tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/electroencephalography-26939/articlesElectroencephalography – The Conversation2021-05-12T12:47:02Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1459182021-05-12T12:47:02Z2021-05-12T12:47:02ZPregnant women’s brains show troubling signs of stress – but feeling strong social support can break those patterns<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399485/original/file-20210507-19-lqcsp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=970%2C1389%2C5772%2C3928&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Just feeling that there's someone out there she can count on can help a mom-to-be.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/beautiful-young-pregnant-woman-relaxing-on-balcony-royalty-free-image/999890406">d3sign/Moment via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Even before the pandemic, there was plenty for expectant mothers to worry about. Pregnant women must withstand a barrage of arguably well-intentioned, but often hyperbolic, <a href="https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/things-not-to-do-while-pregnant#dont-eat-these-foods">warnings about their health and what’s to come</a>, including concerns about everything from what to eat, to what to wear, to how to feel. Health professionals know that <a href="https://adaa.org/find-help-for/women/perinatalmoodisorders">mothers-to-be experience predictable increases in anxiety levels</a> before infants are born. <a href="https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2021/one-year-pandemic-stress-parents">Maternal mental health has been steadily deteriorating</a> in the U.S., particularly among poor and minority women.</p>
<p>The calls to “be afraid, be very afraid” are, of course, countered by the equally strong cautions for pregnant women to not worry too much, lest it lead to long-term negative outcomes for them and their infants.</p>
<p>Such warnings are not entirely off base. Maternal stress hormones cross the placenta and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2017-02140">affect the vulnerable fetus</a>. Fetal exposure to the stress hormone cortisol has been linked to an array of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00207450701820944">negative outcomes</a>, including miscarriage and preterm birth, and irritable temperament for the child and increased risk of emotional problems during childhood. One thing researchers know is that <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0890856709625478">anxious mothers tend to have anxious children</a>. This common, albeit not prescriptive, phenomenon is likely due to numerous factors, both pre- and postpartum.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=l2DzSjIAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">In our laboratory</a>, we focus on what happens when women start their pregnancies already worried or anxious and what clues we can uncover about how to help them and their children. Our research suggests that worry during pregnancy can have long-term impacts on how mothers’ brains communicate – but also that there might be some simple steps that can help rein in the effects.</p>
<h2>Maternal brains change during pregnancy</h2>
<p>The fetal brain isn’t the only one that is vulnerable during pregnancy. There’s evidence that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4458">the maternal brain reorganizes</a> in ways that likely prepare a pregnant woman to care for another human being. The experience of stress during pregnancy can thus hijack a period of change meant to allow for positive adaptations and instead open the door for anxiety problems.</p>
<p>We are interested in whether there might be easy, approachable ways to offset some of these negative effects. So we invite pregnant women into our lab, where we can record their naturally occurring brain activity using electroencephalography. This EEG technique gives us a great sense of how quickly and how strongly brains react to particular stimuli.</p>
<p>In a recent study from our lab, we <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13647">measured pregnant women’s neural reactivity</a> while they viewed emotional and nonemotional pictures. For most people, including pregnant women, their brains show more activity when they’re presented with a negative image or sound – like a crying baby – than with a neutral image or sound – such as a blanket.</p>
<p>We found that for some women in their third trimester of pregnancy, this effect was disrupted; instead of reacting more strongly to a negative image, expectant mothers’ brains showed the same response to negative and neutral pictures. Basically these mothers-to-be did not, at the neural level, distinguish neutral from negative images.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="visualization of brain electrical activity over time" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399494/original/file-20210507-13-1s9x3ev.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Using EEG, researchers recorded the electrical activity of women’s brains when they saw neutral (in black) and negative (in red) images and compared the responses over time.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tristin Nyman and Rebecca Brooker</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We can’t be sure whether what we observed was these women’s brains reacting to neutral pictures as though they were negative, or to negative pictures as though they were neutral. But we did see that the difference between the two emotional categories was smaller compared to what we would expect.</p>
<p>In the context of our interest in worry and anxiety, this finding is concerning. It looks like these women are at risk of responding to even nonthreatening information as though it is problematic. That is, the line between what is worrisome and what should not be becomes blurred, even at the level of neural activity. Other research suggests that this may <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2018.09.003">hurt the mother-infant relationship over time</a>. Researchers found that when women’s brains were more reactive to neutral information, similar to what we think may be happening in our study, mothers reported more difficulty interpreting emotions in their infant.</p>
<p>Critically, though, we saw this mixed-up reaction only in pregnant women who reported having low levels of social support. We asked our volunteers to create lists of people they felt they could talk to if they were in a difficult situation or needed help. We also asked them to tell us if they thought, as they reflected on these lists, that the social support available to them was adequate. When women reported more satisfaction with their social support networks, the neural response was just as we expected, with a clear distinction between negative and neutral information.</p>
