Tag Archives: Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development

What can we learn from laughing?

This post was contributed by Aline Lorandi, a visiting postdoctoral researcher under the supervision of Prof Annette Karmiloff-Smith, investigating the precursors of phonological awareness in Down Syndrome. Aline attended Dr Caspar Addyman’s recent event during Birkbeck’s Science Week

LaughterLaughter is one of the most well-known characteristics of babies, although greatly ignored by science. Motivated by this intriguing gap in the study of babies, Dr Caspar Addyman (Research Fellow from the Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck) decided to invest on the research on baby laughter.

Dr Addyman quotes Victor Borge when he says that “laughter is the shortest distance between two people”. As laughter is one of the central characteristics of babies and a way to connect people, Dr Addyman’s interest in this sort of study is more than justified.

Maternity and paternity brings several challenges: fewer hours of sleep, loads of mess to organise, lack of time for the parents themselves or to work, their lives changed forever – although most of them would say, for the better. One of the greatest rewards for all those challenges in parenting is, undoubtedly, to hear their babies laughing.

“Baby laugh is appealing!” states Dr Addyman. It is present from the very beginning of life, and, historically, it can be tracked to non-mammals more than six-million years ago. It encourages social play, and it is also linked to tickling, which is as old as laughter itself, phylogenetically speaking.

Some researches on rats (like Weaver et al., 2004, published on Nature Neuroscience) show that rats whose mothers lick and groom them were less stressed, for the mother’s touch may be an answer to stress. From this, Dr Addyman argues that touching and tickling are very important for development.

Ontogenetically speaking, Dr Addyman maintains that laughter begins really early. Through a survey with parents, he found out that at three months of life, in general, babies give their first laugh (the first smile is at one month). According to Dr Addyman, laughing is more difficult than crying, for it requires more motor and voice control. When looking for how many laughs per day a baby gives, the number can be bigger than 150. And, of course, a guaranteed way for a laugh is tickling.

As to fun games and toys, Dr Addyman found that ‘peek-a-boo’ seems to be the best one. It also provides social interaction, as you have to wait for the other person to appear, and there is pleasure in doing that.

Naturally, at some point, children will realise that they can make parents laugh, changing the games. By this, Dr Addyman shows us that laughter is about social learning, and ‘peek-a-boo’ is a condensed form of this kind of interaction.

There is another important feature about laughing that distinguishes it from crying – it makes it a way for communication: While crying is a sign that something is wrong and must be stopped by parents, laughing points to something that they want to be continued.

As an argument for the social role of laughing, Dr Addyman presented research where he shows that children laugh more when in a group than alone, independently of how funny they think a movie is. Another experiment shows that laughter captures and holds attention from babies, and it is more ‘contagious’ than yawning!

Dr Addyman believes that we can learn from babies’ laughter. He says that we should challenge ourselves to be happy; for people who challenge themselves see more purpose in life. He also believes that we should do things with joy, be 100% in it, share with other people and simply be happy!

As Abraham Lincoln once said: “Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be”. If this is correct, and babies can show us that it is, as Dr Addyman’s research points out, the answer to happiness is not ‘how to be happy’, but ‘how to change our minds’, remembering ourselves of the pleasures of tickling and laughing, as if we were still babies, and of the rewards of living a less stressful life, through the happiness of laughing out loud.

Find out more

Share

Curiosity: A study about babies and ways to learning

This post was contributed by Aline Lorandi, a visiting postdoctoral researcher under the supervision of Prof Annette Karmiloff-Smith, investigating the precursors of phonological awareness in Down Syndrome.

Curiosity is unique to humans. There are many stories and quotes about curiosity in literature and in mythology. Sometimes you can get in trouble because of your curiosity, as Pandora did when she opened the box that she was given by Zeus and discovered what was inside.

Experiments at babylabWe are all curious, but there are some researchers who are curious about curiosity, as Katarina Begus, who talked about “The development of human curiosity: A few baby steps”, during Science Week.

Some researchers have shown that curiosity activates the same areas in the brain as when we consume chocolate, nicotine or when we win a race. If curiosity seems to be linked to pleasure, why is it so difficult to awaken curiosity in some people?

Driven by the curiosity about curiosity, Katarina is investigating curiosity on babies. She maintains that children seem curious about things, and that the universal gesture for showing curiosity about something is pointing. However, how can we know what babies mean by pointing?

Katarina presented a series of tests that aimed to verify in which situations babies point, including informative versus non-informative parents, different kinds of objects, and spontaneous pointing. She also reported that theta oscillation (during EEG/ERP) is found in the hippocampus during situations that involve reward.

The more motivate a child is, the more theta oscillation is found, and, consequently, the greater is his or her learning. Based on this assumption, Katarina invested on tests that can look at brain activation during play, in order to attest whether the babies would recognise some objects that they saw before as a sign of learning and motivation.

When testing learning of nonwords in informative versus non-informative contexts, she found greater theta oscillations in the brain when babies were expecting for information in informative contexts (contrasted to non-informative contexts, where no real information was available).

