Neuroscience Minor - Department Of Neurobiology, Physiology, And: Fill & Download for Free

Q. What are the good things about going into a neurological medical field?I get immensely depressed thinking about the intense, demanding, and rigorous study (and time studying) to even get into the field (neuropathology, personally), the immense financial debt, and the chance I might not even make the good life that I want.I still find science - especially neuroscience - incredibly fascinating, and there is still a little voice in the back of my head saying I shouldn't give up yet. So, what are the good sides to going into neuroscience?Bonus: are there fields in neuroscience that don't require med school?A. Below are multiple articles that discuss training to become a neuroscientist (PhD) and neurologist (MD) or both.PhD Training:Steps to Becoming a NeuroscientistOverview Of Training Program - Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute (Berkeley)Neuroscientist: Job Description, Duties and RequirementsNeuroscience Degree: What To Expect? | Inside JobsHow to become a neuroscientist (House of mind)When will neuroscience blow our minds?MD Training:Become a Neurologist: Step-by-Step Career GuideHow to Apply for a Residency Step-by-Step Guide to Applying to a Neurology Residency ProgramNeurology Residency Road Map Washington UniversitySteps to Becoming a Neuroscientistby Vicki A. BengeRelated Articles[Neuroscience Ph.D.] Salary of a Neuroscience Ph.D. & M.D.[Neuroscience Pay] Neuroscience Pay Scale[Requirements] What Are the Requirements for a Neuroscientist?[Master] What Can I Do With a Master's Degree in Neuroscience?[Conflict] How to Stop Conflict in the Workplace Before It HappensA medical scientist who studies the brain and nervous system is called a neuroscientist. Skilled in research and equipped with advanced degrees, some neuroscientists focus on a more narrow disciplines such as neuroanatomy, neurochemistry, neurophysiology or neuropsychology. To pursue a career in neuroscience, begin taking steps toward that goal in high school.College-Prep CoursesA high school student interested in a career as a neuroscientist can begin by building a strong foundation in science and mathematics. Basic introductory science courses to study are physics, chemistry, and especially biological science courses such as general biology, physiology and human anatomy. In mathematics, study introductory algebra, calculus and geometry.Undergraduate StepsEntering college students pursuing a bachelor's degree in neuroscience can expect a specific curriculum. For example, course requirements for a neuroscience major contain basic science courses, core neuroscience courses and multiple electives. The core courses include introductions to general neuroscience as well as cellular, molecular, and cognitive or behavioral neuroscience. Advanced science courses are in chemistry, biology, physics and physiology. Study of statistics as they relate to the biological sciences may also be a required course. Students participate in laboratory rotations, also.Postgraduate StudyThe next step to becoming a neuroscientist after obtaining a bachelor's degree is to begin postgraduate study. Graduate students concentrate on advanced neuroscience courses and related instruction, such as the study of statistics as they relate to the biological sciences. Grad students participate in laboratory rotations, special seminars and lectures pertaining to the discipline. It is also in postgraduate study that Ph.D. candidates set their thesis topic and research plans to obtain a doctorate degree.Postdoc TrainingA small percentage of neuroscientists obtain a medical degree before pursuing postdoctoral training. However, whether the individual holds a Ph.D. or M.D., a postdoctoral fellowship to gain further training in neuroscience is a common last step before seeking a job. Postdoctoral trainees gain valuable experience conducting research. Some may choose to do laboratory work in a related yet new area of study. This is valuable training as the majority of medical scientists, which includes neuroscientists, spend their careers working in research and development, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.Overview Of Training Program - Helen Wills Neuroscience InstituteSteps to a PhDNeuroscience is a broad field that requires multidisciplinary training as well as intensive study of specific concepts and techniques related to each student’s primary research focus. The Neuroscience PhD Program is designed to provide highly individualized, flexible training that fulfills both these needs. Our PhD training program has a standard completion time of 5 to 5.5 years. The program is PhD-granting only, there is no Master’s Degree Program. The following is a general overview of the steps to a PhD. For detailed policies, see Resources For Current Students.Neuroscience Boot CampFirst-year students begin the program with an intensive, 10-day “Boot Camp” course held just prior to the official start of fall semester classes. The course features lectures on key neuroscience concepts and on classical and emerging experimental techniques and evening research seminars by Berkeley Neuroscience faculty. In addition, hands-on research projects in faculty laboratories cover techniques ranging from molecular neuroscience to neurophysiology and optogenetics to fMRI. The goal is to provide an immersive introduction to multiple disciplines and experimental approaches within neuroscience. Boot Camp unites Neuroscience-oriented students from multiple PhD programs.Laboratory RotationsDuring Year 1, each student spends three 10-week periods performing research projects in different faculty laboratories. The choice of laboratories is based on student preference. The goal is to expose students to different techniques and approaches in neuroscience and to provide training in experimental design, critical analysis of data, and presentation of research findings. Performance in rotations is evaluated and graded. Rotations also allow students to identify the laboratory in which their thesis research will be performed. Students formally present results from the laboratory rotations in a dedicated course designed to instruct students in clear, effective presentation of scientific findings.CourseworkThe program has highly flexible course requirements. These are designed to provide students with sufficiently broad training to be conversant in all areas of neuroscience, while allowing focus in the area of primary research interest.During the first two years of the program, each student is required to take 3 courses chosen from three broad areas: (A) Cellular, Molecular & Developmental Neuroscience; (B) Systems and Computational Neuroscience; and (C) Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience. Each student consults with faculty advisers to determine the most appropriate individual courses within these areas.Students must also complete a 1-semester course in Applied Statistics in Neuroscience, or an equivalent approved course in statistics or quantitative analysis methods.For additional details, see the Neuroscience-Related Course List.Training in TeachingEffective teaching is a critical skill required in most academic and research careers. Students are required to serve as Graduate Student Instructors (GSIs; equivalent to Teaching Assistants) for two semesters. GSI teaching occurs during Years 2 and 3, and provides supervised teaching experience in laboratory and discussion settings. Teaching is evaluated, and outstanding teaching is rewarded with annual Outstanding Graduate Student Instructor Awards. One to three of our students typically win this award each year.Qualifying ExaminationStudents complete an Oral Qualifying Exam during the Spring semester of Year 2. This exam is structured around two written proposals – one in the student’s proposed area of thesis research, and the other in an area of neuroscience outside the thesis topic. During the exam, a faculty committee tests the student’s knowledge of these areas and general neuroscience. Students must demonstrate the ability to recognize important research problems, propose relevant experimental approaches, and display comprehensive knowledge of relevant subjects. Students must pass the qualifying examination before advancing to doctoral candidacy.Thesis ResearchThesis research begins after the completion of rotations in Spring or Summer of Year 1. During Year 2, students conduct thesis research while completing required coursework and GSI teaching. Years 3 to 5 are spent primarily on thesis research. Progress on thesis research is evaluated by the student, the thesis adviser, and a Thesis Committee of three additional faculty members. Thesis research is expected to lead to publication in top-ranked, refereed scientific journals. Students are strongly encouraged to present posters and speak at scientific meetings and conferences. During Year 4, they make a formal presentation of their research progress to their peers. Completion of thesis research is determined by the Thesis Committee. While there is no formal thesis defense, students present a formal thesis seminar to the neuroscience community in their last semester of candidacy.Other Program ActivitiesDuring training, students are expected to participate in a range of activities to increase their exposure to neuroscience research within and outside their specialty areas. These include the annual Neuroscience Retreat, the Neuroscience Seminar Series, as well as other affiliated seminar series and lectures. Students also participate in journal clubs, lab meetings, and multi-laboratory special interest group meetings focused on specific scientific topics. See Program