Lower brain

What is the purpose of music? A review of evolutionary and pleasurable research findings

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Amygdala, Anterior cingulate cortex, Cerebrum, Dopamine, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Lower brain, Neurochemicals

Ever wonder what happens in your brain and body when you get chills from a musical performance?

This 2013 summary review of 126 studies provided details of brain areas that contribute to our enjoyment of music.

Much of the review addressed Darwin’s observation that music had no readily apparent functional consequence and no clear-cut adaptive function. The researchers noted that:

“There is scant evidence that other species possess the mental machinery to decode music in the way humans do, or to derive enjoyment from it.”

The reasons why different types of music affect us differently are similar to the findings of the Reciprocity behaviors differ as to whether we seek cerebral vs. limbic system rewards study.

Here are the “We seek limbic system rewards” similarities:

“The nucleus accumbens played an important role with both familiar and novel music. In the case of familiar music, hemodynamic activity in the nucleus accumbens was associated with increasing pleasure, and maximally expressed during the experience of chills, which represent the peak emotional response; these were the same regions that showed dopamine release. The nucleus accumbens is tightly connected with subcortical limbic areas of the brain, implicated in processing, detecting, and expressing emotions, including the amygdala and hippocampus. It is also connected to the hypothalamus, insula, and anterior cingulate cortex, all of which are implicated in controlling the autonomic nervous system, and may be responsible for the psychophysiological phenomena associated with listening to music and emotional arousal.”

Here is the “We seek cerebral rewards” part.

“Finally, the nucleus accumbens is tightly integrated with cortical areas implicated in “high-level” processing of emotions that integrate information from various sources, including the orbital and ventromedial frontal lobe. These areas are largely implicated in assigning and maintaining reward value to stimuli and may be critical in evaluating the significance of abstract stimuli that we consider pleasurable.”

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_2/10430.full “From perception to pleasure: Music and its neural substrates”

What happens next after a detox program predictably fails?

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Beliefs, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Primal Therapy , ,

This 2014 study was a misguided example of looking solely at the presenting parts of a person’s condition rather than the whole historical person.

What did this study’s researchers decide after finding:

“Alcohol-dependent subjects..remained with high scores of depression, anxiety, and alcohol craving after a short-term detoxification program.”

Was it that the detox program didn’t work because it dealt with suppressing symptoms rather than addressing causes?

NO!

The researchers decided:

“Gut microbiota seems to be a previously unidentified target in the management of alcohol dependence.”

The researchers proceeded on some trendy, in-vogue aspect of their patients with which to tinker.

The researchers ignored that the correlation of the new treatment course didn’t show causation. They also ignored underlying causes for the ineffectiveness of the preceding treatments of symptoms.

Hard to see how the reviewer believed that this study would advance science.

Meanwhile, the researchers continued to ignore the elephants in the room: the relationships of the patients’ histories and their pain.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/42/E4485.full “Intestinal permeability, gut-bacterial dysbiosis, and behavioral markers of alcohol-dependence severity”

If research provides evidence for the causes of stress-related disorders, why only focus on treating the symptoms?

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Brainstem, Cortisol, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Locus coeruleus, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Stress , , ,

This 2014 rodent research reliably induced many disorders common to humans. Here are some post-birth problems the researchers caused, primarily by applying different types of stress, as detailed in the study’s supplementary material:

Yet the researchers’ goal was to identify a brain receptor for:

“Novel therapeutic targets for stress-related disorders.”

In other words, develop new drugs to treat the symptoms.

Where are the studies that have goals to prevent these common problems being caused in humans by humans?

Where is the research on treatments to reverse the enduring physiological impacts to stress by treating the causes?

What do you think of this excerpt?

“Accumulating evidence suggests that traumatic events particularly during early life (e.g., parental loss or neglect) coupled with genetic factors are important risk factors for the development of depression and anxiety disorders.

Moreover, the brain is particularly vulnerable to the effects of stress during this period.

Maternal separation in rodents is a useful model of early-life stress that results in enduring physiological and behavioral changes that persist into adulthood, including increased hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA)–axis sensitivity, increased anxiety, and visceral hypersensitivity.”

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/42/15232.full “GABAB(1) receptor subunit isoforms differentially regulate stress resilience”

Flooding the hypothalamus with neurochemicals affects reward-seeking, motivated, and depressive behavior

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Lower brain, Neurochemicals

This 2014 rodent study showed the opposing effects of neurochemicals orexin (excitator) and dynorphin (inhibitor) in the hypothalamus.

The hypothalamus plays a role in behaviors such as addiction and impulsiveness. Food and cocaine self-administration were the main techniques used.

Flooding the hypothalamus with orexin produced reward-seeking and motivated behavior. That was greatly reduced when dynorphin levels were increased, and depressive behavior set in.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/16/E1648.full “Hypocretin (orexin) facilitates reward by attenuating the antireward effects of its cotransmitter dynorphin in ventral tegmental area”

Who benefits when research with no practical application becomes a politically correct meme?

gettingwell4 < 0 Detracted from science, Anterior cingulate cortex, Beliefs, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain

Do you take a risk, as this 2013 University of Texas/Yale study concluded, because you don’t foresee how you can avoid the risk?

By making this finding, the study essentially assigned the bases of a person’s risky decisions to their cerebrum.

I wasn’t persuaded. The conclusion was reached because the study’s design only engaged the subjects’ cerebrums with a video game task involving popping balloons. See Task performance and beliefs about task responses are solely cerebral exercises for a similar point.

If the researchers had instead designed a study that also engaged the subjects’ limbic system and lower brains, the findings may have been different.

Only one of the news articles covered this story with some accuracy, io9.com:

“Helfinstein (the lead researcher) doesn’t see any direct, practical applications of the research. After all, people don’t spend their lives in fMRI scanners, so it’s not as if we can tell when people are going to make a risky decision in their day-to-day activities.”

Compare that with the majority of the news coverage that hijacked the study’s findings to try to develop a politically correct meme:

“Many health-relevant risky decisions share this same structure, such as when deciding how many alcoholic beverages to drink before driving home or how much one can experiment with drugs or cigarettes before developing an addiction.”

The study found that “risk taking may be due, in part, to a failure of the control systems necessary to initiate a safe choice.” The brain areas were “primarily located in regions more active when preparing to avoid a risk than when preparing to engage in one.” These areas included the “bilateral parietal and motor regions, anterior cingulate cortex, bilateral insula, and bilateral lateral orbitofrontal cortex.”

Notice that just one of the studied brain areas (the anterior cingulate cortex) is part of the limbic system or lower brains, although the bilateral insula connects to the limbic system. Yet the limbic system and lower parts of the brain are most often the brain areas that drive real-world risky behaviors such as smoking, drug use, sexual risk taking, and unsafe driving.

A video game task of popping balloons that engaged the cerebrum was NOT informative to the cause-and-effect of the emotions and instincts and impulses from limbic system and lower brains that predominantly drive risky behavior.

Who may benefit from the misinterpretations and misdirections of the study’s findings? We can take clues from the five applicable NIH grants (UL1-DE019580, RL1MH083268, RL1MH083269, RL1DA024853, PL1MH083271) and the researchers’ statement:

“We were able to predict choice category successfully in 71.8% of cases.”

Anybody ever read Philip K. Dick?

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/7/2470.full “Predicting risky choices from brain activity patterns”

Can psychologists exclude the limbic system and adequately study awareness and social cognition?

gettingwell4 < 0 Detracted from science, Amygdala, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory , , , ,

This 2014 Princeton human study was proof that cognitive researchers are stuck in the cerebrum. That and gadgets.

The researchers didn’t measure limbic system or lower brain areas, yet from their use of cartoon faces and magnetically zapping their subjects’ brains they proclaimed:

“The findings suggest a fundamental connection between private awareness and social cognition.”

For just one example of the gross omissions of the study’s design, look at the limbic system’s part in “social cognition” for The amygdala is where we integrate our perception of human facial emotion.

And it’s a very limited scope of “private awareness” that excludes conscious awareness of what’s in our own feeling, instinctual, and impulsive levels of consciousness.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/13/5012.full “Attributing awareness to oneself and to others”

This post has somehow become a target for spammers, and I’ve disabled comments. Readers can comment on other posts and indicate that they want their comment to apply here, and I’ll re-enable comments.

Can a study exclude the limbic system and adequately find how we process value?

gettingwell4 < 0 Detracted from science, Beliefs, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain ,

This 2014 human study was notable for defining away the limbic system and lower brain from consideration in processing positive and negative stimuli for value.

However, the researchers didn’t fully reveal their biases until the last paragraph of the supplementary material, where they were obligated to comment on a previous study that included the limbic system. Good for the reviewer if that was how the researchers became obligated to deal with the previous study.

It isn’t difficult to include the limbic system in studies of value. For example, the Teenagers value rewards more and are more sensitive to punishments than are adults study found:

  • Cerebral areas increased activity when the expected value of the reward increased.
  • Limbic system areas increased activity when the expected value of the reward decreased.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/13/5000.full “Disentangling neural representations of value and salience in the human brain”

When do you get to live your own life?

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Limbic system, Lower brain

This 2014 Cambridge/Stanford study asserted that for Facebook users, a computer can be a better judge of who your real self is: better than your social contacts, and in some aspects, than yourself.

There were many elements to this study. Let’s take one – impulsivity – which should be a multifaceted judgment relating to one’s own limbic system and especially lower brain, whose signature is instinctual survival reactions.

The self-assessed correlation score was .52, which was better than the computer score of .28, which was better than the .26 social contacts score.

I interpreted the impulsivity scores as people internally knowing who they really were better than what they displayed externally. A finding of the “duh” variety, although not counter to the study’s headlines.

What do you think about this study’s statement?

“Furthermore, in the future, people might abandon their own psychological judgments and rely on computers when making important life decisions, such as choosing activities, career paths, or even romantic partners. It is possible that such data-driven decisions will improve people’s lives.”

I think that’s generally possible. Whether that’s individually possible depends on who you really are.

If all your life you’ve accepted being constantly told what to do, and accepted being forced to do things “for your own good” then yes, you may accept a computer program as a substitute for your parents’ or some other external party’s authority over your life.

If this describes you, I ask: When do you get to live your own life?

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/4/1036.full “Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans”

Why do researchers title their study the cortex vs. the limbic system or lower brain?

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Brain development, Brainstem, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain, Stress ,

This 2012 review of 89 studies was ostensibly of the prefrontal cortex. The review title showed how researchers characterize their work as studying the cerebrum, even when they primarily deal with the limbic system and lower brains.

For example, the reviewer discussed rodent studies of the developing pup fetus regarding:

  • Sensory/motor – Paternal complex housing, maternal complex housing
  • Stress – Mild stress, bystander stress, moderate stress
  • Psychoactive drugs – Stimulants
  • Adult stimulants – Ethanol

The active brain areas of the rodent fetus are the brainstem and the limbic system, and those areas were primarily what was studied. The cerebrum of the developing pup is a tiny strip that has little cognitive function.

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/Supplement_2/17186.full “Experience and the developing prefrontal cortex”

We feel anxious even when making a choice from multiple good options

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain

This 2014 Harvard/Princeton research studied brain areas as people made choices among multiple good options:

“Our results show that choice conflict can at least lead to substantial short-term anxiety, that this anxiety increases with the number and value of one’s options (potentially enhanced by time pressure), and that it is not attenuated by awareness of the objectively negligible costs of a “bad” choice.”

There was a problem with the way the researchers evaluated “positive feelings” through the subjects’ computerized self-reporting. The subjects’ cerebral assessments of “positive feelings” didn’t match their limbic system functional MRI measurements.

These discrepancies showed that what the subjects assessed weren’t emotions originating from their limbic system or lower brains. “Positive feelings” were, instead, constructs of the subjects’ cerebrums.

“This is what I think I should be feeling” may have been a more appropriate characterization of the subjects’ assessments.

The study had better accuracy when fMRI measurements showed that limbic system areas were more activated in people who self-reported feeling more conflicted at the time they made their choice. The conflicted subjects were also more likely than subjects whose limbic system areas weren’t similarly activated, to reverse their choice when given the opportunity.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/30/10978.full “Neural correlates of dueling affective reactions to win–win choices”

Problematic research on human happiness

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Beliefs, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain

This 2014 UK study provided an example of researchers inappropriately ignoring the limbic system and lower brains when allegedly researching emotions. Only cerebral areas were measured and considered in the researchers’ efforts to measure the subjects’ happiness.

Efforts to determine emotions by cerebral measurements seldom reveal what people actually feel. What’s measured is a construct of people’s cerebrums – a proxy for their emotions – that may not have anything to do with what people actually feel at the time.

It may have been more appropriate to characterize the subjects’ self-reports of happiness as “This is what I think I should tell the researchers about what I think I should feel.”

What we think we should feel is separate from what we actually feel. Limbic system and lower brain measurements need to be taken and considered when subjects self-report degrees of happiness if the researchers intend to draw conclusions about feelings of happiness.

“We show that emotional reactivity in the form of momentary happiness in response to outcomes of a probabilistic reward task is explained not by current task earnings, but by the combined influence of recent reward expectations and prediction errors arising from those expectations.”

It was the researchers’ cerebral exercise of expectations and prediction errors to find:

“Moment-to-moment happiness reflects not just how well things are going, but whether things are going better than expected.”

Informed by the Using expectations of oxytocin to induce positive placebo effects of touching is a cerebral exercise study, I consider the current study to be one big demonstration of how researchers can be fooled by a positive placebo effect!

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/33/12252.full “A computational and neural model of momentary subjective well-being”

Want empathy from your therapist? Don’t give a scientific explanation of your condition

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Lower brain

This 2014 Yale study found that providing scientific explanations of patients’ conditions actually REDUCED an important part of what patients may need from therapists – empathy.

That finding summed up the malaise throughout the current dog-and-pony-show approaches in psychotherapy, where:

  • Efforts to treat symptoms are maximized, and approaches to treat causes are minimized;
  • The therapist is in charge, not the patient;
  • The cerebrum is the all-in-all, while the limbic system and instinctual parts of the patient’s brain that drive behavior are suppressed.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/50/17786.full “Effects of biological explanations for mental disorders on clinicians’ empathy”

Activation of brainstem neurons induces REM sleep

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Acetylcholine, Brainstem, Lower brain, Neurochemicals

This 2014 MIT/Harvard rodent study provided evidence that specific brainstem neurons (cholinergic, or containing acetylcholine) regulated dream sleep.

The researchers used a more exact technique that selectively activated just one neuron. They made the neurons in this study sensitive to light using an algae protein that responded to a specific light frequency. Once expressed in the neuron, the protein activated the neuron when that specific frequency of light was shown onto it.

“Interestingly, both manipulations resulted in a change in the number of REM [rapid eye movement] sleep episodes and did not change REM sleep episode duration, suggesting that the PPT [pedunculopontine tegmentumis part of the brainstem] involved in REM sleep initiation but not REM sleep maintenance.”

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/2/584.full “Optogenetic activation of cholinergic neurons in the PPT or LDT induces REM sleep”

The brainstem nucleus locus coeruleus is the primary source of norepinephrine

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Brainstem, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Locus coeruleus, Lower brain, Neurochemicals

This 2014 rodent study provided further information on the locus coeruleus segment of the brainstem:

“The brainstem nucleus locus coeruleus is the primary source of norepinephrine to the mammalian neocortex.

Neurons in the locus coeruleus maintain segregated connections to brain regions with distinctly different functions. Specifically, cells that communicate with the prefrontal cortex, a region involved in cognition and executive function, are characterized by properties that allow for independent and asynchronous modulation of operations in this area, compared with those that project to the motor cortex and regulate movement generation.”

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/18/6816.full “Heterogeneous organization of the locus coeruleus projections to prefrontal and motor cortices”

The thalamus’ role in coordinating REM sleep stages

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Brainstem, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Thalamus

This 2013 human study provided more details about dream sleep. The thalamus portion of the limbic system coordinates REM stages, which play critical roles in learning and memory.

This study also noted that science assigns no functions to dreams themselves, which was the first I’d heard of it.

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/25/10300.full “Rhythmic alternating patterns of brain activity distinguish rapid eye movement sleep from other states of consciousness”