Archive for October, 2008
Language and intentionality
Michael Tomasello has a new book out titled ” The origins of human communication” and the book seems to be promising, though has been a bit harshly reviewed at the Babel’s Dawn. In it Tomasello proposes that a pre-requisite for language is ‘a psychological infrastructure of shared intentionality’. It is based on Jean Nicod lectures and you can read a review here too.
What I am most interested is in this intentionality business. I have commented on orders of intentionality previously and this shared intentionality seems to fit the third order of intentionality that I proposed was necessary for communication.
But first for the premise of the book:
Tomasello opens his book with a consideration of the “infrastructure” that enables people to tell one another things. Apes do not have this infrastructure and the absence leads to scenes like this one:A “whimpering chimpanzee child” is searching for its mother; the other chimps in the area are smart enough and social enough to recognize why the chimpanzee is whimpering; sometimes one of the chimps present will know where the mother is, and of course chimps have the physical ability to raise an arm point out the mother; even so, chimpanzees never help forlorn infants by pointing to the mother.
Why not?
There is a straightforward, Darwinian explanation for the ape’s mum’s-the-word behavior. Individuals don’t help non-kin. There is nothing in it for the informed adults to help the whimpering child of another. But Tomasello comes at the question from another perspective. Humans typically do help out whimpering children, even if the child is a stranger. An adult, happening upon a solitary, unknown, whimpering child is very likely to stop and ask what is wrong, take charge, and stick around until the problem is resolved. This activity strikes us as perfectly natural, normal behavior, even though it is contrary to so many of the rules in Darwin’s book. What, Tomasello wonders, is there about humans that makes such behavior easy and routine? His answer: “a psychological infrastructure of shared intentionality” [p. 12].
Thus, the premise is that pro-social behaviour and the shared intentionality underlying it are the pre-requisites for any meaningful language to evolve. And for this some tools are required.
The psychological tools Tomasello refers to are cognitive and emotional. The cognitive tools give us the understanding to engage in joint purposes and joint attention. The emotional tools provide us with the motivation for helping and sharing with others. These tools enable people to act together on a “common ground.”
Ebolles goes on further to speculate that this could be tied to Autistics’ difficulty with language and I concur that the cognitive deficits related to intentionality as opposed to affective deficits empathy or mindblindness may be the roots of Autistics’ language and communicative difficulties. We already know that they lack ToM to an extent and they also have communicative and social difficulties; might lack of shared intentionality, or intentionality at all or the lack of feeling of one has an intentional agent, lie at the heart of the autism issue?
Immediately one can imagine all sorts of peculiarities that would arise in people who lack some part of these needs. Some people might have the prosocial motivation but not the cognitive ability to form a bird’s eye view. Perhaps autistic-spectrum disorder includes this difficulty. Others might have the cognitive ability, but not the prosocial motivation. There’s your sociopath, in a nutshell.
I think this common ground and ‘infrastructure of shared intentionality’ concept is awesome and I intend to read the book and review it soon on this blog.
More From TheMouseTrap
TheMouseTrap Recommends
Glutamate and classical conditioning
I had speculated in one of my earlier posts that Glutamate , GABA, Glycine and aspartate may be involved in classical conditioning / avoidance learning. To quote:
That is it for now; I hope to back up these claims, and extend this to the rest of the 3 traits too in the near future. Some things I am toying with is either classical conditioning and avoidance learning on these higher levels; or behavior remembering (as opposed to learning) at these higher levels. Also other neurotransmitter systems like gluatamete, glycine, GABA and aspartate may be active at the higher levels. Also neuro peptides too are broadly classified in five groups so they too may have some role here. Keep guessing and do contribute to the theory if you can!!
Now, I have discovered an article that links Glutamate to classical conditioning. It is titled Reward-Predictive Cues Enhance Excitatory Synaptic Strength onto Midbrain Dopamine Neurons, and here is the abstract:
Using sensory information for the prediction of future events is essential for survival. Midbrain dopamine neurons are activated by environmental cues that predict rewards, but the cellular mechanisms that underlie this phenomenon remain elusive. We used in vivo voltammetry and in vitro patch-clamp electrophysiology to show that both dopamine release to reward predictive cues and enhanced synaptic strength onto dopamine neurons develop over the course of cue-reward learning. Increased synaptic strength was not observed after stable behavioral responding. Thus, enhanced synaptic strength onto dopamine neurons may act to facilitate the transformation of neutral environmental stimuli to salient reward-predictive cues.