Activities for a comprehensive list.Financial SupportAll admitted students receive full financial support, including payment of tuition and fees, and direct financial support (set at $34,500 for the 2016-2017 year) during the period of enrollment in the program, providing that good academic standing is maintained.Resources For Current StudentsGraduate Program PoliciesProgress Through DegreeQualifying Examination GuidelinesThesis Committee Guidelines 2016Single Parent Financial Support PolicyNeuroscience Program Graduate Student Appeal ProceduresGraduate Division PoliciesGuide to Graduate PolicyGraduate Division AppealsProcedureFormAcademic AppointmentsImportant DatesAcademic CalendarNeuroscience Graduate Student CalendarCourses and Interest GroupsNeuroscience Course Curriculum and Course ListNeuroscience Courses of Interest Offered-Fall 2016Neuroscience 290 Seminar List-Fall 2016Brain Lunch Web PageCourse CatalogSchedule of ClassesNeuroscience Data Mining GroupNeuroscience Student ResourcesNeuro Grad Advisers 2016-2017Fellowship Information 2016Professional Development LinksGraduate Student Professional Development GuideForms & Important LinksNeuroscience Program FormsAddress InformationAdviser ChecklistThesis Committee Instructions and Report Form 2016Thesis Placement FormGraduate Division FormsAdd Drop ClassApplication Candidacy FormApplication Filing Fee FormApplication Readmission FormChange in Committee Request FormChange of Major Request FormPetition Retroactive WithdrawalQual Exam Application FormQual Exam Report FormResidence Request for Readmission FormWithdrawal Petition FormGraduate Division & Other Important LinksGraduate DivisionGraduate Student Instructor Teaching and Resource CenterImproving English Language Proficiency for International StudentsGSI and GSR GuideUAW Contract for GSIsUniversity-wide Financial SupportUniversity Health ServicesRegistrar’s OfficeLibrariesBerkeley International OfficeCampus Disability AccessDisabled Students ProgramGraduate AssemblyCal HousingNeuroscientist: Job Description, Duties and RequirementsLearn about the education and preparation needed to become a neuroscientist. Get a quick view of the requirements as well as details about degree programs, job duties and licensure to find out if this is the career for you.View 10 Popular Schools »Neuroscientists conduct research to develop pharmaceuticals to treat neurological disorders. A Ph.D. or M.D. is required for clinical work. Depending on their focus, neuroscientists can work in offices, laboratories, clinics, and hospitals.Essential InformationNeuroscientists research how the nervous system behaves. They can also develop pharmaceuticals for neurological disorders and treat patients. Neuroscientists are expected to complete advanced degree programs and must be licensed before performing clinical work.Job Description for a NeuroscientistNeuroscientists study the development and function of the nervous system, which includes the brain, spinal cord, and nerve cells throughout the body. They could specialize in one part of the nervous system, such as neurotransmitters, or focus their research on specific behaviors, such as psychiatric disorders. Illnesses based in the nervous system include Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly known as Lou Gehrig's disease.Neuroscientists can take part in publicly funded research projects at universities, research institutes, or government facilities. Others perform applied research for private industry, where they develop new pharmaceutical treatments or other biotechnology products. Some treat patients as licensed neurosurgeons and neurologists.Duties of a NeuroscientistNeuroscientists typically perform research in offices or laboratories. Some work in clinics and hospitals to evaluate, diagnose, and treat patients.Neuroscientists begin experiments by preparing tissue and cell samples. They make use of antibodies, dyes, and gene probes to identify different components of the nervous system. Tools and equipment used to monitor brain and nerve activity include magnetic resonance imagers and microelectrodes. Some use computers to create nervous system models, while others study the simplified nervous system of insects to better isolate certain behaviors.Requirements to Become a NeuroscientistNeuroscientists are expected to complete a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree program, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). The BLS further stated that those pursing clinical work must earn a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree. Some schools offer a combined Ph.D./M.D. program, which increases a neuroscientist's career opportunities. In order to treat patients, neuroscientists with an M.D. must also participate in a medical residency and pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination.Students intent on pursuing a Ph.D. can choose to enroll in a bachelor's degree program in neuroscience or a biological science to prepare for graduate studies and research. Relevant coursework includes computer science, cognitive science, mathematics, and physics. In addition to neuroscience, graduates may choose advanced degree fields specifically in neurobiology or pharmacology. Before securing more permanent research positions, neuroscientists commonly participate in postdoctoral fellowships to gain laboratory experience.Salary Info and Job OutlookAccording to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), the median annual salary earned by medical scientists, the category under which neuroscientists fall, was $82,240 in May 2015; those working in scientific research and development services earned an average of $104,310 a year in 2015. The employment of medical scientists is expected to grow by 8% between 2014 and 2024, per the BLS.Neuroscientists improve lives by developing medications to treat patients with neurological disorders. They must possess a Ph.D. or M.D. to engage in clinical work. As of 2015, neuroscientists fall under a category with a median salary of $82,240; those classified under the scientific research and development services industry have an average annual salary of $104,310.Neuroscience Guide1. Online DegreesOnline Neuropsychology Degree Program InformationOnline Oncology Degrees: Summary of OptionsOnline Chemotherapy Certificate & Degree Program Info2. Salaries and OutlookDiabetologist: Job Description, Salary and Career OutlookNeurobiologist: Salary, Job Description and Career Outlook3. Career InformationHow to Choose an Endocrinology SchoolNeuroscientist: Job Description, Duties and Requirements4. Program InfoOnline Neuroscience Course and Class InformationBest Neuroscience Undergraduate Programs: List of Top SchoolsNeuroscience Degree Program InformationNeuroscience Nurse Certification and Training Program Information5. JobsCareers in Neuroscience Research: Job Options and Salary InfoVascular Scientist: Job & Career InfoCardiology Administrator Jobs: Career Options and Requirements6. Top SchoolsTop Colleges with Oncology Programs: List of SchoolsBest Colleges for Forensic Pathology: List of Top SchoolsNeuroscience Degree: What To Expect? | Inside JobsFiguring out what’s going on in another person’s mind is no easy task. Like Psychiatrists, Neuroscientists are professionals who dedicate their days to deciphering what’s going on upstairs. However, unlike Therapists who try to help with feelings or diseases created by our synapses and frontal lobes, Neuroscientists focus on the science and biology of the brain. They work to answer questions about specific diseases affecting the anatomy of the brain, and, in general, attempt to figure out how the different parts of the mind work.If all this sounds interesting, read on so you’ll know what to expect from a degree in neuroscience.TrainingGetting into neuroscience requires you to have more than a few years of schooling. The first degree to get is a bachelor’s degree from an accredited university. Though you can be a neuroscience major, you might also spend your time studying biology, chemistry, or physiology. No matter what you major in though, you want to make sure you get used to doing research, as this is a skill that most job opportunities for Neuroscientists call for.What you study in your undergrad years can influence what area of neuroscience you focus on later, but ultimately, that’s not as important as what you study while getting your master’s degree or Ph.D. in neuroscience.Next StepOnce done with your undergraduate degree, you need more advanced training before you can consider yourself a Neuroscientist. There are a number of neuroscience careers, and what you hope to do dictates what type of degree you need.If you want to work with brain injury patients, head to medical school. If you want to find new medicines or figure out why Alzheimer’s affects certain people, get your Ph.D. and become a researcher. You can become anything from a Professor at a university to a researcher for the National Institute of Health.How to become a neuroscientistHouse of Mind"BIOLOGY GIVES YOU A BRAIN. LIFE TURNS IT INTO A MIND."