Pratica di Shadowing: Neuromyths. | All In The Mind - Impara a parlare inglese con i video
Creazione lezione...
1
This is the BBC.
2
This podcast is supported by advertising outside the UK.
3
Hello, here's a quick quiz for you.
4
True or false?
5
We only use 10 % of our brains.
6
Some of us are left -brained and logical, and others are more right -brained and creative.
7
Brain training can make us cleverer.
8
Answers coming up in the next half an hour.
9
Today, I've come to meet neuroscientists from all over the country
10
who are getting together to discuss some of the big myths about the brain, why we seem to want to believe that they're true, and why even scientists themselves aren't immune to them.
11
I'm at the British Neuroscience Association's Christmas Symposium in London, and all day researchers are taking to the stage to tell us which ideas have evidence behind them and which don't.
12
I'll be catching up with some of them to see what I can learn.
13
You'll sometimes hear people say they are a left -brained logical type, or a more artistic, touchy -feely, right -brained kind of person.
14
Staff development courses in businesses might train people to tap into
15
the right side of their brain to allow them to better access their creative side.
16
But do we really have a tendency to use one side of the brain a whole lot more than the other?
17
And if we do, does it actually affect our personality?
18
Left -handedness comes into it too, and that of course brings up a whole history of myths.
19
So to set us straight, here's Professor Chris McManus from University College London.
20
Now, you've spent many years studying left and right -handedness, so let's start with those.
21
Is it true that left -handers die on average seven years earlier than right -handers?
22
That is one of the great myths.
23
It's utterly, completely, totally wrong.
24
And where's this come from?
25
It all goes back to a paper published in Nature, the Great Scientific Journal, in 1989, I think it was, which showed some data based on baseball players,
26
because baseball players, they know whether they bat with the right
27
or the left hand and he looked at when they were born and how old they were when they died.
28
And it claimed that the left -handers died much earlier than the right -handers.
29
Looking at the paper now, the statistics are all over the place.
30
You couldn't see an effect on a simple statistic.
31
My undergraduates would have seen the problem.
32
But they came up with some incredibly complicated statistic, claimed it was significant, and the thing hit the newspapers everywhere.
33
But it's wrong.
34
What about left -handers' brains?
35
Are left -handers' brains different at all?
36
Finding a statistical signature in the brain of handedness is very hard indeed.
37
We don't know of anything which, if I show you a scan, will allow you to say that's a right -handed brain or a left -handed brain.
38
I ran into that in a court case a couple of years ago where somebody was accused of murder.
39
The pathologist said it must have been done by a left -hander.
40
The person themselves said they were right -handed
41
and people wanted a test to find out whether they were truly right -handed
42
or left -handed and there is none like
43
that all you can do in the end is what we did
44
which is to test them on a whole load of things do they do this faster
45
or slower with this hand or that hand
46
but there's no signature in the brain that you can look at
47
and what about the idea that some people are more left -brained
48
and some people are more right -brained and
49
that this has an impact on their personalities
50
and their skills this is this is such a complicated one the first thing is
51
if you take people are they logical are they intuitive yes
52
of course people differ this is what we call personality people
53
have different personalities they do things differently they prefer different things some people like painting other people like programming computers
54
and so on so there's no doubt
55
that people differ that's one of the great truths of psychology whether
56
that relates to the sides of the brain though is another matter we know
57
that some things are done in different parts of the brain.
58
I know I'm talking to you with the left half of my brain
59
because I've had my brain scanned and that's what's doing most of the the work there.
60
But of course it doesn't mean my right hemisphere is turned off at the moment, it's gone to sleep because I'm talking to you, there's nothing for it to do.
61
It's doing all sorts of things.
62
It's looking at you, it's interpreting your emotions, it's trying to decide whether I'm talking too fast, too slow, it's looking at all sorts of things.
63
So both halves are doing many things but language is mostly in the left hemisphere.
64
If I look at your face to recognise your expressions, that is mostly in the right hemisphere.
65
But it doesn't mean we don't use both of them most of the time.
66
Will it vary between different people though?
67
Is it true that some people are using their right a bit more
68
and some people are using their left a bit more?
69
If you take something like language, some people are very different.
70
The test I had to see that I was using my left half of my brain for talking, about five to ten percent of people,
71
it will show that they're using the right half of their brain for talking.
72
And it's not that you do it a bit of one or the other, you tend to be one or the other.
73
So there's no doubt there are differences there and that's what makes it so extremely interesting.
74
Brains aren't all the same.
75
It's not just that some are slightly bigger or smaller or slightly different shaped.
76
Some are actually organised very differently to others.
77
So you might have language mostly using the left side of your brain, or you might have it using the right side of your brain instead.
78
But would that affect your personality and whether you're logical or intuitive?
79
As far as we can tell, no. Where you have these things in the brain mostly doesn't seem to affect the way you are.
80
It's a bit like in a computer.
81
You can put the processor wherever you like you can change
82
the shape of the outside box you can do many things but it doesn't change the way the processing is going on.
83
But what about on courses where people are told
84
that they're going to be taught how to tap more into their right brain to tap into their creative side?
85
It may well teach them to be more creative
86
but it won't do anything to their brain specifically in the right and left hemispheres.
87
I always talk about
88
that book by Betty Edwards called Drawing on the right side
89
of the brain huge bestseller it sold millions over the years it's wonderful
90
if you actually want to learn to draw better there's nothing
91
wrong with it it's a way of learning to draw just don't use it to learn neuroscience it's rubbish
92
so do you think it's more of a metaphor then maybe a useful metaphor
93
but does it matter then if people are being taught it does it matter
94
if children are being taught this or
95
if people learn this on courses it is a metaphor
96
and it's very useful we need language for describing how we differ that's why we're talking in personality about extroversion
97
and eroticism and so on we need words for describing how people differ
98
and this is clearly a way that some people differ
99
so i don't see any problems there at all the trouble we're talking about somebody being right -brained
100
or left -brained is that it implies
101
that it's fixed you can't override it that's the way you are
102
and at that point it's probably not helpful for somebody to say you're right -brained
103
and then they say well i'll never learn to do maths, will I?
104
So it acts as a block against learning.
105
And most people can learn most things if they try hard enough.
106
Thank you very much, Chris McManus.
107
Pleasure.
108
We mentioned courses taking place in businesses, but there are also some neuromyths getting promoted to a much younger audience,
109
to children in schools, without teachers realising that they're not always based on good evidence.
110
Dr Duncan Astell is from the University of Cambridge.
111
What are some of the worst neuromyths that you've come across being used in schools?
112
Gosh, so some of my favourites.
113
You often hear, well, we only use 5 or 10 or whatever percent of our brains.
114
Very popular one is learning style, so the idea that different children have different brains
115
that learn in different ways and will learn best when the information is delivered in their preferred style.
116
So you'll have your visual learners or your kinesthetic learners or your auditory learners.
117
Because that's a very popular neuromyth for which there's no compelling evidence.
118
So are there no evidence for any of these things?
119
How do they get into schools in the first place then?
120
They get into schools because there's a great demand for interventions to help kids who are struggling at school.
121
And that is then combined with a system where there's no regulation
122
or system of checks and balances to actually test whether any of the claims
123
that are made by these products are true and kind of stack up in terms of the science.
124
So it's that combination of a great demand from families and children and schools with no regulation whatsoever.
125
And I think that provides a very fertile ground for neuromyths.
126
So what sorts of other things are schools paying for?
127
I guess brain gym is the most common one.
128
So brain gym is a series of exercises.
129
It has brain in the title, so you might think that it has a basis in neuroscience.
130
But as a neuroscientist, I can't find any compelling evidence for it.
131
And it's very sketchy whether there's any good evidence that it is effective.
132
It involves exercises like sort of pressing on different parts of the body, the idea that it might boost children's brain power and readiness to learn.
133
And we have been in touch with Brain Gym
134
and they say it's based on the changes that they notice in children before and after they've taken part.
135
So if they're seeing it makes a difference in children, does it matter whether or not it's a scientifically proven method that they're using?
136
Well, I think if schools and families are being asked to pay for a product, then there should be compelling evidence that it works.
137
And anecdotal evidence that people have noticed changes, I don't think is good enough scientific evidence that it does work.
138
So studies need to have proper control groups.
139
The children need to be those for whom the intervention is intended.
