Discuss two effects of the environment on physiological processes. (22) Discuss (22) – A considered and balanced review, including a range of arguments, factors or hypothesis. Opinions and conclusions presented clearly supported by appropriate evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r1UMS5z3FE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELpfYCZa87g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLDi8erFAPI [Neuroplasticity] [Mirror Neurons]

Draganski et al. (2004) – brain changes after learning a new motor skill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAkYL7m5rK4 [Neuroplasticity]

Draganski et al. (2004) – brain changes after learning a new motor skill Aim:  To determine whether functional and structural changes could be detected in the human brain as a result of learning a new motor skill  Method:  21 females and 3 males were split into two groups  One group had to spend 3 months learning a juggling routine for a minimum of 60 seconds, then spend 3 months not practising juggling  Results:  MRI scans showed no structural differences in groups' brains before juggling.  There was an increase in volume of two regions of the jugglers' brains associated with the retention of visually detected movement information of learning  This difference decreased after 3 months of no practice.  Conclusion:  Practising watching balls move and learning to move in response has strengthened the neural connections in brain areas responsible for the activity. 

Rosenzweig & Bennett (1972) effects of a deprived or enriched environment on rat’s neuroplasticity

Rosenzweig & Bennett (1972) Aim:  To investigate the effects of a deprived or enriched environment on neuroplasticity, in particular, the development of neurons in the cerebral cortex.  Method:  The participants used were rats (unspecified type).  The independent variable was the type of environment that the rats were exposed to. Stimulating environment contained interesting toys  Deprived environment had no toys  The dependent variable was the weight of the rats brains, showing the amount of brain plasticity that occurred in the rats.  The rats were separated and exposed to the two environments for 30-60 days before being euthanized.  Results:  Rats in the stimulating environment had a thicker cortex and heavier frontal lobe (associated with thinking, planning, and decision-making) compared to rats in the deprived environment.  Conclusion:  This may have resulted from the exposure to the toys in the stimulating environment, which helped to develop neural connections in the rat’s brain. 

Gaser and Schlaug (2003) – grey matter volume in musicians [Neuroplasticity]

Gaser and Schlaug (2003) Method: Compared the brains of professional musicians (who practice at least 1 hr. a day)  Results:  Grey matter volume was:  highest in the professionals' brains  lowest in the non-musicians  in several brain areas involved in playing music such as motor regions, anterior superior parietal areas and inferior temporal areas Connection of study to question This study shows how environmental enrichment (in the form of music) contributes to neural connections in the brain – demonstrating brain plasticity. 

[Mirror Neurons] Iacoboni (2004) Aim: To determine whether looking at the emotion expressed on someone's face would cause the brain of the observer to be stimulated. Method: Asked participants to look at human faces while in an fMRI.  Participants had to imitate the faces shown and then they watched as the faces were shown again.  Results:  The same brain area was activated both times (in both animals and humans).  The limbic system was stimulated - observing a happy face activated pleasure centres in the brain.  Connection of study to question  This study demonstrates the effect of observing experienced actions on mirror neurons as the participants' mirror neurons were activated when they observed and imitated facial expressions.  [Mirror Neurons]

Iacoboni (2004) – brain stimulation by viewing facial expression [Mirror Neurons]

Keysers (2003)

Keysers (2003)- MN in relation to disgust Aim:  Studied MN in relation to the emotion - disgust  Method:  He put his volunteers in a brain scanner and wafted disgusting odours  For example, rancid butter and rotten eggs into their nostrils  He wafted some non-disgusting ones too, as a control  Results:  The disgusting odours, he found, activated part of the brain called the anterior insula.  He then played film clips of people's faces registering disgust to his volunteers, and found activity in exactly the same part of the brain. 

Keysers (2004)  In 2004, Keysers conducted a similar study, but found that...  Results:  Part of the brain that was activated by touching the leg of a person in a brain scanner also reacted if the subject was shown film of another person being touched on the leg.  Conclusion:  This suggests that understanding experiences and emotions of others and ourselves is mediated by mirror neurons 

Lingau et al (2009) Lingau et al (2009) did not find mirror neuron activity for acts that were first done and then observed, only the other way round.  This suggests that the system is merely priming the motor neurons for subsequent activity.  MN have been used to explain language, culture and empathy  But although monkeys have mirror neurons, they don't have language, culture or empathy.  There are other ways of understanding and explaining other people's actions than MN.  The MN system is not needed  Neuroimaging techniques have provided evidence to suggest that MN exist in humans  However, fMRI studies cannot prove the existence of mirror neurons – only the oxygen use of sections of the brain with many neurons.