Friday, March 27, 2015

SfN Hill Day


Yesterday was SfN Hill Day, an annual event in which neuroscientists advocate for the importance of biomedical research and funding. From the SfN website, they note that the purpose of the event is to
"Meet with their congressional representatives to discuss advances in the field of neuroscience, share the economic and public health benefits of investment in biomedical research, and make the case for strong national investment in scientific research through NIH and NSF."
I searched through the hashtag, #SfNHillDay and recorded the Senators and Representatives (or staffers) that were tagged as having met scientists. In total, 18 Senators and 24 Representatives met with scientists to discuss the importance of funding and investment in neuroscience research. I found the timing of the Hill Day interesting as Rick Domann, a Professor from the University of Iowa has recently tweeted a few interesting articles about science funding in the US including one from Science Magazine where 1000 senior investigators dropped out last year and one from Research Trends about the NIH. Together these two articles suggest problems in biomedical funding. While I am all for more money being responsibly invested in biomedical research, in particular neuroscience, we should first consider fixing a broken system.

Going forward, it will be interesting to watch how these 42 congress people vote and advocate for science funding. As the 2015 NIH budget looks relatively flat, I wonder what the future of funding will look like. Will public funding levels continue to decrease and will we see a rise in crowdfunding of science? As scientists look towards this bureaucratic bypass I wonder what types of institutional oversight and quality control measures will be put forth in order to make sure that the best studies are being put forward for the opportunity of crowdfunding.

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

BetaBoost Brain Serum

BetaBoost is your brain but better. Natural ingredients match your own endogenous chemicals and they probably even cross the blood-brain-barrier. After bringing together the world's best neuroscientists, nutritionists and food scientists, we've created the first scientifically tested and validated neuroenhancer and nootropic. Whatever your brain problem is fogginess, tiredness, depression, concentration or even intelligence, BetaBoost has you covered. Mention the keyword EngagedBrain to receive 10% off your first 12 pack of BetaBoost.

Disclaimer: This is a work of satire. In the tradition of A Prairie Home Companion, this ad, among others, will form the backbone of the underwriting and sponsorship of my podcast.

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

"Noncognitive" Contributions to College Success


FiveThirtyEight blog, the site that makes statistics cool, is best known for predicting political races and athletic performance (especially baseball), but has recently began expanding into a number of new frontiers. This week the blog questioned how we traditionally predict college success. Although it varies across colleges and universities, the traditional application materials include high school GPA, standardized test scores, letters of recommendation and personal essays. The blog notes that a score of 1550 on the SAT (about 52-61% on the subcategories) give a student a 65% chance of attaining a B- average in the first year and a 69% chance of graduating within 6 years, while students scoring below 1550 have a 45% chance of graduating within 6 years. For ACT scores, a student with a 22 (out of 36) in math have a 50% chance of attaining a B in college algebra. However, only 40% of test takers hit college readiness levels in 3 or 4 of the tested subjects and 33% of test takers didn't meet benchmarks in any subject.

However, many argue that standardized tests do not accurately predict college performance like William Hiss who was quoted in the article saying:
“What we have found is that in a significant number of cases, the students who have perfectly sound high school records, but much less impressive SAT scores, do fine in college”
Besides arguing about the value of using standardized test scores and high school GPA to predict college success, FiveThirtyEight wades into their favorite territory of using esoteric and mystical measures like "noncognitive" measures to predict future performance. The mention skills like grit, motivation and perseverance (which are all sound like synonyms of conscientiousness - but I guess I shouldn't question something that was awarded a MacArther Fellowship) as well as the "hidden curriculum" which includes scheduling meetings and reaching out to the right people for help.

From my own experience in college, graduate school and teaching a number of first-year college courses I've developed a number of suggestions for first-year college students transitioning from high school. At Coe College, I asked first-year students to write wiki entries about topics that are important for first-year students, but these were topics that college students should be aware of or face, not topics that would necessarily help them transition to college.

In no particular order these are my suggestions to help students handle the challenges of college:

Join a club, sport or activity that gets you to campus early. While many campuses offer a week zero or transition week for first-year students, any chance to spend as much time on campus as possible and meet older students gives you a chance to get advice from people who have gone through what you are going through and explore the campus without the scheduled events of week zero. In my experience, I played soccer and was able to move to campus more than a week before week zero and met all of the other athletes on campus early, make friends on the team and explore campus, including moving into my dorm room first before the rest of the first-year class.

