NOTE: The following is NOT medical or mental health advice. I am not a therapist or medical doctor. Rather, it is a summary of evidence-based methods for improving cognitive control. If you or someone you love is struggling, contact 1-800-273-TALK (8255).

Recently, we passed the two-year anniversary of when everything changed. On March 11^th, 2020, the World Health Organization designated a global pandemic for the COVID-19 virus. The chaos that ensued, and still persists to this day, will likely take years for most of us to fully process. Overnight, all of us lost so much, and today we are all grieving something. While many of us, myself included, have suffered the unbearable loss of a close loved one due to COVID-19, the damage extends beyond the physical losses. Some of us lost our beloved and cherished senior sports season, our date nights out at the restaurant, our spiritual gatherings, our mental health, or even our own sense of safety, security, and certainty. We all lost precious time with the people we love.

It’s no wonder that we are seeing some persisting mental effects of the pandemic. As a cognitive scientist whose doctoral work has focused on the impacts that anxiety can have on cognitive control, I’ve been paying close attention to what has been unfolding. Cognitive control is a term that psychologists use to describe how we can inhibit both distractions and unwanted automatic behaviors. It is considered perhaps one of the most important skills we can use to optimize our well-being and our community’s well-being. For example, you may use cognitive control to get yourself to exercise routinely, even when you feel like laying on the couch. Unfortunately, there is some building evidence that the pandemic has considerably weakened our cognitive control abilities.

For example, traffic accidents, particularly involving reckless behaviors such as drinking, speeding, and failure to wear seatbelts have skyrocketed since the pandemic, despite fewer people driving on the roads. In schools, student misbehavior is up after months of remote learning. Remote workers have described feelings of “languishing”—feeling aimless and having difficulty concentrating. Many friends of mine who have worked in the service industry have described increases in nasty comments or behavior from guests who are frustrated with their service—perhaps comments they would have had the control to keep to themselves two years ago. From here, you can see how the initial struggles we faced from the pandemic can cause a ripple effect—a feedback loop of sorts, that cause further stress and pain down the line. There are of course some nefarious individuals out there who may take blatant advantage of this pain and exhaustion to commit evil. However, too many of us are merely acting out because we are simply exhausted and in pain ourselves. Our job is to interrupt this cycle and stop it in its tracks.

How might we do this? Here, I will let you in on one of my top pieces of advice as a cognitive scientist: have fun. Yes, that is correct. One of the best things you can do for yourself, your community, and the world right now is to find ways to safely have fun. Today, I’d like to share with you several fun, evidence-based strategies for improving your cognitive control and focus. While COVID cases are in remission in many places around the country, today I’ll talk about strategies that will always be “pandemic safe,” even if there is another surge.

1. Spend time outside in nature

Much of my pre-pandemic research was spent hooking people up with electrodes and taking them on camping trips in the vast desert of Southern Utah, where we examined how their brain activity changed compared to their baseline in the lab. We found evidence that cognitive control abilities in the brain increase when individuals spend time outside in nature. We are not alone—there is now a building body of evidence suggesting that we are happier, healthier, less stressed, and more focused after we spend time interacting with nature.

 In all likelihood, there may be trails in your backyard or neighborhood that you never knew about. The AllTrails app is a great (and free) option for learning about these trails and their maps. As the COVID virus is much less likely to spread outdoors, our trail systems will almost always be safe from pandemic lockdowns and restrictions. Why not take an opportunity to explore something new today? Why not ask your kids, pets, and friends to join you? (P.S. Do you hate the cold? Blair Braverman, a dogsledder in Wisconsin, has some advice for how you can make winter feel less terrible).

2. Socialize with friends outdoors

Growing up in the North Country, I always loved a good bonfire. In high school, on summer nights when we all got off of work, we would round up the usual suspects and some firewood from Stewart’s, and spend the night chatting away. The nice thing about outdoor fires is that they provide warmth even in the winter, light even after dark, and heat to cook food. They also provide the opportunity for perhaps one of our greatest needs right now: socialization.

Of all the methods of improving cognitive control, let me be clear that the most superb method is social support and feelings of social belongingness. It is one of our deepest human needs, and the higher-order processes of our brains suffer when we don’t have it. So, this is your excuse to throw that backyard party. Organize that cornhole tournament with friends. Have that barbecue. Did anything positive in your life happen? Celebrate it. Did you fail at anything recently? Celebrate that too. After a tree fell in his pool, my uncle once famously threw a “fallen tree” party. My fiancé, an avid snowboarder, throws snow dance parties to ask whoever controls the weather for snow. Whether life is going well, badly, or just meh, gather the people around you so that you can support one another. And have fun. Even if you can’t gather right now for whatever reason, spending just a few moments writing a text message, note, or e-mail thanking someone in your life can go a long way. Both for you and for them. At the end of the day, community is all we have.

3. Journaling

I have always loved writing. Maybe it runs in the family. I found it helps me to organize my thoughts, feelings, and emotions. It turns out, that this is supported by science. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that journaling can reduce our worries and improve our focus. This is because when we journal, we quite literally offload our worries from our brain and on to the page. In fact- there is neuroscience evidence (examining brainwaves) of a reduced burden on your cognitive control after you journal about your thoughts and emotions!  Spending even 10-15 minutes a day writing in a journal can improve your well-being and attention. In particular, spending some time (even 2 minutes) writing about things you are grateful for in your life, whether your family members or your coffee maker, can provide even more benefits. Pick up your journal from a local book store, and get writing.

