Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Sleep Away Disease
Scientists believe that sleep deprivation can cause loneliness, an illness that differs from depression. Loneliness is a health concern that often leads to a wide assortment of illnesses such as depression, bad heart pressure, and Alzheimer’s disease. Scientists have found that sleep quality, rather than sleep quantity, has a greater impact on one’s health. Poor sleep quality is more likely to lead to health problems, as well as sluggish, inactive days. When one habitually suffers from poor sleep quality, social interactions suffer, contributing to more serious complications. Using a series of scales and charts, scientists completed a study on the correlation between sleep and health, focusing on loneliness and depression. Scientists aim to discover whether or not poor sleep quality has a significant impact on one’s health.
Researchers conducted the study by putting an ad in the UCLA environs looking for willing participants for a study that would target ‘lifestyle, social contact and sleep quality’. 97 people (28 male, 69 female) were the right age, completed all the correct material and met the age requirements (ages 18-40). The researchers used a revised loneliness scale done by UCLA. The participants were asked ‘how often’ questions such as how do you feel completely alone or how often do you feel as if nobody understands you, and then told to respond on a scale of 1-4, 1 being never and 4 being always. The scores were then added to create a total score ranging from 20-80. Higher scores meant a higher thought of being lonely.
They were required to do the Social Rhythm Metric (SRM), which is a kind of diary that requires you to put down 17 specific activities that would happen during the day. These activities include what time you wake, what time you eat and your first interactions with people. The times these activities happened were then put into an algorithm based on a scale of 0-7. The way it’s set up is kind of like a chart that you fill in with times and names. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was also used. This index measures things that could affect your sleep. The participants were asked questions about their sleep quality the month before and a score was created from their answers. it asks questions like during the past month how often could you not get to sleep in 30 minutes or how often did you feel too cold, too hot or pain. The last scale that the participants used was the Depression Anxiety and Stress scale (DASS). This scale measures the frequency and strength of bad or negative emotions the previous week. It presents statements that the person deems true or not. Statements used sound like ‘i felt i was close to panic or I found it difficult to relax’ in response to situations that had happened. The participants were asked to complete the SRM every day for 2 weeks, and all of the other tests were conducted inside a lab.
Most of the participants turned out to be normal, with a handful of them actually being in the severe to very severe range. They found that loneliness and depression, loneliness and sleep quality and sleep quality and depression had a significant positive correlation. So as predicted, loneliness, depression and sleep all have a weird sort of circle of life. Each affects others negatively regarding the person. I actually did all of the scales and metrics myself and was not surprised to find myself in league with the lower percent of people that don’t have such a good outlook on life. I’ll link the scales in here so you guys can take them and see how you fare on an optimism/pessimism scale.
The link now betwixt loneliness and a poor sleep quality has now been quantified with studies for our better understanding. Scientist have proven that there is a positive correlation between the quality of sleep received and all emotions after. Generally, if the quality of sleep is poor, then so will the emotional quality. Loneliness had a high and positive correlation to getting a lesser sleep quality. So one of the simplest ways to improve better life health is to just get good sleep.
Try these! :
DASS test
The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Friday, March 23, 2012
Pay to lose weight faster
On January 5, 2012, developers released an iPhone app called GymPact, which imposes fines when users do not reach workout goals. Similarly, one might be able to find the idea of this app in a research done a few years ago. Colvin and Zopf’s study supports the conclusion that other psychological tricks such as the presence of a workout buddy or monetary deducting actually help people to lose weight faster.
In the study, some researchers initiated a weight control program, in which they gathered 23 volunteers and placed them in a small office.“Work site” was used as environment settings tentatively for the first time, and the rationale behind it is that researchers expected office colleagues to be more important than total strangers, and thus created a more powerful influence. The subjects were divided into 2 groups: Money group and Social group. The subjects in Social Group simply weighed in every Friday, while subjects in the other group had to make out a check of 2 dollars additionally. At the end of the program, an averaged weight loss of 9 pounds achieved in the money group while it was 3.7 pounds for the other group.
What differed this weight control program from others were that the researchers not only employed a habitual environment (an office) for both groups of people, but also subtract money from the experimental group (Money group). As Abrahms and Allens have proved that the use of money deducting would typically change subjects’ eating behaviors. Therefore, for the Money group, the subjects were weighed every Friday. In the meantime, they were made to write checks dated to Fridays during the research period. The numbers on the checks started at 2, and increased 2 dollars week by week until 10 dollars, then decreased till zero which happened in the last week of the program time. Here, money worked as a stimulus of positive punishment, which meant as the amount of the money increased, subjects would achieve a greater success in weight loss. Meanwhile, the researchers also supposed the weight loss would decrease as the amount of deducting money decreased. On the other hand, as R.D. Colvin talked about the subjects were not self-conscious about their weight changes posted on charts in the article, it’s simply the social connections motivated them to lose weight. In the control group, (Social group), the subjects just meet once a week, but their weight changes were posted on charts right away. In other words, the weight changes showing to the public used positive reinforcement to suggest the subjects that they need to increase any losing-weight behaviors. For most of the subjects, the action of posting weight changes worked as a positive punishment.
