Fear, happiness or arousal: which state is best for appreciating art?

Apparently it’s fear, according to researchers from the City University of New York who have now drawn an uncommon link between danger and art appreciation.  One review of the findings spawned this provocative headline (from Research Digest): “Why you should watch a horror film before going to the art gallery,” but fear not, the film doesn’t have to be of mega-length. Apparently a short video clip will do.

In recent years researchers have confirmed a link between one’s emotional state and their perception of artwork.  But this was the first study, according to its authors, that examined which emotional state (fear, happiness or physiological arousal) provides the most juice for enjoying abstract art.

A Research Digest review of the study asked: “Why should feeling afraid enhance the sublime power of art?”  And the researchers, quoted in this same review, explained: “The capacity for a work of art to grab our interest and attention, to remove us from daily life, may stem from its ability to trigger our evolved mechanisms for coping with danger. . . . Art is not typically described as scary, but it can be surprising, elicit goose bumps, and inspire awe. Like discovering a grand vista in nature, artwork presents new horizons that pose challenges as well as opportunities."

In the study, participants were asked to evaluate a series of abstract works of art, but before the rating began, they were assigned to one of five conditions, designed to induce emotions of fear, happiness and/or arousal (via physical activity).  The chief finding, according to the study abstract: “Only the fear condition resulted in significantly more positive judgments about the art. These striking findings provide the first evidence that fear uniquely inspires positively valenced aesthetic judgments.”

Bob Duggan, in a piece published by bigthink.com, explained that study participants were asked to evaluate the abstract art on how “inspiring, stimulating, dull, exciting, moving, boring, uninteresting, rousing/stirring, imposing and forgetful” they were.  And Duggan pointed out that “to control for subject prejudices either for or against a certain artist or art movement, works by the relatively unknown Russian geometric abstract artist El Lissitsky were shown.”

The study is titled “Stirring images: Fear, not happiness or arousal, makes art more sublime” and is co-authored by Eskine, Natalie Kacinik and Jesse Prinz.

##

Alcohol, Marijuana or E-cigarettes: which of these is a gateway drug?

The “gateway theory” of substance abuse has again taken center stage as dozens of states debate the legalization of marijuana, and, quite suddenly, a new substance has entered the conversation: e-cigarettes. In the first national analysis of the increasingly popular e-cigarette, researchers found that e-cigarettes “may actually be a new route to conventional smoking and nicotine addiction,” according to the study, out of the University of California, San Francisco.  The study involved nearly 40,000 youth nationwide.

Noted lead author Lauren Dutra, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF’s Center for Tobacco Control Research & Education: ““Despite claims that e-cigarettes are helping people quit smoking, we found that e-cigarettes were associated with more, not less, cigarette smoking among adolescents.”

Both the UCSF study, and another that involved 75,000 Korean adolescents, found that teens who use e-cigarettes (battery-powered devices that deliver an aerosol of nicotine and other chemicals) were less likely, not more likely, to stop conventional smoking.  Explained senior author Stanton Glantz, UCSF professor of medicine and director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education: ““It looks to me like the wild west marketing of e-cigarettes is not only encouraging youth to smoke them, but also is promoting regular cigarette smoking among youth.” The UCSF study cited statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention which estimates that 1.78 million U.S. students used e-cigarettes as of 2012.

Said the report: “In spite of the growing consumption of e-cigarettes and the fact that there has been limited research on their health effects, e-cigarettes are currently unregulated by the FDA.  Unlike traditional tobacco products, e-cigarettes are not subject to federal age verification laws and can be legally sold to children unless state or local laws bar their sale to minors.  Presently, 28 states prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to minors.”

Marijuana legalization

Is marijuana a gate drug? The body of research continues to grow, and the dial, increasingly, points to no. Maintains the Marijuana Policy Project: “[Marijuana is] simply the first (or more likely, third, after alcohol and cigarettes) in a normal progression to more dangerous substances among those predisposed to use such drugs.”

A 2012 study out of Yale, in fact, found alcohol’s gateway effect to be much larger than marijuana’s.  The study set out to examine the “gateway effect” as it relates to the abuse of prescription opiate drugs.  In other words, the researchers wanted to know if a person’s early use of substances (alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana) correlated with abuse patterns later in life.  The short conclusion: yes, “people who used alcohol or tobacco in their youth are almost twice as likely to abuse prescription opiate drugs than those who only used marijuana,” according to an article authored by Stephen Webster for www.rawstory.com.  Webster noted that, according to the CDC, prescription opiate overdoses kills more Americans each year than cocaine and heroin overdoses combined.

