Slashdot Mirror
Brain Function "Boosted For Days After Reading a Novel"
cold fjord writes "The Independent reports, 'Being pulled into the world of a gripping novel can trigger actual, measurable changes in the brain that linger for at least five days after reading ... The new research, carried out at Emory University ... found that reading a good book may cause heightened connectivity in the brain and neurological changes that persist in a similar way to muscle memory. The changes were registered in the left temporal cortex, an area of the brain associated with receptivity for language, as well as the primary sensory motor region of the brain. Neurons of this region have been associated with tricking the mind into thinking it is doing something it is not, a phenomenon known as grounded cognition — for example, just thinking about running, can activate the neurons associated with the physical act of running. "The neural changes that we found associated with physical sensation and movement systems suggest that reading a novel can transport you into the body of the protagonist," said neuroscientist Professor Gregory Berns, lead author of the study. "We already knew that good stories can put you in someone else's shoes in a figurative sense. Now we're seeing that something may also be happening biologically."'"
I have to believe that programming and puzzle solving have similar effects. Also, I have to believe that being elected to any government position has the opposite effect.
Well, my brain is boosted for days after writing a neat piece of code.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
The big question - is this cumulative? I want to improve my IQ, so I'll read 3-4 books this week ... but wait a minute, this sounds like school.
... today ... and they're linked by correlation (but not causation). Also? Topical XKCD comic.
Also, this study was done on students. At university (or college, for our american viewers). And didn't eliminate free time or stress relief as possible factors. Also, it was done in the USA, which doesn't have the most homogenous distribution of literacy (or even a consistent measure for literacy).
I'm not saying it's bad science, I'm just saying there's another article about junk science on slashdot
- Nec Impar Pluribus, or so I'm told.
They need a followup study. Just 21 people? How about listening to an audiobook? Does it have the same effect? When I'm bored at work and don't have to worry about distractions to my programming, I listen to audiobooks instead of music.
What does "boosted" actually mean? Fuck all. It's impressive that the task is sensitive enough to show up changes in the brain after reading a book, but scientifically it's not surprising: if you read a book and remembered something about it then there will be physical changes in your brain. There have to be. We've known that for decades. e.g. In 1997 it was shown that environmental enrichment causes production of new neurons in the hippocampus (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v386/n6624/abs/386493a0.html).
soylentnews.org
It seems as though it needs to be something with a lot of prose but either fiction or non-fiction works.
Moderately technical non-fiction is OK as long as it is interesting and mentally stimulating (makes you stop and think etc.).
But pure technical books don't seem to help at all and may just clutter things up with new knowledge that the brain is trying to assimilate. So for example pretty much anything from O'Reilly will not make me feel generally smarter even though it may be very good at cramming in the domain specific knowledge I need for some project.
So just reading tech books is not very helpful at all, and needs to be supplemented with more general works from my experience.
G.
Even more interesting is that the effect measured only applies to paper books. When the same book is read from an e-format, there is no lasting effect. This coincides with other studies that show that reading an e-book utilizes different parts of the brain than an actual book. The e-book registers in the same areas used when watching tv or a movie. The pathways used to interpret the information presented are different.
All of that said, however, researchers indicate that more study is needed to determine if there is a bias to such data (book vs e-book) because most subjects being tested, grew up with traditional books. They estimate it will be another 10 to 15 years before adult subjects could be studied to see if growing up primarily with e-books alters the brain function in the same way. In otherwords, are the results for books because the subjects tested had their neural pathways developed using books (in which case would the results be the same if they had been formed by e-books)?
Regardless, though, the study shows that reading is good, or as they used to say in the 70s (in the US) Reading is FUNdamental.
after reading Slashdot comments. I feel dumber for days.