<p>Our findings are consistent with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.01.038">studies of nonpregnant individuals</a>, suggesting that adequate social support calms the body’s responses to stress. Our work identifies social support as a specific and easily targeted step for protecting pregnant women in ways that can influence neural function during a sensitive period of reorganization.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="family portrait of multiple generations with pregnant woman in the center" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/399787/original/file-20210510-5687-1no81ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">What mattered was whether a woman felt that she was supported during pregnancy, not an objective reality of how many people were on standby to help her.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/portrait-of-family-relaxing-at-home-royalty-free-image/961476054">Cavan Images/Cavan via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Adequate support is in the eye of the beholder</h2>
<p>What especially caught our eye in these findings is that we used a measure of social support that was based on a woman’s perception about how much backup was available to her should she need it. Whether or not her belief is accurate is unknown.</p>
<p>However, more and more neuroscientific evidence underscores the degree to which people live in their own subjective realities. It is intuitive, and supported by <a href="https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/psychology/social/hastorf_cantril_saw_game.html">decades of work</a> in sociology <a href="https://www.macmillanlearning.com/college/us/product/Social-Psychology/p/1319191789">and social psychology</a>, that people base their thoughts, feelings and actions on what they believe to be true about the world regardless of whether it’s accurate.</p>
<p>In this case, a woman’s feelings about her available social support are based on how good she feels about that network rather than whether anyone else thinks she has enough people to talk to if a problem arises.</p>
<p>It follows, then, that changing a mom-to-be’s perception that she has sufficient social support can change the way that her brain processes emotional information to make it more closely resemble typical, healthy function.</p>
<p>Our research suggests there’s an easy and inexpensive way to support pregnant mothers that can alter neural reactivity to negative information and may serve to protect both maternal and child outcomes – simply help mom feel more supported. That doesn’t need to mean encouraging women to join clubs or groups or find new friends or therapists. Rather, pregnant women may benefit from simply recognizing the power and benefit of the networks they already have in place.</p>
<p>[<em>Insight, in your inbox each day.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=insight">You can get it with The Conversation’s email newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/145918/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Brooker receives funding from the National Institutes of Health. Research discussed in the article was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tristin Nyman receives funding from the the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health. The content she shares here is solely her responsibility and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.</span></em></p>Fetal brains are changing rapidly over the course of pregnancy, but so are the brains of mothers-to-be. Neuroscience research shows one way worry can start taking hold – and a simple way to help.Rebecca Brooker, Associate Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M UniversityTristin Nyman, Ph.D. Student in Psychological & Brain Sciences, Texas A&M UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1012312018-08-10T10:37:57Z2018-08-10T10:37:57ZFlip a switch and shut down seizures? New research suggests how to turn off out-of-control signaling in the brain<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231381/original/file-20180809-30449-1vejssm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=257%2C12%2C3624%2C2561&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In an epileptic brain, the neurons fire wildly.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/human-brain-impulse-mixed-media-452290207">Sergey Nivens/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The brain is a precision instrument. Its function depends on finely calibrated electrical activity triggering the release of chemical messages between neurons.</p>
<p>But sometimes the brain’s careful balance is knocked out of control, as in <a href="https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/about-epilepsy-basics/what-epilepsy">epilepsy</a>. Electroencephalography, or <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/eeg/about/pac-20393875">EEG</a>, visualizes a brain’s electrical activity and can reveal how an epileptic seizure diverges from the predictable wave pattern of typical brain activity.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=186&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=186&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=186&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231337/original/file-20180809-30446-1x4fofp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The pattern of typical brain activity is very regular. During an epileptic seizure, the electrical activity erratically spikes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rochelle Hines</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But medicine still lacks a solution to epilepsy. There’s limited possibility of predicting a seizure, and no way to intervene even when you can predict. Although pharmaceuticals are available to people dealing with epilepsy, they are fraught with <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/ern.10.71">side effects</a>, and they <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8040049">do not work for everyone</a>.</p>
<p>Working on a problem in <a href="https://www.hinesgroup.net">my neuroscience lab</a>, when I stop to imagine how frightening it could be to live with a brain out of control in this way, it really motivates me. Could there be a way to seize back control of these neurons gone rogue? I’ve been focusing on how a specific compartment within each brain cell <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05481-1">might be able to help us do just that</a>.</p>
<h2>An override switch for brain activity</h2>
<p>Ever since I was an undergraduate student, I’ve been fascinated with a part of the neuron called the axon initial segment. Each neuron contains this small compartment. It’s where a neuron “decides” to fire an electrical signal, sending a chemical message on to the next cell.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1162&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1162&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231339/original/file-20180809-30467-16v50vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1162&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The axon initial segment receives signals from adjacent neurons and ‘decides’ whether its own neuron will fire an electrical signal in response.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rochelle Hines</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are specialized connections here that can exert powerful control; they can override the cell’s own “decision” about firing. This control mechanism exists to organize or pattern brain activity – a requirement for much of our behavior.</p>
<p>For example, in order to fall asleep your brain activity needs to wind down into a slow oscillation. In contrast, sharp concentration on a problem requires the pattern to pick up, producing a rapid oscillation. An <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0483">inability to produce and regulate these patterns</a> of brain activity has been related to numerous disorders of the brain.</p>
<p>When the axon initial segments of numerous neurons all receive a silencing signal at the same time, it results in a trough in the wave pattern of the EEG. This means that it quiets the brain’s activity, something that under normal conditions would be useful when moving between relaxed awake and sleep states.</p>
<p>If researchers could harness the power of these inhibitory connections, we could potentially reset the brain’s activity pattern whenever we want to. It could be a way to wrest back control in an epileptic brain.</p>
<h2>Molecules that mediate the message</h2>
<p>To begin understanding how to regulate this power of the axon initial segment, my colleagues and I first needed to understand the molecular partnerships at these connections. For inhibition to be effective at the axon initial segment, there needs to be the right equipment available to receive the signal. In the case of inhibition in the brain, this equipment is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2011.10.007">the GABA A receptor</a>.</p>
<p>With collaborators <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=LP1GjaQAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">Hans Maric</a> and <a href="http://www.rudolf-virchow-zentrum.de/en/research/research-groups/schindelin-group/research.html">Hermann Schindelin</a>, we identified a close and exclusive partnership between two proteins – the GABA A receptor α2 subunit and collybistin. Figuring out the close relationship between these two molecules answers some open questions about how proteins at inhibitory contact sites might be interacting. We knew that the GABA A receptor α2 subunit is found at the axon initial segment, but researchers didn’t understand how it gets there or is kept there. Collybistin could be key.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231375/original/file-20180809-30470-1gzgil4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Together, the GABA receptor protein and collybistin work together to receive the message from the neurotransmitter GABA within this important part of the neuron.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rochelle Hines</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So now we thought that these two proteins could be working together at the axon initial segment. To take it further, my postdoctoral mentor <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=8G-86gkAAAAJ&hl=en">Stephen Moss</a> and I wanted to understand what implications this might have for connections at the axon initial segment, and ultimately how the brain works. To try to figure that out, we created a genetic mutation that resulted in the two proteins being unable to connect.</p>
<p>Neurons of mice with this mutation did, in fact, lose inhibitory connections onto the axon initial segment. Inhibitory connections onto other parts of brain cells remained intact, again supporting the idea that this protein partnership is exclusive, and specifically important at the axon initial segment. </p>
<p>Mice with this mutation experience seizures during development. When they grow into adults, these mice no longer show behavioral signs of seizure. In some forms of pediatric epilepsy, kids can also “outgrow” their seizures. So this mutation is extremely valuable in providing a possible model for human pediatric epilepsy. We hope it can help us understand more clearly what happens in the brain during epilepsy, and also to design and test better therapies, like the selective compound developed by <a href="https://www.astrazeneca.com/our-science/IMED.html">AstraZeneca whose scientists</a> also contributed to this project.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231343/original/file-20180809-30461-15y51yr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Understanding more about these molecules could help researchers design what is essentially an ‘off switch’ for a brain that’s firing out of control.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/skeleton-xray-brain-off-male-his-115340698">Jeff Cameron Collingwood/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A quantitative but early step</h2>
<p>Neuroscientists have long speculated about the partnership between the GABA A receptor and collybistin. Now <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05481-1">our results, recently published in Nature Communications</a>, define it quantitatively.</p>
<p>While we know GABA A receptors – which respond to the neurotransmitter GABA – control inhibitory signaling, we’re still figuring out how it all works. GABA signaling is diverse, with various connection types that exert distinct control over cell firing – something else we need to work to understand. And dysfunction in GABA signaling is <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fnmol.2018.00132">involved in a number of other disorders</a> of the brain, too, in addition to epilepsy. </p>
<p>The ultimate goal of this research is to design treatments that might be able to control inhibitory connections at the axon initial segment. We’d like to be in charge of that switch, able to turn off the out-of-control neural firing seen during an epileptic seizure.</p>
<p>I am imagining life with epilepsy, and I am also imagining life without it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101231/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rochelle Hines received funding from the Canadian Institute for Health Research as a postdoctoral fellow, and currently acts as a consultant for Rapid Dose Therapeutics, a relationship that is regulated by the University of Nevada Las Vegas. Her collaborator Stephen Moss serves as a consultant for AstraZeneca, a relationship that is regulated by Tufts University.</span></em></p>During epileptic seizures, neurons in the brain fire without rhyme or reason. New research identifies a possible way to wrest back control by stopping these signals before they can get started.Rochelle Hines, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Nevada, Las VegasLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/830762017-12-09T21:44:10Z2017-12-09T21:44:10ZFor baby’s brain to benefit, read the right books at the right time<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198399/original/file-20171209-27683-qnf9a7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=935%2C40%2C5774%2C4215&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">How can you maximize reading's rewards for baby?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/baby-book-read-aloud-579664624">aijiro/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Parents often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-1384">receive books at pediatric checkups</a> via <a href="https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-1207">programs like Reach Out and Read</a> and hear from a variety of health professionals and educators that reading to their kids is critical for supporting development. </p>
<p>The pro-reading message is getting through to parents, who recognize that it’s an important habit. A summary report by Child Trends, for instance, suggests <a href="https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/05_Reading_to_Young_Children.pdf">55 percent of three- to five-year-old children</a> were read to every day in 2007. According to the U.S. Department of Education, <a href="https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/edu1.asp">83 percent of three- to five-year-old children</a> were read to three or more times per week by a family member in 2012.</p>
<p>What this ever-present advice to read with infants doesn’t necessarily make clear, though, is that what’s on the pages may be just as important as the book-reading experience itself. Are all books created equal when it comes to early shared-book reading? Does it matter what you pick to read? And are the best books for babies different than the best books for toddlers? </p>
<p>In order to guide parents on how to create a high-quality book-reading experience for their infants, <a href="http://www.psych.ufl.edu/bcdlab/">my psychology research lab</a> has conducted a series of baby learning studies. One of our goals is to better understand the extent to which shared book reading is important for brain and behavioral development.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198357/original/file-20171208-27674-v4iqff.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Even the littlest listeners can enjoy having a book read to them.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Maggie Villiger</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What’s on baby’s bookshelf</h2>
<p>Researchers see clear <a href="http://www.reachoutandread.org/FileRepository/ReadingAloudtoChildren_ADC_July2008.pdf">benefits of shared book reading</a> for child development. Shared book reading with young children is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00911.x">good for language and cognitive development</a>, increasing vocabulary and pre-reading skills and honing conceptual development. </p>
<p>Shared book reading also likely enhances the <a href="http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/42878/1/924159134X.pdf">quality of the parent-infant relationship</a> by encouraging reciprocal interactions – the back-and-forth dance between parents and infants. Certainly not least of all, it gives infants and parents a consistent daily time to cuddle.</p>
<p>Recent research has found that <a href="http://www.aappublications.org/news/2017/05/04/PASLiteracy050417">both the quality and quantity</a> of shared book reading in infancy predicted later childhood vocabulary, reading skills and name writing ability. In other words, the more books parents read, and the more time they’d spent reading, the greater the developmental benefits in their 4-year-old children.</p>
<p>This important finding is one of the first to measure the benefit of shared book reading starting early in infancy. But there’s still more to figure out about whether some books might naturally lead to higher-quality interactions and increased learning.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198355/original/file-20171208-27674-1yr2mjn.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">EEG caps let researchers record infant volunteers’ brain activity.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matthew Lester</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Babies and books in the lab</h2>
<p>In our investigations, my colleagues and I followed infants across the second six months of life. We’ve found that when parents showed babies <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02348.x">books with faces</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00019">objects</a> that were individually named, they learn more, generalize what they learn to new situations and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.02.008">show more specialized brain responses</a>. This is in contrast to books with no labels or books with the same generic label under each image in the book. Early learning in infancy was also associated with benefits <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/desc.12259/full">four years later in childhood</a>.</p>
<p>Our most recent addition to this series of studies was <a href="https://nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1560810&HistoricalAwards=false">funded by the National Science Foundation</a> and just <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13004">published in the journal Child Development</a>. Here’s what we did.</p>
<p>First, we brought six-month-old infants into our lab, where we could see how much attention they paid to story characters they’d never seen before. We used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure their brain responses. Infants wear a cap-like net of 128 sensors that let us record the electricity naturally emitted from the scalp as the brain works. We measured these neural responses while infants looked at and paid attention to pictures on a computer screen. These brain measurements can tell us about what infants know and whether they can tell the difference between the characters we show them.</p>
<p>We also tracked the infants’ gaze using eye-tracking technology to see what parts of the characters they focused on and how long they paid attention.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198356/original/file-20171208-27689-1khpwyr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Eye-tracking setups let researchers monitor what infants are paying attention to.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matthew Lester</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The data we collected at this first visit to our lab served as a baseline. We wanted to compare their initial measurements with future measurements we’d take, after we sent them home with storybooks featuring these same characters.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198381/original/file-20171209-27674-1rb2s10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Example of pages from a named character book researchers showed to baby volunteers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lisa Scott</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We divided up our volunteers into three groups. One group of parents read their infants storybooks that contained six individually named characters that they’d never seen before. Another group were given the same storybooks but instead of individually naming the characters, a generic and made-up label was used to refer to all the characters (such as “Hitchel”). Finally, we had a third comparison group of infants whose parents didn’t read them anything special for the study.</p>
