The Science of Laughter--And Why It Also Has a Dark Side

{ http://ift.tt/2oXq5jC

The following essay is reprinted with permission from The Conversation, an online publication covering the latest research.

When you hear someone laugh behind you, you probably picture them on the phone or with a friend – smiling and experiencing a warm, fuzzy feeling inside. Chances are just the sound of the laughter could make you smile or even laugh along. But imagine that the person laughing is just walking around alone in the street, or sitting behind you at a funeral. Suddenly, it doesn’t seem so inviting.

The truth is that laughter isn’t always positive or healthy. According to science, it can be classified into different types, ranging from genuine and spontaneous to simulated (fake), stimulated (for example by tickling), induced (by drugs) or even pathological. But the actual neural basis of laughter is still not very well known – and what we do know about it largely comes from pathological clinical cases.

Laughter and the appreciation of humour are vital components of adaptive social, emotional and cognitive function. Surprisingly, they are not uniquely human. Primates and apes also enjoy a good chuckle. This may have evolved because it helps them survive. Laughter is, after all, a communal activity which promotes bonding, diffuses potential conflict and eases stress and anxiety. But it loses its momentum quickly when indulged in alone (solitary laughter can have ominous connotations).

Laughter does have the power to override other emotions momentarily – we cannot sob morosely or simmer with anger while simultaneously laughing. This is because our facial muscles and vocal architecture have been hijacked by sunnier emotions. And it is all controlled by specialised brain circuits and chemical messengers (neurotransmitters).

We know there are several brain pathways that contribute to laughter – each for different components of it. For example, brain regions usually involved in decision-making and controlling our behaviour have to be inhibited to facilitate spontaneous and unbridled laughter. Laughter also relies on emotional circuitry connecting areas responsible for experiencing emotion with those required for expressing emotion.

What illness can teach us

While we have garnered detailed knowledge of brain features crucial for facial expressions, swallowing, tongue and throat movements, far less is known about how positive emotions actually get transformed into laughter. Luckily, a number of illnesses and conditions have helped shed some light on its underlying neural functions.

One particularly well documented syndrome, thought to be first identified by Charles Darwin, involves an unsettling exhibition of uncontrolled emotion. It is clinically characterised by frequent, involuntary and uncontrollable outbursts of laughing and crying. This is a distressing disorder of emotional expression at odds with the person’s underlying feelings. The condition is known as pseudobulbar affect syndrome and may be expressed in several different neurological conditions.

Briefly summarised, the condition arises from a disconnect between the frontal “descending pathways” in the brainstem – which control emotional drives – and the circuits and pathways that govern facial and emotional expression. Some disorders specifically associated with the condition include traumatic brain injury, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis and stroke.

Indeed, a study last year found that an increasingly twisted sense of humour and laughing at inappropriate times could be an early indication of dementia. Pseudobulbar affect syndrome is also one of the most common reported side effects of stroke in terms of emotional change. And given the high incidence of stroke each year, the condition is likely to be highly prevalent in the general population.

There are a number of other specific conditions that may also be associated with abnormal brain wiring. Gelotophobia is an intense fear of being laughed at. Gelotophilia, on the other hand, is the enjoyment of being laughed at. The related condition katagelasticism, meanwhile, is the joy of laughing at others.

Gelotophobia, in particular, can develop into an extreme, joy-sapping anxiety that ranges from social ineptness to severe depression. It may induce vigilant environmental monitoring for any signs of ridicule. This abnormal fear of being mocked may arise from negative early life experiences of being teased, mocked or laughed at. Imaging data show that gelotophobia is associated with poor connectivity between frontal and medial temporal brain areas, networks responsible for monitoring and processing emotional stimuli.

We also know that frontal brain circuits enable us to interpret the literal meaning of language in a social and emotional context. This helps us appreciate subtle humour like sarcasm. Interestingly, this ability is often lost after frontal brain injury, or in conditions associated with frontal dysfunction, for example autism.

Healthy laughter

Despite the dark side of laughter, there is no denying that laughter generally induces warm fuzzy feelings. We know that laughing enhances cardiovascular function, fortifying our immune and endocrine systems.

We also know that positive, “benevolent humour” – “laughing with” rather than “laughing at” others – is especially rewarding. Indeed the way our brains process other peoples’ laughter seems to indicate that laughing with someone has more emotional depth and is more pleasurable than laughing at them.

