Feelings and the Sense of Time in the Brain

Feelings and the Sense of Time in the Brain

Time moves slowly when sitting on a very hot surface and when waiting for a lover to arrive. It moves quickly when joyful. If life is threatened time moves…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on jonlieffmd.com

Sharing Increases in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and decreases the rostral prefrontal cortex activation after-8 weeks of focused attention based mindfulness meditation via BrowZine

Increases in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and decreases the rostral prefrontal cortex activation after-8 weeks of focused attention based mindfulness meditation
Tomasino, Barbara; Fabbro, Franco
Brain and Cognition, Vol. 102 – 2016: 46 - 54

10.1016/j.bandc.2015.12.004

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262615300439

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262615300439

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Mind wandering, the default network and controlled attention: An OBG video post

(This is an oldie-but-goodie blog post - OBG)

A few interesting video gems for your viewing.

First, forget multitasking and try mono-tasking.  Focus on just one thing...it may be beneficial.

Next, I have frequently blogged about the default mode or default brain network (Brain Clock posts; IM-HOME post).  The default mode (which is estimated to be active approximately 40% of our waking day) has been implicated in how our mind, when idling or resting, is very active--it does not rest while resting.  Difficulty quieting the default network has also been implicated in a variety of clinical disorders such as ADHD, Alzheimers, schizophrenia, and autism. This literature is now frequently referred to as mind wandering research (see Brain Clock mind wandering posts).  The following is a nice brief overview of the default brain network.

I have also suggested that some brain fitness technologies (Interactive Metronome in particular;  conflict of interest disclosure--I serve as a paid external consultant to IM regarding research) are achieving success by either directly or indirectly training controlled, focused attention, which requires shutting down and inhibiting the mind wandering predisposition of the default mode network.  I have posted both a set of PPT slides and the video of my recent IM keynote presentation at the Brain Clock blog where I presented the relevant research and hypotheses in detail.

Finally, a more lengthy, thought provoking video is presented last.  This video makes it clear that the brain is best conceptualized as an evolving interconnected network.

Enjoy.

We All Hear The World In Our Own Unique Way

We All Hear The World In Our Own Unique Way

In a recent talk delivered at the Falling Walls Conference in Berlin this week, Northwestern University researcher Dr. Nina Kraus introduced an intriguing…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on medicaldaily.com

How Music and Language Shape the Brain

How Music and Language Shape the Brain

EVANSTON, Ill. -- Northwestern University professor Nina Kraus shed light on one of the brain's most complex tasks -- making sense of sound -- during the recent…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on northwestern.edu

Interactive Metronome (IM) is measuring and changing something real and important: An old-but-goodie (OBG) post

[This is an oldie-but-goodie (OGB) post that I originally posted as a guest blogger at the IM-HOME blog on Feb 2, 2012]

 

No human investigation can be called real science if it cannot be demonstrated mathematically

Leonardo da Vinci, Treatise on Painting (1651)

Progress in science depends on new techniques, new discoveries and new ideas, probably in that order Sydney Brenner (1980)

 

At the core of the IM intervention technology is a precise measurement system.  To users and clinicians the IM measurement system is transparent.  Yet, without the valid and precise measurement system, IM would not work.

In my “Brain or neural efficiency: Is it quickness or timing?” post, I advanced the hypothesis that the effectiveness of Interactive Metronome may be due to IM operating on a fundamental dimension of brain or neural efficiency, which intelligence scholars also relate to general intelligence (g).  I have also suggested that this mechanism improves control of attention and may allow individuals to “quiet a busy mind”and invoke “on-demand focus.”

As an applied intelligence test developer (click here), I have been intrigued by the underlying precise millisecond-based measurement system which is the heart of IM technology.  IM technology would not work if the underlying measurement system could not reliably measure differences in synchronized metronome tapping between individuals and changes within the same individual over repeated sessions. 

Wanting to know how precise the underlying IM measurement system is, I extracted the average millisecond scores from an unpublished 2003 Interactive Metronome document that reported average times for different age groups.  The sample consisted of the initial IM Long Form Assessment performance of 1,583 clinical and normal subjects ranging in age from 6 thru 60+.  It is important to note that the sample was not a nationally representative normal sample and was comprised of more clinical subjects receiving IM therapy.  Nevertheless, I wondered if this less-than-optimal set of data might demonstrate a pattern of increasingly shorter response times as individuals became older.  Why did I want to examine this?

Developmental increase in proficiency on tests and measures of human abilities is considered one form of evidence that a test or measurement system is reliably and validly measuring an important human ability.  In the case of intelligence, valid measures of cognitive abilities show developmental growth curves where the youngest subjects obtain the lowest raw scores and the average raw scores gradually increase with increasing age.  They eventually level out and then start a decline as old age sets in.  Below are growth curves from seven cognitive ability scores from the Woodcock-Johnson Battery—III, a test battery of which I am a co-author.  The important observation to note is that, despite the specific cognitive ability measure, all curves show low scores for the younger ages followed by acceleration of growth to a certain point.  Each curve then plateaus at a certain age range, after which age-related cognitive decline is noted, but at different rates for different abilities.  These curves are presented in the WJ III Technical Manual (McGrew & Woodcock, 1991) as a form of developmental validity evidence—which provides one piece of evidence that the WJ III tests are valid measures of different and important human intellectual abilities.

Scholars in intelligence have studied and postulated about the different rates of growth and decline for different abilities.  These are serious data about human intelligence and the measures used to capture differences in human abilities.  Within this context, I was ecstatic when I plotted the initial IM Long Form Assessment data (which is analogous to the first time a person is “tested” with the IM measurement system) and discovered the following plot.

 

The first thing the reader should note are the individual data points (the dots).  The points show some random “bouncing around” which we measurement folks call sampling error.  The critical point is that they follow a systematic trend that can be estimated by fitting a mathematical curve to the data points. This was the same procedure used to develop the WJ III cognitive curves in the first figure.  In the second figure, the IM timing curve is demarcated in red.  We who develop test norms and study human ability growth curves generate these smoothed growth curves as they are the best estimate of the real reality of the data if extremely large number of individuals had been tested at each age (there would be much less bounce).

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to interpret the smoothed IM growth curve.  Individuals at the youngest ages, on the average, show the largest millisecond discrepancy from the IM reference tone.  Then, with increasing age, the average IM target-to-response for individuals decreases systematically as children age.  At approximately 25 years of age the curve “bottoms out,” and then as individuals get older, IM millisecond timing scores increase (or get less accurate).  The systematic nature of this curve is amazing, considering it is based on a less-than-optimal sample for determining what constitutes average.

If the reader is having a hard time relating the IM timing curve to the WJ III cognitive ability curves, I have taken the liberty of simply rotating and flipping the IM timing accuracy growth curve in the figure below.  Vioila (aka, walla—“there it is”)!  The curve has the same general shape as the WJ III cognitive ability growth curves!  The reason for the difference between the WJ III growth curves and the first IM timing growth curve is that the meaning of high and low scores are reversed—higher IM times mean lower skilled performance while lower scores on the WJ III battery are associated with lower performance (and vice versa).

Readers who are parents may have seen similar growth curves during well-child visits with the family doctor.  Below are growth charts for weight and length for male children from birth to 36 years.  Although covering a much smaller age span than the WJ III cognitive and IM timing curves above, the shape of the curves is identical for the comparable age ranges (gradually increasing with age).  The middle dark line in each set (labeled 50 for 50^th percentile) is conceptually identical to the above single curve plots.  These physical measurement curves show the systematic and developmental nature of physical growth.

Why am I so excited about the IM timing growth curve?  Because it demonstrates, similar to the physical and intelligence growth curves, that the underlying measurement unit used as the core of IM therapy is measuring a human ability that follows a similar and expected developmental pattern.  Such curves are believed to be due, depending on the specific ability, to the influence of education and experiences as well as genetically-driven biological maturation of the central nervous system (CNS).  The IM timing curve is one form of evidence that the IM measurement system is measuring a fundamental human capacity.  This is extremely exciting!  It is one more piece of evidence that the IM core measurement technology is measuring and working on a core critical human ability. Coupled with other validity evidence previously discussed here and elsewhere, this additional piece of scientific evidence has convinced me that the IM measurement and intervention system is most likely measuring a fundamental aspect of the development of the central nervous system (e.g., neural efficiency).  The cognitive abilities I have suggested fall under the broad umbrella term of executive functions, and more specifically controlled attention (focus) and working memory.

A caveat before I close. The smoothed IM timing curve should not be used by IM providers to evaluate how typical, normal, or close-to-average a person is on their initial IM Long Form Assessment.  The mixed nature of the sample (normal and clinical subjects; more of the later) argues against such use.  Also, the curve only represents the average at each age and calculating and plotting the typical variability around the curve would also be necessary.  I deliberately left out the variability data curves so as not to encourage misuse of the information.

However, IM providers can evaluate their client’s performance by using the official IM Indicator Table.  A copy is reproduced below.  This table can be used to determine whether a client’s performance is in the “ballpark” for their age.  Providers simply locate the clients age in the row at the top then go down that column to find the millisecond score or range that includes their specific IM Long Form Assessment timing score.  The verbal description associated with each level (extremely deficient to exceptional) can be used to make quality of performance statements reflecting where an individual is at the time of the initial assessment.  The scores and labels should not be used for diagnostic purposes.  Instead, they can be used to describe, in approximate ball park terms, where an individual is at the time of the assessment when compared to others of the same age and to make comparisons about that same client’s performance over time.

Age	6	7 to 8	9 to 10	11 to 12	13 to 15	16+
Extreme Deficiency	280+	270+	260+	240+	215+	200+
Severe Deficiency	175-279	170-269	160-259	155-239	150-214	147-199
Below Average	120-174	90-169	80-159	75-154	72-149	70-146
Average	90-119	65-89	55-79	45-74	43-71	41-69
Above Average	56-89	45-64	38-54	36-44	33-42	30-40
Exceptional	40-55	32-44	28-37	26-35	23-32	22-29
Superior	Below 40	Below 32	Below 28	Below 26	Below 23	Below 22

In summary, I have traversed a number of empirical domains in my journey to understand IM.  The finding of such powerful and clear developmental evidence for the underlying IM measurement system is one of the final dots I connected which convinced me of the promise of IM.  The IM program is founded on a valid scientific measurement system of an important human cognitive ability (or constellation of related abilities).
 

Brain Training Evaluation Checklist

Brain Training Evaluation Checklist

To help con­sumers and pro­fes­sion­als nav­i­gate through the grow­ing num­ber of pro­grams and apps mak­ing "brain fit­ness" or "brain train­ing" claims, we offer…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on sharpbrains.com

Article: A Paradigm Shift for the Motor Cortex? - Neuroskeptic

Check out this story on Flipboard!

A Paradigm Shift for the Motor Cortex? - Neuroskeptic

By Neuroskeptic | December 11, 2015 5:56 am Many people will be familiar with this rather strange image: It's a depiction of the motor homunculus,…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on blogs.discovermagazine.com

NIH/NIA research grant awarded to study Interactive Metronome (IM) intervention with aging Native American Indians

I borrowed the announcement below from the Interactive Metronome IM-Home blog.  As many of my readers know, I am a paid external consultant to IM (see conflict of interest disclosure statement).  I have been interested in the IM technology for slightly more than 9 years.  As I blogged yesterday, there is considerable IM research literature available, including 7 "gold standard" randomized control design (RCD) efficacy studies.  Yesterday's posts provide links to key IM and mental timing resources.  I will provide updates regarding this grant project as I learn more.

 Announcement from Interactive Metronome

The National Institutes of Health through the National Institute on Aging has awarded a grant of $2,000,000 to study the effects of Interactive Metronome® (IM) therapy on aging American Indians. The three-year study, which will be conducted by the University of New Mexico and the University of Washington, aims to determine whether the IM intervention can improve cognitive and motor functioning among older American Indians.

American Indians (AIs) experience a disproportionately high incidence of cerebrovascular disease (CBVD) relative to non American Indians with twice the stroke rate of the general US population. Neuroimaging techniques have shown CBVD-related brain abnormalities to be associated with disruption of neuropsychological performance. Therapy for post-stroke cognitive impairment has been challenging. Cognitive therapy involves intense, focused, regular mental activity, intellectual stimulation, and behavioral exercises that assist individuals to regain or maintain cognitive function and reduce the risk of age-related cognitive decline and dementia after brain injury. Interactive Metronome® therapy is a promising form of behavioral therapy for CBVD-related cognitive and motor function. This technology uses operant conditioning of an individual’s responses through simple, repetitive motor tasks (e.g., clapping hands, tapping feet) in sync with a set beat. Through visual and auditory feedback, IM addresses processing speed, attention, and immediate and delayed memory, all of which can be affected by CBVD. IM therapy can improve quality of life, physical mobility, gait, balance and CBVD-related cognitive deficits.

This study’s findings will provide important insights into the relationship among cognitive and motor rehabilitation, neuropsychological assessment, and brain abnormalities in the American Indian who suffers from CBVD. These results will reveal if IM is a viable treatment option for reducing post-stroke challenges in not only American Indians but the general aging population as well.

Interactive metronome (IM) efficacy: Randomized treatment-control group design studies

It has been slightly over nine years since I started the Brain Clock blog (see original post here).  My primary interest in exploring human brain timing stemmed from my role in an intervention study with Interactive Metronome neurotechnology.  This initial interest expanded well beyond the IM technology to a mission to understand human temporal processing, temporal g, brain-clock mechanisms, brain network synchronization, etc.

Today I want to refocus on the IM intervention.  Whenever I tell colleagues or other professionals of my interest (and relations with IM...see conflict of interest statement) in the synchronized metronome tapping technology, I am frequently met with skeptical "you have got to be kidding me" looks or questions.  I understand, as I too was initially a serious skeptic.

Since then I have posted all available IM research literature (and significant amounts of related brain clock literature) at this blog.  The most important IM-specific and general brain clock articles, studies, and other media are listed in the blogrolls on the right side bar of this blog page.  Today I want to focus only on those studies that are considered "gold standard" studies (as per appropriate experimental design methods) that demonstrate treatment or intervention effectiveness.

The gold standard experimental design for demonstrating the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment is to randomly assign subjects to two (or more) groups...one group a control group that receives no treatment and the other(s) that receive the treatment(s).  Efficacy for a treatment is found when the treatment group outperforms the control group on the final or post-test outcome variables.  This is a VERY simplified explanation of what is typically called a randomized control design (RCD) (see RCD info here and here).  RCD studies are those that should carry the most weight in evaluating a treatment's effectiveness claims.

Click on image to enlarge for easier reading

There are now 7 different IM RCD studies that demonstrate positive IM treatment effects for ADHD, blast-related TBI neuropsychological functioning, academics (reading and math), and golf.  The studies are designated with an RCD code in the Interactive Metronome Research blog side bar.  The abstracts for each study are produced below (click on images to enlarge to read).

Based on these RCD studies (as well as other IM research studies), I produced a white paper that presented explanatory hypotheses for the "why" of the IM-effect--why does it produce positive outcomes across multiple human ability domains, especially cognitively controlled domains (reading, math, neuropschological functioning, attentional control, etc.)?  This MindHub Pub # 2 (The Science Behind Interactive Metronome) can be found here.

I encourage those who are interested in learning more to read the MindHub Pub manuscript and the RCD IM-specific studies (can be downloaded from the relevant Brain Clock IM Research side bar).  Additional information (PPT slide shows; videos; publications) and be found at two places at the MindHub web portal (here and here).  Enjoy

Click on images to enlarge to read