Actions

Difference between revisions of "FFFF"

From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki
(→‎Brain Mechanism)
 
(13 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''Fight or Flight''' was a trem coined by Walter Cannon<ref>Cannon WB, 1932, The wisdom of the body, New York, Norton</ref>, and it describe a system that react to threats. In the begging only to reaction were detected -  Fight or Flight. But as the research in this area proressed it is now knowen to consist of one imdiate reaction, and three optional coarse of actions<ref>[http://psy.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/45/5/448 S. Bracha at al, 2004, Does "Fight or Flight" Need Updating?, Psychosomatics 45:448-449, October]</ref>. The first is ''Freeze''. When a threat is suspected or detected, the brain will give order to freeze and try to detect or estimate the what kind of threat it is. Then three options will follow. In most cases it is better to run a way from danger (Which is named Flight). When the danger is unavoidable, then either the brain will give instruction to ''fight'' the danger, and if it is to strong and we can not escape, the last option we be to surrender in hope that the attacker will leave us alone and will not atack us. The last option is called ''Fright''. So today we can calll this reaction '''Freeze, Flight, Fight or Fright''' (FFFF).  
+
'''Fight or Flight''' was a trem coined by Walter Cannon<ref>Cannon WB, 1932, The wisdom of the body, New York, Norton</ref>, and it describe as a [[decision making|decision]] system that react to threats. In the begging only to reaction were detected -  Fight or Flight. But as the research in this area progressed it is now known to consist of more complex set of reactions to threat. It consist of one immediate reaction, and three optional coarse of actions<ref>[http://psy.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/45/5/448 S. Bracha at al, 2004, Does "Fight or Flight" Need Updating?, Psychosomatics 45:448-449, October]</ref>. The first is ''Freeze''. When a threat is suspected or detected, the brain will give order to freeze and try to detect or estimate the what kind of threat it is. Then three options will follow. In most cases it is better to run a way from danger (Which is named Flight). When the danger is unavoidable, then either the brain will give instruction to ''fight'' the danger, and if it is to strong and we can not escape, the last option we be to surrender in hope that the attacker will leave us alone and will not atack us. The last option is called ''Fright''. So today we can calll this reaction '''Freeze, Flight, Fight or Fright''' (FFFF).  
  
−
It seems that most of the system is located in Amygdala<ref>Davis, M., Whalen, P.J., 2001. The amygdala: vigilance and emotion. Mol. Psychiatry 6, 13 – 34.</ref><ref>Halgren, E., 1992. Emotional neurophysiology of the amygdala within the context of human cognition. In: Aggleton, J.P. (Ed.), The Amygdala: Neurobiological Aspects of Emotion, Memory and Mental Dysfunction. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 191 – 228.</ref><ref>LeDoux, J.E., 1998. The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. Touchstone, New York.</ref><ref>Phan, K.L., Wager, T., Taylor, S.F., Liberzon, I., 2002. Functional neuroanatomy of emotion: a meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI. NeuroImage 16, 331 – 348.</ref><ref>Zald, D.H., 2003. The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli. Brain Res., Brain Res. Rev. 41, 88 – 123.</ref> and in other areas of the limbic system<ref>[http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/7916235 Graeff FG, 1994, Neuroanatomy and neurotransmitter regulation of defensive behaviors and related emotions in mammals, ''Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research'', 27(4):811-29]</ref>. In due time and with [[effortful control]] the system can be thought and mainpulated. When signals of threat are intiated, a reaction signals are send from the amygdala to the brain steam and to the prefrontal cortex<ref>[http://www.somasimple.com/pdf_files/brainstem_fear.pdf Liddell et al. A direct brainstem–amygdala–cortical dalarmT system for subliminal signals of fear, NeuroImage 24(2005)235– 243]</ref>.  
+
It seems that most of the system is located in Amygdala<ref>Davis, M., Whalen, P.J., 2001. The amygdala: vigilance and emotion. Mol. Psychiatry 6, 13 – 34.</ref><ref>Halgren, E., 1992. Emotional neurophysiology of the amygdala within the context of human cognition. In: Aggleton, J.P. (Ed.), The Amygdala: Neurobiological Aspects of Emotion, Memory and Mental Dysfunction. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 191 – 228.</ref><ref>LeDoux, J.E., 1998. The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. Touchstone, New York.</ref><ref>Phan, K.L., Wager, T., Taylor, S.F., Liberzon, I., 2002. Functional neuroanatomy of emotion: a meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI. NeuroImage 16, 331 – 348.</ref><ref>Zald, D.H., 2003. The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli. Brain Res., Brain Res. Rev. 41, 88 – 123.</ref> and in other areas of the limbic system<ref>[http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/7916235 Graeff FG, 1994, Neuroanatomy and neurotransmitter regulation of defensive behaviors and related emotions in mammals, ''Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research'', 27(4):811-29]</ref>. The process is called "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala_hijack amygdala hijack]" and it proceess was described by Daniel Goleman<ref>Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (p. 384). Bantam Books.</ref>. When signals of threat are intiated, a reaction signals are send from the amygdala to the brain steam and to the prefrontal cortex<ref>[http://www.somasimple.com/pdf_files/brainstem_fear.pdf Liddell et al. A direct brainstem–amygdala–cortical dalarmT system for subliminal signals of fear, NeuroImage 24(2005)235– 243]</ref>. In due time and with [[effortful control]] the system can be thought and mainpulated.  
  
