551. Neuroscience - The Cognitive Reaction To Touch
The following study has a very important result. It shows the impact of cognition as a filter upon the emotional interpretation of sensory input.
The following study has a very important result. It shows the impact of cognition as a filter upon the emotional interpretation of sensory input.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120604155709.htm
"A nuzzle of the neck, a stroke of the wrist, a brush of the knee -- these caresses often signal a loving touch, but can also feel highly aversive, depending on who is delivering the touch, and to whom."
"The team measured brain activation while self-identified heterosexual male subjects lay in a functional MRI scanner and were each caressed on the leg under two different conditions. In the first condition, they saw a video of an attractive female bending down to caress them; in the second, they saw a video of a masculine man doing the same thing. The men reported the experience as pleasurable when they thought the touch came from the woman, and aversive when they thought it came from the man. And their brains backed them up: this difference in experience was reflected in the activity measured in each man's primary somatosensory cortex."
"Unbeknownst to the subjects, the actual touches on their leg were always exactly the same -- and always from a woman"
""We see responses in a part of the brain thought to process only basic touch that were elicited entirely by the emotional significance of social touch prior to the touch itself, simply in anticipation of the caress that our participants would receive.""
The method of this study is a starting point for further research to settle the question, how far monogamy has evolved as a predominant cognitive need and if therefore men's claim of women's alleged promiscuity is an excuse for abuse and objectification.
I would like to see the results of the following variations of the research design:
1. Monogamy or adultery:
1.1. Men
Subjects: Heterosexual men in a committed relationship
Compared stimuli: Touch by
- the intimate partner
- a single woman
- a woman in a relationship
1.2. Women
Subjects: Heterosexual women in a committed relationship
Compared stimuli: Touch by
- the intimate partner
- a single man
- a man in a relationship
2. Commitment or promiscuity
2.1. Men
Subjects: Single heterosexual men looking for a mate
Compared stimuli: Touch by
- a single woman presented as only available for commitment
- a single woman presented as available easy prey
- a woman in a relationship
2.2. Women
Subjects: Single heterosexual men looking for a mate
Compared stimuli: Touch by
- a single man presented as only interested in commitment
- a single man presented as a habitual predator
- a man in a relationship
3. Desensitization
The number of previous intimate partners is a possible intervening variable causing desensitization and habituation to touching strangers and if this effect is different between men and women.
Stimulus: Touch by a stranger of the opposite gender
Comparing:
- heterosexual men with few previous intimate partners
- heterosexual men with many previous intimate partners
- heterosexual women with few previous intimate partners
- heterosexual women with many previous intimate partners
Such a study could answer, which of the following hypothesis is the most probable.
1. Animal instincts are still the predominant force in both genders, making men promiscuous predators to women selecting men by the quality of their genes. Cognitive restrictions of behavior are merely superposed by culture, social norm and education.
2. The evolution of cognition has led to the predisposition in both genders to experience the emotional and mental need for monogamous bonding, but the instincts are still so strong, that they can become the dominant force. The animal urges compete in both genders with the advanced cognitive evolution of equally strong bonding needs.
Men's animal instinctive urges towards using women's bodies are unilateral, only men are prone to succumb to instinctive behaviors overriding their cognition in a way, that hurts women. Women's instincts merely drive them to breed and not to hurt men.
Behaviors are modified by culture, social norm and education, but the
modification does not override the emotional reactions determined by the
real innate needs. Social norms cause suffering for both genders.
3. The evolution of the predominance of cognitive needs for monogamous bonding has been stronger in females than in men. Women have already evolved to have cognitive bonding needs stronger than the mere animal procreation needs, while for men, animal promiscuity urges are still stronger than there slowly developing cognitive needs for bonding.
Women are ahead in their cognitive evolution, while men are lagging behind.
Behaviors are modified by culture, social norm and education, but the
modification does not override the emotional reactions determined by the
real innate needs. Social norms are accommodating men and cause women to suffer.
Such studies are important because of their potential to help reduce human suffering
Even without hard data, one observation cannot be denied by anybody, who has read enough suffering people's personal accounts on the web:
Emotional pain caused by not reciprocated exclusive emotional attachment in a dyadic relationship is at least one of the most frequent causes of human non-physical suffering.
Any social change to end this kind of suffering needs to be based upon knowing the cause, which is a task for neuroscientific research.
Women, who do not want to be hurt anymore, do certainly not want to wait, until men have improved and evolved beyond being animals. Women need a method to prevent being hurt.
In entry 525 I already mentioned the benefits for women, if men could be sent to a brain scan before risking the tragic mistake of getting involved with and hurt by a commodifying jerk.
The study quoted above is another indication, that the technical possibilities already exist for brain scanning as a part of a wise choice of a mate.
As soon as brain scanning becomes affordable for common use, people could be tested by a brain scan for a score on a scale between monogamy and promiscuity. Research as what I am wishing for would be the basis of such a score. Prospective partners could then be evaluated for how much hazard they are to a partner needing exclusive committed bonding.