140
And it needs to be done by people independent of the people who produce the programme itself.
141
Now, they did also say to us that there are two peer -reviewed studies, both from more than 25 years ago.
142
Would that kind of evidence do?
143
The studies need to be on the groups for whom it's intended.
144
They need to be sufficiently powered.
145
They need to have good active control groups so we can control for things like the placebo effect.
146
And I don't think that those studies have those.
147
And why doesn't this research get done then?
148
These are more than 25 years old.
149
Why isn't this research going on so that people know once and for all, does it work or doesn't it?
150
Well, sometimes the research is done, but then it doesn't get published.
151
because it's hard to publish studies that show null results, even though they are incredibly useful to the wider literature.
152
Also, educational interventions are really hard to run well.
153
They're really hard to get good control groups for, and so it requires a massive investment.
154
And some of these neuromyths have been discussed for a long time now, yet they seem to stick, and they're still being talked about in schools.
155
Why do you think they stick?
156
I think one of the reasons they stick is
157
because they seem like intuitively simple solutions for complex problems it's
158
really hard to study children who are struggling in school
159
and that's because they're a very heterogeneous bunch of individuals
160
so there might be lots of different routes to being a struggling learner
161
so when someone comes in with an intervention that seems very intuitive it seems very simple
162
there's a real allure to it and especially if it's got brain
163
or neuroscience attached to it it gives the impression
164
that it has a foundation in science
165
and i do feel sorry for head teachers in a way
166
because they're not neuroscience researchers
167
so how are they supposed to be able to judge what's good
168
and what's not
169
if they've got people coming in showing them interventions being very very enthusiastic about them then
170
if someone says your kids could do better in your school
171
if you took on this thing then you're going to want to aren't you?
172
I totally agree
173
so in our lab we spend a lot of time heading out to schools helping with teacher training
174
and I think
175
that actually as scientists we need to do a better job
176
of engaging with the education system going through what makes for a good study, what makes for good evidence that might improve your practice and
177
so I think
178
that there's a strong role for scientists to play in helping teachers make decisions about changes that they make in the classroom.
179
And are teachers still being taught this when they do their education degrees?
180
It's hard to know what is in the teacher training
181
but I visit a lot of primary schools
182
and I usually start by going through some neuromyths and
183
when I tell them about something like brain gym for example they all nod sagely.
184
I've yet to go to a primary school in the UK
185
that has not heard of or tried Brain Gym at some point and some still are using it.
186
And what are your rules of thumb for assessing an intervention to work out whether or not it's any good?
187
Firstly, what's the theory behind it?
188
Is there a good theory as to why it might work?
189
Secondly, is there good peer -reviewed evidence that's been conducted by someone independent of the people who created the program itself?
190
Does that research have a good control group ideally an active control group
191
and are the groups the children for whom the intervention is intended
192
and finally is there a good outcome that makes sense so
193
if an intervention is designed to help children read
194
or do maths is that the outcome measure and
195
if it doesn't necessarily work for the reasons that are described
196
but does seem to make a difference you know getting children up
197
and about inactive in the classroom might be a good idea does it matter
198
if it's if it's not you know completely the way they say it happens.
199
I have no problem whatsoever
200
if kids enjoy getting up for five minutes midway through a lesson
201
and getting active and I can well believe that that might help them switch on.
202
The problem is when that's being marketed as a product
203
and being paid for by schools when just the activities that a teacher dreams up could be just as effective.
204
Thank you very much
205
of course some of the myths we believe about the brain
206
go back a very long way take the female brain assumed
207
since at least the 18th century to be different from the male brain
208
and of course not as good smaller fond of pink
209
and naturally no good at reading maps
210
but cordelia fine from the university of melbourne in australia won
211
the royal society science book prize last year for forensically taking
212
apart some of these myths she's joining the conference through the magic of technology
213
so I did the same and she told me
214
while there are sex differences in the brain thanks to genetics
215
and hormonal differences between the sexes the impact isn't quite so straightforward.
216
Every time a scientist reports a sex difference in the brain it seems like it's pointing towards males
217
and females having brains that are ever more divergent
218
but the sex differences
219
that you can see even in non -human animals can depend on the in social environmental conditions
220
that that animal has experienced
221
so the sex difference can depend on having experienced stress for example
222
or particular kinds of housing conditions
223
and sometimes the sex differences in the brain you see can actually reverse depending on what those differences are.