Indeed, our brains seem particularly affected by emotionally rewarding and authentic happy signals. This might help explain why laughter therapy has been shown to have potent effects. These include muscle workout, improved respiration, decreased stress and anxiety and improved mood and resilience. Laughter therapy has even been shown to function similarly to antidepressants by raising serotonin levels in the brain, a crucial neurotransmitter vital for feelings of wellbeing and calmness.

So regardless of the style of the humour, as long at there is no underlying illness, laughter is likely to be the best medicine.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Scientific American: Mind & Brain http://ift.tt/n8vNiX

May 1, 2017 at 12:15AM

With a Little Help from My Friends

{ http://ift.tt/2oOL64N

Humans are social animals, and our species has evolved some unique ways of enforcing the bonds of friendship. Robin Dunbar, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of Oxford, studies the behavioral mechanisms behind the number and nature of such relationships. His work suggests social cohesion and long-term bonding among primates—Homo sapiens included—are the keys to their evolutionary success.

Primate societies are held together by unspoken contracts grounded in “social grooming,” whether in the form of physical affection or nonphysical activities such as storytelling. Primates possess limited time for this, but the more time individuals invest in such activities the more relationships they can maintain—which, in part, explains how big or small social groups are, Dunbar says.

His earlier research from 1992 revealed a correlation between brain size and social group size, suggesting humans can only comfortably maintain about 150 stable friendships whereas nonhuman primates can only sustain about 50.

These days he investigates the cognitive tricks humans have used to reach out to one another and expand our social groups. At a recent meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Scientific American  spoke with Dunbar about how these “rules” of friendship relate to modern armies, singing groups and classroom size.

[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]

What’s the most notable thing that you have learned in your recent studies of human relationships?
My colleagues and I have found that, since humans have much bigger social groups than nonhuman primates, our species must be using more sophisticated bonding mechanisms than simple physical grooming—for instance, laughter, singing and dancing. We have also concluded that the function of social grooming is to activate the brain’s endorphin receptors. These activities give us a mental and physical “social high.” We have also found that human social groups are structured in a series of layers that extend out beyond the 150 number, and these layers have a very specific relationship to one another.

How many of these layers are there?
Generally speaking, humans each have one to two special friends, five intimate friends, 15 best friends, 50 good friends, 150 “just” friends and 500 acquaintances. Our relationships form a series of expanding circles of increasing size and decreasing intensity and quality of the relationship. Not only do we see these circles in the structure of [modern, real-world] social networks and of hunter–gatherer communities—they’re also reflected in big data gleaned from Facebook posting and telephone call frequencies. It also turns out these layers are germane to the organizational structure of modern armies.

How so?
Company size in the British army is 120 troops, and it’s 180 in the American army. These sit nicely on either side of 150, the number of friends per person my research identified. There’s just something special about these numbers, something to do with the structure of relationships that makes them very stable. Even the number of “intimate friends” is reflected in the size of special forces units. For example, British Special Air Service squadrons have four men each.

Are these numbers also reflected in social media?
Yes. Stephen Wolfram, creator of Wolfram|Alpha and the founder and CEO of Wolfram Research, did a study that looked at one million Facebook pages and the most common number of friends was between 150 and 250. We did a smaller-scale study of 3,500 adults in the U.K. and got similar results. Our social world is extremely small-scale.

Now that research shows these group size numbers have stabilized—what does that information tell us?
Well, first about the nature of your friendships and your social world. It has become apparent in the last 10 years that the most important factor influencing your health, well-being, risk of falling ill, even your risk of dying and divorce is actually the size of your friend network. Particularly on the health side, your network seems to cushion you—your friends help you out when you’re in trouble—and more importantly, the endorphins that kick in from interacting with them seem to tune up your immune system. Laughing together, jogging together, dancing together, singing together, telling emotionally wrenching stories, going to see weepy films—these activities buffer the body biochemically and immunologically against the kinds of coughs and colds of everyday life.

How would you encourage someone to make friends?
One of the best ways is joining a singing club. We did a study comparing novice singing classes with novice hobby classes in terms of how much these activities produced feelings of social bonding. Singing produces a massive hit of endorphins, and that makes you feel very bonded to the people with whom you’re doing it. We call it the “icebreaker effect.” It seems when you go once a week to your glee club or barber’s quartet and sing together, it just ramps up this sense of belonging. It’s similar with dancing and jogging. I see people jogging with their ear buds, listening to music, and I think, “You’re doing it wrong. Take the freaking earpieces out and talk to the guy next to you.” It’ll ramp up the effect of the workout or the dance. You’re going to get an endorphin kick from any physical activity, but if it’s done in synchronicity with somebody else, the effect ramps up significantly, our studies of dancers and rowers have found. And that’s why dancing works, too—you can have large numbers of people doing the exact same thing in sync.

