Children's genetic potentials are subdued by poverty: Effects show by age 2

NewsPsychology (Jan. 31, 2011) — Children from poorer families do worse in school, are less likely to graduate from high school, and are less likely to go to college. A new study published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, finds that these differences appear surprisingly early: by the age of 2. It’s not a genetic difference. Instead, something about the poorer children’s environment is keeping them from realizing their genetic potentials.

Past research has found that a gap between poor children and children from wealthier families opens up early in life, even before children enter formal education. “Poor kids aren’t even doing as well in terms of school readiness — sounding out letters and doing other things that you would expect to be relevant to early learning,” says Elliot M. Tucker-Drob of the University of Texas at Austin, lead author of the paper. He and his colleagues, Mijke Rhemtulla and K. Paige Harden of the University of Texas at Austin and Eric Turkheimer and David Fask of the University of Virginia, wanted to look even earlier — to see if they could find these differences in infants.

The researchers used data on about 750 pairs of fraternal and identical twins, from all over the country. The children’s mental abilities were tested at 10 months of age and again when they were 2 years old, with tasks like pulling a string to ring a bell, placing three cubes in a cup, matching pictures, and sorting pegs by color. The children’s socioeconomic status was determined based on parents’ educational attainment, occupations, and family income.

At 10 months of age, children from poor families performed just as well as children from wealthier families. It was over the next 14 months that a gap emerged. By 2 years of age, children from wealthier families were scoring consistently higher than the children from poorer families.

The researchers went on to examine the extent to which genes were involved in the test scores. Among the 2-year-olds from wealthier families, identical twins, who share all of their genes, had much more similar tests scores than fraternal twins, who share only half of their genes, thus indicating that genes were influencing their tests scores. However, among 2-year-olds from poorer families, identical twins scored no more similar to one another than fraternal twins, suggesting that genes were not influencing their test scores. The researchers concluded that something about the poor children’s home life was suppressing their potentials for cognitive development.

This study didn’t look specifically into why wealthy children improve more. It could be that poorer parents may not have the time or resources to spend playing with their children in stimulating ways. A common goal of education policy is to decrease the achievement gap between poorer and wealthier children, says Tucker-Drob. “And I think the first step to achieving this goal is understanding the basis of these disparities.” He’s working now on understanding exactly what it is that parents are doing differently — analyzing videos of poorer and wealthier parents interacting with their children, for example, to see if he can find differences.

Email or share this story:


Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by newsPsychology staff) from materials provided by Association for Psychological Science.

Journal Reference:

  1. E. M. Tucker-Drob, M. Rhemtulla, K. P. Harden, E. Turkheimer, D. Fask. Emergence of a Gene x Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Infant Mental Ability Between 10 Months and 2 Years. Psychological Science, 2010; 22 (1): 125 DOI: 10.1177/0956797610392926

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of NewsPsychology or its staff.

High school biology teachers in U.S. reluctant to endorse evolution in class, study finds

The majority of public high school biology teachers in the U.S. are not strong classroom advocates of evolutionary biology, despite 40 years of court cases that have ruled teaching creationism or intelligent design violates the Constitution, according to Penn State political scientists. A mandatory undergraduate course in evolutionary biology for prospective teachers, and frequent refresher courses for current teachers, may be part of the solution, they say.

"Considerable research suggests that supporters of evolution, scientific methods, and reason itself are losing battles in America's classrooms," write Michael Berkman and Eric Plutzer, professors of political science at Penn State, in the January 28 issue of Science.

The researchers examined data from the National Survey of High School Biology Teachers, a representative sample of 926 public high school biology instructors. They found only about 28 percent of those teachers consistently implement National Research Council recommendations calling for introduction of evidence that evolution occurred, and craft lesson plans with evolution as a unifying theme linking disparate topics in biology.

In contrast, Berkman and Plutzer found that about 13 percent of biology teachers "explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light." Many of these teachers typically rejected the possibility that scientific methods can shed light on the origin of the species, and considered both evolution and creationism as belief systems that cannot be fully proven or discredited.

Berkman and Plutzer dubbed the remaining teachers the "cautious 60 percent," who are neither strong advocates for evolutionary biology nor explicit endorsers of nonscientific alternatives. "Our data show that these teachers understandably want to avoid controversy," they said.

The researchers found these teachers commonly use one or more of three strategies to avoid controversy. Some teach evolutionary biology as if it applies only to molecular biology, ignoring an opportunity to impart a rich understanding of the diversity of species and evidence that one species gives rise to others.

Using a second strategy, some teachers rationalize the teaching of evolution by referring to high-stakes examinations.

These teachers "tell students it does not matter if they really 'believe' in evolution, so long as they know it for the test," Berkman and Plutzer said.

Finally, many teachers expose their students to all positions, scientific and otherwise, and let them make up their own minds.

This is unfortunate, the researchers said, because "this approach tells students that well established concepts can be debated in the same way we debate personal opinions."

Berkman and Plutzer conclude that "the cautious 60 percent fail to explain the nature of scientific inquiry, undermine the authority of established experts, and legitimize creationist arguments." As a result, "they may play a far more important role in hindering scientific literacy in the United States than the smaller number of explicit creationists."

The researchers note that more high school students take biology than any other science course, and for as many as 25 percent of high school students it is the only science course they will ever take, even though a sound science education is important in a democracy that depends on citizen input on highly technical, consequential, public policies.

Berkman and Plutzer say the nation must have better-trained biology teachers who can confidently advocate for high standards of science education in their local communities. Colleges and universities should mandate a dedicated undergraduate course in evolution for all prospective biology teachers, for example, and follow up with outreach refresher courses, so that more biology teachers embrace evolutionary biology.

"Combined with continued successes in courtrooms and the halls of state government, this approach offers our best chance of increasing the scientific literacy of future generations," they conclude.


Journal Reference:

  1. M. B. Berkman, E. Plutzer. Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom. Science, 2011; 331 (6016): 404 DOI: 10.1126/science.1198902

Highly interactive training helps workers in dangerous jobs avoid deadly mistakes

Hands-on safety training for workers in highly hazardous jobs is most effective at improving safe work behavior, according to psychologists who analyzed close to 40 years of research. However, less engaging training can be just as effective in preparing workers to avoid accidents when jobs are less dangerous.

More interactive types of safety training may help employees become more aware of the threats they face on the job and avoid making deadly mistakes, according to the findings in the January issue of the Journal of Applied Psychology, which is published by the American Psychological Association.

Researchers analyzed results from 113 safety training studies conducted since the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act in 1971. The analysis included a total sample of 24,694 workers in 16 countries. The researchers used the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System to sort hazards into hierarchical categories that reflected the increasing potential for severe illness, injury or death. The hazards ranged from simple falls to fires, explosions and physical assaults.

At jobs where the likelihood of death or injury was highest, the findings showed that more engaging training (e.g., behavioral modeling, simulation and hands-on training) was considerably more effective than less engaging training (such as lectures, films, reading materials and videos) for both learning about and demonstrating safety on the job. Less engaging training was just as effective in regard to improving these outcomes when the risk for death or injury was low.

"The primary psychological mechanism we can offer as an explanation for these results is something called the 'dread factor,'" said the study's lead author, Michael Burke, PhD, of Tulane University. "In a more interactive training environment, the trainees are faced more acutely with the possible dangers of their job and they are, in turn, more motivated to learn about such dangers and how to avoid them."

For example, when hazardous events and exposures are extreme (e.g., fires, explosions, exposure to toxic chemicals or radiation), the action, dialogue and considerable reflection that takes place in more interactive training would be expected to create a sense of dread and realization of the dangers of the job.

This analysis offers practical implications for employers who may be hesitant to invest in the more expensive interactive training programs.

"Distance learning and electronic learning may appear to be more cost effective. But our findings point to the value of investing in more hands-on training to help prevent the enormous financial and human costs associated with disasters like the Upper Big Branch mine explosion," said Burke. "Our findings also show that the less expensive, and less interactive, training may be a good fit for workers who are not facing particularly hazardous situations on the job."


Journal Reference:

  1. Michael J. Burke, Rommel O. Salvador, Kristin Smith-Crowe, Suzanne Chan-Serafin, Alexis Smith, Shirley Sonesh. The dread factor: How hazards and safety training influence learning and performance.. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2011; 96 (1): 46 DOI: 10.1037/a0021838

Showing empathy to patients can improve care

Showing clinical empathy to patients can improve their satisfaction of care, motivate them to stick to their treatment plans and lower malpractice complaints, found a study published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

"Empathy is the ability to understand another's experience, to communicate and confirm that understanding with the other person and to then act in a helpful manner," writes Dr. Robert Buckman, Princess Margaret Hospital and the Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto. "Despite some overlap with other compassionate responses, particularly sympathy, empathy is distinct."

In clinical practice, physicians do not express empathic responses frequently. In a recent study where oncologists were video-recorded speaking with their patients, oncologists only responded to 22% of moments thought to be an empathic opportunity. Another more recent study involving oncologists and lung cancer patients showed the physicians responding to only 11% of empathic opportunities.

There is new evidence indicating that empathy is an important medical tool and it can be acquired and taught in medical school. "Clinical empathy is an essential medical skill that can be taught and improved, thereby producing changes in physician behaviour and patient outcomes."

"Our profession now needs to incorporate the teaching of clinical empathy more widely into clinical practice at all levels beginning with the selection of candidates for medical school," write the authors. "The behavioral aspects of empathy — the empathic response — can be assessed and integrated into medical schools' core communication skills training."

The authors conclude that physicians must also model an empathetic approach to patient care in the teaching environment.

Challenging the limits of learning: Linguist measures the human mind against the yardstick of a machine

— Although we're convinced that baby is brilliant when she mutters her first words, cognitive scientists have been conducting a decades-long debate about whether or not human beings actually "learn" language.

Most theoretical linguists, including the noted researcher Noam Chomsky, argue that people have little more than a "language organ" — an inherent capacity for language that's activated during early childhood. On the other hand, researchers like Dr. Roni Katzir of Tel Aviv University's Department of Linguistics insist that what humans can actually learn is still an open question — and he has built a computer program to try and find an answer.

"I have built a computer program that learns basic grammar using only the bare minimum of cognitive machinery — the bare minimum that children might have — to test the hypothesis that language can indeed be learned," says Dr. Katzir, a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (where he took classes taught by Chomsky) and a former faculty member at Cornell University. His early results suggest that the process of language acquisition might be much more active than the majority of linguists have assumed up until now.

Dr. Katzir's work was recently presented at a Cornell University workshop, where researchers from fields in linguistics, psychology, and computer science gathered to discuss learning processes.

A math model in mind

Able to learn basic grammar, the computer program relies on no preconceived assumptions about language or how it might be learned. Still in its early stages of development, the program helps Dr. Katzir explore the limits of learning — what kinds of information can a complex cognitive system like the human mind acquire and then store at the unconscious level? Do people "learn" language, and if so, can a computer be made to learn the same way?

Using a type of machine learning known as "unsupervised learning," Dr. Katzir has programmed his computer to "learn" simple grammar on its own. The program sees raw data and conducts a random search to find the best way to characterize what it sees.

The computer looks for the simplest description of the data using a criterion known as Minimum Description Length. "The process of human learning is similar to the way computers compress files: it searches for recognizable patterns in the data. Let's say, for instance, that you want to describe a string of 1,000 letters. You can be very naïve and list all the letters in order, or you can start to notice patterns — maybe every other character is a vowel — and use that information to give a more compact description. Once you understand something better, you can describe it more efficiently," he says.

Artificial intelligence for answering machines

His early results point to the conclusion that the computer, modeling the human mind, is indeed able to "learn" — that language acquisition need not be limited to choosing from a finite series of possibilities.

While it's primarily theoretical, Dr. Katzir's research may have applications in technologies such as voice dialogue systems: a computer that, on its own, can better understand what callers are looking for. A more advanced version of Dr. Katzir's program might learn natural language grammar and be able to process data received in a realistic setting, reflecting the manner in which humans actually talk.

The results of the research might also be applied to study how we learn to "read" visual images, and may be able to teach a robot how to reconstruct a three-dimensional space from a two-dimensional image and describe what it sees. Dr. Katzir plans to pursue this line of research with engineering colleagues at Tel Aviv University and abroad.

"Many linguists today assume that there are severe limits on what is learnable," Dr. Katzir says. "I take a much more optimistic view about those limitations and the capacity of humans to learn."

Better learning through handwriting

Writing by hand strengthens the learning process. When typing on a keyboard, this process may be impaired.

Associate professor Anne Mangen at the University of Stavanger's Reading Centre asks if something is lost in switching from book to computer screen, and from pen to keyboard.

The process of reading and writing involves a number of senses, she explains. When writing by hand, our brain receives feedback from our motor actions, together with the sensation of touching a pencil and paper. These kinds of feedback is significantly different from those we receive when touching and typing on a keyboard.

Learning by doing

Together with neurophysiologist Jean-Luc Velay at the University of Marseille, Anne Mangen has written an article published in the Advances in Haptics periodical. They have examined research which goes a long way in confirming the significance of these differences.

An experiment carried out by Velay's research team in Marseille establishes that different parts of the brain are activated when we read letters we have learned by handwriting, from those activated when we recognise letters we have learned through typing on a keyboard. When writing by hand, the movements involved leave a motor memory in the sensorimotor part of the brain, which helps us recognise letters. This implies a connection between reading and writing, and suggests that the sensorimotor system plays a role in the process of visual recognition during reading, Mangen explains.

Other experiments suggest that the brain's Broca's area is discernibly more activated when we are read a verb which is linked to a physical activity, compared with being read an abstract verb or a verb not associated with any action.

"This also happens when you observe someone doing something. You don't have to do anything yourself. Hearing about or watching some activity is often enough. It may even suffice to observe a familiar tool associated with a particular physical activity," Mangen says.

Since writing by hand takes longer than typing on a keyboard, the temporal aspect may also influence the learning process, she adds.

The term 'haptic' refers to the process of touching and the way in which we communicate by touch, particularly by using our fingers and hands to explore our surroundings. Haptics include both our perceptions when we relate passively to our surroundings, and when we move and act.

A lack of focus

There is a lot of research on haptics in relation to computer games, in which for instance vibrating hand controls are employed. According to Mangen, virtual drills with sound and vibration are used for training dentists.

But there has been very little effort to include haptics within the humanistic disciplines, she explains. In educational science, there is scant interest in the ergonomics of reading and writing, and its potential significance in the learning process.

Mangen refers to an experiment involving two groups of adults, in which the participants were assigned the task of having to learn to write in an unknown alphabet, consisting of approximately twenty letters. One group was taught to write by hand, while the other was using a keyboard. Three and six weeks into the experiment, the participants' recollection of these letters, as well as their rapidity in distinguishing right and reversed letters, were tested. Those who had learned the letters by handwriting came out best in all tests. Furthermore, fMRI brain scans indicated an activation of the Broca's area within this group. Among those who had learned by typing on keyboards, there was little or no activation of this area.

"The sensorimotor component forms an integral part of training for beginners, and in special education for people with learning difficulties. But there is little awareness and understanding of the importance of handwriting to the learning process, beyond that of writing itself," Mangen says.

She refers to pedagogical research on writing, which has moved from a cognitive approach to a focus on contextual, social and cultural relations. In her opinion, a one-sided focus on context may lead to neglect of the individual, physiological, sensorimotor and phenomenological connections.

Interdisciplinary collaboration

Within the field of psychology, there is an awareness of the danger of paying too much attention on mentality. According to Mangen, perception and sensorimotor now play a more prominent role.

"Our bodies are designed to interact with the world which surrounds us. We are living creatures, geared toward using physical objects — be it a book, a keyboard or a pen — to perform certain tasks," she says.

Being a media and reading researcher, Anne Mangen is a rare bird within her field of study. And she is very enthusiastic about her collaboration with a neurophysiologist.

"We combine very different disciplines. Velay has carried out some very exciting experiments on the difference between handwriting and the use of keyboards, from a neurophysiologic perspective. My contribution centres on how we — as humans with bodies and brains — experience the writing process, through using different technologies in different ways. And how these technologies' interfaces influence our experience," she concludes.

Helping schoolchildren learn the 'Sustainability Game'

An African field trip has inspired students and academics from the University of Leicester to develop a unique game for schools, to help children learn about sustainable living.

The Sustainability Game, which has already proved a hit with youngsters in Kenya, is now being made available to UK schools at a time of growing awareness and interest in 'green' and sustainability issues. There are currently more than 14,000 Eco-schools in the UK, and more than 1,000 have a Green Flag — indicating they have a strong whole-school commitment to environmental issues.

The game was inspired by a visit to Lake Bogoria by members of the University's Centre for Interdisciplinary Science. Students worked on a number of projects with local people, ranging from examining rare plant species to helping with water harvesting, on their module called 'Sustainable Livelihoods', part of a degree theme called Sustainability..

The game promotes the sustainable use of natural resources, and was devised in consultation with local people, who guided the students on the difficulties in their everyday lives and what issues were particularly important to them. It is based on a thousands of years-old game called Bao, played anywhere with stones and two rows of 8 hollows in the ground. Archaeologists have found the game's hollow pattern carved into rock at prehistoric sites.

Emma Tebbs, one of the students involved in developing the game and currently a PhD student and Graduate Teaching Assistant for the Interdisciplinary Science course, said: "The game teaches the students the importance of taking enough for their own needs without taking so much that the environment is damaged for future generations. It gives UK students the chance to think about what sustainability means in the context of a developing country, before relating it back to their own life."

Matt Howard, one of the University of Leicester students, played the game with local children.

He said: "Some of the students in the village enjoyed the game so much that they played it for four hours straight."

"Taking part in this trip has made me realise how we take the resources we use for granted. Hearing the local people talk about the effects of the recent droughts and understanding how important the resource of water is to the community, I have since been far more careful about how I use this precious resource now I am back home."

Children playing the Sustainability Game must learn how to use resources such as water, trees, swamps and pastures, crops, honey, wildlife and livestock. The game teaches them how closely these are interlinked and the impact of using each resource on all the others. The game is also used as part of the Sustainable Futures Masterclass offered by the University of Leicester Centre as outreach to school and colleges.

Teachers can download the game from the Centre's website, where a voluntary donation can be paid to help the local community at Lake Bogoria.

The game supports, and is supported by, short films about sustainability which have been made by Kenyan and Tanzanian film-makers, trained by a team of British film-makers under a project funded by the Darwin Initiative, called CBCF (Community-based Biodiversity Conservation Films), that Dr David Harper, the originator of the iScience module, directs.

Dr Harper is a Senior Lecturer in Ecology & Conservation Biology in the Biology Department and contributes to the iScience degree in ecology and sustainability issues. He has conducted scientific research in Kenya & Tanzania for over 25 years, focussed upon the sustainability of water — a highly limiting resources in an arid country like Kenya, which will shortly become limiting in a country like Britain where so much is wated.

A teacher's pack containing game materials and a short film on sustainability issues in Lake Bogoria is being developed and will be available shortly.

To download the game and for more information about the outreach courses, go to http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/interdisciplinary-science/outreach.

Learning while long-distance driving

Everyone learns differently. Research scientists have therefore developed a system which adapts learning content to specific individual requirements. LogiAssist addresses the needs of companies in the logistics sector and long-distance truck drivers. They can learn while out on the road using audio lectures, text documents or video.

The days are long gone when all you needed to be a truck driver was a heavy goods vehicle license and the ability to read a map. Nowadays it is a skilled occupation which requires lots of qualifications. Modern truck drivers have to operate electronic devices, adapt their routes expertly to the given traffic and loading situation, know how to drive fuel-efficiently, be up to date with statutory regulations and monitor the safety of their load. Then there is all the complex legislation introduced at EU level. What's more, drivers who make trips to other countries also need some knowledge of foreign languages and have to be familiar with the regulations applying in different countries. Modern truck drivers always have something new to learn, and are even obliged by law to keep up with developments. The problem is that they spend most of their time behind the wheel. Trucks only earn money when they are out on the road and so the driver's time for anything else is very limited.

With this in mind, research scientists at the Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT in Sankt Augustin, working in close cooperation with partners from the logistics and training sectors, have developed LogiAssist. "The purpose of the system is to help drivers and trucking firms handle their occupational training needs," explains project manager Dr. Martin Wolpers. The idea is for truckers to listen to an audio lecture after work, during their breaks, or even while driving, and to receive specifically tailored assistance while they are out on the road. Training content is offered via smart phone, tablet computer or laptop — in other words, on devices the driver already uses in his cab. It is tailored to the learning needs of the sector and can be adapted to the relevant context, taking account of prior knowledge, the driver, the vehicle, the load or the route.

The group of research scientists at the Fraunhofer FIT has been working for years on the development of such learning environments in the EU project ROLE — Responsive Open Learning Environments. "We are addressing the needs of several target groups," adds Wolpers. "These include university students, knowledge workers, suppliers of educational materials and also people with mobile non-desk jobs such as truck drivers — basically anyone who wants to learn by electronic means." The scientists have worked out standards and applications which enable learners to use a wide range of materials on an individually configured learning platform. The content can be put together from a kit of ready-made tools, which can be operated with the software users are familiar with, including the same browsers and search engines. People can also learn in groups and contact other participants on the online course by chat program, Outlook or Skype. The learning environment is designed to adapt to the learning and working style of the individual. Some may prefer to work through the course on screen using documents, others will mainly use short course sub-units on their cell phone as a video sequence or audio file.

From March 1 to 5 the Fraunhofer FIT will be demonstrating the practical application of these individual learning environments at CeBit in Hanover.

Researchers can predict your video game aptitude by imaging your brain

Researchers report that they can predict "with unprecedented accuracy" how well you will do on a complex task such as a strategic video game simply by analyzing activity in a specific region of your brain.

The findings, published in the online journal PLoS ONE, offer detailed insights into the brain structures that facilitate learning, and may lead to the development of training strategies tailored to individual strengths and weaknesses.

The new approach used established brain imaging techniques in a new way. Instead of measuring how brain activity differs before and after subjects learn a complex task, the researchers analyzed background activity in the basal ganglia, a group of brain structures known to be important for procedural learning, coordinated movement and feelings of reward.

Using magnetic resonance imaging and a method known as multivoxel pattern analysis, the researchers found significant differences in patterns of a particular type of MRI signal, called T2*, in the basal ganglia of study subjects. These differences enabled researchers to predict between 55 and 68 percent of the variance (differences in performance) among the 34 people who later learned to play the game.

"There are many, many studies, hundreds perhaps, in which psychometricians, people who do the quantitative analysis of learning, try to predict from SATs, GREs, MCATS or other tests how well you're going to succeed at something," said University of Illinois psychology professor and Beckman Institute director Art Kramer, who led the research. These methods, along with studies that look at the relative size of specific-brain structures, have had some success predicting learning, Kramer said, "but never to this degree in a task that is so complex."

"We take a fresh look at MRI images that are recorded routinely to investigate brain function," said Ohio State University psychology professor Dirk Bernhardt-Walther, who designed and performed the computational analysis together with Illinois electrical and computer engineering graduate student Loan Vo. "By analyzing these images in a new way, we find variations among participants in the patterns of brain activity in their basal ganglia," Bernhardt-Walther said. "Powerful statistical algorithms allow us to connect these patterns to individual learning success. Our method may be useful for predicting differences in abilities of individuals in other contexts as well," he said. "Testing this would be inexpensive because the method recycles MRI images that are recorded in many studies anyway."

After having their brains imaged, participants spent 20 hours learning to play Space Fortress, a video game developed at the University of Illinois in which players try to destroy a fortress without losing their own ship to one of several potential hazards. None of the subjects had much experience with video games prior to the study.

The game, which was designed to test participants' real-world cognitive skills, is quite challenging, Kramer said. It forces players to frequently shift their attention to pursue various goals or avoid threats. When they are first learning to play, study subjects "tend to start out with negative 2,000 points," he said. After 20 hours of training and practice, all the players' scores go up significantly. Some do much better than others, however, a difference that can be predicted to a large degree by analyzing activity in parts of the basal ganglia.

"We predict up to three times as much of the variance (in learning) as you would using performance measures," Kramer said. The researchers tested their results against other measures and replicated the findings in new trials with different study subjects.

The brain regions the researchers analyzed include the caudate (CAW'-date) nucleus and the putamen (pew-TAY'-min). These brain structures are active when one is engaged in learning new motor skills, such as moving a joystick, but they also are important in tasks that require one to strategize and quickly shift one's attention. A third region, the nucleus accumbens (ah-COME'-bins) is known to process emotions associated with reward or punishment.

The researchers found that patterns of activity in the putamen and caudate nucleus were better predictors of future performance than those in the nucleus accumbens. They also found that analyzing white matter (the axons and dendrites that carry signals between neurons), but not gray matter (the cell bodies), offered the best predictive power.

"Our data suggest that some persistent physiological and or neuroanatomical difference is actually the predictor of learning," Kramer said.

The findings should not be interpreted to mean that some people are destined to succeed or fail at a given task or learning challenge, however, Kramer said.

"We know that many of these components of brain structure and function are changeable," he said.


Journal Reference:

  1. Loan T K Vo, Dirk B Walther, Arthur F Kramer, Kirk I Erickson, Walter R Boot, Michelle W Voss, Ruchika S Prakash, Hyunkyu Lee, Monica Fabiani, Gabriele Gratton, Daniel J Simons, Bradley P Sutton, Michelle Y Wang. Predicting Individual's Learning Success From Patterns of Pre-learning MRI Activity. PLoS One, 14 Jan 2011 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016093

Writing about worries eases anxiety and improves test performance

— Students can combat test anxiety and improve performance by writing about their worries immediately before the exam begins, according to a University of Chicago study published in the journal Science.

Researchers found that students who were prone to test anxiety improved their high-stakes test scores by nearly one grade point after they were given 10 minutes to write about what was causing them fear, according to a study in the Jan. 14 issue of Science based on research supported by the National Science Foundation.

The writing exercise allowed students to unload their anxieties before taking the test and accordingly freed up brainpower needed to complete the test successfully — brainpower that is normally occupied by worries about the test, explained the study's senior author, Sian Beilock, an associate professor in psychology at the University.

In other research, Beilock has shown that pressure-filled situations can deplete a part of the brain's processing power known as working memory, which is critical to many everyday activities. Working memory is a sort of mental scratch pad that allows people to retrieve and use information relevant to the task at hand. But it is a limited resource, and when worries creep up, the working memory people normally use to succeed becomes overburdened. That can sap the brain power necessary to excel.

Beilock is one of the nation's leading experts on "choking under pressure" — a phenomenon in which talented people perform below their skill level when presented with a particularly challenging experience. Her recently published book, Choke: What the Secrets of the Brain Reveal About Getting It Right When You Have To, gives advice on how to avoid choking in situations ranging from high-stakes exams to important business presentations and athletic competitions.

"Despite the fact that people are often motivated to perform their best, the pressure-filled situations in which important tests, presentations and matches occur can cause people to perform below their ability level instead," Beilock said.

Joining Beilock on the study was her graduate student Gerardo Ramirez, an Institute of Education Sciences predoctoral fellow at UChicago.

Putting writing theory to the test

Other research has shown that expressive writing, in which people repeatedly write about a traumatic or emotional experience over several weeks or months, is an effective technique for decreasing worries in depressed individuals.

In the current research, the scholars wanted to determine if students could benefit from writing in the classroom, so they first tested college students to determine if writing about their anxieties improved their performance on a mathematics test.

"We reasoned that if worries lead to poor test performance, and writing helps regulate these worries, then giving students the opportunity to express their thoughts and feelings about an impending examination would enhance test performance," Beilock said.

The researchers also predicted that just one round of writing immediately before a big event would be sufficient to curb choking and boost students' test scores.

To test those ideas, researchers recruited 20 college students and gave them two short math tests. On the first test, students were told simply to do their best. Before the second test, researchers created a situation designed to produce stress, by saying students who performed well would receive money and that other students were depending on their performance as part of a team effort. Students also were told that their work would be videotaped, and that math teachers would review it.

Half of the students then received 10 minutes to write expressively about their feelings about the upcoming test (expressive writing group), and the other half was told to sit quietly (control group).

"The expressive writing group performed significantly better than the control group," the authors write. "Control participants 'choked under pressure,' showing a 12 percent accuracy drop from pre-test to post-test, whereas students who expressed their thoughts before the high-pressure test showed a significant 5 percent math accuracy improvement."

'Thinking about the consequences of failing'

In another experiment researchers showed that it wasn't just the act of writing that inoculated students against choking; rather, specifically writing about test-related thoughts and feelings had helped.

The researchers also conducted two experiments involving ninth-grade biology students taking the first final exam of their high school career. They tested the students for text anxiety six weeks before the final exam by asking students to rate items such as "During tests, I find myself thinking about the consequences of failing."

Before the biology finals, the students were given envelopes with directions to either write about their feelings on the test, or to think about topics that wouldn't be on the test. When researchers looked at students' final scores, they found that students who hadn't written had higher test anxiety and a worse final exam score — even when accounting for the student's grades throughout the school year.

However, for students given the opportunity to write before the exam, those highest in test anxiety performed just as well as their less anxious classmates. "Writing about your worries for 10 minutes before an upcoming exam leveled the playing field such that those students who usually get most anxious during exams were able to overcome their fears and perform up to their potential," Beilock said.

Indeed, students highly anxious about taking tests who wrote down their thoughts before the test received an average grade of B+, compared with the highly anxious students who didn't write, who received an average grade of B-.

Even if a teacher does not provide a chance to write before an exam, students can take time to write about their worries and should accordingly improve their performance, Beilock said. "In fact, we think this type of writing will help people perform their best in variety of pressure-filled situations — whether it is a big presentation to a client, a speech to an audience or even a job interview," she explained.

"Choking is a serious problem, given that poor exam performance affects students' subsequent academic opportunities," she said. "It also limits potentially qualified students from participating in the talent pool tapped to fill advance jobs where the work force in dwindling, such as those in science, technology and engineering."


Journal Reference:

  1. Gerardo Ramirez, Sian L. Beilock. Writing About Testing Worries Boosts Exam Performance in the Classroom. Science, 2011; 331 (6014): 211-213 DOI: 10.1126/science.1199427