© 2017 by the Seaton Foundation

  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon

Seaton Foundation - P.O. Box 705 San Marcos, TX 78667 - (512)357-1510

Committed to Texas

The Seaton Foundation is committed to making a positive impact on the current state of long-term care in Texas. We strive to educate and train Texas citizens in how to create a vibrant community within  long-term care settings. 

September 26, 2017

September 13, 2017

Please reload

Recent Posts

I'm busy working on my blog posts. Watch this space!

Please reload

Featured Posts

Word of the Day: Apophenia

September 13, 2017

I have a 30 year old habit of writing down words I hear that are new or unique to me, especially if related to cognition or the brain. This process helps me better understand what our residents might be experiencing, and keeps the work interesting. Here’s a word I heard recently on the radio. Think of examples where this might apply to yourself or a resident.

 

Apophenia is the tendency to attribute meaning to perceived connections or patterns between seemingly unrelated things.

 

You experience the following on a Monday: The alarm clock does not wake you up and you are now late for work. The cat has peed on the couch. The coffeemaker is making strange noises and doesn't seem to be working. The kids are fighting with each other. It's raining. And on top of everything else, the car won't start. What do you conclude? One or two of these minor irritants would seem insignificant and unmemorable. Once the list grows, however, it begins to take the shape of a plot—a plot of unseen forces perhaps conspiring in a meaningful way against you.

Our brains are pattern-detection machines that connect the dots, making it possible to uncover meaningful relationships among the barrage of sensory input we face. Without such meaning-making, we would be unable to make predictions about survival and reproduction. The natural and interpersonal world around us would be too chaotic. In the above example, if I draw conspiratorial conclusions (i.e., seeing a pattern where none really exists), I am making what statisticians would call, a Type I error, also called a false positive.

 

 What if you experience the following upon entering your house alone at night: The front door is left open. Household objects are strewn everywhere (you left the house neat and clean just a few hours ago). Your computer is missing. There are faint but unrecognizable smells. You can hear someone talking. In all likelihood, we would not only draw conclusions about has occurred but we will have a palpable, physiological response as well. Nature ensures that we are prone to seeing patterns rather than missing them. The Type II error, seeing no pattern where a pattern exists, turns out to be more dangerous. Far better—from a Darwinian perspective—to erroneously interpret danger where none is present than miss out on important cues that put our survival on the line. There is cognitive efficiency built into this equation: quick reactions depend on a cost-benefit ratio that favors safety and survival.

 

So, when our pattern-recognition systems misfire, they tend to err on the side of caution and self-deception. The experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data was coined apophenia by the German neurologist, Klaus Conrad. He originally described this phenomenon as a kind of psychotic thought process, though it is now viewed as being a ubiquitous feature of human nature. Science historian Michael Shermer (link is external)has called the same phenomenon patternicity. Shermer has pointed out that our brains do not include a “baloney-detection network” that would allow us to distinguish between true and false patterns.

Examples of apophenia, or patternicity, are everywhere. Many people perceive faces in seemingly random places—such as in clouds, in patterns of dirt left on cars, or on the moon. We take such patterns a step further by ascribing meaning to them. People have seen the images of Jesus and Mary inside a halved orange (link is external); or the face of Jesus on a piece of toast (link is external). Sometimes such objects are then worshipped or granted a sacred status. Some forms of apophenia have to do with sequences of behavior—such as the gambler’s fallacy (link is external)or other misperceptions of probability (this is illustrated most simply by sequential coin tosses where one might erroneously believe that after 5 tosses of heads, the probability of getting tails would somehow be higher than 50%). Apophenia also surfaces in the more complex patterns of our interpersonal world. Conspiracy theories, such as the belief that the twin towers of 9/11 were destroyed in a controlled demolition (link is external)perpetrated by the government, are confabulations based on misperceived patterns. Such fallacious reasoning also has potentially adverse social consequences. For example, despite a paucity of evidence (link is external)showing a causal connection, many parents do not vaccinate their children because they believe such vaccinations cause autism.

 

While it’s tempting to view apophenia as merely a defect in our cognitive processing capacities (i.e., something that must be overcome or defeated), it might be useful for us to view this tendency as being an ironic, even amusing aspect of our nature. We are fooled by optical illusions—apophenia of the visual cortex—but we don’t take such cognitive errors personally. Magic shows are often enjoyable precisely because we know that we are being tricked. If we embraced our vulnerability to cognitive errors, we would not be so easily caught off guard.

 

- David Seaton

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

Follow Us

I'm busy working on my blog posts. Watch this space!

Please reload

Search By Tags
Please reload

Archive
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square