Witnessing an awe-inspiring event like an eclipse could make us more prosocial

People used more prosocial language on social media during an eclipse - but it's unclear whether this translates to changes in behaviour.


By Emily Reynolds


Astronomical events such as solar eclipses have mesmerised humanity throughout history. And while we now understand the science behind these occurrences far better than we did hundreds or thousands of years ago, and are far less likely to draw religious or mystical connotations from them, they still act as communal events of excitement and awe.

A new paper in Psychological Science from Sean Goldy and colleagues at the University of California, Irvine,explores these feelings in the wake of the 2017 solar eclipse. It finds that those who witnessed the eclipse expressed more awe and more prosocial language than those who did not, and argues that astronomical events could motivate more collective attitudes.

In the first study, the team analysed a dataset containing over 8 million tweets about the 2017 solar eclipse, which was visible across the United States. To explore the impact of the event, the team compared tweets from the day of the eclipse made by users who were in its path with tweets made by those who were not in the path and were therefore not able to see it in person.

To capture experiences of awe, the researchers developed an ‘awe dictionary’, containing words like ‘awe’, ‘sublime’, ‘transcendental’ or ‘mind blowing’. Each tweet in the set was also coded for prosocial words such as ‘care’ or ‘volunteer’, as well as for words indicating social connection, such as ‘ally’, ‘friend’, or ‘togetherness’. Uses of first-person singular (I, me) and first-person plural pronouns (we, us) were also noted.

The results showed that those in the path of the eclipse were more likely to use words relating to awe, indicating (unsurprisingly) that it was an awe-inspiring thing to witness. Those in the eclipse’s path were also more likely to use prosocial language and language related to social connection, and also used more ‘we’ words and fewer ‘I’ words than those not in its path. Further analysis suggested that awe explained the relationship between being in the eclipse’s path and levels of social language: that is, experiencing awe was the factor that motivated the use of collective and prosocial language.

In the second study the team looked at tweets written before, during and after the eclipse in order to understand whether feelings of awe and sociality shifted over the course of the event. To do this, the team analysed the language in tweets from accounts based in specific American cities in the path of the eclipse.

The researchers identified three groups of people: those who expressed increased awe tweets on the day of the eclipse, those who expressed fewer awe tweets during the event, and those who expressed very low levels of awe throughout.

People whose expressions of awe increased during the eclipse also showed an increase in the use of prosocial, collectively-focused and humble language, while the other two groups did not. This suggests, as the first study did, that feeling awe during an eclipse is connected to collectivity and prosocial attitudes towards others.

So, overall, the 2017 eclipse was associated with increased levels of awe, and increased prosocial and collectivist language. The team suggest that awe-inspiring events “can arouse tendencies – from greater attention to one’s groups to motivations for care for and affiliate with others – vital to collective life”.

However, whether people actually changed their behaviour due to the eclipse is unknown; similarly, eclipses, whilst awe-inspiring and exciting, are fairly brief and intangible events, meaning that active changes in prosocial or collectivist behaviour are unlikely to be more than ephemeral. Future research could focus on the impact of such events in offline life.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/witnessing-awe-inspiring-event-eclipse-could-make-us-more-prosocial(accessed 29.8.22)

Awkwardness

This time on the podcast Meg-John interviewed Elsie Whittington. Elsie is a researcher at Manchester Met Uni who did her PhD on consent and studies youth sexuality.

For the podcast episode Elsie and MJ decided to focus on awkwardness because this was such a big theme in Elsie’s research that it ended up being a whole chapter of her thesis.

How is awkwardness relevant to sex and consent?

Pretty much every one of the young people who Elsie spoke to for her research said that a huge thing they feared during sex was awkwardness, and this was a major barrier to having conversations about consent, or to pausing or stopping what they were doing if it wasn’t feeling good.

Don’t miss out on episodes and blogs! Every other podcast is for Patrons only. Sign up to our Patreon from just $1 per month.

The sex educators and advisors that Elsie spoke with also said that awkwardness was a big barrier to talking about sex openly in schools and youth groups – and evidence suggests that medics, therapists, and other professionsal feel similarly awkward about bringing up issues of sex and consent.
What is awkwardness?

Most of the participants in Elsie’s research said it was a sense of embarrassment or having got something wrong. They felt awkward that they might be exposed as being inept at sex in some way if they brought up consent, or talked about what they wanted, for example. They were scared of losing face and looking stupid.

