Disclaimer: English Kinda Thing

The sole purpose of the "English Kinda Thing" is to document my attempts to correct my own mistakes in standard English usage and to share the resources I find. In no way do I attempt to teach nobody English through these blurbs--just as I intend not to teach nobody to be a neurotic and psychotic handicap in Ratology Reloaded or Down with Meds! :-)

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Ploghaus, Narain, Beckmann, Clare, Bantick, Wise, Matthews, Rawlins, & Tracey (2001) Exacerbation of pain by anxiety is associated with activity in a hippocampal network

Ploghaus, A., Narain, C., Beckmann, C. F., Clare, S., Bantick, S., Wise, R., Matthews, P. M., Rawlins, J. N. & Tracey, I. (2001) Exacerbation of pain by anxiety is associated with activity in a hippocampal network. J Neurosci, 21(24), 9896-903.


"The present study showed that anxiety-induced hyperalgesia is associated with activation in the entorhinal cortex of the hippocampal formation. This is consistent with the Gray–McNaughton theory, which proposes that during anxiety, the hippocampal formation increases the valence of aversive events to prime behavioral responses adaptive to the worst possible outcome. Our observation helps to interpret anatomical, neuropharmacological, and electrophysiological evidence implicating the hippocampal formation in pain modulation. Our finding suggests that accurate preparatory information during medical and dental procedures
alleviates pain by disengaging the hippocampal formation. Searching for interventions to specifically modulate hippocampal activation offers an approach to identifying new treatments for procedural pain and some forms of chronic pain."

Who can assert control over entorhinal cortex? Orbitofrontal cortex--the area associated with metacognition in the affective domain in Dynamic Filtering theory?  Like, I know I am in chronic pain and discomfort... get ready for it, get habituated and tune it down many a blue moon ago already!

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Wagner, Schacter, Rotte, Koutstaal, Maril, Dale, Rosen, & Buckner (1998) Building memories: Remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity

Wagner, A. D., Schacter, D. L., Rotte, M., Koutstaal, W., Maril, A., Dale, A. M., Rosen, B. R. & Buckner, R. L. (1998) Building memories: Remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity. Science, 281(5380), 1188-91.

Did Wagner et al mention the role of the Ventrolateral PFC in the encoding of remembered vs. forgotten info??


First, remember that the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex corresponds to Brodmann's Areas 44, 45, and 47.

"Importantly, the event-related design also permitted identification of regions that demonstrate differential activation during the encoding of words subsequently remembered and those subsequently forgotten. When comparing high confidence hits to misses, greater activation was noted in multiple left prefrontal regions (Fig. 2) and left parahippocampal and fusiform gyri (Fig. 3) (16, 17)"  (p. 1190)

Baldo, Shimamura, Delis, Kramer, & Kaplan (2001) Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions

Baldo, Shimamura, Delis, Kramer, & Kaplan (2001) Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 7(5), 586-96.

Participants: "Patients’ lesions were mostly confined to ventral and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex"

Problem retrieving information from LTM in verbal fluency:  the frontal lobe patients produced fewer correct
responses than control participants (see Figure 4)

Perservative error in design fluency: In terms of perseverative errors, there was no statistical difference between patients with frontal lesions and control participants (F(1,20)= 1.56, p= .22], although numerically patients made proportionally more errors (see Table 2).

Knight, Scabini & Woods (1989) Prefrontal cortex gating of auditory transmission in humans

Knight, R. T., Scabini, D. & Woods, D. L. (1989) Prefrontal cortex gating of auditory transmission in humans. Brain Research, 504(2), 338-342.

"inhibitory and excitatory prefrontal control of distributed neural activity in posterior brain regions."

I came to this article to find this... Prefrontal cortex has inhibitory and excitatory control over the posterior brain regions. 

I know there is research somewhere else looking directly at the kaput head of psychotics.  Unfortunately, my head doesn't allow me to go directly into these research... not until my psychotic model is done and lit review zum ended (Do you understand what it means?) Sign

P. 165
"There is extensive literature supporting an abnormality in prefrontal function in schizophrenics. Findings of altered dorsolateral prefrontal function include evidence from both cerebral blood flow (Weinberg, Berman & Zec, 1986; Weinberg, Berman, Suddath & Torrey, 1992) and post-mortem studies (Akbarian et al., 1995, 1996). Thus, schizophrenia may represent a ``non-lesion'' model of prefrontal dysfunction in humans. Schizophrenics are also reported to have a deficit in inhibitory control of auditory processing. Freedman and colleagues developed and ERP auditory gating paradigm to study inhibitory control in schizophrenics. In normals, presentation of a pair of clicks results in a decrease in amplitude of the evoked response to the second stimulus in the pair. This response suppression occurs in a latency range of 30±65 msec and has been referred to as the P50 gating paradigm in the schizophrenia literature. This finding has been disputed by some authors (Kathman & Engel, 1990), but this may be due in part to di€erences in recording parameters and state of alertness (Boutros, Zouridakis & Overall, 1991a; Boutros, Overall & Zouridakis, 1991b; Smith, Boutros & Schwarzkopf, 1994; Grith, Ho€er, Adler & Zerbe, 1995). Freedman, Adler, Waldo, Pachtman and Franks (1983) reported that the second stimulus in a pair of auditory pulses did not habituate in schizophrenics. This electrophysiological findings supported the longstanding proposal that schizophrenics
fail to properly filter extraneous inputs (McGhie & Chapman, 1961; Venables, 1964).

This auditory gating deficit is reliably seen in a signi®cant percentage of nonpsychotic relatives of schizophrenics and has been proposed to be a neurophysiologicl trait for schizophrenia. Phenotypic segregation of schizophrenics and first order relatives using the auditory gating paradigm has been employed in recent genetic studies. This research has isolated a putative schizophrenia gene localized to a region of chromosome 15q 13±14 which controls alpha 7 nicotinic receptor expression (Freedman et al., 1997). Thus, the neural network controlling the P50 gating deficit is of both theoretical and clinical relevance. We examined auditory gating in patients with dorsolateral prefrontal damage and in age-matched controls (see Fig. 3). An initial study has shown that controls have normal suppression of the second stimulus in an auditory pulse pair. Prefrontal patients showed evidence of an inhibitory failure in the auditory gating paradigm in both ears. As can be seen in Fig. 3, prefrontal patients showed problems with suppression of the second stimulus in both ears with the defect more apparent in the ear contralateral to prefrontal damage
(Knight, Finkbeiner & Lawler, in preparation). This failure to suppress is observed for both an early latency component generated in auditory cortex (P35) and a later component (P50) thought to arise in the thalamus. The data suggests that prefrontal cortex dysfunction may underlie or contribute to the auditory gating deficit in schizophrenics."

Monday, September 16, 2013

As evident/evidenced by?

I am very happy today because a mistake I habitually make was brought to my attention today...

Donno where I got it... but I have a liking to use the expression "as evident by blah blah and blah."

I learn today that it is actually as evidenced by (or as evident from...).

EX. There is no cure in my bad English as evidenced by all them mistakes I can not catch myself or continue to make even after they are identified such as in "the" and "a(n)."

8-O lol 8-X

(Though, at least, I will correct all them "as evident by" to "as evident from" in my writing from now on.)

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Gagné & Smith Jr (1962) A study of the effects of verbalization on problem solving

Gagné, R. M. & Smith Jr, E. C. (1962) A study of the effects of verbalization on problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(1), 12-18.

n-disc problem (Tower of Honoi)


  1. Group V-SS (verbalizing, Solution Set) was instructed to state aloud why they were making each individual move at the time they made it. In addition, these 5s were instructed to try to think of a general rule by means of which they could tell someone
  2. Group V (Verbalizing, No Solution Set) was required to verbalize a reason for each move, but was
  3. not instructed to try to formulate a general rule for solution. 
  4. Group SS (No Verbalizing, Solution Set) was not required to verbalize, but was instructed to try to formulate a rule.
  5. Group No (No Verbalizing, No Solution Set) was simply told of the problem to be presented and its ground rules, with no additional instructions.

