Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the brain-brain-go-away dept.

Training the brain to treat itself is a promising therapy for traumatic stress. The training uses an auditory or visual signal that corresponds to the activity of a particular brain region, called neurofeedback, which can guide people to regulate their own brain activity.

However, treating stress-related disorders requires accessing the brain's emotional hub, the amygdala, which is located deep in the brain and difficult to reach with typical neurofeedback methods. This type of activity has typically only been measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which is costly and poorly accessible, limiting its clinical use.

A study published in the current issue of Biological Psychiatry tested a new imaging method that provided reliable neurofeedback on the level of amygdala activity using electroencephalography (EEG), and allowed people to alter their own emotional responses through self-regulation of its activity.
...
The researchers built upon a new imaging tool they had developed in a previous study that uses EEG to measure changes in amygdala activity, indicated by its "electrical fingerprint." With the new tool, 42 participants were trained to reduce an auditory feedback corresponding to their amygdala activity using any mental strategies they found effective.

During this neurofeedback task, the participants learned to modulate their own amygdala electrical activity. This also led to improved downregulation of blood-oxygen level dependent signals of the amygdala, an indicator of regional activation measured with fMRI.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by stormwyrm on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:01AM

    by stormwyrm (717) on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:01AM (#402113) Journal
    I don't think psychopaths are the sort who can voluntarily shut down their empathy the way we, say, close our eyes or hold our breath. That's a function of normal people, who on occasion need to turn down their normal empathic responses to some purpose. Psychopathy is generally defined as the total lack of any empathy whatsoever. They have to fake empathic responses to normal people as part of the so-called "mask of sanity [wikipedia.org]" they have to wear.
    --
    Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by Francis on Thursday September 15 2016, @06:11AM

    by Francis (5544) on Thursday September 15 2016, @06:11AM (#402152)

    That's questionable. The human brain doesn't normally allow a person to fake emotional responses without them becoming real responses. It's the basic underpinning of various behavioral therapies. A person who is completely lacking in empathy isn't going to be able to fake empathy. How would they even know what response to give if they weren't feeling anything at all?

    There's still a ton of BS in the mental health profession that's in need of debunking and this notion that psychopaths have no empathy at all is something that's badly in need of support. It's certainly not consistent with every day observations of psychopaths.

    Sociopaths on the other hand are a completely different matter.

    • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday September 15 2016, @06:12PM

      by acid andy (1683) on Thursday September 15 2016, @06:12PM (#402393) Homepage Journal

      Sociopaths on the other hand are a completely different matter.

      How would you personally define the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths then? I thought the terms were often considered interchangeable, although I would consider that "psychopath" is more strongly associated with the tendency to actually cause harm to others. I'd imagine that's more a pop sci interpretation of it than anything else though.

      Note that according to wikipedia 'no psychiatric or psychological organization has sanctioned a diagnosis titled "psychopathy"'.

      --
      If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?