Interestingly the word awkward – from the Latin – means wrong (awk) and direction (ward – like backward and forward). So it’s literally about a fear of going in the wrong direction. On the podcast we linked this to the sexual script that is taught in media, sex advice, sex ed, etc. Part of why there is awkwardness around sex is that there is a sense of the ‘right direction’ that we could (intentionally or unintentially) deviate from. Even worse, there’s often a sense that trying to do it consensually will risk us going in the wrong direction.
What do we generally do about awkwardness?

In all aspects of life we’re taught pretty thoroughly to avoid awkwardness – perhaps particularly if we’re from cultural backgrounds which have a horror of embarrassment and where saving face is important. We might struggle with restaurants or shops or other unfamiliar environments if we sense that we don’t know the script – and therefore risk being awkward.

As with so many difficult feelings our default may be to assume that the presence of awkwardness is a bad thing, and that avoiding it is a good thing, at whatever cost.
Why is this risky?

When it comes to sex – which feels like such a loaded, vulnerable situation with potential for awkwardness – people may even prefer to risk unwanted or non-consensual sex than facing an awkward pause, silence, or conversation. Awkwardness is also a reason often given for struggling to suggest contraception.

Sex advice and media – including much advice around consent – is largely to blame for people preferring risky non-awkwardness to consensual awkwardness. It presents a script for sex, with everyone telepathatically knowing what to do without communication, and no awkwardness. Even consent ed often presents consent conversations as straightforward and not awkward. We need to see more realistic images and examples of people navigating awkwardness around sex and consent. It simply isn’t possible to get to that point without a lot of practise (including plenty of awkwardness).
How could we approach awkwardness differently?

We spoke about the importance of staying with feelings: learning how to be with awkwardness, recognising that it’s possible to feel and won’t destroy us. The most we can practise being okay with awkward feelings, the more we’ll be okay when those happen during sex.

Naming awkwardness can really take the sting out of it. Saying ‘oh that’s awkward’ or referencing the awkward turtle meme helps to make it a bonding, perhaps funny, moment rather than something that feels terrible.

It can be great to model the capacity to be awkward and it be okay for other people – if it’s something you can do. You can bring in cultures with friends where you see anybody feeling awkward as a great sign that a conversation would be helpful. Naming awkwardness and asking how others are doing can be helpful for social dynamics, and good practise again for when this comes up in relation to sex (whether sex itself or conversations about it).

© Meg-John Barker and Justin Hancock, 2020

SOURCE:

https://megjohnandjustin.com/sex/awkwardness/(accessed 26.8.22)

Trans and GRA

This week we spent the podcast talking about trans and the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) given that this is in the news so much at the moment.




We talked about the current moral panic about trans which is playing out in popular culture and the mainstream media, and the devastating impact that has on young trans and gender diverse people particularly.

We covered the most recent event in this long running panic: the trans exclusionary radical feminists who disrupted the London Pride march, and why trans rights are a vital part of feminism, not in opposition to it.

We explained that much of the current frenzy has been whipped up by media and others in response to the government consultation on the Gender Recognition Act. We overviewed what this Act does – and doesn’t do. While there is fearmongering around who has access to safe spaces and toilets, and how young gender diverse people will be treated, the act really only deals with the process that a person has to go through to have their identity legally recognised, and whether non-binary people will be included in that process as well as men and women.

Please check out the Stonewall and Ge
ndered Intelligence information, and then complete the consultation. It’s easy to take part as each page has drop-down menus to explain what is being asked of you.
© Meg-John Barker and Justin HancockPosted in Gender and tagged GRA, trans.

SOURCE:

https://megjohnandjustin.com/gender/trans-and-gra/(accessed 26.8.22)

Έρευνα: Η άσκηση κερδίζει και τον κορωνοϊό

Δυόμισι ώρες άσκησης την εβδομάδα αρκούν για να μειωθεί ο κίνδυνος νόσησης και θανάτου από COVID-19




Η τακτική σωματική άσκηση συνδέεται με μικρότερο κίνδυνο CΟVID-19, είτε απλής λοίμωξης είτε σοβαρής που χρειάζεται νοσηλεία και μπορεί να οδηγήσει σε θάνατο, δείχνει μια νέα ισπανική μελέτη που έλαβε υπόψη της στοιχεία από πολλές χώρες.


