Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： What is meant by “body” here? There are many understandings about what the human body is, which promote a variety of research programs in cognitive science in general and cognitive psychology in particular. The classical information-processing model of cognitive psychology treated the body as a biophysical substance that is different from the mind as a mental substance. Therefore, as a science of mind, the body has always been ignored and relegated to the position of a “physiological basis” of the mind. The classical cognitive psychology is founded on the idea that brain is something like a digital computer in which the physical structure of the brain is like a hardware, and the cognition is a software. In other words, the cognition was assumed as a computation of a computer. Usually, computation is understood as the rule-governed manipulation of representations, therefore, it requires the assumption that the mind contains some cognitive representations of aspects of the objective world that is independent of our perceptual and cognitive capacities. The cognitive representations are abstract symbols and they are amodal and exist independent of structures and functions of the body. As if the body is only a “carrier” or “container” of the mind. In contrast, embodiment theories of cognitive psychology had tried to distance itself from the classical cognitive psychology, highlighting the pervasiveness of in cognition of bodily factors. Right now, there are many approaches and programs sailing under the banner of “embodied cognition.” A “moderate” or “weak” approaches to embodied cognitive psychology do not separate the body from the mind. They take the body as more in mind, and want to elevate the importance of the body in explaining cognitive processes. From the point of view of the moderates, cognition is in essence a kinds of bodily experience, and the nature of our bodies shapes our very possibilities for our thinking and feeling. For the moderates, cognition is still involved in mental representation and computable processing which are staples of classical cognitive psychology. However, the cognitive representations are not disembodied symbols, but are body-formatted or body-related codes. The “radical” or “strong” approaches to embodied cognitive psychology claim that cognitive systems do not rely on internal representations and computations. Human cognition should be explained without the ascription of representational mental states. Our cognition is essentially grounded in the brain as it is integrated with our body. The nature of our cognitive processes is determined by the specific action possibilities afforded by our body. Our cognitive system is for action, and about solving problems for the organism, not for forming cognitive representations. Cognition is essentially a embodied action.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Impulsivity is a typical characteristic of drug addiction. In addition to the problems of inhibition and executive control, the driving force from multiple dimensions is also an important reason for impulsive drug use. The psychological drive stems from a variety of sources, including reward effect, S-R related cue response through conditioning. Low levels of inhibition are insufficient to resist the effects of the drive. This leads to an unbalanced state, which results in habitual behavior tendency. Impulsivity has both a behavioral and neural basis. Although impulsivity may be a precursor of drug use, long-term use may also damage brain structures and functions related to the inhibition of impulsive behavior. There is an open question about whether these structures and functions recover after withdrawal. In this research we used multiple imaging methods to study the extent of recovery in heroin addicts who had been abstinent for several years on average. Thirty-five abstinent heroin addicts (26 males; average period of abstinence = 43.55 months) and 26 healthy controls (26 males) were recruited using advertisements in the community. The heroin group and the healthy control group were compared on multiple measures of brain structure and function related to inhibition using the imaging methods of voxel-based morphometry (VBM), amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF) and regional homogeneity (ReHo). Based on the amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF), right inferior frontal gyrus (15, 60, -6) was selected as the region of interest in which to study functional connectivity (FC). Heroin addicts showed damage in inhibition-related brain structures and functions an average of 44 months after withdrawal, and the extent of damage was correlated with lifetime dose. (1) Compared to the healthy control group, the heroin group had significantly (a) lower gray matter volume (p = 0.03) and lower whole-brain volume (p = 0.05); (b) lower gray matter in the right superior frontal gyrus (pAlphaSim < 0.01); (c) higher regional homogeneity in right posterior central gyrus and lower regional homogeneity in right middle frontal gyrus of the orbitofrontal cortex (pAlphaSim < 0.01); (d) lower amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation in right inferior frontal gyrus of the orbitofrontal cortex and left hippocampus (pAlphaSim < 0.01); (e) higher functional connectivity between right inferior frontal gyrus of the orbitofrontal cortex and the right caudate, and lower functional connectivity between the right inferior frontal gyrus and right middle temporal gyrus as well left precentral gyrus (pAlphaSim < 0.01). (2) Within the heroin group, higher lifetime dose of heroin was significantly associated with lower gray matter volume in the right middle temporal gyrus and left middle cingulate (pAlphaSim < 0.01). The results showed that compared to healthy controls, heroin addicts had significant damage in brain structure and functions related to impulsivity even after an average period of 44 months of abstinence. In addition, the extent of damage was correlated with the lifetime dose of heroin. These results suggest that heroin addicts could continue to show impulsive behavior even after several years of abstinence, perhaps explaining the high rate of relapse in this population. Future research could test this conclusion by examining correlations between brain damage in areas related to inhibition and behavioral measures of impulsivity after a period of abstinence. The current evidence underscores the need to take impulsivity into account in relapse prevention programs for heroin addicts.
Subjects: Psychology >> Applied Psychology Subjects: Psychology >> Clinical and Counseling Psychology submitted time 2021-03-26
Abstract： "
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Physiological Psychology submitted time 2019-11-08
Abstract： Persons who are addicted are known to show cue-induced responses (such as psychological craving) to drug-related cues. Previous research showed that both tool-related (e.g., syringe) and action-related (e.g., use of the syringe) drug cues can elicit craving. However, whether the two types of drug related cues can elicit the same brain reactivity and similar degree of disinhibition is still unclear, especially because of the scarcity of ERP studies on this topic. Using a behavioral task and the ERP technique, the present study investigated the behavior reactivity and EEG characteristics shown by men addicted to heroin and healthy controls in response to tool-related and action-related drug cues. Participants were 36 men, 19 of whom were addicted to heroin and 17 of whom were healthy non-drug users, matched on age and years of education. Participants engaged in the two-choice Oddball task, which included two conditions: A. the tool condition, with a picture of a “cup” serving as the standard stimulus and pictures of drug-use tools serving as deviant stimuli; B. the action condition, with a picture of “drinking water” serving as the standard stimulus and pictures of drug-use actions serving as deviant stimuli. In this experiment, the probabilities of standard stimuli and deviant stimuli were 70% and 30%. Participants were asked to press different keys on the keyboard in response to standard stimuli and deviant stimuli as rapidly and accurately as possible. Behavioral results indicated that in men who were addicted to heroin, greater disinhibition was seen in a longer reaction time in response to action cues than tool cues. Between-group analyses of the ERP data showed that compared to the healthy controls, men who were addicted to heroin demonstrated a smaller N2 and larger P3 amplitude in response to drug related cues. Moreover, action cues elicited a smaller N2 amplitude in the heroin addicted group than the control group, especially in the frontal, central and central-parietal areas of the brain, and a larger P3 amplitude, especially in the central and parietal areas of the brain. Within-group analyses in just the heroin addicted group showed that the N2 was smaller in response to action cues versus tool cues. Meanwhile, the action cues elicited a larger amplitude of P3 than the tool cues, especially in the central, central-parietal and parietal regions of the brain. These findings provide behavioral and ERP evidence for the hypothesis that different types of drug-related cues produce different cue-induced reactivity. More specifically, drug use action stimuli, which appear to trigger greater disinhibition and greater ERP reactivity in the brain areas associated with motor resonance, should be considered in the treatment of addiction and in relapse prevention.
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment