Monday, April 10, 2017
An area of controversy in the life sciences relates to the relative roles of genetics and the environment. Confusion commonly afflicts politics. For example, early Communists glommed on to the discredited genetic theory of “inheritance of acquired characteristics.” This theory holds that changing a person’s attitude and behavior would somehow result in changes to his or her genes, which would allow for genetic transmission of the changed attitudes and behavior to his or her children. For this idea to be true, outside influences on the brain would have to change the genes not only in brains but also in the sex cells (sperm and egg cells). The idea was held in ancient times by Hippocrates and Aristotle, but it gained scholarly imprimatur with formal publication in 1809 by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. In the 1930s, the Russian president of the Soviet Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Trofim Lysenko, applied the doctrine to Soviet agriculture with disastrous results. At the same time, Soviet political leaders extended the mistaken doctrine to inheritance of educational and social experiences; that is, changing human nature by government policy. They expected that indoctrinating the current generation in collectivism would genetically transfer collectivist attitudes and behavior to all future generations. Cuba, North Korea, and China showed that collectivism can be transferred culturally but not biologically.
In the United States, much political angst arises from disputes over whether more effective educational and social policies will succeed in lifting people out of poverty and dysfunctional behaviors. When I was a child, I often heard the axiom, “You can take the boy out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the boy.” Today, the corresponding axiom would seem to be, “You can take the boy out of the ghetto, but you can’t take the ghetto out of the boy.” The reality is that you can take the country or ghetto out of the boy, but this won’t transfer to his children by his genes.
What we are now discovering is that environment and experience affect the expression of genes. Whether or not genes are accessible for readout often depends on the environment. People have underestimated their capacity to sculpt their own brains, attitudes, and behavior by controlling experiences that affect gene expression. Though people may control to some extent how their own genes are expressed, there won’t be any biological transfer to their heirs. Environmental and cultural influences do of course transfer, so one’s heirs can be taught how to likewise exert control over how their genes are expressed.
Having the right chemicals in the right environment at the right time is believed by most scientists to be all that is needed for creating life and shaping the mental life of the individual. To them, life seems like a highly improbable occurrence. But it did happen, and even more improbable, there may be a life force that sustains it.
Many scientists also think of the brain’s conscious mind as an emergent property of brain function. Emergent properties follow the rule that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Another way of saying this is that the properties of the whole cannot be predicted from what you know about the properties of the contributing parts. Yet, paradoxically, most scientists believe that as they learn more and more about less and less, they will somehow explain the whole.
Emergent properties apply both to molecules in a primordial soup that generate simple living organisms and to the 87 billion or so neurons of a human brain that generate a conscious mind. A physical world that can generate emergent properties is a mysterious and magical world indeed.
What gets left out in such consideration is the capacity for personal control over one’s biology, which is an important theme. I contend that at the level of the individual person, mind itself—especially conscious mind—is a major force of natural selection that drives creation of mental capacity and character. The implications for daily living could not be more profound. Accepting one’s biology and circumstance breeds helplessness and fatalism. So, it boils down to one’s belief system. Either you are “captain of your own ship, master of your own fate,” or you are shackled by the belief that change is not possible. What you think and do shapes your brain's function.
Excerpted from Mental Biology. The New Science of How the Brain and Mind Relate, by W. R. Klemm. New York: Prometheus. See rave reviews at WRKlemm.com, click on "author."
Thursday, March 30, 2017
"Teaching to the test" is the common format for K-12 education. But is it working? Very little improvement seems to result. SAT scores, the generally accepted metric for college readiness have been flat since 1970. In that same period, inflation adjusted federal funding has increased 375% and state funding increases ranged from 150% to over 200%. In that same period, we have gone through one educational “reform” after another (Goals 2000, New Math, Nation at Risk, No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, Common Core, Next Generation Science Standards, Charter Schools, and Head Start). Each new initiative, typically emphasizing new money, standards, curricula, and accountability policy, was needed because the prior programs did not meet expectations. Where is the evidence that any of this works?
Robust learning only occurs when the learner takes charge of his or her own learning. To take such charge, a learner has to be motivated and has to know how to be an autonomous learner. Who teaches them how to become that?
I just had a book published that explains this remedy to teachers and parents (The Learning Skills Cycle. A Way to Rethink Education Reform). Teachers are one segment of the book's audience, because many teachers were not taught everything that is in the book. I know, because I give workshops on the subject to teacher groups. The book's audience also includes parents, who don't have to be an educational expert to learn the ideas in the book and transmit them to their children.
Another part of the problem is that teachers are usually not given the time and flexibility to work this kind of learning-how-to-learn into their curriculum, which is often driven by government edict and enforcement educrats. Having more "school choice" is not likely to help much either if charter- and private-school teachers aren't teaching learning-how-to-learn skills.
The right kind of reform of U.S. education is obviously important to the children and parents who are directly affected. But it should also be of concern to everyone, because we live in an interconnected and economically competing world. When other countries have more curricular flexibility and the knowledge and will to teach learning-how-to-learn skills, their populations become more competitive, in science, technology, economics, and military strength.
The compelling purpose for writing the book is that student achievement in the U.S. is not improving, despite all the government programs and enormous spending. As a man of medicine, I realize that if the treatment is not working there is a good chance the problem has been misdiagnosed. And the problem, as I see it, is that the learners do not have good learning skills, and that teaching such skills is not emphasized in the curricula. What these skills encompass includes: 1) wanting to learn, 2) ability for intense attention and focus, 3) knowing how to organize information, 4) strategic capabilities for reducing confusion when you don't understand new ideas, 5) using established principles and methods for making memorization easier and more reliable, 6) problem-solving skills, and 7) creativity. When students are taught these skills, they take charge of their own learning. Schools will start achieving their objectives.
Klemm, W. R. (2017). The Learning Skills Cycle. https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781475833225/The-Learning-Skills-Cycle-A-Way-to-Rethink-Education-Reform
Saturday, March 04, 2017
Most readers of this blog are familiar with assorted advice on how to age well. But if I asked you to name the two most important lifestyle influences on aging, in two words, could you do it?
The answer is (drum roll please): diet and exercise. Both animal and human research confirm the major role of diet and exercise. Fortunately, we have control over both of these factors, yet sadly neglect to eat and exercise as properly as we should.
A prime example is the popularity of fast-food meals. They are typically loaded with calories, saturated fat, preservatives, and salt. Mice fed on a fast-food diet developed nearly triple their amount of body fat in just four months. Other mice that were given access to an exercise wheel benefitted from the exercise. Those that were on a fast-food diet gained more weight and fat mass than their counterparts that could exercise. The exercise also reduced the development of senescent cells, which are cells that lose their ability divide and replace themselves. As impaired ability to divide happens in organs like the liver, lungs, immune cells, and gut, it promotes development of disease. Normally, the cell turnover time needs to occur:
· every 10 days for immune cells in the blood and cells in the lungs and gut
· every month for pancreas cells, skin, and certain bone cells
· every year for liver cells
You might think that turnover could yield new replacement cells that are more healthy, assuming that a person improved their diet and exercised more. It is certain that precursor cells, once damaged, have been tagged with epigenetic changes that transfer the damage to new replacements.
So what makes a good diet? Eat more foods containing omega-3 fat (a special kind of unsaturated fat found in fish (especially sardines and salmon), shrimp, canola and soybean oil, walnuts, and to a lesser extent, green leafy vegetables. Pill-form supplements are widely available.
Eat a wide variety of foods high in anti-oxidants (most foods have different chemical varieties of anti-oxidants). This includes citrus fruits (vitamin C), brightly colored berries (especially blueberries), dark grapes, red wine (resveratrol), nuts, dark green veggies, beans, coffee, and tea. Vitamin D supplements in moderate dose are probably a good idea too, because this vitamin confers many health benefits even though it is not a primary anti-oxidant.
