SYNC stands for Society, Youth and Neuroscience Connected. This is not just a catchy acronym; it truly reflects our mission: To bridge multiple levels of measurement to understand how young people develop into contributing members of society. All of society: regardless of origin, skin color, gender, education level, or sexual preference.
We are concerned about how the recent events of continuous violence and brutal deaths of Black people in the United States of America affect the wellbeing of Black youth and youth of color all over the world. We cannot ignore the fact that also in the Netherlands some of our Black youth are dealing with racism on a daily basis. Institutionalized racism exists here too. All of us at the SYNC lab believe that now is not a time of silence. We speak up against racism and we stand in solidarity with our Black colleagues, fellow Black scientists, and the Black community. As a research group we aim to work on providing the scientific building blocks needed to help shape a better future for the current and next generation of youth – all youth.
In order to make progress and enable equality, it is not enough to just “not be racist”, we must speak out and strive for anti-racist strategies. We want to use our platform to not only get a better understanding of the current protest situations and the wellbeing of Black youth and other minorities, but also share our knowledge on racism, White privilege and implicit biases. One way to do so is by looking into what we have learned from psychological research and neuroscience. Here we share some important psychological and neuroscientific factors that might influence our knowledge on racism. However, we acknowledge that making a statement and sharing our knowledge is not enough. We also want to make an effort to improve our own learning and practices, and provide some starting points below.
Identity
Racism is often defined as the prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed to a person based on the belief that your race is inherently superior of the other person’s race. Many people do not identify themselves as racists. It is important to acknowledge that racism is a complex phenomenon that should be seen as a continuum rather than a dichotomous construct. While most people agree that what happened to George Floyd is beyond all human understanding and that Black lives cannot be lost this way, a large part of our society still struggles to see the less overt and more subtle forms of racial inequality. Many people do not realize that their thoughts and actions may still contribute to the prejudiced system that threatens Black people. It is far more difficult to get united, speak up against and counteract those racial prejudices that are somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.
As we will explain below, such subtle forms of racial prejudices can be partially explained by psychological mechanisms that help us understand the world around us. During our lives, our brain processes a vast amount of information, and to help us quickly crunch through all of it, our brain often relies on shortcuts. For instance, one way to speed up our information processing is by sorting information into categories (e.g. a dog is an animal) and coupling this information with how we feel about a certain category. Below, we will explain how this quick-and-dirty brain processing can result in implicit biases and ingroup vs. outgroup thinking.
Implicit biases
Implicit bias is considered to be a rather automatic and unconscious process of associating attitudes towards people. Several studies indicate that on a group level White people show discrepancies between explicit attitudes towards other races and implicit racial prejudices. Most individuals are not aware that implicit biases can just be beneath the surface. However, these implicit racial biases may contribute to racial disparities in for instance health care settings or conflict situations. Neuroscience research showed that the amygdala, a region located deep in the brain, plays a role in implicit bias.Scientific studies have also shown that the brain is a flexible organ and new connections between brain regions can be made as a result of learning and to overcome prejudice. We can learn to be better.
Ingroup vs. outgroup
The second process is ingroup vs. outgroup thinking, a process of social categorization by putting some people in one group based on certain characteristics, such as race, and others in another group. While belonging to groups and understanding the world in terms of categories has several evolutionary and social advantages, it can also result in unwanted biases. People tend to have stronger positive feelings and special treatments for their ingroup members, while having negative feelings towards outgroup members. These processes are also driven by affective systems in the brain. Neuroscientific studies have shown that change requires effort but it is possible. The last couple of days people may have gotten the feeling that this all about Black vs. White, while in fact it is about everyone vs. racism.
As noted earlier, it is possible to overcome these biases: we can learn to do better. For a large part, this has to do with expanding our experiences beyond what we already know and learning from other perspectives. During our lives, we not only learn about categories and our attitudes towards them from our own experiences, but also from experiences of other people, and from what we encounter on TV or social media. Interestingly, then, as we will explain below, adolescents are the designated developmental group to teach us how to break down bias and expand our perspective.
Adolescence: a time of reflection and possibilities
During the past few days, you may have noticed that adolescents (of all ethnicities) make up a large portion of the individuals who actively stand in solidarity with the Black community – for instance by protesting on the streets. One of the main developmental tasks of adolescents is to form their own identity in an ever-changing social world. Interestingly, during this period, youngsters develop perspective taking skills that enable them to understand other people’s minds and consider perspectives that are different from their own.
Adolescents conform to social norms of the group they want to belong to, which helps them to develop their identity and each generation forms new norms. Two decades of developmental neuroscience have shown that the brain matures well into adolescence. Adolescence is a period of brain growth and specialization; it is a time of reflection; a phase were youngsters explore the world and form their identity. Most importantly: Adolescence is a period of hope.
We can learn from adolescence by taking the time for reflection, to demine what is important for us. To step out of our comfort zone and form new norms. We at the SYNC lab want to shape a better future for the current and next generation of youth. And what better way than to start with ourselves. Because the question is not if we can do better, but how we can do better.
How can we do better?
1. Inclusive research samples
Although we have made some steps to diversify our research samples, we recognize that we still have much to learn and improve. Therefore, we want to make an effort to make our samples more diverse and representative of the whole population. For this purpose, we will (1) pay more attention to all facets of diversity (i.e., origin, skin color, gender, education level, and sexual preference), and (2) align our recruitment strategy accordingly – choosing the appropriate channels to reach a diverse group of participants and minimize issues that may prevent certain sub-groups from participating.
2. Inclusive education and work environment
Another essential aspect of our work and responsibility involves education – whether it pertains to teaching our knowledge and skills to university students or to society more broadly, in the form of outreach or policy recommendations. We need to consider how to be more inclusive and supportive in the opportunities we provide to a wide arrange of students, what the most appropriate channels are for sharing our findings to reach all of society, and how we can make sure that policy recommendations do not exclude important sub-groups of our population. We are developing SMART rules to get there.
