Transcript Slide 1

Environmental Enrichment:
Interventions and Interpretations
Andrew Brown
Psy328
March 15, 2005
Aims and Objectives
• Reinforce awareness that environment
and biology interact in development
• Emphasize the importance of long-term
follow-ups and scientific controlled
investigations
• Consider scientific vs pseudoscientific
interventions
Ramey & Ramey (1998)
• ‘Early years’ programmes must attempt to
alter rate of cognitive development if
genuine catch-up is to occur
• “little is known about how to accelerate
cognitive development beyond normative
or typical rates”
Seven Principles of Successful Early
Intervention Programs
(Ramey & Ramey, 1998)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Timing
Intensity
Direct provision of learning experiences
Breadth
Recognition of individual differences
Environmental maintenance of development
Cultural appropriateness and relevance of
intervention strategies
Science Vs Pseudoscience
(Beyerstein, 1995)
Science
Pseudoscience
• experiments
• controlled conditions
• public accessibility
• peer accountability
• gold standard = RCT
• ‘expert opinion’ = a low
grade of evidence
• anecdotes not acceptable
as evidence – “the plural of
anecdote is not data”
•tries to appropriate prestige of
science
•lacks rigorous controls
•secrecy/role of ‘experts’ / gurus
•reliance on anecdotal evidence
•Their explanations are ‘usually
contradicted by well-established
scientific knowledge’
•their own findings ‘rarely, if ever,
withstand scrutiny by competent
critics’
• Pseudotechnology – “commercial ventures
promoted by hucksters who mislead
consumers into thinking that their products
are sound applications of scientific
knowledge … any supporting ‘research’
done by these distributors or their
associates will be found to be seriously
flawed” (Beyerstein, 1995)
• http://www.sfu.ca/~beyerste/research/articles/02
SciencevsPseudoscience.pdf
• http://skepdic.com/
Brain Gym
• Drinking water
• Simple physical exercises
• Pseudoscientific explanation
www.braingym.org
What is Brain Gym ?
Brain Gym® is an educational, movement based
programme which uses simple movements to
integrate the whole brain, senses and body,
preparing the person with the physical skills they
need to learn effectively. It can be used to
improve a wide range of learning, attention and
behaviour skills. Educational Kinesiology and
Brain Gym® are the result of many years of
research into learning and brain function by an
educationalist, Dr Paul Dennison PhD, from the
United States. It is now used in over 45 countries
and is recognised as a safe, effective and
innovative educational and self-development tool.
www.braingym.org
Who does it help?
Originally created to help children and adults with
learning challenges, for example dyslexia,
dyspraxia and ADHD, Brain Gym® is now used to
improve functioning and life quality by people
from all walks of life from education to the arts,
business, healthcare, sport and personal
development. The movements can be safely used
by people of almost any age and mobility, from
babies upwards.
Rationale
• Movement improves learning
• Much of the movement focuses on
improving communication between
hemispheres
• Specific neurophysiological explanations
given
• Water consumption also aids this process
Brain Gym in UK schools
• 1700 teachers trained by one body (Osiris)
• Widely in use in Wakefield LEA
• In use in over 40 countries
• 43 Brain Gym consultants in the UK (to
complete all BG courses costs around
£3,000)
Guiding concepts for efficacy trials
(Ramey and Ramey, 2004)
• Recruitment from prespecified populations
• Random assignment to treatment and control
groups
• Application and documentation of a replicable
compound of services
• Minimization of attrition
• Independent assessment of outcomes by
researches blinded to participant’s condition
Guiding concepts for efficacy trials
(Ramey and Ramey, 2004)
• Pre-planned statistical analysis of hypothesized
outcomes
• Replication of key findings in independent
samples
• Publication in peer reviewed journals
• Dissemination of findings to key policy makers
following peer-reviewed publication
Brain Gym ‘research pack’
• Summaries of evidence, most in the Brain
Gym Journal
• 10 expts, 9 from BGJ, 1 from Perceptual
and motor skills (impact factor 0.3)
• 21 quasi expts (most from BGJ)
• 11 qualitative reports
Brain Gym ‘research pack’
Populations included in the research pack:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ADHD
Simple response times (only peer reviewed paper)
Improves learning and memory in adults
‘learning disabled’ children
‘Emotional handicaps’
Foetal alcohol syndrome
Improves hearing
Athletes
Alzheimer’s patients
Insurance salesmen
Brain Gym teacher’s handbook
(1989; still in use)
• “There are no lazy,
withdrawn or
aggressive children,
only children denied
the ability to learn in a
way that is natural to
them”
Movements to
improve laterality:
“hook-ups shift electrical energy
from the survival centres in the
hindbrain to the reasoning
centres in the midbrain and
neocortex, thus activating
hemispheric integration … the
tongue pressing into the roof of
the mouth stimulates the limbic
system for emotional processing
in concert with more refined
reasoning in the frontal lobes”
Why the popularity ?
• Offers a very quick, relatively cheap, easy fix to
almost any ailment
• Contains enough (incorrect or inappropriate)
science to go unquestioned by teachers
• Trappings of scientific respectability – Brain
metaphors, the ‘PhD effect’
• Probably works !
– Fun, running around before doing work,
– ‘special’ components eg being allowed to drink in
class,
– huge potential for expectancy and placebo effects
Conclusions
• Programs like Head Start are based on the assumption
that it is possible to modify the trajectory of a child’s
intellectual development
• Enrichment programs are most effective when they are
intensive and start early, but they will only be effective
within the limits of biology
• “Wild claims … are likely to surface whenever proven
empirical techniques offer no quick and easy route to a
desirable end … if something sounds too good to be
true, it probably is” (Beyerstein, 1995)
• “In an ideal world, we would be teaching children enough
science in school that they were able to stand up to a
teacher who was spouting this kind of rubbish” (Ben
Goldacre, the Guardian’s ‘Bad Science’ column, 2003)