Though the article itself does not talk about glutamate, and nor does this Scicurious article on Neurotopia, commenting on the same , which focuses more on the dopamine connection, still I believe that we have a Glutamate connection here. First let us see how the artifact under discussion is indeed nothing but classical conditioning:
The basic idea is that, when you get a reward unexpectedly, you get a big spike of DA to make your brain go “sweet!” After a while, you being to recognize the cues behind the reward, and so seeing the wrapper to the candy will make your DA spike in anticipation. But it’s only very recently that we’ve been able to see this change taking place, and there were still lots of questions as to what was happening when these changes happen.
So the authors of this study took a bunch of rats. They implanted fast scan cyclic voltammetry probes into their heads. Voltammetry is a technique that allows you to detect changes in DA levels in brain areas (in this case the nucleus accumbens, an area linked with reward) which represent groups of cells firing. So the rats had probes in their heads detecting their DA, and then they were given a stimulus light (a conditioned stimulus), a nosepoke device, and a sugar pellet. There is nothing that a rat likes more than a sugar pellet, and so there was a nice big spike in DA as it got its reward. So the rats figured out pretty quickly that, when the light came on, you stick your nose in the hole, and sugar was on the way. As they learned the conditioned stimulus, their DA spikes in response to reward SHIFTED, moving backward in time, so that they soon got a spike of DA when they saw the light, without a spike when they got the pellet. This means that the animals had learned to associate a conditioned stimulus with reward. Not only that, the DA spike was higher immediately after learning than the spike in rats who just got rewards without learning.
So, if we consider the dopamine spike as an Unconditioned Response, then what we have is a new CS-> CR pairing or classical conditioning taking place. Now, the crucial study that showed that the learning is mediated by Glutamate: (emphasis mine)
To find out whether or not excitatory synapses were in fact changing, they authors conducted electrophysiology experiments in rats that were either trained or not trained. Electrophysiology is a technique where you actually put a tiny, tiny electrode into a cell membrane. When that cell is then stimulated, you can actually WATCH it fire. It’s really very cool to see. Of course all sorts of things are responsible for when a cell fires and how, but what they were looking at here were specific glutamate receptors known as AMPA and NMDA. These are two major receptors that receive glutamate currents, which are excitatory and induce cells downstream to fire. What they found was that, in animals that had been trained to a conditioned stimulus, AMPA and NMDA receptors had a much stronger influence on firing than in non-trained animals, which means that the synaptic strength on DA neurons is getting stronger as animals learn. Not only that, but cells from trained rats already exhibited long-term potentiation, a phenomenon associated with formation of things like learning and memory.
But of course, you have to make sure that glutamate is really the neurotransmitter responsible, and not just a symptom of something else changing. So they ran more rats on voltammetry and trained, and this time put a glutamate antagonist into the brain. The found that a glutamate antagonist completely blocked not only the DA shift to a conditioned stimulus, but the learning itself.
From the above it is clear that Glutamate , and the LTP that it leads to in the mid-brain neurons synapses , is crucial for Classical conditioning learning. Seems that one more puzzle is solved and another jig-jaw piece fits where it should have.
More From TheMouseTrap
- Obesity and the dopamine connection
- Language and intentionality
- Antidepressants and neurogenesis / plasticity
TheMouseTrap Recommends
Ig Nobles, good Science books and good banned books
This is just an FYI post regarding a few things I found worth sharing.
First on, there happened recently, an Ig noble prize ceremony and the recipients included Dan Ariely, the author of predictably irrational, for his research showing that expensive placebo medicines work better than inexpensive placebo medicines. Other interesting researches honored include research showing that coco-cola kills sperms and that playing sounds that gel while eating something (like ocean waves while eating turkey) make the food tastier. Also some research that shows that exotic dancers earn better at the peak of their fertility cycle. to me all of this seems very interesting and rational research, but let us enjoy the spirit of the Ig noble and not start using coca-cola as a contraceptive.
