The assessment of sentence context effects in reading for comprehension

Focuses on the problem of how semantic context provided by a sentence would affect the process of word recognition

The Relationship between Hypnotisability, Working Memory, and the Process of Automatization

Abstract The Relationship between Hypnotisability, Working Memory, and the Process of Automatization Mahmoud Khodaverdi-Khani Concordia University, 2017 The literature on hypnosis indicates that high hypnotizable (HH) people tend to follow suggestions more attentively and be less distracted by peripheral information than low hypnotizable (LH) people. Neuro-psychological measures of attention, however, seem to indicate that HHs may demonstrate less efficient executive functions. To compensate this limitation, HHs may have learned to allocate all of their attention to the task at hand and learned to automatize some aspect of information processing. In experiment one, the relationship between working memory and the degree to which participants react to hypnotic suggestions was investigated. Thirty-eight participants who underwent the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotisability Form A (HGSHS: A) in small group sessions were assessed on a forward and backward digit span, and a reading span tests. The results showed that hypnotisability correlated negatively with the digit span backward and the digit span total tests. In experiment 1b, ten HH and ten LH participants underwent the same procedure as in experiment one with the exception that the reading span was replaced by the N-back test. The results of this experiment replicated the magnitude, direction, and significance of the relationship between hypnotisability and measures of working memory (WM). The analysis of N-back data further revealed a distinction between storage and processing involved in WM, pointing to a dynamic interaction with the automatization of attentional processes. To further investigate the role of WM in the process of automatization, in experiment two, participants’ WM was loaded with zero, three, or five digits while they were performing a visual search task over five sessions. It was hypothesized that if the process of automatization is due to the limited resources available to participants then participants in the high load condition would reach automaticity over the 5 sessions regardless of their hypnotisability level. In addition, it was expected that the HH group would reach automaticity in fewer sessions than the LH or the MH groups regardless of the load condition they were in. Support for the two hypotheses was obtained when the coefficients of variability were analyzed. Across sessions, HHs significantly decreased their coefficients of variability, indicating that more than a simple improvement in speed of processing was at play in their responses. Experiment 2b, following the same methodology, replicated the key findings of experiment 2. These results are discussed in the context of two-process theory and their applicability to the study of hypnotisability and automatization. The current results suggest that individual differences in hypnotisability may be in part linked to variations in WM resources and a more efficient automatization process of information

Psychedelics and hypnosis: Commonalities and therapeutic implications

Background Recent research on psychedelics and hypnosis demonstrates the value of both methods in the treatment of a range of psychopathologies with overlapping applications and neurophenomenological features. The potential of harnessing the power of suggestion to influence the phenomenological response to psychedelics toward more therapeutic action has remained unexplored in recent research and thereby warrants empirical attention. Aims Here we aim to elucidate the phenomenological and neurophysiological similarities and dissimilarities between psychedelic states and hypnosis in order to revisit how contemporary knowledge may inform their conjunct usage in psychotherapy. Methods We review recent advances in phenomenological and neurophysiological research on psychedelics and hypnosis and we summarize early investigations on the coupling of psychedelics and hypnosis in scientific and therapeutic contexts. Results/Outcomes We highlight commonalities and differences between psychedelics and hypnosis that point to the potential efficacy of combining the two in psychotherapy. We propose multiple research paths for coupling these two phenomena at different stages in the preparation, acute phase, and follow-up of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy in order to prepare, guide, and integrate the psychedelic experience with the aim of enhancing therapeutic outcomes. Conclusions/Interpretation Harnessing the power of suggestion to modulate response to psychedelics could enhance their therapeutic efficacy by helping to increase the likelihood of positive responses, including mystical type experiences

Hypnosis and top-down regulation of consciousness

Hypnosis is a unique form of top-down regulation in which verbal suggestions are capable of eliciting pronounced changes in a multitude of psychological phenomena. Hypnotic suggestion has been widely used both as a technique for studying basic science questions regarding human consciousness but also as a method for targeting a range of symptoms within a therapeutic context. Here we provide a synthesis of current knowledge regarding the characteristics and neurocognitive mechanisms of hypnosis. We review evidence from cognitive neuroscience, experimental psychopathology, and clinical psychology regarding the utility of hypnosis as an experimental method for modulating consciousness, as a model for studying healthy and pathological cognition, and as a therapeutic vehicle. We also highlight the relations between hypnosis and other psychological phenomena, including the broader domain of suggestion and suggestibility, and conclude by identifying the most salient challenges confronting the nascent cognitive neuroscience of hypnosis and outlining future directions for research on hypnosis and suggestion

Comparison of common para-clinical and laboratory methods in Iran: for the diagnosis of Covid-19 disease

Introduction: Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute RespiratorySyndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was first discovered in China in late 2019 and spreadrapidly worldwide. This study aimed to correlate positive real time Reverse TranscriptasePolymerase Reaction (RT-PCR) results after one month of follow-up with laboratory findingsof the same patients at hospital admission to predict clinical outcome and diagnosis.Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on the laboratory findings of299 adult patients suspected of COVID-19. Patients were admitted to hospital from March21 to May 25, 2021 with final follow-up of one month for each patient. After one month offollow-up, 233 patients recovered; however, in 64 patients the symptoms worsened. For thesepatients RT-PCR was performed and some patients needed chest Computed Tomography(CT) imaging and were hospitalized. We extracted laboratory findings of these 64 patients andcorrelated the results of their RT-PCR with their laboratory findings.Results: Based on our findings, severe cases are middle-aged adults (P=0.001) withlymphopenia (P<0.001), decreased levels of white blood cells (WBCs) (P<0.001), and platelets(P=0.007) count along with elevated COVID-19 IgG antibody (P=0.002) and ErythrocyteSedimentation Rate (ESR) (P<0.001).Conclusion: RT-PCR is not necessary at admission; instead, some routine hematologyexaminations and serological tests can predict the prognosis of COVID- 19 disease.  Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a newly emerging virus, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was first discovered in China in late 2019 and has spread rapidly worldwide. This study aimed to correlate patients with positive real time reverse transcriptase polymerase reaction (RT-PCR) results after one month of follow-up with their laboratory findings at hospital admission to predict clinical outcome and diagnosis. Methods: We performed a retrospective study on the laboratory findings of 299 adult patients suspected with COVID-19. Patients were admitted to hospital from 21 March 2021 to 25 May 2021 with final follow-up of one month for each patient. Results: After one month of follow-up, 233 patients recovered but in 64 patients, the symptoms worsened. For these patients RT-PCR was performed and some patients needed chest computed tomography (CT) imaging and were hospitalized. We extracted laboratory findings of these 64 patients at hospital admission and correlate the results of their RT-PCR with their laboratory findings. Conclusions: Based on our results, severe cases are middle-aged adults (p = 0.001) with lymphopenia (p<0.001) and decreased levels of white blood cells (WBCs) (p<0.001) and platelets (p = 0.007) count along with elevated COVID-19 IgG antibody (p = 0.002) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (p<0.001). It is therefore suggested that RT-PCR is not necessary at admission; instead, some routine hematology examinations and serological tests can predict the prognosis of COVID- 19 disease

JAGN1 mutation with distinct clinical features; two case reports and literature review

Abstract Jagunal homolog 1 (JAGN1) has been recognized as an essential protein in neutrophil function. The mutated JAGN1 is responsible for immunodeficiency related to innate and humoral defense mechanisms. This deficiency impairs neutrophil development and function, leading to recurrent infections and facial dysmorphism as phenotypic consequences of severe congenital neutropenia (SCN). We report two siblings having the reported JAGN1 mutation with different clinical manifestations. Recurrent abscess formation unresponsive to antibiotic therapy, a history of delayed umbilical separation, frequent bacterial or fungal infection, dysmorphic face, failure to thrive, and other coexisting organ abnormalities should prompt physicians to syndromic immunodeficiencies involving neutrophils. Genetic investigations to elucidate the responsible mutation is critical as clinical management varies. Once the diagnosis is confirmed, a multi-disciplinary team should perform further workups to investigate other coexisting malformations and neurodevelopmental evaluation