Media Production Project

Does Sleep Deprivation Increase Susceptibility to False Memories?

Can one be more susceptible to false memory formation due to the lack of sleep?

Steven J. Frenda a psychological scientist, along with his colleagues, at the University of California, Irvine conducted a study on whether or not sleep deprivation increases susceptibility to false memory formation. Two experiments were conducted to reach their results and conclusions on this question.

In experiment one, one hundred and ninety-three undergraduate student’s self-logged the number of hours they slept per night, Frenda and colleagues posed that getting 5 hours of sleep or less was associated with forming false memories. In the beginning, students completed a questionnaire that described a plane crash and had been told that video footage of this crash was widely seen all over social media. The main question participants were asked was if they had seen “video footage of the plane crashing taken by one of the witnesses on the grown.” Experiment one’s misinformation task was that photos and audio of a crime scene were shown to participants and then asked questions about them.

The findings from experiment one needed further confirmation but broadly suggested that less sleep is related to memory suggestibility. Researchers wanted to further understand when during the formation of false memories did restricted sleep have an effect. Researchers were also curious about retrieval of memories and if restricted sleep was the one to blame for that. With these things in mind, they conducted experiment two. Here, the researchers had four main groups with their independent variable being sleep. Participants were either told to immediately sleep or stay awake then take the questionnaire in the morning or take the questionnaire then sleep or stay awake.

The researchers found that students that had read the narratives, viewed the photos and took the memory test after staying up all night were more likely to form false memories and report false details from the text narrative. On the other hand, students who saw the photos before staying up all night had almost very similar results for false memory formation.

“The researchers believe these findings have important legal applications: Recent studies are suggesting that people are getting fewer hours of sleep on average, and chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise,” says Frenda. “Our findings have implications for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced long periods of restricted or deprived sleep.”

Frenda closes by says that further research need to be conducted before enforcing specific law enforcement and says, “We are running new experiments now, in order to better understand the influence of sleep deprivation on processes related to false memory.”

Reflection:

After writing my own summary of the research article, I underestimated the amount of thought and summarizing that went into writing an inside view on today’s psychological studies. I definitely thought it would not be so difficult to compose my own thoughts and feelings to summarizing a study as well as keeping the readers entertained. It was difficult trying to condense the study’s experiments because I thought that everything was important and worth mentioning in the journal article for the reader to fully understand the material and the flow of the study. In the study there is a shift from experiment one to experiment two and it was difficult trying to create my own shift in the journal article because I had to be careful about plagiarism.

I think the journalist wrote the article in a way that the regular person could understand the article which was something that I struggled with when I first started to re-write the article. The journalist did talk about some parts of the study, but failed to mention other parts that I thought were important to mention and would make understanding the study easier. Adding those details about the study, that the original journalist missed, is something that I added to my re-write of the article that is different from the original creator.

I don’t think that the perspectives of the journalist were wrong, I just don’t think that there was enough detail to completely understand the study in its entirety, but, I did like how the journalist made reading the paper easy without the use of difficult words or phrases that the general audience might not understand.

 

 

References:

Link to the original article: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-susceptibility-to-false-memories.html#.WRN-1FKZOfT

Link to the scholarly article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614534694

 

 

 

Media Production Project

Does Sleep Deprivation Increase Susceptibility to False Memories?

Can one be more susceptible to false memory formation due to the lack of sleep?

Steven J. Frenda a psychological scientist, along with his colleagues, at the University of California, Irvine conducted a study on whether or not sleep deprivation increases susceptibility to false memory formation. Two experiments were conducted to reach their results and conclusions on this question.

In experiment one, one hundred and ninety-three undergraduate student’s self-logged the number of hours they slept per night, Frenda and colleagues posed that getting 5 hours of sleep or less was associated with forming false memories. In the beginning, students completed a questionnaire that described a plane crash and had been told that video footage of this crash was widely seen all over social media. The main question participants were asked was if they had seen “video footage of the plane crashing taken by one of the witnesses on the grown.” Experiment one’s misinformation task was that photos and audio of a crime scene were shown to participants and then asked questions about them.

The findings from experiment one needed further confirmation but broadly suggested that less sleep is related to memory suggestibility. Researchers wanted to further understand when during the formation of false memories did restricted sleep have an effect. Researchers were also curious about retrieval of memories and if restricted sleep was the one to blame for that. With these things in mind, they conducted experiment two. Here, the researchers had four main groups with their independent variable being sleep. Participants were either told to immediately sleep or stay awake then take the questionnaire in the morning or take the questionnaire then sleep or stay awake.

The researchers found that students that had read the narratives, viewed the photos and took the memory test after staying up all night were more likely to form false memories and report false details from the text narrative. On the other hand, students who saw the photos before staying up all night had almost very similar results for false memory formation.

“The researchers believe these findings have important legal applications: Recent studies are suggesting that people are getting fewer hours of sleep on average, and chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise,” says Frenda. “Our findings have implications for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced long periods of restricted or deprived sleep.”

Frenda closes by says that further research need to be conducted before enforcing specific law enforcement and says, “We are running new experiments now, in order to better understand the influence of sleep deprivation on processes related to false memory.”

Reflection:

After writing my own summary of the research article, I underestimated the amount of thought and summarizing that went into writing an inside view on today’s psychological studies. I definitely thought it would not be so difficult to compose my own thoughts and feelings to summarizing a study as well as keeping the readers entertained. It was difficult trying to condense the study’s experiments because I thought that everything was important and worth mentioning in the journal article for the reader to fully understand the material and the flow of the study. In the study there is a shift from experiment one to experiment two and it was difficult trying to create my own shift in the journal article because I had to be careful about plagiarism.

I think the journalist wrote the article in a way that the regular person could understand the article which was something that I struggled with when I first started to re-write the article. The journalist did talk about some parts of the study, but failed to mention other parts that I thought were important to mention and would make understanding the study easier. Adding those details about the study, that the original journalist missed, is something that I added to my re-write of the article that is different from the original creator.

I don’t think that the perspectives of the journalist were wrong, I just don’t think that there was enough detail to completely understand the study in its entirety, but, I did like how the journalist made reading the paper easy without the use of difficult words or phrases that the general audience might not understand.

 

 

References:

Link to the original article: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-susceptibility-to-false-memories.html#.WRN-1FKZOfT

Link to the scholarly article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614534694

 

 

 

Media Production Project

Does Sleep Deprivation Increase Susceptibility to False Memories?

Can one be more susceptible to false memory formation due to the lack of sleep?

Steven J. Frenda a psychological scientist, along with his colleagues, at the University of California, Irvine conducted a study on whether or not sleep deprivation increases susceptibility to false memory formation. Two experiments were conducted to reach their results and conclusions on this question.

In experiment one, one hundred and ninety-three undergraduate student’s self-logged the number of hours they slept per night, Frenda and colleagues posed that getting 5 hours of sleep or less was associated with forming false memories. In the beginning, students completed a questionnaire that described a plane crash and had been told that video footage of this crash was widely seen all over social media. The main question participants were asked was if they had seen “video footage of the plane crashing taken by one of the witnesses on the grown.” Experiment one’s misinformation task was that photos and audio of a crime scene were shown to participants and then asked questions about them.

The findings from experiment one needed further confirmation but broadly suggested that less sleep is related to memory suggestibility. Researchers wanted to further understand when during the formation of false memories did restricted sleep have an effect. Researchers were also curious about retrieval of memories and if restricted sleep was the one to blame for that. With these things in mind, they conducted experiment two. Here, the researchers had four main groups with their independent variable being sleep. Participants were either told to immediately sleep or stay awake then take the questionnaire in the morning or take the questionnaire then sleep or stay awake.

The researchers found that students that had read the narratives, viewed the photos and took the memory test after staying up all night were more likely to form false memories and report false details from the text narrative. On the other hand, students who saw the photos before staying up all night had almost very similar results for false memory formation.

“The researchers believe these findings have important legal applications: Recent studies are suggesting that people are getting fewer hours of sleep on average, and chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise,” says Frenda. “Our findings have implications for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced long periods of restricted or deprived sleep.”

Frenda closes by says that further research need to be conducted before enforcing specific law enforcement and says, “We are running new experiments now, in order to better understand the influence of sleep deprivation on processes related to false memory.”

Reflection:

After writing my own summary of the research article, I underestimated the amount of thought and summarizing that went into writing an inside view on today’s psychological studies. I definitely thought it would not be so difficult to compose my own thoughts and feelings to summarizing a study as well as keeping the readers entertained. It was difficult trying to condense the study’s experiments because I thought that everything was important and worth mentioning in the journal article for the reader to fully understand the material and the flow of the study. In the study there is a shift from experiment one to experiment two and it was difficult trying to create my own shift in the journal article because I had to be careful about plagiarism.

