Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Eye Contact Increases Resistance to Persuasion

Remember this when you are talking to your doctor and need to convince them that they are stupid and know nothing about stroke recovery.
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/25/0956797613491968
  1. Frances S. Chen1,2
  2. Julia A. Minson3
  3. Maren Schöne1
  4. Markus Heinrichs1,4
  1. 1Department of Psychology, Laboratory for Biological and Personality Psychology, University of Freiburg
  2. 2Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia
  3. 3Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University
  4. 4Freiburg Brain Imaging Center, University Medical Center, University of Freiburg
  1. Frances S. Chen, Department of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 3521-2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4 E-mail: frances.chen@psych.ubc.ca
  1. Author Contributions F. S. Chen and J. A. Minson contributed equally to this work and share first authorship. F. S. Chen and J. A. Minson developed the study concept. All authors contributed to the study design. Testing and data collection were performed by M. Schöne. F. S. Chen and J. A. Minson performed the data analysis and interpretation. F. S. Chen and J. A. Minson drafted the manuscript, and all authors provided critical revisions. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.

Abstract

Popular belief holds that eye contact increases the success of persuasive communication, and prior research suggests that speakers who direct their gaze more toward their listeners are perceived as more persuasive. In contrast, we demonstrate that more eye contact between the listener and speaker during persuasive communication predicts less attitude change in the direction advocated. In Study 1, participants freely watched videos of speakers expressing various views on controversial sociopolitical issues. Greater direct gaze at the speaker’s eyes was associated with less attitude change in the direction advocated by the speaker. In Study 2, we instructed participants to look at either the eyes or the mouths of speakers presenting arguments counter to participants’ own attitudes. Intentionally maintaining direct eye contact led to less persuasion than did gazing at the mouth. These findings suggest that efforts at increasing eye contact may be counterproductive across a variety of persuasion contexts.

No comments:

Post a Comment