Talk:Mass action principle (neuroscience)

Page Improvements

This article needs to be expanded upon in general as it is a stub article. This will include adding a large amount of content as well as using more sources as the article currently only has one. Luvpaws (talk) 03:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Additions to Mass Action Principle

This topic could be enhanced by including related research, and linking to other articles for obscure terms/concepts. I think there are other complimentary concepts that could be included in the article as well. Nicbie7 (talk) 15:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Sections and subsections

This article needs to be split into many different sections instead of two, rather unrelated paragraphs. Sections could include a brief summary of Lashey's research surrounding this principle and a compare/contrast perhaps with the equipoteniality principle. RachelTod (talk) 05:14, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

To Do List

Identify relevant related topics to link to such as: -Equipotentiality -Ablation -Neuroplasticity Identify relevant researchers and their experiments such as: -Franz -Lashley -Ghiselli and Brown -Jean Pierre FlourensLuvpaws (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I will find clear and helpful pictures to add to this article. Maybe including brain regions/highlighted area of cortex, example of brain lesions, and maybe a graph or chart showing affects of these lesions on maze times in order to further develop this page and help educate visual learners. ---After reading a post about what pictures we are technically allowed to post, I will briefly look for a picture of Lashley to use, but I don't think this article absolutely needs a photo. They are hard to find and have the rights to use, so I'll spend the majority of my time finding more written info to use!RachelTod (talk) 05:52, 8 November 2014 (UTC) RachelTod (talk) 21:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

-Find out more about the history of the term -See if there are people who openly disagreed with the idea at the time -Include specific experiments and the implications of them -Find what new info we have found since the time of Lashley's experiments Nicbie7 (talk) 00:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

As I look at what we have added I notice that we are using technical terms that are familiar to us as psychology students but are probably not familiar to people outside of the medical or psychological field, going forward I suggest we explain these terms better in the article as to make it easier for the lay reader. Luvpaws (talk) 05:08, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Outline

Background: Discuss briefly basic brain functioning and how this topic relates including discussion of the Equipotential/Localization theories Early Research-Jean Pierre Flourens, Ablation studies on maze learning in rats Recent Research- Discuss more recent research as well as its contributions to newer areas of research Controversy- Discuss more in depth the Localization theory, research that supports it and how this relates to Equipotential and Mass Action Principle, discuss specific areas that have been identified by localization theory (FFA, Broca's, Wernicke's etc).Luvpaws (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Have a short introductory paragraph quickly explaining the mass action principle in simple terms, so anyone accessing this page immediately can get a good idea as to what this is. Is there any group or idea that doesn't completely agree/flow with the mass action principle or related themes? That might be something to add to the "controversy" section, if something like that exists. I will try to find any opposing viewpoint. RachelTod (talk) 21:28, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I added a section that we can briefly list some major research done that connects to the mass action principle. This might help readers understand that psychological principles are usually intertwined and affect other areas of research rather than just that single experiment. I added a theory by Pavlov, and I'll look for more! Feel free to add anything interesting to it! RachelTod (talk) 05:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

-Start with a definition of the term as we now know it. -Add a background/history of the term and possibly how it came to be. -Note all the contributions to the principle through people, research, and concepts of the time. -Relevant research. -Possibly include opposing viewpoints under a "Criticisms" headline. -Real life applications? Maybe how we have used the rat studies to treat people today. -New contributions, new research. -At the end: "See also" concepts, References, Further Reading, and Additional Bibliography. Nicbie7 (talk) 00:27, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Background

Mass action principle was also called “principle of motor equivalence.” The principle of Lashley's equivalence is useful in postlesion movement disorders. A typical recovery of the hand may be partly compensated; the subject learns automatically to shift to more proximal muscles for achieving the goal. Wiesendanger (2011). Nicbie7 (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Criticisms

Lashley's findings were generally accepted right away among psychologists. Hunter and Pavlov had different interpretations. They thought there was enough evidence that maze learning is dependent on sensory cues. If one sensory center was destroyed, the learned habit would diminish in proportion to the amount of tissue destroyed, as fewer sensory cues were available. But Lashley supported his conclusion that maze learning is dependent on some unitary function of the cortex rather than on sensory cues by control experiemnts. (Tizard, 1959 Pg. 141) Nicbie7 (talk) 17:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent developments

C Von Monakow introduced the term "diaschisis" to explain acute language improvements after a stroke. (Cramer & Nudo, 2010) Nicbie7 (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The potential for functionally relevant change to occur will depend on a number of other factors, inclucing age, the stage of the brain pre-trauma, drug treatments, and possibly genetic status. Treatment will depend on fully understanding and working with the individuals surviving networks. Functional brain imaging can help achieve this goal. (Cramer & Nudo, 2010. Pg. 120) Nicbie7 (talk) 16:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Understanding the neural signaling pathways that influence synaptic plasticity may guide the development of new therapies that can upregulate plasticity mechanisms and enhance motor improvement when paired with motor rehabilitation. (Cramer & Nudo, 2010. Pg. 8) Nicbie7 (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a growing body of evidence that electrically stimulating the motor cortex facilitates recovery of motor function after CNS injury. Clinical reports suggest that epidural motor cortex stimulation, used to reduce chronic pain after subcortical strokes, reduces hemiparetic impairments, motor weakness, motor spasticity, action tremor, and dystonia. (Cramer & Nudo, 2010. Pg. 7) Nicbie7 (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

References

Thompson, R. (1974). Localization of the "maze memory system" in the white rat. Physiological Psychology, 2, 1-17.