 
People how feel thretend or intimidated from social circumstances, will become more conservatives. A socail stress will occuer and the FFFF system will intiate a reaction to the threat. They will be more aggresive (fight) or detached (flight) or depressesed (fright), depending of their patern of reaction.  
 
People how feel thretend or intimidated from social circumstances, will become more conservatives. A socail stress will occuer and the FFFF system will intiate a reaction to the threat. They will be more aggresive (fight) or detached (flight) or depressesed (fright), depending of their patern of reaction.  
Line 9: Line 9:
 
The limbic system is connected to [[Decision Making|decision making]] with [[short term rewards|rewrds in the short range]]<ref>[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5695/503.short Samuel M. McClure, David I. Laibson, George Loewenstein and Jonathan D. Cohen, 2004, Separate Neural Systems Value Immediate and Delayed Monetary Rewards, Science 15 October 2004: Vol. 306 no. 5695 pp. 503-507]</ref>.  
 
The limbic system is connected to [[Decision Making|decision making]] with [[short term rewards|rewrds in the short range]]<ref>[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5695/503.short Samuel M. McClure, David I. Laibson, George Loewenstein and Jonathan D. Cohen, 2004, Separate Neural Systems Value Immediate and Delayed Monetary Rewards, Science 15 October 2004: Vol. 306 no. 5695 pp. 503-507]</ref>.  
  
−
In order to resolve an emotional conflict the rostal[[ACC]] inhibits the amygdala (or [[FFFF]] mechanism<ref>[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.126.1555&rep=rep1&type=pdf Amit Etkin, Tobias Egner, Daniel M. Peraza, Eric R. Kandel and Joy Hirsch, Resolving Emotional Conflict: A Role for the Rostral Anterior Cingulate Cortex in Modulating Activity in the Amygdala, Neuron 51, 1–12, September 7, 2006]</ref>).
+
In order to resolve an emotional conflict the rostal[[ACC]] inhibits the amygdala (or [[FFFF]] mechanism)<ref>[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.126.1555&rep=rep1&type=pdf Amit Etkin, Tobias Egner, Daniel M. Peraza, Eric R. Kandel and Joy Hirsch, Resolving Emotional Conflict: A Role for the Rostral Anterior Cingulate Cortex in Modulating Activity in the Amygdala, Neuron 51, 1–12, September 7, 2006]</ref>. This is strengthing by the findings that in panic disorder, the volume of the the ACC is reduced, <ref>[https://www.slicer.org/slicerWeb/images/2/2c/Asami-PsychiatryClinNeurosci2008.pdf Takeshi et al., Anterior cingulate cortex volume reduction in patients with panic disorder, Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2008; 62: 322–330]</ref> . When the ACC (ACcd) has deficient in activation, there seem to be more impolsivity in ADHD compered to control group<ref>[http://faculty-web.at.northwestern.edu/speech/booth/james/neuropsychology/AttentionArticles/BushFrazier.1999.pdf low ACcd activity and ADHD impulsivity, 1999]</ref>. When anticipating pain, women domnstrate more activation of the ACC<ref>[http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/16012355/reload=0;jsessionid=fBlS5IiTyyjXq46t6m68.12 Gender difrences in ACC before pain, 2005]</ref>.  
  
