theory and Obesity

As we are becoming more aware of the health implications of obesity and what we eat, from the ‘let some pretentious cow tell you what not to eat’ programmes to the traffic lights (which are appearing on the front of all my favourite foods telling me exactly how unhealthy what I am eating is) are we actually at a higher risk of obesity if those around us are obese? It was Festinger (1954) who first coined the term social comparison theory with the idea that we view our behaviour in light of those around us.

“[Social comparison theory is] the idea that there is a drive within individuals to look to outside images in order to evaluate their own opinions and abilities. These images may be a reference to physical reality or in comparison to other people. People look to the images portrayed by others to be obtainable and realistic, and subsequently, make comparisons among themselves, others and the idealized images.” [quote]

Could it be that in those parts of the country where obesity is rife, people are creating a vicious circle by looking at those people around them (who are inevitably ‘larger’) and comparing their physical appearance to that? Walking around Hull, which was named (and shamed) as the chubbiest city in the UK back in 2004, it is evident that the average size is more … cuddly … than other places in the country. This conclusion wasn’t arrived at after laborious study and measurement, it’s from my personal observations but it’s an interesting issue never the less.

As social beings we compare ourselves to those around us; be it the size of our cars (or the size of anything else come to think of that!) how much we earn; what we wear or even our size. Consider this hypothetical situation: a town of people where more people are getting fat. Other people are going to look around and see that being fat is becoming more of a social norm and less stigmatised, consequently one might start to go the same way or at least think that it’s okay.

The results of a mass longitudinal study in the USA has recently been published which seems to support this idea. Christakis and Fowler (2007) research followed a social network of 12,067 people who were assessed between 1971 and 2003 and found:

“The spread of obesity in social networks appears to be a factor in the obesity epidemic. Yet the relevance of social influence also suggests that it may be possible to harness this same force to slow the spread of obesity. Network phenomena might be exploited to spread positive health behaviours in part because people’s perceptions of their own risk of illness may depend on the people around them. Smoking- and alcohol-cessation programs and weight-loss interventions that provide peer support – that is, that modify the person’s social network – are more successful than those that do not. People are connected, and so their health is connected.” [quote]

We have to ensure is that we don’t over simplify things or propose reductionist theses on this topic; although obesity is easy to define the causes are many, wide spread, and interrelated. Some psychologists put the ball firmly in the social playing field comparing ourselves to those around us; socioeconomic conditions; levels of education. Neuropsychologists however would argue that it’s a case of under active or fewer neurotransmitters (Volkow argues that people with obesity tend to have fewer D2 dopamine receptors in the striatum that could promote over-eating.)

It does seem that our lives, health and weight might be connected at a social level. Think about that the next time you’re looking around.

Tags: A2, health, jamiesmind

I’ve spoken about health promotion a few times in the past, and echoing the title of my last post: have we gone too far? As of the 1st July smoking in an enclosed public place became illegal. As psychology students you learn about health promotion and ways to make the masses ‘more health aware’ – has the government gone too far this time? Is this ‘health fascism?’

A battle is presenting itself: FAGS against the UK Government.

” …Mr Howitt, the self-styled leader of FAGS – Fight Against Government Suppression – which claims that “14 million adult smokers are under house arrest”, said: “I’m not pro-smoking, just pro-freedom.”

He said: “Having a pint and a cigarette in a pub is one of the last great enjoyments left for the working classes. I’m not prepared to shove my customers outside in the wind and the rain to allow them their right to smoke.

“I believe this ban is tantamount to a hate crime. I won’t pay the fine and will go to prison if necessary to make a point while I take this to the court of human rights.”

Mr Howitt, who says he is a non-smoker, said the ban amounted to “health fascism” and was an assault on civil liberties…”

From Guardian.co.uk

As psychologists do we applaud the Government on their ‘preventative’ measures of banning smoking, or are we turning into a nanny state taking away each persons individual freedoms? Related to Health Promotion and Adherence to Medical Requests: is this the best way to do it? Have the government actually raised awareness by banning smoking or have they started something that they can’t finish?