Wood, C.C. (1978). Variations on a theme by Lashley: Lesion experiments on the neural model of Anderson, Silverstein, Ritz, and Jones. Psychological Review, 85, 582-591.Luvpaws (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Carmichael, L. (1959). “Karl Spencer Lashley, experimental psychologist” Science, 129-3360, 1410-1412.

Thompson, R., Yun,J. (2013). Specific brain lesions producting nonspecific (generalized) learning impairments in weanling rats. Pysiological Psychology, 11:4, 225-234. RachelTod (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Cathy J Price,Karl J Friston. (2002)  "Degeneracy and cognitive anatomy" Trends in Cognitive Science. 

Wiesendanger. M, (2011) "Postlesion Recovery of Motor and Sensory Cortex in the Early Twentieth Century." Journal of The History of The Neurosciences. Nicbie7 (talk) 00:29, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Steven C. Cramer, Randolph J. Nudo. (2010). Brain Repair After Stroke. Cambridge University Press. Nicbie7 (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Barbara Tizard (1959). Theories of Brain Localization from Flourens to Lashley. Medical History, 3, pp 132-145 doi:10.1017/S0025727300024418 Nicbie7 (talk) 17:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Lashley, K.S. (1930). Basic neural mechanisms in behavior. The psychological review, 37, 1-24. Luvpaws (talk) 05:03, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

This one might have some good info for the "controvery" section: RachelTod (talk) 06:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Posner, Michael I. (2000). Cognitive neurocience: orgins and promise. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 873-899. RachelTod (talk) 06:53, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

References

See Also:

Graham Brown T, Stewart RM (1916): On disturbances of the localization and discrimination of sensations in cases of cerebral lesions, and on the possibility of recovery of these functions after a process of training. Brain 39: 348–454. Nicbie7 (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Bruce, D. (2001). Fifty Years Since Lashley's In Search of the Engram: Refutations and Conjectures. Journal Of The History Of The Neurosciences, 10(3), 308. Nicbie7 (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Lashley, K. S. (1929). Brain mechanisms and intelligence: A quantitative study of injuries to the brain. Chicago, IL, US: University of Chicago Press. doi:10.1037/10017-000. Nicbie7 (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Netz J, Lammers T, Homberg V. Reorganization of motor output in the non-affected hemisphere after stroke. Brain, 1997; 120; 1579-86 Nicbie7 (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Individual Contributions

I can work on the different theories (Localization/Equipotential) and how they are relevant to our topic. Basically that will be a large chunk of the material for both the background and the controversy sections, I can also find more information to put into the background. These sections will probably involve the most links to related topics so I can also keep a running list of those. I will also find some more recent research as that should probably be the largest section of the article. Luvpaws (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I will find as many helpful diagrams or photos as needed- let me know if you guys come across an idea that would be supported well with a photo. I will also write a brief background on Lashley's educational background and any information and general research he was working on before this principle to help readers get an idea as to how he began the research that led to this principle. RachelTod (talk) 21:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Since we didn't talk/meet up to divide anything up it just so happens the more or less complete outline I developed is covered by Marah's noted Individual Contribution. Maybe we can solidify our parts better. Nicbie7 (talk) 00:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Nice start!

Nice job, group. There is so little to this article as it stands that there are lots of ways you can improve it. Time to start reading the articles you've found and adding to the article. It is so bare-bones right now that it really doesn't matter where you start. However, the better you organize your work at the early stages, the easier it will be to add on later. Remember the rules - encyclopedic style, no original research WP:NOR, etc. J.R. Council (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Historical Views

I have found numerous reviews of Lashley and similar research but many of them are quite old now so we could have a section looking back on how the theory has been viewed since it was first suggested. Luvpaws (talk) 05:22, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Feedback for Assignment 9

General comments: You’ve got a lot of really good ideas for this article on the talk page. It’s time to start putting them into the main article.

For organizing an article on a psychological concept, see the brochure, Editing Wikipedia Articles on Psychology, 2nd page, Organizing your article/An article on a psychological concept.

Comments on specific sections of the main article follow:

1. Intro

• This definition, which begins the section, can be improved. “In neuroscience, the Mass Action Principle states that the reduction in learning is proportional to the amount of tissue destroyed and that the more complex the learning task, the more disruptive the lesions are.” Not only ungrammatical, but confusing. *Change the definition so it’s more in line with what’s in the textbook.

2. Karl Lashley Since this article is on Mass Action, don’t need more content on Lashley. 3. Mass Action Principle versus Equipotentiality Principle

• This section is confusing. Start by defining equipotentiality. Then say how mass action and equipotentiality are not contradictory.

4. Further studies This seems tacked on. Either delete this section or integrate it into another section. 5. Needs an ending!

• You need to write an section to conclude the article. Sum up research, state significance.

J.R. Council (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Change of Section

I changed the section title Mass Action Principle vs Equipotentiality Principle to Mass Action Principle versus Functional specialization because I think this is a more relevant topic within neuroscience, also these two theories are somewhat contradictory unlike Mass action principle and equipotentiality which area actually quite similar. Luvpaws (talk) 05:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Safe assign report

In the safe assign report it says that the article contains plagiarized sections from 2 other students, which I am assuming is my group members who put the article through safe assign before me, from wikipedia which is obviously going to show up and lastly there was one sentence that was said to be plagiarized from a psychology wiki so that sentence will need to be rewritten or a source will need to be found so that it can be properly quoted/cited.Luvpaws (talk) 05:38, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

safe assign

Which sentence is plagiarized? I only see two "possible" plagiarism sources, and that is "another student's paper" which is each of our submissions, and the other is a link directly to our page. Nicbie7 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)