 
The modulation between FFFF reaction and normal [[system 1]]-[[system 2]] decision making mechanisem is seems to be by the right CBF<ref>[http://people.hnl.bcm.tmc.edu/jli/reference/212.pdf Hariri Ahmad, Bookheimer Susan, Y Mazziotta, John C, 2000, Modulating emotional responses: effects of a neocortical network on the limbic system, Neuroreport:17 January 2000 - Volume 11 - Issue 1 - p 43-48]</ref> and the [[ACC]].
 
The modulation between FFFF reaction and normal [[system 1]]-[[system 2]] decision making mechanisem is seems to be by the right CBF<ref>[http://people.hnl.bcm.tmc.edu/jli/reference/212.pdf Hariri Ahmad, Bookheimer Susan, Y Mazziotta, John C, 2000, Modulating emotional responses: effects of a neocortical network on the limbic system, Neuroreport:17 January 2000 - Volume 11 - Issue 1 - p 43-48]</ref> and the [[ACC]].
 +
 +
==States==
 +
===Fight===
 +
It seems that in a state of fight, people will take more [[risk taking|risks]].
 
   
 
   
 
===Threat reaction in women===
 
===Threat reaction in women===
  
 
It seems the women have different stress reaction, which promote defending ofsprings and strengthening the social ties, so that the group can be stronger<ref>[http://scholar.harvard.edu/sites/scholar.iq.harvard.edu/files/marianabockarova/files/tend-and-befriend.pdf Behavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-Befriend not Fight or Flight, 2000, Taylor et al. ''psycological review'' 107(3), 411-29]</ref>. I suggest that such a reaction also exists in men, and it help them tight social bonds wthin the group, and though, strengh [[social capital]], and strength the group abilities to attack or defend as a whole<ref>Geary, D.C., & Flinn, M.V. (2002). Sex differences in behavioral and hormonal response to social threat: Commentary on Taylor et al.(2000). ''Psychological Review'', 109, 745–750.</ref><ref>Kenrick, D.T., & Johnson, G.A. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in aversive environments: A problem for the classical conditioning paradigm? ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology'', 37, 572–579.</ref><ref>Taylor, S.E., Klein, L.C., Lewis, B.P., Gruenewald, T.L.,Gurung, R.A.R., & Updegraff, J.A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-orflight. Psychological Review, 107, 411–429.</ref>. The group become more conformtive (I belive it is because of FFFF reaction inhibiting the [[ACC]])<ref>Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N.J., Mortensen, C.R., Sundie, J.M.,Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2009). Fear and loving in Las Vegas: Evolution, emotion, and persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 384–395.</ref><ref>Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N., Mortensen, C., Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.</ref><ref>Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M., Sundie, J.M., Cialdini, R.B.,Miller, G.F., & Kenrick, D.T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93,85–102.</ref>.
 
It seems the women have different stress reaction, which promote defending ofsprings and strengthening the social ties, so that the group can be stronger<ref>[http://scholar.harvard.edu/sites/scholar.iq.harvard.edu/files/marianabockarova/files/tend-and-befriend.pdf Behavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-Befriend not Fight or Flight, 2000, Taylor et al. ''psycological review'' 107(3), 411-29]</ref>. I suggest that such a reaction also exists in men, and it help them tight social bonds wthin the group, and though, strengh [[social capital]], and strength the group abilities to attack or defend as a whole<ref>Geary, D.C., & Flinn, M.V. (2002). Sex differences in behavioral and hormonal response to social threat: Commentary on Taylor et al.(2000). ''Psychological Review'', 109, 745–750.</ref><ref>Kenrick, D.T., & Johnson, G.A. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in aversive environments: A problem for the classical conditioning paradigm? ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology'', 37, 572–579.</ref><ref>Taylor, S.E., Klein, L.C., Lewis, B.P., Gruenewald, T.L.,Gurung, R.A.R., & Updegraff, J.A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-orflight. Psychological Review, 107, 411–429.</ref>. The group become more conformtive (I belive it is because of FFFF reaction inhibiting the [[ACC]])<ref>Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N.J., Mortensen, C.R., Sundie, J.M.,Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2009). Fear and loving in Las Vegas: Evolution, emotion, and persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 384–395.</ref><ref>Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N., Mortensen, C., Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.</ref><ref>Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M., Sundie, J.M., Cialdini, R.B.,Miller, G.F., & Kenrick, D.T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93,85–102.</ref>.
 +
===Brain Mechanism===
 +
Predation and evasion are driven respectively form  hypothalamus (LH) to the periaqueductal gray (PAG) inhibitory and excitatory projections from the mouse lateral  midbrain <ref>[http://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(18)30008-4 Li, Yi, et al. "Hypothalamic Circuits for Predation and Evasion." Neuron (2018).]</ref>.
  