Αρκούν 150 λεπτά άσκησης μέτριας έντασης μέσα στην εβδομάδα ή 75 λεπτά άσκησης μεγάλης έντασης, για να μειωθεί σε ένα βαθμό ο κίνδυνος του κορωνοϊού.

Οι ερευνητές, με επικεφαλής τον δρα Αντόνιο Γκαρθία-Χερμόζο του Πανεπιστημίου και του Πανεπιστημιακού Νοσοκομείου της Ναβάρα, οι οποίοι έκαναν τη σχετική δημοσίευση στο βρετανικό αθλητιατρικό περιοδικό «British Journal of Sports Medicine». Αξιολόγησαν 16 έρευνες της περιόδου Νοεμβρίου 2019-Μαρτίου 2022, οι οποίες αφορούσαν συνολικά περίπου 1,85 εκατομμύρια ενήλικες με μέση ηλικία 53 ετών.

Σύμφωνα με τη μελέτη (συστηματική ανασκόπηση και μετα-ανάλυση), οι τακτικά ασκούμενοι είχαν κατά μέσο όρο 11% μικρότερο κίνδυνο να αρρωστήσουν με Covid-19, 36% μικρότερο κίνδυνο για εισαγωγή στο νοσοκομείο, 44% μικρότερο κίνδυνο βαριάς νόσου Covid-19 και 43% μικρότερο κίνδυνο θανάτου, σε σχέση με τους ανθρώπους που είναι σωματικά αδρανείς.


Προηγούμενες μελέτες έχουν δείξει ότι η σωματική άσκηση μπορεί γενικότερα να μειώσει τον κίνδυνο και τη σοβαρότητα των διαφόρων αναπνευστικών λοιμώξεων, επειδή ενισχύει τη δράση του ανοσοποιητικού συστήματος και την αντιφλεγμονώδη απόκριση του οργανισμού, καθώς επίσης την καρδιοαναπνευστική, τη μεταβολική και τη μυϊκή φυσική κατάσταση.

Πηγή:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/life/health/562009330/ereyna-i-askisi-kerdizei-kai-ton-koronoio/(accessed 25.8.22)

We underestimate how enjoyable it can be to just sit and think

We may be avoiding spending time alone with our thoughts because we mistakenly feel it will be aversive.



By Emily Reynolds


It can be hard to find the time to ‘just think’ - to daydream, let your mind wander, or immerse yourself deeply in your internal world. This is despite the fact that there is a multitude of research suggesting that letting your mind wander is good for wellbeing.

A new study suggests another reason we may prefer to keep busy rather than take a moment to stop and think. Writing in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, the team finds that we consistently underestimate how enjoyable and how engaging just thinking can be.

In the first study, participants were told they were taking part in an experiment measuring their cognitive processing during waiting, before being told to sit in a room for twenty minutes without any external stimulation. Before the task they predicted how much they would enjoy and engage with their time spent waiting, and how interested or bored they would feel. They then rated their actual experience after the twenty minutes was over. The results showed that participants felt more enjoyment, engagement and interest in waiting, and less boredom, than they had predicted. Further studies replicated these results in different environments and for different lengths of waiting.

To explore the real world impact of this underestimation effect, in a subsequent study participants were told that they would be assigned to one of two conditions: the ‘thinking only’ condition and the ‘news checking’ condition, which allowed them to browse news sites online. Participants rated their predicted feelings for both conditions, and then were told they could choose one of two lotteries to determine which they would be placed into. The first lottery had a 70% chance of their being assigned to the thinking only condition, and the other a 70% chance of assigning them to the news checking condition. In reality, their condition had been predetermined.

As anticipated, participants predicted that the news-checking condition would be more enjoyable and engaging than the thinking-only condition, and were more likely to choose the lottery with a higher chance of landing in the former condition. However, participants in the thinking only condition again enjoyed it more than they expected, while those in the news-checking condition did not show significant differences in their predicted and actual enjoyment. The fact that the vast majority of participants in this final study chose the lottery that was likely to place them in the news reading condition suggests that we may be avoiding spending time alone with our thoughts due to a vast overestimation of how boring or unenjoyable it will be. Future research could explore the actual experience of just thinking – although the studies show that just thinking is more enjoyable than we might anticipate, it does not tell us much about how it feels more generally.