Webster cited two additional studies which pointed the finger at alcohol.  The first, published in the Journal of School Health, “pinpointed alcohol, instead of marijuana, as the most commonly abused substance for first-time drug users.” The second, published in 2010 in the medical journal Lancet, “ranked alcohol as the most harmful drug known to man, with more than double the potential harms of heroin use.” 

The fact that fewer Americans now consider marijuana a gateway drug may account for the rising tide for legalization. A Huffington Post article listed 14 states which appear next in line to legalize the product – following positive experiences in Washington (the state) and Colorado. The 14 states, according to Huffington Post, are as follows (in each state, surveys found that a majority of residents are in favor of legalization): Alaska, Arizona, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

##

When you get out of the pool, why do your fingers and toes wrinkle?

Consider this: when human beings step out of the pool, just two areas of their body wrinkle up, their fingers and their toes.  Consider further that scientists have little idea whether other mammals (save for the macaques) experience this same phenomenon. What’s the purpose?

Years ago, it was believed that wrinkled fingers and toes was caused by osmotic (think: osmosis) reactions. Two common theories were advanced: 1. Fingers wrinkle because water enters the tip, and seeks to balance the water content on both sides; and 2. Wrinkling is the result of water passing into the outer layer of the skin and making it swell up.  But in the 1930s, researchers discovered that if you sever the nerves in your finger (not recommended, by the way), the wrinkles won’t form. 

The ready conclusion? Wrinkling is an involuntary reaction by the body’s autonomic nervous system (the system that controls breathing, heart rate and perspiration). Specifically, wrinkling is caused by blood vessels constricting below the skin.

But why does it exist?  What’s the evolutionary purpose? Recently, neurobiologist Mark Changizi and colleagues developed a theory that wrinkling is designed to enhance human grip, and last year an independent research team out of the UK’s Newcastle University confirmed his hypothesis.  They found that, like rain treads on tires, pruney fingers “create channels that let water drain away, allowing them to make better contact with damp surfaces,” according to a piece authored by Ed Yong, for National Geographic’s Phenomena.

Becky Summers, author of an article written for Nature magazine, quoted Tom Smulders, an evolutionary biologist at Newcastle University, UK, and a co-author of the paper. Said Smulders: “We have shown that wrinkled fingers give a better grip in wet conditions — it could be working like treads on your car tires, which allow more of the tire to be in contact with the road and gives you a better grip.”  Summers, paraphrasing Smulders, explains that “wrinkled fingers could have helped our ancestors to gather food from wet vegetation or streams.” The analogous effect in the toes, the article adds, could help us to get a better footing in the rain.

Summers goes on:

“Given that wrinkles confer an advantage with wet objects but apparently no disadvantage with dry ones, it's not clear why our fingers are not permanently wrinkled, says Smulders. But he has some ideas. ‘Our initial thoughts are that this could diminish the sensitivity in our fingertips or could increase the risk of damage through catching on objects.’”

Some take issue with Changizi’s evolutionary hypothesis, raising the concern that testing human beings in their current form won’t necessarily help us explain evolutionary origins. Said Yong, in his piece for Phenomena: “The new study . . . raises some interesting questions about how to test evolutionary explanations. So far, all of the evidence for Changizi’s idea comes from looking at modern human fingers. . . . If modern human fingers grip wet marbles well, and form patterns that resemble rain treads, does that tell us anything about the origins of such patterns or are all such explanations merely just-so-stories?”

Steve Ferber is author of “21 Rules to Live By,” available either at Amazon.com or Island Expressions, located on Daniel Island. Reviews at www.21rules.com. 

Marriage/Relationships: The Secret to Making Them Work?

Marriage/Relationships: The Secret to Making Them Work?

Let’s start with three:

1.      Stop trying to change your partner;

2.      Never begin a sentence with the word "you"; and 

3.      Avoid trigger phrases (e.g., "you’re being just like your mother/father").

And here’s three more: 

4.      Know your partner’s love language; 

5.      When you spend time together, try to make it “sacred” time; and

6.      Hold your hugs for at least 20 seconds ("that’s how long it takes for your oxytocin – the ‘cuddle hormone’ – to kick in," explains Dr. Jim Walkup).