 
==Related subjects==
 
==Related subjects==
 
* Decision making in dangerous situations<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3014440/?tool=pubmed Tom Schonberg, Craig R. Fox and Russell A. Poldrack,Mind the Gap: Bridging economic and naturalistic risk-taking with cognitive neuroscience, ''Trends Cogn Sci.'' 2011 January; 15(1): 11–19.]</ref>.
 
* Decision making in dangerous situations<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3014440/?tool=pubmed Tom Schonberg, Craig R. Fox and Russell A. Poldrack,Mind the Gap: Bridging economic and naturalistic risk-taking with cognitive neuroscience, ''Trends Cogn Sci.'' 2011 January; 15(1): 11–19.]</ref>.
 
* [http://www.rpts.edu/Courses/PT13%20Worship/Collateral%20Readings/AdrenalineAddiction1.pdf Theological assay on risk, decision making and addiction to risks]
 
* [http://www.rpts.edu/Courses/PT13%20Worship/Collateral%20Readings/AdrenalineAddiction1.pdf Theological assay on risk, decision making and addiction to risks]
 +
* [[fear|Fear]]
 +
* [[hate speech|Hate speech]]
 +
* [http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/21/7218.full Important article]
 +
* [[bad and good]]
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Latest revision as of 09:22, 16 February 2018

Fight or Flight was a trem coined by Walter Cannon[1], and it describe as a decision system that react to threats. In the begging only to reaction were detected - Fight or Flight. But as the research in this area progressed it is now known to consist of more complex set of reactions to threat. It consist of one immediate reaction, and three optional coarse of actions[2]. The first is Freeze. When a threat is suspected or detected, the brain will give order to freeze and try to detect or estimate the what kind of threat it is. Then three options will follow. In most cases it is better to run a way from danger (Which is named Flight). When the danger is unavoidable, then either the brain will give instruction to fight the danger, and if it is to strong and we can not escape, the last option we be to surrender in hope that the attacker will leave us alone and will not atack us. The last option is called Fright. So today we can calll this reaction Freeze, Flight, Fight or Fright (FFFF).

It seems that most of the system is located in Amygdala[3][4][5][6][7] and in other areas of the limbic system[8]. The process is called "amygdala hijack" and it proceess was described by Daniel Goleman[9]. When signals of threat are intiated, a reaction signals are send from the amygdala to the brain steam and to the prefrontal cortex[10]. In due time and with effortful control the system can be thought and mainpulated.

People how feel thretend or intimidated from social circumstances, will become more conservatives. A socail stress will occuer and the FFFF system will intiate a reaction to the threat. They will be more aggresive (fight) or detached (flight) or depressesed (fright), depending of their patern of reaction.

The FFFF system will be more active in people who grow in a harsh invoriment with social threats and parental criticism.

The limbic system is connected to decision making with rewrds in the short range[11].

In order to resolve an emotional conflict the rostalACC inhibits the amygdala (or FFFF mechanism)[12]. This is strengthing by the findings that in panic disorder, the volume of the the ACC is reduced, [13] . When the ACC (ACcd) has deficient in activation, there seem to be more impolsivity in ADHD compered to control group[14]. When anticipating pain, women domnstrate more activation of the ACC[15].

The modulation between FFFF reaction and normal system 1-system 2 decision making mechanisem is seems to be by the right CBF[16] and the ACC.

States

Fight

It seems that in a state of fight, people will take more risks.

Threat reaction in women

It seems the women have different stress reaction, which promote defending ofsprings and strengthening the social ties, so that the group can be stronger[17]. I suggest that such a reaction also exists in men, and it help them tight social bonds wthin the group, and though, strengh social capital, and strength the group abilities to attack or defend as a whole[18][19][20]. The group become more conformtive (I belive it is because of FFFF reaction inhibiting the ACC)[21][22][23].

