Reply
Mon 29 Mar, 2010 12:45 am
1) the negative consequences = (consequence one)the brains of those that ate junk freely were less sensitive to reward activity than those in the other groups. (consequence two) They were also obese ?
2) the negative consequences are a telltale sign of addiction?
Context:
They used electrodes to measure the sensitivity of rats' brains to reward activity. Some ate normal rat food while others had limited or unlimited access to junk foods, tasty to both rats and humans. After 40 days, the brains of those that ate junk freely were less sensitive to reward activity than those in the other groups. They were also obese.
Compulsive eaters
To see if these rats would display compulsive eating in the face of negative consequences - a telltale sign of addiction - all the rats were taught that a flash of light led to a painful electric shock.
If i have interpreted the experiment correctly the rats were taught that a flash of light = pain.
Pain is the negetive consequence.
I assume that when rats ate the junk food a light flashed and the rat experienced some pain.
I also assume that the rats continued to eat junk food even when they experienced some negetive consequence or the possibility of negetive consequence.
personally I have my doubts about the validity of the conclusions the researchers have drawn, but thats only my opinion.
the definition of addiction is "continued use even after knowing the consequences. "
in spite of the pain, they continued the bad behavior
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace