[转帖]英国研究显示艺术家基因与精神分裂者相似

silkworm · Post by **silkworm** » 2005-12-06 9:09

英国研究显示艺术家基因与精神分裂者相似
http://tech.sina.com.cn/d/2005-12-06/1004783703.shtml

　　英国两位心理学者日前在英国《卫报》上公布了最新的研究结果。该结果的调查报告用精神分析法，比较了精神分裂症患者、艺术家、普通人的日常行为，发现艺术家与精神分裂症患者在基因上的相似之处。

　　纽卡斯特尔大学心理分析学家丹尼尔・奈特尔(DanielNettle)博士联合海伦・克雷格(HelenClegg)共同得出结论：精神分裂症让人困扰不已，导致社交困难，维持一般人际关系和再生能力比常人要低；而且，精神分裂的基因在人群中的拥有率非常高，差不多有1%的人带有这样的基因。

　　心理学家发现，艺术家和精神分裂症患者在某些方面都具有“不寻常的认识”，最明显的一点，就是容易模糊现实和梦幻间的界限，或在自己的思想中“没顶”。但是艺术家和精神分裂症患者区别最大的在于，精神分裂症患者缺乏情绪起伏与情感的表达能力，没有活力，缺少冲动；而与此相异，根据奈特尔博士的论断，艺术家的某些精神分裂基因被转而用于激发创造力，精神分裂的艺术家的症状就跟一般精神分裂症患者不同，能把创造力发挥到艺术项目中去。

　　此结果一出，立刻有人提出质疑，英国当代艺术代表人物查普曼首先质疑这一研究过程的科学性：“那些所谓的心理学家只是做了425个人的典例分析，简单地用进化论分析了艺术家所携带的基因。”他称这个研究结果是“基于极端的自负和短视，不具有任何说服力。事实上艺术家并不是那么奇特的，所有的特别只是出于人们的想象。”(东方)

silkworm · Post by **silkworm** » 2005-12-06 9:11

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/daniel.nettl ... gs%20b.pdf

Schizotypy, creativity and mating success in humans

Daniel Nettle and Helen Clegg
Proceedings of the Royal Society 2005.3349

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-06 10:08

该结果的调查报告用精神分析法，比较了精神分裂症患者、艺术家、普通人的日常行为，发现艺术家与精神分裂症患者在基因上的相似之处。

I haven't read the original article, but this particular sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

I cannot access the URL. It says access forbidden.

OK. I got through from Nettle's own Web site using the following URL:

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/daniel.nettle/

From just skimming the 2 related publications, I'd say this is interesting speculative investigation. What's the conclusion one can draw from the data? Basically nothing. But it does help raise more questions rather than answering any.

tiffany · Post by **tiffany** » 2005-12-06 10:28

ha, I might have got a paper copy at home! they gave off free copies of the journal at the neuroscience meeting, and I grabbed a couple, did not look into it though

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-06 10:36

The translated synopsis got it all wrong. This study is not about the correlation between schizotype and creativity, but schizotype and mating success. They studied whether certain psychological traits (supposedly present in both artists and in schizophrenics) increase the number of people's sexual partners.

I wonder whether the translator of the news didn't read the study or is just pulling our legs.

The quality of the study itself is ... well, a bit laughable if you judge it with scientific research standards. That's why I have no respect for psychologists. Psychology is the haven for nonscientific people to pretend to be scientific.

洛洛 · Post by 洛洛 » 2005-12-06 12:16

精神分裂症让人困扰不已，导致社交困难，维持一般人际关系和再生能力比常人要低；而且，精神分裂的基因在人群中的拥有率非常高，差不多有1%的人带有这样的基因

社交和人际关系对我永远都是困难的，我觉得没什么关系呀。

森林的火焰 · Post by **森林的火焰** » 2005-12-06 13:17

我不明白的是用精神分析法何以能分析出基因的相似性？如果抽了这五百个人的ＤＮＡ，做microarray，比精神分析法还稍具说服力。
要看看原文了。

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-06 13:33

The study has nothing to do with genetics (psychologists are no scientists...). The author is interested in evolutionary psychology and used a few buzz words. That's all.

silkworm · Post by **silkworm** » 2005-12-06 14:15

http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/(seo ... 1:102024,1

Abstract:
There is an evolutionary puzzle surrounding the persistence of schizophrenia, since it is substantially heritable and associated with sharply reduced fitness. However, some of the personality traits which are predictive of schizophrenia are also associated with artistic creativity. Geoffrey Miller has proposed that artistic creativity functions to attract mates. Here, we investigate the relationship between schizotypal personality traits, creative activity, and mating success in a large sample of British poets, visual artists, and other adults. We show that two components of schizotypy are positively correlated with mating success. For one component, this relationship is mediated by creative activity. Results are discussed in terms of the evolution of human creativity and the genesis of schizophrenia.

silkworm · Post by **silkworm** » 2005-12-06 14:18

Look at its Material and methods section, it is hilarious to say the least.

洛洛 · Post by 洛洛 » 2005-12-06 14:46

还有一个好玩的（打岔），建筑师被评为男性最性感的职业，高于医生和演员。我们同行说，一定是brad pitt在这行呆过的原因。（btw, isn't it cool to say:brad pitt borrowed my gluegun in the studio?）
另一个说，可惜after brad pitt, they set the bar high for rest of us.――嗯，我也不知道brad pitt是怎么考到牌的，我知道加州是要口试的，他的脸确实会比较讨好。

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-06 14:50

Yeah, especially that "mating success" part...

atiti · Post by **atiti** » 2005-12-06 15:01

hmm, isn't it a bit over killing to say "psychologists are no scientist" though? but maybe we have different ideas of who count as psychologists... I would consider professors in psychology department as psychologists, and quite a number of them study the neural basis of cognition (sometimes with joint appointment in neuralscience department) and are almost half-biologist; even if we concentrate on those who do not directly work with the neural system, the methodology used in a lot of studies in perception, developmental psychology, etc. are very scientific ah?

on second thought, maybe Jun really meant "some psychologists", in which case, forgive my quibbling

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-06 15:06

不不不，你随便扁我好了。我对psychology的无理偏见完全认罪。

icefire · Post by **icefire** » 2005-12-06 15:35

这个观点是现在才提出来的？我很友邦惊诧地问

vivi · Post by **vivi** » 2005-12-06 17:54

What's the word for 'psychopathology' in Chinese? As far as I know 精神分析法 is and has always been Psychoanalysis, originated by Sigmund Freud. According to today’s standard it is definitely not ‘science’. Most of the branches of Psychology feel ashamed to have anything to do with it. I somehow still find it’s fascinating.

狸狸 · Post by 狸狸 » 2005-12-07 1:32

不用科学研究，我也一直是这么认为的！

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-07 9:06

原先的研究本身就到处是大窟窿。翻译的更是前言不搭后语，乱用术语。要澄清都不知从何说起。

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2005-12-07 9:59

洛洛 wrote:还有一个好玩的（打岔），建筑师被评为男性最性感的职业，高于医生和演员。我们同行说，一定是brad pitt在这行呆过的原因。（btw, isn't it cool to say:brad pitt borrowed my gluegun in the studio?）
另一个说，可惜after brad pitt, they set the bar high for rest of us.――嗯，我也不知道brad pitt是怎么考到牌的，我知道加州是要口试的，他的脸确实会比较讨好。

真的？我的建筑师情结儿又被强化了一把。他有执照么？

silkworm · Post by **silkworm** » 2005-12-07 10:02

说到浑身窟窿的"科学"研究,前阵子一个朋友推荐了以下这一篇,顺便拿出来给大家奇文共赏一下吧:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 042505.php

Black-White-East Asian IQ differences at least 50% genetic, scientists conclude in major law journal

tiffany · Post by **tiffany** » 2005-12-07 10:10

scientists conclude in major law journal

how to publish a piece of crap

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-07 10:34

The lead article in the June 2005 issue of Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association,

American Psychological Association.

I think I'll go on beating up psychology as a "science."

And the article also drags evolution into it. Gosh, do we have to rehash the same tired old crap about brain size and social Darwinism?

Too bad these authors were born into this era. If they had lived in 1930s Germany, I'm sure they'd get a lot of grant money and promotions.

海岸 · Post by 海岸 » 2005-12-07 21:10

这观点真没什么新鲜，概况成霸王别姬里那句话总结“不疯魔不成活”，言简意赅。

笑嘻嘻 · Post by **笑嘻嘻** » 2005-12-07 22:40

海岸 wrote:这观点真没什么新鲜，概况成霸王别姬里那句话总结“不疯魔不成活”，言简意赅。

“不疯魔不成活”，嗯，我喜欢这句话。

atiti · Post by **atiti** » 2005-12-07 22:57

我看见Jun前面写的低头认罪一段，琢磨半天是正话反话，然后乐观的按正话处理了，原来是自多

我把我说的话修正一下算了，我觉得cognitive psychology是科学，或者再保守一点说很多psychologist做得跟认知有关的研究是很科学的。怎么说呢，我觉得psychology这个词儿给用得太广了――我不是学psychology的，所以下面说的错了可以当放屁――好像有点儿像用一个词来统称中医西医生物恨不能再加上跳大神的，所以说psychology是不是科学得看你想的是什么。

至于上面提到的那个文章，虽然是American Psychological Association的出版物，可是我去它网站看了一眼，是归在众多类型里面 Professional Issues, Public Policy Journals一类里的，Editor好像是一个法律出身的... 不能拿来反对整个学科吧？夸张点儿说，咱也不能因为neuroscience大会请了达赖讲话就说神经科学不是科学吧？

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2005-12-13 12:46

是正话，我对心理学有恨铁不成钢偏见，一不小心就说过头的气话。

Cognitive 和 Behavioral Psychology 是相当严谨的，科学的。问题在于Psychology学科自己不够严谨，什么都让进来，没有个科学的研究气氛，连跳大神的也让加入，怎么能赢得真正科学界的尊重呢？

其实这都是Freud那帮人从一开头就搞坏了的风气，心理学的发展历史跟其他科学一早叉开了，一直也没有建立起对科学方法尤其是求证的重视。

所以真正搞cognitive and behavioral psychology的人很烦精神分析学，知道那些都是胡说八道，自欺欺人的玩意儿。

Freud and his crack-pot (literally) theories are nothing but over-intellectualized bullsh*t.