Interactive Metronome Featured on The Brainvolts Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory Website
Dr. Nina Kraus leads a diverse team of researchers and clinicians at The Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory (Brainvolts) as they investigate the way brains process sounds, finding that auditory ability is a strong indicator of brain health.
Brainvolts has discovered how to measure the biology of auditory processing with unprecedented precision. Together they extend science beyond the laboratory to schools, community centers, and clinics.
Using the principles of neuroscience to improve human communication, the Brainvolts team advocates for best practices in education, health, and social policy.
“Brain: an apparatus with which we think we think”
Your brain is an incredibly fast, effective and efficient machine that makes about 10,402,560,000,000,000,000,000 calculations per day if everything is running smoothly. That also leaves a lot of room for error. So how does that three pound fat ball on your shoulders control all of that information? Read more to find out about brain communication and information processing.
We’re going to be at SharpBrains Virtual Summit 2013
2013 SharpBrains Virtual Summit to Discuss Latest on Digital Brain Health, Brain Fitness, Personal Health
150+ science and industry pioneers in 14 countries to gather online on September 19th and 20th
Washington, DC (PRWEB) September 17, 2013
The 2013 SharpBrains Virtual Summit (September 19-20th) will feature over 30 of the world’s top scientists and innovators working on ways to enhance behavioral and brain health via neuroscience-based innovation. All sessions will be chaired by some of the world’s most inspiring and accomplished trailblazers, recognized as Young Global Leaders (YGLs) by the World Economic Forum.
“It is exciting to imagine the possibilities at the intersection of brain health, digital health, and neuroplasticity, but getting there requires addressing the immediate questions confronting us today,” says Alvaro Fernandez, CEO of SharpBrains and Summit’s producer. “We are proud to offer this unique forum to help the field move forward.”
The Brain Clock: The brain clock as a “jack-of-all-trades” brain mechanism that can be fine-tuned to improve human performance
The Brain Clock: The brain clock as a “jack-of-all-trades” brain mechanism that can be fine-tuned to improve human performance
In my inaugural IM-Home blog post (Brain Clock: My journey to understand the science of mental timing interventions), I concluded with the following statement:
“I am now convinced that the IM-effect is impacting a fundamental and critical cognitive mechanism (or set of mechanisms) involved in a wide array of human cognitive and motor performance domains.”
Cognitive and intelligence researchers have long sought for (and argued about) the “holy grail”of intelligence—an underlying core essence or mechanism that plays a role in most all intellectual and human performance situations. It is typically referred to as g, or general intelligence. The general consensus touches on the concept of neural efficiency. Such a general mechanism or process is considered a domain-general cognitive mechanism as it works across multiple domains of human ability, or in other words...if you improve this one area of ability, it in turn improves several areas of ability in the same person like cognitive skills (focus, attention, memory), speech/language abilities (articulation, auditory processing, reading), and motor skills (coordination, gait, balance). It works across multiple domains of human ability. Some have referred to such general mechanisms...
The Brain Clock: My journey to understand the science of mental timing interventions
The Brain Clock: My journey to understand the science of mental timing interventions
“Run Gordon Run…this sounds like high-tech snake oil!”
That was my knee-jerk advice to friend and colleague, Dr. Gordon Taub, when he called me in 2004 to assess my interest in consulting on a “synchronized metronome tapping” (SMT) invention called Interactive Metronome (IM). IM was supposedly directed at improving the academic achievement of elementary school students. My skepticism was grounded on the fact that for many years in education (and special education in particular), non-academic interventions focused on remediating underlying cognitive deficits (e.g., psycholinguistic process training; visual-motor or spatial integration training; motor planning retraining) were subsequently found to be ineffective in improving reading, writing and math. Yes, performance could be improved on tests of the specific cognitive processes trained, but the results did not transfer to academic improvement in the classroom.
By the early to mid-1980’s non-academic cognitive process intervention programs had been debunked as ineffective for improving school achievement. It was from this skeptical lens that I offered Dr. Taub my advice. I went as far as telling Dr. Taub that I could not risk my professional reputation by being associated with yet another “magic bullet” claim for school learning, especially for “at risk” learners. The magic bullet lesson had been burned well into my school psychology psyche after...
