openness to change logical reasoning (dlPFC, vlPFC) <--> Ti, Te
episodic simulation (vmPFC) <--> Ni
memory retrieval, intuition (dmPFC) <--> Ne
openness to change logical reasoning (dlPFC, vlPFC) <--> Ti, Te
episodic simulation (vmPFC) <--> Ni
memory retrieval, intuition (dmPFC) <--> Ne
Last edited by Petter; 11-29-2022 at 02:37 PM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognit..._underpinnings
"Activation of the dorsolateral PFC has been shown during resolution of interference of irrelevant task sets."
"Activation is mediated by the level of abstractness of the set switch in an anterior to posterior fashion within the PFC, with the most anterior activations elicited by set switches and the most posterior activations resulting from stimulus or perceptual switches."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefrontal_synthesis
"The mechanism of PFS is hypothesized to involve synchronization of several independent object-encoding neuronal ensembles (objectNEs). When objectNEs fire out-of-sync, the objects are perceived one at a time. However, once those objectNEs are time-shifted by the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) to fire in-phase with each other, they are consciously experienced as one unified object or scene."
------
openness to change dlPFC and vlPFC <--> creativity
Last edited by Petter; 11-29-2022 at 02:42 PM.
... and thinking outside the boxmemory retrieval, intuition (dmPFC) <--> Ne
The striatum receives inputs from multiple cortical regions (Webster, 1961; Beckstead, 1979; Hintiryan et al., 2016; Hunnicutt et al., 2016), and prefrontal inputs to the striatum have been shown to play significant roles in both goal-directed, as well as habitual behavior (Gourley and Taylor, 2016; Smith and Laiks, 2017; Amaya and Smith, 2018). The major frontal structures that have been implicated in instrumental and automatic behaviors are the prelimbic cortex (PL) and infralimbic cortex (IL) Amaya and Smith, 2018 in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), as well as the OFC located in the ventral part of the PFC.
Interestingly, the two substructures of the mPFC, the IL and PL, seem to play opposing roles in balancing between goal and habit, with the IL supporting habitual behavior, and the PL supporting goal-directed behavior (Smith and Laiks, 2017; Amaya and Smith, 2018).
8. openness to change vs. habitual behavior (PFC mPFC vs. the striatum ... or the prelimbic cortex (PL) vs. the infralimbic cortex (IL))
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...014.00235/full
The prelimbic (PL) cortex allows rodents to adapt their responding under changing experimental circumstances. In line with this, the PL cortex has been implicated in strategy set shifting, attentional set shifting, the resolution of response conflict, and the modulation of attention towards predictive stimuli.
12. cognitive control, attention, working memory (PFC: high activity vs. low activity)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3708542/ (Neural structures underlying set-shifting: roles of medial prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex)
13. (?) many connections between dmPFC and the rest of the brain (intuition or thinking outside the box) vs. few connections between dmPFC and the rest of the brain
dmPFC: see page 12
brain22.png
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...22.999320/full
However, the dmPFC has been strongly implicated in multiple aspects of behavioral flexibility including set-shifting (Ragozzino et al., 1999; Stefani et al., 2003; Floresco et al., 2006, 2008; Bissonette and Roesch, 2015; Powell and Redish, 2016; Brockett et al., 2020) and response inhibition (Bussey et al., 1996; Muir et al., 1996; Narayanan and Laubach, 2006; Jonkman et al., 2009; Terra et al., 2020; Hamel et al., 2022). Such studies have revealed that the dmPFC is important for withholding or otherwise modifying learned motor behaviors (e.g., instrumental habits), but do not directly address its role in negatively regulating Pavlovian incentive motivation as measured by PIT.
------
8. <--> 13.
brain40.png
anterior dmPFC <--> DMN
posterior dmPFC <--> FPN (or CEN)
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/na...w_ni_2009b.pdf
"... demonstrated greater activity in both cognitive/evaluative (posterior dmPFC) and emotional/interoceptive (anterior dmPFC) cortical regions."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28054822/
"the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) is implicated in episodic future thinking (EFT)"
14. two mirror networks (high activity vs. low activity)
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ctor-dopamine/
A brain chemical linked to pleasure and depression may also trigger fear, according to a new study. Researchers say this may explain why the neurotransmitter dopamine, known to cause addictive behavior, may also play a role in anxiety disorders.
