3 ms·

> fMRI https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurious-brain/ignobel-prize-in-neuroscience-the-dead-salmon-study/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurio

> fMRI https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurious-brain/ignobel-prize-in-neuroscience-the-dead-salmon-study/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurious-brain/ignobe... > “If you’re in a highly resourced environment, with many rewards available, your brain gets tuned in a certain way. If you’re in an environment in which rewards are more scarce, then your brain accommodates the environment in which you live. Instead of being overresponsive to rewards, it seems like these brains, on average, are less responsive, because probably their environment has been less consistent in the availability of rewards,” says John Gabrieli, the Grover Hermann Professor of Health Sciences and Technology, a professor of brain and cognitive sciences, and a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research. So, "Kids aren't as excited about getting things they're not familiar with."? >"Here you got a thing" A>>"um cool I guess" B>>"oh nice I know something I can do with that!" that ^^ sort of scenario?

hmcq6 3y ago
No... there's an example in the article. It means that kid A's brain wont reward them as much when they complete a task that leads to rewards. Which in theory would lead to less motivation to undertake those kinds of tasks in the first place. The example in the article uses money, the kids obviously know what money is or it wouldn't be a motivator. Basically, we're training poor kids to not even try because their brains have adapted to just accept the fact that it wont get the resources it needs.
- unwise-exe 3y ago
  I do not see how your mechanistic description actually conflicts with my description. > their brains reward them less The reward centers show lower activity. This does not have to be some inscrutable thing only noticeable with a fMRI. It could perfectly well be that they're not used to turning extra money into things they like, and so because of that don't show as much activity in the "I just got rewarded" area.
  - hmcq6 3y ago
    > So, "Kids aren't as excited about getting things they're not familiar with."? These kids are poor they're not extraterrestrials. I don't think it's fair to say poor kids aren't familiar with money. The study is on 12-14 year olds. The majority of kids buy lunch at school and even the ones on the free lunch program see their peers who splurge on 2 cookies or a soda from the vending machine or w/e. My mom was a teacher, we were on welfare but that doesn't mean I wouldn't sometimes get birthday money. I collected coins from between the sofa cushions for junk food. I did odd jobs for spending money in the summer. I knew what money was and what it was for. Arguably more than well off kids. > "oh nice I know something I can do with that!" Why is that implied to be the rich kids response and not the poor kids? I worked in my dads convenience store when I was 12 and I saved up all summer so I could buy a ps2. Why is it assumed the poor kid isn't saving for anything?

hmcq6 3y ago

No... there's an example in the article. It means that kid A's brain wont reward them as much when they complete a task that leads to rewards. Which in theory would lead to less motivation to undertake those kinds of tasks in the first place. The example in the article uses money, the kids obviously know what money is or it wouldn't be a motivator. Basically, we're training poor kids to not even try because their brains have adapted to just accept the fact that it wont get the resources it needs.

unwise-exe 3y ago
I do not see how your mechanistic description actually conflicts with my description. > their brains reward them less The reward centers show lower activity. This does not have to be some inscrutable thing only noticeable with a fMRI. It could perfectly well be that they're not used to turning extra money into things they like, and so because of that don't show as much activity in the "I just got rewarded" area.
- hmcq6 3y ago
  > So, "Kids aren't as excited about getting things they're not familiar with."? These kids are poor they're not extraterrestrials. I don't think it's fair to say poor kids aren't familiar with money. The study is on 12-14 year olds. The majority of kids buy lunch at school and even the ones on the free lunch program see their peers who splurge on 2 cookies or a soda from the vending machine or w/e. My mom was a teacher, we were on welfare but that doesn't mean I wouldn't sometimes get birthday money. I collected coins from between the sofa cushions for junk food. I did odd jobs for spending money in the summer. I knew what money was and what it was for. Arguably more than well off kids. > "oh nice I know something I can do with that!" Why is that implied to be the rich kids response and not the poor kids? I worked in my dads convenience store when I was 12 and I saved up all summer so I could buy a ps2. Why is it assumed the poor kid isn't saving for anything?