Although Katarina Begus has already found some very exciting results for how children demonstrate curiosity, her work is still going on, and her curiosity about curiosity never ends:

  • What is the role of technology in our curiosity?
  • How will children explore their curiosity using technology?
  • How the studies about curiosity and learning can help us prevent dementia?

Those were questions that Katarina would like to address in future researches. The audience was also curious, a fact that was shown by the questions made by the end of the talk:

  • How far children go with non-informative teachers?
  • What about their reaction to surprises?
  • What about the effects of surprise on learning?
  • How can we make people more curious?
  • What is the role of the environment on curiosity?

As Albert Einstein once said, “The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.” Let’s keep curious!

Find out more

Share

Infants, Down syndrome and the Alzheimer disease: A multidisciplinary approach

This post was contributed by Aline Lorandi, a visiting postdoctoral researcher under the supervision of Prof Annette Karmiloff-Smith, investigating the precursors of phonological awareness in Down Syndrome. She also is a collaborator in the infant stream of the London Down Syndrome Consortium (LonDownS), which investigates the links between Down syndrome and the Alzheimer disease

One of the premises of developmental neuroscience is based on the fact that, in order to understand certain phenotypes, it is crucial that we investigate their origins, that is, that we track the developmental trajectory that leads us to different sorts of behaviour, cognitive profiles, disorders, and diseases.

DNA StrandsWe must also acknowledge that the advances made by the field of developmental neuroscience allow us to take the debate between the contribution of genes and environment to another level: It is a fact that it is only possible to understand such contribution in a bilateral way, in which one modifies the other all the time.

With all that in mind, we can understand the curious title that Dr Esha Massand gave to her talk: ‘What can infants possibly tell us about Dementia?’ It seems a bit odd to think how studying babies can provide us any kind of relevant information about a condition typically related to ageing. Nevertheless, from the study of Down Syndrome arose the inspiration to establish the link between child development and Alzheimer’s disease.

The research described by Dr Massand is part of the LonDowS Research Consortium, involving different universities, which works in five sites: Genetics, mouse models, cells, adults, and infants.

The aim of the infant stream, according to Dr Massand, is to understand individual differences in infancy that may point to early signs of Alzheimer’s Disease. It is known that individuals with Down Syndrome have an extra copy of chromosome 21, and there is a gene in this chromosome, called APP gene, that produces a protein that, because of this extra chromosome, will be overexpressed in all individuals from the womb throughout development.

This APP gene produces plaques that are found in the brains of individuals with Alzheimer’s Disease. As the APP gene is overexpressed in Down Syndrome, it is very important to investigate its relationship with Alzheimer disease. One of the interesting facts is that, although all individuals with Down Syndrome will present, by the age of 30 onwards, the plaques in their brains, not all of them will develop signs of Alzheimer’s Disease.

Using a varied range of methodologies (eye tracking, sleep pattern measuring, EEG/ERP, behavioural tasks), Dr Massand and colleagues aim to understand how behaviour and neural responses may shed some light on whether it is possible to track some early biomarkers that can point to the onset of the disease in a developmental way. Among the cognitive and neural underpinnings, they are looking at several abilities, such as memory, attention, language, sleep fragmentation, mother/father/infant interactions, and many others. All those methodologies are very child-friendly.

Although preliminary, many interesting results already point to important individual differences, like the relationship between language and the gap-overlap/disengaging effect (the ability to disengage from one stimulus to look at another one, concomitantly or not).

Dr Massand’s team found that the fewer words a child understands and produces, the longer he or she takes to disengage from the stimulus presented in the task. Additionally, the disengaging effect was positively correlated to aggressive behaviour. That means that the higher the score that the child reached in the behaviour questionnaire (related, among other measures, to aggressive behaviour), the longer he or she took to disengage from the stimuli.

They also found a positive correlation between the ability to pay attention to novelties and detect them, to more sleep. Analysing several trials during a test to find the location of the objects, they also discovered that children with Down Syndrome may take longer to habituate to the objects and may take longer in the tasks: While typically developing children can detect a change of location of the objects in a first trial, observable by the duration of them looking at the screen in the eye tracking, children with Down syndrome do better – or more ‘typically’ – in a second trial, presenting more variability in the first trial than typically developing children. All these findings are related to individual differences that may be correlated to those who will be at risk of developing Alzheimer disease.

Exciting trends and lots more to do for Dr Esha Massand’s team! There are more data to collect, especially from controls, findings from EEG/ERP to analyse, which may point to underlying neural differences related to Alzheimer’s Disease, and the exciting combination with the data from the other streams (cells, mouse models, genetics, and adults) to explore.

As the questions from the audience show, this is the kind of research that makes us excited and curious about! Should the participants be followed longitudinally? How long do children take to get familiarised to the cap in the EEG tests? These and other questions about the relationships between the different cognitive abilities were answered by Dr. Massand, who also highlighted that the hope is to find those individual differences in adults as well, in order to seek a better understanding of the factors that might indicate early clinical signs of the Alzheimer’s Disease.

Find out more

Share