We all know the basics: patience, kindness, support, respect and trust. But we are human, so every now and then it’s good to pause, collect ourselves, and re-focus on what makes a relationship tick, and keep on ticking. Here then are a few tips, culled from hundreds we’ve come across. Hopefully you’ll find a few that will make your relationship thrive.

Don’t try to change your partner. Says Dr. Rick Kirschner, Relationship Coach: "The biggest waste of effort in a marriage is trying to change your spouse, since the problems you have with your spouse are generally problems you have in yourself. When you try to change your spouse you come across as a nag and wind up sending the message that 'who you are is not enough.' Nobody likes getting that message, and it leads to distance and polarization. Let your spouse be who he or she is and focus on changing yourself."

Spend time together. But make it “sacred” time. Marni Battista, CPC, founder of Dating with Dignity, says that to keep the spark alive and avoid ‘roommate syndrome’, "couples have to understand the notion of spending ‘time’ together versus creating ‘sacred’ time together. Spending time at social events, time with family and doing ‘chores’ together does not count as sacred time. Instead, carve out special time to not only be intimate, but also ensure that you continue to share new experiences together such as hiking, exploring someplace new, or arranging a stay-cation in your own city."

Control or connection? Psychologist and marriage counselor Lee Horton points out: "You can have control or you can have connection with your partner, but you can't have both. Pursue connection!"

Know your partner’s love language. In his Huffington Post article, Walkup explains: "This one is so important. Just because your mom sang your praises for cleaning up your room doesn’t mean your partner is as impressed by the act. We each value different loving behaviors and gestures in our relationship. Often couples have completely different love languages."  Walkup encourages us to periodically ask: “What things have I done that make you feel the most loved?” Walkup also recommends grabbing a copy of Gary Chapman’s "The Five Languages of Love."

Touch every chance you get. "This isn’t just about sex," according to a piece at sixseeds.patheos.com, “although sex is another consistent habit of happy couples. Physical touch includes cuddling, kissing, hugging, foot rubs, shoulder rubs, holding hands and putting your arm around each other. The simple act of touch binds a [couple’s] hearts together like nothing else. If you are one of the many in a 'touch-starved' [relationship], make it a priority to bring more affection and physical touch" to the relationship.

Watch those words! Marcia Sirota, a psychiatrist and the author of "Women Decoded: The Secret Strategy for Relationship Success," shares 10 phrases to avoid. Here are three:

"You’re being just like your father/mother." Says psychologist Megan Fleming, as quoted in Brittany Wong’s Huffington Post piece: “It doesn’t matter how healthy a relationship your partner has with his or her parents: comparing them to dear old dad or mom mid-argument is a particularly low blow, even if the comparison is true.”

"Will you please just relax." Says Sirota, as quoted by Wong: "Unless your goal is to prolong your partner’s anger during an argument, don’t tell them to ‘calm down’ or ‘relax’."

"We need to talk, but now is not a good time." Psychologist Susan Krauss, as quoted by Wong, explains that phrases such as these create "anxiety without providing an avenue for alleviating that anxiety. . . . It’s also a controlling statement. If you feel the need to talk, then wait until you have the time and ask if your partner has whatever length of time you need."  

Author’s note: quotes from Kirschner, Battista, Horton, Monet and Marshall are drawn from an article at www.yourtango.com.

##

An Experiment in Digital Democracy: Will it Work?

An Experiment in Digital Democracy: Will it Work?

How strong is our democracy?  And does the digital age have the potential to strengthen it?

That’s what the citizens of Mexico City are about to find out, in a fascinating experiment in digital democracy.  Just six months ago Mexico City was granted the right to become its own master and now is taking steps to craft its first-ever Constitution. Mexico City mayor Miguel Angel Mancera, seizing this rare opportunity, opened the digital gates, asking citizens to submit petitions to help shape this historic document.

The idea, according to mayor Mancera, as reported in qz.com, “is to bestow the constitution project with a democratic, progressive, inclusive, civic and plural character.”

As an experiment in digital democracy, Mexico City – a metropolitan area home to more than 20 million people – is on the cutting edge. Iceland, a country of 330,000 people, launched a similar experiment some years ago, and similar efforts have been tried around the globe. But nothing approaches the scale and significance of Mexico City. 

Will it work?