<p>After three months passed, the families returned to our lab so we could again measure the infants’ attention to our storybook characters. It turned out that only those who received books with individually labeled characters showed enhanced attention compared to their earlier visit. And the brain activity of babies who learned individual labels also showed that they could distinguish between different individual characters. We didn’t see these effects for infants in the comparison group or for infants who received books with generic labels. </p>
<p>These findings suggest that very young infants are able to use labels to learn about the world around them and that shared book reading is an effective tool for supporting development in the first year of life.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198359/original/file-20171208-27680-1re78pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Best book choices vary as kids grow.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pennstatelive/33070370920">Penn State</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Tailoring book picks for maximum effect</h2>
<p>So what do our results from the lab mean for parents who want to maximize the benefits of storytime?</p>
<p>Not all books are created equal. The books that parents should read to six- and nine-month-olds will likely be different than those they read to two-year-olds, which will likely be different than those appropriate for four-year-olds who are getting ready to read on their own. In other words, to reap the benefits of shared book reading during infancy, we need to be reading our little ones the right books at the right time.</p>
<p>For infants, finding books that name different characters may lead to higher-quality shared book reading experiences and result in the learning and brain development benefits we find in our studies. All infants are unique, so parents should try to find books that interest their baby.</p>
<p>My own daughter loved the “<a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/241481/pat-the-bunny-first-books-for-baby-pat-the-bunny-by-dorothy-kunhardt-and-edith-kunhardt/">Pat the Bunny</a>” books, as well as stories about animals, like “<a href="https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/rod-campbell/dear-zoo">Dear Zoo</a>.” If names weren’t in the book, we simply made them up.</p>
<p>It’s possible that books that include named characters simply increase the amount of parent talking. We know that <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/babies-learn-what-words-mean-before-they-can-use-them/">talking to babies</a> is important for their development. So parents of infants: Add shared book reading to your daily routines and name the characters in the books you read. Talk to your babies early and often to guide them through their amazing new world – and let storytime help.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83076/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lisa Scott has received funding from the National Science Foundation and the US Army Research Institute. </span></em></p>Psychology researchers bring infants into the lab to learn more about how shared book reading influences brain and behavioral development.Lisa S. Scott, Associate Professor in Psychology, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/838742017-09-25T20:04:10Z2017-09-25T20:04:10ZMind-reading technology should not be used to solve crime<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185772/original/file-20170913-3782-833nte.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Brain-reading technology can still be tricked.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/closeup-ct-scan-brain-skull-on-107572736?src=t1Jn3hoHnJKYjeZNaHLEMA-1-5">Shutterstock/SvedOliver</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is growing interest in the potential for a technology known as brain fingerprinting to be used in the fight <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-23/brain-finger-printing-could-revolutionise-criminal-trials/8647462">against crime</a> and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/scanning-for-terrorism--brain-fingerprinting-offers-new-hope-in-antiterrorism-fight-20160106-gm08k1.html">terrorism</a>, but it’s far from reliable.</p>
<p>Its use without consent violates human rights. And importantly, the technology (as it currently exists) can be tricked.</p>
<p>Brain fingerprinting seeks to detect deception by essentially reading thoughts. It works by using electroencephelography (EEG) to read the electrical activity of the brain, with the aim of trying to identify a phenomenon known as the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1464675">P300 response</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/can-we-predict-who-will-turn-to-crime-63047">Can we predict who will turn to crime?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The P300 response is a noticeable spike in the brain’s electrical activity, which usually occurs within <a href="https://www.google.com/patents/US7376459">one-third of a second</a> of being shown a familiar stimulus. The idea is that our subconscious brain has an uncontrollable and measurable response to familiar stimuli that the machine can register.</p>
<p>Imagine, for example, that a particular knife was used in a murder, and police show an image of it to their lead suspect who denies the crime. If the suspect registers a P300 response and thus a positive recognition of the knife, this would seem to suggest he’s lying. Alternatively, if the suspect doesn’t register a positive recognition, maybe police have the wrong guy.</p>
<p>It isn’t hard to see why this procedure might be enticing for law enforcement, but, as I explored in a <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/toc/aljb/0/0">recent journal article</a>, they should be wary. </p>
<h2>Human rights concerns</h2>
<p>Most Australians would agree that they have a right to privacy, a right not to incriminate themselves, and a right to freedom of thought. Brain fingerprinting threatens all three.</p>
<p>The right to privacy usually protects us from police intrusions without a warrant into our home, our car, our body, or (at least in the United States) our <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/us/supreme-court-cellphones-search-privacy.html?mcubz=0">mobile phone</a>. It seems almost obvious that if we have privacy in these physical things, then surely we deserve privacy in <a href="http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/2654/">our innermost thoughts</a>.</p>