It may also be fruitful to understand why we don’t want to be alone with our thoughts. Is it just that we don’t realise that it will be enjoyable? Do we fear being bored? Or worry about it inducing anxiety or unwanted intrusive thoughts? Further exploration of the mechanism behind our desire to avoid just thinking could provide further insights.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/we-underestimate-how-enjoyable-it-can-be-just-sit-and-think(accessed 25.8.22)

Telling a partner about your bad day can bring you closer

Sharing your bad experiences with a partner might not make you feel better — but it could strengthen your relationship.


By Matthew Warren


When something bad happens to you in your everyday life — you get a parking ticket, say, or have a disagreement with a co-worker — your first instinct may be to tell a loved one about it. But what purpose does this serve? Although we often believe that venting to a partner will help us feel better, past research suggests that it can actually prolong negative emotions, or even have a spillover effect, leaving the listener feeling worse too. But a new paper in Social Psychological and Personality Science has another explanation for why we tell loved ones about these everyday hassles: it brings couples closer together.

Antje Rauers and Michaela Riediger from the University of Jena recruited 100 heterosexual couples living in Berlin; half were aged 20-30 and half aged 69-80. Both partners first independently rated their relationship closeness, and then took part in a diary study over the course of three weeks. They each received notifications to complete a survey on their phone, six times per day for 15 days. In each survey, they noted whether they had recently experienced something “very unpleasant” (this could be an actual incident, like oversleeping, or a thought, like thinking about a recent fight), and indicated whether they had told their partner about it. They also rated the extent to which they felt angry, downcast, disappointed, and nervous, and indicated how close they felt to their partner at that point in time. Finally, 2.5 years later, most of the couples again rated their relationship closeness.

On average, participants completed the surveys 87 times in the three-week period, and reported that they’d had an unpleasant experience in 10 of them. They said that they’d discussed these experiences with their partner 57% of the time.

The team found that when men had experienced an unpleasant event, they reported less negative mood if they told their partner about it than if they didn’t. Women didn’t show the same benefit, but did report more negative mood if a partner had told them about his bad experience. The results suggest that telling a partner about daily hassles can have both emotional benefits and drawbacks — though the authors also point out that these effects were very small.

More strikingly, participants reported feeling closer to their partner after either telling them about an unpleasant event or after hearing about an unpleasant event that their partner had experienced. And sharing these hassles with a partner seemed to have long-term effects too: people whose partners regularly told them about their negative experiences reported an increase in closeness over the 2.5 year period, while those whose partners rarely or never shared these experiences reported a decrease in closeness.

Overall, the results show that sharing bad experiences with a partner has minimal and conflicting effects on our mood. However, it seems to bring couples closer, both in the short- and long-term.

The team suggests that when you hear about a partner’s bad day-to-day experiences, it creates an image of that partner as a nuanced person who trusts you. Over time, this could lead to greater closeness. Interestingly, participants didn’t report a similar long-term increase in closeness when they were the ones regularly telling their partners about their own negative experiences. This could be because there are other factors that shape the effects of sharing bad news with a partner, the researchers write. For instance, if a partner doesn’t listen to you, then attempting to share your bad experiences with them could actually drive you apart rather than bring you closer. There are various limitations to the study. The correlational design means that it’s not really possible to conclude that sharing bad experiences actually causes couples to become closer: it could be that there is some other aspect of the relationship that both helps couples to open up with each other and fosters closeness. The couples also all reported being close even before the study started, so it would be interesting to see whether talking about daily hassles has similar effects for partners who don’t feel close, or for other pairs of people not in romantic relationships, such as friends or acquaintances.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/telling-partner-about-your-bad-day-can-bring-you-closer(accessed 14.8.22)

Go ahead and contact that old friend – they’ll probably appreciate it more than you think

Studies show we underestimate how much others appreciate it when we “reach out”.

By Emily Reynolds


Amidst our busy lives, it’s not always easy to stay in touch with friends. During the pandemic in particular, many people found their social circle shrinking. And even though friendship has clear benefits for wellbeing, mental health, and personal growth, getting in touch with friends sometimes falls down our list of priorities.

A new study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, suggests we should probably be making more of an effort to keep in touch. It finds that reaching out can have a surprisingly big impact, with people appreciating it much more than we expect.

In the first study, participants were asked to recall the last time either they “reached out” to someone in their own social circle or someone in their social circle reached out to them after an extended period of time (the team defined “reaching out” as getting in touch to indicate that you are thinking about someone).

They then rated how much they thought the person (or how much they) appreciated the contact. And the results suggested that we underestimate how much this kind of gesture is appreciated: participants rated their friends' appreciation of being contacted lower than their own appreciation.

In the next studies, participants actually wrote notes and sent gifts to friends before estimating how much these gestures would be appreciated. The friends who received the notes and gifts also took part in the study, indicating how grateful they were for the gift. Again, those who reached out underestimated how much the recipients would appreciate both the written notes and gifts.

Next, the team focused on a particular factor involved in the underestimation of appreciation: surprise. Participants first wrote a note to a friend, checking in and saying hello. They then predicted how much the friend would appreciate them reaching out, and how much they were thinking about how pleasantly surprised the friend would be after receiving the note. The recipient then reported how much they appreciated the note and the extent to which they were thinking about how pleasantly surprised they were.

The results showed that recipients were more focused on their surprise than the senders were. In fact, the senders’ lack of focus on how surprised the recipient would be could actually explain why they underestimated how much their message would be appreciated.

As the team notes, chance encounters with friends can be rare in the modern world: as much of our communication occurs online we may be less likely to run into someone at a coffee shop or in another in-person setting. One person reaching out to another, therefore, is a fairly crucial aspect of staying part of communities of friends that make us happy and well.

Yet if we consistently underestimate how much people want us to reach out, are we going to do it? Whether we’re scared of rejection or simply believe that our friends aren’t that bothered about hearing from us, this seems a fairly large barrier to keeping in touch. This isn’t the only research that suggests we’re often surprised at how pleasant interactions can be with others, either: a study published this year found that we underestimate how enjoyable conversations with strangers can be.

So throw caution to the wind and get in touch with an old friend – it’s likely that you’re underestimating how much they want to hear from you.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/go-ahead-and-contact-old-friend-theyll-probably-appreciate-it-more-you-think(accessed 10.8.22)

Θεραπείες ειδικής αγωγής και αυτισμός στην εποχή της εικονικής πραγματικότητας

Οι εξ αποστάσεως θεραπευτικές παρεμβάσεις που χρησιμοποιούνται στην κλινική φροντίδα παιδιών και εφήβων με αναπτυξιακές και συμπεριφορικές διαταραχές τα τελευταία χρόνια


Γράφει η Ελευθερία Μπινίκου, Ψυχολόγος, Επιστημονικά Υπεύθυνη Τμήματος Παιδιών και Εφήβων, Κέντρο Παιδιού και Εφήβου/ autismap.gr μέσω nevronas.gr


Ποια ανάγκη οδήγησε στην ανάπτυξη των θεραπειών από απόσταση με την αρωγή της τεχνολογίας και του διαδικτύου;

Την τελευταία δεκαετία υπήρξε αυξημένο ενδιαφέρον για τις εξ αποστάσεως θεραπείες ειδικής αγωγής και ψυχικής υγείας λόγω της αυξημένης ευαισθητοποίησης, καθώς και της μείωσης των τεχνολογικών φραγμών. Οι εξ αποστάσεως θεραπευτικές παρεμβάσεις χρησιμοποιούνται στην κλινική φροντίδα παιδιών και εφήβων με αναπτυξιακές και συμπεριφορικές διαταραχές εδώ και αρκετά χρόνια. Ένας εκ των αρχικών στόχων των εξ αποστάσεως υπηρεσιών αφορούσε την κάλυψη των αναγκών των οικογενειών που ζούσαν σε περιοχές απομακρυσμένες από τα αστικά κέντρα ή σε περιοχές όπου δεν μπορούσαν να έχουν πρόσβαση σε υπηρεσίες ειδικής αγωγής με εξειδικευμένο προσωπικό που να μπορούσε να καλύπτει τις πολυάριθμες ανάγκες των ατόμων με Διαταραχή Αυτιστικού Φάσματος (ΔΑΦ).

Λόγω των έκτακτων ειδικών συνθηκών για την πρόληψη της διασποράς του Κορωνοϊού και αναγνωρίζοντας την αναγκαιότητα συνέχισης των προγραμμάτων αποκατάστασης στα παιδιά που την είχαν ανάγκη, με γοργούς ρυθμούς οι θεραπευτές επέδειξαν ευελιξία και προσάρμοσαν τις συνεδρίες Ειδικής Αγωγής κατά τέτοιο τρόπο έτσι ώστε να λαμβάνουν χώρα μέσω διαδικτύου, όπου και εφόσον αυτό ήταν εφικτό, υπό συγκεκριμένες προϋποθέσεις και συνθήκες. Στην πορεία, η πρότερη εμπειρία και οι γνώσεις από τις έως τώρα εφαρμογές αποτελούν μια φιλόδοξη προοπτική προκειμένου η περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη των θεραπειών ειδικής αγωγής από απόσταση να εξασφαλίσει τη δυνατότητα πρόσβασης σε εξειδικευμένες υπηρεσίες από όλες τις οικογένειες ακόμη και σε αυτές που δεν έχουν την ίδια προσβασιμότητα για περαιτέρω εκπαίδευση και αποκατάσταση των δυσκολιών των μελών τους.


Υπάρχουν πρόσφατα ερευνητικά δεδομένα για την αποτελεσματικότητα των εξ αποστάσεως θεραπευτικών παρεμβάσεων γενικότερα στα παιδιά με ΔΑΦ;

Οι αρχικές έρευνες σχετικά με την εφαρμογή της εξ αποστάσεως εκπαίδευσης για παιδιά με ΔΑΦ αναδεικνύουν ενθαρρυντικά ευρήματα. Ορισμένες μελέτες σημειώνουν ότι ενώ η εξ αποστάσεως εκπαίδευση μπορεί να μην είναι το ιδανικό περιβάλλον για εργασία μαζί τους, ωστόσο μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί αποτελεσματικά για να αυξήσει την προσωπική μάθηση και να γεφυρώσει το χάσμα μεταξύ των πόρων παρέμβασης που απαιτούνται για να βοηθηθούν τα παιδιά και των διαθέσιμων πόρων στην τοπική κοινότητα.

Μια πρόσφατη συστηματική μελέτη κατέληξε στο συμπέρασμα ότι «οι υπηρεσίες που παρέχονται εξ αποστάσεως ήταν ισοδύναμες με τις υπηρεσίες που παρέχονται πρόσωπο με πρόσωπο και δη ανώτερες από τις ομάδες σύγκρισης που δεν επωφελήθηκαν εξ αποστάσεως συνεδριών».

Οι μετα-αναλύσεις της υπάρχουσας έρευνας δείχνουν ενθαρρυντικά ευρήματα όσον αφορά τα κλινικά δεδομένα αποτελεσματικότητας.


Eρευνητές επισημαίνουν επίσης ορισμένα επιπλέον σημαντικά πλεονεκτήματα των εξ αποστάσεως θεραπειών συμπεριλαμβανομένης της εξοικονόμησης κόστους και χρόνου λόγω της ελάττωσης των μετακινήσεων, αλλά και άγχους.

Η δημιουργία ενός προγράμματος εξ αποστάσεως επιτρέπει στο θεραπευτή να συνεργάζεται πιο στενά με την οικογένεια και να τεκμηριώνει τη φροντίδα που παρέχεται, να καταγράφει συνεδρίες σε βίντεο, να καταγράφει την πρόοδο και να προσαρμόζει ή να κάνει αλλαγές στη θεραπευτικό πλάνο όταν χρειάζεται.

Ποια είναι τα πιθανά οφέλη και περιορισμοί που απορρέουν από τη χρήση της τεχνολογίας και των εξ αποστάσεως υπηρεσιών που αφορούν τη διάγνωση, τη θεραπεία και το συντονισμό της φροντίδας για παιδιά που έχουν διαγνωστεί με ΔΑΦ;

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/life/health/561978589/therapeies-eidikis-agogis-kai-aytismos-stin-epochi-tis-eikonikis-pragmatikotitas/(accessed 8.8.22)

Γιατί κάποιοι άνθρωποι χρειάζονται λιγότερο ύπνο;

Το φαινόμενο της «ελίτ του ύπνου» καταρρίπτει τον μύθο του 8ωρου ύπνου. Που οφείλεται και πώς μπορεί η επιστήμη να το εκμεταλλευτεί για θεραπευτικούς σκοπούς;



Όλοι γνωρίζουμε τον μαγικό αριθμό για τον ύπνο: 8. Τόσες είναι οι ώρες που, υποτίθεται, κάθε ενήλικας θα πρέπει να κοιμάται κάθε βράδυ, προκειμένου να είναι αρκετά ξεκούραστος για να ανταποκριθεί στις ανάγκες της καθημερινότητας και να είναι υγιής σε σώμα και πνεύμα.


Η αλήθεια, βέβαια, είναι πως οι περισσότεροι από εμάς, με τους συχνά απαιτητικούς ρυθμούς που καλούμαστε να ακολουθήσουμε, δεν καταφέρνουμε να συμπληρώσουμε αυτό το πολυπόθητο 8ωρο, με αποτέλεσμα να νιώθουμε αρκετά κουρασμένοι μέσα στην ημέρα. Υπάρχουν, όμως, κι εκείνοι που κοιμούνται αρκετά λιγότερες ώρες κάθε βράδυ και καταφέρνουν να είναι λειτουργικοί και γεμάτοι ενέργεια.

Όχι, αυτοί οι άνθρωποι δεν έχουν απλά διαφορετικές συνήθειες. Έχουν συγκεκριμένα γονίδια.

Σύμφωνα με επιστημονικές έρευνες, υπάρχει γενετική εξήγηση για τους ανθρώπους που χρειάζονται λιγότερο ύπνο, κάτι που έρχεται να καταρρίψει τον μύθο των 8 ωρών. «Είναι σαν να λες ότι όλοι οι άνθρωποι πρέπει να έχουν ύψος 1.77 κι αν είσαι πιο κοντός, έχεις πρόβλημα» λέει χαρακτηριστικά ο Λούις Τάτσεκ, από το Τμήμα Νευρολογίας του Πανεπιστημίου του Σαν Φρανσίσκο.


Έτσι, κάποιοι άνθρωποι από την φύση τους κοιμούνται λίγες ώρες. Για αυτούς, 4 ή 6 ώρες ύπνου κάθε βράδυ είναι αρκετές για να γεμίσουν πλήρως τις μπαταρίες τους για την επόμενη ημέρα. Ανήκουν στην λεγόμενη «ελίτ του ύπνου».

Είναι, άραγε, η «ελίτ του ύπνου» το κλειδί στην αποδοτικότητα που χρειάζεται ο σύγχρονος τρόπος ζωής;

Τα τελευταία 25 χρόνια, ο Λούις Τάτσεκ με την ομάδα του, έχουν αναλύσει τα δεδομένα και τις συνήθειες ύπνου 100 οικογενειών. Στο αρχικό λοιπόν, στάδιο της έρευνας, το βάρος δόθηκε σε αυτούς που λέμε «πρωινούς τύπους» δηλαδή εκείνους που λειτουργούν καλύτερα όταν ξυπνάνε και ξεκινούν την ημέρα τους νωρίς.

Όπως ξέρουμε, οι «πρωινοι τύποι» όχι μόνο ξυπνούν πολύ νωρίς, αλλά συνηθίζουν να πηγαίνουν και για ύπνο νωρίς. Υπάρχουν όμως κι εκείνες οι σπάνιες περιπτώσεις ατόμων που, ενώ ξυπνούν νωρίς, κοιμούνται και αργά.


Στην παραπάνω έρευνα, παρατηρήθηκε πως υπήρχαν οικογένειες που εμπίπτουν στην παραπάνω κατηγορία, κάνουν, δηλαδή, «φυσικά λίγο ύπνο».

Ο ύπνος αυτός αποδείχθηκε πως σχετίζεται με 4 συγκεκριμένα γονίδια, χωρίς να αποκλείεται ότι υπάρχουν και άλλα που σχετίζονται με αυτόν. Το μόνο σίγουρο είναι πως αυτά τα γονίδια είναι αρκετά σπάνια, με μόλις 1 στους 1000 ανθρώπους να ανήκει στην «ελίτ του ύπνου», όπως υπολογίζεται.

