11
   

Study links childhood IQ to likelihood of future drug use

 
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 10:30 am
@DrewDad,
The directly down wind faster then the wind still break basic laws of nature so either we are going to need to rewrite all repeat all of our most basic laws from Newton on or it is a con that was sold to a hobbies group.

I vote by Occam razor that it is still likely a hoax.....................

Not that it had a thing to do with a study that was nonsense on it face and such nonsense does a deserve to the anti-drug message by causing a lost of creditability.
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 10:36 am
@BillRM,
This thread is not about you in case you haven't noticed.
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 10:42 am
@boomerang,
On the other hand, boomer, if Mo had a voice recognition device to "write" about his trip to the science center, I bet he would have talked endlessly about it. He simply couldn't put it on paper, but could have given a great oral presentation if his teacher had asked him.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 10:52 am
@CalamityJane,
Quote:
This thread is not about you in case you haven't noticed
.

No but it is partly about trying to support an anti drug message using false studies/informations to scare young people and the wisdom of trying to do so.

To me using most drugs is harmful enough without the need to try to revisit the reefer madness days in a time of the internet where the truth is just a google click away.


0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 12:39 pm
@boomerang,
I'm thinking more about how much faster typing is than handwriting. When his typing speed improves, he'll be better able to keep up with the speed of his thoughts and won't be so frustrated.

I find myself often frustrated when I am stuck taking handwritten notes rather than being able to type out the notes. I type so fast I can take notes verbatim with my thinking, but have to take cryptic keyword notes when handwriting because my hand can't keep up with the speed of my thoughts.

0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 12:42 pm
@CalamityJane,
Yep. That too would help solve the problem of his being able to write at the speed of his thoughts and not get frustrated.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 12:45 pm
@boomerang,
Quote:
His teacher talked about how when she's demonstrating something by writing it on the board, expecting the kids to take notes that Mo never does. He just stares at his desk. She says she can tell that he's listening, really listening, and concentrating on what is being said but that he will never write anything down.

Can Mo explain why he doesn't take notes? Is he confused if he has to do two complex tasks at once--listen and retain what he's heard long enough to write it down? Can he simply copy what's on the board if she's not talking and the room is quiet?
Quote:
After each trip they are supposed to write in a diary about their experience. His teacher recently showed me his diary, it read like this: We went to ______ station, then we did _____________, then we had lunch, then we ____________, then we came back to school.

If he reads that diary aloud, back to himself, can he understand what's missing and fill it in?

Will his teacher allow him to use a tape recorder instead of taking notes?

boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 12:55 pm
@firefly,
He just says it's too confusing -- that he understands it better if he just listens. I've had his vision checked and it isn't a vision problem.... maybe some kind of visual processing problem?
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 01:02 pm
@boomerang,
If I had been forced to take notes, I would have flunked out.

I got to where I made very basic outlines with lots of doodles when made to show note taking. sometimes I would go back and fake notes from memory of the lecture.

concentration is much more effective for me.

FWIW...
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 01:13 pm
@boomerang,
Since Mo reads and can verbally describe the answers to questions, it could well be a disorder of written expression.

If that is the case, it might be worth it to find out if using sign language would be helpful for Mo. It is one of the suggestions at one of the links I gave earlier http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1835883-treatment

An earlier page at that link provides a list of tests which have subtests that can help identify. If you are able to get a referral to a neuropsychologist, do get all of the raw test results to give to the assessor for review.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2011 02:19 pm
@boomerang,
He might grow out of aversion to writing; I did.

In the meantime, he can carry a dictafone.





David
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 01:49 am
@boomerang,
Quote:
The problems are all with written information. Having to write things down seems almost physically painful to him: he can tell you, in detail and in depth, what he wants to write but when it comes to writing it down.... he just can't do it. Something stops it

Would this explanation make any sense in terms of Mo?
Quote:
Cray-Computer-to-Manual-Typewriter Hypothesis – stems from the inability to write or type fast enough to keep up with the thoughts that a gifted child wants to express. A 9-year-old complained, “My brain works much too fast for my fingers.” Given that he had the “gift of the gab,” this child usually did very well when he could respond orally, but did poorly when he had to respond in writing.
http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10447.aspx

The author of the article that the above quote is from makes good points about the Processing Speed Index on the WISC-IV, particularly the fact that both of the sub-tests that make up that index are timed tests.
It is possible that Mo's relatively lower performance on those sub-tests may have more to do with how he approaches a timed task than processing speed per se. Does he rush it, not pay enough attention to details, and make too many mistakes, or is he too slow because he wants to avoid making errors? Either of things can lower the scores on those two sub-tests. Did the school psychologist make any comments about Mo's test-taking behavior in that regard? Were both the Coding and Symbol Search sub-test scores low, or was one score significantly lower than the other?