Next, we have a list of five great and worth reading science books by readwriteweb: While I have read GEB, the others are still on my reading list especially Stuart Koffman’s book At home in the Universee and Complexity by Waldrop. would love comments from my readers as to how they have found the above books, and what additional books they would suggest.
Finally, to celebrate the banned books day, Time recently published ten most banned books and it seems I am quite perverse in my tastes because some of the best books that I have read, and which are my fondest, belong to the list. The list includes 1984, Brave New world, Lolita and The Catcher in the Rye , all of whom I simply adore. I was surprised to find children’ s books like Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Harry Potter series included there, as having read and enjoyed them, I couldn’t imagine why they could have been controversial. Now, I know from where to choose my reading titles. Next on my reading list I know why the caged bird sings.
More From TheMouseTrap
- Depression, Neurogenesis and Spatial navigation
- Top 100 cutting edge science blogs! | The Mouse Trap
- Not Exactly Rocket Science : the book
TheMouseTrap Recommends
- Raw and Real…This Time Last Year (DanielleMMiller)
- Falling Off the Wagon, Skinning Your Knees (and Getting BACK on the Wagon) (DanielleMMiller)
After Social Maturity, Emotional Maturity or EI/ EQ
My last two posts have dealt with the Social Maturity theory of the developmental psychologist Robert Kegan. This post is about emotional maturity as reflected in Emotional quotient (EQ) / Emotional Intelligence (EI).
I presume that everybody is familiar with the term Emotional Intelligence, thanks to Daniel Goleman. It can be defined as:
Emotional Intelligence (EI), often measured as an Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EQ), describes an ability, capacity, skill or (in the case of the trait EI model) a self-perceived ability, to identify, assess, and manage the emotions of one’s self, of others, and of groups.
As per Goleman, a person has many emotional competencies, related and measured by the above EQ, and these fall in five broad domains.
The Five Components of Emotional Intelligence
Self-awareness. The ability to recognize and understand personal moods and emotions and drives, as well as their effect on others. Hallmarks* of self-awareness include self-confidence, realistic self-assessment, and a self-deprecating sense of humor. Self-awareness depend on one’s ability to monitor one’s own emotion state and to correctly identify and name one’s emotions.
Self-regulation.The ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses and moods, and the propensity to suspend judgment and to think before acting. Hallmarks include trustworthiness and integrity; comfort with ambiguity; and openness to change.
Motivation. A passion to work for reasons that go beyond money and status, which are external rewards. A propensity to pursue goals with energy and persistence. Hallmarks include a strong drive to achieve, optimism even in the face of failure, and organizational commitment.
Empathy. The ability to understand the emotional makeup of other people. A skill in treating people according to their emotional reactions. Hallmarks include expertise in building and retaining talent, cross-cultural sensitivity, and service to clients and customers. (In an educational context, empathy is often thought to include, or lead to, sympathy, which implies concern, or care or a wish to soften negative emotions or experiences in others.) See also Mirror Neurons.
It is important to note that empathy does not necessarily imply compassion. Empathy can be ‘used’ for compassionate or cruel behavior. Serial killers who marry and kill many partners in a row tend to have great emphatic skills!
Social skills. Proficiency in managing relationships and building networks, and an ability to find common ground and build rapport. Hallmarks of social skills include effectiveness in leading change, persuasiveness, and expertise building and leading teams.
These can easily be related to the Big five traits (although I am not aware of any research that does so). Below I try to correlate them to the Big five. Some of the material is taken from this source.
I) SELF-AWARENESS:
- Emotional Awareness:recognizing one’s emotions and their effect
- Accurate Self-assessment: knowing one’s strengths and limits
- Self-confidence: A strong sense of one’s self-worth and capabilities
One can easily relate this to Neuroticism as I believe that N underlies the awareness of emotions for the first time in the child.
II) SELF-REGULATION
- Self-control: Keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check
- Trustworthiness: Maintaining standards of honesty and integrity
- Conscientiousness: Taking responsibility for personal performance
- Adaptability: Flexibility in handling change
- Innovation: Being comfortable with novel ideas, approaches and new information
Introduction of Conscientiousness as a sub-competency in this domain makes it easy to correlate this with Conscientiousness . Also note the emphasis on impulses.
