Difference between revisions of "Tem"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
m
Line 1: Line 1:
==9: SEP 29==
+
==8: SEP 30==
  
===Assigned===
+
===Some questions I'm considering for a student "engagement" survey===
  
:*Robert Sapolsky, C 13, "Morality" pp. 483-493
+
:*Do you feel there is less participation in "hybrid" courses such as ours vs. similar traditional face-to-face courses?
:*Haidt, Chapter 4, "Vote for Me (Here's Why)" (23)
+
:*Do you like the option of turning your video off?
 +
:*Why do you like the option of turning your video off?
 +
:*Do you turn video on in break out rooms?
 +
:*Would it helpful to turn video on during times when questions or discussion are solicited from the whole class?
 +
:*Would you like me to make more use of Zoom options to express agreement, etc?
 +
:*Are there other things I could do or we could do to improve the course experience in any way?
  
===Point on Method===
+
===Assigned Reading===
  
:*A way of framing the research we are reviewing (and some we are not):  Three Frames:
+
:*Kessler, The End of Overeating, Chs 1-9 pp. 3-45
::*1. Differences and Structures in our individual psychology for expression moral behaviors.(Evolved psychology.)
 
::*2. Differences that emerge from the interactions of individuals in a society or culture. (Evolved social behaviors.)
 
::*3. Differences between cultures, including, for example the remarkable emergence of WEIRD culture.  (Joe Henrich, The Weirdest People on Earth) -- mention relevance for happiness.  (Culturally evolved cognition and behaviors.)
 
  
:*Now that we are piling on the more research results, we should make sure our research strategy in the course makes sense:  So far:
+
===Kessler, The End of Overeating, Chs 1-9 pp. 3-45===
::*1. The evolution of social behavior takes us deep into the nature of morality, but it is incomplete for various reasons.  (big reasony brains make free moves (like "rights"!) much of the evo machinery needs to be "deployed" to work, no answers from evolution to today's problems.
 
::*2. Reason and intuition (rider and elephant) characterize our individual moral experience. We are still filling in our picture of reasoning in morals.  
 
::*3. There are important asymmetries in our moral experience: Paradox of Moral Experience, and, today, the Fundamental Attribution Error.  (These, and other research results in this unit, hold profound "practical lessons" for improving moral deliberation and avoiding moral polarization (in which groups not only disagree, but see each other as morally inferior).)
 
  
:*Please start tracking "Practical Lessons" in your notes.
+
:*Some comments about approaching "unhealthy eating patterns" (expand list), some baseline data, and Kessler's basic theory.
  
===Sapolsky. Behave. C 13, 483-493===
+
C1
  
Rough topics:
+
:*obesity trend of the 1980s.  by late 80s 1/3 of pop bt. 20 and 74 overweight(2017: 42.4% obese (note: not just overweight).   J
:*Origins of Social/Moral Intuitions in Babies and Monkeys and Chimps
 
::*infants track commission better than ommission, as in adults.
 
::*infants show signs of moral reasoning -- baby helper studies, baby sweets study - rewards helper, baby secondary friends study (484)
 
::*capuchin monkey study (deWaal) - monkey fairness. (demonstrated also with macaques monkeys, crows, ravens, and dogs), details on 485google "crows solving puzzles" or "elephants solving puzzles"  animals are much more intelligent than we have historically understood.
 
::*Chimp version of Ultimatum Game - in the deWaal version, chimps tend toward equity unless they can give the token directly to the grape dispensers. 486
 
::*also studies for fairness without loss of self-interest and "other regarding preferences", but not in chimps! Keep this in mind the next time you are in a position to get justice from a chimp.
 
::*in one inequity study the advantaged monkey (the one who gets grapes) stops working as well.  solidarity?
 
::*Interesting comment: '''human morality transcends species boundary'''. starts before us.
 
  
::*(Add in the Joseph Stalin reference from Ch. 10He said he couldn't trust a guy who would rat out his relatives.)
+
:*Historic comparisons: 1960-2000, average weight of women in their 20s goes from 128 to 157. Also other decilesData also revealed that some people were gaining a lot more than the average.   
:*Exemptions for testifying against relatives and vmPFC patients who will trade relatives in Trolley situations
 
::*vmPFC damaged patient will sacrifice a relative to save four non-relatives.   
 
::*Interesting note about criminal law exemptions.
 
  
:*Neuroscience of the Trolley Problem and "Intuition discounting"
+
C2
::*dlPFC in level condition and vmPFC in bridge condition.
 
::*Greene's hypothesis: in level condition the killing of the one is a side-effect.  In bridge condition, its ''because'' of the killing.  Different kinds of intentionality.
 
::*Loop condition -- you know you have to kill the person on the side track, should be like bridge condition, but test subjects match level condition.
 
::*Hypothesis: Intuitions are local; heavily discounted for time and space.  (Think of other examples of this.)  Stories in which your reaction to something changes when you learn where it happens.
 
::*related point about proximity - leave money around vs. cokes.  Cokes disappear. One step from money and the rationalization is easier.  Singer's pool scenario vs. sending money for absolute poverty relief.
 
::*priming study on cheating involving bankers.  492 - shows "intuition discounting" when primed to think about work identity. 
 
  
:*Neuroscience of the Fundamental Attribution Error
+
:*obesity is the result of eating too much foodConfusing to separate metabolism, etc. People underreport consumption. Studies to support claimsP.
::*p. 492: "but this circumstance is different" - neuro-evidence for the Fundamental Attribution Error [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error]
 
::*we judge ourselves by internal motives and others by external actionsOur failings/successes elicit shame/pride others elicit anger or indignation and emulation (envy?).
 
:*Study showing that putting people under stress causes more egoistic judgements, at least about personal moral issues.
 
::*Ariely: cheating not limited by risk but rationalization.
 
  
===Haidt, Chapter 4, "Vote for Me (Here's Why)"===
+
:*homeostasis:  tendency of body systems to maintain bodily states within a particular range of variation.  Communication occurs throughout the body to this end.  But homeostasis can’t explain weight gain. Homeostasic system can be overwhelmed by the “reward system”.  Anticipations of reward motivate exertion.  Some animal studies show direct stimulation of reward seeking behavior.  Even to cross electrified floor. 
  
:*Ring of Gyges 
+
:*Can some kinds of food stimulate us to keep eating?
:*Functionalism in psychology
 
:*Reminder of big theoretical choice about ethics.  (74) Is function of ethics truth discovery or pursuit of socially strategic goals?
 
  
:*Tetlock: accountability research
+
C3
::*Exploratory vs. Confirmatory thought
 
::*Conditions promoting exploratory thought
 
:::*1) knowing ahead of time that you'll be called to account;
 
:::*2) not knowing what the audience thinks;
 
:::*3) believing that the audience is well informed and interested in truth or accuracy.
 
  
:*Section 1: Obsessed with polls
+
:*palatability - def. a food with an agreeable taste, but in food science - a food that motivates more consumption. [Let's think about the definition a bit: Does it have to be connected to overconsumption?]
:*Leary's research on self-esteem importance"sociometer" -- non-conscious level mostly.
 
  
:*Section 2: Confirmation bias and exploratory thought
+
:*palatable foods engage sugar, salt, and fat, but also sensory cues.  Research (13) on combined effects of sugar and fat. Underlies many palatable features of food. Combinations of fat and sugar chosen over other mixes. Can make food hyperpalatable. [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/11/191105104436.htm Example] of "hyper-palatability" in industry and as a research concept in food science.
:*Confirmation bias
 
::*Wasson again -- number series
 
::*Deann Kuhn -- 80: We are horrible at theorizing (requiring exploratory thought)....
 
::*David Perkins research on reason giving
 
  
:*Section 3: We're really good at finding rationalizations for things.
+
:*15: research showing that consumption of SFS optimized foods increases further consumption(Very consequential, if true!)
:*more examples of people behaving as Glaucon would have predictedMembers of parliament, Ariely, ''Predictably Irrational'',  
 
  
:*Section 4: Can I believe it vs. Must I believe it
+
:*Sclafani researchNeat fruit-loop lab detailJust chillin' with his rats.: feeding rats a supermarket sample of palatable food makes them obese.
:*more evidence of reason in the service of desire: Can I believe it? vs. Must I believe it? We keep two different standards for belief-assent.
 
:*"motivated reasoning" - 84ff.
 
