Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Predicting Sexual Orientation


Predicting Sexual Orientation


Brain imaging has become a wide-spread tool in Neuroscience research.  In general, imaging techniques indicate where activity is occurring in the brain.  While these techniques can lead to inferences about how stimuli are affecting the brain due to prior knowledge of localization patterns, these techniques do not produce causality results. Brain imaging has been used to help map the brain as well as predict certain diseases.  One of the most classic examples is the prediction of Alzheimer’s disease.  Alzheimer’s disease is an incurable and progressive form of dementia that leads to death and is most common amongst the elderly. Positron emission tomography (PET) scanning can detect the beginning stages of Alzheimer’s disease years before its clinical onset.  This technique involves injecting radioactive material into a patient and having that material make its way up to the brain through circulation for detection.  It measures blood flow, oxygen, and glucose metabolism with relatively good special accuracy but long measurement intervals as compared with other techniques such as Electroencephalography (EEG).

Ethical implications arise from the availability of such tests.  Individuals having prior knowledge that they are likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease would help them plan rationally for the future as well as take action to delay its onset with cognitive training.  However, knowledge that you will likely get Alzheimer’s disease may lead to pain and worry leading up to the development of the disease. Such distraught could be considered unnecessary, detrimental, and ultimately wrong. I believe that brain imaging diagnoses have ethical implications outside of disease.

This PET technology has been used to detect differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men and women. In particular, images of the amygdala, a brain region associated with the processing of emotion, showed a striking similarity between homosexual men and heterosexual women and between heterosexual men and homosexual women.

Similar to Alzheimer’s disease, homosexuality can be suggested by childhood behavior before homosexuality’s theoretical “onset” at puberty when attraction takes place.  There is a “strong link between childhooddeviations from gender role norms and adult sexual orientation” and there is evidence that more of these behaviors mean greater likelihood of homosexuality.


It remains unclear as to whether these PET scans are effective in predicting the sexual orientation of prepubescent children.  Ethical consequences arise if brain imaging could predict with considerable accuracy the sexual orientation of children.

Families that know that they have a homosexual child could take steps in easing the child’s progression into puberty and adulthood.  The family could introduce the child to their country’s history with homosexuality so that the child understands the context in which the child lives.  The family could give their child a more fitting sexual education. Children who know that they will most likely be homosexuals might want to form support groups with each other at the beginning of puberty to help each other deal with their common concerns.  Finally, children who know that they are likely to be homosexuals will likely have an easier time accepting this identity instead of feeling as confused and conflicted.

Negative ramifications could also arise.  If children who are likely to be homosexual are treated differently during pre-pubescence, the family could be funneling and limiting the children’s exploration of their identity.  Many children hide their sexuality in fear of prejudice from their family.  Children might wait to inform their parents of their sexuality to secure food and shelter until they are ready to leave the home.  It’s possible that suspecting prejudiced parents could request that such testing be done. Such testing could be troubling for a child in the case that the test is a false positive or negative, making navigating feelings of attraction as a young adult very difficult.

If such testing becomes available, ethics should be strongly considered before any wide-scale distribution of the service.  I feel that such a test would be useful in helping young adults avoid some of the questioning and self-doubt that often comes with having a different orientation than straight.  I believe that such testing should only be done at the prepubescent age with some evidence that the family doesn’t have a certain level of prejudice and the child’s community has sufficient material and social resources if the family does display prejudice.

With a scientific mindset, more knowledge can seem universally good.  It’s important to remember that knowledge can cause harm if put in the wrong hands.
 



Practice Doesn’t Always Make Perfect: The Neuroscience of Musical Perception

The ability to perceive music (and sound in general for that matter) is perhaps one of the most influential yet underrated cognitive functions to have come into existence through evolution. It is utilized by a wide variety of animals, from the simple rhythmic chirp of a grasshopper to the elaborate melody of a humpback whale song, and is almost always employed as a means of communicating information, be that location, identification, an emotional state, or an interest in mating. Most (if not all) humans have experienced the effects music can have on our emotional state[1] and research has shown it can also have an effect on physical performance of certain tasks[2] (e.g. sports). However, as we all know, not all individuals possess the gift that is musical talent. The International Laboratory for Brain, Music, and Sound Research (BRAMS) has devised an online test to measure an individual’s ability to perceive music and is accessible to the general public via the following URL: http://www.brams.umontreal.ca/amusia-general/.
But why are some individuals more talented than others? According to the one estimation, 4-5% of the general public is considered to have congenital amusia, i.e. they’re born tone deaf[3]. As is the case in most early research on cognitive functions, scientists have been able to study the neural pathways involved in musical perception by looking more closely at individuals with amusia, either congenital or acquired. Researchers studying musical perception have found congenital amusia to be hereditary and have outlined some of the neural pathways involved in amusia as shown in the figure below. 