The group instructed to verbalize and to formulate a rule yielded the best performance.

Could my psychotic pursuit to get the book out and to explicate my problem and action schema be helpful in my learning to problem solve my mental problem? 8-O

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Stanovich (1999) Who is rational? : Studies of individual differences in reasoning

Where system 1 and system 2 are coined...

Stanovich, K. E. (1999) Who is rational? : Studies of individual differences in reasoning,  (Mahwah, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).

"It helps to distinguish between evolutionary adaptation and instrumental rationality.... Anderson (1990) accepted Stich's... argument that evolutionary adaptation (hereafter termed evolutionary rationality) does not guarantee perfect human rationality in the normative sense." (p. 148)

"Evolutionary rationality has dissociated from normative rationality--where the later viewed as utility maximization for the individual organism (instrumental rationality) and the former is defined as survival probability at the level of the gene." (p. 149)

"It is hypothesized that the features of System 1 are designed to very closely track increases in the reproduction probability of genes.  System 2, though also clearly an evolutionary product, is primarily a control system focused on the interest of the whole person.  Although its overall function was no doubt fitness enhancing, it is the primary maximizer of an individual's personal utility.  Maximizing the latter will occasionally result in sacrificing genetic fitness.

(Why I am not even entertaining having children? 8-O lol 8-X)

Thus, the hypothesis is that System 1 is more specifically attuned than is System 2 to evolutionary rationality.  System 1 process represent the collection of the processes that are goal maximizing for the genes--the reproductive goals of fecundity, longevity, and replication accuracy.  System 2, in contrast, maximizes goal satisfaction for people--the survil machines for the genes.  Because System 2 is more attuned to normative rationality, it is System 2 that will seek to fulfill the individual's goals in the minority of cases where those goals conflict with the responses triggered by system 1.

... in the vast majority of mundane situations, the evolutionary rationality embodied in System 1 processes will also serve the goals of normative rationality.  Accurately navigating around objects in the natural world fostered evolutionary adaptation, and it likewise serves our personal goals as we carry out our lives in the modern world... Nevertheless, the assumption that we are adapted in the evolutionary sense--the assumption made in so many of the adaptionist models--does not entail normative rationality.  Thus, situations where evolutionary and normative rationality dissociate might well put the two processing systems in conflict with each other." (p. 151)

System 2 theory... there is no uni-reality in life and the personal System 1 components devised for mes, myselves, and Is... as a pursuit to cope with psychosis.  What I have to do might not maximize the survival of the "genetic fitness" though instrumental of letting me kick on kicking finishing up spitting out already too many my words.  

Albeit evolutionary this and that, isn't the grasping of the dual-reality principle yet another manifestation of genetic preparedness? 

Regardless, the gene prepared us and the socialization further foster what we are prepared for... how it is interpreted... dependent on the interpreter...

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Morris, Griffiths, Le Pelley, & Weickert (2013) Attention to irrelevant cues is related to positive symptoms in schizophrenia

Morris, R., Griffiths, O., Le Pelley, M. E. & Weickert, T. W. (2013) Attention to irrelevant cues is related to positive symptoms in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 39(3), 575-582.

"suggests normal selective learning can occur in schizophrenia under easier task conditions."

So say the experts... thank God... it's possible for me to learn...

"those with more severe positive symptoms failed to ignore the nonpredictive cues, suggesting the bias also varies with the severity of positive symptoms."

Let me tell you... when symptoms are really bad... all the irrelevant are relevant and like how the song goes... can't take my eyes off from you... (no switching allowed almost)

"The failure of these patients to distinguish between previously predictive and nonpredictive cues results in the formation of abnormal causal associations and suggests this deficit may be critical in the formation and experience of psychotic symptoms."

I would like to say that I would definitely second this notion except... who gives a rat's ass about my endorsement? (Especially not this paranoid delusional with grandiosity. 8-O lol 8-X)

Finally done with this iteration of lit review... 