Your thoughts in the comments or in the discussion forums.

Tags: A2, adherence, health, health promotion, news commentary

I’ve made a few posts on here about pain and the perception of pain. The gate theory of pain suggests that perception of pain can be influenced by external influences like distraction. Could smell have a similar effect on the perception of pain? Well a new study would have us believe that it can, especially if it’s a sweet smell.

The research conducted by Prescott and Wilkie (2007) aimed to see if participants could hold their hand in a vat of cold water for longer depending on the type of smells presented at the same time:

The mechanism underlying reported analgesic effects of odors in humans is unclear, although odor hedonics has been implicated. We tested whether odors that are sweet smelling through prior association with tasted sweetness might influence pain by activating the same analgesic mechanisms as sweet tastes. Inhalation of a sweet-smelling odor during a cold-pressor test increased tolerance for pain compared with inhalation of pleasant and unpleasant low-sweetness odors and no odor. There were no significant differences in pain ratings among the odor conditions. These results suggest that smelled sweetness can produce a naturally occurring conditioned increase in pain tolerance. [abstract]

The results showed that those participants who were presented with the sweet smelling odors were able to keep their hands in the water for over twice as long as the other participants (for a much more detailed discussion of the study see Mixing Memory).

So, how can smells actually effect our perceptions of pain?

This experiment obviously doesn’t test any causal hypotheses, but Prescott and Wilkie suggest that because the sweetness of smells is largely learned, through associations with sweet tastes, the analgesic effects of sweet smells are likely the result of learned associations as well. Sweet tastes have been show to increase pain tolerance, and by association, sweet smells come to do so as well. [quote]

A really interesting study which again shows that the mind can have a massive effect over our perceptions of pain.

Further Reading:

• Prescott, J., & Wilkie, J. (2007). Pain tolerance selectively increased by sweet-smelling odor. Psychological Science, 18(4), 308-311.
• Mixing Memory: Do Sweet Smells Make Pain More Tolerable?

Tags: A2, health, pain, Research

Pain is a funny thing (well it’s not the funny if you’re in pain). Perception of pain, some would argue, is a largely psychological phenomenon which is influenced greatly by the mind. Be it the mind making you feel pain in a limb that doesn’t exist, or you mind blocking out pain so that you can continue with an activity; the mind obviously has a powerful influence over perception of pain and provides evidence against it being a purely physiological perception.

Interesting new research conducted in Japan recently have shown that if you see something painful happening to someone else, you experience something similar to that yourself. You perceive the pain of the other person even though nothing is happening to you.

The brain powerfully modulates pain, as a function of the context in which an injury arises, and as a function of your ongoing expectations about “how much it SHOULD hurt”. If thugs beat me up in an alley, I might feel little pain when I realize that I am damn lucky that the beating is over, and I have survived it. On the other hand, it might hurt like hell once it sinks in that I’m going to be unemployed for weeks, with no food on the table for my family. [quote]

Pain, or at least the perception of pain, is a fascinating topic which is gaining increasing attention as ways of measring brain activity are becoming every better and more accessible. There are some excellent commentaries on pain and the perception of pain by Dr. Michael Merzenich over at his blog (more specifically here, here and here). Also related to his is the effect of placebos and noceboes on the perception of pain.

Tags: A2, health, pain, Research

Recently I made a post about the AIDS campaign in France where rather graphic images were used to get the message about safe sex across. New Scientist has two more stories that relate to the ways that people are promoting healthy behaviour or bringing awareness of health issues.

The first story relates to smoking and the effect that it has on your lungs. The story talks about a new ‘smoking jacket‘ which can be used to prevent the exhaled smoke going to the environment around you by breathing into the collar of the jacket. The smoke is then filtered by material in the jacket but the filters are visible as two lung shapes on the front of the jacket. Over time the filter will become black with the chemicals that are in the smoke thus providing a visual representation of what it may be doing to the smokers lungs.

The second is a review of a new TV show that was shown on Dutch TV. It’s a spin on the (very popular with TV producers now) real life / fly on the wall / reality TV shows that seem to be infesting our channels at the moment. The idea was that there is a dying patient with a terminal illness who is going to donate her organs to a selected patient. Three patients on a waiting list have to convince the donor that they should receive the organs after her passing.

The premise for The Big Donor Show is simple: a terminally ill woman has to select one of three people to receive her kidneys. The 37-year-old woman known as Lisa will make her decision based on the contestants’ histories, profiles and conversations with their friends and families. And viewers will attempt to influence her by sending text messages with “advice” during the show. [quote]

The premise behind the show was to shine light on the need for more organ donors and like all controversial television, the show highlights an uncomfortable issue in our society: there are not enough organs for everyone who needs them. And the implications of this are huge. For obvious reasons there have been massive amounts of media attention aimed at the TV show and the ethical issues (and good taste for that matter) surrounding the TV show.

Following the show it was shown that the premise behind the show was actually a hoax – the ‘donor patient’ was actually a healthy actor and the three patients wanting the transplant were terminally ill but ‘in on the hoax’.

Two very different ways of promoting health behaviours or gaining attention to important health issues; but have we gone too far? When do we start crossing a line from raising awareness to bad taste? What are your thoughts?

Tags: A2, health, health promotion, news commentary

Well, they say that sex sells, so I thought that it was about time that I jumped on that band-wagon. We all know the dangers of unprotected sex, or at least we should do, so how can we get the message across to those who still aren’t paying attention? In the Health module of the A2 course we study adherence to medical requests and one of the examples that I give is BSE and TSE for the students.

When we create some form of media presentation to try to support or dissuade people from certain risky behaviours we need to be aware of what works, what doesn’t work, and how far we can go to shock people into taking note of the message. Some research has shown that smokers are affected by graphic images plastered on cig packets.

In France a new safe sex / AIDS awareness campaign has been started using some rather graphic and disturbing images – click here to see. But does it work? I know that when I saw them they left a lasting impression. How far can we push people before they turn off though? Yerks-Dodson’s law of arousal will have us believe that we all have an individual optimum level of arousal – is this campaign enough? Too much?

Whatever you think, they must have done something right – there’s plenty of people that have started talking about this campaign – and after all, isn’t the who aim of an advertising campaign to get noticed?

Tags: A2, adherence, health, health promotion

An interesting article over at psychcentral has identified a study looking into the sexual behaviour of adolescents and what variables effect is.

“… A study conducted in August 2006 examined longitudinal data from a survey of 5,401 Scottish teenagers. The researchers led by Daniel Wight of the Medical Research Council, Social and Public Health Sciences Unit in Glasgow UK found that talking to teens about sex had little relationship to sexual behaviour. So what did? …

It was found that of the variables that were looked at:

… The study also found that teens who have more spending money also was a good predictor for early sexual activity, and, for males, having more sexual partners. Not surprising, since people are often drawn to others who have influence (money = influence).”

Interesting to use when thinking of adherence to health behaviours (contraception) in the health unit. For more see the psychcentral post or the abstract of the original study here.

Source: Journal of Adolescence, Vol 29(4), Aug 2006. pp. 473-494.

Tags: A2, adherence, health

Recently there has been a flurry of articles on addiction, the reasons why we become addicted and why do we continue to abuse these substances; be it alcohol, gambling or even love (there was a very interesting article about being addicted to love by Prof Mark Griffiths in a recent Psychology Review – and on a side note I will be writing about interviewing him later on this week for this site so keep your eyes out for that). As part of the A2 health course we study substance use and abuse so here I will give a quick overview of what everyone’s been ranting about. :)

There’s a common perception that overindulgence in certain behaviours is all down to individual choice. If you are overeating, oversexed, gambling away your earnings or spending all your time online, you are more likely to be considered morally abhorrent than the victim of a disease. Calling these problems “addictions” has triggered debates about whether our society or our biology is to blame, and whether people that fall foul of a behavioural obsession should be offered help and treatment rather than punishment. [quote]

One of the most interesting thoughts (and one that came up while talking to Prof. G) was that addiction is not a behaviour that can be classified by how much of something that you do, but actually the effect of it on your life. Two people could show the same behavioural traits (for example playing 12hours of computer games a day) and one would be said to be addicted whereas another one not. There will be more about this in a coming article that I’m in the process of writing.