3. Include all voices
In all of these aforementioned activities (e.g. Research, Education, Outreach), we realize that it is not enough to try to understand what we could improve upon on our own. In all (the stages of) our activities, we need to hear other voices, to help us expand our view and understand what is important for all of society. That is the ultimate way to truly getsociety, youth and neuroscience connected.
Do you want to share your voice and help us in our effort? Contact our (faculty) diversity office (dendulk@essb.eur.nl | denktas@essb.eur.nl) or find out more on the diversity and inclusion page on the EUR website.
On behalf of the entire SYNC-lab;
Eveline Crone, Professor
Michelle Achterberg, post doc
Ilse van de Groep, PhD candidate
Kayla Green, research assistant
Philip Brandner, PhD candidate
Dorien Huijser, research assistant
Suzanne van de Groep, PhD candidate
Lina van Drunen, PhD candidate
Simone Dobbelaar, PhD candidate
Sophie Sweijen, research assistant
Andrik Becht, post doc
Renske van der Cruijsen, PhD candidate
Eduard Klapwijk, post doc
Jochem Spaans, PhD candidate
This summer got me thinking about how easy it is when you work in academics to just keep on going. Summertime is the time you can take it easy or even go on a holiday, but you may find yourself tempted to (finally) focus on your research since you probably have little teaching obligations.
I have always been focused on planning enough vacation weeks a year, so I can reload and be productive the rest of the time. However, I sometimes forget that during all the other weeks of the year I tend to sacrifice increasing amounts of free time in order to ‘just quickly finish this’. Until recently, I never used to take real breaks, not even for lunch. And I know a lot of people who don’t either. Why is it such a challenge for academics to take enough downtime and vacation?
Why we struggle taking breaks
We can work anytime, and anywhere. Since a big part of our job requires only a computer, we can work wherever we can find a semi-reliable internet connection. Although this has its advantages (you can work from home, in a coffee shop, etc.) it also makes it particularly difficult to separate work and personal life. Especially now that we’ve been working from home for over 4 months (work & life being more intertwined than ever), and will continue to do so for a while, it’s important to think about taking downtime.
Unfortunately however, we are extremely proficient in thinking of reasons for not taking a break. It can be because our work is never done, because we feel guilty about not-working, or because we may feel like we’re too important to be away from work. We may be afraid to be labelled ‘lazy’ if we claim more free time to ourselves, and can sometimes feel like we ‘have to’ keep going because we need to compete with equally hard-working colleagues for competitive grants. In short, it’s always easy to find a reason to say: ‘this is not the right time to take a break, I’m just too busy right now’.
An ode to downtime
Taking time off work is healthy and good for your creativity and productivity. When we rest, we activate a network in our brains (the default mode network) which is suggested to help us reflect on and learn from our experiences, understand new information, and construct creative connections between complex ideas. So it’s no surprise we often get our best ideas while taking a shower or walking around in nature. Even though it may feel counterintuitive, taking breaks during the day and enjoying your free evenings are good for you and your work!
Additionally, it’s important to take a vacation every now and then. Vacations and traveling allow us to detach from work, which enables you to psychologically and physically recharge. A failure to recover from work stress can result in reduced well-being and mental health complaints such as burn-out, depressive symptoms, and stress. Too much work and not enough downtime recovery is simply not good for us!
The art of actually taking a break
Mental shift
Ok so taking downtime is important, but we had so many reasons to not take enough of it. Maybe we should first try to make a mental shift. First, we can try to realize (and accept) that we’re not as important as we might like to think. No matter how important your position: you can be missed (at least for a couple of weeks a year). Second, we need to stop feeling guilty about not-working. When you work in Europe, you are legally allowed to take an x number of vacation days each year. You’re not cutting anyone short if you actually use them! I am trying to get there by attempting to ignore those who are surprised to hear I don’t have my work-email and slack on my private phone, and by reminding myself that I really am more creative and productive when I also take breaks and travel.
Walk the talk
During Corona ‘smart’ lockdown I picked up the habit to actually take breaks and to go outside and walk during these breaks. Sometimes I go with a colleague or friend, other times I go alone, usually listening to a podcast on my phone. Although I thought I was doing a good job, the last (Dutch) podcast I listened to during a break told me I was doing it all wrong. In order to activate the default mode network, it’s better if you don’t get any new information and just let your mind wander. So this also means no reading news or checking social media during a break! Something I obviously still have to work on…
Vacation versus staycation
There are lots of differences in how people choose to spend their holidays. While some people prefer to go away for short periods of time and/or stay at home instead of travel, others like to be away for a couple of weeks in a row, and travel to foreign countries. Although any extended time you take off work will probably help you to recharge, it appears that people seem to detach from work more when they actually leave their home during vacations. During travel, people sleep more, take part in more social and less obligatory activities than when they stay home. There is a larger mental distance from everyday worries, and people experience higher hedonic well-being and less ruminative thinking when they’re away. So whether you go only for a weekend or a longer period of time, it is worth the effort to make trips away from home. Even now with restricted travel during the Corona crisis, there are probably places within your own country you can visit.
Now that this blog is finished, I think I have deserved a nice afternoon at the beach! I wish everyone a great and relaxing summer!
By Jochem Spaans
“What, July already!?” I think, as I receive emails from the University about the close of the academic year. These past 7 months feel to have gone by in the blink of an eye. At the same time, the start of the lockdown in the Netherlands (that started on the 12th of March), has created a divide in my mind; there’s a distinct time before and time after the start of the lockdown. For instance, the memory of my skiing holiday in January feels to belong to a different lifetime. Interestingly, when talking to friends or family about my perception of time, it seems that there are quite some individual differences. Some feel that the past months have been dragged out, rather than sped up. As a result of my own experiences and the contradiction of my experience in the reports of others, I am left with questions: What affects our perception of time? And how do we keep track of time in the first place? Time to find out!
Time flies when you’re having fun..
With respect to time speeding up, several factors might play a role. For instance, time tends to move faster when we are emotionally taxed and having fun, such as when talking with a friend, when playing a game, or when discovering interesting theories about time perception. One example from the psychological literature is the concept of flow, which describes a specific state of concentration or complete absorption in the activity that is being performed. It can occur in situations that are intrinsically rewarding and challenging yet mastered, for instance when playing sports or making music. The acceleration of time might possibly be the result of resources being drawn away from our internal timer (which might make it ‘miss’ keeping track of time, like a stopwatch being turned on too late when you are not paying attention).
Time crawls when you need to run!
Have you ever been involved in a near-accident in traffic? Once, a car almost hit me as I was biking across an intersection. As I saw the car approach out of the corner of my eye and I noticed it wasn’t slowing down and on a direct collision course with me, time seemed to freeze. I slammed the brakes and turned my bike in what must have been less than a second or two, but it felt like ten seconds. This matrix like power is not unique to me and could actually relate to the fact that heightened arousal seems to slow down our perception of time. For instance, studies have shown that artificially inducing arousal before a timed stimulus increases the perceived duration of a timed interval (and certain drugs that heighten arousal, such as cocaine, as well as increased body temperature, have a similar effect on time perception). What happens to the internal timing mechanism? Possibly, more resources are being used by the internal timer, leading to it keep track of more time (like a stopwatch being turned on exactly at the start of an event).
Novelty versus routines
Some studies posit that novelty plays a role in our perception of time, and that new stimuli slow down our perception while known stimuli, such as in routines, speed it up. This would fit with the theory of arousal / attention described above, with more attention being paid to -and more arousal being elicited by- a novel stimulus compared to a known one. The first times you’re tasting a new food, trying a new sport, or going on a date, are given more attention and are more arousing, slowing down our perception of time. This would also explain the well documented phenomenon that time feels to be moving faster with increasing age. As we age, we tend to encounter less and less novel situations, and get into more daily and weekly routines.
Time to sum up
In short, according to the literature that I have read for this blog*, it seems that our sense of time is influenced by how much resources are left to keep our internal stopwatch active. Keeping track of time requires attention and working memory, and the more resources are taken up by other processes that do not require attention or working memory (emotion, well-practiced routines), the faster time seems to move. On the other hand, the more direct attention a situation requires, such as when attending to novel stimuli, or when a situation is arousing, such as when trying to prevent yourself from crashing into a car, the slower time seems to pass by.
Individual differences in lock-downtime?
Looping all the way back to the start, I tried to apply what I learned in the literature to my experiences in the corona period. Given the novelty of all the situations that corona has brought about (wearing facemasks, getting accustomed to working and teaching online, constant, arousal-inducing news that draws your attention), one would expect time to slow down. However, following the lockdown, most of us were also stuck in the same environment for over two months. Confined to your own house or even room, days become weeks, and weeks become months, and the only novel stimuli are all presented through the same medium, my laptop. It seems to be that there’s plenty of reasons for our perception of time to have been sped up, as well as having been slowed down. Depending on which is more prevalent or salient at a given time, 2020 can feel as either a train or a snail riding by. I’m personally leaning towards team train. How about you?
*If I had all the time in the world, I would have read more, but this blog is already overdue on time.
References
Buhusi, C.V., & Meck, W.H. (2005). What makes us tick? Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 755–765.
Cordes, S. et al. (2007) Common representations of abstract quantities. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 16, 156–161.
Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
Droit-Volet, S., & Meck, W. H. (2007). How emotions colour our perception of time. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(12), 504–513.
Gibbon, J. et al. (1984) Scalar timing in memory. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 423, 52–77.
Matell, M.S. and Meck, W.H. (2000) Neuropsychological mechanisms of interval timing behaviour. Bioessays 22, 94–103.
Matell, M.S. and Meck, W.H. (2004) Cortico-striatal circuits and interval timing: coincidence-detection of oscillatory processes. Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res. 21, 139–170.
Meck, W.H., & Church, R.M. (1983). A mode control model of counting and timing processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 9, 320–334.
By Dorien Huijser
Recently, we released an MRI data sharing guide for Dutch researchers. This is a tool for researchers who want to share brain MRI data but do not know where to start. Such a practical tool is an output form that we as researchers are not very much used to. Creating this guide was therefore a very different process compared to regular research. Specifically, it involved a lot less planning, first-time hackathon experiences and many teachable moments.
So it begins: the brainstorm
In October 2019, the Open Science Community Leiden helped me organize a brainstorm session for university employees who were interested in sharing MRI data. During my work, I had already noticed that most people I spoke to didn’t have much experience with sharing MRI data. Therefore, with this brainstorm session, I hoped to hear more points of view on the matter or find out about regulations I wasn’t yet aware of. Most importantly, I hoped to reach consensus on what to do, because from where I was standing, it seemed as if there wasn’t any.
The session was well-attended, not only by researchers from the Social Sciences faculty, but also by support staff and staff from the University Medical Center. Together, we came to a few important conclusions:
1. We weren’t the only ones with little experience sharing MRI data;
2. Many researchers didn’t know how privacy regulations apply to MRI data;
3. Researchers were unaware that support staff was there to help and support staff, in turn, had no idea what MRI data was and were unsure how to get in touch with researchers.
With these conclusions in mind, we decided to draft a guide about the subject. We formed a group consisting of both researchers working with MRI data as well as research support staff to tackle the issue and got started.
Appointments followed and a few months went by. Apparently, getting together with both researchers and support staff had been a good idea: we complemented each other’s knowledge and were all prepared to explain our view on the issue. During our get-togethers, we realized that there were many aspects that play a role in sharing MRI data (type of MRI scans, stage of research, location of data collection, etc.). We therefore decided to keep the first tool small, focusing on the Dutch situation, as this was by itself already a challenge.
A knack to hack
In January, the Open MR Benelux 2020 took place, a small-scale event for Benelux researchers who work with neuroimaging data and are interested in open science. This was where I joined my first hackathon and I was quite nervous about it. The word “hackathon” sounds very advanced and since I do not have much programming experience, I worried it was going to be a disaster. Luckily, the opposite turned out to be true.