As for exercise, you don't have to be a marathon runner. In fact, some research shows that marathon-level exercise is actually harmful. Various recommendations have been made, but the consensus advice seems to be combined aerobic and strength building exercises at least three times a week, lasting 30 minutes to an hour.
Why exercise improves health is not entirely clear, but the evidence is consistently clear. Exercise certainly reduces emotional stress, which in itself is a major source of poor health. The effects on circulation and heart function are readily demonstrated. In my own case when I was 35, during the first weeks after I stopped smoking and started jogging, it would take a full 15 minutes to get my breath back to normal after a jog. Within a few months, I could recover in less than a minute. I no longer recommend jogging, because for some people it will damage joints. But plenty of aerobic forms of exercise can substitute (biking, rowing, use of ellipticals, swimming, singles tennis or handball, even vigorous walking). Most commercial gyms have stationary bikes, treadmills, and elliptical and rowing machines.
So you only have to remember two words to know how to age well. The problem is mustering the will power to eat right and exercise.
Documentation and further explanation on aging well is found in Dr. Bill's inexpensive e-book, Improve Your Memory for a Healthy Brain. Memory Is the Canary in Your Brain's Coal Mine. The book is available in all formats from Smashwords.com.
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Got kids or grandkids in school? Odds are they are not getting enough sleep, and it is hurting their learning and grades. This is a special problem for older adolescents. At this age, the biological clock shifts and makes them stay up too late if they need to get up at 6-7 A.M. to get ready for school. Kids this age need about 9 hours of sleep a night. So what is the relationship to learning? Two things:
1. When students are drowsy during class, they can't focus attention and will not encode new information effectively. Sometimes they even fall asleep in class, which means they are not encoding anything.
2. Sleep provides an uninterrupted mental environment in which the brain rehearses the events of that day. As documented in dozens of peer-reviewed research reports, this rehearsal promotes consolidation of fragile temporary memory into more permanent form.
Now, two new studies reveal what happens during sleep to accomplish this consolidation task. Just as a computer writes to a hard drive or CD for permanent storage, the brain has to have a storage mechanism. Information in the brain resides, in real time, in the form of nerve impulses flowing around in certain networks. As long as the impulses are present, the memory is present. But if the impulse patterns change, then the information they represented is lost—unless the impulse pattern was played long enough to cause structural change in the corresponding circuitry. Scientists have known for several decades that information is stored in the junctions (synapses) between neurons. We used to think that the synapses involved in learning can grow from repeated use. Impulse patterns representing the day's experiences are replayed during sleep, providing the repetition needed to stimulate growth in the corresponding synapses. But new evidence suggests that learning does not cause the involved synapses to grow, but rather prunes them during sleep to remove irrelevant information.
One of the new studies showed that synapses in mice change structure and chemistry during sleep. In sleep, the synaptic gaps become narrower and the number of neurotransmitter receptors decreases. This may constitute a pruning process. Synapses receive multiple inputs, and a pruning process could help remove irrelevant and interfering information, thus causing a relative magnification of the memory of information being rehearsed during sleep. Another way to think about it is that sleep may provide a mechanism for "smart forgetting."
The second study by another group, also in mice, confirmed this evidence of pruning and further implicated a particular receptor, the one for the excitatory neurotransmitter, glutamate. The investigators even identified the gene that is activated to remove excess glutamate receptors.
The practical application of these findings for school children is that the more they are allowed to sleep, the more time there is for sleep to cause the synaptic changes needed to store the day's learning in the "brain's hard drive." The other, more general, implication of these studies is that the brain's anatomy and physiology are readily changed by experience, a well-established fact that scientists call "neural plasticity."
Readers may be interested in "Memory Medic's" book, Memory Power 101 (Skyhorse) and his more recent book, Mental Biology (Prometheus).
de Vivo, Luisa, et al. (2017). Ultrastructural evidence for synaptic scaling across the wake/sleep cycle. Science. 355, 507-510.