<p>As Tim Robbins said in The Shawshawnk Redemption: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>There are places in the world that aren’t made out of stone … there’s something inside that they can’t get to and they can’t touch. That’s yours.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YM7y5KrS4QI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Shawshank Redemption.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The <a href="http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2001/25.html">right against self-incrimination</a>, otherwise known as the right to silence, protects us from being compelled to bear witness against ourselves if doing so might implicate us in a crime. Surely it should also protect us from someone reaching in and <a href="http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/2651/">taking our thoughts by force</a>.</p>
<p>We also expect to have <a href="http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/cohrara2006433/s14.html">freedom of thought</a>.</p>
<p>This right has not received much attention from courts, but until recently the idea that anyone could tamper with or steal our thoughts was more science fiction than fact. This is no longer the case. </p>
<p>In 2011, for example, <a href="http://news.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/">researchers at the University of California</a> were able to teach a computer to reconstruct a video someone was watching based only on their brain signals, and the results were remarkable.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nsjDnYxJ0bo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Movie reconstruction from human brain activity.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But if brain fingerprinting were to become a part of the police’s investigative toolkit, this could force suspects to take the extreme step of trying to erase or suppress their memories.</p>
<p>Which brings us to our next question: can we suppress or erase our memories?</p>
<h2>Tricking the technology</h2>
<p>Around Australia, most jurisdictions expressly <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/lda1983144/s6.html">prohibit the use</a> of polygraph evidence in court proceedings, in large part because of how fallible the technology is. It can be tricked by anyone with <a href="https://www.livescience.com/33512-pass-lie-detector-polygraph.html">a thumb tack</a>. </p>
<p>Brain fingerprinting was supposed to fix this issue. If you read someone’s subconscious brain responses before they have a chance to alter their physiology, theoretically they shouldn’t be able to trick the machine.</p>
<p>But there are already two plausible ways to do so.</p>
<p>First, research now suggests that a person can <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301051113001154">intentionally suppress</a> their memories and reduce the chances of the brain fingerprinting machine registering a positive response.</p>
<p>Second, researchers have discovered that beta-blockers such as propranolol (which was originally used to treat heart disease) can sometimes <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3050592/">block memory formation</a>. Theoretically, a wily offender could take the drug after committing a crime and effectively erase (or at least dull) their memory of the event.</p>
<p>For anyone interested in testing this theory, the technology’s inventor Larry Farwell has apparently <a href="http://www.larryfarwell.com/brain-fingerprinting-100,000-dollar-reward-dr-larry-farwell-dr-lawrence-farwell.html">offered US$100,000</a> to anyone who can “beat” a brain fingerprinting test.</p>
<h2>Courts should steer clear</h2>
<p>Worryingly, it’s possible that brain fingerprinting could be used in Australia to contribute to the “<a href="http://www.tai.org.au/content/tough-crime">tough on crime</a>” rhetoric. The headlines practically write themselves: “Got away with it? <em>Think</em> again!”.</p>
<p>Indeed, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-23/brain-finger-printing-could-revolutionise-criminal-trials/8647462">researchers in New Zealand</a> are currently hoping that their research into brain fingerprinting might have the potential to help police solve crimes.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/virtual-child-pornography-could-both-help-and-hinder-law-enforcement-82746">Virtual child pornography could both help and hinder law enforcement</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And there may very well be situations where this sort of technology can be useful – for example, as a means of narrowing down the likely location of an imminent terrorist attack.</p>
<p>But extreme caution is needed. This technology has the potential to violate fundamental human rights, and because it has not yet proved itself to be infallible, it is simply too soon to start making Orwellian thought crimes a reality.</p>
<p>Police should be wary of using brain fingerprinting to investigate crime. And, at least for now, courts should be opposed to admitting brain fingerprinting evidence in criminal proceedings.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83874/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Paul McGorrery does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Most Australians would agree they have a right to privacy, a right not to incriminate themselves, and a right to freedom of thought. Brain fingerprinting threatens all three.Dr Paul McGorrery, PhD Candidate in Criminal Law, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/802632017-08-02T08:39:33Z2017-08-02T08:39:33ZIf a brain can be caught lying, should we admit that evidence to court? Here’s what legal experts think<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/180175/original/file-20170728-23788-guf82w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Functional magnetic resonance imaging could reveal whether someone knows something they're not telling.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2013.00016/full">John Graner et al/Frontiers in Neurology</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A man is charged with stealing a very distinctive blue diamond. The man claims never to have seen the diamond before. An expert is called to testify whether the brain responses exhibited by this man indicate he has seen the diamond before. The question is – should this information be used in court?</p>
<p>Courts are reluctant to admit evidence where there is considerable debate over the interpretation of scientific findings. But a <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/3796509/The-limited-effect-of-electroencephalography?searchresult=1">recent study from researchers in the US</a> has noted that the accuracy of such “mind reading” technology is improving. </p>
<p>There are various methods of detecting false statements or concealed knowledge, which vary greatly. For example, traditional “lie detection” relies on measuring physiological reactions such as heart rate, blood pressure, pupil dilation and skin sweat response to direct questions, such as “did you kill your wife?” Alternatively, a <a href="http://theconversation.com/brain-scanners-allow-scientists-to-read-minds-could-they-now-enable-a-big-brother-future-72435">functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)</a> approach uses brain scans to identify a brain signature for lying. </p>
<p>However, the technology considered by the US researchers, known as “brain fingerprinting”, “guilty knowledge tests” or “concealed information tests”, differs from standard lie detection because it claims to reveal the fingerprint of knowledge stored in the brain. For example, in the case of the hypothetical blue diamond, knowledge of what type of diamond was stolen, where it was stolen, and what type of tools were used to effect the theft.</p>
<p>This technique gathers electrical signals within the brain through the scalp by electroencephalography (EEG), signals which indicate brain responses. Known as the <a href="https://www.rroij.com/open-access/the-p300-wave-of-eventrelatedpotential.php?aid=34978">P300 signal</a>, those responses to questions or visual stimuli are assessed for signs that the individual recognises certain pieces of information. The process includes some questions that are neutral in content and used as controls, while others probe for knowledge of facts related to the offence. </p>
<p>The P300 response typically occurs some 300 to 800 milliseconds after the stimulus, and it is said that those tested will react to the stimulus before they are able to conceal their response. If the probes sufficiently narrow the focus to knowledge that only the perpetrator of the crime could possess, then the test is said to be “accurate” in revealing this concealed knowledge. Proponents of the use of this technology argue that this gives much stronger evidence than is possible to get through human assessment.</p>
<p>Assuming this technology might be capable of showing that someone has hidden knowledge of events relevant to a crime, should we be concerned about its use?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176612/original/file-20170703-4580-1c1nqcr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How private are our memories?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cute-girl-colorful-glowing-photo-memories-246693712?src=wiIuEZYLCMwWJVX1yAjxjQ-1-18">ESB Professional/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Potential for prejudice</h2>
<p>Evidence of this sort has not yet been accepted by the English courts, and possibly never will be. But similar evidence has been admitted in other jurisdictions, including India. </p>
<p>In the Indian case of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/world/asia/15brainscan.html">Aditi Sharma</a> the court heard evidence that her brain responses implicated her in her former fiancé’s murder. After investigators read statements related and unrelated to the offence, they claimed her responses indicated experiential knowledge of planning to poison him with arsenic, and of buying arsenic with which to carry out the murder. The case generated much discussion, and while she was initially convicted, this was later overturned. </p>
<p>However, the Indian Supreme Court has <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/migration_catalog/article16297234.ece/BINARY/Supreme%20Court%20judgement%20on%20narco-analysis%20test%20(833%20Kb)">not ruled out the possibility of such evidence being used</a> if the person being tested freely consents. We should not forget that people may knowingly conceal knowledge of facts relevant to a crime for all sorts of reasons, such as protecting other people or hiding illicit relationships. These reasons for hiding knowledge may have nothing to do with the crime. You could have knowledge relevant to a crime but be totally innocent of that crime. The test is for knowledge, not for guilt.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=886&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=886&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176644/original/file-20170703-17450-u7v7lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=886&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How much weight is placed on neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/balance-weight-head-silhouette-graphic-design-330801134">Studio_G/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Context is key</h2>
<p>The US researchers looked at whether brain-based evidence might unduly influence juries and prejudice the fair outcome of trials. They found concerns that <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2778755/">neuroscientific evidence may adversely influence trials</a> could be overstated. In their experiment, mock jurors were influenced by the existence of brain based evidence, whether it indicated guilty knowledge or the absence of it. But the strength of other evidence such as motive or opportunity weighed more heavily in the hypothetical jurors’ minds.</p>
<p>This is not surprising, as our <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/2/3/510/1917949/The-use-of-neuroscientific-evidence-in-the?searchresult=1">case-based research</a> demonstrates the importance of the context in which neuroscientific evidence is introduced in court. It could help support a case, but the success is dependent on the strength of all the evidence combined. In no case was the use of neuroscientific evidence alone determinative of the outcome, though in several it was highly significant.</p>
<p>Memory detection technologies are improving, but even if they are “accurate” (however we choose to define that term) it does not automatically mean they will or should be allowed in court. Society, legislators and the courts are going to have to decide whether our memories should be allowed to remain private or whether the needs of justice trump privacy considerations. Our innermost thoughts have always been viewed as private; are we ready to surrender them to law enforcement agencies?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80263/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Using mind reading technologies in court could become common practice.Lisa Claydon, Senior Lecturer in Law, The Open UniversityPaul Catley, Head of Law School, The Open UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/582972016-04-25T10:20:09Z2016-04-25T10:20:09ZHow the power to control objects with our minds stopped being science fiction<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119931/original/image-20160424-22383-n5f1j9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Open Sesame!</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Vojtêch Kubašta</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/first-paralysed-person-to-be-reanimated-offers-neuroscience-insights-1.19749">recent announcement</a> that a young paralysed man in Ohio in the US named Ian Burkhart managed to regain the use of his fingers after having a chip implanted in his brain is an exciting step forward for science and healthcare. In fact, you may now be wondering how long it will be before we can unlock a door, turn on a kettle, or even send an email simply by thinking about it? </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=722&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=722&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119932/original/image-20160424-22357-y87ngi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=722&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ian Burkhart.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/139719303@N07/26396446396/in/photolist-oyajxt-GdyFSL-w8pHGH-p3aZiC-pZ6jsh-pGwDKp-pGC6XA-pGCcP5-p33pNz-p33prx-pGdfPm-pGCcnd-pGyYVJ-p33osi-pYB38Z-pGotis-drDPE">rumedicalnews</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Ohio breakthrough used a technique called <a href="http://www.ndcn.ox.ac.uk/divisions/fmrib/what-is-fmri/introduction-to-fmri">functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)</a> to identify the pattern of electrical impulses in the part of the brain that controls movement – the motor cortex – that was generated when Burkhart thought about using his fingers. The system learned to recognise this pattern when it appeared in his brain, and then instruct receivers to stimulate his arm muscles to make the appropriate movements. </p>