III) MOTIVATION
- Achievement drive: Striving to improve or meet a standard of excellence
- Commitment: Aligning with the goals of the group or organization
- Initiative: Readiness to act on opportunities
- Optimism: Persistence in pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks
This can be related to Positive emotionality or Extarversion as the emphasis seems to be on developmental of positive emotions and general energy and motivation level.
IV) EMPATHY
- Understanding others: sensing others’ feelings and perspectives, taking an active interest in their concerns
- Developing others: Sensing others development needs and bolstering their abilities
- Service orientation: Anticipating, recognizing, and meeting customers’ needs
- Leveraging diversity: Cultivating opportunities through different kinds of people
- Political Awareness: Reading a group’s emotional currents and power relationships
This also by being named Empathy , is clearly reflective of Agreeableness. The focus for the first time shifts from self to others.
V) SOCIAL SKILLS
- Influence: Wielding effective tactics for persuasion
- Communication: Listening openly and sending convincing messages
- Conflict management: Negotiating and resolving disagreements
- Leadership: Inspiring and guiding individuals and groups
- Change Catalyst: Initiating or managing change
- Building bonds: Nurturing instrumental relationships
- Collaboration and cooperation: Working with others toward shared goals
- Team capabilities: creating group synergy in pursuing collective goals
This can be stretched to correlate to Rebelliousness-conformity/ openness/ intellect. It reflects how one uses the acquired emotional knowledge about others emotional states to advantage.
Please note that while the first three domains refer to individual’s self-reflective behavior, the last tow are focused on how individual relates with others. I believe it is possible to move a notch higher and add three more domains to this – one that relate to how groups themselves function effectively in emotional settings. Note that the definition of EI contains references to how groups behave wisely, but that is not captured in above analysis by Goleman, which is confined to individuals self-reflective or other-oriented behavior, but does not cover group dynamics.
Now, many people have dismissed Goleman as Pop science, So I would like to move beyond Goleman to other people working in the same field like Mayor and Salovey and Heins. Mayor and Salovey have defined EI as :
The Four branches of EI:1. Perception Appraisal and Expression of Emotion
2. Emotional Facilitation of Thinking
3. Understanding and Analyzing Emotions; Employing Emotional Knowledge
4. Reflective Regulation of Emotions to Promote Emotional and Intellectual GrowthPerception, Appraisal and Expression of Emotion
- Ability to identify emotion in one’s physical states, feelings, and thoughts.
- Ability to identify emotions in other people, designs, artwork, etc. through language, sound, appearance, and behavior.
- Ability to express emotions accurately, and to express needs related to those feelings.
- Ability to discriminate between accurate and inaccurate, or honest vs. dishonest expressions of feeling.
Emotional Facilitation of Thinking
- Emotions prioritize thinking by directing attention to important information.
- Emotions are sufficiently vivid and available that they can be generated as aids to judgment and memory concerning feelings.
- Emotional mood swings change the individual’s perspective from optimistic to pessimistic, encouraging consideration of multiple points of view.
- Emotional states differentially encourage specific problem-solving approaches such as when happiness facilitates inductive reasoning and creativity.
Understanding and Analyzing Emotions; Employing Emotional Knowledge
- Ability to label emotions and recognize relations among the words and the emotions themselves, such as the relation between liking and loving.
- Ability to interpret the meanings that emotions convey regarding relationships, such as that sadness often accompanies a loss.
- Ability to understand complex feelings: simultaneous feelings of love and hate or blends such as awe as a combination of fear and surprise.
- Ability to recognize likely transitions among emotions, such as the transition from anger to satisfaction or from anger to shame.
Reflective Regulation of Emotion to Promote Emotional and Intellectual Growth
- Ability to stay open to feelings, both those that are pleasant and those that are unpleasant.
- Ability to reflectively engage or detach from an emotion depending upon its judged informativeness or utility.
- Ability to reflectively monitor emotions in relation to oneself and others, such as recognizing how clear, typical, influential or reasonable they are.
- Ability to manage emotion in oneself and others by moderating negative emotions and enhancing pleasant ones, without repressing or exaggerating information they may convey.
I would like to modify and extend the Mayor and Salovey breakup of EI into the following eight components. It is also my thesis that they occur in the following order:
- Emotional self-Awareness: people can differ in how much aware are they of their own internal emotional states.
- Emotional tone/ vivacity : people can differ in how much emotion they feel for the same external / internal triggers. some may have vivid emotions while some may have bland emotions.
- Emotional understanding/analysis/ knowledge/ monitoring : people can differ in how they interpret ones emotional states- which states they deem as close, positive, negative etc and whether they identify the states correctly.
- Emotional self-regulation: people can differ in their abilities to regulate their emotional states: some states may be more desirable and some need to be replaced with other depending on external exigences.
- Emotional Maturity/development/ refinement: people may differ in the extent to which they let their lives be defined by a prominent emotional/ mood state. Some may devlope their primary emotion to be Joy while others may define them primarily by sad emotions.
- Emotional others-awareness or empathy: while the discussion till now was focused on the individual’s emotions, it now moves to others’ emotions. People may differ in their ability to perceive and feel the correct emotional state of others
- Emotional communication/ labeling/ expression: People may differ in their ability to communicate their emotions to others, to label them correctly in such verbal/ non-verbal communication.
- Emotional Integrity/ holism : people may differ in their ability to feel contradictory emotions within themselves and integrate in an overarching integral framework. they may also differ in their ability to judge the honesty or trustworthiness of others’ expressed/ subtle emotions.
To me this seems a promising framework using one which could investigate the EQ/ EI conundrum. However, the above is juts a hypothesis; I believe it is testable and generates many predictions that can, and should, be tested and the theory verified or rejected accordingly. I also belive that these competencies develop in stages and follow a distinct developmental pattern. this too can be verified or rejected.
Social maturity and self-control
In my last post I touched upon Robert Kegan’s Social Maturity theory whereby as humans develop they become more and more objective and loose more and more of their subjectivity. Today I read a blog post on PsyBlog about self-control and how the techniques for self-control relies on becoming more and more abstract and more and more objective. But first the importance of self-control.
One of humanity’s most useful skills, without which advanced civilizations would not exist, is being able to engage our higher cognitive functions, our self-control, to resist these temptations. Psychologists have found that self-control is strongly associated with what we label success: higher self-esteem, better interpersonal skills, better emotional responses and, perhaps surprisingly, few drawbacks at even very high levels of self-control.
Now how raising self-control is akin to becoming more objective or more socially mature. (emphasis mine)
It’s not hard to see the convergence between the idea of ‘psychological distance’ and high-level construal. Both emphasise the idea that the more psychological or conceptual distance we can put between ourselves and the particular decision or event, the more we are able to think about it in an abstract way, and therefore the more self-control we can exert. It’s all about developing a special type of objectivity.
Now for the ways in which self-control can be enhanced. Jeremy provides three ways in which we can raise our self-control (emphasis mine):
Fujita et al.’s (2006) studies, along with other similar findings reported by Fujita (2008), suggest that self-control can be increased by these related ways of thinking:
- Global processing. This means trying to focus on the wood rather than the trees: seeing the big picture and our specific actions as just one part of a major plan or purpose. For example, someone trying to eat healthily should focus on the ultimate goal and how each individual decision about what to eat contributes (or detracts) from that goal.
- Abstract reasoning. This means trying to avoid considering the specific details of the situation at hand in favour of thinking about how actions fit into an overall framework – being philosophical. Someone trying to add more self-control to their exercise regime might try to think less about the details of the exercise, and instead focus on an abstract vision of the ideal physical self, or how exercise provides a time to re-connect mind and body.
- High-level categorisation. This means thinking about high-level concepts rather than specific instances. Any long-term project, whether in business, academia or elsewhere can easily get bogged down by focusing too much on the minutiae of everyday processes and forgetting the ultimate goal. Categorising tasks or project stages conceptually may help an individual or group maintain their focus and achieve greater self-discipline.
These are just some examples of specific instances, but with a little creativity the same principles can be applied to many situations in which self-control is required. Ultimately these three ways of thinking are different ways of saying much the same thing: avoid thinking locally and specifically and practice thinking globally, objectively and abstractly, and increased self-control should follow.
To me, this looks like a very apt illustration of why developing social maturity is important. It helps in increased self control and thus better behavioral outcomes.
Recent Comments