The titles of the two works are in fact very superficial, highly polarized society and discussions on many topics are somewhat almost blocked. And authors Studies published in the journal Nature Neuroscience He knows it. When summarizing your findings In Conversation Magazine They also look at the social context of their research.
“For example, over the past decade, climate scientists have become increasingly optimistic that climate change is man-made. Pew Research Center showsThe percentage of Republicans who believe this has declined over the same period, “they said.”
That too, according to their study, is related to the difference of opinion of our brain. “Our findings may shed light on some of the mysterious trends in today’s society,” he said.
We ignore the opponent’s beliefs
The test is very simple based on the results they provide. They took twenty-one pairs of volunteers and put their brains under surveillance scanners and gave them a task. They had to evaluate the assets displayed on the monitor and bet that their judgment on their price was correct. The more confident they were, the bigger the bet. They saw the price estimate and the bet of a fellow competitor on the screen.
Their appreciation of the value of the objects encountered, if it was agreed, strengthened the confidence of the other, the confidence of the other, the confidence of his colleague. The authors of the work write, “If I agree with you, it is logical, and strongly, you firmly believe that you are right.” Andreas Cups a Tali Sharotova. Admittedly, the two volunteers recorded each other’s strengths and realized and accepted.
But what if their ratings are different? What happened to the acceptance of mutual recognition, respect and self-confidence of the enemy? Those elements are gone. With regard to consent, the activity of the part of the brain that caused the cognitive variation also increased, and reflected the level of confidence of the adversary. However, in the event of a disagreement, the brain does not specify the level of trust of the other.
“As a result, the opinion of the dissenting ally had little effect on the former belief that what he was saying was right. Regardless of whether the opponent believed his opinion very firmly or not,” the scientists explain.
It does not mean that people do not deal with the opinion of the opponent during the fight. The researchers believed that the participants in the experiment remembered the opponent’s different ratings and his bet on those ratings. “It came to our notice that opposition and dissent were deliberately misunderstood, so the brain considered their strengths and the beliefs behind them irrelevant,” they explain.
From their test and its results, they also try to draw recommendations for today’s polarized age. According to them, if you want to eliminate the risk that your partner in the discussion will ignore the strength of your beliefs, do not start with the biggest start. Avoid counting the arguments as to why his attitude is wrong and yours is right. Getting started is a great fit, part of the problem you agree on. So the partner in the discussion should make sure that you are recording the power of argument.
Duet, or everyone here
Parental fusion of mind. Caring for children together synchronizes the brain All it takes is the presence of the other, and we feel the cries, laughter or shouts of the offspring differently. The brain functions of the two partners change and they connect together. Especially when they take turns in caring for children. |
The second study then charged that controversy, disagreement, the brain uses more than consensus. Yale University and its faculty at the University of London also scanned the brain function of their volunteers, but encountered them on a different mission. “Same-sex marriage is a civil right” and “Marijuana should be legalized”, Describes the Yale University server. As the couple measured their views, they scanned their brains using a method called near-infrared spectroscopy.
From the results of the experiment, the authors found that if the couple agreed with this report, their brain was functioning calmly and harmoniously, and their activities were concentrated in areas where the senses were centered, especially visual senses.
When pairs collide with each other, these areas of the brain are less active. Instead, the frontal lobes are mobilized, leading to various functions such as planning, abstract thinking, self-control, emotional control, decision-making, problem-solving, or memory.
In other words, this agreement led to a quiet, peaceful synchronicity between the two brains, and disagreement erupted into frantic activity within the brain, the authors of the study explain. na serveru research findings. When two people have similar ideas, scientists compare a musical duet song because their brain is quiet and functioning simultaneously. However, if there is a disagreement, the band will start playing on its own in each of them.
So the more the conflict uses the brain, the more it can be measured. “Disagreement requires more than consent,” the authors summarize in a press release about their work. Published in Boundaries in Human Neuroscience. They are also reminiscent of the current context. “It is important today to understand how the brain functions in harmony and disagreement, because America faces radically divided communities.” Notes One of the authors of the study Joy Hirshova.