I think the journalist wrote the article in a way that the regular person could understand the article which was something that I struggled with when I first started to re-write the article. The journalist did talk about some parts of the study, but failed to mention other parts that I thought were important to mention and would make understanding the study easier. Adding those details about the study, that the original journalist missed, is something that I added to my re-write of the article that is different from the original creator.

I don’t think that the perspectives of the journalist were wrong, I just don’t think that there was enough detail to completely understand the study in its entirety, but, I did like how the journalist made reading the paper easy without the use of difficult words or phrases that the general audience might not understand.

 

 

References:

Link to the original article: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-susceptibility-to-false-memories.html#.WRN-1FKZOfT

Link to the scholarly article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614534694

 

 

 

Media Production Project

Does Sleep Deprivation Increase Susceptibility to False Memories?

Can one be more susceptible to false memory formation due to the lack of sleep?

Steven J. Frenda a psychological scientist, along with his colleagues, at the University of California, Irvine conducted a study on whether or not sleep deprivation increases susceptibility to false memory formation. Two experiments were conducted to reach their results and conclusions on this question.

In experiment one, one hundred and ninety-three undergraduate student’s self-logged the number of hours they slept per night, Frenda and colleagues posed that getting 5 hours of sleep or less was associated with forming false memories. In the beginning, students completed a questionnaire that described a plane crash and had been told that video footage of this crash was widely seen all over social media. The main question participants were asked was if they had seen “video footage of the plane crashing taken by one of the witnesses on the grown.” Experiment one’s misinformation task was that photos and audio of a crime scene were shown to participants and then asked questions about them.

The findings from experiment one needed further confirmation but broadly suggested that less sleep is related to memory suggestibility. Researchers wanted to further understand when during the formation of false memories did restricted sleep have an effect. Researchers were also curious about retrieval of memories and if restricted sleep was the one to blame for that. With these things in mind, they conducted experiment two. Here, the researchers had four main groups with their independent variable being sleep. Participants were either told to immediately sleep or stay awake then take the questionnaire in the morning or take the questionnaire then sleep or stay awake.

The researchers found that students that had read the narratives, viewed the photos and took the memory test after staying up all night were more likely to form false memories and report false details from the text narrative. On the other hand, students who saw the photos before staying up all night had almost very similar results for false memory formation.

“The researchers believe these findings have important legal applications: Recent studies are suggesting that people are getting fewer hours of sleep on average, and chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise,” says Frenda. “Our findings have implications for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced long periods of restricted or deprived sleep.”

Frenda closes by says that further research need to be conducted before enforcing specific law enforcement and says, “We are running new experiments now, in order to better understand the influence of sleep deprivation on processes related to false memory.”

Reflection:

After writing my own summary of the research article, I underestimated the amount of thought and summarizing that went into writing an inside view on today’s psychological studies. I definitely thought it would not be so difficult to compose my own thoughts and feelings to summarizing a study as well as keeping the readers entertained. It was difficult trying to condense the study’s experiments because I thought that everything was important and worth mentioning in the journal article for the reader to fully understand the material and the flow of the study. In the study there is a shift from experiment one to experiment two and it was difficult trying to create my own shift in the journal article because I had to be careful about plagiarism.

I think the journalist wrote the article in a way that the regular person could understand the article which was something that I struggled with when I first started to re-write the article. The journalist did talk about some parts of the study, but failed to mention other parts that I thought were important to mention and would make understanding the study easier. Adding those details about the study, that the original journalist missed, is something that I added to my re-write of the article that is different from the original creator.

I don’t think that the perspectives of the journalist were wrong, I just don’t think that there was enough detail to completely understand the study in its entirety, but, I did like how the journalist made reading the paper easy without the use of difficult words or phrases that the general audience might not understand.

 

 

References:

Link to the original article: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-susceptibility-to-false-memories.html#.WRN-1FKZOfT

Link to the scholarly article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614534694

 

 

 

Media Production Project

Does Sleep Deprivation Increase Susceptibility to False Memories?

Can one be more susceptible to false memory formation due to the lack of sleep?

