In a conventional computer, logic and memory are located in different parts of the circuit and each element is only connected to a few neighboring elements, resulting in a linear form of operation. Such linear processing allows computers to perform simple tasks, but makes multitasking difficult. Brains obviously can perform many different computations at once, and the goal for the memristor devices is to mimic the interconnected nature of the brain. The researchers devised a paradigm similar to how neurons are connected and connect two circuits through a memristor. With this technology they hope to make a computer brain that is about as smart as a cat (sorry dog lovers). From then they hope to build an even bigger system containing hundreds of artificial neurons connected by memristor synapses.

Many theories have been proposed on the science of falling in love, but most share a common theme that love is comprised of intimacy, compassion, attraction, and attachment. How these feelings develop is often described in three stages. The first is lust or physical attraction driven by sexual hormones in men and women. The second stage is attraction, but not the sexual kind, rather the “crush” kind. Adrenaline is responsible for those sweats and rapid heart beats you experience when someone you are attracted to approaches and dopamine is responsible for that feeling of pleasure and energy you get when thinking about or being with your crush. The third and final stage is attachment. This stage is usually due to oxytosin and vasopressin both hormones which lead to a feeling of attachment and intimacy with your partner.

Finding someone attractive at first sight is a different story. We are for the most part attracted to people who are compatible with us in socioeconomically, intellectually, religiously, and ethnically. However, these factors only seem relevant after two people have gotten to know each other. But what makes you turn your head, and what makes you feel a connection to a person without getting to know them? Scientific studies attribute attraction to evolution. We search for characteristics that have been engrained in us since the first Homo sapiens. A symmetrical face for both men and women is said to be most attractive while for women a youthful hourglass figure is attractive because evolutionary speaking, it means the woman is healthy for child rearing and carrying on a male’s genes. Women are said to be more attracted to men with angular faces and prominent jaws and greater muscle mass signs of greater testosterone levels, therefore more protection. Clear and smooth skin, fuller lips, bright eyes, and lustrous hair are also signs of attraction as evolutionary speaking they signify health.

Helen Fisher, the author of the book Why him? Why her? suggests that attraction is due to hormone levels. According to Fisher, hormones attract other hormones and so a high level of a hormone in one person can attract a high level of hormone in another person. This leads to certain personality types in humans which she has outlined.(Check out a more detailed explanation of her work at http://www.tellinitlikeitis.net/2009/01/why-him-why-her-helen-fisher-personality-test-understanding-your-personality-type.html) Other factors such as scent, which actually deals with pheromones that signal brain responses of attraction, and personal history such as whether or not someone reminds you of your first love, is more personal and specific to a person in the laws of attraction. Aside from all these evolutionary qualities people often search for a mate who shares similar characteristics in hopes of building a family.

One thing though that most scientists agree is that attraction and love is a result of fortuitous encounters. A chance meeting can lead to a life together. Sometimes love and relationships follow the saying “in the right place at the right time.”

Surely we have all experienced the frustration of not being able to recall a particular fact when we wish to recall it, only to suddenly remember at a later time when it is not at all necessary. Wouldn’t it be wonderful, then, to have at our fingertips a device like Albus Dumbledore’s pensieve (Harry Potter) – a utility that helps us systematically sort through and organize our memories?

Recent research conducted at the University College London suggests that, in the not-so-distant future, functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) could be our pensive. Essentially, these researchers maintain that it is possible to identify the type and location of certain memories while the human brain is functioning normally. If these findings are developed further, they could potentially lead to the creation of a sort of memory map – a diagram of the human brain that would locate the individual positions of memory traces.

Despite the published study, the findings of the UCL research remain controversial for several reasons. Can the human brain really be likened to a filing cabinet? Why is memory-mapping even useful? And could fMRI thereby be the tool that helps our generation finally understand the intricate workings of the human memory and mind?

Recent research suggests that the linkage between culture and biology determines the way that we view problems in the world. Eastern and Western subjects were asked the same questions while being examined through Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) techniques – different regions of their brains were activated even when the subjects ultimately came up with the same response. For example, the Chinese subjects used one area of their brain to compute a basic math problem such as 3+4, while American subjects used a completely different region. Both groups ultimately arrived at the correct answer, of course, but these differences illuminate interesting biological phenomena about the influence that culture has on biology.

Of course, it is possible that these differences are due to a difference in biology all along – perhaps people from Eastern cultures simply have a different “math gene” than the rest of us. But consider the alternative – perhaps our cultural values and upbringing shape our neural development and perception. Further research may bring us closer to the truth.