Diering, Graham H. et al. (2017). Homerla drives homeostatic scaling-down of excitatory synapses during sleep. Science. 355, 511-515.
Thursday, February 16, 2017
Do you feel embarrassed because you use such memory aids as sticky notes, calendars, shopping lists, designated places for personal items, or other shortcuts to help you remember? If so, don’t feel bad. Some recent research suggests that saving key information in specific ways can be a good idea. Not only do reminder notes, computer files, and other means of information storage make information available for later access, they also can apparently lighten cognitive load and make it easier to remember new information.
Recent experiments tested the hypothesis that saving information is a form of off-loading cognitive workload that frees the brain to be more effective at attending and remembering new information. These experiments by a team at the University of California, Santa Cruz, were inspired by prior work of others revealing that information was not remembered as well if it were saved as a computer file, presumably because participants knew they could look it up later. This finding was subsequently confirmed in other ways. This is the effect of "Memory in the Age of Google," the title of a keynote address I gave to 1,300 teachers at a conference.
But one question not addressed in the prior work was the possibility of an effect on future learning. Now a principle of proactive inhibition of memory formation has been identified in which new learning can be impaired by immediately prior conditions. Could off-loading of previously acquired information affect proactive inhibition? Saving a copy of information might reduce such inhibition by lowering the brain’s workload as it encounters new information to be remembered. Indeed, several groups had established that telling participants they don’t have to remember a list of items enhanced the memory for a second list of items. Thus, it seemed plausible to suggest that saving a list of items, as for example in a computer file, might make it easier to memorize a second list because the learner knows the saved original information can be accessed later.
The test of this idea involved 20 college students who took six trials, each involving study and testing of the contents of two PDF computer files, labeled A and B. For example, they first studied file A, but before being tested on it, they would study and be tested on file B. On half of the trials, participants saved file A after studying it, and the other half were no-save trials in which file A was exited without saving before study and testing on file B. The amount of recall on testing of file B was significantly greater on trials when file A had been saved. This was confirmed in a subsequent trial in which half of the save trials were conducted when participants were told the save procedure was not reliable and that the information in file A could be lost. As long as they trusted that file A was reliably saved, they remembered more from file B.
It seems likely that this principle could apply to other contexts, and thus there might be practical applications. By using a variety of memory saving aids (sticky notes, calendars, etc.), people gain some protection from proactive interference for new learning. And, of course, the earlier saved information is still accessible to be memorized as needed. This may well be the major advantage of taking good lecture notes, for as the learner is off-loading information as it is being saved in the notes, some of the new learning (which is also being saved in the notes) might actually become memory during the note-taking process.
Another obvious benefit is the reduction of anxiety over a concern that you might forget. You know the information is safely stored, so the brain is free to take on new learning without a degree of proactive interference that anxiety always produces. You probably can think better too, as the mind has very limited capacity to hold information in conscious working memory, which holds the information that you think with.
Dr. Klemm is author of Memory Power 101 (Skyhorse), Better Grades, Less Effort (Benecton), and Mental Biology (Prometheus).
Sparrow, B. Liu, J., and Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory. Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science. 333, 776-778.
Storm, B. C., and Stone, S. M. (2014). Saving-enhanced memory: The benefits of saving on the learning and remembering of new information. Psychological Science. Doi: 10.1177/0956797614559285.
Saturday, January 21, 2017
Every generation has its preferred music. In the 1920s, it was classic jazz. In the 40s it was big-band swing. In the 50s it was modern jazz, Elvis, and rock. In the 90s rap and hip-hop became popular. However, some music, such as country and classical music does not seem to be bound to a particular generation.
Whatever your generation is, you likely prefer that generation's musical genre. As we age, we can find great comfort in listening to the music of our generation, often accompanied with irritation at "that terrible noise" of the current musical fad.