- JEFFREY EUGENIDESAbout Dr. MNYU Neuroscience PhD turned Postdoctoral Fellow at Pitt. I started this neuroscience/psych blog as a grad student (2010) to help me remember cool concepts learned during class. Now, I mostly review articles and concepts, summarize new findings, answer questions you may have about neuroscience/psych/the grad school experience.May 6, 2011How to Become a NeuroscientistI have gotten so many questions about people who are interested in neuroscience as a career that I have created this post so I can reference back to it in the future.Note: This is a guide directed towards people that want RESEARCH careers. My graduate program’s approach towards neuroscience integrated knowledge from many areas like electrophysiology, cellular and molecular biology, and computational neurobiology relying on mathematics/physics. Also, a number of you seem to be under the impression that I am studying neuropsych, which I am not. Neuropsych is traditionally a more clinically-oriented branch within neuroscience.First of all, if you want to become a neuroscientist, you will most likely have to complete formal graduate training in a related branch or field. You have to be ready for this, because it is something that will take a long time. Not to worry though, time flies and if you like what you’re doing you won’t mind…In college, the most common options are majoring in either biology or psychology. Some schools have a neuroscience or biopsychology major that may be in the biological sciences department or the psych department or even a combination of both. For example, you could major in biology and minor in psych or vice versa… Because neuroscience is an interdisciplinary field, I would recommend taking courses outside your major (especially if you’re in a psych dept). Helpful and attractive courses include: physics, calculus, organic chemistry, biochem, genetics, cell and molecular biology, bioethics, and neuropsych or psych courses. Importantly, some people come from other backgrounds like electrical/computer engineering that are also helpful in areas like electrophysiology, computational neurobiology and neuronal modeling. Thus, a major in biology or psychology is not a MUST but it definitely gives you an advantage.While in college, it is also important to gain research experience (try volunteering in labs just to learn or for course credit) while maintaining a decent GPA. And by decent I mean higher than 3.5 on a 4.0 scale. Of course, not all is lost if your GPA is below a 3.5. It will just be harder and you might not be regarded as competitive as other students. Mind you, if you have a 4.0 but all your classes are in the soft sciences and you didn’t take challenging courses, you’re in trouble as well… Third year of college (assuming you will graduate in 4 years) is crucial. This is the time to beef up your CV/resume, take the GRE, talk to people who will be your references, and complete your application to graduate schools. Graduate schools have a wide variety of programs (i.e. neurobiology, neuroscience, neuropsych) with different kinds of focus. Look at the curriculum for each program and find one that is well-suited for your interests and career aspirations. Remember to apply early and to ask for fee waivers, if available (I applied to 8 schools and got fee waivers for all but one of them!). Your personal statement is essential. And by that I mean it absolutely has to be good if not great. Different schools have different criteria for this essay and you should remember to pay attention to these criteria and follow instructions. You should also have several people proofread it before you send it. After you submit your application, send an e-mail to make sure everything is complete. If you get an interview, ask who your interviewers will be and familiarize yourself with their research and areas of expertise. Be nice, enthusiastic and ask smart questions. Also, during your interview, highlight why you want to be part of the training environment at that particular university or location and why you’d be a good match for the program and the department. Remember to send thank you e-mail to the faculty that met with you and anybody else you deem appropriate to thank.Graduate school: Do your best to learn and understand the material presented in your intro classes, as it will be the foundation that most of the other classes will be built upon. You don’t need stellar grades in graduate school, but you do need to pass, which for most universities is a solid B. While you are during your first year, you will most probably rotate through different labs in which you will be able to get to know the lab, learn the techniques and figure out if it’s a good fit for you. After you finish classes, you will be working on your thesis. Most likely, you will need to propose your thesis, select a review committee (composed of experts in fields relating to your research), work in lab and collect data to support your thesis, and defend it. After you defend your thesis, your committee decides your fate. This is the meat of grad school. Work, work, work. Get that thesis out and publishing well. Bonus if you learn how to write grants.Post-graduate school: Postdoctoral fellowships are a common way of learning additional techniques or addressing a different but related question. Or you could also go into something you don’t know much about. I keep hearing that a postdoc is supposed to add versatility, diversity and publications to your CV. This is also the time period in which you learn how to run a lab, work on your own independent projects, write grants, and decide where you want your career to go (i.e. industry, academia, clinical). Think about it as an extension of your training in which you get more freedom and flexibility.Alternatively, some people enroll in medical school to pursue an MD degree in addition to the Ph.D. one while others go back to school for other degrees (ex. PsyD, law, etc…). Others find industry jobs or go into public policy.Hope this helps. If you want to know about something more specific not listed here, contact me.When will neuroscience blow our minds?The discipline has promised big advances in many areas, but is it failing to live up to the hype? Three neuroscientists consider the state of their fieldAugust 4, 2016Source: AlamyThere has been no great theoretical revolution in neuroscience. But that does not mean that no revolution will ever come. Neuroscience is still youngIt’s a curious time to be a neuroscientist. The science of brain and behaviour is everywhere: endless books, documentaries, newspaper articles and conferences report new findings aplenty.The recognition by the general public that the brain deserves serious attention is gratifying. Much of this interest derives from worries about maintaining brain health. Disorders of brain and behaviour (from anxiety and depression to brain tumours and Alzheimer’s disease) come with enormous costs to both individuals and health systems. Consequently, many private and public agencies support wonderful research in neuroscience. The Wellcome Trust, for example, funds a vast and far-reaching programme extending from studying individual molecules all the way to imaging the working brain. In the US, both the National Institute of Mental Health and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) support a large neuro-research programme – partly driven in the latter’s case by the desperate need for viable treatments for brain trauma deriving from blast injuries in active service personnel.Philanthropy is also active: my own institution, Trinity College Dublin, recently received a joint endowment with the University of California, San Francisco of €175 million (£134 million) for work on brain health – the single largest endowment in our history.And yet there are misgivings. The deep answers to the problems that impact on public health and well-being are not coming quickly enough. The hundred or so failed drug trials for Alzheimer’s disease have come at a cost reckoned in the billions; these are huge sums for any pharmaceutical company to absorb, and many have now written off research in brain diseases as too complex and too costly to sustain – blocking off one potential career destination for neuroscience graduates in the process.Answers to big basic questions also seem a long way off. Even if this trend is now in decline, there have historically been too many papers reporting results along the lines of “brain area x does trivial function y”. The brain is, by definition, more complex than our current models of it, and it is only by embracing that complexity that we will be able to address questions such as: How can a brain be conscious? How can a brain experience diffidence or embarrassment, or reason in a moral fashion – and be simultaneously aware that it is so doing? How can a brain play rugby? Should a brain play rugby?A few simple principles aside, there has been no great theoretical revolution in neuroscience comparable to those precipitated in other disciplines by Darwin, Newton or Crick and Watson. But that does not mean that no revolution will ever come. Neuroscience is still a young discipline, reflected by the fact that many undergraduate programmes still rely on matrix arrangements between multiple home departments (chiefly psychology, physiology and biochemistry).Number of neuroscience degrees conferred in the USSource: US National Center for Education StatisticsMeanwhile, recent controversies over the replicability and reliability of research studies have been healthy, as they expose limits to knowledge. Understanding has been boosted of the dangers of basing conclusions on experiments that lack sufficient statistical power because of, for instance, low numbers of research participants or the retrofitting of hypotheses in light of results.Other anxieties revolve around definitional issues: where does neuroscience stop and psychology or molecular biology start? But really, nobody should care too deeply about such questions: there are no knowledge silos in nature, and man-made silos aren’t useful. Knowledge blending is the game: it’s good to know something about the engine, the engineering principles and the nuts and bolts of the car you drive: not just the dynamic relationships between the steering wheel, accelerator, brake and petrol gauge. To