Μάλιστα, όπως λέει ο Τάτσεκ, υπάρχει η πεποίθηση πως αυτά τα άτομα είναι πιο υγιή από τον μέσο όρο. Αυτό μπορεί κανείς να συμπεράνει μέσα από έρευνα με ερωτηματολόγια, σύμφωνα με την οποία, τα «μέλη» της «ελίτ του ύπνου» παρουσίασαν μεγαλύτερες αντοχές.

Άρα, όσοι κοιμούνται λιγότερο, κοιμούνται ίσως και πιο αποτελεσματικά; Πολύ πιθανό. Σε πρόσφατη έρευνα, γονίδια αυτών των ατόμων χορηγήθηκαν σε ποντίκια πάσχοντα από την νόσο του Αλτσχάιμερ, και οι αντοχές τους αυξήθηκαν.

Αν, λοιπόν, αυτά τα γονίδια απομονωθούν και χρησιμοποιηθούν για θεραπευτικούς σκοπούς, ίσως μπορούν να βοηθήσουν σε μια σειρά ασθενειών, όπως ψυχιατρικές ασθένειες, διαβήτη, παχυσαρκία αλλά και καρκίνο.

Όλα τα παραπάνω αποτελούν μόνο την αρχή του παζλ του μυστηρίου του ύπνου, πάντως, τα στοιχεία μοιάζουν αρκετά ενθαρρυντικά.

Με πληροφορίες από το BBC.

ΠΗΓΗ:

https://www.kathimerini.gr/life/health/561974185/giati-kapoioi-anthropoi-chreiazontai-ligotero-ypno/(accessed 8.8.22)

To stimulate people’s curiosity in a topic, explain how it benefits society

Study finds people might be more curious to know the answer when they think the topic is personally or socially beneficial.


By Emma Young


There’s a simple way to boost curiosity in a topic — and if you’re a teacher or lecturer, or parent who would like their kids to engage with science, it could be helpful to know it…. According to new work in Cognition, simply presenting people with interesting facts isn’t enough to really drive a desire to know more. But stressing that the facts are useful — not necessarily to them personally, but to society in general — stimulates significantly more curiosity.

Rachit Dubey and colleagues at Princeton University, US first gave 300 participants 10 scientific questions each from Reddit’s Explain Like I’m Five subreddit. For each question, the participants rated their curiosity in knowing the answer and also how much they thought that the answer would benefit them personally or benefit others and society in general. The team found that participants were more curious to know the answer when they thought the topic was either personally or socially beneficial.

In a fresh study, the team manipulated the perceived social usefulness of information on the biology of fruit flies and of rats. Participants read two articles: one emphasised how work on the fly (or rat) could be highly beneficial to medicine, while the other questioned whether it would generate any medical benefits. Participants were more curious about this topic when the work was framed as having high vs low value to medicine. (No, I didn’t find this surprising, either. But the team argues that it helps to build their case.)

In a final online study, participants read one of three versions of an article that presented information about fruit fly reproduction. One version highlighted this topic’s usefulness to ecology while a second version referenced its usefulness to medical research. A third version just presented “interesting facts” without highlighting any particular benefits. Emphasising benefits to medicine triggered most curiosity. And the researchers report that those who read only the “interesting facts” were least curious about learning more, even if they’d found those facts surprising.

Of course, few people would find information about fruit fly reproduction interesting. So yes, emphasizing benefits may indeed be important for stoking curiosity in a relatively arcane topic. For a topic that’s more appealing to a general audience, perhaps presenting the facts alone might have been enough to stimulate plenty of curiosity.

However, many academics working on curiosity argue that it is pursued for its own sake, the researchers write; perceived usefulness, for example, is not generally thought to be relevant for curiosity — and this new work challenges this idea.

So what are the practical lessons? For lecturers and teachers, highlighting, wherever possible, the potential usefulness of various topics to society, if not to students personally, might help to stoke a desire to learn more (especially if the topic is not obviously immediately interesting). The researchers make this argument for scientific facts, especially. But of course it could be true for other subjects that unfortunately some kids see as boring and irrelevant, such as history. You’d think all kids would love “doing” the Vikings, for example; mine just didn’t. But if the absolute usefulness of understanding that history for understanding modern Britain had been highlighted, perhaps they’d have been keener to learn more.

SOURCE:

https://www.bps.org.uk/research-digest/stimulate-peoples-curiosity-topic-explain-how-it-benefits-society(accessed 1.8.22)