At the conclusion, the researchers mapped out goals and actual achievements of two groups of participants respectively, and compared the results. The research results showed that all the subjects in the Money group were able to reach their goals except one person failed to do so for two weeks, while in the Social group only 2 participants were able to complete their goals. It is conclusive proved that work site is a feasible setting in weight changes programs, and it seemed that positive punishment had a strong influence on the subjects because the subjects felt like losing money.
In a follow-up observation, the weights of participants in money group returned to near pre-program weights. The researchers argued that this was because positive punishment tended to lost its efficacy faster than positive reinforcement. Thus, as the subjects were losing less money than before, their motivation decreased. Moreover, although results of social group appeared as weak right after the program ended, the participants actually continued losing weight in a longer observation. Besides, the subjects who lost weight efficiently in the first week managed to lose more both during and after the program.
Works Cited
In the study, some researchers initiated a weight control program, in which they gathered 23 volunteers and placed them in a small office.“Work site” was used as environment settings tentatively for the first time, and the rationale behind it is that researchers expected office colleagues to be more important than total strangers, and thus created a more powerful influence. The subjects were divided into 2 groups: Money group and Social group. The subjects in Social Group simply weighed in every Friday, while subjects in the other group had to make out a check of 2 dollars additionally. At the end of the program, an averaged weight loss of 9 pounds achieved in the money group while it was 3.7 pounds for the other group.
What differed this weight control program from others were that the researchers not only employed a habitual environment (an office) for both groups of people, but also subtract money from the experimental group (Money group). As Abrahms and Allens have proved that the use of money deducting would typically change subjects’ eating behaviors. Therefore, for the Money group, the subjects were weighed every Friday. In the meantime, they were made to write checks dated to Fridays during the research period. The numbers on the checks started at 2, and increased 2 dollars week by week until 10 dollars, then decreased till zero which happened in the last week of the program time. Here, money worked as a stimulus of positive punishment, which meant as the amount of the money increased, subjects would achieve a greater success in weight loss. Meanwhile, the researchers also supposed the weight loss would decrease as the amount of deducting money decreased. On the other hand, as R.D. Colvin talked about the subjects were not self-conscious about their weight changes posted on charts in the article, it’s simply the social connections motivated them to lose weight. In the control group, (Social group), the subjects just meet once a week, but their weight changes were posted on charts right away. In other words, the weight changes showing to the public used positive reinforcement to suggest the subjects that they need to increase any losing-weight behaviors. For most of the subjects, the action of posting weight changes worked as a positive punishment.
At the conclusion, the researchers mapped out goals and actual achievements of two groups of participants respectively, and compared the results. The research results showed that all the subjects in the Money group were able to reach their goals except one person failed to do so for two weeks, while in the Social group only 2 participants were able to complete their goals. It is conclusive proved that work site is a feasible setting in weight changes programs, and it seemed that positive punishment had a strong influence on the subjects because the subjects felt like losing money.
In a follow-up observation, the weights of participants in money group returned to near pre-program weights. The researchers argued that this was because positive punishment tended to lost its efficacy faster than positive reinforcement. Thus, as the subjects were losing less money than before, their motivation decreased. Moreover, although results of social group appeared as weak right after the program ended, the participants actually continued losing weight in a longer observation. Besides, the subjects who lost weight efficiently in the first week managed to lose more both during and after the program.
Works Cited
Abrahms, J.L., &Allen,G.J. Comparative effectiveness of situational programming, financial pay-offs and group pressure in weight reduction. Behavior Therapy, 1974, 5, 391-400
Buckle Up! An Experiment on Seat Belt Usage
Jordan Bailey
Each year, approximately 35,000 people die in motor vehicle accidents. About fifty percent of these people could be saved simply by wearing seat belts. Additionally, over 90% of drivers report feeling that seat belts are necessary and beneficial, but in practice, only 14% actually use seat belts (“James Madison University”). When safety belts are properly used, they save thousands of lives, yet many neglect to spend the few seconds it takes to fasten a seat belt. Luigi Pasto and Andrew G. Baker host an intervention to modify the behavior of seatbelt use among college students, as younger drivers are both less likely to wear their seat belts and more likely to be involved in motor vehicle accidents than their older counterparts. According to Pasto and Baker, results feedback and informational flyers given to the public during a five-day intervention increases seat belt use among young adults.