Most of us know from personal experience that certain music is profoundly linked to personal memories. When we hear music from our past we not only remember the music, we often remember associated places, events, and people. This was an underlying theme of the highly acclaimed new movie, LA LA Land. If it is music we loved then, we love it now, and it feels good to hear it again. Listening to your favorite music combats the body's response to stress.
You don't even have to wait years for the benefit. I remember in college, I got exposed to modern jazz as a freshman, and years later as a graduate student got much relief from my academic stress from listening to jazz records. Now 50 years later, jazz still has the same effect on me. By the way, there is a formal scientific study showing that listening to jazz raises body levels of the feel-good endorphins and of immunoglobulin, which protects against infections.
Music has therapeutic value. The "right kind" of music soothes our frazzled nerves. Some of that effect comes from the music's rhythm. Biologically we are rhythmic creatures with all sorts of rhythms: heart and breathing rates, hormone cycles, sleep cycles, mental alertness cycles, and so on. Other musical benefits are emotional, for reasons that are sometimes hard to explain.
For seniors with dementia, music is now becoming considered as part of the therapy. A formal therapy program has been instituted by MusicandMemory.org. I have no vested interest in this program, but it seems to have the right idea and practical approach to helping demented patients. In Alzheimer's Disease patients, for example, music can improve mood and thinking ability and memory and reduce the need for psychotropic drugs.
A movie documentary, Alive Inside, is a story of music and memory that illustrates that musical memory lasts longer than other kinds of memory. Even in Alzheimer's and other dementias, favorite music resurrects memories that help to reawaken patients, making them feel like themselves again and socialize. Life is especially confusing to a demented person, and musical favorites provide something interpretable and pleasurable. A podcast is available at http://musicandmemory.org. There are over 3,000 Music & Memory Care organizations in U.S., Canada, Australia, and Europe. The program provides iPods and trains volunteers to help seniors listen to their favorite music by creating a personalized iTunes play lists for iPods. The Canadian affiliates report that the program helps people who have been silent or less communicative, sad and depressed. and less mobile.
The organization surveyed its care facilities staff in 2012 who said that personalized music:
· brought more pleasure to patients (100% of the staff respondents).
· made their job of care easier (68% of the staff).
· was effective for patients with depression (58% of staff) and for patients with anxiety (71% of staff).
· reduced the use of anti-psychotic medication (53% of staff).
A review of the program by Monica Jacquez, of television KXTV, quotes Casey Simon, one of the senior care staff, as saying that "Music really makes everybody happy. It really does, and especially if you hear a song from your past, it brings back those happy memories and puts you in a place of happiness." Simon said the staff got inspired to host dance parties.
The need is great for helping seniors to enjoy life. Loss of happiness is widely experienced by seniors. Friends and spouse may have died. Children may not need you anymore. Food no longer tastes as good. Aches and pains seem to be everywhere in the body. Successful careers are over. The problems may be compounded by having to live alone. Getting old is not for wimps.
You haven't outgrown the music of your teenage years. You just need reminding. So when you are down, bring out the CDS and tapes of your favorite music. It's what I do―and it works!
Readers of this column will be interested in "Memory Medic's" e-book, "Improve Your Memory for a Healthy Brain. Memory Is the Canary in Your Brain's Coal Mine" (available in all formats from Smashwords.com). The book is devoted exclusively to memory issues in seniors.
Fancourt, Daisy, Ockelford, Adam, and Belai, Abi (2014). The psychoneuroimmunological effects of music: A systematic review and a new model. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. 36, 15-26.
Jacquez, Monica (2016). Music program helps seniors with memory loss. ABC10 Connect. November 21. http://www.abc10.com/news/local/sacramento/new-music-program-helps-seniors-with-memory-loss/354733172
Thoma, Myriam V. et al. (2013). The effect of music on the human stress response. PLoS One. 8(8): e70156. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070156
Thursday, December 29, 2016
It is well known that stress can impair memory. Everyone has had some experience of this kind. As a student suffering test anxiety, grades are likely to suffer. In high-stakes social or business interactions, the stress may well cause memory to fail us, as when Presidential candidate Rick Perry forgot the name of the agency he wanted to abolish if elected, or when we forget a friend’s name in the process of making a social introduction. How does stress do this? Is there anything we can do about it?