take one example, there has been great mutual enrichment between socio-psychological theories concerned with stereotyping and those concerned with the brain’s mentalising network (activated when we attempt to understand agency in others). It turns out that brain regions involved in disgust are activated when we make judgements about members of despised out-groups. This is an important finding, integrating psychological processes involved in stereotyping into more general biological processes concerned with cleanliness and self-other differentiation.Yet further anxiety is generated by neuroscience’s encroachment into public policy. We see the almost obligatory “neuro” prefix attached to concepts from ethics to politics, leadership, marketing and beyond. No wonder the great “neurobollocks” rejoinder, blog and meme have arisen. There are regular calls to apply neuroscience in classrooms, for example, despite there being no meaningful knowledge base to apply. Similar pleas arise for the use of brain imaging in the courtroom, as if the underlying science to detect the presence (or absence) of lying were settled. It is not. And the public will have been done no favours if one form of voodoo science (lie detection polygraphy) is substituted by another. The background thinking, of course, has not been done: a science that revealed actual thoughts (as opposed to coloured blobs representing neural activity) would be a remarkable violation of our assumed rights to cognitive privacy. There are lots of sticky questions here for the willing (neuro-) ethicist to ponder.But one useful effect of the popular focus on the brain is destigmatisation. Seeing conditions such as addiction as a brain and behaviour disorder rather than a moral failing facilitates understanding and treatment – although, ironically, the therapeutic potential of psychedelic drugs for treating depression is being obstructed by unhelpful rules based on inappropriate worries about addiction.Adding to the ferment are new neurotechnologies. Some are potentially dangerous, such as the use of commercially bought or even home-made electrical devices known as transcranial direct current stimulators to “enhance” brain function, or the off-label experimentation with supposed cognitively enhancing drugs that some students indulge in during revision and exams. But other technologies are astounding: brain imaging, optogenetics (which uses light to control genetically modified neurons in living tissues) and deep-brain stimulation (which uses a surgically implanted device to treat neurological disorders with targeted electrical impulses) are just three examples.But, with all new therapeutic treatments and devices, there is always a question of how scalable it is. A successful pharmacotherapy-based treatment for Alzheimer’s disease would scale easily, but deep-brain stimulation for drug-resistant Parkinson’s disease involves serious and very expensive neurosurgery. Of course, restoring individual productive potential should be important to the bean counters; restoring quality of life to sufferers is beyond value. But only about 100,000 patients have had this operation; scaling it to all sufferers worldwide is a pipe dream.There are early interventions that could have great effect by addressing prevention rather than cure. Early childhood poverty, for instance, has enduring effects on brain structure and function: relieving it through income support, school meal provision and intensifying education has an upfront expense but a great downstream benefit in terms of productive lives supported. Similarly, aerobic exercise interventions promote brain and cognitive function, in addition to heart health. But only public intervention is going to promote such things because there is no money to be made in it for a pharmaceutical company.And while we are (again) on the subject of money, it is worth reflecting that, notwithstanding the billion-euro and billion-dollar brain projects currently being carried out in Europe and the US (see Steven Rose’s piece), research into diseases such as dementia still receives much less funding than research into cancer.Perhaps that balance could be redressed if there were one catch-all term for diseases and disorders of the brain, just as “cancer” designates a wide array of fundamental and applied research in cell biology, applied to a difficult patient condition.It is not easy to think of something suitable. “Neurodegenerative disorders” doesn’t work, for example: it has too many syllables, and misses the many other brain disorders that are not neurodegenerative (such as attention deficit disorders or addictions). But here’s a thought: just as “malware” is used to indicate functional or structural problems with a given information technology device, perhaps we could use “malbrain” to mean something like “any disorder, dysfunction, structural problem or pathophysiological problem afflicting the brain, impairing normal neurological, psychological and psychiatric functioning of an individual”.“Malbrain” has advantages as a word. It hasn’t been widely used before, it has few syllables and it doesn’t come with any stigma. Adopting it would not instantly erase neuroscience’s problems, but if it drew in more medical funding it could help the discipline further mature, opening up career options, enhancing the sense of common purpose among researchers and, hopefully, edging one or more of them closer to their Einstein moment.Shane O’Mara is professor of experimental brain research at Trinity College Dublin and was director of the Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience from 2009 to 2016. His latest book, Why Torture Doesn’t Work: The Neuroscience of Interrogation, was published by Harvard University Press in 2015.The technologies are there, the problems to be addressed are tempting and the theoretical issues are profound, touching some of the deepest questions about what it means to be humanNeuroscience has become one of the hottest fields in biology in the half-century since the term was coined by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. With the mega-projects under way in the European Union and the US, the discipline can now qualify as a full-fledged Big Science.As neuroscience has expanded, the “neuro” prefix has reached out far beyond its original terrain. For our new book, Hilary Rose and I counted no fewer than 50 instances, from neuroaesthetics to neurowar, by way of neurogastronomy and neuroepistemology. “Neuro” is intervening in the social and political, too. We have neuroeducation, neuromarketing and neurolaw. In public consciousness, the glowing, false-coloured magnetic resonance images of the brain, ostensibly locating the “seats” of memory, mathematical skill or even romantic love, have replaced DNA’s double helix as a guarantor of scientific certainty.Meanwhile, the torrent of neuro-papers pouring out of labs overspills the proliferating specialist journals and threatens to take over much of Nature and Science. A wealth of new technologies has made it possible to address questions that were almost inconceivable to my generation of neuroscientists. When, as a postdoctoral researcher, I wanted to research the molecular processes that enable learning and underlie memory storage in the brain, my Nobelist superiors told me firmly that this was no fit or feasible subject for a biochemist to study. Today, memory is a mainstream field for molecular neurobiologists; it has yielded its own good-sized clutch of Nobel prizes, and ambitious neuroscientists are reaching out to claim the ultimate prize of reducing human consciousness to brain processes.What has proved most productive has been the combination of new genetic and imaging techniques. The well-established methods of deleting or inserting specific genes into the developing mouse and exploring their effect on brain structure or behaviour have been superseded. It is now possible to place the modified genes into specific brain regions and to switch them on or off using electronically directed light, allowing researchers to activate or erase specific memories, for instance. The new imaging techniques are so powerful that they even make it possible to track the molecular events occurring in individual synapses – the junctions between nerve cells – as chemical signals pass across them.But such technical and scientific triumphs may pale into insignificance when faced with the complexity of the brain. To see how far there is to go, consider the ostensible goal of the EU’s Human Brain Project: to model the human brain and all its connections in a computer and thereby develop new forms of “neuromorphic” computing. The scale of the task and the grandiosity of the ambition is indicated by the fact that in 2015, after six years of painstaking anatomic study, a team of US researchers published a complete map of a minuscule 1,500 cubic micrometres of the mouse brain – smaller than a grain of rice. And the mouse brain’s weight is about 1/3,000th of that of the human brain – although this didn’t inhibit the journal’s press release from suggesting that the map might reveal the origins of human mental diseases.What might a complete model of the human brain reveal if one could be built? Potentially very little. For we still lack any overarching theory of how the brain works – not in the sense of its minute molecular mechanisms or physiological processes, but how brain processes relate to the actual experience of learning or remembering something, solving a maths problem or being in love. What is certain is that these experiences are not statically located in one brain site, but engage many regions, linked not just through anatomical connections but by the rhythmic firing of many neurons across many brain regions. It may be that, despite its imperialising claims, neuroscience lacks the appropriate tools to solve what neuroscientists and philosophers alike refer to as “the hard problem” of consciousness.Perhaps of more general concern is the question of what neuroscience can contribute to the pressing problems of neurological disease and mental illness. Where biology is still unable to provide methods to regenerate severed spinal nerves to overcome paralysis, advances in ICT have come to the rescue, with the development of brain-computer interfaces and prostheses, offering hope of bypassing the severed nerves and restoring function. But despite detailed knowledge of the biochemistry and pathology underlying Alzheimer’s and other dementias, there are still only palliative treatments available.Furthermore, despite the funds poured into the brain sciences by the pharmaceutical industry, there have been few advances in treating those with mental disorders, from depression to schizophrenia. The newer generations of antidepressant drugs, for example, work no better than those discovered or synthesised at the dawn of the psychopharmacological era in the 1960s. All are based on the proposition that the origins of these disorders lie in some malfunction of the processes by which neurons communicate with one another, primarily through chemical transmission across synapses. Plausible though this sounds, the continued failure to come up with better treatments has even led many biologically oriented psychiatrists to question the entire paradigm. In the US, the National Institutes of Health will no longer accept grant applications related to psychiatric disorders unless they can specify a clear hypothesis and a biological target. And I have lost count of the number of times in the past few decades that the discovery of a “gene for” schizophrenia has been loudly trumpeted, only to be quietly buried a few months later. A consequence has been that many pharmaceutical companies have rowed back from such research in favour of more tractable areas.So how to sum up the state of neuroscience? If one sets aside general issues about the state of academia, such as job insecurity, the ferocious competition for grants and the increasingly authoritarian structure of universities, there has never been a more exciting time to be working in the field. The technologies are there, the problems waiting to be addressed are tempting and the theoretical issues are profound, touching both the minutiae of day-to-day life and some of the deepest questions about what it means to be human.But, in approaching them, neuroscientists must learn some humility. Ours is not the only game in town. Philosophers, social scientists, writers and artists all have things of importance to say about the human condition. And neuroscientists who offer to use their science to educate the young or adjudicate morality in courts of law should proceed with utmost caution.Steven Rose is emeritus professor of neuroscience at the Open University. Co‑written with Hilary Rose, his latest book, Can Neuroscience Change Our Minds?, was published by Polity Press in June.The ‘black box’ that has squatted resolutely between genes and specific behaviours for such a long time is now being filled with real mechanistic insightI was at a meeting recently where a speaker declared that “in the neurosciences, we have experienced the excitement of technical innovation, followed by inflated expectation, and now we have entered the trough of disappointment”. This depiction surprised me. Not just because it is a cliché, trotted out and used to describe the current status of topics as diverse as graphene and the Great British Bake Off, but also because it is palpably wrong.Wanting to get to the root of the speaker’s confusion, I enquired over dinner if he was getting enough sleep. He said “tiredness stalks me like a harpy”. Interesting. The rationale for my question was a recent study showing that sleep-deprived individuals retain negative or neutral information, while readily forgetting information with a positive content. I concluded that sleep deprivation must be at the root of his distorted and overly negative views. As I articulated my counterarguments, his eyes glazed over and his head dipped. I rest my case.I sleep well, and so remain immensely positive about the current state of neuroscience. But why? What positive knowledge and experiences have I retained and consolidated in my cortex? The first would be the immense culture change that many of us have experienced over the past 20 years. Traditionally, questions in neuroscience were addressed by a single laboratory using a limited repertoire of techniques. The work usually focused on a specific neuron, or neuronal circuit, located in a favoured animal model. Some individuals spent their entire working life hunched over “their” electrophysiological rig collecting data from “their” neuron. Just moving the electrode a few millimetres and “poaching” the neuron of another was considered to be the height of predatory aggression.Most neuroscientists were more than aware of the limitations of this narrow approach. Ready for change and helped by surprisingly innovative funding initiatives, they found a new way of working – not just with other neuroscientists but across the spectrum of biomedical science. There are now countless examples of major questions being addressed by a critical mass of researchers sharing expertise and employing integrated approaches and communal facilities.The result is that detailed information is emerging about the molecular and cellular basis of core functions of the brain, providing a real understanding of how the brain is involved in autonomic, endocrine, sensory, motor, emotional, cognitive and disease processes. All these developments, along with advances in bioinformatics and computational modelling, now place the neuroscience community in an unparalleled position to address the bigger picture of how the brain functions through its synchronised networks to produce both normal and abnormal behaviour. Furthermore, the expansion of experimental medicine is providing new and exciting research opportunities. The human genotype-to-phenotype link, studied through close cooperative contacts between clinical and non-clinical researchers, is an increasingly important driver in elucidating fundamental mechanisms.True – neuroscientists have yet to answer the question of “what is consciousness?”, or to cure dementia or schizophrenia. We may not be able to do this for some time. But should these great and laudable goals be the only metrics against which progress is measured? If so, then spectacular successes will be overlooked. Across the neurosciences, important fundamental questions are being answered: not least, how genes give rise to specific behaviours. In my own field, the collective efforts of many individuals have begun to explain in considerable detail how circadian rhythms arise from an interaction between key “clock genes” and their protein products. We are also beginning to understand how multiple individual clock cells are able to coordinate their efforts to drive circadian rhythms in every aspect of physiology and behaviour, including the sleep/wake cycle. Attempts to understand how the eye detects the dawn/dusk cycle to align the molecular clockwork to the solar day led to the discovery of an entirely new class of light-sensing system within the retina. Efforts to explain why some people are morning types (larks) while others are evening types (owls) have been linked directly to subtle changes in specific clock genes.I could go on and on, and I know colleagues in other areas of neuroscience could cite analogous triumphs. For some balance, I am keen to highlight psychiatry. It has long been known that conditions such as schizophrenia have a major genetic component, but identifying the specific genes involved has been a significant problem, and at one stage was thought to be an intractable one. However, very recent genome-wide association studies have provided real insight. More than 100 gene loci have now been linked with schizophrenia risk, identifying for the first time “genes for schizophrenia”. Furthermore, many of these genes have clear therapeutic potential, both as drug targets and in identifying environmental factors that influence the development of the condition. The point I am trying to make is that the “black box” that has squatted resolutely between genes and specific behaviours for such a long time is now being filled with real mechanistic insight.I will not pretend that everything is perfect. We do face significant problems, not least how we fund and recognise the efforts of early career neuroscientists, who are often obliged to work in very large teams, making individual achievements hard to highlight. However, I absolutely refuse to support the notion that neuroscience now resides within a “trough of disappointment”. The immense progress and successes that have been and are being achieved across the broad spectrum of the discipline should be recognised and celebrated. The state of neuroscience is robust, and we are genuinely shuffling forward in our understanding of the most complicated structure in the known universe: the human brain.Russell G. Foster is professor of circadian neuroscience at the University of Oxford.Read more about:Knowledge transferResearchScienceRelated universitiesUniversity of OxfordExploreMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyExploreTrinity College DublinExploreBecome a Neurologist: Step-by-Step Career GuideShould I Become a Neurologist?Neurologists are physicians and surgeons who treat patients with nervous system disorders, including problems with the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerves. Many neurologists work in hospitals, and though health and safety precautions are taken, there is some risk of exposure to infectious diseases while working in any medical setting. Doctors who work in hospitals commonly work more than 40 hours a week and often during irregular hours of the day. The potential for high income is present in this career. It can be emotionally and physically challenging, but there is great reward in improving peoples' health and saving peoples' lives.Neurologists will need strong communication and leadership skills, attention to detail, organizational skills, problem-solving skills, patience, empathy, and knowledge of human anatomy and the nervous system. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the average salary for all other physicians and surgeons, including neurologists, was $197,700 as of May 2015.Undergraduate DegreeEarning a bachelor's degree is the first step toward becoming a neurologist. There is no specific major required for undergraduate study. However, aspiring neurologists may benefit from concentrating their studies in biological sciences, chemistry, physics or pre-med to meet admission requirements for medical school. Pre-med requisite courses typically include microbiology, biochemistry and human anatomy.During the junior year of an undergraduate program, aspiring neurologists must take and pass the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT). This exam allows medical schools to evaluate an applicant's training and knowledge through a skills assessment and a set of multiple-choice questions. They then must submit their applications through an online service administered by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM).Students can improve their undergraduate preparation by volunteering. According to the BLS, medical school admissions boards may give preference to students who have completed volunteer hours throughout their undergraduate studies. Volunteering at a hospital or in a similar medical environment can help an aspiring neurologist stand out on his or her medical school application, while also gaining hands-on experience working with patients.Students can also participate in extracurricular activities. The BLS reports that extracurricular activities can help students demonstrate their leadership qualities. Joining honors societies, clubs, student-run publications, or other similar extracurricular activities can help an aspiring neurologist build essential skills and stand out when applying to medical schools.It might also be helpful to learn a foreign language. Neurologists may frequently work with patients who do not speak English, so learning a foreign language, such as Spanish, can help a candidate succeed in this field and may help him or her stand out over other medical school applicants.Graduate Education & ResidencyAspiring neurologists are required to earn a Doctor of Medicine degree by attending medical school. Most medical school programs last four years, with the first two years typically covering the basics of human anatomy and physiology. Courses may also delve into nutrition, immunology and ethics. During their third and fourth years, med students usually receive clinical training and participate in a clerkship that covers medical specializations, like family medicine, neurology or radiology.The National Board of Medical Examiners and the Federation of State Medical Boards administer the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE). The National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners administers the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX). All aspiring physicians, including neurologists, must pass one of these exams prior to practicing medicine in the United States. Both tests come in multiple stages, beginning during medical school. The final stage can be taken right after medical school or within the first part of a residency program. Taking the test immediately after graduating from medical school may be beneficial, as internship and residency programs may rely on these scores for admissions.Aspiring neurologists begin their postgraduate training by entering a 1-year internship program in either internal medicine or surgery. Interns generally gain advanced experience with patients and specific healthcare practices through rotations. For example, while interns working in oncology may interact and provide treatment for cancer patients, those in the intensive care unit may receive instruction on protocols when caring for critically ill patients.After completing their internships, postgraduates will begin a 3-year neurology residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Neurology residents typically attend lectures, participate in patient rounds, and complete case studies of clinical scenarios. Through these activities, they gain experience with an assortment of neurological disorders and issues, such as multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and neuroradiology.Students may also consider a fellowship program. Neurologists seeking advanced training in a particular field of neurology might consider participating in a fellowship offered by a university medical facility or hospital. These programs generally last 1-2 years after a residency and offer extensive work and research opportunities with faculty and medical teams. Fellowships may be available in epilepsy, neurophysiology and other specialized areas of practice.Journey with Parkinson's (interesting site on developments)Beyond SchoolThe American Board of Psychology and Neurology (ABPN) offers voluntary certifications for qualified neurologists. Prospective candidates may become certified as neurologists or child neurologists after completing a certification examination. In order to take the exam, candidates must have completed an accredited medical school program, earned a medical license, and satisfied the ABPN training requirements. Once certified, neurologists participate in the ABPN 10-year certification maintenance program, which includes completing self-assessment activities and other ABPN components.Continuing education can help a neurologist stay up-to-date with trends, breakthroughs and advances in the field. In some cases, continuing education may even be required. For example, the ABPN 10-year certification maintenance program requires completion of continuing education opportunities to ensure certified neurologists are constantly learning and improving in their careers. Continuing education can be completed through classes hosted by professional organizations or university medical centers; opportunities may include classes, meetings, self-assessment and seminars.Neurologists are physicians that specialize in the nervous system. They require a residency and perhaps a fellowship beyond medical school.How to Apply for a Residency Step-by-Step Guide to Applying to a Neurology Residency ProgramNeurologyOverview of the SpecialtyThe specialty of neurology is concerned with the diagnosis and treatment of nervous system disorders involving the brain, spinal cord and other nerve and muscular conditions as well as the blood vessels that relate to them. Many neurological problems are characterized by pain and can be chronic, debilitating and difficult to treat. Headaches, strokes and seizure disorders are typical conditions neurologists treat. A large portion of the practice of neurology is consultative, but the neurologist may also be the primary physician.Training RequirementsTraining generally consists of a minimum of four years of postgraduate education. Entry into a neurology residency training program is preceded by 12 months of ACGME-accredited graduate training in the United States or Canada, usually in general internal medicine. ACGME-approved residency training programs in neurology must provide three years of graduate education in neurology. There were 133 neurological residency training programs accredited by the ACGME for 2014/15 that offered 717 categorical/advanced positions.Matching Program Information and Match StatisticsNeurology training programs participate in the NRMP. Match results and competitiveness information for neurology residency training positions are summarized in U.S. Match Statistics table below.US Match StatisticsSubspecialty/fellowship training upon completion of a neurology residency training program is available in child neurology and clinical neurophysiology.Detailed information about the scope of these subspecialty training programs, number of positions offered and length of training is available in the GMED online database FREIDA.FREIDA Career Information FREIDA physician workforce information for each specialty includes statistical information on the number of positions/programs for residency training, resident work hours, resident work environment and compensation, employment status upon completion of program and work environment for those entering practice in each specialty.Washington University Resources Washington University Graduate Medical Education: GME Washington University Department Website: Department of Neurology

