Nanomaterials for Neural Interfaces

This review focuses on the application of nanomaterials for neural interfacing. The junction between nanotechnology and neural tissues can be particularly worthy of scientific attention for several reasons: (i) Neural cells are electroactive, and the electronic properties of nanostructures can be tailored to match the charge transport requirements of electrical cellular interfacing. (ii) The unique mechanical and chemical properties of nanomaterials are critical for integration with neural tissue as long-term implants. (iii) Solutions to many critical problems in neural biology/medicine are limited by the availability of specialized materials. (iv) Neuronal stimulation is needed for a variety of common and severe health problems. This confluence of need, accumulated expertise, and potential impact on the well-being of people suggests the potential of nanomaterials to revolutionize the field of neural interfacing. In this review, we begin with foundational topics, such as the current status of neural electrode (NE) technology, the key challenges facing the practical utilization of NEs, and the potential advantages of nanostructures as components of chronic implants. After that the detailed account of toxicology and biocompatibility of nanomaterials in respect to neural tissues is given. Next, we cover a variety of specific applications of nanoengineered devices, including drug delivery, imaging, topographic patterning, electrode design, nanoscale transistors for high-resolution neural interfacing, and photoactivated interfaces. We also critically evaluate the specific properties of particular nanomaterials—including nanoparticles, nanowires, and carbon nanotubes—that can be taken advantage of in neuroprosthetic devices. The most promising future areas of research and practical device engineering are discussed as a conclusion to the review.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/64336/1/3970_ftp.pd

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges