Τι είναι η σεξουαλική ταυτότητα; Τι είναι ο σεξουαλικός προσανατολισμός;

Ο όρος σεξουαλική ταυτότητα αναφέρεται στην ταυτότητα του φύλου («είμαι άντρας, είμαι γυναίκα»), στον σεξουαλικό προσανατολισμό του ατόμου και στον προσδιορισμό της έλξης, αν το άτομο δηλαδή είναι ομοφυλόφιλο, ετεροφυλόφιλο ή αμφιφυλόφιλο. Παράλληλα, έχει να κάνει και με τις σεξουαλικές προσδοκίες του ατόμου, με όλα εκείνα δηλαδή που ορίζουν «τι μου αρέσει και τι δεν μου αρέσει» και αυτά που αναζητά κανείς σε έναν άλλον άνθρωπο.



Ο σεξουαλικός προσανατολισμός προσδιορίζει τη σεξουαλική έλξη του ατόμου και αναφέρεται στο αν το άτομο είναι ετεροφυλόφιλο, ομοφυλόφιλο ή αμφιφυλόφιλο. Αρχίζει να οργανώνεται από την παιδική ηλικία, διαμορφώνεται στα χρόνια της ήβης, για να ολοκληρωθεί στο κλείσιμο της εφηβικής ηλικίας, που ουσιαστικά ξεκινάει η σεξουαλική δραστηριότητα του ατόμου. Αποτελεί μία βίο - συναισθηματική έκφραση και για τον καθορισμό του εμπλέκονται βιολογικοί, αλλά και ψυχολογικοί μηχανισμοί και είναι ο θεμελιώδης μηχανισμός της ανθρώπινης επιλογής, που σκοπό έχει τη σεξουαλική ικανοποίηση, την επικοινωνία με τον ερωτικό σύντροφο και την αναπαραγωγή.



Πηγή:

http://www.askitis.gr/sexualhealth/view/ti_einai_i_seksoialiki_taitotita_ti_einai_o_seksoialikos_prosanatolismos(accessed 8.2.17)

Κοιμόμαστε για να διαγράψουμε «δεδομένα»

Το γιατί κοιμόμαστε είναι μείζον ερώτημα για τους επιστήμονες, που τώρα πιστεύουν ότι ίσως συμβαίνει για να συρρικνωθούν οι συνάψεις του εγκεφάλου.


Eνα από τα βασικά όσο και αναπάντητα ερωτήματα των ερευνητών είναι γιατί κοιμόμαστε. Κάποιοι πιστεύουν ότι κοιμόμαστε για να σώσουμε ενέργεια. Αλλοι θεωρούν ότι κοιμόμαστε για να καθαρίσει ο εγκέφαλος από τα κυτταρικά απόβλητα, ενώ κάποιοι άλλοι πιστεύουν ότι ο ύπνος αναγκάζει τα ζώα να στέκονται ακίνητα και έτσι να κρύβονται από τους θηρευτές τους. Ωστόσο, κάποιες μελέτες που είδαν τώρα τα φώτα της δημοσιότητας, μέσα από τις σελίδες του περιοδικού Science, υποδεικνύουν ότι κοιμόμαστε για να λησμονήσουμε τελικά τα διάφορα πράγματα που μάθαμε κατά τη διάρκεια της ημέρας.

Για να μάθουμε κάτι, θα πρέπει να μεγαλώσουν οι συνάψεις, οι συνδέσεις ανάμεσα στους νευρώνες του εγκεφάλου μας. Αυτές οι συνδέσεις επιτρέπουν στους νευρώνες να ανταλλάσσουν μηνύματα, ενώ σε αυτά τα δίκτυα αποθηκεύουμε τις νέες μνήμες.

Το 2003, ο Τζούλιο Τονόνι και η Κιάρα Τσιρέλι, του πανεπιστημίου του Ουισκόνσιν, διατύπωσαν την άποψη ότι οι συνάψεις αυτές μεγαλώνουν τόσο πολύ κατά τη διάρκεια της ημέρας που ο εγκέφαλος γίνεται «θορυβώδης». Οταν κοιμόμαστε, επισήμαναν οι ερευνητές, ο εγκέφαλος «κλαδεύει» τις συνάψεις, έτσι ώστε να μην υπάρχουν προβλήματα στη μετάδοση των μηνυμάτων. Μάλιστα, έκτοτε οι δύο ερευνητές βρήκαν πολλά στοιχεία που υποδεικνύουν την υπόθεση της «συναπτικής ομοιόστασης».

Τελικά, αποδεικνύεται ότι πράγματι οι νευρώνες «κλαδεύουν» τις συνάψεις, όπως τουλάχιστον διαπιστώθηκε από πειράματα που έγιναν σε εργαστηριακό δισκάριο. Οι ειδικοί χορήγησαν σε νευρώνες, που βρίσκονταν σε δισκάρια, φάρμακα που ενίσχυαν την ανάπτυξη των συνάψεων και μετά τους παρακολούθησαν να «κλαδεύουν» τις πλεονάζουσες συνάψεις. Αλλα αποδεικτικά στοιχεία σχετικά με το τι συμβαίνει έρχονται από τα ηλεκτρικά σήματα του εγκεφάλου. Κατά τη διάρκεια του βαθέος ύπνου τα σήματα αυτά επιβραδύνονται.

Ο δρ Τονόνι και η δρ Τσιρέλι πιστεύουν ότι αυτό συμβαίνει λόγω της συρρίκνωσης των συνάψεων. Ταυτόχρονα, από πειράματα που έκαναν σε ποντίκια, οι ερευνητές διαπίστωσαν ότι οι συνάψεις στον εγκέφαλο κοιμωμένων ποντικών ήταν κατά 18% μικρότερες από ό,τι αυτές στον εγκέφαλο ξύπνιων ποντικών.

Σε μοριακό επίπεδο

Η δεύτερη μελέτη εκπονήθηκε από τον Γκράχαμ Η. Ντίρινγκ, ερευνητή του πανεπιστημίου Τζον Χόπκινς. Ο Ντίρινγκ και οι συνεργάτες του προσπάθησαν να ερευνήσουν την υπόθεση της «συναπτικής ομοιόστασης» μελετώντας τις πρωτεΐνες στον εγκέφαλο ποντικών. Σε ένα πείραμα οι επιστήμονες δημιούργησαν ένα μικρό παράθυρο στον εγκέφαλο των πειραματόζωων από το οποίο μπορούσαν να μελετήσουν τα τεκταινόμενα εκεί. Στη συνέχεια, με τη βοήθεια ενός φαρμάκου χρωμάτισαν την επιφανειακή πρωτεΐνη των συνάψεων. Ετσι, διαπίστωσαν ότι ο αριθμός των επιφανειακών πρωτεϊνών μειωνόταν κατά τη διάρκεια του ύπνου, κάτι που θα συνέβαινε αν τελικά και οι συνάψεις συρρικνώνονταν.

Ο δρ Ντίρινγκ και οι συνεργάτες τους αναζήτησαν τι προκαλούσε την αλλαγή σε μοριακό επίπεδο, διαπιστώνοντας ότι εκατοντάδες πρωτεΐνες αυξάνονται ή μειώνονται στο εσωτερικό των συνάψεων κατά τη διάρκεια της νύχτας. Ωστόσο, μία πρωτεΐνη ιδιαίτερα, η Homer1A, ξεχώριζε. Από τα πειράματα που έγιναν στο εργαστήριο αποδείχθηκε ότι η συγκεκριμένη πρωτεΐνη διαδραμάτιζε σημαντικό ρόλο στη συρρίκνωση των συνάψεων, ενώ από τις έρευνες που πραγματοποιήσαν οι ειδικοί διαπιστώθηκε ότι ο ύπνος πυροδοτεί τη δημιουργία της πρωτεΐνης Homer1A στους νευρώνες, ενώ στη συνέχεια μεταφέρεται στις συνάψεις.}

Επίσης διαπιστώθηκε ότι η συρρίκνωση των συνάψεων δεν αφορά όλους τους νευρώνες. Το ένα πέμπτο των συνάψεων παρέμενε αναλλοίωτο. Είναι πιθανό αυτές οι συνάψεις να αφορούν τις παγιωμένες αναμνήσεις που πρέπει να παραμείνουν αμετάβλητες.

Ωστόσο, πολλοί ερευνητές επισημαίνουν ότι τα προαναφερθέντα συμπεράσματα δεν αποτελούν απόδειξη της υπόθεσης της «συναπτικής ομοιόστασης».

Δύσκολη διαπίστωση

Ο Μάρκος Τζ. Φρανκ, ερευνητής ύπνου στο πολιτειακό πανεπιστήμιο της Ουάσιγκτον, επισημαίνει ότι είναι πολύ δύσκολο να διαπιστωθεί κατά πόσον οι μεταβολές στον εγκέφαλο κατά τη διάρκεια του ύπνου προκαλούνται από τον ύπνο ή από το βιολογικό ρολόι. Αλλωστε, πολλά όργανα λειτουργούν κατά διαφορετικό τρόπο την ώρα του ύπνου όπως το έντερο που δημιουργεί πολλά νέα κύτταρα.

ΠΗΓΗ:

http://www.kathimerini.gr/894839/article/epikairothta/episthmh/koimomaste-gia-na-diagrayoyme-dedomena(accessed 6.2.17)

This Is What People Find Essential In A Long-Term Partner

Largest ever survey reveals what men and women are looking for in a long-term partner.


The largest every survey of mate-preferences has revealed the characteristics that people find both essential and desirable in a long-term.


Here are some highlights of the findings:
92% of men and 84% of women said that it was desirable or essential that their potential partner was good-looking.
80% of men and 58% of women said a slender body was desirable or essential.
74% of men and 97% of women wanted someone with a steady income.
47% of men and 69% of women said that a potential partner making a lot of money was important to them.

Only around 40% of men and women, though, thought it was important that their partner was similar in physical attractiveness to themselves.

The biggest gender differences were seen in the area of money and career.

Twice as many women placed importance on a potential partner’s successful career and earnings than did men.

Dr David Frederick, study co-author, said:


“We’ve known for a long time that men care more about attractiveness in a long term partner, and women care more about resources.


In two national datasets, we found that gender was by far the strongest predictor of what people want in a long-term mate: it was more important than age, income, education, or confidence in appearance.



We found that although men have stronger preferences for a ‘good looking’ and ‘slender’ partner, men and women care equally about having a partner who is specifically attractive to them.

Wealthier men and people who were more confident in their appearance had stronger preferences for a good-looking partner, and older men and women placed less importance on looks and income traits when seeking a long-term partner.”

Some other interesting findings:
Richer people — whether men or women — wanted better looking partners.
Educated men were especially interested in good-looking and slender women in comparison to less well-educated men.
Older people were less focused on looks.

The results come from a survey of almost 28,000 heterosexuals aged 18-75.

SOURCE:

http://www.spring.org.uk/2016/06/people-find-essential-long-term-partner.php(accessed 6.2.17)

The study was published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences (Fales et al., 2016).

A promising study suggests teachers can train 8-year-olds in Theory of Mind

Theory of Mind is psychologist-speak for our ability to put ourselves in other people’s shoes, to recognise that their thoughts and beliefs can be different from our own. Children begin to develop this ability around age three to four: it starts off fairly basic, in terms of understanding people can hold false beliefs, becoming more sophisticated as they get older, eventually taking in concepts like double bluffing and faux pas.

Of course, as with most things, kids vary in how adept they are at Theory of Mind, and there’s evidence that those with more skills in this area benefit in all sorts of ways, from their relationships to school achievement. Importantly, experiments have shown that this isn’t something that’s fixed, rather children can be trained fairly easily to improve their Theory of Mind by spending time talking about and reflecting upon characters’ perspectives in social scenarios.

These previous training studies have been contrived experiments delivered by researchers with the sessions conducted outside of normal classes. A promising but preliminary new study in the British Journal of Educational Psychology has made an important leap, taking the training to a more real-life setting, showing that a brief teacher-led intervention was able to boost eight- to nine-year-olds’ Theory of Mind, with the benefits still demonstrable two months later.



Federico Bianco and Serena Lecce trained four teachers at four different primary schools how to deliver a Theory of Mind intervention that involved the children reading about different social situations, writing answers to questions about the thoughts and perspectives of the different characters, and then discussing the stories in groups. The stories involved misunderstandings, sarcasm, faux pas and a double bluff. The teachers were trained to provide feedback to correct the pupils when necessary. The teachers also learned how to deliver a control intervention that was similar but involved reflecting on physical aspects of stories: for instance, a typical question might ask what materials an architect should use for tall buildings.

The Theory of Mind training – four sessions of 50 minutes – was given by the teachers to one of their usual classes, and the control training of equal length to another class. This meant 34 eight-year-olds received the Theory of Mind training, and 38 acted as controls. Meanwhile, the pupils completed various tests before the training, such as verbal ability and executive training tests, and answered questions about their family background. Critically, before the training, one week afterwards and two months afterwards, they also completed a test of their Theory of Mind skills, based on their comprehension of three stories involving double bluff, persuasion and misunderstanding.

All the children showed improvements in their Theory of Mind test performance over the course of the study, but the children who received the Theory of Mind training showed greater gains than the control group. And while the two groups showed equal Theory of Mind skills pre-training, after they’d completed their training, the Theory of Mind training group were superior at both the one week and two month follow up. The apparent benefits of the Theory of Mind training remained after controlling in the analysis for the influence of other abilities such as verbal skill or other factors like family background.

Bianco and Lecce said their results suggest teachers “can successfully promote their 8- to 9-year-old pupils’ Theory of Mind development during regular teaching hours” and that they hoped this might be the “first step of a new line of research aimed at translating Theory of Mind research into school life practices.”

