Slashdot Mirror
Personality Traits Are Linked To Differences In Brain Structure, Says Researchers (neurosciencenews.com)
New submitter baalcat quotes a report from Neuroscience News: Our personality may be shaped by how our brain works, but in fact the shape of our brain can itself provide surprising clues about how we behave -- and our risk of developing mental health disorders -- suggests a study published today. According to psychologists, the extraordinary variety of human personality can be broken down into the so-called 'Big Five' personality traits, namely neuroticism (how moody a person is), extraversion (how enthusiastic a person is), openness (how open-minded a person is), agreeableness (a measure of altruism), and conscientiousness (a measure of self-control). In a study published today in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, an international team of researchers from the UK, US, and Italy have analyzed a brain imaging dataset from over 500 individuals that has been made publicly available by the Human Connectome Project, a major US initiative funded by the National Institutes of Health. In particular, the researchers looked at differences in the brain cortical anatomy (the structure of the outer layer of the brain) as indexed by three measures -- the thickness, area, and amount of folding in the cortex -- and how these measures related to the Big Five personality traits. The study has been published in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience.
So it would be nice if the summary linked to the actual study instead of the splash page for the journal. Some of the results wouldn't hurt either.
Neuroticism was associated with thicker cortex and smaller area and folding in prefrontal–temporal regions. Extraversion was linked to thicker pre-cuneus and smaller superior temporal cortex area. Openness was linked to thinner cortex and greater area and folding in prefrontal–parietal regions. Agreeableness was correlated to thinner prefrontal cortex and smaller fusiform gyrus area. Conscientiousness was associated with thicker cortex and smaller area and folding in prefrontal regions. ... Cortical thickness and surface area/folding were inversely related each others as a function of different FFM traits (neuroticism, extraversion and consciousness vs openness), which may reflect brain maturational effects that predispose or protect against psychiatric disorders.
It's like peeling the phrenological onion
See Subject.
I don't think that extraversion is usually defined as "how enthusiastic a person is". On the contrary, Wikipedia defines it thus:
"Extraversion is the state of primarily obtaining gratification from outside oneself.[4] Extraverts tend to enjoy human interactions and to be enthusiastic, talkative, assertive, and gregarious. Extraverts are energized and thrive off being around other people. They take pleasure in activities that involve large social gatherings, such as parties, community activities, public demonstrations, and business or political groups. They also tend to work well in groups.[5] An extraverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people, and they are more prone to boredom when they are by themselves". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I imagine that Slashdotters, on average, have a much higher tendency to be introverted. It's not that extraverts can't be good at technical work - one could cite many examples to the contrary - just that it's easier to put a lot of time and effort into thinking if you don't have a lot of social commitments as well. But surely no one could claim that introverts necessarily lack enthusiasm. It just manifests in different ways.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
It's literally 2017.
... on the library shelf?
So brain structure affects personality, who knew??
Our personality may be shaped by how our brain works, [...]
Of course it is! By what else would it be "shaped"?
Except of course if you are very ugly, then you have a "good personality" because of that!
Which part of the brain is responsible for modifying the configuration of the brain. You know, the one that makes cognitive behavioral therapy work. In other words, where does meta thinking happen and what parts of the brain are responsible for that? That's an INFINITELY more interesting question.
We'll make great pets
Even neuroscience is jumping on the "fast five" bandwagon. Ugh!
The reason you think you're smarter than you really are is apparently linked to the enormous thickness of your skull.
It was suspected, but far from proven. Even now, we don't know what exact proportion of personality is derived from these brain structures that have been identified, from other brain structures, from hormone levels and from life experience.
This could be both incredibly useful in helping to diagnose and treat mental illness, and extremely dangerous if people start trying to design ideal personalities. Science fiction has often features docile slave races, perfect soldiers with high aggression and little empathy, people genetically modified and raised to do a single job.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Look, buddy, if you want to go to war, please do so, go ahead and get shot, nobody will hold you back.
In the meantime we'll stay here and find a way to coexist, ok? I guess that makes everyone happy.
See? We're open to your ideas. And we even support you!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I doubt he is that old. No one is that old.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
I'm no warmonger, but as Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Just another day in Paradise
Are we sure that our personality comes from our brain structure? Or does our brain grow to that structure as our personalities mature during childhood?
Just another day in Paradise
What they have is a correlation. It can be that personality causes brain structure, brain structure cause personality and that both are caused by a third factor. It is also possible that the people were this correlation is high are P-zombies and that the whole research is meaningless.