Steven J. Frenda a psychological scientist, along with his colleagues, at the University of California, Irvine conducted a study on whether or not sleep deprivation increases susceptibility to false memory formation. Two experiments were conducted to reach their results and conclusions on this question.

In experiment one, one hundred and ninety-three undergraduate student’s self-logged the number of hours they slept per night, Frenda and colleagues posed that getting 5 hours of sleep or less was associated with forming false memories. In the beginning, students completed a questionnaire that described a plane crash and had been told that video footage of this crash was widely seen all over social media. The main question participants were asked was if they had seen “video footage of the plane crashing taken by one of the witnesses on the grown.” Experiment one’s misinformation task was that photos and audio of a crime scene were shown to participants and then asked questions about them.

The findings from experiment one needed further confirmation but broadly suggested that less sleep is related to memory suggestibility. Researchers wanted to further understand when during the formation of false memories did restricted sleep have an effect. Researchers were also curious about retrieval of memories and if restricted sleep was the one to blame for that. With these things in mind, they conducted experiment two. Here, the researchers had four main groups with their independent variable being sleep. Participants were either told to immediately sleep or stay awake then take the questionnaire in the morning or take the questionnaire then sleep or stay awake.

The researchers found that students that had read the narratives, viewed the photos and took the memory test after staying up all night were more likely to form false memories and report false details from the text narrative. On the other hand, students who saw the photos before staying up all night had almost very similar results for false memory formation.

“The researchers believe these findings have important legal applications: Recent studies are suggesting that people are getting fewer hours of sleep on average, and chronic sleep deprivation is on the rise,” says Frenda. “Our findings have implications for the reliability of eyewitnesses who may have experienced long periods of restricted or deprived sleep.”

Frenda closes by says that further research need to be conducted before enforcing specific law enforcement and says, “We are running new experiments now, in order to better understand the influence of sleep deprivation on processes related to false memory.”

Reflection:

After writing my own summary of the research article, I underestimated the amount of thought and summarizing that went into writing an inside view on today’s psychological studies. I definitely thought it would not be so difficult to compose my own thoughts and feelings to summarizing a study as well as keeping the readers entertained. It was difficult trying to condense the study’s experiments because I thought that everything was important and worth mentioning in the journal article for the reader to fully understand the material and the flow of the study. In the study there is a shift from experiment one to experiment two and it was difficult trying to create my own shift in the journal article because I had to be careful about plagiarism.

I think the journalist wrote the article in a way that the regular person could understand the article which was something that I struggled with when I first started to re-write the article. The journalist did talk about some parts of the study, but failed to mention other parts that I thought were important to mention and would make understanding the study easier. Adding those details about the study, that the original journalist missed, is something that I added to my re-write of the article that is different from the original creator.

I don’t think that the perspectives of the journalist were wrong, I just don’t think that there was enough detail to completely understand the study in its entirety, but, I did like how the journalist made reading the paper easy without the use of difficult words or phrases that the general audience might not understand.

 

 

References:

Link to the original article: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-susceptibility-to-false-memories.html#.WRN-1FKZOfT

Link to the scholarly article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614534694

 

 

 


Media Production – Music as a Reward

For most, music is enjoyable. We turn on the radio on our way to work, we listen to music as we do homework, and play it at parties. However, there is a small percentage of the population that finds almost no pleasure in music. This condition is known as specific musical anhedonia.

In a recent study published in September, 2016, a team of researchers addressed the neurological differences that exist between those with music anhedonia and those without the condition. In order to investigate this, three group of 15 volunteers with different sensitivities to music were recruited for the study. A series of tests were run while the participants were listening to music to measure their response. These tests included skin conductance measurements and fMRI scans.

After completing these tests, the researchers found that participants with musical anhedonia rated the excerpts of music as less pleasurable and less emotionally arousing than the other participants. The fMRI scans were completed to measure the interactions in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). After these, the researchers found that participants with specific musical anhedonia showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens and corpus striatum (which plays a role in motivation and reward) than those with average music sensitivity. When presented with monetary rewards, however, the participants with musical anhedonia and participants without showed equal level of activity in the nucleus accumbens.

These finding have lead researchers to believe that multiple reward pathways are present in the brain. The activation of the pathways differs according to the reward presented. The researchers have also concluded that the level of connectivity between cortical regions of the brain determines the effects experienced by the body both physically and emotionally. These findings have allowed researchers to understand the variability that exists in neural pathways. It has also allowed for a better understanding of the cause and mechanism behind musical anhedonia. This could potentially be useful in developing a treatment for this condition now that the neural pathway is better understood.

–

–

–

–

After writing a new news article on the original research article, my perspective on journalists has definitely changed. Sometimes, journalists are blamed for twisting words to make research articles support the attention-grabbing claims they want to make. While this may be true for some, I think this is due to the fact that journalists are trying to summarize the words of a scientists to make their findings more accessible to the general public. Since the audience is mostly uninformed, the journalist cannot use any of the technical terms or go too deep into the science behind the conclusions. As I was trying to simplify the findings being discussed in the scientific article, the real scientific findings started to get lost or blurred in my efforts to simplify.

I did chose to leave some of the information out of the article. I mostly left out a lot of the information regarding the methods of the experiment. Many different tests and brain scans were performed. The terminology, procedures, and the statistical explanation of the results seemed too complex to include in an article for the general public. Although it may be useful to further understanding the study, information on methods is not necessarily critical to understanding the conclusions being made.

I have come to realize that journalists have very tough jobs since they are the mediators between scientists, experts, anyone that has something to say, and the audience. They make the information accessible to the public. Their job becomes tougher when they must “translate” information into everyday language while also making the article entertaining, attention grabbing, and worth reading without losing sight of the actual data being presented. Through the course of this project, I have learned that is important to look at the scientific information behind claims presented in the media. I have also learned that conveying research findings is important and must be done so in a form that the audience can easily understand the ideas, finding, discoveries, and claims being made.

 

Media Production – Music as a Reward

For most, music is enjoyable. We turn on the radio on our way to work, we listen to music as we do homework, and play it at parties. However, there is a small percentage of the population that finds almost no pleasure in music. This condition is known as specific musical anhedonia.

In a recent study published in September, 2016, a team of researchers addressed the neurological differences that exist between those with music anhedonia and those without the condition. In order to investigate this, three group of 15 volunteers with different sensitivities to music were recruited for the study. A series of tests were run while the participants were listening to music to measure their response. These tests included skin conductance measurements and fMRI scans.

After completing these tests, the researchers found that participants with musical anhedonia rated the excerpts of music as less pleasurable and less emotionally arousing than the other participants. The fMRI scans were completed to measure the interactions in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). After these, the researchers found that participants with specific musical anhedonia showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens and corpus striatum (which plays a role in motivation and reward) than those with average music sensitivity. When presented with monetary rewards, however, the participants with musical anhedonia and participants without showed equal level of activity in the nucleus accumbens.

These finding have lead researchers to believe that multiple reward pathways are present in the brain. The activation of the pathways differs according to the reward presented. The researchers have also concluded that the level of connectivity between cortical regions of the brain determines the effects experienced by the body both physically and emotionally. These findings have allowed researchers to understand the variability that exists in neural pathways. It has also allowed for a better understanding of the cause and mechanism behind musical anhedonia. This could potentially be useful in developing a treatment for this condition now that the neural pathway is better understood.

–

–

–

–

After writing a new news article on the original research article, my perspective on journalists has definitely changed. Sometimes, journalists are blamed for twisting words to make research articles support the attention-grabbing claims they want to make. While this may be true for some, I think this is due to the fact that journalists are trying to summarize the words of a scientists to make their findings more accessible to the general public. Since the audience is mostly uninformed, the journalist cannot use any of the technical terms or go too deep into the science behind the conclusions. As I was trying to simplify the findings being discussed in the scientific article, the real scientific findings started to get lost or blurred in my efforts to simplify.

I did chose to leave some of the information out of the article. I mostly left out a lot of the information regarding the methods of the experiment. Many different tests and brain scans were performed. The terminology, procedures, and the statistical explanation of the results seemed too complex to include in an article for the general public. Although it may be useful to further understanding the study, information on methods is not necessarily critical to understanding the conclusions being made.

I have come to realize that journalists have very tough jobs since they are the mediators between scientists, experts, anyone that has something to say, and the audience. They make the information accessible to the public. Their job becomes tougher when they must “translate” information into everyday language while also making the article entertaining, attention grabbing, and worth reading without losing sight of the actual data being presented. Through the course of this project, I have learned that is important to look at the scientific information behind claims presented in the media. I have also learned that conveying research findings is important and must be done so in a form that the audience can easily understand the ideas, finding, discoveries, and claims being made.

 

Media Production – Music as a Reward

For most, music is enjoyable. We turn on the radio on our way to work, we listen to music as we do homework, and play it at parties. However, there is a small percentage of the population that finds almost no pleasure in music. This condition is known as specific musical anhedonia.

In a recent study published in September, 2016, a team of researchers addressed the neurological differences that exist between those with music anhedonia and those without the condition. In order to investigate this, three group of 15 volunteers with different sensitivities to music were recruited for the study. A series of tests were run while the participants were listening to music to measure their response. These tests included skin conductance measurements and fMRI scans.

After completing these tests, the researchers found that participants with musical anhedonia rated the excerpts of music as less pleasurable and less emotionally arousing than the other participants. The fMRI scans were completed to measure the interactions in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). After these, the researchers found that participants with specific musical anhedonia showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens and corpus striatum (which plays a role in motivation and reward) than those with average music sensitivity. When presented with monetary rewards, however, the participants with musical anhedonia and participants without showed equal level of activity in the nucleus accumbens.

These finding have lead researchers to believe that multiple reward pathways are present in the brain. The activation of the pathways differs according to the reward presented. The researchers have also concluded that the level of connectivity between cortical regions of the brain determines the effects experienced by the body both physically and emotionally. These findings have allowed researchers to understand the variability that exists in neural pathways. It has also allowed for a better understanding of the cause and mechanism behind musical anhedonia. This could potentially be useful in developing a treatment for this condition now that the neural pathway is better understood.

–

–

–

–

After writing a new news article on the original research article, my perspective on journalists has definitely changed. Sometimes, journalists are blamed for twisting words to make research articles support the attention-grabbing claims they want to make. While this may be true for some, I think this is due to the fact that journalists are trying to summarize the words of a scientists to make their findings more accessible to the general public. Since the audience is mostly uninformed, the journalist cannot use any of the technical terms or go too deep into the science behind the conclusions. As I was trying to simplify the findings being discussed in the scientific article, the real scientific findings started to get lost or blurred in my efforts to simplify.

I did chose to leave some of the information out of the article. I mostly left out a lot of the information regarding the methods of the experiment. Many different tests and brain scans were performed. The terminology, procedures, and the statistical explanation of the results seemed too complex to include in an article for the general public. Although it may be useful to further understanding the study, information on methods is not necessarily critical to understanding the conclusions being made.

I have come to realize that journalists have very tough jobs since they are the mediators between scientists, experts, anyone that has something to say, and the audience. They make the information accessible to the public. Their job becomes tougher when they must “translate” information into everyday language while also making the article entertaining, attention grabbing, and worth reading without losing sight of the actual data being presented. Through the course of this project, I have learned that is important to look at the scientific information behind claims presented in the media. I have also learned that conveying research findings is important and must be done so in a form that the audience can easily understand the ideas, finding, discoveries, and claims being made.

 

Media Production – Music as a Reward

For most, music is enjoyable. We turn on the radio on our way to work, we listen to music as we do homework, and play it at parties. However, there is a small percentage of the population that finds almost no pleasure in music. This condition is known as specific musical anhedonia.

In a recent study published in September, 2016, a team of researchers addressed the neurological differences that exist between those with music anhedonia and those without the condition. In order to investigate this, three group of 15 volunteers with different sensitivities to music were recruited for the study. A series of tests were run while the participants were listening to music to measure their response. These tests included skin conductance measurements and fMRI scans.

After completing these tests, the researchers found that participants with musical anhedonia rated the excerpts of music as less pleasurable and less emotionally arousing than the other participants. The fMRI scans were completed to measure the interactions in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). After these, the researchers found that participants with specific musical anhedonia showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens and corpus striatum (which plays a role in motivation and reward) than those with average music sensitivity. When presented with monetary rewards, however, the participants with musical anhedonia and participants without showed equal level of activity in the nucleus accumbens.

These finding have lead researchers to believe that multiple reward pathways are present in the brain. The activation of the pathways differs according to the reward presented. The researchers have also concluded that the level of connectivity between cortical regions of the brain determines the effects experienced by the body both physically and emotionally. These findings have allowed researchers to understand the variability that exists in neural pathways. It has also allowed for a better understanding of the cause and mechanism behind musical anhedonia. This could potentially be useful in developing a treatment for this condition now that the neural pathway is better understood.

