Source author record

Julia Mossbridge

Julia Mossbridge appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2016arXiv

The Influence of Streamlined Music on Cognition and Mood

Recent advances in sound engineering have led to the development of so-called streamlined music designed to reduce exogenous attention and improve endogenous attention. Although anecdotal reports suggest that streamlined music does indeed improve focus on daily work tasks and may improve mood, the specific influences of streamlined music on cognition and mood have yet to be examined. In this paper, we report the results of a series of online experiments that examined the impact of one form of streamlined music on cognition and mood. The tested form of streamlined music, which was tested primarily by listeners who felt they benefited from this type of music, significantly outperformed plain music on measures of perceived focus, task persistence, precognition, and creative thinking, with borderline effects on mood. In contrast, this same form of streamlined music did not significantly influence measures assessing visual attention, verbal memory, logical thinking, self-efficacy, perceived stress, or self-transcendence. We also found that improvements in perceived focus over a 2-month period were correlated with improvements in emotional state, including mood. Overall the results suggest that at least for individuals who enjoy using streamlined music as a focus tool, streamlined music can have a beneficial impact on cognition without any obvious costs, while at the same time it may potentially boost mood.

preprint2015arXiv

Time and the Unconscious Mind

Most of us think we know some basic facts about how time works. The facts we believe we know are based on a few intuitions about time, which are, in turn, based on our conscious waking experiences. As far as I can tell, these intuitions about time are something like this: 1) There is a physical world in which events occur, 2) These events are mirrored by our perceptual re-creation of them in essentially the same order in which they occur in the physical world, 3) This re-creation of events occurs in a linear order based on our conscious memory of them (e.g., event A is said to occur before event B if at some point we do remember event A but we don not yet remember event B, and at another point we remember both events), 4) Assuming we have good memories, what we remember has occurred in the past and what we don not remember but we can imagine might: a) never occur, b) occur when we are not conscious, or c) occur in the future. These intuitions are excellent ones for understanding our conscious conception of ordered events. However, they do not tell us anything about how the non-conscious processes in our brains navigate events in time. Currently, neuroscientists assume that neural processes of which we are unaware, that is, non-conscious processes, create conscious awareness as a reflection of physical reality (Singer, 2015). Thus, if we wish to understand how events unfold in time in the physical world, we would do well to attempt to get some hints about how these events are navigated by non-conscious processes.

preprint2015arXiv

We Did See This Coming: Response to, We Should Have Seen This Coming, by D. Sam Schwarzkopf

We appreciate the effort by Schwarzkopf to examine alternative explanations for predictive anticipatory activity (PAA) or presentiment (for first response, see: Schwarzkopf 2014a; for additional response, see: Schwarzkopf 2014b, for original article, see: Mossbridge et al. 2014). These commentaries are a laudable effort to promote collegial discussion of the controversial claim of presentiment, whereby physiological measures preceding unpredictable emotional events differ from physiological measures preceding calm or neutral events (Mossbridge et al., 2012; Mossbridge et al., 2014). What is called truth at any given time in science has achieved that status through a continuous process of measurement and interpretation based on the current knowledge at hand. Here we address six points in his original commentary (Schwarzkopf 2014a), though our responses are informed by the points he made in his his supplementary commentary (Schwarzkopf 2014b). We hope our responses will help Schwarzkopf and others understand our interpretation of these data.