<p>This might produce life-changing results for people with disabilities, but it has limited potential outside the body. It is about sending movement instructions to parts of the body that cannot be reached in the usual way. We might be able to use it to make a robot reproduce our movements, but that may be the limit. </p>
<p>Having said that, we have already discovered ways of manipulating foreign objects. Three years ago, I demonstrated a modified Scalextric set at the Lancashire Science Festival that enabled people to make the cars go faster round the track simply by concentrating harder on them. Hundreds of people were able to try this using a Bluetooth headset called the <a href="http://store.neurosky.com">Neurosky Mindwave</a>, connected to nothing more than a laptop and a simple microcontroller. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119930/original/image-20160424-22390-5ajszf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Brain-powered Grand Prix.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Stephen Sigurnjak</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The technology behind this shift from the telekinesis of sci-fi movies or comic books into the real world is electroencephalography, or EEG. This monitors the brain’s electrical activity using electrodes placed on the scalp. The data is then processed to see the underlying frequencies in these impulses, which are associated with different kinds of brain activities. The alpha frequency band is associated with wakeful relaxation with closed eyes, for example, while the beta frequency is associated with normal waking consciousness. </p>
<p>The headsets in my demonstration transmitted this information to the laptop, which used algorithms that recognise concentration as a combination of different impulses: increasing on several frequencies while falling on several other frqeuencies at the same time. When it detected this, it instructed the microcontroller to increase the amount of power going to the Scalextric. There is an art to making the system work well: sometimes people find the cars going faster even though they didn’t think they were concentrating. I found I made the cars go faster by doing the alphabet in my head; and could slow them down by looking at a blank wall. Everyone is a bit different. </p>
<p>There are now commercial toys available that use the same technology. One example is the Star Wars Force Trainer, where EEG – not Jedi power – enables users to elevate a ping-pong ball using just their mind. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TQDra0NiHcQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>There are also serious potential applications. To try to make computer programs easier to use, for example, researchers <a href="http://shura.shu.ac.uk/10802/">have studied</a> EEGs to discern the amount of cognitive effort someone expends on different elements of a program. I have <a href="http://mac.sagepub.com/content/47/6/185.short">studied</a> the brain activity of experienced archers and found a difference in impulses between “good” and “bad” shots. This might enable coaches to tell players when they are in the right mindset, while players might be able to train their minds to achieve better results. </p>
<h2>The trouble with thoughts</h2>
<p>These are promising developments, but they are all looking more at the “global” activity of the brain rather than someone’s thoughts. There is a very big difference. For instance, researchers have built an EEG-powered electric wheelchair, but it runs into problems when a hazard appears. The user is prone to start concentrating on the hazard, and because the system can’t tell one kind of concentration from another, the wheelchair keeps moving and the person could end up in danger. To get around this problem, researchers added a secondary control system that allows the user to touch a pad to allow the wheelchair to move and touch it again to disable it – with moderately successful results. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Uyrd0uOuyms?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The brain is a very complex organ with multiple areas responsible for many different kinds of activity. It is a major challenge to unpick everything and isolate “thoughts” from the data. The limit of current technology is to attach numerous electrodes to the scalp and measure the activity in different areas of the brain at the same time. Because different areas govern different actions, this makes it possible to use algorithms to detect whether a person is thinking of, say, moving their left or right arm. This might allow a slightly more sophisticated means of brain-powered wheelchair control, for instance. But while this is starting to get closer to thought control, it is still rather global and has to be tailored to the individual subject since the exact patterns of brain activity vary from person to person. </p>
<p>In future, we may well gain a greater understanding of the structure and function of the brain. Together with more sensitive electrodes and more computer processing power, this might make it possible to further develop this brain-to-computer interface into a more accurate system that can adjust to the variations between one person and the next. This might make it easier for someone who would otherwise be paralysed to control a device or communicate. </p>
<p>Even then, that would still be quite a way from true “thought” control. It is already possible to switch on a kettle through concentration using EEG technology, but we are still some way from being able to think a range of different instructions to different objects attached to a single system. As for sending emails, it looks like we will be typing for some time to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58297/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Sigurnjak does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>How long will it be before we can open doors and send emails with just our minds?Stephen Sigurnjak, Senior Lecturer in Electronics, University of Central LancashireLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.