Tachypsychia

[Bill Glasheen]

I just realized that the fellow training "Jesse" to use the chronometer is the same David Eagleman who reported that this experiment failed to show a change in the ability to perceive rapidly-flashed numbers under stress. So a printed link is contradicting a YouTube link - all from David Eagleman.

Interesting...

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

I wonder how recent that video was that TSDGuy posted. It was one subject's experience.

This "pre"publication is more likely to be his findings with experimental subject numbers and some reflection behind it. YouTube and BBC video aside, this is what has made it into the literature to date. And this is a fairly recent citation.

PLoS ONE. 2007 Dec 12;2(12):e1295.

Does Time Really Slow Down during a Frightening Event?

Stetson C, Fiesta MP, Eagleman DM.

California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, United States of America.

Observers commonly report that time seems to have moved in slow motion during a life-threatening event. It is unknown whether this is a function of increased time resolution during the event, or instead an illusion of remembering an emotionally salient event. Using a hand-held device to measure speed of visual perception, participants experienced free fall for 31 m before landing safely in a net. We found no evidence of increased temporal resolution, in apparent conflict with the fact that participants retrospectively estimated their own fall to last 36% longer than others' falls. The duration dilation during a frightening event, and the lack of concomitant increase in temporal resolution, indicate that subjective time is not a single entity that speeds or slows, but instead is composed of separable subcomponents. Our findings suggest that time-slowing is a function of recollection, not perception: a richer encoding of memory may cause a salient event to appear, retrospectively, as though it lasted longer.

I still have an issue with the experimental model. Here are my issues.

• A free fall with a safety net is nothing more than glorified bungee jumping. This isn't a life-threatening scenario.
• The problem with the experimental model is the subject was forced to focus on reading the chronometer while falling. It is well known that your sympathetic response to a situation is blunted when you engage your senses. In other words, you can make your brain too busy to be afraid. The subject isn't focused on the threat in this experiment; he is focused on the measurement apparatus. And therein lies an interesting potential coping strategy for a martial artist.

I'd love to talk with Eagleman some time. Maybe I'll give him a call. Looks like a great guy.

- Bill

[JimHawkins]

From what I know now.
Actually it's my understanding that memory is stored as synaptic connections.

Yes I agree but I seem to recall the neurotransmitter acetylcholine playing large role in the memory creation process.

As I posted in my earlier thread, Jim, baseball players have been able to train themselves to read numbers off of tennis balls fired at them at 150 mph. At first this is impossible. But with practice, the best athletes can do it. Even the U.S. women's softball team was training with these machines. I saw a show where a woman was watching the balls fly by, and reading the numbers off of them. It was an astounding feat.

I can see that.

In fact I always thought and have been thinking that through MA training, sparring, visual work and also chisao, tactile work, that part of learning and training these skills equates to learning how to fit in with a kind of timing 'scale' or tune into a scale via these reference points.. A kind of fast timing perception that's required for sparring, applying techniques, etc in real time.

I think Bruce used to talk about increasing his mind speed in fighting by 'thinking in a faster mode'. This seems to be part of the mental aspect to me..

I wonder..

If you spar someone under normal conditions and then take some cocaine how would your perceptual performance change your ability?

[Bill Glasheen]

If you spar someone under normal conditions and then take some cocaine how would your perceptual performance change your ability?

First... Let's be clear to the audience that this would be a dumb thing to do. Just ask Len Bias - from beyond the grave.

That being stated... My sense is that you would remember more of the detail of the fight.

I was just talking with George about this earlier. If you've ever driven VERY fast and then slowed down to legal speeds (not that I've ever done that... ) you'll have a sense that you're driving much slower than you actually are. So this is one way to induce some of whatever the pheonomenon is.

- Bill

[cxt]

Sounds to me like bad word usage to me.

Time as the experimenter is loosly using the term is a constant, abscent realtivistic speed or highly complex physic's experiments.
What he means and should be saying is the perception of time--not "time" itself.

