|
|
|
|
|
by murrayh
1738 days ago
|
|
I was a test subject for someone's PHD on this. AFAIR it was about identifying the part of the brain that is responsible for aborting actions. Like if you decide to pickup a pan, and then notice the handle is hot, some people can't help but pickup the pan anyways because they lack this abort function. They took an MRI of my brain.
They found where one part of my brain resided in the MRI images.
I performed reaction tests -- press this button for green circle, press that button for blue circle, abort pressing button if the icon gets crossed out (the crossing out was delayed)
Then they strapped the magnet to my head (not touching but very close AFAIR)
Then do all the tests again AFAIR they showed that part of the brain did affect your ability to abort an action. I think they knew this anyway because of behavior of people with brain injuries. So I guessed they learned the magnet scrambled that part of the brain? It was extremely boring doing these tests. I don't remember much about it except that the magnet made unreasonably loud popping sounds. |
|
Tests like this are intended to prove or refine information derived from clues from damaged subjects. You can learn a lot of things about complex systems like the brain by studying their failure modes, but you have to be careful of inferring causation from correlation and other such fallacies — for instance here they could have been trying to rule out the behaviour being a secondary symptom (the correct response actually being controlled elsewhere normally, but that is blocked by the damage rather than the damage having affected it more directly), or testing to see if multiple areas are directly involved in the behaviour rather than it being as simple as that one area seeming to control the veto, or just ruling out a pre-existing condition in the initial subjects unrelated to the subsequent damage.