What are hackathons?
he word ‘hackathon’ originates from the programming world and stands for “hacking marathon”. Originally, hackathons are large meetings of smart people trying to build some kind of working software in a(n impossibly) small amount of time. Nowadays, an academic hackathon is typically a period in which academics collaborate fully on one specific project which will probably advance the field in one way or another. Admittedly, many projects do focus on developing tools, but they can also be tools that have nothing to do with programming. In fact, hackathon organizers increasingly stimulate making projects open to those with little coding experience. In recent hackathons, participants also do not only “hack”, but also have possibilities to follow training sessions and participate in “unconferences” – basically open and unplanned discussions for everyone to join. In this much more open way, hackathons are a great place to get to know new people, learn from them and have fun in the meantime.
At OpenMR Benelux, I proposed our MRI guide as a hackathon project to receive more input. Despite the fact that there weren’t many participants to help, I received valuable input from an associate professor from Erasmus MC (Stefan Klein), who provided some more technical and medical insights. The rest of my time there, I spent helping with an existing initiative (eCOBIDAS). I was pleasantly surprised to realize that I learned more from my – very patient – collaborators than I imagined was possible in 3 days. Recently, I joined a second hackathon (OHBM Brainhack), which basically repeated this experience: I learned so many new things in a short amount of time. The best part about both these experiences wasn’t only to learn new skills. It was also getting to know colleagues and initiatives outside of the Netherlands that turned out to be very relevant to my own work. In addition, these events were both so informal and accessible that my embarrassment to ask things I didn’t know quickly faded.
In the meantime, the first version of the MRI data sharing guide has been published and we have already received feedback for a next version. My conclusion from this is that community-driven efforts, such as hackathons and our sharing guide, can contribute to scientific advancement in an extremely meaningful way. For me, this meant bringing the right people together to try to figure out the complicated issue that is sharing MRI data. For others, this may mean something different. Overall, I think that community-driven initiatives can have large impact, not only because they result from collaboration, but also because they have personal benefits: you can learn about projects happening in the world, get to know new people and collaborate on projects that you would otherwise never have thought about. It would be great if our MRI data sharing guide could be followed by something more widely applicable and will be just as widely supported as many preceding hackathon projects. In the meantime, I will keep on hacking.
Vandaag verscheen er in Erasmus Magazine een interview met onderzoekers Kayla Green, Michelle Achterberg en Ilse van de Groep over het antiracismestatement dat zij namens het SYNC lab schreven. Hierin leggen ze uit waarom het voor het SYNC lab belangrijk is om dit statement te schrijven en hoe ze hopen de komende tijd met actiepunten aan de slag te gaan.
Wil je het statement lezen? Klik hier voor de oorspronkelijke, Engelse versie. Hieronder kun je de Nederlandse versie lezen.
Samen de samenleving verbinden
SYNC staat voor Society, Youth and Neuroscience Connected. Dit is niet zomaar een pakkende afkorting; het is een weerspiegeling van onze missie: we willen meerdere meetniveaus overbruggen om te begrijpen hoe jongeren zich ontwikkelen tot volwaardige leden van de samenleving, ongeacht hun afkomst, huidskleur, geslacht, opleidingsniveau of seksuele voorkeur.
We zijn bezorgd over hoe de recente gebeurtenissen van voortdurend geweld en wrede sterfgevallen van zwarte mensen in Amerika het welzijn van zwarte jongeren en gekleurde jongeren over de hele wereld beïnvloeden. We kunnen niet over het hoofd zien dat ook in Nederland sommige van onze zwarte jongeren dagelijks met racisme te maken hebben. Ook in ons land bestaat geïnstitutionaliseerd racisme. Wij van het SYNC lab zijn van mening dat dit geen tijd is om stil te zijn. We spreken ons uit tegen racisme en staan solidair met onze zwarte collega’s, collega-zwarte wetenschappers en de zwarte gemeenschap. Als onderzoeksgroep willen we werken aan de wetenschappelijke bouwstenen die nodig zijn om een betere toekomst voor de huidige en volgende generaties jongeren vorm te geven – voor alle jongeren.
Om vooruitgang te boeken en gelijkheid mogelijk te maken, is het niet genoeg om alleen maar “niet-racistisch te zijn”, wij moeten ons tegen racisme uitspreken en streven naar antiracistische strategieën. We willen ons platform gebruiken om een beter beeld te krijgen van de huidige protesten en het welzijn van zwarte jongeren en andere minderheden, maar ook om onze kennis over racisme, wit privilege en impliciete vooroordelen te delen. Een manier om dat te doen is door te kijken naar wat we hierover weten op basis van psychologisch onderzoek en neurowetenschappen. We zullen enkele belangrijke psychologische en neurowetenschappelijke factoren delen die onze kennis over racisme kunnen beïnvloeden. We zijn er ons bewust van dat het maken van een statement en het delen van onze kennis niet voldoende is. We willen ons ook inspannen om te blijven leren en onze eigen werkwijze te verbeteren. Hieronder geven we enkele actiepunten.
Identiteit
Racisme wordt vaak omschreven als vooroordelen, discriminatie of antagonisme die gericht zijn op een ander, op basis van de overtuiging dat je eigen ras inherent superieur is dan dat van die ander. Veel mensen identificeren zichzelf niet als racist. Het is belangrijk om te erkennen dat racisme een complex fenomeen is dat gezien moet worden als een continuüm in plaats van een dichotoom construct. Hoewel de meeste mensen het erover eens zijn dat wat er met George Floyd is gebeurd, het menselijk begrip te boven gaat en dat zwarte levens op deze manier niet verloren kunnen gaan, worstelt een groot deel van onze samenleving nog steeds met het waarnemen en erkennen van de minder openlijke en subtielere vormen van raciale ongelijkheid. Veel mensen realiseren zich niet dat hun gedachten en acties wel degelijk kunnen bijdragen aan het bevooroordeelde systeem dat zwarte mensen bedreigt. Het is veel moeilijker om bewust te worden en iets te doen tegen raciale vooroordelen in het midden van het spectrum.