224
So how do these differences add up then if at all?
225
Sex differences in the brain seem to mix up rather than add up
226
if you think of being able to line males
227
and females up on a continuum
228
that goes from the sort of most masculine brain to the
229
most feminine brain rather people have quite idiosyncratic mosaics of you know more male typical
230
and more female features and the second important thing
231
that often gets overlooked is
232
that whenever we find a sex difference in the brain we
233
tend to think okay well what's what difference in behavior is
234
that difference in the brain creating
235
but actually in many ways many animals including humans males and females behave in quite similar ways Please.
236
But they have to do that in bodies that can be different sizes, have different chemicals and hormones running through them.
237
And sometimes sex differences can actually serve to compensate for another sex difference
238
or to cancel each other out in order to enable the two sexes of the species to actually behave the same.
239
So do you have any examples of that in humans or other animals?
240
Well, one, for example, is in a kind of songbird.
241
So songbirds are one of the few animal species where neuroscientists
242
have actually had a real success story in terms of linking genetic and hormonal differences to sex differences in the brain, to sex differences in behavior,
243
which is actually a much harder pathway to plot out than popular writers would have us realize
244
but in many songbirds these links have been made
245
and there's a sort of song control center in the in the male brain
246
and female brain but it's much larger in the male brain
247
and that is the basis of the male's ability to be the songster of the species
248
but there's another canary species called the african weaver bird where there's still
249
that same sex difference in the size of that song control center
250
but in females there's much more gene expression going on in
251
that part of the brain and in fact
252
that genetic sex difference seems to compensate
253
or cancel out the sex difference in the brain size
254
and both males and females sing together in a very similar way
255
so that's an example of where you have two sex differences in the brain
256
but they're actually cancelling each other out to create similarity of behaviour.
257
So do you think when it comes to people have we over exaggerated the differences
258
that there are between men and women based on their brains?
259
Well, one of the real issues in sex differences research, whether you're talking about brains or behavior or trying to link the two,
260
is that there's been quite an issue with false positive results.
261
People are interested in whether men and women are different.
262
And it's very easy and apparently intuitive for researchers to test for sex differences.
263
And the problem here is that if you don't find a difference, then you can often tend not to even report it.
264
And so that similarity kind of disappears, never to be found again.
265
So the research is skewed by what's published and what's not, because if there aren't any results, if you don't find the differences, those non -significant results tend not to get published.
266
That's right.
267
And it's even very difficult to search for sex similarities in research databases.
268
And when you talk to the public about some of the myths there are about differences between male
269
and female brains and where those differences come from
270
and what size those are and how they may be smaller than they think, what sort of reactions do you get?
271
Do you think we want to look for these differences somehow?
272
I suppose in terms of the public reception, you know, one frustrating reaction that one can get is
273
that it's a denial of science to deny
274
that there are sex differences in the brain or that they have fundamental importance for how men and women behave, that it's a sort of form of political correctness.
275
But really the purpose here is to offer people ways of making sense of what is a really complex area
276
and asking important questions about the reliability of findings, the size of findings, the generalizability of findings,
277
thinking in a more sophisticated way about the origins of sex
278
differences in the brain of course in the brain doesn't mean innate what they mean for behavior
279
so you can as I said one sex difference can compensate
280
for another it doesn't necessarily have an impact on behavior
281
and you know thinking in a more knowledgeable way about evolutionary explanations
282
so it's all about giving people tools and information to assess the data themselves.
283
Do you have any favorite myths that you'd like people to know are myths?
284
I think the most important myth to bust is probably a myth peddled by a certain very well -selling book
285
that male brain is is not designed to spot dust
286
spot dust that one's definitely a myth cordelia fine this is all in the mind on bbc radio 4
287
and today we're at the british neuroscience associations annual conference on the topic of neuromyths those stories about the brain
288
that we just can't resist believing dr ann cook is chief executive of the association.
289
Why do these myths persist do you think?
290
I think partly it's because they appeal.
291
There is something appealing about say the 10 % of your brain myth that we only use 10 % of your brain.