Peters, Pickering, Kent, Glasper, Irani, David, Day, & Hemsleym (2000) The relationship between cognitive inhibition and psychotic symptoms

Peters, E. R., Pickering, A. D., Kent, A., Glasper, A., Irani, M., David, A. S., Day, S. & Hemsley, D. R. (2000) The relationship between cognitive inhibition and psychotic symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109(3), 386-395.

The hypothetical endowment of psychotics... low latent inhibition... no wonder the process of literature review is so lengthy because everything seems to be related. 8-O 8-X

From public access...

Spread the info so lessons learned could be shared... like... how many psychotics might have access to the sea of literature about us including writings by psychotics about psychosis?

The Sickness in Writing

Treisman (1960) Contextual cues in selective listening

Treisman, A. M. (1960) Contextual cues in selective listening. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(4), 242-248.

"In using the word “threshold” in this context, it is not necessarily meant to imply an intensity threshold, which might be one possibility, but simply that the unit is more or less likely to be activated by incoming signals, or that it is made more or less quickly available. Now if the selective mechanism in attention acts on all words not coming from one particular source by “attenuating” rather than “blocking” them, that is, it transforms them in such a way that they become less likely to activate dictionary units, it might still allow the above classes of words, with their thresholds which were originally exceptionally low, to be heard."

Treisman's "threshold" hypothesis and possibly the grandfather notion (threshold) of salience differences? (not sure but surely can be inferred from it.

Turk, Brady-Van Den Bos, Collard, Gillespie-Smith, Conway & Cunningham (2013) Divided attention selectively impairs memory for self-relevant information

Turk, D. J., Brady-Van Den Bos, M., Collard, P., Gillespie-Smith, K., Conway, M. A. & Cunningham, S. J. (2013) Divided attention selectively impairs memory for self-relevant information. Memory & Cognition, 41(4), 503-510.

"the memory advantages associated with self-referential encoding are dependent on the availability of attentional resources."

How does this paper resonate with my head?

  1. Self-referencing is attentionally demanding and could thus compete with other attentionally demanding task.  Worst of all, don't know about for the normal, self-referencing info are prioritized.
  2. The memory advantage of self-associated items is possibly what contribute to my plights... (the fuzzy boundary between good and bad)
  3. Given the need for the attentional resource, does the need to engage in other attentional demanding task depletes the "advantage" of self-referenced items?  Based on my "field" experiences such as working at large, yes, when highly focused on my work, I could attempt to minimize the impacts of self-related items... though it ain't fail-safe.

Shapiro, Caldwell, & Sorensen (1997) Personal names and the attentional blink: A visual "cocktail party" effect

Shapiro, K. L., Caldwell, J. & Sorensen, R. E. (1997) Personal names and the attentional blink: A visual "cocktail party" effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(2), 504-514.

"Treisman (1960) proposed that the filter is not an "all or nothing" mechanism but instead serves to attenuate rather than to block information from the unattended channel. According to her views, a node for a particular word in a mental "dictionary" possesses a threshold that must be exceeded for that word to reach "awareness." Information from the unattended channel is transformed in such a way as to make it less likely that the information will activate a particular node. Thus, only words with very low thresholds can be activated by the unattended channel. For example, words with high salience, such as fire or an individual's name, have thresholds for activation that are permanently lower than those for other words and can reach awareness even when presented to the unattended channel." p. 506

Sounds almost like... "ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS"  if not all stimuli are euqual but some stimuli are more equal than others.  8-X

"As posed originally by Shapiro, Raymond, and Amell (1994) but elaborated on here, each competing stimulus possesses a different weighting according to its salience, which is determined by a goodness-of-fit match between target and probe templates and the level of word logogen activation."

When can I stop weighting my selves so much?

"we suggest that certain words possess a permanently lower threshold (and thus a higher salience), as
in the case of a person's own name or a signal for danger. We further argue that the consequence of this higher salience is less interference between the probe stimulus and other competing items in VSTM."

salience vs. threshold level

"One's own name, by this same account, possesses an even higher salience allowing for its detection regardless of the distractor stream."

Again, the basis of my minor inconveniences in life... I surely know no moderation and taken the own name effect to the extreme... like You can call me Al (or Betty will do) though I am ratprincess.