Following the success of last year’s inaugural competition, Cambridge University’s Department of Social & Developmental Psychology is again hosting an essay competition for sixth-form students. This year, we are inviting essays on the following title:
“In an era of genetics, are psychological studies of environmental influences irrelevant?”
These essays should address issues within developmental and/or social psychology and demonstrate both a breadth of knowledge and ideas and an ability to write with clarity and coherence. Schools and colleges may submit essays from a maximum of three pupils in their first year of study for A-level, Scottish Higher Level or an equivalent qualification. Last year’s winner went on to study psychology at University, but did not actually study psychology at school and so we’d like to emphasize that the competition is open to all students who are thinking about a degree in Psychology.
Click here for more information/ see Shanie/ Challenge Wall
Click here to play the Split Brain Experiments Game
- What is a “split brain”?
- What happens if you surgically remove the connection called corpus calossum between the two brain hemispheres?
- What is the classic split brain experiment?
- What have we learned about the brain from split brain operated patients?
- To which of the hemispheres are the left and right vision fields connected?
- What are the characteristics of the right and left brain hemispheres?
The brain is made up of two halves, or hemispheres. These hemispheres are connected to each other through a system consisting of millions of nerve fibres. Therefore, each hemisphere is continually informed about what is happening in the other. What happens if the connection is broken? In this game you can follow a classic experiment with a patient whose corpus callosum connection has been surgically removed.
In this game you perform the classic split brain experiment used by Nobel Laureate Roger Sperry when he discovered differences between the right and left hemispheres of the brain. See how the patient reacts and try to figure out how come he is acting the way he does. In order to be able to proceed with your research you have to get more money, and when applying for more grants you have to report on your findings. If you manage to make correct conclusions you’ll be awarded with more grants and eventually your research will be published in a scientific journal.
Click here to read Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science columns. The linked article is really interesting and there are some great clips to watch too. Check out the Brain Gym article, you will see the link highlighted in the text.
Click here to listen to a pragramme presented by Sir David Attenborough Scars of Evolution in a two part series looking at the history and current status of the ‘aquatic ape hypothesis’ (AAH), first proposed 45 years ago by Sir Alister Hardy, then elaborated and developed by Elaine Morgan and others.
The hypothesis proposes that the physical characteristics that distinguish us from our nearest cousin apes - standing and moving bipedally, being naked and sweaty, our swimming and diving abilities, fat babies, big brains and language - all of these and others are best explained as adaptations to a prolonged period of our evolutionary history being spent in and around the seashore and lake margins, not on the hot dry savannah or in the forest with the other apes. The programmes explore the varieties of response to the theory, from when it was first proposed to the present day. Why it is seen by many as a very provoking idea and at the accumulating evidence of recent years that seems to be tipping the mainstream towards assimilating many of the AAH proposals. Programme two ends with dramatic new biological evidence suggesting that water-birthing was a very early human evolutionary adaptation.
Heather shows disordered unorganized thoughts in her conversations. The odd facial expressions she displays when she speaks is a side effect of the antipsychotic medication she is on. While some antipsychotic medications do not produce such side effects, not all schizophrenics response well to such medication.
A BBC presentation suggested that Anti-Depressants work no better than placebos. Prescribing anti-depressants to the vast majority of patients is futile, as the drugs have little or no impact at all, according to researchers. Almost 50 clinical trials were reviewed by psychologists from the University of Hull who found that new-generation anti-depressants worked no better than a placebo — a dummy pill — for mildly depressed patients. Even the trials that suggested some clinical benefit for the most severely depressed patients did not produce convincing evidence. Professor Irving Kirsch from the university’s pyschology department said: “The difference in improvement between patients taking placebos and patients taking anti-depressants is not very great. “This means that depressed people can improve without chemical treatments. Given these results, there seems little reason to prescribe anti-depressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients.” The researchers focused on four widely prescribed anti-depressants and the clinical trials that were submitted to win licensing approval from the US Food and Drug Administration. The drugs included fluoxetine (Prozac), venlafaxine (Efexor), and Paroxetine (Seroxat). All belong to a family of drugs known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs). These drugs have become popular over the past 15 years as doctors consider them to be safer than tricyclic drugs that carried a high risk of overdose. In 2006, 31m prescriptions for anti-depressants were issued in England, up 27 per cent since 2001. Alison Cobb, policy officer at mental health charity Mind, said: “This study represents a serious challenge to the predominance of pharmacological treatments for depression. Anti-depressants have been shown to help many people, but by no means all.” “Too many GPs are being forced to dish out drugs because they don’t have proper access to psychological therapies services which are recommended by Nice.” Mind is urging GPs to consider alternative therapies such as exercise — particularly outdoor exercise — which it believes has shown to be very effective in combating depression. However, Dr Gary Bell, consultant psychiatrist at Capio Nightingale Hospitals, the provider of private psychiatry treatment, contested the conclusions of the Hull research. “Anti-depressants are one of the great breakthroughs in the treatment of depression in last 20 to 30 years,” he said. “They do not always suit everybody but the results are often life-saving. People who do studies do not have the hands-on experience of using these medicines.” According to the Royal College of Psychiatrists, at least one person in five will suffer from a depressive illness at some point.
Click here to read an article published in the Times, discussing new research which suggests reasons why some people are better at coping with pain and others.