292
It's nice to think that we've got another 90 % that
293
if we could tap into we could be anybody we wanted to be.
294
I think sometimes there are a number of alternative hypotheses
295
and one of them turns out to be simpler
296
and easier to understand than the others and perhaps cheaper to implement or even, dare I say it, to market to people.
297
The Mozart effect would be a good one for that.
298
So that was based on a piece of science.
299
It was a hypothesis that listening to Mozart increased the IQ and that was found to be the case.
300
It was actually in adults, not in children.
301
But it was picked up by various people, it was picked up by some policy makers, it was picked up by lots of companies selling Mozart to actually pay to children, even though the study wasn't in children.
302
And there have since been other studies which have shown that is not to the effect.
303
But it's so nice to think about it, isn't it?
304
All I need to do is listen to some Mozart and I will improve my intelligence.
305
Yeah, and other studies since have found that U2 and blur is just as good.
306
So you could have the blur effect and the U2 effect, and that only lasts about 15 minutes anyway, so it's not even very long
307
but some of these myths have been around for a really long time haven't they
308
so I guess you could say
309
that myths about the brain have been since you know time began
310
but they keep arising some of them persist it wasn't till quite recently quite scarily recently
311
that it was thought that babies couldn't feel pain
312
and you know quite invasive procedures would be carried out without anaesthetic
313
because there was this misunderstanding about neuroscience and it's through neuroscience
314
that we now know that isn't the case of course
315
and the used to be thought that autism was caused by the mother's behavior these
316
so -called refrigerator mothers and now a lot of research has shown that obviously isn't the case.
317
I think it's a common thing everyone is fascinated by the
318
brain there's a real appetite for knowing about the brain
319
and the nervous system and that makes perhaps neuroscience especially prone to these myths being perpetuated.
320
Does it matter that it's not true
321
that we only use 10 % of our brains and that lots of people believe that?
322
I think there's a lot to be said for, if it's helpful for someone to actually believe in something, then great, you know, why not?
323
I think it can matter.
324
I do feel quite strongly when vulnerable people are potentially preyed upon by,
325
you know, selling something which purports to be based on science and actually isn't.
326
And I think that exploitative side of neuromyths can be very damaging
327
and I think there can be something damaging about putting people in pigeonholes as well.
328
The kind of classic, the learning styles, which has been shown time and time again to not have any scientific evidence
329
but still children are put into one of a certain type of learning style.
330
You know, pigeonholing people, especially when they're young, can actually be quite limiting so I think that can be damaging too.
331
What is the best way of countering these myths, do you think?
332
Because psychological research shows that myth -busting isn't in fact that effective and that telling people that it's all a myth, which is exactly, I appreciate what I'm doing right now in this programme,
333
doesn't actually change people's minds.
334
What should we do?
335
I think it's important to, although accept that there are these reasons for neuromyths persisting,
336
to continue to put out good information and to really empower people to have access to information through websites,
337
through talks, through being able to talk to scientists directly, through schools, through everyday life you know there's more
338
and more kind of science in shopping centres and things like this
339
so it's really giving people the tools to assess things and question things themselves you know is this real or not.
340
And let me ask you one last thing do you ever
341
find yourself in a social situation where somebody confidently asserts
342
that something about the brain is true that you know to be untrue
343
and have you got some good way of dealing with that?
344
Usually I would start by asking them why they held
345
that belief so trying to understand something of where they're coming from I think
346
if you come in and say no no no that's all wrong
347
and i know more than you and super
348
that doesn't really get you anywhere but people believe things for reasons
349
and sometimes for really good reasons so it's trying to understand where they get
350
that from and then if it's appropriate to kind of pick
351
that apart a bit and to come up with some information
352
that they might not have come across before
353
and then just to kind of let them draw the conclusion as much as possible that's the most effective way
354
That sounds good.
355
You're doing it in a nice way.
356
That's good.
357
I try to be nice.
358
Thank you very much, Anne Cook.
359
Now, before we go, one thing that's been discovered about the brain in recent years is its capacity to change.
360
Neuroplasticity means that it can form new connections throughout life.
361
So how about training your brain to perform better?
362
There are hundreds of brain training games out there.
363
Could they hold the answer?