Figure 1. Levels of causation for the perceptual form of congenital amusia. The musical deficits observed at the behavioral level (bottom) can be related to a difficulty interpreting melodic pitches in terms of musical tonal rules. This impairment at the cognitive level (tonal encoding of pitch) may arise partly from a subtle problem in acoustical encoding of pitch. The musical-pitch disorder probably results from an anomalous connectivity between the auditory associative cortex (BA 22) and the inferior frontal gyrus (BA 47). The brain anomalies should be ultimately traced back to genes (etiology, top row) since congenital amusia is hereditary. Genetic predispositions will be modulated by environmental factors (e.g., musical rehabilitation during childhood). The dashed line emphasizes that behavior can affect the environment (e.g., avoidance of musical activities).
From Peretz (2008)[4]. ©2008 by Association for Psychological Science.

            These neural pathways are essential for normal musical perception and individuals with genetic defects or damage to these pathways often demonstrate diminished ability to accurately process music. However, it isn’t just differences in our brains that result in the range of musical ability we observe in our day-to-day experiences. According to more recent research on the auditory system, prenatal hormone exposure may effect development of the cochlea[5], the part of our inner ear responsible for the transduction of sound waves into nervous signals. The researchers measured the otoacoustic emissions (OAEs; a measure used to evaluate hearing ability) from the cochleas of heterosexual males and females and found heterosexual females to have stronger OAEs than heterosexual males. When nonheterosexual males and females were added in, they found no significant difference between the male groups while nonheterosexual females showed OAEs comparable to that of the males.
            The results of this study suggest that there are likely separate and independent causes of nonheterosexuality in males and females as we would expect nonheterosexual males to have OAEs comparable to heterosexual females if this wasn’t the case. More importantly (to the topic of this blog post), prenatal hormone exposure affects the development of the cochlea such that heterosexual females show stronger OAEs than the other test groups… but why? This, of course, is a very difficult question to answer with any certainty, but the results of that study align with a theory on musical development.
            It’s no secret that caregivers often sing to their infants to calm them down; lullabies were created for this exact purpose. According to some researchers, this may have been a critical role for music in our development as a species[6]. Human babies are born developmentally premature compared to most other animals. This is because our brain to body size ratio is larger than any other mammals so our brains are not fully developed before we become too big for the womb. Because our brains are underdeveloped, human infants lack emotional stability. However, humans are born with the ability to process music and because of this, caregivers can use music as a tool to influence the emotional state of an infant.
            As all humans were once infants, it makes sense that we all have the ability to process music at birth and pass this trait down. However, as heterosexual females (historically) were most likely to be the caregiver, an enhanced ability to hear and perceive music would be a favorable trait for them to retain into adulthood. This is not the case with males of either sexual orientation or nonheterosexual females which would explain why these groups developed to be more similar in terms of OAE magnitude. I would be interested to see this subject explored much more in the future as there are many holes in our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying musical perception.




[1] Dillman Carpentier, F. R. Potter R. F. “Effects of Music on Physiological Arousal: Explorations into Tempo and Genre” Media Psychology. (2007) 10: 339–363.
[2] Terry, P. C. Karageorghis, C. I. Mecozzi Saha, A. & D’Auria, S. “Effects of synchronous music on treadmill running among elite triathletes” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. (2012) 15, 52-57.
[3] Hyde, K.L. Peretz, I. “Brains That Are out of Tune but in Time” Psychological Science. (2004) 15: 356-360.
[4] Peretz, I. “Musical Disorders: From Behavior to Genes” Current Directions in Psychological Science. (2008) 17: 329-333.
[5] McFadden, D. “Review: Sexual Orientation and the Auditory System” Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology. (2011) 32: 201-213.
[6] Trainor, L. J. Hannon, E. E. “Musical Development” in The Psychology of Music, Third Edition, Ed. Diana Deutsch. (San Diego: Elsevier, 2013). 423-432.