Psychiatrist Charles O’Brien of the University of Pennsylvania attests that there is adequate brain imaging evidence to make a "pretty strong case that [gambling] activates the reward system in much the same way that a drug does" (935). Researchers in Germany have shown that gamblers show an increase in dopamine, stress hormones, and heart rate compared with non-gamblers. At Yale, brain imaging studies by a research group show that the brains of pathological gamblers resemble those of cocaine addicts – specifically, this shows a decrease in activation in regions that indicated judgment and motivation. This evidence collectively suggests that the
effects of being a "degenerate gambler" have about the same impact internally as being addicted to drugs or alcohol.

Behaviorally, we also see similar effects. Gamblers show impaired social functioning, as their behavior is geared toward feeding their attachment to gambling, much as the concerns of someone addicted to drugs are centered on being able to obtain their next fix. But what about other behavior? For instance, can people be "addicted" to things like sex, the Internet, or a certain genre of books? Here is where the fine distinction between addiction and compulsions comes into play. Like physical substances such as alcohol, behaviors are difficult to control because they could take other forms. If you refuse an alcoholic alcohol, he may turn to smoking instead. If someone is "addicted" to sex, their next recourse will take the form of increasing other pleasure-seeking areas in the brain in the same way that sex once did. It is the behavior of addiction itself that needs to be stopped for the obsession to engage in it to decrease. The compulsions are not addictions, but if the need for the addiction is removed, the compulsion may also decrease. Studies need to be conducted to ascertain the relationship between these factors (compulsion, obsession, and addiction) in behavior.

Blanketing addictive behavior into one DSM diagnosis may encompass a large group of people, but not be geared toward the needs of a specific person or group of people. It’s like a one-size-fits-all glove – it will fit most people’s hands generally well; there will always be outliers, and perhaps their issues are serious enough to warrant attention. But if their particular problems aren’t included in the DSM, how can they be treated fairly? The DSM committees need to recognize foremost that with the advance of technology and a deeper understanding of human behavior must come the acceptance that behavior will keep changing. The only thing to do is meet it – and when necessary, make it easier for people who need help with negative behavior patterns, to get it.

To examine this question, Fisher dyed the sperm from two male mouses different colors (one green and the other red) and mixed them together in a petri dish and observed what happened. She found that sperm would conglomerate based on the mouse that they originated from, meaning that red sperm would more often than not clump with other red sperm and green sperm would clump with other green sperm. It is not known how sperm can differentiate between similar and dissimilar sperm, but it isn't too hard to understand why such behavior occurs. It all goes back to our selfish genes, the desire to pass one's genetic material on to the next generation, an impulse so strong that even sperm will compete for this privilege.

While pundits will talk about vague platforms, poor campaigning and finger-pointing as root causes of voter apathy, science suggests alternative explanations. Investigators James H. Fowler (who collaborates prominently with popular Pfoho housemaster Professor Nicholas Christakis) and Christopher Dawes recently showed in 2008 in two independent studies of fraternal and identical twins that voter turnout may be genetically linked and inheritable.

The reasoning, as in most twin studies, was that if voter apathy were inheritable, then identical twins should have more similar patterns of voting or abstaining than fraternal twins. Examining data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, investigators were able to estimate that genetics dictates some 72 percent of differences in voting turnout. Futhermore, roughly 60 percent of differences in other political activity can be explained by genetic makeup. Other geneticists like Dr. Robert Polmin of Kings College, London, suggest that while the association may be true, the percentages concluded may be too high.

Naturally, each of the scientists concede that the remaining percentages that influence whether a person chooses to vote are gained from environmental cues, suggesting that although politicians may tremble at the idea that voter apathy is genetically engrained, there is still hope for behavioral changes caused by inspiring speeches and attractive ads.

In other words, don’t give up Dems. Just because you did it once doesn’t mean you’re allowed to sit back and expect voters to flock.

When first interviewed by parole officers who were suspicious of her abductor, Jaycee Lee Dugard did not reveal her identity. Instead, she told investigators she was a battered wife from Minnesota who was hiding from her abusive husband, and described Garrido as a "great person" who was "good with her kids." Why would Dugard say these things, even in safe custody of law enforcement?

Stockholm Syndrome is a psychological change that occurs in captives when they are seriously in danger, but are shown acts of kindheartedness by their captors. Captives who exhibit Stockholm Syndrome tend to empathize with and think well and positively of their captors. Such captives fail to identify that their captors' choices are in effect self-serving to only the captors, because the captives are being held against their will. When subjected to prolonged imprisonment, these captives can develop a strong relationship with their captors, in some cases including a mutual sexual interest.