4. Mindfulness Meditation

Yeah, I know. You are probably as sick of hearing about this as I was. And you might be wondering what meditation even is. Meditation is many things, but perhaps the easiest way to describe it is the deliberate practice of living in the moment and focusing our attention on the present. Often, we practice this by paying attention to our breath or to our own bodies. I initially was skeptical that this would do much for me, but after meditating almost every day for a year, I personally have felt a very dramatic and positive shift. There is also ample evidence, both from long intergenerational knowledge stemming from Asian cultures, and from science, suggesting that meditation matters, and can improve both our focus and our mental health.

Several local parks offer “5 senses walks” (and there are also apps and youtube videos out there for this). This is a fantastic opportunity to check several of these wellness ideas off at once—being in nature, socializing, and meditating! It also could be a great introduction to the practice if you are new to it, and don’t know how it all works. 

These are just a few ideas for combating the growing pandemic-related malaises we are all experiencing. I hope you will take the opportunity to take care of yourself and your community by trying one (or all) of these suggestions. Most especially, I hope you take the opportunity to give or receive support to those in your life. We all need it right now.

Cognitive Science Myth-Busting

After a hiatus due to collecting dissertation data during a pandemic, I’m back to blogging. I am going to * try * to make this more of a regular thing, because I think that community engagement is arguably the most important thing I do as a scientist.

As many of you know, I work as a cognitive neuroscientist. While I have posted extensively about some of my specific research here, especially on the neuroscience side, I realized I have never covered the basics on here! In particular, I have never really even covered what cognitive science in general is. Therefore, I’m going to try to make a concerted effort each month to post at least one blog, and for the next several months I will go over the basics.

First, just a review of what cognitive science even is. In my own words, cognitive neuroscience is the study of how processes of the mind like memory, attention and language work, and how the brain helps us do these things!

If you could think of psychology and neuroscience on a spectrum, where at one end we have cellular neuroscientists who study neurons (cells of the brain) and at the other end we have social psychologists who study how individuals behave in certain situations, cognitive neuroscientists sit somewhere in the middle.

My particular research interests and expertise lies in understanding attention and cognitive control, and how the brain helps us stay on task. I use a lot of tools in my research, but I really enjoy using electroencephalography of EEG (brainwaves, for a refresher, see here).

OK. Now that we have that covered, I’d like to start off today with a little bit of cognitive science myth-busting. Now- without cheating (looking below)- answer true or false to the following statements.

1. Driving while talking on the phone is safe if you are using “hands-free” technology like Bluetooth
2. Flash cards are a better study strategy to promote memory than highlighting important material in the reading.
3. Eyewitness testimonies are highly reliable in court 
4. Information can only be stored in long-term memory if you paid attention to it in the first place.
5. Speed reading techniques can dramatically improve reading speed without sacrificing comprehension

Now for the answers!

1. FALSE

Studies indicate that talking on the phone will driving is still unsafe, even if it is hands-free! This is because we can only focus on so much at once, so when you are talking on the phone you are using cognitive resources that you would otherwise use for paying attention to driving (Strayer, Watson & Drews, 2011). Talking on the phone is also more distracting than having a passenger for two main reasons: 1) because the person on the phone is not receiving the same environmental cues as you are (i.e. talking less when traffic increases) and 2) There is more effort devoted to listening to speech on the phone than in person, as the audio is more difficult to hear and comprehend. In fact, talking on the phone while driving is comparable to drinking while driving (Strayer, Drews & Crouch, 2006).

2. TRUE

Testing yourself on material (preferably in the same format you’d be tested in) is the best way to promote retention of material and understanding of material! This is what cognitive scientists called the “desired difficulty” that improves memory for material (Bjork & Bjork, 2011), much more so than re-reading it

3. FALSE

Our memories are much worse than we tend to think they are—studies have indicated that eyewitness testimony is very unreliable. In fact, about half of all wrongful convictions occur as the result of faulty eyewitness testimonies! In particular, faulty eyewitness testimonies happen disproportionately to people of color being misidentified by white witnesses- a phenomenon known as “own-race bias” (e.g. Slone et al., 2000).

4. TRUE

We can really only form long term memories if we paid some amount of attention to it in the first place! This is supported by some neuroscience evidence (e.g. Wagner et al., 1998). As an example- could you confidently, without looking, identify which of these pennies pictured below is the correct and accurate design? Probably not, unless you pay attention to pennies pretty regularly.

5. FALSE

Unfortunately, reading, like many human tasks, is governed by the “speed-accuracy tradeoff.” This means that as speed increases, your accuracy (in this case, reading comprehension) decreases. There is little evidence to suggest that speed reading techniques will dramatically increase your reading speed while retaining comprehension (Rayner et al., 2016). If you want to become more efficient at reading, you should practice reading more, and in particular, increase your vocabulary skills (Rayner et al., 2016).

References:

Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Psychology and the real world: Essays illustrating fundamental contributions to society, 2(59-68).

Rayner, K., Schotter, E. R., Masson, M. E., Potter, M. C., & Treiman, R. (2016). So much to read, so little time: How do we read, and can speed reading help?. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(1), 4-34.

Slone, A. E., Brigham, J. C., & Meissner, C. A. (2000). Social and cognitive factors affecting the own-race bias in Whites. Basic and applied social Psychology, 22(2), 71-84.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human factors, 48(2), 381-391.

Strayer, D. L., Watson, J. M., & Drews, F. A. (2011). Cognitive distraction while multitasking in the automobile. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 54, pp. 29-58). Academic Press.

Wagner, A. D., Schacter, D. L., Rotte, M., Koutstaal, W., Maril, A., Dale, A. M., … & Buckner, R. L. (1998). Building memories: remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity. Science, 281(5380), 1188-1191.

Welcome back to the blog! It’s been a while because life has been busy. But even when we’re busy, the science never stops. Take a read of what we’ve been up to, summarized by my awesome collaborator Ty McKinney

Guest post: Ty McKinney

Most neuroscience studies happen in a lab. Let’s get in touch with our wild science and explore what happens to our brain when we study it in the great outdoors. Yes, this tent was the research lab. No, it was not intact by the end of the study. 

Technology has been a wonderful tool for humanity, from life-saving medicine to the conveniences of modern life. Just 100 years ago, life looked very different than it does today (though ironically they also were dealing with a pandemic). This is a blink of the eye when you consider the scale of human history, so our bodies largely haven’t adapted to the rapid change imposed on us by technology. Despite the neuroplasticity in our brain, even it has struggled to adapt to the hyper-real pace at which we now receive information and the prolonged intensity of what modern life demands of us. The prevalence of mental health conditions has sky-rocketed in recent years, which demands a widely accessible solution to address this issue. While training more mental health specialists and reducing barriers to treatment access will definitely be part of the solution, what if the most effective solution to the intrusion of technology in our lifestyle is a return to our natural environments? 

For decades, exposure to greenspaces has been linked to improvements in attention1 and emotional stability2, as well as reduced risk for many physical health conditions3. The underlying logic is that since constant exposure to an urban lifestyle results in constant demands for attention and is full of stressors, time in natural environments will restore our attention4 and recalibrate our stress response system5. While studies have shown benefits from as short as 40 second microbreaks 6, we know a lot less about longer exposures to nature and what happens in the brain to mediate these restorative changes. This research question prompted a series of studies at the University of Utah where participants completed a comprehensive brain assessment, complete with brainwave and heart rate recordings. The twist is that these assessments were done in the middle of the Utah desert during a 4 day camping trip and compared to scores in urban settings. Yes, you read that right: a neuroscience study conducted not in a lab, but outside fully exposed to the elements. After several years of collecting and analyzing data (science moves slow, ok), these studies have finally gotten the scientific gold-stamp of approval and been published in peer-reviewed journals. So, what does this neuroscience in the wild study say about returning to natural environments? 

Hypothesis #1: After some time to chill, attention-related brain signals would show higher activity7. To test this, the research team had people do the most boring and attention demanding video game ever and look at brain signals that turn on the attention network. In one sample, this hypothesis was refuted, while in a follow up study this hypothesis was supported. #mixedmessages. Since the follow up study had more people and better equipment, its findings were better supported leading to the conclusion that your attention networks are more easily engaged while you are in nature. Surely Hypothesis #2 will be more clear. Certain patterns of heart beats can indicate information about our brain’s emotional networks, so the research team hypothesized that they would find patterns of relaxation8. Instead, they found patterns that indicated less relaxation than urban environments, the opposite of expectations.

Main Points

Urban life can strain our brain’s attention networks

Spending time in nature makes it easier to engage these networks 

This could have implications for ADHD treatment

If it sounds like neuroscientists are confused a lot, that’s because we are. Writing this blog article would be a breeze if everything turned out exactly as expected, but the reality is that the brain is incredibly complicated. Scientists are often wrong a lot more than they are right as they try to understand some of the biggest questions that face humanity. An unsupported hypothesis is just an opportunity to refine our understanding with the new information we learned and be less wrong next time. So, time to update our understanding of what happens to our brain when we go camping from the final results.

One important unique feature of these studies was how long the exposure to nature was (4 days) compared to a more usual 30 minutes (for logistical reasons). Its entirely possible that while previous studies may have showed relaxation effects during a short exposures, remaining in this relaxed state could make it easier to self-motivate and engage attention networks when needed. This small change could have huge mental health implications though, since the same attention-engagement brainwaves examined in these studies have been found to be smaller in people with ADHD9. Imagine kids with ADHD getting a hiking prescription before being prescribed stimulant medications. While we need a lot more research on this topic before that case could be made, these initial studies highlight that this could be a possibility if future studies can confirm these findings. One additional implication of these studies is an argument for preserving the natural world and increasing widespread accessibility to it. Even if ecotherapy for ADHD doesn’t catch on, these studies join a growing evidence base for health benefits when greenspace is integrated into our lifestyles. While technology has tremendously improved our lives, there can be too much of a good thing and a quick walk through the park can be a great first line of defense for brain health. 

Meet the Scientists

Science is a Team effort. These studies couldn’t have happened without these project leaders and dozens of enthusiastic volunteers.  

Sara LoTemplio

Influence of Nature on Error Processing

Follow Sara on Twitter @SaraLoTemplio

Emily Scott

Autonomic and Working Memory Changes in Natural Settings

Follow Emily on ResearchGate

Amy McDonnell

Reward Processing in Nature

Follow Amy on Twitter @AmyMcDonnell_09

Ty McKinney

Holds tents and Follow-up Analysis

Follow Ty on Twitter @tythenuy

and LinkedIn

Enjoy reading this article?

Ty the NeuroGuy

Let’s make learning fun again!

Follow Ty the NeuroGuy on social media:

 @tytheneuroguy

Learn More

…about NeuroCAM approaches to a good immune systemLearn More

…about how the importance of exercise for our brain and bodyLearn More

…about brain networks during mindfulness

Inspired By…

1. Ohly, H., White, M. P., Wheeler, B. W., Bethel, A., Ukoumunne, O. C., Nikolaou, V., & Garside, R. (2016). Attention Restoration Theory: A systematic review of the attention restoration potential of exposure to natural environments. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 19(7), 305-343.

2. Mygind, L., Kjeldsted, E., Hartmeyer, R., Mygind, E., Stevenson, M. P., Quintana, D. S., & Bentsen, P. (2019). Effects of public green space on acute psychophysiological stress response: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental and quasi-experimental evidence. Environment and Behavior, 0013916519873376.

3. Twohig-Bennett, C., & Jones, A. (2018). The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environmental research, 166, 628-637.

4. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology, 15(3), 169-182.

5. Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of environmental psychology, 11(3), 201-230.

6. Lee, K. E., Williams, K. J., Sargent, L. D., Williams, N. S., & Johnson, K. A. (2015). 40-second green roof views sustain attention: The role of micro-breaks in attention restoration. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 182-189.

7. LoTemplio, S. B., Scott, E. E., McDonnell, A. S., Hopman, R. J., Castro, S., McNay, D., McKinney, T.L., Greenberg, K., Payne, B.R,  & Strayer, D. L. (2020). Nature as a potential modulator of the error-related negativity: A registered report. International Journal of Psychophysiology.

8. Scott, E. E., LoTemplio, S. B., McDonnell, A. S.,  McNay, D., Greenberg, K., McKinney, T.L., Uchino, B. N., & Strayer, D. L. (2020). The Autonomic Nervous System in its Natural Environment: Immersion in Nature is Associated with Changes in Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability. Psychophysiology.

9. Liotti, M., Pliszka, S. R., Perez, R., Kothmann, D., & Woldorff, M. G. (2005). Abnormal brain activity related to performance monitoring and error detection in children with ADHD. Cortex, 41(3), 377-388.

Today we have a special guest post from my friend, Lauren McCarthy, who is a meteorologist based out of Plymouth, NH. Lauren has loved meteorology for as long as I have known her. I learned so much about the weather I see every day on the news from reading this! You can find her on #ScienceTwitter at: @wx_lem

The way that scientists communicate their research can be just as important as how they conduct their research. When it comes time for a scientist to step outside the realm of their field to talk about their findings, some may find themselves toeing the line between over-simplifying their work and fully getting their point across. The level of clarity and comprehensiveness achieved when communicating scientific findings will ultimately determine how the results impact those that are listening. As meteorologists, myself and others in my field consistently make it a priority to improve how we communicate. This is relevant not only for research, but for operational weather forecasting as well.

I’m excited to write this piece for Sara’s #science blog because I think it’s the perfect platform to address some common misconceptions non-meteorologists may have about meteorology and forecasting. My idea for this topic stemmed off of a few articles by Dr. Marshall Shepherd in Forbes magazine. Dr. Shepherd is a Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Georgia and is a former president of the American Meteorological Society (AMS). He is a really admirable scientist, writer, and communicator. I’ve included a couple of his articles as references for some of the info I’m sharing below.

The first forecasting concept that I think could use some additional explanation relates to something that can often make or break your day: rain.

1.) What does a chance of rain actually mean?

Probability is a common way to express uncertainty in the forecast. However, at the end of the day, it ultimately rains or it doesn’t. For example, here is a sample 2-day forecast for Plymouth, NH from the National Weather Service (NWS) office in Gray, Maine (https://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?CityName=Plymouth&state=NH&site=GYX&lat=43.7386&lon=-71.6983#.XL5EfTBKjb1):

You’ll notice that there’s a 60% chance of rain on Wednesday for the Plymouth area. In other words, the probability of precipitation, or PoP, is 60%. This value reflects both the confidence (C) the forecaster has that rain showers will occur somewhere in the Plymouth area, as well as the percentage of the forecast area (A) that will receive measurable precipitation, should precipitation occur (NWS, 2019; Shepherd, 2019). Those two values are multiplied together to get PoP: C x A

There are several opportunities for a misunderstanding here. Not everyone in the forecast area could observe rain, and even if they do, it may not be measureable. A brief, light drizzle may not end up being measureable (needs to accumulate to more than 0.01”), but it still technically “rained”. Keep in mind, that even though a forecast calling for a 60% chance of rain makes rain seem relatively more likely, there’s still a chance that it won’t happen. Because meteorologists need to produce a forecast for a relatively large area, and different amounts of precipitation can occur within that area, it makes sense to use probabilities to communicate the chance of rain. Strange Planet (https://www.instagram.com/p/BwhIJYdlv5M/) really sums up this dilemma perfectly:

2) What are all these watches, advisories, and warnings?

