This section of the library shall be dedicated to commentaries on the Hubermanlab podcast. Included below is not a summary of the episode (I’ll leave that for you to check out), but rather my comments on the episode in terms of psychology, health, and human behavior. Whenever possible, I draw connections to autism as well. Most of my comments originally appear on Twitter/X, so be sure to follow on there.
Dr. Kay Tye: The Biology of Social Interactions and Emotions
Social Media and the Amygdala
Dr. Huberman asked whether social media has the same effect as face-to-face social interaction on the amygdala. Although we do not have yet studies on the matter, Dr. Kay Tye hypothesized that it would not.
I do wonder at this in the context of previous stimulation of specific neural wiring based upon the history of social interactions, either face-to-face or via social media. In other words, for some people who have grown up using social media as a form of interaction with others, could it be that specific neural circuits have developed for those types of interactions, and that those are getting stimulated by social media interactions? Versus those who grew up with solely/mostly face-to-face interactions having a different set of neural pathways they are accustomed to and have received stimulation in the past? Does the amygdala have to treat both the same and they both get processed through the same ‘wiring’ which is then either more or less stimulated depending on whether its in-person or social media, or can they be treated entirely differently? I think I would hypothesize that they get treated separately but only if one is not doing a live video face-to-face call -and I’m fine with being wrong. To break it down into the most simple framework, a picture of a loved one versus seeing our loved one face-to-face may both light up similar brain areas, but perhaps if we could look much deeper at which specific neural circuits are being activated if that’s at all possible (I’m not a neuroscience background, so I’m learning from Dr. Huberman as I go and doing extra reading and getting ideas) depending on whether its via social media or face to face, I would guess that that is where the wires would split of into different directions. If we can consciously differentiate that a picture is a picture and that a face in front of us is real and we can interact with it, surely this can be reflected somewhere in the brain.
Another thing to consider is perhaps the degree of depth of the social interaction itself. Face-to-face interactions have a greater depth to them than social media interactions; by ’depth’ I mean its more personable and more accountable, you might be obligated to verbally respond, one may be more likely to care about what the other person thinks when they’re in front of us, etc. But maybe some people don’t want deep, social interactions and are perfectly content with being behind a computer for most of their interactions. Perhaps that’s the value of social media; it doesn’t require emotional commitment to someone you’re having a face to face interaction with -and this is just one opinion, as some could argue social media does carry similar emotional commitment as face to face interactions. Conversely, perhaps this is also affected by who we are talking to on the other side; with complete strangers or with family and friends. We might feel more emotionally/amygdally (hehe, just made up a word) obligated with family and friends and thereby more amygdally stimulated by social media interactions with family/friends, versus with complete strangers.
So, perhaps the degree to which the amygdala is stimulated by social media interactions is affected by the emotional commitment we have to the person we are speaking to -near to none for a complete stranger, and higher for family and friends.
Empathy is Affected by Competition -Inverse Correlation
Regarding research that indicates an inverse correlation between viewing someone as a competitor and the amount of empathy we have toward them, this would be applicable within the domain government-sponsored narratives against another country that result in viewing that country as a competitor, thereby reducing the empathy we feel for the citizens of that country -and consequently, garnering public support for war.
Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin this week is particularly interesting to consider. Since the start of the Russia-Ukraine, many mainstream narratives have pushed a condemnation of Russia’s actions. Have narratives that have shaped public opinion toward viewing Russia as competitors resulted in a reduction of empathy toward Russia, thereby increasing the likelihood of further sanctions against them? I’m not into politics very much, so I won’t get too in-depth on those matters.
Nevertheless, this would carry important implications regarding the role of journalism, and news reporting in general in shaping public opinions that could result in greater or decreased empathy toward others.
Within the realm of politics, no doubt that this is a huge deal.
You can’t generate public support for a war if your citizens empathize with the country you want to go to war with.
“You Can’t Hit Me”
Dr. Huberman shared a story about a child who wanted food, who boldly declared “you can’t hit me” as rationale for getting more food than he was supposed to get. Interesting, and in behavioral terms speaks to the fact that in an environment without Reinforcement and only Consequences (alluding to the environment the child likely grew up in), the sudden removal of consequences -no one hits the child anymore- will most likely result in the return of the behavior that previously met with reinforcement (getting and eating more food).
On one side, this could speak to the darker side of human nature: what would people do in the absence of speeding tickets or theft charges?
Maybe we should ask Gavin Newsom how the absence of consequences is going -a reference to the increase in theft that has gained media attention.
Social Hierarchy
I would be curious if there’s any research with humans on what leads certain people to, on some level, reject social hierarchies. For decades we have heard music artists sing about the rejection of the status quo, or social norms. I would be curious what makes a person more likely to reject a social hierarchy. Lower on the hierarchy, increased probability of rejection of hierarchy? Higher on the hierarchy, more likely to try to impose hierarchical systems? And how would we define ‘rejection’ of the hierarchy? Is it an internal rejection, or do external behaviors have to reflect ‘rejection’?
Personally, one social hierarchy word that has been bothering me for some time is the term ‘celebrity.’ Many people use this term when referring to a famous actor or a famous musician; however, it’s often forgotten that the term can only be applied and used by the person for whom that other person is considered to have a higher status. In other words, a person may be ‘a celebrity to you, but not to me.’ I do have quite strong beliefs in the equality of man, and perhaps to some extent that drives my own rejection of social hierarchies which I would argue only exist in the minds of people.
As the saying goes, we all are made of starstuff, to which I would also add, “and we all bleed red.”
Monkeys with Brain Lesions in the Amygdala having Neutrally Affective Responses to Stimuli
This is something I do see in some children on the spectrum in clinical practice. Children may exhibit low levels of excitement/emotion when presented with things that are typically positive/exciting for neurotypical peers (e.g., such as no smiles and no physical reaction when tickled).
But I actually see the opposite as well, where things that one may find unpleasant as an adult seem to exhibit excitatory responses for young children (e.g., a loud, disruptive sound in the middle of a classical music song; playing with poop, etc.). These unpleasant things may sometimes become an attention-seeking behavior, perhaps due to stimulation of a brain area (amygdala?) that doesn’t get stimulated by things that commonly are attractive/stimulating for neurotypical peers. Or it could also be a combination of the excitement of doing an inappropriate behavior itself and the surprised reaction from adults -double stimulation.
Judges Change the Leniency of their Rulings Based on how Well Fed They Are
As Dr. Tye said, being hangry is not a new phenomenon!
This gave me a flashback to the proseminar I took in judgment and decision-making within the field of cognitive psychology. I remember specifically discussions around biases in juries and judge rulings. We discussed a lot of fallacies and errors in judgement. It was one of the reasons I refused going to jury duty from that point on. I explicitly responded to the very last summons I received that I was aware of research regarding biases that could affect rulings in the courtroom.
I have never received another jury duty summons since then. Lol.
Autism and Amygdala
Whenever possible, I always do a bit of extra reading and draw connectiosn on the Hubermanlab episode to autism.
It should come as no surprise to many that the amygdala is a compromised brain area in those diagnosed with autism. In the past, it was believed that the amygdala played a central role in autism deficits, such that the “Amygdala Theory of Autism” emerged. And although recent research does continue to point at the role of the amygdala in autism, such as a 2023 study found that children with a diagnosis of autism were more likely to have had abnormal growth in the amygdala and hippocampus earlier in life as 6 month infants [1], as well as studies on sleep show that the amygdala impacts REM sleep potentially due to compromised dopamine changes [2], the amygdala’s previously accepted central role is currently being challenged by studies comparing autism to amygdala-lesion patients.
A 2023 HHS review published in Neuropsychologia on the amygdala’s role in autism discusses several important lines of research -most of them comparing amygdala-lesion patients to those with an autism diagnosis. Lines of research on the role of the amygdala in social interactions include: abnormal face processing, abnormal social judgement of trustworthiness, impaired categorization of facial emotions (the results were not exactly like amygdala-lesion patients, suggesting alternative processing), social attention (results were not not exactly like amygdala-lesion patients, suggesting alternative processing), and close personal proximity (violating personal space) -this study tested whether those with amygdala lesions would meet criteria for ASD and they did not [3]. Caveats to this literature: amygdala lesions in patients may differ, amygdala patients may have compensatory functions performed by other regions of the brain, both autism diagnoses and amygdala lesion patients are heterogeneous, developmental trajectories between those with lesions versus those with autism may account for some variance, and most of the amygdala-lesion/autism literature uses “high functioning” autistics in their groups. In summary, we have a long way to go, and the authors recommend multimodel neuroimaging to understand the interaction between the amygdala and other brain regions to understand social impairments in autism. Ultimately, they argue the amygdala alone does not explain social impairments related to autism, although it is to a degree related to them.
Research in this area is still developing.
A study published in 2023 using fMRI comparing an autism group to a control group found altered functional connectivity in the left amygdala based upon the use of slow-5 frequency band which reflects brain activity from the gray matter perspective. This study was conducted with a control group of non-amygdala lesion patients, adding to the literature on the importance of the amygdala in autism, and perhaps reinforcing Amygdala Theory of Autism.
Interestingly, research on the use of vasopressin in autism treatment discusses the role of the amygdala [5]. Citing the work of Dr. Karen Parker, who previously appeared on the Hubermanlab podcast to discuss autism (see my commentary), László et al. (2023) in their literature review take a disappointing jab at the Wakefield-MMR vaccine paper (see my vaccines section for an ongoing literature review of vaccines-autism link), but the authors correctly add pregnancy use of Valproate, the anti-seizure medication, as an autism risk factor. Regarding vasopressin, in animal models vasopressin treatment has been shown to ameliorate valproate-induced genetic abnormalities in the amygdala, while in humans, vasopressin plasma levels have been found to be correlated to the increased volume of the left amygdala as well as negative functional connectivity between the left amygdala and the left supramarginal gyrus in boys. Other research points to vasopressin’s role in facial emotion recognition through modulating prefrontal-cortex amygdala circuitry. What these lines of research tell us is that vasopressin is playing a role in the amgydala’s role in autism as far as social interactions are concerned.
As always, thank you for the lovely episode Dr. Huberman.
Autism Librarian
References
- Li, G., Chen, M. H., Li, G., Wu, D., Lian, C., Sun, Q., Rushmore, R. J., & Wang, L. (2023). Volumetric Analysis of Amygdala and Hippocampal Subfields for Infants with Autism. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 53(6), 2475–2489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-022-05535-w
- Ji, Q., Li, S. J., Zhao, J. B., Xiong, Y., Du, X. H., Wang, C. X., Lu, L. M., Tan, J. Y., & Zhu, Z. R. (2023). Genetic and neural mechanisms of sleep disorders in children with autism spectrum disorder: a review. Frontiers in psychiatry, 14, 1079683. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1079683
- Wang S, Li X. A revisit of the amygdala theory of autism: Twenty years after. Neuropsychologia. 2023;183:108519. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108519.
- Ma H, Cao Y, Li M, et al. Abnormal amygdala functional connectivity and deep learning classification in multifrequency bands in autism spectrum disorder: A multisite functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Hum Brain Mapp. 2023;44(3):1094-1104. doi:10.1002/hbm.26141
- László K, Vörös D, Correia P, et al. Vasopressin as Possible Treatment Option in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Biomedicines. 2023;11(10):2603. Published 2023 Sep 22. doi:10.3390/biomedicines11102603
The Causes of Autism 