I'm sure that he knows and understands the difference....so he should take at least some pains to be more clear.

I also think that there are some methodology problems...most of them addressed already.

I still fail to understand the point...that some people become hyperalert or just hyperaware during high stress situations would seem to be a given.....and that some people "shut down" during the same would also seem to me to be an "ok" what is your point?

Don't we have a couple of decades of research with crime victems/witnesses of violent acts etc to use already?

Now if his test was predictive or offered a means of controlling the response....then we would be talking.

[Bill Glasheen]

Don't we have a couple of decades of research with crime victems/witnesses of violent acts etc to use already?

We have lots of anecdotes under all kinds of conditions. But we really don't understand what's going on in the brain to cause these perception distortions. That's part of what the research is about.

There's so much we don't know about how the brain works. Add to that the fact that we very rarely are in the Survival Stress Reflex mode.

Now if his test was predictive or offered a means of controlling the response....then we would be talking.

The idea is to create an experimental model to reproduce the pheonomenon or phenomena in a reliable fashion while in a controlled environment. Once that is accomplished, more can be learned about a most important aspect of our genetic heritage.

If this phenomenon eventually could be controlled, there are any number of athletes, LEOs, and soldiers who would love to get a handle on it.

- Bill

[cxt]

Bill

I get what the claimed idea was......I just don't see where he could have thought such a test would yield reliable results.

If one wished to test such things and they doubted the 2nd hand anacdotal experience...they could easily test it themselevs by fighting in a MA tournament.

Besides, unless I missed it, he damaged any actual value to his test by not vetting his control group...for all we know those folks are less stressed by such siutations-----you have to be a little bit of thrill seeker to agree to do that from the get-go and maybe people really scared rather than finding it fun would yeild different results.

They were also pretty young---they had good eyesight---least I assume they did--another thing he does not seem to have controlled for---could have gone either way on that---either better vision helps or lack of it might seriously hurt the outcome.

Not sure that simply asking people a couple of times if they can see the numbers would fly--how does he know they are fibbing?

Are the numbers random on the device? Again, maybe missed it--but if they don't pop up random--then who knows what that does to the study.

Besides, I think you asked a very salient question about the actual mechanism invloved here.....is it hyperALERTNESS or just hyperAWARENESS......both driven by stress and the test won't tell you that.

Not trying to be a kill-joy, might be a good first step.......its just science by "you tube" just makes me uneasy...people get the idea that is how a study is supposed to be run.

[Bill Glasheen]

You make great points.

Not trying to be a kill-joy, might be a good first step.......its just science by "you tube" just makes me uneasy...people get the idea that is how a study is supposed to be run.

Day to day, most of what scientists do is so tedious that it's like watching grass grow. When you have experiments where people are falling from piss-your-pants heights or rats get a buzz, it has a Mr. Wizard quality to it that makes for compelling entertainment. And there's nothing wrong with the Average Joe getting just a taste of science - even if it's a few flawed steps on a long journey.

Just my take on it.

The truth is, this IS science. Your first experiment rarely works out. And not all questions asked yield positive findings. (One of two did for Eagleman - so far.) The brass ring eventually yields to those who are part clever and part tenacious.

- Bill

[cxt]

If his aim was "wow" then I'm sure that worked well for him.

I just would be happier if what people saw was more strigent.....and who knows, it may well be---its just was not "cool" enough to make the cut for the vid.

To be honest--painfully so ,I've done similar for my grants as well.

I guess sometimes you do have to sing a bit for your supper...to fund the research you need to do--sometimes you have to figure out an angle that people can easily see and relate to.

I'll bow to the reailty...but I don't have to like...but I also probably should give him a break...I'd expect one myself afterall.

[JimHawkins]

If folks watched the whole video you'd see that the machine did generate random numbers, those numbers were then verified after the test as was the participant's ability to read the unit at normal speed and faster speed under normal conditions, I think they actually calibrated the unit for each person.

I would assume that the research folks are going through more rigorous testing and on going testing than was shown in the few minutes covered in the video.