First, we need to know what stressful events do to the body and brain. Brain freezes, like Rick Perry's, probably occur because thinking can get so preoccupied with the stress-inducing stimuli that other thoughts cannot emerge. But other kinds of stress-induced memory impaired come from the well-known “fight or flight” response in which stress activates the release of adrenalin into the blood stream. Adrenalin has many bodily effects that support fight or flight, such as raising heart rate and blood pressure, and increasing arousal perhaps to the point of anxiety and fear. The increased attentiveness may have a fleeting beneficial effect on memory, as has been demonstrated in laboratory experiments. But the other effects of adrenalin on anxiety and distress are likely to impair memory.
The other thing that happens during stress is the activation of the anterior pituitary gland’s release of ACTH, which in turn activates another part of the adrenal gland to dump cortisol into the blood stream. In the short term, cortisol can have many beneficial effects for combatting stress, such as mobilizing white blood cells and enhancing the immune system. But cortisol binds to cells in the brain’s hippocampus, the area that converts new experiences into memory. This binding actually disrupts the memory-forming process. Ultimately, if stress continues, the synaptic regions deteriorate, making the impairment permanent.
The effects of both adrenalin and cortisol were revealed in an interesting study of mild social stress. Here, the focus was on a theory of how stress effects on memory might be thwarted by a learning technique called forced retrieval. Prior research with students, had shown, that the usual study technique of re-reading notes or text is not nearly as effective as requiring the learner to actively retrieve the information, as one might do, with flash cards, for example. Just a few months ago, I posted a blog on this forced retrieval phenomenon as a key element in “strategic studying.”
This new research was aimed at testing the possibility that forced retrieval might protect learners from the memory deficits caused by stress. In the study on the first day, 120 subjects studied a list of 30 nouns or images of nouns one at a time. Then, one half of the group restudied the items while the other half practiced retrieval by recalling as many items as they could (but without feedback telling them if they got it right). One the next day, half of each group were stressed by being required to solve hard math problems and by giving speeches in front of two judges and three peers. Then they were tested. Twenty minutes later they took a second test on items that had not been tested on the first test. The results revealed that retrieval practice yielded better results.
On the first test, we see that the stressed learners who just studied the items the day before had fewer of the items remembered on the first test given immediately after the stress. But there was no such effect on the stressed leaners who used retrieval practice during the initial learning. This protective effect of retrieval practice was evident on the second test 25 minutes later. In fact, the retrieval practice effect was better than on the first test, even though different items were tested. You may have noticed that the stressed study group on the second test did worse than they did on the first test. This is attributed to a mild effect of adrenalin, which as mentioned above can have some benefit on memory. Adrenalin’s action is immediate and is apparently swamped on the second test by the delayed release of cortisol, which shows up by the second test. Students might note that the magnitude of difference may appear small, but in percentage terms could equal to more than two letter grades (compare the two stressed groups on the delayed test).
To explain why forced retrieval works, the authors speculate that it provides better initial encoding. That is, the new information is registered more strongly if you make yourself try to retrieve it. This is consistent with the everyday experience that most of us have had wherein information that strongly grabs our attention is more likely to be remembered. Forced retrieval is a way to make ourselves pay better attention to what we are trying to lean.
Readers wanting to learn more about improving memory are urged to check “Memory Medic’s” books, Memory Power 101 and Better Grades, Less Effort.
Klemm, W. R. (2016). Strategic studying. October 9, http://thankyoubrain.blogspot.com/2016/10/strategic-studying.html
Smith, Amy M. et al. (2016). Retrieval practice protects memory against acute stress. Science. 354 (6315), 1046-1047.