364
Dr Emma Winnell is from Cardiff University and is talking at the conference today about brain training.
365
So first of all, what is meant by brain training?
366
We really mean repetitively completing tasks that are specially designed to train particular cognitive functions of the brain.
367
And what sort of claims have been made about it?
368
Some people have claims that it can improve memory in people suffering from conditions such as dementia.
369
Across the board, really, in terms of medical conditions, even things like autism, learning disabilities.
370
The claims span a far -reaching field in terms of diseases and also in the healthy population.
371
So some people have claimed that they can improve intelligence, for example, which might be very useful for people thinking of exams and things like that.
372
And how much evidence is there that some brain training games can do something
373
that then tips over into other kinds of skills?
374
So the evidence is mixed.
375
You may play a brain training game that looks at memory.
376
Your memory will likely get better on that game.
377
But will that transfer into your real life?
378
Will that improve your memory and kind of everyday tasks?
379
And there are some studies, although there aren't many, to support what we call transfer effects.
380
So transfer from the computer game into everyday life.
381
And in your research, you've been looking specifically at the very serious condition Huntington's disease.
382
How are you using brain training there?
383
Yes, that's right.
384
So Huntington's disease is a neurodegenerative disease and we are conducting a feasibility study.
385
So we are looking at whether brain training on a computer can be feasible in this patient population
386
because we know that people with Huntington's disease struggle with motivation sometimes
387
and apathy so I'm really interested in whether people are able to play the brain training computer games
388
because Huntington's disease is associated with problems with movement
389
so are people physically able to do it
390
and do they want to do it as well
391
because that's very important there's also a very interesting question about
392
how regularly you might play brain training computer games you know
393
if I were to say to you you'd have to play this game for five hours a day
394
versus ten minutes a day There's that trade -off, isn't there, between the amount of time and energy, resource you put into it versus the benefit that you think you will achieve.
395
And what are you hoping it might do for these patients?
396
If we establish feasibility, and we would have to do that, the brain training games may well help these particular patients.
397
There are other studies in similar conditions, such as Parkinson's disease,
398
which have demonstrated improvements in cognitive function the big question for me is whether the patients in themselves report improvement
399
so we're asking patients whether they feel they've got better in a range of measures including cognitive
400
and movement measures but also we've got some objective tests to see whether they have got better
401
and it's interesting that you're trying it with a condition that's
402
so serious you almost think or something like brain training couldn't possibly make a difference
403
but obviously there's a possibility that it might
404
or you wouldn't be trying certainly and it may well be
405
that it's given as well as drugs
406
or in combination with very much people are prepared to have a go at it
407
and just to see what happens
408
so do you think one day in the future we might go to the doctors
409
and be prescribed video games as part of the kind of treatment we're getting for different conditions i think
410
that we need to broaden our kind of horizons in terms
411
of treatments i think as part of the bigger picture It could be a really useful tool.
412
Well, very best of luck with your research.
413
Thank you very much, Emma Wynel.
414
That is all for our myth -busting from the British Neuroscience Association Christmas Symposium.
415
And it's the last in this series of All in the Mind.
416
Thank you very much for listening and for all your emails and tweets.
417
It's lovely to hear from you.
418
We'll be back in the spring.
419
Thanks for listening to the All in the Mind podcast from the BBC.
420
It's produced in association with The Open University and
421
if you go to the All in the Mind website you'll
422
find links to their work on issues in mental health and social care.
📺 Stesso Canale
B11
Is music getting faster? | 6 Minute English.
Business EnglishDaily ConversationHigh School Students
B12
Is the internet good or bad? | 6 Minute English.
Business EnglishDaily ConversationHigh School Students
B12
Alien Contact. | 6 Minute English.
Daily ConversationHigh School StudentsUniversity Students
B14
Odd job interviews. | 6 Minute English.
Business EnglishInterview EnglishUniversity Students
B2Alcohol abuse. | British Council-Learn English.
