Showing posts with label cogntive science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cogntive science. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Singing for you, babe.

Ostensibly about bird song, it brings in topics such as social cues, context-driven gene expression, mating behavior, and attention. Science is yummy.

However, this hypothesis predicts that directed–undirected song differences, despite their subtlety, should matter to female zebra finches, which is a question that has not been investigated. We tested female preferences for this natural variation in song in a behavioral approach assay, and we found that both mated and socially naive females could discriminate between directed and undirected song—and strongly preferred directed song. These preferences, which appeared to reflect attention especially to aspects of song variability controlled by the AFP, were enhanced by experience, as they were strongest for mated females responding to their mate's directed songs. We then measured neural activity using expression of the immediate early gene product ZENK, and found that social context and song familiarity differentially modulated the number of ZENK-expressing cells in telencephalic auditory areas. Specifically, the number of ZENK-expressing cells in the caudomedial mesopallium (CMM) was most affected by whether a song was directed or undirected, whereas the caudomedial nidopallium (NCM) was most affected by whether a song was familiar or unfamiliar. Together these data demonstrate that females detect and prefer the features of directed song and suggest that high-level auditory areas including the CMM are involved in this social perception.


Woolley SC, Doupe AJ (2008) Social Context–Induced Song Variation Affects Female Behavior and Gene Expression. PLoS Biol 6(3): e62 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060062

Friday, November 2, 2007

Critical Mass = 2?

It seems that my critical mass for checking out new things based on recommendations or references is somewhere around two. That is, catching a glimpse of something vaguely interesting registers it in the neocortex with a little emotional marking, based on the source and content. Given a second reference or recommendation, plus the right context, seems to have recently led to some interesting forays. For example, I was told that Landmarc was a good spot to dine by some semi-anonymous drunkards last week, and then an old friend did shine a light upon it as well. One very satisfying (though pricey) meal later, with new friends and new tips, I see the rule of 2 at work.

It happened again tonight, with Brijit. More than just the name of a college chum's ex-girlfriend, Brijit is a nifty site offering bite-size (<100 words) ADD-oriented reviews of various pieces of long-form journalism. The blurbs are submitted by registered users to a panel of editors, who boil it down to one postable bit. And then they pay the "winner" with a shiny fiver in the paypal. This was power-of-twoed at me by kottke.org, which didn't fully agree with my enthusiastic assessment. However, it's the second rec/ref in as many days, so I dove right in - and approve. (I think the first may have been from thrillist)

Already submitted an abstract on A-Rod in the onion. Hoo-hah I love me some encapsulated ranting. Not sure if I can post it here (they might own my words! eep!), but we shall see if I become five American dollars richer!

As for the theory of two-ness as pertains to refs and recs, I can't make a categorical claim, as a)my evidence is all anecdotal and from the past week; b)this phenomenon is probably deeper and more interesting than can be fully covered here; c)I bet the number shifts for each instance, but I also bet there is a relationship that can be described and elucidated through experiment.

Hence, some research questions:
What influence do the recommendations of friends, family, colleagues and acquaintances have on whether we choose to engage in some activity? And what is the role of the other contributory factors, such as memory, emotion, content, and context? Fodder for my future!

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Homo Politicus

From PhysOrg (via Digg):


Homo politicus: brain function of liberals, conservatives differs from PhysOrg.com

The brain neurons of liberals and conservatives fire differently when confronted with tough choices, suggesting that some political divides may be hard-wired, according a study released Sunday.

[...]

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Eye Movement and Conversation

A comment on a review at Cognitive Daily:

This is really interesting in that it provides some evidence as to how factors relating to embodiment contribute to two agents' ability to share their intentions and engage in a shared activity. rtl, while I too love the mirror neurons, there's more to it then the activity of those cells. In general, there seems to be an elaborate coordination between two agents that incorporates salient aspects of the situated physical environment (e.g., the painting), as well as prior knowledge (the lecture in the second case). One other tremendously important factor, as hinted at in the beginning of the review, is the ability of each agent to assess the intentions of the other. If a listener is observing the speaker look at something, the listener's mirror neuron activity might predispose them to looking at the same thing, and thus give them a predictive stance on what the speaker intends, which is supported by the content of the speech. The shared attention given to the painting then, could be seen as emerging from the interaction between imitative behaviors, shared environmental cues, physical interactions, and assessments of salience in the environment. Very interesting stuff.