The above terms are three ways NWS offices go about assessing “risk to life and property” within their forecasting zone (NWS, 2019). These terms can apply to several different types of weather phenomena, including winter weather, thunderstorms, tornados, floods, high winds, and more. Each of the three categories essentially tells us how imminent weather-related damages to life and property are. Using winter storms as an example:

• WATCHES indicate that the atmospheric/environmental ingredients necessary to produce a winter storm are present, but there is still uncertainty regarding the details of the storm (which areas will be impacted, when the storm will move in, or if the storm will happen at all)
• ADVISORIES indicate that a winter storm has become imminent, weather conditions can create inconveniences for things like travel, and caution needs to be taken to avoid damage to life and property
• WARNINGS indicate that a winter storm has become imminent, and weather-related damages to life and property are likely

 

The NWS Central Illinois Office (https://www.weather.gov/ilx/wwa_social) page presents a great graphic that breaks these differences down further. Broadcast Meteorologist Brad Panovich also explained watch vs. warnings in terms of cupcakes (https://twitter.com/wxbrad/status/985565693826478080), because who doesn’t like cake:

 

3) “How does it feel to have a job where you can be wrong half the time and get paid?”

First of all, RUDE. Second of all, despite the fact that meteorologists have historically been criticized for being wrong, recent analyses of forecast skill (with real numbers and forecast verifications) have shown that forecast error has decreased steadily over the past 40+ years. Take temperature forecasts, for example:

Image courtesy of the Weather Prediction Center (WPC) (obtained from https://www.e-education.psu.edu/meteo3/node/2285)

The graph above shows that maximum temperature forecasts are, yes, becoming more accurate than they used to be. For example, the red line represents the maximum temperature forecast made three days in advance. In the 1970s, this forecast used to be about 6°F off from the actual observed temperature, but can now be predicted within about 3°F. Currently, 1-day forecast error for maximum temperature is as low as 2-2.5°F. It’s still not perfect, but it’s pretty good for predicting the future on a “complex fluid on a rotating planet with oceans, mountains, and varying heat distribution changes” (Shepherd, 2019).

I hope that this assortment of meteorology- and forecasting-related topics were helpful and informative! Improving the way that forecasts are communicated and consumed will ultimately help citizens, private companies, and government organizations alike make decisions based on the weather and will on the whole create a more scientifically-literate society.

Thanks for reading!

 

References

National Weather Service (NWS) Central Illinois, 2019: What is the Difference Between a Winter Storm Watch, Warning, and Advisory? Accessed 22 April 2019, https://www.weather.gov/ilx/wwa_social.

National Weather Service (NWS) Peachtree City, GA, 2019: What is the Meaning of PoP? Accessed 22 April 2019, https://www.weather.gov/ffc/pop.

Shepherd, M., 2019: How Meteorologists Compare to Other Professions that Predict the Future, accessed 22 April 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2019/04/02/how-meteorologists-compare-to-other-professions-that-predict-the-future/#4f9e23975698.

Shepherd, M., 2019: The Top 7 Most Unreasonable Expectations About Weather Forecasts, accessed 22 April 2019,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2019/04/16/the-top-7-most-unreasonable-expectations-about-weather-forecasts/#43198c201f34

Imagine yourself standing here, looking up at the mountain, as I was 4 years ago in New Zealand.

Imagine how this would make you feel. Would you feel differently standing here than in your office? Maybe you have been here, or somewhere similar before. What likely comes to mind when thinking of these environments are words like “awe,” “beauty,” “relaxation,” etc., and it’s true. Nature pretty reliably makes us subjectively feel better (e.g. Berman, 2012). Remarkably, some studies have even suggested that nature helps some of us us live longer (Mitchell & Popham, 2008). But- did you also know that it reliably produces cognitive benefits as well?

For those who already know me well, you’ll know that I have decided to dedicate a non-trivial amount of my life to studying and understanding how interacting with nature changes our behaviors and brains. The idea that nature is good for people is not exactly  novel. For centuries, philosophers, artists and writers have extolled the virtues of nature on the human mind. If you need a refresher- look no further than local authors Terry Tempest Williams and Edward Abbey.

However, in recent decades, a body of scientific evidence has emerged suggesting that there are indeed many cognitive benefits (for a review see Ohly et al., 2016) to interacting with nature. For example, walking in a park produces greater working memory capacity than an hour-long walk through the city (Berman et al., 2008). Our lab has demonstrated that people are better at creative reasoning while on a backpacking trip compared to a control group (Atchley, Strayer, & Atchley, 2012); recently, these results were replicated on a canoe camping trip in the Boundary Waters (Ferraro, 2015). Additionally, those who spend time in nature perform better on proofreading tasks compared to those were not exposed to nature (Hartig et al., 2003). These are just a few of many examples. The science is clear- spending time in nature affords us cognitive benefits, but why? What’s happening in the brain?

Long story short – we don’t really know. There have been some preliminary studies suggesting that the subgenual prefrontal cortex, an area associated with depression, is less active when participants spend time walking in nature compared to walking in a city (Bratman et al., 2015). This could potentially help to explain some of the increases in mood that I’ve discussed earlier. My colleagues and I are interested, however, in what’s driving the cognitive changes. A theory exists (Kaplan, 1995) that the cognitive process of attention is the driver of these changes. Kaplan suggests that spending time in nature gives our attentional network a break; from work and from distractions like cell phones and honking cars. This break, Kaplan suggests, allows our attentional system to restore its resources, and function more efficiently. So how do we test whether or not this is true?