Zoals we hieronder zullen uitleggen, kunnen dergelijke subtiele vormen van raciale vooroordelen gedeeltelijk worden verklaard door psychologische mechanismen die ons helpen de wereld om ons heen te begrijpen. Tijdens ons leven verwerkt ons brein een enorme hoeveelheid informatie en om ons te helpen dat snel te kunnen doen, vertrouwen onze hersenen vaak op shortcuts. Een manier om onze informatieverwerking bijvoorbeeld te versnellen, is door informatie in categorieën te sorteren (bijv. een hond is een dier) en deze informatie te koppelen aan hoe we ons voelen over een bepaalde categorie. Hieronder zullen we uitleggen hoe deze snelle – maar niet altijd even accurate – hersenverwerking kan resulteren in impliciete vooroordelen en ingroup versus outgroup denken.
Impliciete vooroordelen
Impliciete bias wordt beschouwd als een tamelijk automatisch en onbewust proces waarbij attitudes (gevoelens) worden geassocieerd met mensen . Verschillende studies tonen aan dat op groepsniveau Witte mensen verschillen laten zien tussen hun expliciete houding, ten opzichte van andere rassen, en hun impliciete raciale vooroordelen. De meeste mensen zijn zich niet bewust dat impliciete vooringenomenheid onder de oppervlakte kan bestaan. Zulke impliciete raciale vooroordelen kunnen echter bijdragen aan raciale verschillen in bijvoorbeeld de toegang tot gezondheidszorg instellingen of binnen conflictsituaties. Neurowetenschappelijk onderzoek laat zien dat de amygdala, een gebied diep in de hersenen , een rol speelt bij impliciete bias. Wetenschappelijke studies hebben ook aangetoond dat de hersenen een flexibel orgaan zijn en dat nieuwe verbindingen tussen hersengebieden kunnen worden gemaakt als we leren (bijvoorbeeld door een ander perspectief te zien), wat kan helpen om vooroordelen te overwinnen . We kunnen dus leren om beter om te gaan met vooroordelen.
Ingroup vs. outgroup
Het tweede proces is ingroup versus outgroup denken, een proces van sociale categorisatie waarbij mensen in groepen geplaatst worden op basis van bepaalde kenmerken, zoals ras, Terwijl het behoren tot een groep en het begrijpen van de wereld in categorieën t verschillende evolutionaire en sociale voordelen heeft, kan het ook leiden tot ongewenste vooroordelen . Mensen hebben doorgaans sterkere positieve gevoelens voor en speciale manieren van omgang met leden van hun eigen groep, terwijl ze negatieve gevoelens hebben tegenover leden van de outgroup . Deze processen worden ook aangedreven door affectieve systemen in de hersenen . Neurowetenschappelijke studies hebben aangetoond dat verandering inspanning vereist, maar zeker mogelijk is. De laatste dagen hebben mensen wellicht het idee gekregen dat dit allemaal over Zwart vs. Wit gaat , terwijl het in feite draait om iedereen vs. racisme.
Zoals eerder opgemerkt, het is mogelijk om deze vooroordelen te overwinnen: we kunnen leren om hier beter mee om te gaan. Dit heeft voor een groot deel te maken met het verrijken van onze ervaringen, door niet alleen af te gaan op wat we al weten, maar juist door tede wereld te zien vanuit andere perspectieven. Tijdens ons leven leren we niet alleen over categorieën en ons gevoel hierbijvanuit onze eigen ervaringen , maar ook door ervaringen van andere mensen en van wat we tegenkomen op tv of sociale media. Interessant is dat, zoals we hieronder zullen uitleggen, adolescenten de aangewezen ontwikkelingsgroep zijn om ons te leren hoe we vooroordelen en biases kunnen doorbreken en ons perspectief kunnen verbreden.
Adolescentie: een tijd van reflectie en mogelijkheden
Het is je de afgelopen dagen misschien opgevallen dat adolescenten (van alle etnische groepen) een groot deel uitmaken van de individuen die actief solidair zijn met de zwarte gemeenschap – bijvoorbeeld door te protesteren op straat. Een van de belangrijkste ontwikkelingstaken van adolescenten is om hun eigen identiteit te vormen in een steeds veranderende sociale wereld. Interessant is dat jongeren in deze periode vaardigheden ontwikkelen om het perspectief van een ander te kunnen innemen, waarmee ze anderen goed kunnen begrijpen en verder gaan dan hun eigen beleving.
Adolescenten willen graag voldoen aan de sociale normen van de groep waartoe ze willen behoren. Dit helpt hen om hun identiteit te ontwikkelen en nieuwe normen te vormen. Twee decennia van onderzoek in de ontwikkelingsneurowetenschap hebben aangetoond dat de hersenen tot ver in de adolescentie volwassen worden. Adolescentie is een periode van hersengroei en specialisatie; het is een tijd van reflectie; een fase waarin jongeren de wereld verkennen en hun identiteit vormen. Het belangrijkste is: adolescentie is een periode van hoop.
Wij kunnen van adolescenten lerendoor tijd te nemen voor reflectie, om te bepalen wat voor ons belangrijk is. Het is tijd om uit onze comfortzone te stappen en nieuwe normen te vormen. Bij SYNC willen we een betere toekomst vormgeven voor de huidige en volgende generatie jongeren En de beste manier om daarmee te starten is om bij onszelf te beginnen. Omdat de vraag niet is of we het beter kunnen, maar hoe we het beter kunnen doen.
Hoe kunnen we het beter doen?
1. Inclusieve onderzoekspopulaties
Hoewel we enkele stappen hebben gezet om onderzoekspopulaties te diversifiëren, erkennen we dat we nog veel moeten leren en verbeteren. Daarom willen we ons inspannen om onze samples diverser en representatiever te maken voor de hele populatie. Voor dit doel zullen we (1) meer aandacht besteden aan alle facetten van diversiteit (d.w.z. oorsprong, huidskleur, geslacht, opleidingsniveau en seksuele voorkeur), en (2) onze wervingsstrategie hiermee afstemmen (d.w.z.de juiste manieren kiezen om een diverse groep deelnemers te bereiken en zaken waardoor bepaalde subgroepen mogelijk niet kunnen deelnemen te minimaliseren).