Further to this is the question as to why people become addicted to certain substances (and, importantly, why others do not). It’s important not to be reductionist.

“Almost any of us can become behavioural addicts, given the right exposure, the right timing and so on,” he says. “But there are multiple causes: our personalities, genetics – it’s not simple.” Why some people develop addictions while others can safely dip into these activities with no ill effects is still unknown. [quote]

Moving on from this, how do we actually classify something as being addictive? What if it’s a behaviour that everyone is doing, is this still an addiction? An article over at PsychCentral by John M. Grohol addresses this exact issue:

… if everyone is engaging in a behavior, it’s neither addiction nor abuse, by very definition. It’s “normal.” Unless you’re the morality police or something, when someone chooses to spend more time talking to their friends online or playing an online game, that’s their right and choice. It’s not “abuse” by any stretch of the imagination.

Finally, many studies at the moment are looking at the biological effects of addiction on the brain.

Several studies of the brain and behaviour back the idea that there’s very little biological difference between what goes on in the head of a gambling addict and that of a crack addict. A growing number of researchers believe that the same processes lie behind all addictions, behavioural or chemical, whether it’s gambling or shopping, computer gaming, love, work, exercise, pornography, eating or sex…

Although this does raise issues of being deterministic when it come to the understanding of these addictions:

… That’s a controversial claim. There’s a common perception that overindulgence in certain behaviours is all down to individual choice. If you are overeating, oversexed, gambling away your earnings or spending all your time online, you are more likely to be considered morally abhorrent than the victim of a disease. Calling these problems “addictions” has triggered debates about whether our society or our biology is to blame, and whether people that fall foul of a behavioural obsession should be offered help and treatment rather than punishment.

Over the last few weeks I have been reading a lot about addiction and the current theories and research into it. There seems to still be a lot of competing views, even now. But, as the world is changing, so too are the things that we are becoming addicted to and the accessibility to those things. Gambling is now no-longer a passion of those who frequent casinos or that slot machine in a Smokey pub; it’s in our living rooms on TV and everywhere you look on the internet.

Anyway, read the articles and make you own minds up – just don’t spend too much time on the internet: you might become an addict! ;)

Further Reading:

• http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/04/07/the-science-of-addiction-the-myth-of-choice/
• http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2007/04/15/if-everyone-does-it-is-it-abuse/
• http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19125661.200

Tags: A2, addiction, health, Research

When teaching psychology and health I have found that a top evaluation issue that students can really get their teeth into and discuss well in part B essays is the issue of correlation and causality (or more accurately lack of causality).

Because of the practical and ethical problems of studying health and illness this tricky little number occurs very frequently.

I give small groups of students an example of a correlational analysis to evaluate so that they can work out for themselves the issue of lack of causality and then ask them to present their findings back to the rest of the class. All of these examples are easy to print – and if you have any other (better) examples please leave a comment.

Here are the examples that I use:

• A study investigating the correlation between tooth loss and heart disease
• A study investigating the correlation between nightshifts and breast cancer
• A study investigating the correlation between shaving habits and stroke risks
• A study investigating the correlation between watching the telly and autism

It is very empowering for the students to rip apart this scientific research and I think it gives them the strength to do the same to the material they are learning for this unit. I would love to hear of any other examples of correlations that teachers use – even any anecdotal ones such as the correlation between ice cream sales and deaths from drowning.

Tags: A2, correlation, evaluation, health