Time-management. Most students are used to going to class for some number of hours straight and when faced with a college schedule that could include an 8:00AM class and a 6:00PM class with nothing in between can get lost. A typical class schedule may include 3 M/W/F 50 minute classes a 3 hour lab and 1 T/Th 80 min class which means only a little over 13 hours in class. Depending on the course, it is suggested that you study 2-4 hours per hour in class which means somewhere between 26 and 52 hours of studying per week. This means that you should spend between 39 and 65 hours per week on school material or between 5.6 and 9.2 hours per day. If you make sure you get your sleep and get 8 hours per day you have between 6.7 and 10.3 hours per day left to work, participate in extracurriculars, and have fun. After working a 20 hour per week part time job you'll have between 7.4 and 3.8 hours per day for extracurriculars and fun. To some people, this may not sound like much but if you plan and use your time well, then it works well. This works especially well if you plan your part time job well. For example if you have a job that allows you to spend a lot of your time studying (e.g., office work, dorm front desk) or allows you to save money (e.g., working in the cafeteria or at a restaurant and getting free meals every shift) then you can double up on your time. Another great use of your part-time job is to use it as an applied study of what you're interested in for a career.

Engagement. Most of the complaints that I hear about higher education (e.g., teachers not teaching enough, students not learning, etc.) come from a misunderstanding of what college does and is for. In my experience this misunderstanding is addressed above in the time management section, that college is limited to the 39-65 hours per week going to class and studying for class. Before describing other aspects of engagement, engagement starts in the classroom. If the material isn't something that you're interested in, engage in the basic/broad skills that underlie every course. No, teachers do not spend only 3 or 13 hours a week working, no, students do not spend 40 hours a week "going to college" and spend the rest of it partying. To me, some of the most important parts of college come outside of the classroom and studying for class in the form of engaging with something. This could be engaging with the material that your learning in an applied way like an internship or research experience. This could be from the club or extracurricular you join. While a number of people note that they need to work as many hours as possible to even have the ability to attend college, I counter that unless your jobs are helping you in someway (e.g., allowing you to study, reduce spending in some area or preparing you for your future employment) you should cap study at 20 hours per week. Students should take every opportunity to engage in their interests as possible and also check what their college offers. Most colleges offer a number of hidden gems that are sometimes not widely advertised. These gems range from assistance with courses (e.g., writing/math centers, tutoring), help finding jobs (e.g., work study, alumni foundation) and preparing for your future. Earlier I noted that college students studying 10.3 hours, working 2.85 hours and sleeping 8 hours a day still have 3.8 hours a day to participate in extracurriculars and have fun. These ~4 hours are probably among the most important in college and the part that separates successful from unsuccessful use of your time in college.

Look for and ask for help. College is hard and it is almost impossible to do by yourself. The blog noted the "hidden curriculum" of college and while it is difficult for some people, its important to reach out. In a limited version of this advice, I always urge students to visit office hours at least once. In a broader version, colleges have a number of avenues to help you find help. In courses you can either reach out to the professor or in larger sections, the TA. In your dorm you can reach out to your RA/JC and outside those domains, you can often find offices for health and academic support. I had some difficulty transitioning academically and reached out to two of my professors first semester to help me in their courses. Colleges and Universities may even have special organizations set up to help people. At the University of Iowa I was a mentor in Critical MASS which helped students after they faced trouble or problems in order to help them find things they were interested in or helped them achieve goals.

These suggestions are fairly broad but can help lead to more specific advice. I'd be interested to hear what other people suggest would help students transition to college. Relating back to the FiveThirtyEight blog, I'd suggest students who have good time-management are willing to engage, and who are willing to reach out for help would have the best chance for success.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

BrainSonic

BrainSonic measures the electrical activity of your brain allowing you to change your behavior based on your brain's activity. Paired with the BrainSonic smartphone app you'll be able to decrease stress, changing not only your emotional state, but over time your emotional traits and increase attention helping you remember and accomplish more. Just make sure you hold still while using our headset so you don't introduce any eye, muscle or heart related artifacts in the signal ruining our patented algorithm that extracts information from our 8 channels of electrodes. Use the promo-code "Engaged" to receive 10% off your first headset.