2. Inclusieve onderwijs en werkomgeving
Een ander essentieel aspect van ons werk en onze verantwoordelijkheid is onderwijs – of het nu gaat om het overbrengen van onze kennis en vaardigheden aan universiteitsstudenten of aan de samenleving in het algemeen, zoals in de vorm van wetenschapscommunicatie of beleidsaanbevelingen. We moeten nadenken over hoe we meer inclusief en ondersteunend kunnen zijn in de kansen die we bieden aan een brede groep studenten, wat de meest geschikte kanalen zijn om onze bevindingen te delen zodat we de hele samenleving bereiken, en hoe we ervoor kunnen zorgen dat beleidsaanbevelingen niet belangrijke subgroepen van onze bevolking buiten sluiten. We ontwikkelen momenteel SMART regels om hier aan te werken.
3. Includeer alle stemmen
In al deze bovengenoemde activiteiten (zoals onderzoek, onderwijs, wetenschapscommunicatie), realiseren we ons dat het niet voldoende is om te proberen te begrijpen wat we op kunnen verbeteren op onze eigen manier . In al (de fasen van) onze activiteiten moeten we andere stemmen horen, om ons te helpen onze visie uit te breiden en te begrijpen wat belangrijk is voor de hele samenleving . Dat is de ultieme manier om samenleving, jeugd en neurowetenschappen echt met elkaar te verbinden.
Wil je je stem delen en ons helpen bij onze inspanningen? Neem contact op met ons ( faculteits ) diversiteitsbureau ( dendulk@essb.eur.nl | denktas@essb.eur.nl) of lees meer op de diversiteits- en inclusiepagina op de EUR-website.
Namens het gehele SYNC-lab;
Eveline Crone, professor
Michelle Achterberg, postdoc
Ilse van de Groep, promovendus
Kayla Green, onderzoeksassistent
Philip Brandner , promovendus
Dorien Huijser, onderzoeksassistent
Suzanne van de Groep, promovendus
Lina van Drunen, promovendus
Simone Dobbelaar, promovendus
Sophie Sweijen, onderzoeksassistent
Andrik Becht, postdoc
Renske van der Cruijsen, promovendus
Eduard Klapwijk, postdoc
Jochem Spaans, promovendus
The Clock – Marc Chagall (1914)
A ticking clock symbolizing the uncertain times you cannot hold back
It is easy for me to think about how spring and summer of 2020 would have been. I would have lived in my brand-new apartment and have commuted to my new office in Rotterdam. I would have gone on a family trip to New York, for the first time in my life. I would have gone to a concert of a singer I have been a huge fan of since I was 13 years old. Will this thinking about a different reality help me stay sane? Probably not.
Counterfactual thinking
I may not be the only person wondering what might have been during this Covid-19 pandemic. Having these thoughts about alternatives to past events is called counterfactual thinking. It is a central part of people trying to make sense of the world around them. Counterfactuals can therefore be seen as thoughts focusing on the imagined versus factual state of affairs; thoughts of what might have been. This thinking about a different reality is seen as an unhelpful thinking style, since it may lead to more distress. When we think too much in sentences as “I would have …” or “I should have…”, this leads us to excessively focus on a situation we are not content with. Several studies have associated this thinking style with more negative affect, worry, anxiety, and rumination.
The value of counterfactuals
If this human tendency to think in counterfactuals appears to be unhelpful and distressing, why do we do this? Why do we think in this dysfunctional way? Rather than seeing it as a source of distress, counterfactual thinking can also be seen as a beneficial way of thinking. Some argue that counterfactuals form a useful and necessary component of behavior regulation. Thinking about what might have been equals thinking about the discrepancy between the current and ideal state. Because of this discrepancy, we are thinking about the current situation we are not happy with and are wondering if there are ways we could have achieved our ideal state that we are more content with. In this line of reasoning, counterfactual thinking is a form of problem solving.
An important factor in the value of counterfactuals is opportunity. When opportunities exist for further action, this can promote behavior regulation. Imagine saying to yourself “I should have been more productive today”. It is more likely that you will change your behavior and be more productive if you think this is possible; for example, when you can create a quiet and comfortable home workspace. In other words, when thinking about what might have been and at the same time about alternatives for the situation, counterfactual thinking can be seen as a form of problem solving. The perception of opportunities can make counterfactual thinking of value.
Counterfactuals in young individuals during a pandemic
So, how do counterfactuals relate to the current pandemic? The effects of the pandemic on the development of young individuals are currently unknown. We do not yet know how young individuals cope with this uncertain period. To this day, they have not seen their friends and peers for months in the ways they would typically see them. Similarly, they have not been able to go to school, sports, parties and other social gatherings. Given that the perception of opportunities plays a role in using counterfactuals beneficially, young individuals may be good candidates for using counterfactual thinking to their advantage. Adolescence is seen as an important developmental period, reflecting a sensitive period for adapting to one’s environment, particularly to one’s social environment. Adolescents may find creative ways to make the best out of this situation. Indeed, there are many examples of young individuals finding opportunities during this pandemic: students helping children from primary and high schools to catch up with their schoolwork (1), adolescents making food packages for others (2), and adolescents spending time and playing games with the elderly (3). This may suggest the beneficial use of counterfactuals among young individuals.
On the other hand, adolescence is seen as an important period for self-development with physical, cognitive, and social changes. This developmental period is a time of exploring, spending time with friends, and gaining independence from your parents. Being in a pandemic during the adolescent years may affect this development in a disadvantageous way.
Staying sane during insane times
As a 24-year-old, I am probably not the only young individual being a ‘culprit’ of counterfactual thinking during these pandemic times. We have seen that counterfactuals may be beneficial. However, we have never been in a pandemic this size before. How can we use counterfactuals to our advantage during these uncertain times? Counterfactuals may help us to think about what we miss and what we wish for. I am trying to optimally use this knowledge during these times. To compensate not being able to attend the concert of my favorite artist, I am repeatedly watching the concerts from previous years. Instead of living alone for weeks in my apartment, I see my apartment as a holiday destination by occasionally inviting friends over (while keeping a distance of 1.5 meters) or by spending the night there. In this way, I hope that the value of counterfactuals helps me to stay sane during these insane times.