On a more sceptical note, there wasn’t a no-treatment control condition, so we can’t tell for sure whether the Theory of Mind training boosted Theory of Mind or if the physical concepts training was for some reason detrimental to Theory of Mind. Also, the test of Theory of Mind was remarkably similar to the training (all scenarios were derived from the so-called Strange Stories Task), so it’s perhaps not surprising improvements were shown in the intervention group. It would have been more impressive if the training had led to improvements in Theory of Mind that were tested in a different way. Finally, this study wasn’t able to show that there were any follow-on benefits from the apparent increases in Theory of Mind abilities enjoyed by the pupils who received the Theory of Mind intervention. If future research could show the training leads to tangible benefits to children’s relationships or schoolwork, for example, that would be very exciting.

SOURCE:

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/01/27/a-promising-study-suggests-teachers-can-train-8-year-olds-in-theory-of-mind/(accessed 6.2.17)

Is creativity something you inherit from your parents?

Jeb Bush’s failure to secure a Presidential triple-play is memorable perhaps because it’s an exception to a familiar routine: the family dynasty. It’s a routine especially common in the arts, where a writer’s family tree is apt to contain a couple of actors, a director, and maybe a flower arranger to boot. This might simply reflect upbringing – or maybe the powers of nepotism – but creative success also owes to temperament and talents, some of which may have their origins in our genetic makeup. The journal Behavioural Genetics has recently published a heritability study that explores how deeply a creative vocation sits in our DNA.



Mark Roeling and his colleagues at Oxford and Vrije universities, drew on data from the Netherlands Twin Register, covering around 1800 monozygotic (identical) twins who share the same genes, and 1600 dizygotic or non-identical twins who have only 50 per cent of their DNA in common, just like non-twin siblings. The register includes information on the twins’ professions, which were coded as artistic if they fell into the categories of dance, film, music, theatre, visual arts, or writing. This applied to 233 of the individuals on the register.

The question that Roeling and his colleagues were interested in was: if an individual has an artistic profession, how likely is it that their twin does too? If the answer is the same for monozygotic and dizygotic pairs, then this would suggest genes exert no effect on the likelihood of entering a creative career – it’s all nurture. Stronger creative overlap among the identical twins, by contrast, would suggest more of a role for nature.

The team found that there was more similarity in the careers of identical twins than non-identical twins. If one identical twin had a creative career, there was a .68 per cent chance that their sibling would do too (where 1 would mean the other twin always had a creative profession), compared with a probability of just .4 for a creative non-identical twin. This difference between identical and non-identical twins suggests that genes have a fairly large say in whether you go into a creative profession. After adjusting the results using data from non-twin siblings, the researchers estimated that the heritability of being in a creative profession is 0.7: in other words, in attempting to understand why some individuals in the sample ended up in creative careers and others didn’t, the researchers think that 70 per cent of this difference is attributable to genetic influences.

It’s worth looking at other recent studies to put this in context. Also working with data from the Netherlands Twin Register, a different research group led by Anna Vinkhuyzen at VU University found high levels of heritability (.83 ) for creative writing, including letters, manuscripts and books, but somewhat lower heritability (.56) for a fairly broad category of ‘arts’ comprising painting and acting. Meanwhile, another group headed by Christian Kandler at Universität Bielefeld used German datasets to find another reasonably large heritability estimate (.62) for “perceived” creativity, that is how highly participants rated themselves as creative or how creative they were rated by their peers.

These earlier findings tended to rely on self-report measures of participants’ thoughts on their own creativity. Kandler found a much lower heritability of .26 for what he calls “figural” creativity, measured by objective tests, such as completing partial line drawings to create objects judged as especially clear and original. This links into earlier findings that suggested there are two dimensions to creativity: one a subjective sense of “being a creative” (or wanting to be), which tends to correlate with higher scores on the personality traits of Openness and Extraversion, and the other, actual creative ability, which tends to correlate with intelligence and can be objectively assessed through tests, such as those used in Kandler’s research on figural creativity.

The current study’s heritability of .70 finds better company among the creativity self-report measures than the much weaker heritability suggested for pure creative ability. This makes it plausible that the substantial influence that genetics appears to have on creative professions may not just be about pure creative ability, but also about the other personal characteristics that are needed to make an artistic life, such as determination and self-belief. Further work that looks at the heritability of artistic attainments would be one way of exploring this, as would looking at time spent on creative pursuits, inside or outside of a main profession. After all, to be creative professionally takes a fair amount of luck and circumstance. To be creative in life, however, just requires you to make it a priority.

SOURCE:

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/01/16/is-creativity-something-you-inherit-from-your-parents/(accessed 1.2.17)