According to the psychoanalytic view of this syndrome, this propensity might be the consequence of employing the strategy evolved by newborn babies to form an emotional connection to the closest authoritative figure in order to increase the likelihood that this adult will facilitate for the survival of the child, if not also prove to be a solid parental figure. In the Dugard case, Garrido seemed to fill that role for her, and therefore, was able to make her trust him for 18 long years.

But perhaps there is a way to cram facts into our head while we sleep, according to a recent study by Rudoy et al of Northwestern University.

The researchers performed a series of tests in which after subjects were taught the locations of certain pictures on the screen, they napped for 90 minutes while sounds related to certain pictures were played. The results showed that all subjects were able to recall the locations of those specific pictures much more efficiently than the pictures not reinforced by sound during sleep.  This would make sense, considering that it is speculated that memory consolidation occurs during sleep and rehearsal is known to be a good way to strengthen specific memories rather it be facts, names, or dates.

Looks like learning a fifth foreign language over J-term with those 1000 phrases on CD playing while you sleep may be an option after all!
And as for next semester, consider recording lectures and sleeping with headphones on – this may very well be the secret to the easy A that you’ve been missing all along!

During my research I learned that the way the brain creates time is still an enigma for many scientists. Moreover, extensive research has been done which has led us to believe that certain neurological diseases such as dyslexia are results of the brain’s distortion of time.  According to the research of Dean Buonomano, a neuroscientist at UCLA, and Warren Meck of Duke University, the brain has an internal clock which creates time. It does this through medium spiny neurons which send pulses that are read by the brain much like music.

In an effort to explain how we can skew the perception of time, Meck believes that neurotransmitters such as dopamine affect the pulses read by these neurons. As a result, watching a car crash can seem to us to have taken place a longer period of time than it actually was. However, on a daily basis, the brain makes time elastic, making certain events or actions seem much longer or shorter in time span. Moreover, emotions greatly affect our brain’s perception of time.  It is still debated where the brain stores memories of time and how we remember the amount of time that an action took to complete.

Perception of time is not dependent on one sensory organ but rather on many parts of the brain depending on the situation. For example, a sense of the length of an event is thought to originate in the medial temporal lobe, while sequencing events in their correct order comes from the prefrontal cortex.   Therefore, understanding how we perceive time has proven to be very complex. Einstein once said "…for us physicists believe the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one." Perhaps, Einstein knew more about our perception of time than we know today.

"Just what I always wanted!” I screamed, as tears of joy came streaming down my face.  Hold on a second…  "What’s this?  A price-tag?” I thought,  "Silly elves!  Children don’t pay for Stretch-Armstrongs, Santa gives them for free…  OH NO!”

There I was, only 17 years old when I came face-to-face with the cold and bitter truth that elves were selfish creatures, occasionally charging Santa-Clause for high-quality goods and services.

I soon refuted this theory as well, and settled on the idea that neither Santa, nor elves actually existed.  It wasn’t long before I realized that there was no hard evidence for God’s existence either, which called me to question why faith-based concepts like religion have not only survived but flourished throughout human history.  Many human evolutionary biologist think that religion is common despite its provability because of it’ is evolutionary benefit, because it helps us to survive and reproduce.  Think of religion as a group of ideas that is passed down from generation to generation much in the same way that genes are vertically inherited.  In this way, religion is a group of memes that, just like genes, can either be beneficial or disruptive to the survival of humans, and if beneficial, is passed down to the successor generation to aid in their survival as well.  Here are a few of my thoughts on why religion could be an evolutionarily beneficial group of memes.