By late June, more than 206,000 citizens have raised their voice, submitting a total of 330 petitions. The biggest issues?  Corruption, jobs, access to technology, women’s rights, animal rights and protecting the environment (e.g., taking steps to become a Smart City).  And the mayor is serious: he’s set up more than 300 kiosks around the city for citizens input, guaranteed petitioners the right to meet with his 27-member committee if they garner sufficient support and used results from a detailed “Imagine Your City” survey to guide the crafters.  Further, through pubpub.com (an editing platform similar to Google Docs and created by MIT’s Media Lab), citizens can comment directly on Constitution proposals.

There are skeptics, of course. Digital rights lawyer Antonio Martinez told qz.com: “It’s a bit of a show,” given that the committee is under no legal obligation to incorporate citizen input. But others insist that the process, however flawed, will enhance accountability.  Said Diego Cuesy, a city policy analyst, in the qz.com article: “The platform represents, at the very least, a commitment by the government to listen [and] there will also be an electronic record for everyone to see.”

What’s the process? If a petition garners more than 5,000 supporters, the mayor’s committee will respond. More than 10,000?  Committee members will meet with petitioners. More than 50,000?  Petitioners will address the full committee (by late June, a dozen petitions have passed the 10K mark, with one approaching 50,000, see sidebar, below). Among the 330 petitions in play, said a fusion.net report, are recommendations to: lower the voting age to 16, ban zoos, reduce wages for government officials, increase paid vacation days, extend maternity and paternity leave and ban the sale of junk food in schools. Plus, this notable proposal: requiring Mexico City cops to wear GoPro-style cameras to prevent corruption and abuse of power.

Noted the fusion.net report: “[It’s a] “daunting challenge [to write] a magna carta for a city that has existed for nearly 700 years.” Yet, optimism is high. Said one-time skeptic Francisco Fontano, a young Mexican travel blogger, as quoted at fusion.net: “If this process turns out to be fake and it all fails, it won’t matter because I did what I could . . . I’ve always believed you have to remain idealistic to change things; be a little crazy and always stay positive.”

Good words to live by.

##

Sidebar

Digital Democracy: Mexico City’s most popular proposal

Over 200,000 citizens of Mexico City have weighed in, submitting over 330 petitions aimed at shaping the city’s first-ever Constitution, and the most popular proposal to date (48,997 supporters and counting) deals with corruption. The petition reads, in part: “We are tired of seeing every day how public servants in senior positions [receive] high wages and benefits . . . often without meeting a minimally acceptable performance. It is necessary that the new Constitution of the CDMX establishes the right of citizens to good governance, so as to limit and regulate . . . bonuses, benefits, rewards, incentives, bonuses, vouchers, travel expenses, compensation, insurance payments tax or subsidy. . . . In addition, the right to good administration should include a general principle of austerity in public spending.” 

What, no strawberries?

Comedian Louis C.K. on the miracle of air traffic: “ ‘I had to sit on the runway for 40 minutes.’ Oh my gosh, really? What happened then, did you fly through the air like a bird, incredibly? Did you soar into the clouds, impossibly? Did you partake in the miracle of human flight and then land softly on giant tires that you couldn't even conceive how they put air in them? You're sitting in a chair in the sky. You're like a Greek myth right now.”

What, no strawberries?

The scene was all too familiar. I’m in the fruits and vegetable aisle of Publix, hovering over the avocadoes, when I hear a woman proclaim, to one in particular: “What, no strawberries?”  She’s clearly irritated. No, I mean, she’s visibly upset. 

As the blueberries and raspberries nestle close to one another, the strawberry section remains bare. Perhaps a batch rejected by the health inspector? Or, more simply, a shipment delayed by bad weather? Either way, no strawberries are going home with this woman today.

As she frets, I loop back to a familiar thought, amazed, yet again, that on any given day I can stroll into a supermarket, a mile from home and buy virtually any type of food. And the magic persists – new food arrives daily, shelves are re-stocked, electricity stays on, freezers remain cool. Day after day, year after year. How is this possible?

When I worked in Washington, DC some years ago my office looked directly onto the runway at National Airport.  I was never a fan of air travel but the experience was life changing. With each passing minute another plane took off, then another landed.  Months rolled by without a hitch and I came to marvel at the miraculous achievement of air travel. (How safe is it? Some 40,000 planes land safely each day – so if you were to fly every day of your life, you would experience one major accident every 19,000 years).

Out of bed each morning, with little notice, we turn a handle and fresh water pours out. Flick a switch and electricity arrives.  Have a health concern or worry? There’s a doctor, and staff, waiting for you at a nearby emergency room. A domestic dispute or urgent smoke alarm? Police and firemen move into action. Is that not amazing?

It’s not as if these systems are run by automatons.  It’s humans – human beings run these systems and, honestly, we’re not the most reliable creatures. We’re emotional, we’re erratic, we’re irascible at times. Yet, when it comes to making things run, making things work, health inspectors inspect, teachers teach, medical professionals save lives. 

It’s all pretty stunning.  And when there is a rare breakdown in the system (e.g., an electricity outage, empty gas pumps, a storm-induced closure at the supermarket), it’s a welcome reminder of how incredibly well systems work.

So the next time you’re browsing in Publix and a favorite food of yours is on vacation, take a moment to reflect.  It’s not simply about appreciating what we have (1.2 billion people lack access to electricity, 780 million lack access to clean water and 2.5 billion lack access to adequate sanitation), it’s about marveling at the level of consistency with which systems perform. After all, humans are running the show.

##

Friendships: Is it possible to be honest without being negative?

Friendships: Is it possible to be honest without being negative?

“Honesty may hurt for a bit, but blunt burns forever.”- Kate Nasser

How honest should a good friend be?

Says Steven Handel, author of www.theemotionmachine.com: “A good friend needs to be honest, and that sometimes means touching on subjects that aren’t always very comfortable to talk about. At the same time, we need to do it in a healthy and respectful way.  Bullying, insults, and peer pressure are all negative and counterproductive ways of being honest with someone. One recent study found that when individuals are made fun of for their obesity, they are actually driven to gain more weight.”

The authors at Wikihow.com remind us: “Remember that honesty is the basis of all healthy relationships, whether with a friend, a significant other, co-worker or any other person. Honesty gives rise to trust, which is essential for maintaining relationships.”

Some tips from the pros:

·        Avoid “You.” Never start a sentence with the word “you” in difficult situations, according to Kate Nasser, the People-Skills Coach, who explains: “Imagine saying, ‘You aren’t doing your job’ or ‘You are failing badly.’ Starting with ‘you’ sets the hearing up for a blunt attack and a defensive reply. Saying: ‘Here is what we are expecting from you and this is what you are doing. We need these changes’ . . . Now the person can hear your message and has specifics on what to change.”

·        Do it in private. Says Handel: “You don’t want the person to feel like they are being pressured by a bunch of people all at once.” The authors at Wikihow agree: “Seek a favorable environment for divulging the truth. Don't tell the person something potentially hurtful or embarrassing in front of other people––try to speak to them alone. . . .”

·        Face to face is best.  “Face-to-face is best,” according to the authors at Wikihow, “it lets the other person read your body language and helps them put your words into emotional perspective.”

·        Ask three questions. When you’re on the verge of sharing your “honest opinion,” the Wikihow authors recommend, ask yourself “the trilogy of essential questions when deciding whether your honesty is coming from a place of good intent: ‘Is it true, is it necessary, is it kind?’ If you can't answer all of these in the affirmative, then your ‘honesty’ probably has the wrong motivation (such as spite, anger or revenge) and you'll need to rethink what you intend to communicate, if anything.” They add: “Distinguish between jealousy and honesty. Jealousy is not tactful, caring or considerate of reality. . . . Do not confuse the two.”

·        Rehearse.  “If you need to rehearse, do so!” say the authors at Wikihow.

·        Watch your speed. Explains Nasser: “The faster you speak in tough moments, the more brutal it sounds. Meanwhile, speaking too slowly or softly risks sounding patronizing. Using a normal even pace of speech communicates honesty and avoids the brutality.”

·        Focus on the emotional impact, not just the message. Adds Nasser: “Much of the brutal bluntness comes from focusing only on the message you want to deliver. Oddly enough, it makes the message less clear because the emotion blocks the other person’s listening. Before speaking, ask yourself what impact your words will have on people. Honesty without honoring the human comes out blunt.”

·        Consider the person. “Consider the person with whom you must be honest,” say the authors at Wikihow.com, who add: “Don't be brash or too pointed where the person is usually shy or very sensitive. Take into account their nature when adapting your message. There will be a different approach between telling your best friend something delicate and motivating a slack co-worker with whom you are trying to complete a project.”

##