"Showing that dopamine can enhance both approach and avoidance behaviors is an important finding," says Howard Fields, a neurobiologist at the University of California, San Francisco.
------
1. perfectionism vs. tolerates disorder ... or single-tasking vs. multitasking (serotonin sensitivity?)
6. expressive/quick decisions vs. inexpressive (dopamine sensitivity ... the sympathetic nervous system vs. the parasympathetic nervous system ... 16PF: Liveliness, F)
10. fearless vs. fearful (serotonin sensitivity ... neuroticism)
It is possible that these three dichotomies merge into one dichotomy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight-or-flight_response
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eysenc..._Questionnaire
"Neuroticism, according to Eysenck's theory, is based on activation thresholds in the sympathetic nervous system or visceral brain."
... or defend vs. care9. self vs. others (low oxytocin vs. high oxytocin ... or vasopressin vs. oxytocin)
people-oriented + defend + episodic memory: a police officer
people-oriented + defend + episodic simulation: a political advisor or a strategist
people-oriented + care + episodic memory: a nurse or a social worker
people-oriented + care + episodic simulation: a psychologist
task-oriented + defend + episodic memory: a mechanic
task-oriented + defend + episodic simulation: an engineer or a physicist
task-oriented + care + episodic memory: a physician
task-oriented + care + episodic simulation: a biomedical scientist or a sociologist
This is the difference between a politician and a political advisor.3. the external world vs. the internal world (DAN/VAN vs. the precuneus ... a mirror network vs. dmPFC and the precuneus ... CON (the external world) vs. CON (the internal world))
Both a police officer and a mechanic are focused on the external world so SeTi vs. TiSe does not work.
This is the difference between a police officer and a prison officer.6. expressive/quick decisions vs. inexpressive (dopamine sensitivity ... the sympathetic nervous system vs. the parasympathetic nervous system ... 16PF: Liveliness, F)
This is the difference between a police officer and a detective.4. the dorsal stream vs. the ventral stream
https://drmichaelmcgee.com/self-centeredness/ (self vs. others)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6609689/
"Overall, these results present the first evidence that intranasal AVP promotes human defensive aggression for both males and females in a bilateral situation where each party can potentially damage the resources of the other party."
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...018.00202/full
"Oxytocin allows immobility without fear in the presence of offspring or partners (Porges, 1998). Oxytocin also has a central role in the formation of selective social bonds between mothers and offspring (Keverne and Kendrick, 1992), between adults (Carter, 1998) and also in paternal behavior (Kenkel et al., 2012; Rilling, 2013). The more ancient mammalian neuropeptide, vasopressin, in dynamic interplay with oxytocin, also regulates birth (Arrowsmith and Wray, 2014). In conjunction with oxytocin, vasopressin was critical to pair bond formation and selective sociality (Cho et al., 1999). Vasopressin also plays a major role in defensive behaviors such as mate guarding. Both males and females are affected by oxytocin and vasopressin (Carter, 2017). However, the physiological effects of vasopressin support physical mobilization and defensive aggression, which may be especially critical in male mammals. Although both males and females synthesize oxytocin and vasopressin, there are often differences in the roles these molecules play in behavioral regulation in males vs. females (Bales et al., 2007a; Albers, 2015; Caldwell, 2017)."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3604648/
"The medial prefrontal cortex is critical for memory retrieval and resolving interference"
9. self vs. others (low oxytocin vs. high oxytocin ... or vasopressin vs. oxytocin)
... or defend vs. care
15.
https://drmichaelmcgee.com/self-centeredness/ (self vs. others)
This dichotomy is directly related to 16PF's Dominance (E) and Vigilance (L).9. defend vs. care (vasopressin vs. oxytocin)
mirror network A vs. mirror network Bmirror network 1 vs. mirror network 2
self vs. others <--> NEO PI-R's Self-consciousness
This is another reason why SeTi vs. TiSe is inaccurate (see post #781). A police officer (or an "Se type") is completely different from a mechanic (or a "Ti type").
Dario Nardi
Se types:
Show a "tennis hop" brain pattern.
Easily go "in the zone" in a crisis situation.
Quickly integrate body and sensory information.
Easily bored and need external stimulation.
Focus on literal or common interpretations.
Favor details that are dramatic or in motion.