People from time immemorial huddled in groups. If innocent tug of war has created intergroup strife, imagine the passions between the two groups of men who need to feed their mouths more than rare meat is killed mammoths. It is now for us the war at least partly justified ideologically, but the need for food and water - stronger than any global ideologies. Long before the invention of communism, democracy and theories of racial superiority neighboring groups of people were fighting and then massively destroy each other, winning vital resources. In this environment, a developed sense of "we're off them" was a necessary condition for survival. Within groups is the most 'us versus them "is also there: the prehistoric people, as well as other hominids, formed alliances and coalitions within their same groups. Cleverness in office politics - a useful talent of our time, and twenty thousand years ago, who will be able to eat, could determine the group dynamics and the human resources department could rein potboiler with a spear in the back. And if the ability to pick up where the wind blows domestic policies, in the modern work is very useful, in prehistoric times, it was vital today you're fired, and then would have been dead. Scientists refer to any group to which people count themselves among "ingruiioy" or "my band", and the group that they did not include a - "they-group" or "other." In contrast to the general use of use, the terms "own group" and the "they-group" in the technical sense, means not the level of popularity of the person in the group, but simply distinguish between "us" and "them." This is an important distinction: we think differently about those occurrences in the same group as ourselves, and those who belong to the group, where we are not numbers; Moreover, we behave differently in both cases - in this we shall see shortly. All this takes place automatically contact, regardless of whether we want to intentionally differentiate these two types of group. In the previous chapter, I talked about how our tendency to categorize other people affects our judgments about them. Categorization of themselves in relation to "the group" and the "they-group" is also very noticeable - it affects how in the world we attach ourselves and how to perceive others in this regard. Next we'll look at what happens when we apply categorization, defining themselves and separating "us" from the other. We all come in many "own group", and therefore our identity from situation to situation changes. One and the same person at different times can be considered like a woman, boss, employee of the company "Disney", Brazilian, mother - depending on what is currently appropriate or that, say, enjoyable. Juggling belonging to one or another "the group" - a trick used by all of us, it helps to make a vivid impression on others, "his group" with which we identify - an important component of our internal image. And the experimental and theoretical studies have shown that people are willing to sacrifice for the sake of serious financial resources belonging to "the group", which is why they ever attractive. For this reason, for example, people are willing to pay big bucks for a membership in some exclusive country club - and even use its services. One big boss of the company on the development of computer games told me about the wonderful example of willingness to pay a lot of money for the prestige of belonging to a certain "of their group." One of the senior producers, knowing that the other producer, went on increasing, stated emphatically in the office of the chief. He said that her career is not will - for financial reasons. But she continued to insist: the other a colleague raised the salary. It was a great boss is not easy to live: ultra-competitive market, other companies are breathing in the back of his head and strive Stribro good shots, if the lie is bad, but giving away money right and left, all who deserve them, he can not. For a while, discuss-with a colleague about it, he said, that is not itself a raise rest it does not, but the fact that her younger colleague got the same position as it is. Then he offered her a compromise: he appointed her taller, and will increase a little later. As the sales office of the country club, he gave her access to "his group" - in exchange for money. Advertisers perfectly capture this momentum. Therefore, the "Apple" is spending hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising campaigns, emphasizing the fact that the association with "his team", "Mac" - it belongs to the community of smart, elegant and hippest and associating with "his group" the PC-users - to losers . It is necessary to start thinking of yourself as a member of an exclusive country club, a circle big bosses or classes of users of certain computers as the views of other members "of his group" begin to penetrate into our thinking and paint our picture of the world in their own way. Psychologists call this view "group norms". Probably the most distilled illustration of the impact of proposed author experiment Robberz Cave. His name was Muzaffer Sheriff. Turk, who emigrated to the United States to study at the University, he received his doctorate from Columbia University in 1935. His dissertation was devoted to the influence of group norms on visual perception. You might think that vision - an objective process, but the work of Sheriff shown that group norms can influence even on the visual perception of the light point. In their studies, Sheriff, ahead of the development of this branch of science for decades, inviting subjects in a dark room and showed them a small spot of light on the wall. After some time, there is a feeling that the spot moves. But this is just an illusion. This effect arises from the tiny eye movements, resulting in the image on the retina is slightly fluctuated. As I said in the second chapter, in normal conditions, the brain, at the same time capturing the slight shaking of all the objects in the field of view, corrects it, and we perceive what we see as a still. But the brain can Nadur, showing him a light spot out of context, and then perceiving seem that the spot moves. Moreover, since the distance and speed compared with what is not, the mobility stains observer can assess very differently. If you ask different subjects as far-spot has moved from the starting point, the answers will be very different. Sheriff conducted an experiment on a group of three people at a time and asked them to report aloud how advanced spot. And what is interesting: the participants of each group initially called different, someone more, someone less, but soon their estimates have been reduced to a certain narrow range of general - "norm" of the group. "Norma" vary widely from group to group, but within each group reigns agreement to which the participants came without any negotiations or belief. Moreover, when the individual group members were invited to repeat the experiment a week later, this time alone, they repeated the same assessment that was given collectively. The perception of the participants "own group" became their personal perception. [...] People in general, we may not like it, but no matter how we treat the human race, our unconscious "I" tends to sympathize with the members of "his group" more than others. Take, for example, "a group of" people of your profession. In one study, researchers asked subjects to evaluate the overall good-looking doctors, lawyers, waiters and hairdressers on a scale of 1 to 100. The trick experiment consisted in the fact that all its members were themselves doctors, lawyers, waiters or hairdressers. The results were very stable: any of the three members of the profession appreciated the representatives of the fourth as the average, with a nice 50 points. But colleagues in the shop all Otten significantly higher - gave them 70 points. There was, however, one exception - the lawyers: they appreciated and representatives of other professions, and its the same - about 50 points. Immediately, probably remember the anecdote about this job, so I'm here not to repeat them. However, to explain the absence of lawyers particular sympathy for other lawyers only in that the only difference between a lawyer and a catfish that one feeds the dregs, and the other - the fish, not worth it. Of all the four professional groups invited to the experiment, a lawyer involves the constant opposition of its members to each other. Therefore, despite the fact that the lawyers - "own group", some of its representatives can always be in the "they-group" in relation to each other. But if you leave out this anomaly, the study shows that we have a built-in tendency to the participants "own group", be it religion, race, nationality, style or computer department in a company where we work. Experiments demonstrate that belonging to a group may even cover the bad personality traits of participants for each other. One researcher summarizes it this way: "A person may appeal to certain people as members of the group, even if they do not like him as a person." At this discovery - that we humans are like because we are them ourselves somehow associate - there is a natural consequence: we prefer to deal with and in social life, and in business with the "own group", as well as to assess their work and its fruits are more lenient than in the general case, even if we think that we are all treated equally. For example, in one experiment, the researchers divided the participants into groups of three. Groups paired two, and each paired group was given three tasks: to create a work of art from a set of children's toys, to outline the project to the nursing home and write a parable with a moral. In each setting one troika member in a group of guys ( "non-party") was separated from the others, and he was not involved assignments. On completion of each task both non-participants were asked to evaluate the results of the efforts of the two triples in the group. Do not parties no interest in the results achieved "their groups" to which they originally belonged, was not; "His group" were formed without any system and correlation with the personal qualities of the participants. If non-participants were unbiased, they would have