Saturday, December 10, 2016
Everyone has feelings about those who have been close to them: parents, siblings, spouses, and colleagues. Those feelings are usually formed from memories of past interactions with those people. When those memories are negative, they can poison relationships and lead to terrible results: family feuds, alienated siblings, estrangement between children and parents, divorce, law suits, and assorted vendettas. The saddest part of all is that research is showing that many of these negative memories can be wrong.
Memories are seldom fully literal. Memories are constructed, not recorded like an audio tape. The brain decides how an experience is to be packaged as a narrative to remember. We even generate fictions for experiences that do not involve our own inter-personal relationships. Witness the conflicting stories about how many planes struck the World Trade Center or about the Ferguson "hands up, don't shoot" imagined incident. The criminal justice system now downplays eye-witness testimony because so much of it in the past has proven unreliable. Often this happens when experiences are intense and complex, causing the over-taxed brain to jam them unthinkingly into its already formed store of memories.
Construction of false memory is especially likely during childhood, for several inevitable reasons:
· Children do not process reality as readily or correctly as adults.
· The brain circuitry of children changes dramatically as brains grow and re-wire, which causes many memories to be lost or corrupted.
· Constant replay of the memory over the years leads to further alteration of the memory and the repetition confirms the memory, even when it is wrong.
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal says that we categorize memories to help define ourselves. The author says this is a good thing because it is a method for bolstering one's ego. We may, for example, construct memories to help us think of ourselves as superior, righteous, or likable. But others will construct memories that confirm a pre-existing low self-esteem, thinking of oneself as a victim, incorrigible, unlikable, or whatever. This is a well-studied phenomenon that psychologists call confirmation bias. For better or worse, we transform real experiences into memories that are a "creative blend" that mixes fact and fiction.
When we construct memories that put a negative spin on past interactions with others, we build a negative attitude toward them. Negative attitudes about others are hard to hide. Then as subsequent relationship experiences occur, they too get the negative spin, adding to the storehouse of false memories that can grow into hostility. Rubbing salt into mental wounds by rehearsing grievances year after year intensifies the memory and reinforces belief in it. Apologies and forgiveness become harder and harder to generate.
Why does the brain work this way? A Harvard study revealed that the same areas of the brain are used for remembering past events and imaginary events. A University of Dayton study showed another reason: people have an unconscious incentive to create false memories to protect themselves from threats to their beliefs about themselves. As a relatively benign example, college students who opposed increased tuition, after writing an essay that required them to defend a tuition increase, mis-remembered their initial opposition.
More serious consequences result when, as a Northwestern U. psychology professor explains, people exaggerate the negativity or misery of past experiences to impress themselves and others by their endurance of suffering or "escape" from it. Such exaggeration also occurs as responses to real-time events, as for example when people put the worst possible spin on a current experience. It makes them seem to be a bigger victim and coping with it seems like a bigger achievement.
A University of Utah psychologist says false memories take on more meaning and apparent justification when recounted to others. So as if the false memory were not bad enough, we use it to poison the reputation of others. A child who thinks parents or siblings were unfair, gains validation by telling friends about the presumed mistreatment. A worker may put a negative spin on an annual review and may feel better if he uses that memory to discredit the boss in the eyes of others.
The damage in such cases is three-fold: 1) lying to oneself prevents dealing with real solutions, 2) damaging the reputation of others is mean-spirited and unjust, and 3) spreading this kind of falsehood ultimately destroys the reputation of the perpetrator.
"Bury the hatchet" is sound advice. The more promising way to have good relationships is to base them on the present and to nurture them in positive ways for the future.
Dr. Klemm is author of the recent book,
Mental Biology (New York: Prometheus).
Krokos, Dan. (2012). False Memory. New York: Hyperion.
Shellenbarger, Sue (2016). How inaccurate memories can be good for you. Wall Street Journal. July 27.