KNAW Open Science in psychology and cognitive neuroscience meeting
December 9, 2019
In recent years, many efforts have been made to shift the field of psychology and cognitive neuroscience towards Open Science. This is an umbrella term under which many different initiatives fall to make research more open: increasing transparency, sharing data, open access to research papers, diversity of researchers, and so forth (see here for an introduction and reading list; here for SYNC lab’s Open Science vision). In December 2019, members of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (the KNAW), and junior researchers from their research groups came together. We aimed to determine current needs, both on the work floor as well as at the policy level, to facilitate the transition towards Open Science in the fields of psychology and cognitive neuroscience.
Junior and senior researchers discussing pressing issues
The KNAW members nominated researchers of the new generation to participate. This made this meeting perfectly suited to incorporate multiple perspectives. The perspective of the young generation with ambition to make science more open, more transparent and better, and the perspective of the more senior generation who embrace this collaborative atmosphere and who have the connections and opportunities to bring this to the next level.
Beforehand, we sent out a survey to all participants to determine the most pressing topics to discuss. This led to a selection of 5 broad topics that were discussed in small groups. The topics were:
– Achieving greater time efficiency in open science
– Efficient organisation of research support
– Data sharing and privacy
– Education and open science
– Valuing, rewarding and authorship
With the goal of providing concrete steps on how to move forward, teams of both junior and senior scientists started brainstorming about what would be the ideal situation in 2030. In the inspiring atmosphere of the Trippenhuis library and surroundings, soon participants enthusiastically noted down many ideas on their pile of post-it notes.
Outcomes of the workshop: visions for 2030
At the end of the day, each group presented their suggestions in a short presentation. Each group 1) provided a vision of an ideal situation in 2030, 2) described the current status, 3) stated the main challenges regarding their topic and 4) provided concrete goals and actions on how to get from the current status to the desired, ideal situation.
The group discussing time efficiency presented an ideal situation of standardization, more training and eventually designated staff members to make our science more open. Next, the group thinking about the role of research support envisioned a future of team science, in which data infrastructures are aligned across the globe and open science skills are rewarded. The researchers discussing data sharing and privacy emphasized that transparency should be as large for study participants as for fellow researchers. Regarding education in open science, the discussion group argued that open science should be an explicit part of learning outcomes for students (Bachelor/Master/PhD) and for continuous education of teaching staff. Finally, the group discussing valuing and rewarding shared their thoughts on how to value quality over quantity and how to value team science.
Moving forward: concrete steps and involving junior researchers
The presentations might give you the feeling that the workshop was only about what we ought to do. But during the plenary discussion many emphasized how all of this opens great possibilities for scientific discoveries. We are at a moment in which great steps can be made towards more open science, partly thanks to technological advances such as for sharing data and analysis scripts. There are still many things that need to be done though: the incentive system needs to change, and in our field data sharing is complicated because we work with human data.
Practical steps that were discussed in which the KNAW and its members can have an important role is the initiation of consensus meetings (e.g., by coming up with how to evaluate open science for hiring and grant decisions). One thought shared by both junior and senior researchers was that the mix of juniors and seniors was very fruitful and should be used more often. Thus, such consensus meetings and other KNAW committees would greatly benefit from the input of more junior scientists.
Most discussion groups also noticed that because of all the possible tools and workflows available, training researchers in all career stages (students, juniors, seniors) is vital. This could be done by organizing workshops, preferably at a central location and organized by a visible organization such as the KNAW in order to reach many. Many local initiatives such as the Open Science Communities that can be found in almost every university in the Netherlands are already leading the way and would be ideal partners to team up for this with the KNAW.
To conclude, we look back at an inspiring day full of plans for the near future. There is still a lot of work that has to be done on the work floor and at the policy level, but thanks to this workshop, we have started a to-do list for the near and far future. Want to know how you can contribute yourself in the near future? Start with the list below!
Concrete steps towards open scholarship you can start taking today
– open science is about small steps you can take, rather than doing everything right all at once
– reward when you see others doing transparent work (as a mentor, reviewer, collaborator, etc.)
– look at the quality of papers (e.g. from job applicants) rather than the quantity
– make discussing mistakes less taboo; implement a co-pilot for the research process, or a lab meeting about the fact that everybody makes mistakes and how to prevent them in the future
– reward contributions in authorship roles, see for instance here
– ask your dean what is being done in your local strategic plan to make Open Science part of the fabric of science (e.g. how it will be evaluated in existing forms)
– become a member of your local Open Science Community and see which events you can join
Meeting organizers:
Anna van ‘t Veer, Barbara Braams, Dorien Huijser, Eduard Klapwijk, Lara Wierenga, Tomas Knapen, Jan Theeuwes, Eveline Crone
As a PhD candidate, you carry out research that no one has ever done before to answer questions that have never been answered. After a few years, this – hopefully – results in a thesis that clearly makes a novel contribution to the existing literature and a doctorate. This is a daunting task – it takes a lot of motivation and perseverance to tackle all the issues you encounter during a multi-year project – but it is also something to be incredibly proud of once you accomplish it. When I started my PhD project in January 2017, I knew it was going to be challenging at times, especially for a perfectionist like me. However, I never expected that during the fourth year of my PhD the world would be in a global pandemic crisis. In this blog, read more about how I face the challenges associated with carrying on with my PhD research in times of corona.
1. Data collection stop
In my PhD research I study the behavioral and neural development of prosocial behavior (i.e., behavior that benefits others) in adolescence. To this end, I work on a longitudinal, three-wave study with adolescents aged 9 – 20. To map adolescents’ prosocial development we invited them to our lab in 2018 and 2019 to fill in questionnaires, perform experiments, and undergo MRI scanning. The third measurement wave was planned to start in 2020, but data collection has stopped and it is unclear when projects will be able to commence again. This data collection stop is obviously very disappointing for me – I was very proud of conducting a longitudinal study over the course of three years and could not wait to see the results. Besides, I often worry about the negative impact that the corona crisis has on our results in terms of reliability, as the circumstances changed so much between the second and third wave, and we will no longer be able to spread the measurement waves as we carefully planned to optimize our study design. Luckily for me, I already have data from the first two measurement waves that I can use to finish my dissertation. Moreover, together with my supervisors and colleagues I have been able to set up and collect additional behavioral data for our study a few weeks ago to examine how adolescents experience the corona crisis. I am currently working on a paper about this data, and I feel very thankful to work on such an important and timely topic. Even though I am disappointed that I may not be able to carry on with my research as planned, I am grateful for supervisors that help me to adjust my plans and to point out opportunities to conduct meaningful research.