Incidentally, the 5-trait model is overly simplistic and only captures stereotypical people well.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
"Yes, depending where the sun appeared to be when you were born affects the structure of your brain."
As interpreted by a coding scheme which is two thousand years of earthly precession (that's one whole constellation) out of date, and which for no particular reason omits two of the constellations through which the sun appears to pass.
The summary leaves me very concerned about the quality of the research.
agreeableness == a measure of altruism
WTF
Is this an industry term which I've never heard about?
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
It's an alternative fact that it's literally 1984.
It is totally obvious though, that human behaviour, which originates in the brain, depends on the structure of that brain.
With computers, you'll see again and again that software architecture is heavily influenced by what is easy to achieve and/or efficient for a given piece of hardware. Humans' learning naturally gravitates towards ease and efficiency, so it is hardly surprising that this shows up in the brain. The thing that is hard to show, however, is the degree to which the interplay between personality and brain-structure influences the brain's development.
John_Chalisque
The Big Five is often studied, but is a really poor personality paradigm. It's based on randomly chosen traits, it's not orthogonal, it's not complete, and it's only frequently used in research because it's essentially a research fad that refuses to die.
I'm no warmonger, but as Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
I vote tyrants.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Wrong. If it provides insight into understanding the subject and it makes testable predictions about that subject, then even after it's been scientifically tested and evidence for or against it is found, it's a scientific theory. No "only" about it.
I have a very good brain.
You are welcome on my lawn.
They shouldn't be using something that isn't scientific to try and do more science...
https://www.psychologytoday.co...
-
If some study finds left hand/right structural differences are very different for 500 tennis players and it was linked to whether they were left handed players or right handed players, would you conclude "people born with big right hands become right handed players and those who were born with big left hands become left handed players"?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I don't see where I would possibly contradict you.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
My 6 year old kid would not make this sort of egregious grammatical mistake. But he's not a moron.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
And if it is the size of a pea are you pea brained (able to hold contradictory ideas at same time)?
Ability to doublethink is highly valued in the legal profession and in politics.
Add duckspeak to the mix, and you have the perfect lawyer and politician all rolled into one.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Pics from the studies that reproduce these results or it might as well have never happened.
Okay, I don't need the pics, just the reproducible results.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Hopefully we will see modern Trepanning tools soon.
A reasonably priced CNC unit with laser 3D sculpting/printing attachments should sell millions of unit the first year!
Spoken like a true Fox-bot.
Why don't you try to actually listen to the other side, for once? Or are you one of those people who complains about how divided the country is, while you're reaching for the remote, so you can tune in to Tucker Carlson, so he can tell you how to think?
Which exact structures and whether the most important brain structures could be inspected and measured, those questions did not have an obvious answer. Even this result is only a toe in the door on that topic. Furthermore, the human brain is astoundingly malleable, so how useful a brain scan of a 13 year old could ever be in predicting the personality of the 37 year old is unknown -- the answer might turn out to be "not very, but better than nothing".
Yes and no. At this point in history, approximately zero of our fighting has anything to do with keeping American citizens physically safe. America has created a kind of empire. And while it is a much kinder and civilized empire than those that came before, it is still vulnerable to the classic blunders of the old style empire, e.g. the Vietnam War.
There is a Chinese saying: "To love war will ruin the nation; to forget warfare endangers everyone."
IMHO, America suffers for loving war far too much, at this point in history.
People who love war are often quick to accuse any other opinion as advocating a complete forgetting of warfare. Of course, that is just the Black-Or-White fallacy. Arguing for less war in the context of the America of today, does not mean arguing for zero wars or zero warfare.
In the meantime we'll stay here and find a way to coexist, ok?
Unfortunately, wanting to coexist with others doesn't mean that others will want to coexist with you.
I didn't say the brain wasn't malleable, or that you could predict the personality of a 37 year old by scanning their brain when they were 13. Try to address the actual argument, instead of making one up.
Considering how many were murdered by their own-- almost entirely socialist-- governments and countrymen in the last century your statement doesn't make me feel better.
It reduces the experience of travel to a checklist, and wildlife to a parade-type show.
Reductionism.
You touched upon the very heart (pun semi-intended...) of something that may be profound.
The flaw with modern atheistic science worship is that it's too reductionistic and doesn't offer any answers or meaning only a description, like a checklist, of life.
The scientific method is absolutely crucial and extremely valuable.
The body of knowledge gained through the scientific method is absolutely priceless.
The scientific community is full of brilliant people doing a lot of good work.
But there's no mind, no consciousness, no personhood in a checklist or a reductionist description.
Perhaps scientists shouldn't look down their noses at philosophers-- those who're figuring out where to steer the ship that the scientists are rowing.
(Obviously, as with any generality regarding humans, there are bad examples of scientists and philosophers. Why should I even have to say this?)
Just because you expect there to be bear shit in the woods does not in any way reduce the amount of information you can learn about the bear's life from looking at its shit.
I say that as somebody who spends a lot of time off-trail in the woods, and sees a lot of bear shit.
Seeing both aspects of a Necker Cube simultaneously could be an indication of hyper-savantism, or so I have read...
Literary references/jokes aside, the human capacity and propensity to develop certitude in the face of little to no relevant information is a hindrance to acquiring knowledge and understanding. Allowing multiple competing theories to occupy space in your head concurrently is a much better strategy.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
I would take issue with your first assertion. The memory, record, and threat of our bellicose foreign interactions are a deterrent for all of our adversaries.
The blunder of the Vietnam War you point to is misplaced. That war was created by the US for ulterior motives having to do with China. One's lens of that part of history is distorted if they think in terms of victory in North Vietnam being a prerequisite for American victory and attainment of American goals in that region. It was specifically not the objective and when the objective was accomplished America withdrew its forces. See the Pentagon Papers for details.
The planning, incitement, and creation of a war for ulterior motives proves your point about America loving war. The memories of our grandfathers who survived World War II disprove it. As always the battle field looks quite different when from the safety of Washington rather than through the eyes of infantry.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
Why don't you just say "true", instead of using more sophisticated concepts that don't apply?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Kill Whitey
Kill the Infidels
Just who is it that's excessively willing to use violence?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I would take issue with your first assertion. The memory, record, and threat of our bellicose foreign interactions are a deterrent for all of our adversaries.
Historical examples of a gov't's leaders being willing to accept casualties has some positive deterrent value. But "bellicose foreign interactions" have both positive and negative deterrent value, in the case of the US.
For example, WBush made a big show of talking tough but no one ever backed down an inch in response -- he got walked all over by everyone he did not get around to actually invaded, which is really quite a long list. Furthermore, his legacy set a dangerous precedent that perhaps US military action will have nothing to do with the strategic reality and everything to do with American domestic politics. What is the point of a foreign leader backing down, when US policy is often driven by ideology and polls, which rational negotiations cannot be expected to address?
You've still misused the word. You mean "true". A tautology is a statement that is technically true but carries no information (usually because it is logically self-referential) - this is not what you're criticising Jefferson quoters of believing.
Your main point is well-taken. Why should we assume classic quotes are necessarily true? Why would it be impossible to achieve liberty without bloodshed?
The problem is that the 5 'clusters' in the Big 5 aren't all that informative, they are aggregations of more specific traits, which can be wildly different than the score for the category and the others within the category. In grad school, I did a systematic survey of personality assessment instruments ( Personalysis, Myers-Briggs, etc.). The IPIP-NEO was the only one that passed the sniff test for internal and external validity, especially over time. Just carefully read the definitions and the supporting pages that explain what is going on.
.. it is eessentially similar to the Big-5 ... Warning about the nature of this site ... For persons wandering into this site who have not completed a university course or two in psychological assessment, BEWARE: This site includes highly technical scientific information, ..." http://ipip.ori.org/HistoryOfT...
You can take the 300 question one, and look at your own results: "The IPIP-NEO (International Personality Item Pool Representation of the NEO PI-R) " at http://www.personal.psu.edu/~j...
"This is the official website for the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP). The site includes over 3,000 items and over 250 scales that have been constructed from the items. New items and scales are developed on an irregular basis. The items and scales are in the public domain, which means that one can copy, edit, translate, or use them for any purpose without asking permission and without paying a fee.
Over the past 15 years or so, I have taken it at intervals, also taken the results and reviewed them with friends to get their insights. What it doesn't do, is it doesn't predict. And there are no assumptions about how it plays out between individuals with different traits.
I assure you that the only reason some one of the 7b people on this planet hasn't shoved a gun into your back and taken everything you have is because you have a friend with a bigger gun guarding that back. Not to say that you shouldn't be discerning as to who your friends are, but there is no liberty without either bloodshed or MAD. The minute you put down your gun someone will pick it up and point it at you. C'est la humanité.