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
✨ Video consigliato
C155
66 frasi
What science can’t answer, according to physicist Jim Al-Khalili | Big Think
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C172 frasi
MRI-Negative Epilepsy
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C15
201 frasi
The illusion that broken the internet
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
55 frasi
Your genes affect your education. Here’s why that’s controversial. | Kathryn Paige Harden
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C15
54 frasi
Why is walking humans’ superpower? – C1 English Listening Test
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C14
131 frasi
The medicine myth | Denis Noble, Nessa Carey, Guy Brown
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C1119
29 frasi
The Neuroscience of Creativity
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
259 frasi
We've Been Using The Wrong Science In Court For 50 years
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C11
318 frasi
What neuroscience reveals about free will and psychopaths | Sam Harris, Roger Penrose, Sophie Scott
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
118 frasi
How Language Shapes the Way We Think • Professor Lera Boroditsky • Duocon 2022
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C15
73 frasi
Kevin Spacey Breaks Down The Game Theory | 21
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C16
74 frasi
The “Nietzsche Thesis”: Why we don’t really care about truth
British AccentIELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
Il contesto: miti sul cervello e conversazione in inglese
Il video presenta una conversazione tra un presentatore e neuroscienziati che smentiscono miti comuni sul cervello, come l'idea che usiamo solo il 10% del cervello o che i sinistri muoiano più presto. Questo contesto reale è perfetto per la pratica di conversazione in inglese, poiché combina discussioni scientifiche con linguaggio colloquiale, ideale per esercitare l'ascolto e la pronuncia.
Frasi e collocazioni utili da memorizzare
- "Set us straight": Significa "chiarirci le idee". Esempio: "Il professore ci ha settato straight sui miti sui sinistri".
- "Statistical signature": "Firma statistica". Usato per descrivere un pattern ricorrente nei dati. Esempio: "Non c'è una statistical signature per differenziare i cervelli destri e sinistri".
- "All over the place": "Scomposto", "disorganizzato". Esempio: "Le statistiche del paper erano all over the place".
- "Tap into": "Sfruttare", "accedere a". Esempio: "I corsi aziendali insegnano a tap into il lato destro del cervello per la creatività".
La tua sfida: shadowing in inglese
Per migliorare la pronuncia e la fluidità, prova il shadowing (o shadow speak). Segui questi passaggi: 1) Riproduci un frammento del video di 10-15 secondi. 2) Pausa e ripetilo immediatamente, imitando l'intonazione e il ritmo. 3) Ripeti finché non senti che la tua pronuncia è simile a quella originale. Questo esercizio, chiamato shadow speech, aiuta a internalizzare il flusso naturale dell'inglese. Usa questo video come materiale: le conversazioni tra presentatore e scienziati hanno un tono chiaro e un ritmo accessibile, perfetto per iniziare. Imparare l'inglese con i video è efficace perché combini ascolto e produzione, due skill chiave per la conversazione.
La grammatica di questo video
Le strutture che chi parla usa di più, con le parole esatte del video:
| Struttura | Nel video |
|---|---|
| Frasi condizionali if + frase, will/would + verbo — una condizione e il suo risultato | if I show you a scan, will allow · If we establish feasibility, and we would have |
| Present perfect have/has + participio passato — un’azione passata che conta ancora adesso | I've come · you've spent · you've come |
| Forma passiva be + participio passato — conta ciò che accade, non chi lo fa | is supported · are left · were born |
| Frasi relative who / which + frase — un’informazione in più su una persona o una cosa | kids who are · people who produce · children who are |
Cos'è la tecnica dello Shadowing?
Shadowing è una tecnica di apprendimento delle lingue supportata da studi scientifici, originariamente sviluppata per la formazione dei traduttori professionisti e resa popolare dal poliglotta Dr. Alexander Arguelles. Il metodo è semplice ma potente: ascolti un audio in inglese di madrelingua e lo ripeti immediatamente ad alta voce — come un'ombra che segue il parlante con un ritardo di solo 1–2 secondi. A differenza dell'ascolto passivo o degli esercizi di grammatica, lo shadowing costringe il tuo cervello e i muscoli della bocca a elaborare e riprodurre simultaneamente i modelli di discorso reale. La ricerca dimostra che migliora significativamente la precisione della pronuncia, l'intonazione, il ritmo, il discorso connesso, la comprensione dell'ascolto e la fluidità del parlato — rendendolo uno dei metodi più efficaci per la preparazione alla prova di speaking dell'IELTS e per la comunicazione reale in inglese.