The "tennis hop" brain pattern is one in which all regions of neocortex out low amplitude and out of sync. This is an effective state that requires little energy while the shifting frequencies allow the brain to quickly direct whichever regions are needed for a surprise, incoming task.
Ti types:
Show high use of four regions that afford complex logical reasoning: F3, F4, P3, P4
Use F3 to linearly derive solutions.
Use F4 to categorize and define concepts.
Use P3 to integrate visual-kinesthetic data.
Use P4 to holistically weigh numerous pros and cons of many uncertain or risky factors.
Above regions are located away from direct sensory contact, so have a "deep" or "detached" quality.
Tend to enter a dissociated state when arguing or meeting someone new. In this state, their neocortex shuts out raw emotions in order to enjoy objectivity.
Least interested in listening.
Engage the above regions + Fp1 and Fp2 when examining a topic from multiple angles and integrating the angles into a coherent way.
INTPs are likely to quickly stop listening as they assess the relevance of what others are saying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJoR0N8KinE
Ant Anstead is an expressive mechanic (or "Ti type") ... i.e. Liveliness (F) is high.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...06453013003326
"Results indicate that homosexual in comparison to heterosexual men display higher sensitivity to oxytocin's enhancing impact on social approach tendencies, suggesting that differences in sexual orientation imply differential oxytocinergic signaling."
Most male physicians are <> types, i.e. defend and care are equally strong/active.task-oriented + care + episodic memory: a physician
It is possible that males and females have to be separated in the defend vs. care dichotomy.Although both males and females synthesize oxytocin and vasopressin, there are often differences in the roles these molecules play in behavioral regulation in males vs. females.
A multitasker has a fairly inactive BA10. He or she does not usually keep track of internal goals so it is easier to go from one task to another.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21930138/
"A role for rostral prefrontal cortex (BA10) has been proposed in multitasking, in particular, the selection and maintenance of higher order internal goals while other sub-goals are being performed. BA10 has also been implicated in the ability to infer someone else's feelings and thoughts, often referred to as theory of mind."
Last edited by Petter; 08-06-2023 at 01:58 PM.
... and a mirror network is activepeople-oriented + defend + episodic memory: a police officer
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics...-neuron-system
The mirror neuron system (MNS), comprising premotor cortex, inferior parietal lobe, and motor and somatosensory cortex, is engaged when one performs a motor action or views another person perform the same action, thus providing a potential neural mechanism by which we understand other's action goals (review, Rizzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2016) (Fig. 1). This motor resonance may play an important role in social interaction as interaction involves ongoing coordination with and prediction of one's social partner's actions and intentions. However, most neuroimaging research on the MNS involves participants viewing a detached arm reach for an object, with participants sometimes asked to imitate the action. In real-time social interactions actions between partners tend to be complementary, not imitative. Thus, these studies do not directly address the role of the MNS or mirroring mechanisms in live social interaction.
In an early study to address the role of the MNS in social interaction, Newman-Norlund, van Schie, van Zuijlen, and Bekkering (2007) demonstrated that the key portions of the MNS (inferior frontal gyrus and inferior parietal lobe) were engaged more for complementary than imitative actions during an fMRI experiment (Newman-Norlund et al., 2007). While suggestive, these actions were still performed in a relatively asocial context in which participants viewed a video of a hand performing either a precision or power grip and were told to perform either an imitative or complementary action. More recently, studies have examined coordinated joint actions or communicative actions. For example, in a study of joint action, an experimenter stood next to the fMRI scanner bed and the participant either performed a joint action with experimenter (moving two sticks into the appropriate shape), performed a solo action (moving the sticks alone), or observed the experimenter's solo action. The regions showing greater activation during joint actions only overlapped with the MNS within the superior parietal lobe (Kokal, Gazzola, & Keysers, 2009). These studies required coordination but not direct communication between social partners. In a clever study of real-time communication in the scanner, Schippers et al. (2009, 2010) had participants play “charades.” They found that both the MNS and the mentalizing system showed greater activation when participants decoded observed gestures than when they viewed gestures without decoding them (Schippers et al., 2009). Further, the neural synchrony between partners was greater during the active guessing task than during passive viewing, both within the MNS and the mentalizing systems (Schippers, Roebroeck, Renken, Nanetti, & Keysers, 2010). Similar to the charades study, when participants perceived actions to be directed toward them with a communicative intent, regions of the MNS and mentalizing systems showed greater coordination (or functional connectivity) than when viewing private or noncommunicative actions (Ciaramidaro, Becchio, Colle, Bara, & Walter, 2014). Other work, however, has not identified a role of the MNS in processing communicative gestures (e.g., Redcay et al., 2016). These studies highlight a potential role of the MNS in representing and coordinating action goals with a social partner but further studies need to examine this question within social interactive contexts. Further, when these action goals require inference about a social partner's communicative intent, the MNS works in concert with the mentalizing system.
people-oriented vs. task-oriented (2)
the external world vs. the internal world ... blue-collar jobs vs. white-collar jobs (3)
the dorsal stream vs. the ventral stream ... mathematics vs. physics ... structure vs. cause and effect (4)
the left hemisphere vs. the right hemisphere ... discrete mathematics vs. continuous mathematics ... verbal thinking vs. visual thinking (5)
expressive vs. inexpressive ... quick decision-making vs. careful decision-making (1 and 6)
a planner/competitive vs. easy-going (7)
openness to change vs. habitual behavior (8 and 13)
defend vs. care (9)
affective evaluation vs. social interaction ... CON vs. a mirror network (11 and 14 ... Fe- vs. Fi-)
abstract vs. concrete (12)
------
2^10 = 1024 types
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6948820/
Habits are automated behaviors that are insensitive to changes in behavioral outcomes. Habitual responding is thought to be mediated by the striatum, with medial striatum guiding goal-directed action and lateral striatum promoting habits.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4526748/
The Striatum: Where Skills and Habits Meet
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6657020/
The striatum receives inputs from multiple cortical regions (Webster, 1961; Beckstead, 1979; Hintiryan et al., 2016; Hunnicutt et al., 2016), and prefrontal inputs to the striatum have been shown to play significant roles in both goal-directed, as well as habitual behavior (Gourley and Taylor, 2016; Smith and Laiks, 2017; Amaya and Smith, 2018). The major frontal structures that have been implicated in instrumental and automatic behaviors are the prelimbic cortex (PL) and infralimbic cortex (IL) Amaya and Smith, 2018 in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), as well as the OFC located in the ventral part of the PFC.
Interestingly, the two substructures of the mPFC, the IL and PL, seem to play opposing roles in balancing between goal and habit, with the IL supporting habitual behavior, and the PL supporting goal-directed behavior (Smith and Laiks, 2017; Amaya and Smith, 2018). The IL exhibits task-bracketing activity, similar to the activity observed in the DLS during habit learning (Smith and Graybiel, 2013). Furthermore, chronic perturbation of the IL disrupts both habit acquisition and expression (Smith et al., 2012; Smith and Graybiel, 2013), while its optogenetic inhibition disrupts habit expression (Smith et al., 2012).
(see figure 1)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05318-x
Prefrontal cortical areas mediate flexible adaptive control of behavior, but the specific contributions of individual areas and the circuit mechanisms through which they interact to modulate learning have remained poorly understood. Using viral tracing and pharmacogenetic techniques, we show that prelimbic (PreL) and infralimbic cortex (IL) exhibit reciprocal PreL↔IL layer 5/6 connectivity. In set-shifting tasks and in fear/extinction learning, activity in PreL is required during new learning to apply previously learned associations, whereas activity in IL is required to learn associations alternative to previous ones. IL→PreL connectivity is specifically required during IL-dependent learning, whereas reciprocal PreL↔IL connectivity is required during a time window of 12–14 h after association learning, to set up the role of IL in subsequent learning. Our results define specific and opposing roles of PreL and IL to together flexibly support new learning, and provide circuit evidence that IL-mediated learning of alternative associations depends on direct reciprocal PreL↔IL connectivity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6345614/
The overall pattern of results suggests that the PL is involved in expression of minimally trained goal-directed behavior while the IL is involved in expression of extensively trained goal-directed behavior. This implies that the PL does not control all types of actions and the IL can control some types of actions. These results expand upon the traditional view that the PL controls action while the IL controls habit.
Last edited by Petter; 12-10-2023 at 09:08 AM.
a police officer
people-oriented
the external world
the dorsal stream
the right hemisphere
expressive/quick decision-making
a planner/competitive
openness to change
defend
social interaction
concrete