1. Divinity and Godliness are often associated with perfection--In medieval Jewish theology God’s attributes (e.g. Wisdom, Power, Mercy, Justice).  Representations of Gods are often anthropomorphic which can spur a vision of the divine human that the individual can model himself after.  The result is an individual who, because he strives to perfect himself and come closer to God, pushes his personal limits.   Such divinely inspired ambition at the individual level will increase productivity and fitness of the society as a whole.
2. Anthropomorphism reinforces the idea that "man is the most perfect, next to god.” God created man in his form, man has the same form as god, therefore man is closest of animals to God.  This drives the Homo sapiens superiority complex to allow for more degradation and destruction of the environment (competing genes) in the name of god (who favors our genes).
3. Religion becomes a distinct advantage when people believe that they are carrying out the will of God.  This can create a strong (and perhaps false) sense of righteousness with regards to the goals of that particular society.   There are many examples of religiously sanctioned military campaigns that resulted in the genocide of other peoples and expansion into their lands.  The result is that individuals of one culture are slaughtered and replaced by another that praises religious conquest. The Christian crusades and American expansion "manifest destiny” are good examples of this phenomenon.
4. Religion often starts with creation myths.  These resolve fundamental questions about our existence that would otherwise go unsolved by the inadequate scientific progress of early humans.  Acceptance of creation myths allowed early human societies to put the majority of mental effort into productivity and chores rather than pondering the unsolvable.
5. Religion creates common ground among individuals within a given society and strengthens societal bonds through ritual practice and group worship.  The result is a constructive synergy that results in a net gain of productivity for the society in which those individuals live.  A more productive society means the ability to support more offspring.  This is an evolutionary bonus.
6. Religion teaches obedience, which is good for establishing a lower class and social hierarch.  Without organizations that have leaders, society runs less efficiently.  Religion reinforces ideas of divine right, and allows the lower class to feel comfortable being ruled, which results in a more complacent, less rebellious societal structure.

Fiery Cushman, jointly sponsored by Joshua Greene (FAS/Psychology), Martin Nowak (Program Evolutionary Dynamics), and David Laibson (FAS/Economics), is puzzling out the different weights we assign to outcomes and intentions in moral judgment and punishment. Surprisingly, a dice game experiment revealed that even when chance, rather than a partner’s choice, influenced how much money someone received, the person often chose to reward or punish on the basis of the outcome. Cushman hypothesizes that we punish outcomes because outcome-based learning is a better teaching strategy. This was corroborated by a dart experiment in which subjects learned the difference between colors that lost and earned money for their partner more quickly when their partners rewarded and punished based on outcome. Cushman believes that an outcome-based attitude towards punishment evolved when we did not have the language to explain intent, and that we should be critical of our own moral psychology and give each other more information so that intent is easier to judge and accidents can be distinguished from maliciousness.

Mark Eldalef, sponsored by Alvaro Pascual-Leone (HMS/Neurology) and Randy Buckner (FAS/Psychology) does work on changing default network activity with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS). The default network is the nexus of brain areas active when the brain is awake but resting, not focused on tasks in the outside world. Its activity is anti-correlated with the visual attention network, and it has been implicated in introspective thinking, considering the future, and putting oneself into other people’s mindsets. The default network is often aberrant in disease states such as Alzheimer’s as well as in normal aging. Eldalef’s work aims to find whether TMS can change connectivity within the default network, whether the signal is propagated throughout, if the opposite effect might be found in non-stimulated hubs, and if the result might be distance-dependent. He found that 20hz TMS pulses to the inferior parietal lobule increase default network activation while 1hz pulses decrease it, and that this effect is time-dependent, apparent right after TMS but less visible later on due to compensation. His work demonstrates that we can directly manipulate resting networks in the brain, rather than through behavioral studies, and may have implications for further research on the default network’s function, its reactions to stress, and possibilities for altering disease courses.

Andrea Heberlein, sponsored by Daniel Wegner (FAS/Psychology) and Moshe Bar (HMS/Martinos), is interested in using behavioral and neuroimaging studies to learn how context, motivation and mood influence our perceptions of other people’s minds. Normal research subjects interpret a movie containing geometrical characters behaving in seemingly intentional ways by anthropomorphizing them. Evolutionarily, we tend to err on the side of over-attributing minds to objects because it is the safer route. The content we attribute to other minds tends to fall into two categories, experience (phenomenology) and agency (planning/control). Emotions such as sadness seem to increase our perceptions of others’ experience, increasing our empathy and decreasing our propensity to stereotype. Frustration, on the other hand, causes us to attribute excessive blame and agency to other minds, while dampening our perception of their experience and ability to be affected by our actions. Her next steps will involve using MRIs to detect what other moods are associated with which types of information about other minds, for instance, whether her predictions that fear causes a perception of increased agency but no change in experience, and embarrassment a perception of more agency and experience, are supported by brain scans.

Adam Kampff, sponsored by Bence Olveczky (FAS/Organismic and Evolutionary Biology) and Florian Engert (FAS/Molecular and Cellular Biology) is using rodents as a model for motor and procedural learning. He tests rats’ learning in the absence of adaptive behavior by teaching them a highly stereotyped motor skill involving pressing levers at specific time intervals. Although rats’ actions look unplanned and unskilled, slowing down and comparing several videos of a rat who has been practicing this motor task for weeks shows that they have learned a precise procedure, down to the exact timing and placement of each toe. Kampff is also interested in how this motor memory is stored, a question which is addressed by lesions studies, transient chemical inactivation, and optical excitation and inhibition of specific brain regions. Kampff found that removing the motor cortex of a rat that has already learned the procedure has no impact on performance. Optical imaging has been an obstacle in awake, behaving rats, but the Olveczky lab has found a way of combining water rewards and head mounting to use powerful imaging tools to examine the pattern of neural activation in conscious, active rats.

Brian Russ, sponsored by Alvaro Pascual-Leone (HMS/Neurology) and Marc Hauser (FAS/Psychology), studies the neural basis of moral cognition and the cognitive and evolutionary components of recognizing ownership. Moral decision-making derives from three different areas: the right temporal parietal junction (rTPJ), the dorsalateral prefrontal cortex (DLPC), and the medial prefrontal cortex. Russ is currently using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to study the role of the DLPC. So far, using TMS to stimulate the DLPC has caused subjects to perceive personal harms as more forbidden than under control conditions, and is particularly sensitive to using people as means. Russ also does field work on ownership in the minds of animals and has discovered that rhesus monkeys that are offered two identical rewards will go for the one that is less connected to the research (e.g. not tied by a rope), as the attachment makes the reward seem more competitive. This suggests that they have some understanding of ownership in the case of a direct physical connection, but further work remains on how rhesus monkeys perform on tasks of nonexplicit ownership.

Twilight, the first novel of the series chronicle’s Edward is obsessed with Bella, climbing into her room to watch her as she sleeps every night, stalking her and disabling her car when he does not want her to go visit a friend. For her part, Bella seems attracted to Edward’s aura of danger, unflinching as he describes his blood lust for her and his instinct to kill her. When Edward dumps her during the course of the series, she collapses into depression and takes suicidal risks so that she can see vision of him.

"The big thing that really makes ‘Twilight’ a really bad book is that fear should never be an aphrodisiac,” says Gina Barreca, an English professor at the University of Connecticut. There is concern that teenagers and preteen fans of Twilight will associate positive attributes with feelings of danger, and put themselves in hazardous situations in relationships and in everyday life.

In addition to Edward’s stalkerish obsession with Bella, and Bella’s determination to put herself in danger, the novel sympathetically depicts domestic violence in the relationship of a character named Sam, a werewolf that loses control during his transformation and severely scars his love interest. She forgives him and proceeds to fall in love with him. Mitru Ciarlante, the youth initiative director for the National Center for Victims of Crimes in Washington, D.C, notes that this is a pattern all too common to cases of domestic violence.

A study published in the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in 2008 concluded that "dating violence is a significant public health problem in adolescent populations” in the United States. Since literature emulates life and teenage life copies popular literature, perhaps someone should notify Stephanie Meyers?

Genomarketing takes neuromarketing one step further and branches off the assumption that we can potentially predict people's actions by assessing their genes. A study published this month in the SSRN working paper series has found that people who lack full expression of a certain gene (monoamine oxidase A) are far more likely to be in credit card debt than are people who express the gene normally. (The authors are Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, a research associate formerly at Harvard Business School, and James Fowler, a long-time collaborator on social network research with Harvard professor Nicholas Christakis.)

Genomarketing would allow companies to use genomic data about individuals in the population to target their marketing strategies toward certain groups of people. With genomic sequencing technology rapidly advancing, it is reasonable to predict that some day in the future, each human will know his/her own genetic code. Undoubtedly this information could be released to particular industries, thus promoting further research on the isolation of individual genes to observe different behaviors.

Would genomarketing be ethical? Certainly not. Consider the possibilities: a credit card company looks at your genetic information, and discovers that you are part of a pool of members who are at high risk for developing fraudulent credit card practices. They target you differently with their marketing. A clothing company discovers that a certain gene puts you "at risk" for compulsively shopping more; they consequently send you many promotional coupons, hoping to lure you into their store. Clearly the possibilities are widespread, endless, and somewhat frightening. Scarier still is that genetic information can be obtained so easily - through fingerprinting, or through a single strand of the individual's hair, etc.

Undoubtedly there are still many, many years until genomarketing will become a viable possibility. At the moment, it would be far too expensive and would surely be deemed illegal. But the development of such a practice is almost certainly looming on the horizon. Especially with the rapid development of technology, it is reasonable to assume that genomarketing will become an inevitable part of our society some day in the (relatively near) future.