This article suggests using video games to help children with slow processing speed.
http://eideneurolearningblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/slow-processing-speedvideo-game-therapy.html

And this article reports on some research using games to increase processing speed.
Quote:

Posted Thursday, December 10, 2009
New Research: $13 Christmas gifts = 13 point gain in kids’ IQ
Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman

Shoppers, you might want to redo your gift list after you read this.

Dr. Silvia Bunge, a neuroscientist at UC Berkeley, has long been interested in understanding the development of children’s intelligence. She’s been measuring kids’ intelligence and scanning their brains for several years in order to understand what exactly makes some brains function better than others. This has given her unique insight into the mental processes kids are capable of, and how to test for it. Last year, Bunge and her graduate students decided to see if they could train up, or sharpen, children’s minds. Their study might sound remarkably simple, but the results have been flat-out astonishing.

First, they went looking for off-the-shelf board games, card games, and video games that demanded distinct mental functions. One group of these games was chosen because they’d give children’s reasoning ability a workout – these games require forethought, planning, comparisons and logical integration. The games chosen were card games like SET, the traffic-jam puzzle Rush Hour, and Qwirkle, a cross between Dominos and Scrabble. For the Nintendo DS, they chose Picross and Big Brain Academy. There were also two games for the computer – one called Azada, another called Chocolate Fix.

Bunge’s team brought the games to an elementary school in Oakland with historically low state test scores. The researchers asked some second, third and fourth graders to stay after school to play. The kids’ IQ averaged a 90, and their brain speed (a subtest of intelligence) ranked them at only the 27th percentile. The children’s parents, on average, were high-school dropouts. These were the kids every education policy hopes to target, and every thought leader has an opinion on how to improve.

Twice a week, the kids played the games for an hour and fifteen minutes. Every fifteen minutes the kids moved to a new table, to make sure their brains always had something new to figure out. (The neuroscientists thought it was important the sessions remained fun.)

After just eight weeks – twenty total hours of game playing – Bunge’s team retested the children’s intelligence. They were specifically interested in the kids’ reasoning ability. According to the classic theories of intelligence, reasoning ability is considered both the core element of intelligence and also the hardest to change. Allyson Mackey, Bunge’s graduate student who supervised the study, thought she might see gains of 3 to 6 points, at most.

“From adult training studies, we knew some improvement was possible,” said Bunge. “But it was enormous.”

The children’s reasoning scores, on average, leapt 32%. Translated to an IQ standard, that bumped them 13 points.

For comparison, consider that a 12 point gain is normally how much a child’s IQ goes up after an entire year of school. By giving the children precisely targeted games, Bunge and Mackey were able to beat that, in just 20 hours of game playing.

Reasoning ability was not the neuroscientists’ only target. Bunge’s team was also interested in another component of intelligence, called processing speed. So, at the same time, a second group of games was assembled, and a second group of kids spent their afternoons in that classroom. “Those games didn’t require memory or strategy, just very rapid visual recognition,” described Mackey. These included traditional card games like Spoons and Speed, the video game Brickbuster, the board game Blink, and Perfection, in which kids must push 25 plastic shapes into a springboard in under a minute.

After the eight weeks, these kids’ cognitive scores were tested as well. The kids who trained for speed saw their processing speed scores leap 27%; they began well-below average, but quickly reached a level far above-average. In football, a famous adage is “You can’t teach speed.” That doesn’t seem to be the case for the brain.

Each group’s improvements were domain-specific, so it was clear the games were the cause. The speed group saw only insignificant gains in reasoning ability. Those who trained on the reasoning games (and improved their reasoning) saw almost no speed benefit. Neither group saw improvement in working memory. This also suggests that cross-training is necessary for full-scale intelligence.

Bunge has concluded, “All parts of intelligence are malleable. They’re all in the brain, and all of the brain shows plasticity. There’s no evidence that some regions are most or less plastic than others.” The presumption that some components of intelligence are more fixed than others isn’t backed up by the new science.

Bunge’s team, thrilled with their results, are continuing to build on this with new experiments. They’re currently looking for more schools in Northern Californiato participate. The original study is now being reproduced, with kids who are having their brains scanned before and after the game training. Bunge is hoping to learn what’s changed, on a neural level, in just eight weeks. She expects to find a pattern toward greater efficiency – more focused activity in the specific regions required by the tasks, and less activation of unnecessary brain regions. She might also find how the frontal lobe and the parietal lobe fire in concert, or even a physical change in the nerves connecting the two brain regions, making the network faster.

