Search

This review explores several rarely discussed examples illustrating constructivism principles, generative and selective features of neuronal regulation of behaviour. First, the review highlights Walter Freeman's experiments and mathematical analysis that uncovered the existence of anticipatory attractors, i.e. non-random dynamical patterns in neurodynamics. Since Freeman's work did not extend to neurochemistry, this paper then points to the proposed earlier neurochemical framework summarizing the managerial roles of monoaminergic, cholinergic and opioid receptor systems likely contributing to anticipatory attractors in line with functional constructivism. As a third example, neurochemistry's evidence points to the "Throw & Catch" (T&C) principle in neurodynamics. This principle refers to the pro-active, neurochemically expensive, massive but topical increase of potentials ("Throw") within electrodynamics and neurotransmission in the brain whenever there is an uncertainty in selection of degrees of freedom (DFs). The T&C also underlines the relay-like processes during the selection of DFs. The "Throw" works as an internally generated "flashlight" that, contrarily to the expectations of entropy reduction, increases entropy and variance observed in processes related to orientation and action-formation. The discussed examples highlight the deficiency of structures-oriented projects and excitation-inhibition concepts in neuroscience. The neural regulation of behaviour appears to be a fluid, constructive process, constantly upgrading the choice of behavioural DFs, to ensure the compatibility between the environmental and individual's individuals' needs and capacities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the analysis of mining engineers’ eco-innovation training key components associated with the formation of special knowledge and skills in the field of coal mining enterprises environmental management. The issues of the eco-innovation activities and the objectives of environmental management at coal mining enterprises are consistently considered. The article presents the examination of general and special requirements for the environmental education of mining engineers, which are to become the basis for the sustainable development of engineering projects in coal-mining industry.

This paper reviews the principles identified in analytic neuroscience that could be used in the setup of an international project, "Hippocrates" (H-project), named after the author of the endocrine theory of temperaments. The H-project can aim to summarize the findings in functional neurochemistry of consistent behavioural patterns (CBPs) in health (such as temperament traits) and psychopathology (symptoms of psychiatric disorders); to have systematically structured neurochemical investigations; to have an analysis of CBPs that include all ranges of behavioural histories and to have these modules complemented by regional contrasts related to climate, diets and other bio-environmental factors. The review highlights the benefits of constructivism and illustrates the contrast between constructivism and current approaches in terms of analytic and methodological aspects. (1) "Where" the neurochemical biomarkers should be measured: the review expands the range of needed measurements to out-of-brain systems, including environmental factors, and explores the concept of Specialized Extended Phenotype. (2) "What" should be measured but is missing: the review points to the need for measurement of the "Throw & Catch" neurochemical relays; behavioural and neuronal events contributing to the consistency of the CBPs but not documented in measurements. (3) Structuring the H-project's setup: the paper briefly describes a proposed earlier neurochemical framework, Functional Ensemble of Temperament that that accommodates the neurochemical continuum between temperament and symptoms of psychiatric disorders. This framework is in line with documented "Throw & Catch" neurochemical relays and can also be used to organize data about the personal and professional history of an individual. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyzes the differences between an activity-specific temperament model and the Big Five personality model using the Structure of Temperament Questionnaire--Compact (STQ77). The STQ-77 has 3 emotionality scales and 9 scales assessing 3 dynamic aspects (arousal, lability, and sensory sensitivity) in 3 areas of activity (physical, verbal--social, and mental). The results of administration of the Russian STQ-77, NEO-FFI, and SSS-V to 174 Russian participants showed how components of temperament can represent the traits described in the Big Five model. The confirmatory factor analysis of the English STQ-77 and the results of a study involving a prolonged word classification task with 221 Canadian participants showed the benefits of the activity-specific approach, separating temperament traits in three areas of activity. Such specificity of temperament traits differentiates them from personality traits.

The Structure of Temperament Questionnaire (STQ) was proposed by Rusalov in 1989 and subsequently tested in five languages. The questionnaire assesses four temperamental traits (Ergonicity, Plasticity, Tempo, and Emotionality) in three separate areas of activity: physical, verbal-social, and intellectual. The scales are all activity-specific. In 775 Canadian subjects, two temperament tests were compared, both developed on the basis of Pavlovian studies of the nervous system: the activity-specific approach (STQ) and the nonspecific Pavlovian Temperamental Survey (PTS). More significant sex differences were found on activity-specific scales of the STQ than on the nonspecific PTS scales. The pattern of correlations between the STQ scales and the time taken on an experimental task requiring a prolonged and intense word-assessment activity showed stronger correlations with the specific scales of the STQ measuring the dynamic aspects of social-verbal activity, and not with the PTS Strength of Excitation scale, which is based on a 'general arousal' concept. The results supported the separation of temperament traits related to three different types of activities and opposed to 'general arousal' theories of temperament. DOI 10.2466/PR0.105.2.643-658