preferred the fruits of labor and "his group" and the "they-group" in equal proportions. But it turned out otherwise. In two out of three cases, if the preference arose, they were in favor of the product "of their group." [...] I have already noted that mentally we treat people from "their groups" and the "they-group" in different ways, whether we consciously think so or not. Curious years psychologists have tried to define the minimum requirements necessary to man felt a certain kinship with "his team". It was found that such requirements exist. There is no need to share any views or to be like the other members of the group - they do not even need to drive acquaintance. Enough to know about this accessory, and there is a commitment to herself. Scientists, for example, proposed an experiment in which subjects were asked to look at pictures of the Swiss painter Paul Klee, and the Russian painter Wassily Kandinsky, and report that they no longer liked, and researchers have identified each participant as a fan or admirer of Kandinsky Klee. Both artists own recognizable style, but rabid enthusiasts of art history, specializing in avant-garde European art early XX century, it appear they were among the participants, some might feel the warmth to those who share their tastes. For most people, the scale ardor against Klee Kandinsky - is not the same that Brazil against Argentina or fur coat against the drab coat. So by giving all participants names fans of one or the other artist, scientists have made something quite strange: they are, in fact, was given to each test subject for a suitcase of money and offered to share them with other members on any basis whatever. Divide privately produced, the participants were not familiar with each other and have not seen each other in the process of division. And yet more money, participants received "his group" - people with similar tastes. A huge body of experimental work confirms this conclusion: our group social identification is so strong that we are ready to elect "our", "alien", even if the difference between "our" and "Nenashev" determined by coin toss. Just imagine: we are not only associate themselves with a particular group on the basis of a completely random differences, but also perceive the team members in different ways - even if membership in one group or another has nothing to do with any meaningful personal qualities of the participants; This effect does not only affect our personal lives - it affects the whole organization. For example, companies benefit from support identification of employees with "their team" (employees of one company) - this can be achieved by creating and maintaining a vibrant corporate culture, which is managed companies "Disney", "Apple", "Google". On the other hand, if the unit within the company develop a strong group start, it gets sensitive: may be biased relations within "their group" and discrimination in relation to the "they-group", and studies show that the feud soon arise between groups than between individuals. But even though the nature of the overall group of self, if at all inside the team, many companies find effective self support group in their buyers. That is why "our group", based on the preference of "Mac", "PC" or "Mercedes" - "Cadillac" or "the BMW" - not just a club of computer or motorists: the categorization we perceive much more meaningful and inclusive than they so deserve [...] from the book Mlodinow L. "(Neo) confessed. As the unconscious mind controls our behavior, "What exactly happens to a man when he is following the herd instinct? "I always wondered how others affect our brain so that we change our decision - said Vasily IQ Klyucharev, Dean of the Faculty of Psychology Higher School of Economics, a leading researcher at the University of Basel (Switzerland). - In fact, it is a matter of social psychology: how we are being manipulated? But we decided to change it a few and find out what happens to the brain when a person changes his mind under the influence of the majority. " One of the leading experts in the field of neurobiology of decision-making, Klyucharev calls his study neuroeconomics - they are at the intersection of economics, neuroscience and psychology. The main hypothesis put forward by V. Klyucharev, lies in the fact that the man laid his sense of similarity to others. In the case of the reverse situation the brain generates an error signal, which is, in fact, indicates the man: "You are wrong, promptly changed his mind!". Dopaminergic system generates a signal that is associated with a number of brain regions and, in particular, to the prefrontal cortex. This system is rich in dopamine - a neurotransmitter that provide communication between neurons and signals involved in the formation of an error in the event of conflict with the opinion of the crowd. Irradiation creates characters What happens in the brain dopamine storm at the time of the change of opinion under the influence of others, it has been proven in the laboratory. Klyucharev decided to go ahead and check whether you can temporarily suppress the dopaminergic system of the human brain, being under the influence of the majority and, as a consequence, reduce the level of conformity. "To do this, we've been working a magnetic field in the region of the medial-prefrontal cortex that is involved dopaminergic system. This is called transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), "- said Vasily Klyucharev. As a result of the experiment, the subjects inclination to change his mind in the direction of the majority fell significantly (by 40%), and while they did not experience discomfort. In Denmark, we conducted a reverse experiment, which tested whether it is possible to increase the level of conformity. For this volunteers were given a tablet increasing the amount of dopamine. And, indeed, the people began to actively change their minds in the direction of the majority. This shows how people depend on the activity of dopaminergic system of the brain and the signals generated by it in case it starts to differ from the crowd. Uniqueness as a deviation from the norm Knowing that traditional choice to follow the crowd due to the physiology is very important, said V. Klyucharev. "We need to understand how easy it is to manipulate us because of the nature of our brain, formed evolution", - the scientist explains. In many cases, he said, we are not even aware of the impact on the majority of their own behavior. "The system of evaluation of our behavior laid comparing us with other component. We constantly compare their behavior with the behavior of others and expect to be similar. " Otherwise brain creates discomfort, including, therefore, a learning system. But the brain focus on conformity as V.Klyucharev notices can not be called evil. In fact, it is the human survival strategy: "From a biological point of view, from the point of view of evolution may be conformist and correctly. Each of our model of behavior evolution is tested and its effectiveness is confirmed by the fact that humanity continues to live and to leave behind offspring. " However, not all tend to be similar to the others, even if it carries overt physical threat. For example, the revolutionaries, the behavior of which may have some shocking explanation. The tendency to stand out from the crowd can be predetermined by the anatomy of the brain. This is evidenced by one of the research conducted by Japanese scientists. They investigated the relationship between cortex thickness of generating dopaminergic signal and the need to be different and have their own opinion - the so-called propensity for uniqueness. The results showed that people who are prone to the uniqueness, it is less developed part of the brain cortex, which generates an error signal. It turns out that people who seek to stand out from the crowd, to some extent, have a different physiology. "They just physically brain may be slightly different, the thickness of the crust, generating an error signal, they are thinner," - notes Klyucharev, but stipulates that these findings require further research. As a minority becomes a majority of the dopamine level in the brain of each person is different and it can determine the degree of conformity. But the capacity of dopaminergic signal, signaling error may depend on other factors. For example, the magnitude and quality of the group in which one or another of the majority plays a role. If this is the group to which you feel sympathy and affection, you strive to be like her. And if the band you do not like, then you tend to differ on the contrary. This was proved by studies conducted in the United States. Dopaminergic signal is more likely to occur when the subjects opinion differs with the group to which they appealed and was absent when subjects harbored antipathy towards the group. Nevertheless, there is still a huge research field in terms neuroeconomics. One of the interesting questions: what happens to the brain when the minority becomes a majority suddenly? "Interesting process when a couple gets all the revolutionaries and turns the other way. Lenin shortly before the 1917 revolution, wrote that the revolution in Russia is impossible for many more years, and then suddenly exploded, "- notes Vladimir Klyucharev. Modern protest activity in Russia in this regard, in his opinion, is also interesting. "We live in a digital-era, when a local minority in the framework of social networking becomes a kind of domestic majority" - he says. In humans, it seems mobilizing movement, and they are attached to groups which are perceived as most, but in fact these groups are a minority. And this, according to the scientist, a very interesting field of research