2. Isolation
As a perfectionist and passionate researcher, I am no stranger to stress. In the last few years, I have learned that I am particularly good in creating self-imposed stress due to having very high expectations of myself. Over the past three years I have seen around me that I am not the only one: many PhD candidates experience feelings of stress, depression, or isolation. Doing PhD research can be a lonely endeavor even in normal times: analyzing results and writing papers often involves working alone for many hours, which for some people might result in feelings of isolation. Normally, I try to prevent such feelings by spending enough time with family, friends, and colleagues, but this has become increasingly difficult in times of corona. At the same time, I feel that now, more than ever, I want to feel connected to colleagues and supervisors. For me, it really helps that in our SYNC lab we have weekly stand-ups where me and my colleagues share what we are planning to do that week and whether we need any help. We also have weekly lab meetings, where we discuss lab values and culture, research methods, and present our latest work. Finally, I try to schedule regular coffee breaks and drinks with colleagues and friends, and a recent pub quiz that we did with our lab also really helped to make me feel more connected.
3. Work/life-balance
The corona crisis definitely gives rise to challenges with regard to my work/life-balance. For example, I teach next to doing research, and switching to online teaching in the recent months has not only increased my teaching hours, it also required me to re-think the structure of the course, the assignments, and to spend extra time comforting distressed students. Despite this extra time invested, I still sometimes worry that my teaching is not of the same quality as it was before the switch to online teaching. Also, I now work in the living room together with my husband, which means what we disturb each other’s concentration by calling or having video meetings, but also that our work time and leisure time mainly take place in one single room. For me, it really helps that we take regular walks to have a change of scenery, and we also schedule workouts three days a week right after our working hours to create some dissociation between work and spare time.
4. Concerns about the future
Finally, the corona crisis created additional concerns about the future, both work-wise and in general. Generally, I feel distressed about not being able to see and hug my family and friends for a long time. Also, it is still unclear how long the corona crisis and associated regulations will last, which leads to feelings of insecurity and stress. Work-wise, I really empathize with all the PhD candidates who have to defend their thesis online – I imagine that this can make the moment feel less special and celebratory, and may limit networking opportunities with attendees. I sincerely hope that I will be able to defend my thesis the normal way. Furthermore, being unable to carried out your planned research means that the quality of your thesis could be affected, as you may not be able to answer the research questions you set out to answer. This could have detrimental effects on being able to find a job in academia or obtaining grants to fund your research. I sometimes worry about this myself, but this feeling is probably even stronger for PhD candidates who cannot collect any data at all or who combine their work with family responsibilities. For now, I try to handle these feelings by talking about them to others, but only time will tell how long these worries will remain.
Conclusion
All things considered, doing PhD research can be an incredibly rewarding experience, but also a very challenging one. The corona crisis poses extra challenges – probably even more than the ones I listed above, and we are yet to discover the consequences and to find creative solutions. Do you – as a PhD candidate, supervisor, or otherwise interested individual – experience other challenges than the ones listed above? Or did you think of a great solution? Please let me know in the comment section below!
When I decided to start a new lab, I knew it would be an adventure. But I never imagined our first challenge would be to start a lab in quarantine! In April 2020, my lab and I transferred to Erasmus University Rotterdam. In reality, of course, we started from home, but we all tried to make the best of it. Unexpectedly, the new reality made us more creative than we ever imagined. Today we launch the SYNC lab: Society, Youth & Neuroscience Connected, with the ambition to make big steps in connecting developmental neuroscience with societal challenges.
It was a few weeks before the move that we realized we would not be able to see each other on campus for quite some time. All our plans to decorate our offices, have coffee get-togethers and start the collaboratory office (a place where new ideas, programs, codes and experiments could be developed on site) had to be postponed and we realized we had to be creative. We started a Slack group, where channels such as open science, remote meetings, homeschooling and positive news were created. Here, we share novel ideas, newly accepted papers, challenges of combining work and kids, and offer each other help. We got used to using Slack so quickly that I cannot even imagine that I used to write so many emails. Given that everybody is in the same challenging situation, the social support and collaborative effort has been amazing. For example, we now often start the day with a 15-minute Zoom meeting just to give updates and ask for help if needed.
We already had the ambition to work fully remotely and transparently before, but plans were often delayed because of technical difficulties or because it is just easier to stick to old routines. But in times of quarantine, IT support has been fantastic. All the things that seemed to be difficult before, can now be implemented and I am so excited that we are making the transition to working in the most innovative and modern ways. I am lucky to have several open-science-savvy scientists in the lab who have the time and ideas to get this going.
Finally, the pandemic made us realize that this is a challenging time for everybody. We felt a strong need to contribute to a better understanding of the effects of this pandemic on adolescents in the Rotterdam area and Erasmus University based students. We developed a research study on wellbeing, the ethical committee evaluated it through a fast track procedure (for which we are so grateful!) and schools in the area were more than willing to collaborate, because this is a situation that affects us all. The lab picked this up as a joint effort, worked together immensely well, and we are now following over 600 individuals over several weeks to examine how they are feeling and what their opportunities are to help others. Our ambition to connect to a large metropole was established much faster than we thought possible!
I very much realize that this is a time of great challenges and that health and social connection are our most precious goods. Nonetheless, I have experienced a great collaborative spirit, opportunities to work in creative and novel ways, and the opportunity to contribute to societal problems. Despite the challenging times that we are currently experiencing, we are making big steps for science and youth, and we hope to continue to do so in the future.