–

–

–

–

After writing a new news article on the original research article, my perspective on journalists has definitely changed. Sometimes, journalists are blamed for twisting words to make research articles support the attention-grabbing claims they want to make. While this may be true for some, I think this is due to the fact that journalists are trying to summarize the words of a scientists to make their findings more accessible to the general public. Since the audience is mostly uninformed, the journalist cannot use any of the technical terms or go too deep into the science behind the conclusions. As I was trying to simplify the findings being discussed in the scientific article, the real scientific findings started to get lost or blurred in my efforts to simplify.

I did chose to leave some of the information out of the article. I mostly left out a lot of the information regarding the methods of the experiment. Many different tests and brain scans were performed. The terminology, procedures, and the statistical explanation of the results seemed too complex to include in an article for the general public. Although it may be useful to further understanding the study, information on methods is not necessarily critical to understanding the conclusions being made.

I have come to realize that journalists have very tough jobs since they are the mediators between scientists, experts, anyone that has something to say, and the audience. They make the information accessible to the public. Their job becomes tougher when they must “translate” information into everyday language while also making the article entertaining, attention grabbing, and worth reading without losing sight of the actual data being presented. Through the course of this project, I have learned that is important to look at the scientific information behind claims presented in the media. I have also learned that conveying research findings is important and must be done so in a form that the audience can easily understand the ideas, finding, discoveries, and claims being made.

 

Media Production – Music as a Reward

For most, music is enjoyable. We turn on the radio on our way to work, we listen to music as we do homework, and play it at parties. However, there is a small percentage of the population that finds almost no pleasure in music. This condition is known as specific musical anhedonia.

In a recent study published in September, 2016, a team of researchers addressed the neurological differences that exist between those with music anhedonia and those without the condition. In order to investigate this, three group of 15 volunteers with different sensitivities to music were recruited for the study. A series of tests were run while the participants were listening to music to measure their response. These tests included skin conductance measurements and fMRI scans.

After completing these tests, the researchers found that participants with musical anhedonia rated the excerpts of music as less pleasurable and less emotionally arousing than the other participants. The fMRI scans were completed to measure the interactions in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). After these, the researchers found that participants with specific musical anhedonia showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens and corpus striatum (which plays a role in motivation and reward) than those with average music sensitivity. When presented with monetary rewards, however, the participants with musical anhedonia and participants without showed equal level of activity in the nucleus accumbens.

These finding have lead researchers to believe that multiple reward pathways are present in the brain. The activation of the pathways differs according to the reward presented. The researchers have also concluded that the level of connectivity between cortical regions of the brain determines the effects experienced by the body both physically and emotionally. These findings have allowed researchers to understand the variability that exists in neural pathways. It has also allowed for a better understanding of the cause and mechanism behind musical anhedonia. This could potentially be useful in developing a treatment for this condition now that the neural pathway is better understood.

–

–

–

–

After writing a new news article on the original research article, my perspective on journalists has definitely changed. Sometimes, journalists are blamed for twisting words to make research articles support the attention-grabbing claims they want to make. While this may be true for some, I think this is due to the fact that journalists are trying to summarize the words of a scientists to make their findings more accessible to the general public. Since the audience is mostly uninformed, the journalist cannot use any of the technical terms or go too deep into the science behind the conclusions. As I was trying to simplify the findings being discussed in the scientific article, the real scientific findings started to get lost or blurred in my efforts to simplify.

I did chose to leave some of the information out of the article. I mostly left out a lot of the information regarding the methods of the experiment. Many different tests and brain scans were performed. The terminology, procedures, and the statistical explanation of the results seemed too complex to include in an article for the general public. Although it may be useful to further understanding the study, information on methods is not necessarily critical to understanding the conclusions being made.

I have come to realize that journalists have very tough jobs since they are the mediators between scientists, experts, anyone that has something to say, and the audience. They make the information accessible to the public. Their job becomes tougher when they must “translate” information into everyday language while also making the article entertaining, attention grabbing, and worth reading without losing sight of the actual data being presented. Through the course of this project, I have learned that is important to look at the scientific information behind claims presented in the media. I have also learned that conveying research findings is important and must be done so in a form that the audience can easily understand the ideas, finding, discoveries, and claims being made.