Our lab has recently begun measuring neurophysiological correlates of “the nature effect” using electroencephalography (EEG). EEG is a relatively portable system, where we place electrodes on peoples’ heads to record the electrical activity in the brain. If you know virtually nothing about EEG, there are two important facts you need to know: 1) Spatial resolution is TERRIBLE- so we can’t really be totally sure precisely where the activity is coming from and 2) temporal resolution is PRISTINE- meaning we get a really good picture of what’s going on in the brain in real time- down to the millisecond- unlike in fMRI. So, with EEG, we can measure how your brain is precisely responding to something nearly exactly when it happens. Our lab is particularly interested in what happens when you make an error, and how you might respond to that differently while in nature. The area of our brain that monitors our performance on tasks for errors is part of the attentional network. So- if we expect that the activity of this attentional network is decreasing when we spend time in nature, we should expect that the brain signal that occurs when you make a mistake (called the Error-Related Negativity) should change. 

This study is currently ongoing (if you’re interested in participating- please email natureandcognition@gmail.com), and it’s one of the first (to our knowledge) to actively record brain activity while participants are out in nature. Its findings will help us characterize the so-called “nature effect” that occurs both emotionally and cognitively when we spend time outside.

So- for those who ask me- should I spend more time outside yet? The answer is yes- we just don’t know why yet.

 

Guest author: Kimberly Bourne, Lab Manager of the Intergroup Studies Lab at Davidson College.  To learn more about Kim’s research, see her lab website, or check out the references she provided below!

#MeToo or to not #MeToo 

“I’ve had multiple experiences of harassment and sexual assault, and I don’t speak about them very often, but after hearing all the stories these past few days and hearing these brave women speak up tonight, the things that we’re kind of told to sweep under the rug and not talk about, it’s made me want to speak up and speak up loudly because I felt less alone this week than I’ve ever felt in my entire career…For the young women in this room, life is going to be different because we’re with you, we have your back and it makes me feel better…If we can raise consciousness and really help create change, that’s what’s going to change this industry and change society.”

– Reese Witherspoon in response to the #MeToo movement

The explosion of the #MeToo movement in the last year not only highlighted sexual assault but also demonstrated the prevalence of sexism in women’s everyday lives. As social psychologists in the Davidson Intergroup Studies Lab, we have been working to understand the motivations behind confronting sexism, and the ways in which people confront and respond to being confronted. So, how do these social psychological concepts apply to the #MeToo movement?

Reese Witherspoon mentions experiencing harassment and sexual assault on multiple occasions but not speaking up about them often. For many women this is a very common experience as confronting sexism can be difficult, and costly. People who question victims of sexual assault or harassment ask why nothing was said: “Why didn’t you say no?” “Why didn’t you report them?”  Or “Why didn’t you speak up or stand up for yourself?” Unfortunately, there is often a disconnect in people’s beliefs about what they imagine they would do when encountering sexism, and what they realistically do. In a study by Woodzicka and LaFrance (2001) women imagined being interviewed by a man for a job in which they were asked a sexually harassing question. Sixty eight percent of the women said they would refuse to answer the sexually harassing question, but in reality when a separate group of women was actually put in this exact situation, no one refused to answer. This points to a troubling reality, that the costs associated with confronting often outweigh the benefits; discouraging women from speaking up. Perceived costs such as being disliked, impolite or perceived as a complainer, having ones’ value dismissed, social sanction, and getting fired are common reasons women do not confront. For women who experience sexual harassment in the workplace a severe perceived cost of confronting is retaliation (Fitzgerald, Swan & Fischer, 1995). With all of the costs associated with confronting, what was different about the #MeToo movement?

In contrast to direct confrontation, the #MeToo movement provided a safe way for women to voice their experiences without necessarily risking the physical, emotional or work related costs of directly confronting their perpetrators. In this way, it could have buffered real or perceived costs of confronting and boosted the perceived benefits. Like Reese Witherspoon described, hearing women speak up, and the idea of creating lasting change for future generations of women motivated her to speak up. Benefits to confronting are varied – financial remuneration, policy change, self-satisfaction, improved interpersonal interactions – but the most motivating benefit is that confronting will make a difference and stop future sexist acts (Good, Moss-Racusin, & Sanchez, 2012). For Reese Witherspoon, a self-identified feminist, this was likely motivating. The more a woman identifies as a feminist the more likely she is to confront sexism (Ayres, Friedman, & Leaper, 2009). And if you are an activist whose goal is to educate perpetrators by confronting, you are more likely to respond more assertively to sexist incidents than those less identified as activists (Hyers, 2007). The motivation to make a difference by preventing future assaults, improving the work place environment, working towards social equality, etc. is a clear benefit to confronting sexism. For feminists and activists, the guilt associated with not confronting could also have been a factor in motivating those to contribute to the #MeToo movement. On social media seeing women posting their own experiences associated with #MeToo, may have given women who are less identified as feminist a feeling of security that motivated them to share their story. Whereas for women who are more identified as feminist seeing all of those posts on social media may have motivated them to share their experiences as a way to maintain their self-image of being a good group member in addition to wanting to make a difference.

Editor’s Note: I love Kim’s post because, aside from the obvious benefit her research gives women who experience sexism, she shatters our stereotypes of what a scientist is. The scientific method is useful in the way we traditionally think of it- developing drugs, understanding natural phenomena, etc., but can also be exceptionally powerful when we apply it to study human social interactions or behavior.

References

Ayres, M. M., Friedman, C. K., & Leaper, C. (2009). Individual and situational factors related to young women’s likelihood of confronting sexism in their everyday lives. Sex Roles, 61, 449-460. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9635-3

Elle. (2017, October 17). Reese Witherspoon Reveals She Was Assaulted by a Director at 16. Retrieved from https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a13032565/reese-witherspoon-assaulted-by-director/

Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Fischer, K. (1995). Why didn’t she just report him? The psychological and legal implications of women’s responses to sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 117–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01312.x

Good, J. J., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Sanchez, D. T., (2012). When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others. Psychology of Women Quarterly 36, 210-226. doi: 10.1177/0361684312440958

Hyers, L. (2007). Resisting prejudice every day: Exploring women’s assertive responses to anti-Black racism, anti-Semitism, heterosexism, and sexism. Sex Roles, 56, 1-12. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9142-8

Woodzicka, J. A., & LaFrance, M. (2001). Real versus imagined gender harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 15-30. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00199

 

Guest author: Amy LoTemplio, Colby College Senior, Biochemistry Major

Hello science enthusiasts! My name is Amy LoTemplio and I am Sara’s sister (surprise!) I work in an organic chemistry research lab at Colby college in Maine where I will be a senior this year. I am currently working on a polymer project for Professor Reuben Hudson and Professor Jeff Katz. I have been working in the Katz/Hudson lab since January of Sophomore year. I was even able to go on a research trip to Japan with my professor and a peer for a week. I have learned a lot over the past few years, and i will share some of my research with you here in this blog.

The best way to think about my research if you are an outsider to synthetic/organic chemistry is to imagine yourself as a master chef baking your favorite chocolate cake (maybe it’s even chocolate lava cake). Your pour all of your ingredients into the bowl and then you reach for something to use for mixing. You are in someone else’s kitchen and you find a strange object with a weird shape that is labeled “use for mixing cake batter.” You follow the instructions and use this mystery device, and WOW! It mixed the cake batter twice as quickly as the cake batter mixer that you have been using your whole life. On the side of this new mixer, you see that it says “lifetime guaranteed” meaning that it can be used again and again without the need to go to Bed Bath and Beyond to buy another, or make another with materials around the house. You get super excited, and you want to understand the functions of all of the pieces on the mixer, so you scan it with your eyes, and measure it, and take notes on its appearance. You want to understand the functions of these pieces because, who knows, maybe you could use one of the parts as inspiration for you to design a new coffee maker, or bread cooker, or microwave. You then think about the possibilities of using this mixer for other purposes, like mixing cookie batter, or whipping cream for fresh strawberry shortcake. Your try out a series of recipes and take notes about how well the mixer functions for each recipe. You then wonder how you could make the mixer even better. Should you add another handle? Should you tighten the screws? The potential for this mixer is endless!

To compare the cake example to the Katz/Hudson research, the cake recipe is an overall reaction, written neatly in a lab notebook instead of a Betty crocker cookbook, the mixer is a chemical chain called a polymer that may be used to decrease the energy required for a reaction to produce products (the cake) from the reactants (the ingredients). The special thing about the polymers in the Katz/Hudson research is that they show evidence of recycling capabilities. Just like the mixer in the example, the polymers may be used multiple times before they need to be replaced. Also similar to the example, my job, along with another fellow student, is to understand as much as possible about the polymers so that they may be optimized, or best used. This entails measuring features of the polymers and using them in different reactions, in order to establish the ideal conditions and recipes for their use. In the lab, we use very small amounts of chemicals instead of large amounts that would be used in a cake recipe. This is because we do not want to waste ingredients while we are exploring the capabilities of the polymers. Instead of scanning the polymers with our eyes like the chef did with the mixer, we use large machines in order to look at our polymers because they are too small to be examined with the eye.

Overall, these chemical mixers are exciting because they may one day make converting energy from chemical to electrical energy more green, as these polymers are recyclable. This prevents the need for buying new parts for the polymers and also saves the time that would have been dedicated to building new polymers. I am happy to be a part of building and understanding this science. If you would like more details about this specific research area, I have attached some references to more detailed articles. You can also ask me questions in the comments section!

As part of my research, I got to travel to Washington D.C. for a chemistry conference. Here is me and my labmate Georganna stopping by to visit Maine senator Angus King.

References

Hudson, R.; Katz, J. L. Oxacalixarenes in Calixarenes and Beyond; Neri, P., Sessler, J. L., Wang, M.-X., Eds.; Springer, 2016; pp 399−420.

Hudson, R.; Zhang, H.; LoTemplio, A.; Benedetto, G.; Hamasaka, G.; Yamada, Y.; Katz, J.; Uozumi, Y. Poly(Meta-Phenylene Oxides) For The Design Of A Tunable, Efficient, And Reusable Catalytic Platform. Chemical Communications 2018, 54, 2878-2881.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell

If you’ve been on my website before, you’ve probably read that I use EEG in my research, and perhaps thought I was excitedly spelling “eggs” the wrong way. As exciting as this would be, that unfortunately isn’t what’s happening. EEG is short for electroencephalography, which is a non-invasive neuroimaging technique.

So like, what does that sentence actually mean? electro-encephalo-graphy is basically Latin for “electric brain writing” (which, coincidentally, sounds WAY more metal than EEG). Non-invasive neuroimaging means that we can observe the dynamics of your brain without cutting it open. How? With electricity!

Your brain, like your phone or computer, communicates within itself electrically (and also chemically, but that’s a story for another day). This means that if we put electrodes, which measure current, on top of your head, which is attached to your neck, we can pick up a teeeeeny tiny electrical current- this is your brain talking! A box called an amplifier does exactly what it sounds like it does- it amplifies the signal so that it’s actually observable to humans– kind of like a microscope. The amplifier sends these large signals to the computer, and voila! I can see your brain communicating on my computer screen. Still confused? Hopefully you are a Stranger Things fan, because a nice visual of EEG is Eleven with the Coke can in season 1.