  
:*Section 5: Application to political beliefs: Partisan Brains
+
:*Some palatability research not in the reading:
::*Does self interest or group affiliation predict policy preferences?  Not so much self-interest.  We are groupish.
+
::*[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5332909/ Can the Palatability of Healthy, Satiety-Promoting Foods Increase with Repeated Exposure during Weight Loss?]
::*Drew Westen's fMRI research on strongly partisan individuals. We feel threat to dissonant information (like hypocrisy or lying) about our preferred leader, but no threat, or even pleasure, at the problems for the opponent.  the partisan brain.  Difference in brain activation did not seem to be rational/cog (dlPFC).  bit of dopamine after threat passes.
+
::*
::*Research suggests that ethicists are not more ethical than others. (89  Schwitzgebel)
 
::*Mercier and Sperber.  [https://www.dan.sperber.fr/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/MercierSperberWhydohumansreason.pdf Why Do Humans Reason?]
 
::*Good thinking as an emergent property. individual neurons vs. networks.  analogy to social intelligence. 
 
::*Statement, 90, on H's view of political life in light of this way of theorizing. read and discuss.  introduce term "social epistemology"
 
  
===Small Group discussion===
+
C4
  
::*We all have examples from social life of people who are more or less interested in exploratory thought and holding themselves accountable to external information and "their side" arguments.   
+
:*examples of foods that layer S F and S.  (Gordy's lemon chicken, much like p. 20 "Chicken Pot Stickers")
::*Share examples of the verbal and non-verbal behaviors of people who are not very good at exploratory thought and inviting diversity of viewpoint in social settings (other people, of course).   
+
 
::*Then, try to consider or recall the behaviors of people who do the oppositeWhat are some verbal or other behaviors that you can use to indicate to others' that you are open to having your views examined? What have you noticed about the practices of people who are good at generating viewpoint diversity in social setting?
+
:* reports from food execs confirming that industrial food design focuses on highly stimulating and palatable foods.  Common popular restaurant foods described in terms of stacking fat on fat on sugar on salt on fat, ... etc.  fat with a little lettuce!
 +
 
 +
C5
 +
 
 +
:*critical of “set point theory” more interested in version he calls “settling point” theory.  A kind of equilibrium between appetite (which both a drive to eat and capacity to be satisfied and expenditure - physical work and body that burns calories effectively.  Constant access to highly palatable foods drives up '''settling point'''.    (Kind of acknowledges that there is wide variation in the hold (capture) of high SFS foods.   
 +
 
 +
:*p. 25: Discussion with other people who find weight control challenging.  note descriptions.  Important qualification: Food cravings are not unique to overweight people.  Significance of this section, I think: Most of you probably don't have similar reactions.  His point. 
 +
 
 +
C6
 +
 
 +
:*rewarding foods are reinforcing.  Reinforcing measured by willingness to work for substance and whether other stimuli can become associated with it.  (Mention Neurogastronomy coming later to show how this works.)
 +
 
 +
:*food can be an effective reward even in the absence of hunger.  Animal studies to show this. 
 +
 
 +
:* “conditioned place paradigm”. — tendency to prefer the location in which a reward was experience. 
 +
 
 +
:*Other influences:  portion, concentration of rewarding ingredients, variety.   
 +
 
 +
C7
 +
 
 +
:*Neural account of high SFS / palatable foods.  Neuron encodes when it fires more often from a stimuli.  Complex patterns can be encoded from food experience. 
 +
 
 +
:* Taste is predominant.  “Orosensory self-stimulation”.  Opioid circuitry stimulated by food.  P. 37: mechanisms of the reward system.  Imp of nucleus accumbens. 
 +
 
 +
:*Claims there is a mutually reinforcing effect between highly palatable foods and opioid circuits.   
 +
 
 +
:* Some evidence (Wooley p. 38) that highly palatable foods interfere with or override taste specific satiety (a mechanism that should reduce the reward experience of food at margins), which predicts that we will get tired of a single taste more quickly than if other tastes are present. Stimulation of the opioid circuits in animals overrode boredom with single taste.

Revision as of 20:28, 30 September 2020

8: SEP 30

Some questions I'm considering for a student "engagement" survey

  • Do you feel there is less participation in "hybrid" courses such as ours vs. similar traditional face-to-face courses?
  • Do you like the option of turning your video off?
  • Why do you like the option of turning your video off?
  • Do you turn video on in break out rooms?
  • Would it helpful to turn video on during times when questions or discussion are solicited from the whole class?
  • Would you like me to make more use of Zoom options to express agreement, etc?
  • Are there other things I could do or we could do to improve the course experience in any way?

Assigned Reading

  • Kessler, The End of Overeating, Chs 1-9 pp. 3-45

Kessler, The End of Overeating, Chs 1-9 pp. 3-45

  • Some comments about approaching "unhealthy eating patterns" (expand list), some baseline data, and Kessler's basic theory.

C1

  • obesity trend of the 1980s. by late 80s 1/3 of pop bt. 20 and 74 overweight. (2017: 42.4% obese (note: not just overweight). J
  • Historic comparisons: 1960-2000, average weight of women in their 20s goes from 128 to 157. Also other deciles. Data also revealed that some people were gaining a lot more than the average.

C2

  • obesity is the result of eating too much food. Confusing to separate metabolism, etc. People underreport consumption. Studies to support claims. P.8
  • homeostasis: tendency of body systems to maintain bodily states within a particular range of variation. Communication occurs throughout the body to this end. But homeostasis can’t explain weight gain. Homeostasic system can be overwhelmed by the “reward system”. Anticipations of reward motivate exertion. Some animal studies show direct stimulation of reward seeking behavior. Even to cross electrified floor.
  • Can some kinds of food stimulate us to keep eating?

C3

  • palatability - def. a food with an agreeable taste, but in food science - a food that motivates more consumption. [Let's think about the definition a bit: Does it have to be connected to overconsumption?]
  • palatable foods engage sugar, salt, and fat, but also sensory cues. Research (13) on combined effects of sugar and fat. Underlies many palatable features of food. Combinations of fat and sugar chosen over other mixes. Can make food hyperpalatable. Example of "hyper-palatability" in industry and as a research concept in food science.
  • 15: research showing that consumption of SFS optimized foods increases further consumption. (Very consequential, if true!)
  • Sclafani research. Neat fruit-loop lab detail. Just chillin' with his rats.: feeding rats a supermarket sample of palatable food makes them obese.
  • Some palatability research not in the reading:

C4

  • examples of foods that layer S F and S. (Gordy's lemon chicken, much like p. 20 "Chicken Pot Stickers")
  • reports from food execs confirming that industrial food design focuses on highly stimulating and palatable foods. Common popular restaurant foods described in terms of stacking fat on fat on sugar on salt on fat, ... etc. fat with a little lettuce!

C5

  • critical of “set point theory” more interested in version he calls “settling point” theory. A kind of equilibrium between appetite (which both a drive to eat and capacity to be satisfied and expenditure - physical work and body that burns calories effectively. Constant access to highly palatable foods drives up settling point. (Kind of acknowledges that there is wide variation in the hold (capture) of high SFS foods.
  • p. 25: Discussion with other people who find weight control challenging. note descriptions. Important qualification: Food cravings are not unique to overweight people. Significance of this section, I think: Most of you probably don't have similar reactions. His point.

C6

  • rewarding foods are reinforcing. Reinforcing measured by willingness to work for substance and whether other stimuli can become associated with it. (Mention Neurogastronomy coming later to show how this works.)
  • food can be an effective reward even in the absence of hunger. Animal studies to show this.
  • “conditioned place paradigm”. — tendency to prefer the location in which a reward was experience.
  • Other influences: portion, concentration of rewarding ingredients, variety.

C7

  • Neural account of high SFS / palatable foods. Neuron encodes when it fires more often from a stimuli. Complex patterns can be encoded from food experience.
  • Taste is predominant. “Orosensory self-stimulation”. Opioid circuitry stimulated by food. P. 37: mechanisms of the reward system. Imp of nucleus accumbens.
  • Claims there is a mutually reinforcing effect between highly palatable foods and opioid circuits.
  • Some evidence (Wooley p. 38) that highly palatable foods interfere with or override taste specific satiety (a mechanism that should reduce the reward experience of food at margins), which predicts that we will get tired of a single taste more quickly than if other tastes are present. Stimulation of the opioid circuits in animals overrode boredom with single taste.