Drivers and front seat passengers in a particular parking lot on Montreal’s Vanier College campus were observed for four weeks. 2,285 total cars were observed; resulting in 2,285 drivers and 660 front seat passengers. For the first week, an observer monitored the uninterrupted behavior of the subjects with a video recorder from inside an attendant booth at the entrance of the parking lot. The observer recorded the subjects’ gender, approximate age, and whether or not they were wearing a seat belt. Cars were observed Monday through Friday during the hours of 3:30pm and 5:30pm, the time of day with the greatest traffic flow. The intervention took place during the second week of the experiment. Subjects were observed in the same manner during the same time period, but during this week experimenters attempted to modify the behavior of the subjects in two ways. First, a large poster was placed approximately 6 meters away from the attendance booth, where drivers must stop before entering the parking lot, displaying the percentage of people who wore their seat belt driving into the parking lot the previous day. The sign read “DRIVERS WEARING SEAT BELTS YESTERDAY, XX%,” and the percentage was changed daily to reflect the data from the previous day. Second, an informational flyer was placed on the windshield of every car in the parking lot on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday of the intervention week. The flyer had four components. The first area stated in bold lettering, “SEAT BELTS SAVE LIVES. BUCKLE UP PLEASE.” The second component of the flyer gave statistics on fatalities and injuries due to car accidents in Quebec, followed by a statement on the effectiveness of seat belts. The third section presented the message, “Whether or not you wear a seat belt may be your own business, but tell that to the family and friends of someone who has been injured in a car accident.” The final component of the flyer informed drivers that their seat belt usage was being monitored and explained the feedback sign. On the last day of the intervention phase, the distributed flyer contained the results of the experiment. During the final two weeks of the experiment, the feedback sign and flyers were removed and observers monitored the behavior of the drivers and front seat passengers.
At the conclusion of the experiment, Pasto and Baker observed a general increase in seat belt usage from both drivers and front seat passengers. For drivers, seat belt usage increased by 7%, from 64% at the baseline to 71% during the intervention. Seat belt usage increased by a whopping 18% for front seat passengers, from 49% at the baseline to 67% during the intervention. Both drivers and front seat passengers experienced a subtle decrease in seat belt usage after the intervention. For drivers, seat belt usage dropped to 68% and for passengers it dropped to 61%. However, in both cases, seat belt usage remained higher after the intervention than it was at the baseline. Additionally, more female drivers and front seat passengers were proven to wear seat belts than males. 75% of female drivers wear seat belts, whereas only 63% of male drivers do. Comparably, 66% of female passengers wear seat belts and only 52% of male passengers do.
Works Cited:
"Safety Belt Statistics." James Madison University. James Madison University, 21 oct 2004. Web. 23 Mar 2012. <http://www.jmu.edu/safetyplan/vehicle/generaldriver/safetybelt.shtml>.
Pasto, Luigi, and Andrew G. Baker. "Evaluation of a Brief Intervention for Increasing Seat Belt Use on a College Campus." Sage Journals. 25.3 (2011): n. page. Web. 23 Mar. 2012.
Each year, approximately 35,000 people die in motor vehicle accidents. About fifty percent of these people could be saved simply by wearing seat belts. Additionally, over 90% of drivers report feeling that seat belts are necessary and beneficial, but in practice, only 14% actually use seat belts (“James Madison University”). When safety belts are properly used, they save thousands of lives, yet many neglect to spend the few seconds it takes to fasten a seat belt. Luigi Pasto and Andrew G. Baker host an intervention to modify the behavior of seatbelt use among college students, as younger drivers are both less likely to wear their seat belts and more likely to be involved in motor vehicle accidents than their older counterparts. According to Pasto and Baker, results feedback and informational flyers given to the public during a five-day intervention increases seat belt use among young adults.
Drivers and front seat passengers in a particular parking lot on Montreal’s Vanier College campus were observed for four weeks. 2,285 total cars were observed; resulting in 2,285 drivers and 660 front seat passengers. For the first week, an observer monitored the uninterrupted behavior of the subjects with a video recorder from inside an attendant booth at the entrance of the parking lot. The observer recorded the subjects’ gender, approximate age, and whether or not they were wearing a seat belt. Cars were observed Monday through Friday during the hours of 3:30pm and 5:30pm, the time of day with the greatest traffic flow. The intervention took place during the second week of the experiment. Subjects were observed in the same manner during the same time period, but during this week experimenters attempted to modify the behavior of the subjects in two ways. First, a large poster was placed approximately 6 meters away from the attendance booth, where drivers must stop before entering the parking lot, displaying the percentage of people who wore their seat belt driving into the parking lot the previous day. The sign read “DRIVERS WEARING SEAT BELTS YESTERDAY, XX%,” and the percentage was changed daily to reflect the data from the previous day. Second, an informational flyer was placed on the windshield of every car in the parking lot on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday of the intervention week. The flyer had four components. The first area stated in bold lettering, “SEAT BELTS SAVE LIVES. BUCKLE UP PLEASE.” The second component of the flyer gave statistics on fatalities and injuries due to car accidents in Quebec, followed by a statement on the effectiveness of seat belts. The third section presented the message, “Whether or not you wear a seat belt may be your own business, but tell that to the family and friends of someone who has been injured in a car accident.” The final component of the flyer informed drivers that their seat belt usage was being monitored and explained the feedback sign. On the last day of the intervention phase, the distributed flyer contained the results of the experiment. During the final two weeks of the experiment, the feedback sign and flyers were removed and observers monitored the behavior of the drivers and front seat passengers.
At the conclusion of the experiment, Pasto and Baker observed a general increase in seat belt usage from both drivers and front seat passengers. For drivers, seat belt usage increased by 7%, from 64% at the baseline to 71% during the intervention. Seat belt usage increased by a whopping 18% for front seat passengers, from 49% at the baseline to 67% during the intervention. Both drivers and front seat passengers experienced a subtle decrease in seat belt usage after the intervention. For drivers, seat belt usage dropped to 68% and for passengers it dropped to 61%. However, in both cases, seat belt usage remained higher after the intervention than it was at the baseline. Additionally, more female drivers and front seat passengers were proven to wear seat belts than males. 75% of female drivers wear seat belts, whereas only 63% of male drivers do. Comparably, 66% of female passengers wear seat belts and only 52% of male passengers do.
Works Cited:
"Safety Belt Statistics." James Madison University. James Madison University, 21 oct 2004. Web. 23 Mar 2012. <http://www.jmu.edu/safetyplan/vehicle/generaldriver/safetybelt.shtml>.
Pasto, Luigi, and Andrew G. Baker. "Evaluation of a Brief Intervention for Increasing Seat Belt Use on a College Campus." Sage Journals. 25.3 (2011): n. page. Web. 23 Mar. 2012.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Prevent Yourself from Biting Your Nails with a Bracelet
Catherine Auten
photo by: Maxwell GS
The researchers split up eighty college students participating in the study into two groups and within those groups were two subgroups. One group was given a vinyl wristband to wear reminding them of their commitment to stop biting their fingernails. Participants would need to cut the bands off to remove this reminder, thus excluding themselves from further participation. One subgroup wearing the vinyl bands had the bands placed on their wrists and the other subgroup had the bands placed on their ankles. The second group was instructed to paint bitter tasting nail enamel on at least twice daily to remind them of their commitment to stop biting their fingernails. One subgroup in the nail enamel group was asked to use colored nail enamel; the other subgroup was instructed to use clear enamel.
The goal of the experiment was to measure the effectiveness of the nonremovable reminder versus the “aversion” method, which required routine maintenance from the participants, over a six week period. The researchers then controlled for different types of personalities by creating a “Delay Discounting Task” which would indicate a participant's relative desire for immediate gratification. The Delay Discounting Task was tested with a self-control questionnaire. Finally, the researchers assessed the students’ risk aversion to determine their likelihood to accept an instant reward in exchange for an undesirable, yet delayed, outcome.
The participants were then allowed to go on with their daily lives wearing either the vinyl bands or the nail enamel for six weeks checking in three different times with the researchers. The researchers encouraged every participant to be conscious of their nail biting and to try to stop and think about their reminder to their commitment every time they felt the urge to bite their nails. Between the second and third sessions, 26 percent of the participants using the nail enamel had dropped out, while only 12 percent of the participants wearing the nonremovable band dropped out. However, when excluding the dropouts, the aversion method of using the bitter nail enamel resulted in less nail biting among participants.
Forty-two of the original participants attended a follow up assessment five months after completing the study. In this follow up, the researchers found that nail biting had increased from the initial completion of the study, but decreased from the participants’ original habits before the study. Unfortunately, researchers found no significant differences in the long-term success of those who used the vinyl bands versus those who used the aversion technique.
The study proved that a nonremovable reminder can be an effective way to curb the impulsive behavior of biting nails. Even better, the nonremovable reminder method proved to be more successful at preventing people from giving up on their behavior modification goals because it does not require people to remember to create a reminder for themselves. The nonremovable reminder solves the problem of “who will guard the guards.” So, for all of you forgetful nail-biters out there, the “nonremovable reminder” method may be the best and lowest maintenance way for you to stop the chewing.
Works Cited
Koritzky, Gilly, and Eldad Yechiam. "On the Value of Nonremovable Reminders for Behavior Modification." Behavior Modification 35.6 (2011): 511-30. Behavior Modification. Sage Journals, 26 Aug. 2011. Web. 22 Mar. 2012.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)