Brain Mechanism

Predation and evasion are driven respectively form hypothalamus (LH) to the periaqueductal gray (PAG) inhibitory and excitatory projections from the mouse lateral midbrain [24].

Related subjects

References

  1. ↑ Cannon WB, 1932, The wisdom of the body, New York, Norton
  2. ↑ S. Bracha at al, 2004, Does "Fight or Flight" Need Updating?, Psychosomatics 45:448-449, October
  3. ↑ Davis, M., Whalen, P.J., 2001. The amygdala: vigilance and emotion. Mol. Psychiatry 6, 13 – 34.
  4. ↑ Halgren, E., 1992. Emotional neurophysiology of the amygdala within the context of human cognition. In: Aggleton, J.P. (Ed.), The Amygdala: Neurobiological Aspects of Emotion, Memory and Mental Dysfunction. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 191 – 228.
  5. ↑ LeDoux, J.E., 1998. The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. Touchstone, New York.
  6. ↑ Phan, K.L., Wager, T., Taylor, S.F., Liberzon, I., 2002. Functional neuroanatomy of emotion: a meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI. NeuroImage 16, 331 – 348.
  7. ↑ Zald, D.H., 2003. The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli. Brain Res., Brain Res. Rev. 41, 88 – 123.
  8. ↑ Graeff FG, 1994, Neuroanatomy and neurotransmitter regulation of defensive behaviors and related emotions in mammals, Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 27(4):811-29
  9. ↑ Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (p. 384). Bantam Books.
  10. ↑ Liddell et al. A direct brainstem–amygdala–cortical dalarmT system for subliminal signals of fear, NeuroImage 24(2005)235– 243
  11. ↑ Samuel M. McClure, David I. Laibson, George Loewenstein and Jonathan D. Cohen, 2004, Separate Neural Systems Value Immediate and Delayed Monetary Rewards, Science 15 October 2004: Vol. 306 no. 5695 pp. 503-507
  12. ↑ Amit Etkin, Tobias Egner, Daniel M. Peraza, Eric R. Kandel and Joy Hirsch, Resolving Emotional Conflict: A Role for the Rostral Anterior Cingulate Cortex in Modulating Activity in the Amygdala, Neuron 51, 1–12, September 7, 2006
  13. ↑ Takeshi et al., Anterior cingulate cortex volume reduction in patients with panic disorder, Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2008; 62: 322–330
  14. ↑ low ACcd activity and ADHD impulsivity, 1999
  15. ↑ Gender difrences in ACC before pain, 2005
  16. ↑ Hariri Ahmad, Bookheimer Susan, Y Mazziotta, John C, 2000, Modulating emotional responses: effects of a neocortical network on the limbic system, Neuroreport:17 January 2000 - Volume 11 - Issue 1 - p 43-48
  17. ↑ Behavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-Befriend not Fight or Flight, 2000, Taylor et al. psycological review 107(3), 411-29
  18. ↑ Geary, D.C., & Flinn, M.V. (2002). Sex differences in behavioral and hormonal response to social threat: Commentary on Taylor et al.(2000). Psychological Review, 109, 745–750.
  19. ↑ Kenrick, D.T., & Johnson, G.A. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in aversive environments: A problem for the classical conditioning paradigm? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 572–579.
  20. ↑ Taylor, S.E., Klein, L.C., Lewis, B.P., Gruenewald, T.L.,Gurung, R.A.R., & Updegraff, J.A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-orflight. Psychological Review, 107, 411–429.
  21. ↑ Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N.J., Mortensen, C.R., Sundie, J.M.,Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2009). Fear and loving in Las Vegas: Evolution, emotion, and persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 384–395.
  22. ↑ Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N., Mortensen, C., Cialdini, R.B., & Kenrick, D.T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.
  23. ↑ Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M., Sundie, J.M., Cialdini, R.B.,Miller, G.F., & Kenrick, D.T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93,85–102.
  24. ↑ Li, Yi, et al. "Hypothalamic Circuits for Predation and Evasion." Neuron (2018).
  25. ↑ Tom Schonberg, Craig R. Fox and Russell A. Poldrack,Mind the Gap: Bridging economic and naturalistic risk-taking with cognitive neuroscience, Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 January; 15(1): 11–19.
Retrieved from "http://www.delib.org/wiki/index.php?title=FFFF&oldid=3737"