The Negative Effects Of The Brain On - amazonia.fiocruz.br

The Negative Effects Of The Brain On Video

Dr. Joe Dispenza - Train Your Brain To Fall In Love In The Future - Powerful Speech! The Negative Effects Of The Brain On

The Negative Effects Of The Brain On - consider, that

Technology has certainly changed the way we go about our day to day activities. This is true of adults and children alike. And while technology has certainly done its part in helping to enhance how we go through our daily tasks, there is also a negative aspect that is not always readily discussed. A plethora of recent studies show that the tech devices we use each day reshape our brains — and not always for the better. Particularly in children and teens, the negative effects of technology become apparent when we look at brain development. Before letting your child have too much screen time, consider the consequences of this decision. While it is important to not demonize the explosion of technological advancement in our society over the past thirty years, we may still need to be wary of it. When smartphones, computers, video games and the internet entered our lives, we accepted them without considering the potential consequences of our actions. Now, in an age where younger generations have grown up with the constant stimulation and distraction of flashing screens, we see a significant amount of studies finding a negative correlation between technology and brain development. While we are all susceptible to the enticements of technology, the developing brains of children and teens seem most affected.

The negativity bias[1] also known as the negativity effectis the notion that, even when of equal intensity, things of a more negative nature e. The negativity bias has been investigated within many different domains, including the formation of impressions Netative general evaluations; attention, learning, and memory; and decision-making and risk considerations. Paul Rozin and Edward Royzman proposed four elements of the negativity bias in order to explain its manifestation: negative potency, steeper negative gradients, negativity dominance, and negative differentiation. Rozin and Royzman note that this characteristic of the negativity bias is only empirically demonstrable in situations with inherent measurability, such as comparing how positively or negatively a change in temperature is interpreted.

Navigation menu

With respect to positive and negative gradients, it appears to be the case that negative events are thought to be perceived as increasingly more negative than positive events are increasingly positive the closer one gets spatially or temporally to the affective event itself. In other words, there is a steeper negative gradient than positive gradient. For example, the negative experience of an impending dental surgery is perceived as increasingly more negative the closer one gets to the date of surgery than the positive experience of an impending party is perceived as increasingly more positive the closer one gets to the date of celebration assuming for the sake of this example that these events are equally positive and negative.

Rozin and Royzman argue that this characteristic is distinct from The Negative Effects Of The Brain On of negative potency because there appears to be evidence of steeper negative slopes relative to positive slopes even when potency itself is low. Phrasing in more Gestalt -friendly terms, the whole is more negative than the sum of its parts. Negative differentiation is consistent with evidence suggesting that the conceptualization of negativity is more elaborate and complex than that of positivity. For instance, research indicates that negative vocabulary is more richly descriptive of the affective experience than that of positive vocabulary. Most of the early evidence suggesting a negativity bias stems from research on social judgments and impression formation, in which it became clear that negative information was typically more heavily weighted when participants were tasked with forming comprehensive evaluations and impressions of other target individuals.

As an example, a famous study by Leon Festinger and colleagues investigated critical factors in predicting friendship formation; the researchers concluded that whether or not people became friends was most strongly predicted by their proximity to one another.

As negative information tends to outweigh positive information, proximity may predict a failure to form friendships even more so than successful friendship formation. One explanation that has been put forth as to why such a negativity bias is demonstrated in social judgments is that people may generally consider negative information to be more Tue of an individual's character than positive information, that it is more useful than positive information in forming an overall impression.

An oft-cited paradox, [20] [21] a dishonest person can sometimes act honestly while still being considered to be predominantly Braib on the other hand, an honest person who sometimes does dishonest things will likely be reclassified as a dishonest person. It is expected that a The Negative Effects Of The Brain On person will occasionally be honest, but this honesty will not counteract the prior demonstrations of dishonesty. Honesty is considered more easily tarnished by acts of dishonesty. Honesty itself would then be not diagnostic of an honest nature, only the absence of dishonesty.

The presumption that negative information has greater diagnostic accuracy is also evident in voting patterns. Voting behaviors have been shown to be more affected or motivated by Ngeative information than positive: people tend to be more motivated to vote against a candidate because of negative information than they are to vote for a candidate because of positive information.

This diagnostic preference for negative traits over positive traits is thought to be a consequence of behavioral expectations: there is a general expectation that, owing to social requirements and regulations, people will generally behave positively and exhibit positive traits. Studies reported in a paper in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General by Carey Morewedge found that people exhibit a negativity bias in attribution of external agencysuch that they are more likely to attribute negative outcomes to the intentions of another person than similar neutral and Effechs outcomes. This bias is not limited to adults. Children also appear to be The Negative Effects Of The Brain On likely to attribute negative events to intentional causes than similarly positive events.

As addressed by negative differentiation, [4] negative information seems to require greater information processing resources and activity than does positive information; people tend to think and reason more about negative events than positive events. A number of studies have suggested that negativity is essentially an attention magnet.

For example, when tasked with forming an impression of presented target individuals, participants spent longer looking at negative photographs than they did looking at positive photographs. Also, people Efcects found to show greater orienting responses following negative than positive outcomes, including larger increases in pupil diameter, heart rate, and peripheral arterial tone [34] [35].

Importantly, this preferential attendance to negative information is evident even when the affective nature of the stimuli is irrelevant to the task itself. Effecte automatic vigilance hypothesis has been investigated using a modified Stroop task. Even though the positive and negative elements of the words were immaterial to the color-naming task, participants were slower to name the color of negative traits than they were positive traits.

This difference in response Braij indicates that greater attention was devoted to processing the trait itself when it was negative. Aside from studies of eye blinks and color naming, Baumeister and colleagues noted in their review of bad events versus good events [2] that there is also easily accessible, real-world evidence for this attentional bias: bad news sells more papers and the bulk of successful novels are full of negative events and turmoil. When learn more here in conjunction with The Negative Effects Of The Brain On laboratory-based experiments, there is strong support for the notion that negative information generally has a stronger pull on attention than does positive information.]