Perhaps the most important finding in Bunge’s data is that the training helped the neediest kids the most. The farther down a child started on the rankings, the quicker and greater was his cognitive improvement. This is extremely rare in education interventions. Usually, smart kids benefit most, and the kids who struggle at the beginning only fall farther behind. Broadscale education reforms like smaller classes, teacher training, charter schools, and all-day schedules have pricetags in the millions of dollars.

Compare that to the cost of these games, which average only $13 (and Brickbuster [also called Breakout or Brickbreaker] can be played online for free):

•Deck of Cards $1.25
•Blink $5
•Azada $7
•SET $10
•Perfection $12
•Chocolate Fix $12
•Rush Hour $18
•Qwirkle $19
•Big Brain Academy $26
•Picross $20
https://academictech.doit.wisc.edu/blogs/at/interesting-newsweek-post-games-and-iq


Think playing any of those games might help Mo?

If you want to read it, this is the research that the above article refers to:
Differential effects of reasoning and speed training in children
Allyson P. Mackey,Susanna S. Hill, Susan I. Stone and Silvia A. Bunge
http://ihd.berkeley.edu/Mackey_DevSci_withSuppl_2011-1.pdf
boomerang
 
  3  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 11:37 am
I've been thinking a bit about DrewDad's warnings about one time drug use and BillRM's claims that such a thing is propaganda.

Obviously there aren't a lot of studies on this -- they aren't going to try to damage some kid's brain just to see what happens. So I started thinking there must be instances of people having adverse reactions to certain medications that resulted in brain damage after only one dose and there was indeed quite a bit of information on that. I also recalled reading that a lot of young athletes that just drop dead have often just started taking drugs for treating ADD/ADHD.

All of that led me to this Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_MDMA_on_the_human_body. For some people taking a single dose of drugs can clearly aggravate preexisting conditions that have not been diagnosed.

I think this round goes to DrewDad.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:02 pm
@CalamityJane,
I'm really thinking about this voice recognition thing, too. I can see some real benefits with that.

Typing is immensely frustrating to him so the computer doesn't hold much interest. To be honest, I'm perfectly okay with that (for now). Many of his friends are signing up to social media sites and I'm not at all sure that would be a good idea for Mo since he doesn't "get" a lot of social cues as it is. Interestingly, he's really pretty popular at school and has a very solid set of friends. Looking over the psychologist's report it says that his teachers comment on his "kindness and helpfulness" and that during testing he was "polite, upbeat, and quite charming".

This kid is full of contradictions!
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:03 pm
@Rockhead,
I too was a doodler. Keywords and doodles comprised all of my school notes.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:07 pm
@ehBeth,
Good info. Thanks. We're still hammering out his IEP for this year so there is some time to get things in place. I'm going to bring some of this up.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:07 pm
@boomerang,
Some drugs also have highly addictive properties, and that's true of cocaine, particularly crack cocaine, and they can result in a rather rapid addiction for many people. Some people do get psychologically hooked after only a one-time ingestion of these drugs, especially crack, and that results in the continued use that leads to physical dependency.

Even prescription drugs can have that effect. I believe that Xanax, a benzodiazepine given to reduce symptoms of anxiety, can result in signs of addiction, including some withdrawal symptoms, after as little as two weeks of use--and that's when used as directed by a physician.
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:08 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
There's also a chance that he won't grow out of it. So much communication is text based these days. I don't particularly care if he never enjoys writing but I do think it's essential that he have a basic mastery of it.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:19 pm
@firefly,
The "gift of gab" certainly describes him! He has never complained about his writing never being able to keep up with his thoughts though.

From the glimpses I got of the tests I would say he was very methodical. There weren't many mistakes, he just didn't answer very many -- so I wouldn't say he rushed through it.

We do actually play a lot of board games and we own quite a few of the ones listed! Maybe I need to up the amount of time we play.

He also plays video games and I think they're very helpful to him. He is very persistent. He used to always say "This game won't let me blahblahblah!" and I'd say "Yes it will, you just think different." He's become very good at thinking around obstacles, in games and in life. I'm among the minority of very pro-video game moms!

I am going to read that research. Thanks!
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2011 12:21 pm
@boomerang,
boomerang wrote:
There's also a chance that he won't grow out of it. So much communication is text based these days.
I don't particularly care if he never enjoys writing but I do think it's essential that he have a basic mastery of it.
U r certainly correct.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

hello - Discussion by sherry lambert
Best online IQ test? - Question by Marcitko
Intelligence. - Discussion by MKABRSTI
Have the highest IQ-score? - Question by sbrissman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 04:09:05