How have singing, dancing and laughter helped humans maximize our social bonding and group sizes?
The problem is that physical grooming is really inefficient. It is a one on one activity that’s very good at stimulating the release of endorphins, but you can only do it with one person at a time. For humans to increase group size, we somehow we had to break through that particular barrier of just using grooming to bolster community bonds. We had to find new ways of doing these things. We cannot invest more time, we just don’t have it. The only option we have, then, is to “groom” with more people at once. And laughter allows you to do that with several people simultaneously. What’s more, you get the benefit yourself—in grooming, only the person being groomed is getting the endorphin hit, but when you laugh, you get the hit, too. So it’s already twice as efficient. It turns out the limit of conversational laughter group size—say, at a bar—is about three people, which is slightly below the limit for conversation group size, which is four. These numbers are very consistent in my research. When laughter triggers these endorphins, it’s three times as effective as physical grooming, so it should allow you to increase group size by a comparable proportion. The same goes with storytelling.

What other areas might these stable social numbers might be informative for?
The other side has to do more with whether there are sizes of organizations that work more efficiently than others. One that is really glaringly obvious is schools. By and large, American high schools are pretty big affairs, which we’re endeavoring to copy in Britain. Our secondary schools are around 1,500 students in size, and I think that is completely dysfunctional in terms of creating a sense of community. I think you need much smaller groups, particularly for the younger kids. The average social network size for an 18-year-old is still only about 50 people. You don’t hit the 150 mark until your mid-20s. And if your natural social world is 50 people, being thrown into a school environment of several thousand is not only going to be stressful, it’s also going to be much more difficult to build a sense of community.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Scientific American: Mind & Brain http://ift.tt/n8vNiX

April 30, 2017 at 11:51PM

Will Work for Food and Health Care

{ http://ift.tt/2quVCdV

Health insurance: only when you don’t need it.

Confused? Let me explain.

In our illogical model, our society provides health insurance to the gainfully employed. But, ironically, it is the gainfully unemployed who most need mental health coverage.

In the United States, our employer-based health care model is predicated on — surprise surprise — employment. For the standard nine to five set, employer-based health insurance is a satisfactory option. Generally, employers subsidize out-of-pocket health care costs — including mental health coverage–for their employees.

Yes, the health care system works — if you gainfully work. But in our unstable job market (hello, Great Recession!), millennials to Boomers face dwindling employment opportunities. During the Great Recession alone, the U.S. economy lost over 10 million jobs.  

As the Great Recession plunged millions of Americans into unemployment, mental health issues among displaced workers soared. According to The Atlantic, “unemployed Americans are more than twice as likely as those with full-time jobs to say they currently have or are being treated for depression — 12.4 percent vs. 5.6 percent, respectively.”

Unemployment exacts an emotional toll — and our health care paradigm exacerbates that sense of estrangement and alienation.  

When I was unemployed, my mental health issues spiked. Depressive and anxious thoughts vied for supremacy, torpedoing my emotional well-being. And like millions of unemployed Americans, I struggled to find suitable mental health care. Out-of-pocket costs were prohibitive, straining my already limited budget. I isolated myself from family and friends, embarrassed at my sagging fortunes.  

Insert Dr. McCann.

Out of the goodness of her heart, Dr. McCann counseled me during this tumultuous time. She mentored and advised, becoming a trusted confidante. As we visited over a year-long stretch, the anxious and depressive thoughts slowly receded. Financially strapped, Dr. McCann — bless her heart — did not charge me for these counseling sessions.  

How many of us–as unemployment upends our emotional stability — has a Dr. McCann to confide in? The answer: very few. And even more germane, how many accomplished counselors would counsel an indigent client? You and I (along with the millions of unemployed Americans) know the answer.

To be clear, I am incredibly lucky. Without Dr. McCann’s guidance, I shudder to think where I would be. As unemployment battered my psyche, Dr. McCann was a calming, reassuring voice.

As I reflect on my good fortune, I recognize the sad irony undergirding our health care system. While employed, my mental health issues stabilized — in part because I could regularly access cost-effective treatment. But I could only access cost-effective treatment because I was employed. Our flawed health care system, in essence, protected me. Circular logic and all.

When my job ended, my unemployability exposed the systemic flaws in our health care model. Now as the job market recovers from Great Recession depths, millions of un- and underemployed Americans yearn for reliable insurance. Insurance — that is — from the job market’s capricious whims. And the devastating impact on our fragile mental health.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via World of Psychology http://ift.tt/2jgn2Ba

April 30, 2017 at 11:32PM

Unhappy relationships may lead to excessive crying in infants

Partners can help with PMS: Couples counselling key to coping with premenstrual distress

{ http://ift.tt/2pmeXR0

A Western Sydney University study has found that couples counselling can be critical for women in the treatment of severe premenstrual symptoms (PMS).

Leading women's health researchers Professor Jane Ussher and Professor Janette Perz, from the University's Translational Health Research Institute (THRI), compared the impacts of one-to-one and couples counselling for Premenstrual Disorders (PMDs).

The results, which have been published in the prestigious PLOS ONE journal, indicate that couple-based interventions have a greater positive impact upon women's ability to cope with premenstrual distress.

As part of a three-year Australian Research Council (ARC) funded study, 83 women who suffered from severe PMS were randomly divided into three groups: a one-to-one therapy group, a couple's therapy group, and a waiting list group.

The results revealed that couple-based interventions were the most effective in improving coping, reducing relationship difficulties and alleviating premenstrual distress.

• 84 per cent of those in the couple's therapy group reported increased partner awareness and understanding of PMS, compared with 39 per cent of the one-to-one group and 19 per cent of the wait list.
• 57 per cent of women in the couple group reported an improved relationship with their partner, compared with 26 per cent in the one-to-one group and 5 per cent of the wait list.
• There was an 18 per cent reduction in reports of intimate relationship difficulties within the couple group, compared with a 5 per cent increase in the one-to-one group to a 10% increase in the wait list.
• Increased self-care and coping was reported by 58 per cent of women in the couple's group, compared to 26 per cent in the one-to-one group, and 9 per cent of women in the wait list.

Professor Ussher says research consistently shows that relationship issues are deeply connected to women's experiences of PMS.

"Issues within a relationship can trigger PMS symptoms, just as 'that time of the month' can seemly compound and worsen existing issues," says Professor Ussher.

"It's so common to hear that women are dissatisfied by elements of their relationship - whether it is the emotional support that they receive at home, or the dishes that are left in the sink at the end of the day.

"To use the metaphor of a pressure cooker - for women who suffer from severe PMS, these issues can be left to simmer and for three weeks of every month they are able to be repressed or ignored.

"But during that one week, when PMS takes hold, suddenly it all becomes too much. The pent-up anger and resentment finally reaches boiling point and they are no longer in control - leading to significant distress, and of course, relationship issues."

As part of the research, the two therapy groups participated in five 90-minute therapy sessions over a five-month period with a female clinical psychologist, while the women on the waiting list received no immediate treatment.

Each PMDs therapy session was targeted to address the woman's experiences of PMS, introduce a range of positive coping strategies, as well as to explore the role that their relationships played in their premenstrual distress.

Professor Ussher says, following the therapy sessions, women reported lowered premenstrual distress; increased coping; the resolution of relationship difficulties; greater couple communications; and greater closeness.

"Women reported that they were less likely to 'lose control' when expressing their feelings. They had increased awareness of the potential for relationship conflict; described relationship tension as less problematic; and were more likely to talk to their partner about PMS and ask for support," she says.

These improvements were evident in both therapy groups, irrespective of whether or not their partner was involved - indicating that any psychological intervention can have positive relational impacts.

"Even if women do therapy on their own, it can still have a positive impact. The women will still learn self-care and coping strategies, will develop a better understanding of PMS, and will go home and tell their partner about the experiences in therapy," says Professor Ussher.

"However the results of this study clearly indicate that the greatest positive impact is evidenced when a women's significant other participated in the therapy sessions as well."

Professor Ussher says the research further highlights the importance of providing women with access to psychological interventions for PMDs.

As an outcome of the ongoing research in this area, a self-help information pack has been developed to provide all women the opportunity to explore the psychological symptoms of PMS, as well as learn effective problem-solving, relaxation and stress management techniques.

The self-help pack can be downloaded from: http://ift.tt/2plTbwz

Article: Evaluation of the relative efficacy of a couple cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) for Premenstrual Disorders (PMDs), in comparison to one-to-one CBT and a wait list control: A randomized controlled trial, Jane M. Ussher, Janette Perz, PLOS ONE, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175068, published 18 April 2017.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Psychology / Psychiatry News From Medical News Today http://ift.tt/O45xlc

April 30, 2017 at 09:14PM

What is the Turning Pro Programme? ST

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW29GKbGh6A

Fiona Harold and the Turning Pro.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fw0gVCz6ZA