February 9, 2016 By danablog505 in Behavior, Dana publications, Emotions, From the Archives, Journals - Cerebrum Tags: brains do it: lust attraction and attachment, Brenda Patoine, emotions, Feeling our way: the challenge of studying emotion and the brain, From the Archives, Helen Fisher, Kathlyn Stone, Kayt Sukel, love, Neurobiology Affects Love and Attraction, neuroscience, The Brian Signature of Love, The Chemistry of Love, Valentine’s Day
Here are some stories recently posted on dana.org
by Michael H. Baumann, Ph.D.
Known as “designer drugs,” new psychoactive substances (NPS) represents a disturbing new trend. Our article describes what is known about the molecular mechanisms of action, and highlights some of the considerable challenges in dealing with this public health problem. From Cerebrum, our online magazine of ideas.
It’s difficult to know what motivates people, but R. Alison Adcock’s lab is using imaging to study how states like desire and curiosity can facilitate “motivated memory.” Her work could have implications in the education field, but also in other learning contexts like psychotherapy and behavior change. One of our series of Scientist Q&As. Continue reading
The Brain Awareness Week (BAW) 2016 website has officially launched! Gearing up for BAW 2016, March 14-20, US partners can now order free publications and materials and international partners can access several new and spiffy downloadable materials (some available in multiple languages).
This year, our new Staying Sharp: Successful Aging and the Brain booklet debuts as a more condensed and updated version of the previous three Staying Sharp booklets. It answers questions such as “How do learning and memory change with age?”, and “When is memory loss a sign of dementia?”, and delves into topics such as memory formation, neuroplasticity, and living a brain-healthy lifestyle.
“What makes us curious? What makes us play with our environment and investigate it? Why are some people more curious than others—and why does my own curiosity wax and wane over time?” These are questions Dana Foundation grantee R. Alison Adcock has asked herself since she was child, and which have led her to focus her scientific research on motivation.
When we published the Cerebrum article, “The Brain Games Conundrum: Does Cognitive Function Really Sharpen the Mind?”, and a follow-up Q&A with the authors in November 2014, three aspects of the article were crystal clear: I) Few topics in neuroscience evoke as much debate as brain game effectiveness. 2) Advertising has convinced tens of thousands of people to open their wallets and buy products. 3) The science surrounding the benefits of brain games is sketchy at best.
The article was in direct contrast to website claims by Lumosity, a major player in the brain-game business, with more than $1 billion a year in revenues and 60-million members. At the time, Lumosity’s website boasted of nine peer-reviewed studies, 36 university collaborators, and testimonials galore.
Now, according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTA):
The creators and marketers of the Lumosity ‘brain training’ program have agreed to settle FTA charges alleging that they deceived consumers with unfounded claims that Lumosity games can help users perform better at work and in school, and reduce or delay cognitive impairment associated with age and other serious health conditions.
As part of the settlement, Lumos Labs, the company behind Lumosity, will pay $2 million in redress and will notify subscribers of the FTC action and provide them with an easy way to cancel their auto-renewal to avoid future billing.