Eleven is wearing an EEG cap in this scene.  There are a few things that are different about this scene and what it’s like to participate in one of my lab’s studies. A) Unfortunately, none of my participants have telekenisis… that I know of B) we are WAY less creepy and C) EEG technology has improved dramatically since the 80’s- a modern day EEG cap looks something like this:

What are you exactly measuring? 

We are measuring, essentially, what you may hear referred to as “brain waves,” because they look kind of like waves. When they appear on our computer, they look like this:

Some complicated math that our computers do can break that big, complicated messy wave into a bunch of smaller waves that are overlayed on top of each other. The wave categories most scientists look at are delta, theta, alpha, beta, and gamma (not pictured). 

Contrary to popular belief, one wave doesn’t necessarily “mean” anything in particular- it depends a lot on the context and where in the brain it is coming from as to what it “means.” So, no, I can not “read your brain.” We can look at how much each of these oscillations are occurring in different parts of your brain. These are called frequency analyses.

There is another type of analysis you can do called an event-related potential. In this situation, the person with the EEG cap would be doing a very task on the computer (e.g. click whenever you see an O, but not when you see and X)- when these “events” happen, like when you see an O, the computer will mark it in the data. Later on, we can average all the activity around that event to get an average waveform. There are many different wave forms that can indicate many different things. I will discuss more of them at another time.

That’s cool. But like, what do we actually use EEG for?

EEG is used in many different scenarios. Clinical neuropsychologists may use it to help diagnose and understand medical conditions like seizures, deafness in infants, sleep conditions, etc. There is currently research going on that is trying to understand whether EEG can be used as a biomarker for schizophrenia, alzhiemer’s, and numerous other cognitive diseases.

As for us, cognitive neuroscientists, we use it to understand cognition more broadly. Using the scientific method, we are able to use EEG to better understand how vision, attention, memory, language, etc. all work. For example, my lab uses frequency analyses to discover how the brain changes when we spend time in nature; specifically, we look at the theta frequency in the midline (top middle part) of your brain. Scientists are still trying to figure out what exactly midline theta represents in the brain, but it is commonly associated with multitasking and cognitive exertion, suggesting that your brain may be less overloaded while outside.

Where can I learn more!?!?

Youtubing EEG would be a good place to get a visual as to what EEG actually is, and what it looks like.

If you are a college student or advanced high school student, I would recommend Steve Luck’s “An Introduction to the Event Related Potential”- buy it online or check to see if you local library has it!

Hello readers. Over the past few years that I have been involved in research, it has become apparent to me that people don’t really know what research actually is. This is not to point fingers at anyone, in fact perhaps the number one question I tried to ask other graduate students when I was interviewing for graduate school was “but like.. what do you do all day?” (I am purposefully leaving this question unanswered so that future graduate students can fantasize that I am working with unfathomable productivity towards a goal and not eating candy while taking 4 hours to write one paragraph in my office).

Indeed, science seems to take on an air of mystique in the general public- I remember thinking when I was younger that scientists were old white men that wore lab coats and goggles and either a) brewed Cancer Cures as a happy accident or b) menacingly cackled to themselves while slowly building their annihilatrix to destroy the world, or to steal the Krabby Patty secret formula.

It has occurred to me that I was not, and am not, alone. Not many people understand how science operates on a daily basis, how it involves them, who scientists are, or that to some degree, they themselves operate as scientists in their own lives.

Even this article bemoaning American adult’s poor understanding of science ironically demonstrates a misunderstanding of the very core of what science is. Science is not a list of facts, but an active process that involves many stages of trial and error, of mistakes and triumphs, mistakes that turn into triumphs, and rigorous testing and questioning of what we claim to already know. In short- we are truth seekers, and though we may use many different tools (from EEG to bug nets to chemicals), we all strive to meet this same objective.

I’m here to challenge the fact that until college, one of the only scientists I knowingly interacted with was Plankton. Scientists, in fact, are usually not microscopic organisms. We’re humans- humans that are a multitude of different races, genders, religions, sexual orientations, abilities, ethnicities, nationalities, etc.

How to use this blog if you are a scientist.

As much of a narcissist as I am, I would really love for this blog to not just be me ranting about my own work and why it’s important. Plus, I can attempt to explain chemistry, but I think I may have actually burned my chemistry 101 book after taking the introductory course in college. I would love to get contributions from you and your friends, no matter what field you are in! (And yes, as a pseudo social scientist, I count social sciences as science too). I would love to have you contribute either a) in the form of an interview with me or b) in the form of you writing about some of your work, or some work in your field you deem important.

How to use this blog if you are a teacher:

Share this blog with your students. Encourage them to comment with questions, reactions, additional interesting related things they found. Encourage them to comment just to say hi, or to ask a question about how you get involved in science. If you are local to the area, contact me or my friends, and we’d be happy to come talk to your classroom.

How to use this blog if you are a Regular Person:

Please read it! Share it with your friends. Use one of the posts to prove a point in a facebook argument with your aunt. Question. Critique. Engage. Read more. Reach out to the scientist in your life (there is definitely at least one).

How to use this blog if you are a dog: 

You don’t need this blog. You are already perfect.