Disclaimer: This is a work of satire. In the tradition of A Prairie Home Companion, this ad, among others, will form the backbone of the underwriting and sponsorship of my podcast.

International Science Research Journals

International Science Research Journal (ISRJ) is an online publisher of the world's highest impact, most cutting-edge research. As a leader in open-access (OA), ISRJ caters to only the most interdisciplinary, highest-impact research. While keeping the highest editorial standards we have the fastest peer-review guarantee with a maximum turnaround time of 24 hours. We have a lower acceptance rate (on first submission) than Nature or Science (although upon second submission there is an almost 100% acceptance rate). For only the low rate of $400 to submit, $100 for each figure, $50 for each appendix, $25 for each author, and $10 for each affiliation you can submit a manuscript. Also note for each citation you give to the journal you receive a $5 discount on your submission fee, which reminds us that our impact factor is 46.4.

Disclaimer: This is a work of satire. In the tradition of A Prairie Home Companion, this ad, among others, will form the backbone of the underwriting and sponsorship of my podcast.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Brain Learning Institute

The field of education is a largely untapped resources begging to be milked year after year for profit. Currently only textbooks are able to run rampant in the sector with massive profit margins that can be kept high by releasing new editions or locking the actual use of book (e.g., submitting problem sets) behind DRMs and paywalls. While education is slow to change and adapt on a large scale, pseudo-neuroscience/education evangelists are trying to find ways into education through gimmicky technologies and promises. At the Brain Learning Institute we work to inoculate educators and administrators from neuroscience snake oil salesmen by debunking neuro-ed myths. No more 10% myth, no more left/right brain learners and no more learning style differences. By making an investment early, you can avoid the pain of buying into false neuroeducational practices and products.

Disclaimer: This is a work of satire. In the tradition of A Prairie Home Companion, this ad, among others, will form the backbone of the underwriting and sponsorship of my podcast.

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

March Madness


March Madness not only brings us 64 games of drama filled college basketball, but the opportunity to hear about how psychological principles apply to even the most fun events in our lives. Below are a few of the most common concepts that we'll encounter over the next two weeks.


Superstition
Your unwashed lucky jersey, a pregame meal of Skittles and a steak, a ridiculous coordinated handshake a pigeons spinning in circles all share something in common: superstition. There is a tendency to infer causality between closely occurring events with positive secondary events (e.g., winning a game, getting a food reward) more likely to cause a repetition of the first event (e.g. not tying your shoes) in the future, while negative secondary events (e.g., losing the game, not getting food) are more likely to case a decrease in repeating the first event in the future. Operant conditioning breaks a behavior down into tiny reinforceable pieces. B.F. Skinner explored conditioning and reinforcement in his study of radical behaviorism. With pigeons and rats he was able to shape behavior through different types of reinforcement applied on various schedules. In sports we can see the principles of behaviorism in rituals developed by athletes and fans alike. Even picking brackets may be influenced from year to year when you win your previous seasons bracket by choosing which mascot could beat up the other.

Lesson: Unless you make the game winning shot, almost anything you do will have little effect on the outcome of the games you watch or the teams you cheer for



Hot Hand
The hot hand fallacy is the false belief that previous success in a random event will lead to a greater chance of further success. In basketball, the hot hand fallacy is that after a player hits two shots in a row, they will be more likely to hit the next shot. Instead of viewing the probability of a player making a shot over the long-term, people are more likely to view smaller sequences of hot and cold streaks (i.e. clustering illusion). More broadly humans are constantly finding patterns within random sequences (Gilovich et al., 1985).

Lesson: Don't give the ball to the career 29% shooter who's hit 4/5 for the last shot over the career 47% shooter.



Underdogs
So called Cinderella teams may be the most exciting parts of the annual March Madness. These "bracket-busters"seeds 9-15 (we can't include 16 as they have never beat a 1 team) can place their school on the map, from the 1985 Villanova Wildcats, to the 2006 George Mason Patriots, and capture a place in America's favorite narrative. However, even if we like the narrative, the odds are not in the favor of Cinderella teams. Ignoring the issues of human rankings of teams we see that the better team usually wins.

Lesson: Yes teams ranked lower by humans win games, but win we look at statistical rankings of teams, the better team usually wins.

So as we finish filling out our brackets we can be reminded of the psychological issues that interface with all aspects of our lives or just sit down and watch some basketball.