LeftBrainRightBrainPPT课件
脑功能的一侧化PPT课件
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
5
大脑半球之间的联系
• 在左右半球和各个功能区之间有许多神经 纤维连接
• 胼胝体、前联合、海马联合等交换信息 • 其中胼胝体是最大的连接结构 • 通过一侧半球的信息在短暂的停留后传到
对侧。
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
• 但是他们协调性差、动作不灵活。
• 但他们可以用别人不能做到的方式，独立 地使用两手去完成。因为他们的两侧大脑 半球是独立的。
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
28
• 实验：正常人
• 姓名 性别 年龄
•左
左右利手
右
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
29
– 在你的右手画
U
半球优势---由于胼胝体的原因。
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
39
（二）胼胝体的成熟（maturation）
• 胼胝体是在开始的5-10年逐渐成熟的 • 发育过程中并没有神经轴突的增加，而是
有所取舍 • 婴儿的行为在许多方面象裂脑人，左右半
球不能很好地统一指挥和协调 • 在17周前，如果婴儿的一只手臂受到限制，
10
人类大脑左右半球不对称性功能
功能 视觉
听觉 运动
语言
左半球
字母及单词识 别
言语性声音
右半球
复杂图形及脸孔识 别
环境声音及音乐
复杂随意运动 听说读写
运动模式的空间组 织
空间和数学能 力
数学能力
几何学、方向感觉 和心理旋转
04心理学专业--生理心理学（2005.12）
让左右脑协调发展黄PPT课件
1843年10月16日，威廉罗旺·哈密尔顿爵士 发现四元数的基本乘法公式并刻在石桥上
晚上回去后，他开始计算： （a+bi+cj+dk）×（α+βi+γi+δk） =（aα-bβ-cγ-dδ）+（aβ+bα+cδ-dγ）i +（aγ-bβ+cα+dβ）j+（aδ+bγ-cβ+dα）k 而且也发现右式的1，i，j，k前的系数平方的和 恰好等于 （a2+b2+c2+d2）（α2+β2+γ2+δ2）， 因此这四元数真的是满足“模法则”。
数学右脑思维的共同特征： 形象性、非逻辑性、默会性 （默会性：无法用符号语言明确表达出来）
画 中 能 看 到 几 个 人
折纸与美丽的包络1 （围成椭圆）
折纸与美丽的包络2
（围成双曲线）
折纸与美丽的包络3 （围成抛物线）
数学猜测的5种方法 1.类比 2.归纳 3.强化或弱化定理条件 4.想象和直觉 5.逆向思维
哥尼斯堡七桥问题（遍历问题） 问题
一笔画
数学左脑思维的限度：
在抽象领域畅行无阻，但无法处理形 象领域里的问题； 在逻辑领域畅行无阻，但无法处理非 逻辑领域里的问题； 在数学符号语言所及的领域畅行无阻， 但无法处理尚不能用符号语言表达而 只能依靠直觉处理的问题；
数学抽象形式思维的不完全性原理 局部特征分离法得到数学理论体系，忽略了数学理 论体系的某些整体特征
二元数—四元数—八元数
美国心理生物学家斯佩里博士 （Roger Wolcott Sperry， 1913.8.20—1994.4.17） 通过著名的割裂脑实验， 证实了大脑不对称性的“左右脑分工理论”， 因此荣获1981年诺贝尔生理学或医学奖。
引爆右脑英语潜能PPT课件
骨、镫骨上制造体内振动音，形成新的听 觉回路。
9
第七章 私塾-神秘的右脑训练
1. 只有死去才能活来 2. 素读----不求甚解，只照着字面朗读----论语、大学 3. “为死记硬背”平反，开发过目不忘，过耳不忘的能力 4. 犹太人教育以记忆学习为中心，强调反复朗读 5. 熟能生巧，熟读唐诗三百首，不会做诗也会吟 6. 三岁以前是唯一能够无意识体会到语言所有音律和节奏的时
第一、下定决心：下定决心用一年的时间学 好英语。
第二、完整地听取声音：完整地听取声音。 连续听英语CD三个月。
第三、想象：进行想象训练。进入适合学习 的alpha波状态，在这个状态听英语CD。
第四、朗读、背诵，每天进行30分钟朗读练 习。
15
第五、改善听觉：朗读时用手按住一只耳朵说话， 就能够听到体内振动音，增强听力。
4、We’re a team和 Hey listen 分别背 2000遍，可以初步激活右脑超记忆回路
13
4、抑制理论：朗读时，只有传递声音的神经回 路在运作，其它的视觉、嗅觉等感觉都会被 掩盖。意识的单纯化(大脑的单纯化)：集中 精神可以使大脑的一部分神经兴奋起来，抑 制周围神经细胞活动。
14
第十章 超右脑七大神奇步骤
3、一位37岁的印度妇女莎姑达拉在美国引起了大大的轰动，因为她击败了一部 目前最精密的电脑。这部电脑花了不止1分钟的时间才算出一个201位数的23次 方根，而她只用50秒钟就算出来了。
4、开发40%右脑潜能就可以在90天内学会28门语言，读12个博士学位，倒 背全美百科全书。
3
第二章 自身脑和祖先脑
1、左脑是自身脑，自身脑是指人出生之ຫໍສະໝຸດ 所拥有的经验和知识存储在自身脑里；
大脑思维导图ppt课件
而你要写到十点？
纳
、
为什么总是丢三落四，忘东忘 条
西？
理
ห้องสมุดไป่ตู้
为什么其他同学的物品总是摆 放的仅仅有条，而你的总是乱
性
七八糟？
你知道多少？
你没能取得好成绩，甚至取得成功，是因为只使用了大脑潜力的一小部分，个人 能力并没有发挥出来。 如果我们想表现得更出色，那就必须重视我们的大脑，让大脑发挥更大的潜力。 其实你的大脑比你想象的厉害得多。
上发明而来的。
脑图的特征
• 一个中心N个基本点
围绕中心主题
发散出多个子主题 及要点
脑图的特征
使用脑图的好处？
快速提升 思维能力
强化大脑记忆
提高工作效率
激发联想和想像
画思维导图的工具
没有画上线条的空白纸张。 彩色水笔和铅笔。 你的大脑。 你的想象！
绘制步骤：
1.确定灵魂 2.确定主干 3.确定一级词语 4.确定分支并完善分支内容 5.附加图案 6.描绘颜色
并都 且知
……
世界著名大学，如哈佛、剑桥均开设了大到思维导图 的课程 波音747公司、李宁使用大脑思维导图的方法节省了大 量的时间
思维脑图的威力有多大？
“思维脑图”该年度提出，标志着人类对大脑潜能的 开发进入了一个全新的阶段，已成为21世纪风靡全球 的革命性思维工具，并成功改变2.5亿人的思维习惯， 被人称为“大脑瑞士军刀”。
定义
心智图（Mind Map），又称脑图、心智地图、脑力激荡图、 思维导图、灵感触发图、概念地图、树状图、树枝图或思维 地图，是一种图像式思维的工具与及一种利用图像式思考辅 助工具来表达思维的工具。
脑神经细胞结构与思维导图
左右大脑
985AJNR:22,May 2001986NAGATA TABLE 1:Number of activated pixels in each region of interest (ROI)and laterality index values obtained by two methodsSubject No.No.in Left ROI No.inRight ROI No.in Both ROI LI-1(%)LI-2(%)Gap between LI-1and LI-2123456789101150385525204360201629282836512263111105378746026226991312634312838392822532292371812816827661282925377474014216214341446121st 2nd 3rd SD 672940345701061511003625416644311834126131st 2nd 3rd SD 271304119941446224551716491923204514644141st 2nd 3rd SD 64869516362980122124604153105338518732151st 2nd 3rd SD 212337402252339681009016616455573635161st 2nd 3rd SD 5181152550576131203424501338313044820171st 2nd 3rd SD3253221135743882949205218411831128221Note.—LI-1,indicates laterality index-1;LI-2,laterality index-2.The number of activated pixels and LI-1shown were obtained at the z score ϭ1.0.SD indicates standard deviation for the three measure-ments.this reason,it was difficult to evaluate lateralization quantitatively by the z score method previously re-ported in functional MR imaging studies (16,19,20).The drawback of this method was that LI was calculated from a simple above-threshold pixel count,whereas we found it of greater value to use more of the data.We describe our attempt to es-tablish a method for quantitatively evaluating lat-eralization of linguistic function on a continuous scale by functional MR imaging using the z score,and evaluate our new method according to the three criteria of optimality defined above.MethodsSubjectsSeventeen consecutive right-handed healthy adult subjects (16men and one woman;20–39years old)were recruited for this study;of these,six (subjects 12–17)were recruited for the investigation of reproducibility (see Table 1).Subjects gave written informed consent for functional MR imaging.Hand preference was assessed by the Edinburgh Handedness Inven-tory (EDI)(22),in which subjects were asked to indicate hand preference for each of the 12EDI items,and a handedness score was obtained for each subject.EDI scores varied from ϩ100to Ϫ100%,with ϩ100%meaning right-handedness and Ϫ100%meaning left-handedness.A subject was excluded if the EDI score was negative.Image AcquisitionThe subjects were informed of the purpose and meaning of the examination before imaging.Images were obtained on a 1.5-T MR unit with a gradient-echo echo-planar sequence with the following parameters:TR/TE (repetition time/echo time)ϭ2265/64,flip angle ϭ90Њ,field of view ϭ300mm,matrix ϭ84ϫ128,slice thickness ϭ10mm,scan time ϭ180ms.Three contiguous axial slices were obtained parallel to a ref-erence line through the superior edge of the anterior commis-sure and the inferior of the posterior commissure.These slices covered the pars opercularis (Brodmann’s areas 44and 45)(23).The subjects underwent seven alternating periods of a rest and a silent linguistic stimulation task.During each of the four rest periods and three task periods,10images were ob-tained for every slice.Thus,70images per slice were acquired.During the imaging examination,the room light was dimmed and the subject’s head was fixed tightly with foam pads bilat-erally to minimize motion artifacts.Subjects were instructed to close their eyes and to keep their head and eyes still.Task DesignThe word generation task was performed silently through internal speech.During the task periods,the subjects were asked to generate and ‘‘say’’silently as many words as pos-sible that were associated with the first word announced through an intercom at the beginning of the task period.The subjects were instructed to finish the task period when the word end was announced through an intercom.During the rest periods,the subjects were asked to rest and concentrate on their breathing.After the experiment,subjects were asked whether they believed they had performed the task success-fully.If their answer was negative,the examination was repeated.Data AnalysisBefore carrying out the data analysis,we discarded the first two images of each period,because activation/deactivation typ-ically lags several seconds behind stimulus onset/termination (24).Thus,56of the 70images per slice were used.Significant signal changes were identified by the z score (25–28),which was calculated using the following formula:ͦMt ϪMr ͦz score ϭ22͙␦t /Nt ϩ␦r /Nrwhere Mt is the mean signal during task periods,Mr is mean signal during rest periods,␦t is the standard deviation (SD)during task periods,␦r is the SD during rest periods,Nt is the image number during task periods,and Nr is the image number during rest periods.No correction was made for head motion,and no additional filtering or clustering algorithm was used.The pixels that were found to be significantly activated were superimposed on the T1-weighted structural images obtained with a spin-echo se-quence (500/12/2).The number of activated pixels was count-ed using Numaris software supplied by the manufacturer (Siemens).AJNR:22,May 2001LINGUISTIC FUNCTION LATERALIZATION987F IG 1.A and B,Scatter diagrams for subjects 5(A )and 10(B ).Circles indicate the values for the left ROI;squares,for the right ROI.Evaluation of LateralizationFor the evaluation of the lateralization of linguistic function,the LI was calculated by two methods:first by a method (LI-1)reported previously (16,19,20)and second by our new method (LI-2),which we describe here.The regions of interest (ROIs)were drawn on the superimposed images,focusing on the pars opercularis (Brodmann’s areas 44and 45)rather than on Wernicke’s area,because there is no consensus as to where Wernicke’s area is located (29–31).LI-1Method .—With this method,we kept the z score uni-form in all subjects,and the number of activated pixels was measured in each ROI (ie,the left pars opercularis and the right pars opercularis).LI-1was calculated using the following formula:LI-1ϭ[(Nl ϪNr)/(Nl ϩNr)]ϫ100(%)2)where Nl is the number of activated pixels in the left ROI,and Nr is the number of activated pixels in the right ROI.LI-2Method .—With this method,to first determine the cor-relation between the z scores and the number of activated pix-els in each ROI,we made a scatter diagram in which the x -axis represented the z scores and the y -axis represented the number of activated pixels (Fig 1).Robust and more detailed information could be obtained by fitting these ROI concave curves into a regression function.All functions fitting these ROI concave curves well could be used,but it was not possible to calculate a correlation coefficient between these ROI con-cave curves for all functions.A function having few parame-ters is ideal for calculating LI-2;in other words,a monomial expression is more suitable than a polynomial expression,be-cause it is difficult to select one parameter to represent a par-ticular value if the function has many parameters.We therefore chose (1/z score)n as the particular function.We transformed each of the z scores into (1/z score)n to calculate regression equations,and we investigated the correlation coefficient be-tween (1/z score)n and the number of activated pixels.The mean correlation coefficient differences were compared statis-tically using the Friedman test.We used the function that had the highest correlation coefficient.We then calculated the re-gression equations of the two curves from Figure 1.LI-2was calculated using the following formula:LI-2ϭ[{Fl(Z)ϪFr(Z)}/{Fl(Z)ϩFr(Z)}]ϫ100(%)3)where Fl(Z)is the regression equation that was calculated from the curve of the left ROI,and Fr(Z)is the regression equation that was calculated from the curve of the right ROI.LI-1and LI-2varied from ϩ100to Ϫ100%,in which ϩ100%indicates left hemisphere dominance and Ϫ100%indicates right hemi-sphere dominance.To compare the LI-1method with the LI-2method for re-producibility (degree of variation),we performed three func-tional MR imaging measurements at different times and on different days in six subjects (subjects 12–17),and the LI was obtained by both methods.A scatter plot of LI-1versus LI-2for all six subjects was made,and the SD between LI-1and LI-2for the three measurements was obtained for each subject (see Table).The SD between LI-1and LI-2was compared statistically using a Wilcoxon signed rank test.ResultsEDI scores were positive for all subjects.The mean EDI score was 90Ϯ5(%)(mean ϮSD);all subjects were considered strongly right-handed.All subjects performed the internal speech task suc-cessfully,and all showed evidence of a focal MR signal increase in the pars opercularis.The LI-1and LI-2scores were positive for all subjects,and we found that language lateralization was to the left in all subjects (see Table).LI-1The number of activated pixels in each ROI var-ied meaningfully with the z score (Fig 1);that is,the number depended on the z score.LI-1was ob-tained from the number of activated pixels in the right and left ROIs,assuming that the z score was a fixed value (eg,z score ϭ1.0).The number of activated pixels at threshold z ϭ1.0in each ROI varied among subjects,showing a marked variation in activation grade among subjects (see Table).Within the same subject,LI-1varied with the z score.At higher thresholds,LI-1reached 100%,be-cause the number of activated pixels in the right ROI became too small (Fig 2).Therefore,we con-firmed that LI-1varied markedly and was depen-dent on the z score.A threshold in the relatively flat part of LI-1versus the threshold (a cross-cor-relation method)has been reported (16);however,such a threshold in the z score could not be deter-mined from our results.AJNR:22,May 2001988NAGATA F IG 2.A–D,Brain activity images (viewed from below)of subject 5at thresholds 1.0(A )and 1.5(B )and of subject 10at thresh-olds 1.0(C )and 1.5(D ).Black boxes in-dicate ROIs.LI-2The scatter diagrams (in which the x -axis rep-resents the z scores and the y -axis the number of activated pixels)showed similar concave curves in all subjects,regardless of the difference in the grade of activation.We chose (1/z score)n as the particular function.When the value of n ranged from 1to 10,the correlation coefficient between (1/z score)n and the number of activated pixels was very high.A Friedman test revealed that the mean correlation coefficient differences for both sides,for the left side,and for the right side were statis-tically significant (P Ͻ.0001).The mean correla-tion coefficients for both sides,for the left side,and for the right side showed a maximum at n ϭ4.The mean values at n ϭ4for both sides,for the left side,and for the right side were .989Ϯ.006(mean ϮSD),.988Ϯ.12,and .989Ϯ.009,re-spectively (Fig 3).We therefore used (1/z score)4as the function.Because the value of the correlation coefficient was very high,regression functions of the concave curves could be calculated with the following formulas (Fig 4).Number of activated pixels in the left 4)4ROI ϭA ϫ(1/z score)Number of activated pixels in the right 5)4ROI ϭB/(1/z score)where A and B are the fixed values calculated from the scatter diagrams.In nearly all 17subjects,a difference in the num-ber of plots of concave curves (ie,in the df between the two ROI curves)was observed.For example,in subject 5,the df of the left ROI curve was 27and that of the right ROI curve was 10.However,there was a negligible difference in the correlation coefficient between the two ROI curves,which was very high.We therefore surmised that there was no significant difference in the reliability between the fixed values A and B used in the above formulas.LI-2was calculated using the following formula:LI-2ϭ[{Fl(Z)ϪFr(Z)}/{Fl(Z)ϩFr(Z)}]6)ϫ100(%)44ϭ{A ϫ(1/z score)ϪB ϫ(1/z score)}44Ϭ{A ϫ(1/z score)ϩB ϫ(1/z score)}ϫ100(%)ϭ{(A ϪB)/(A ϩB)}ϫ100(%)Thus,LI-2was a fixed value and independent ofAJNR:22,May2001LINGUISTIC FUNCTION LATERALIZATION989F IG 3.A–C,The mean correlation coefficient between(1/z score),(1/z score)2...(1/z score)10,and the number of activated pixels for all subjects on both sides(A),on the left side(B),and on the right side(C).the z score,and we were able to evaluate laterali-zation independent of the z score.The values of A and B did not change significantly when the num-ber of the plots of the concave curves was changed.A relationship between LI-1and LI-2was ob-served.The gap between the two indexes tended to be larger when the number of activated pixels in both ROIs was small(Table and Fig5).When comparing the two LI methods for repro-ducibility,the scatter plots of LI-1versus LI-2 scores for six subjects indicated a slight slant(Fig 6),and the SD of the LI-2scores was statistically smaller than that of the LI-1scores(Wilcoxon signed rank test,PϽ.05).DiscussionIn this study,we evaluated lateralization of lin-guistic function on a continuous scale with both the well-known LI-1method and our new LI-2meth-od.A suitable and useful medical examination should meet the following three criteria:1)the re-sults from the examination should represent robust information about the subject,2)the results should be easily compared across subjects,and3)the ex-amination should have good reproducibility(21). The LI-1scores of our subjects were found to vary with the z score.In this regard,the LI-1method did not meet thefirst criterion.Because the number of activated pixels at a cer-tain threshold varied among subjects,it may be that the reliability of the LI-1scores differed,even when those scores were the same.For example,in one subject,the number of activated pixels in the left ROI was40and the number in the right ROI was20;the subject’s LI-1score was therefore33%. In another subject,the number in the left ROI was 4and the number in the right ROI was2;this sub-ject’s LI-1score was therefore also33%.The LI-1 scores were the same,but the reliability of LI-1 differed(ie,it was higher in thefirst subject). Therefore,it was not possible to compare the two LI-1scores,and therefore,the LI-1method did not meet the second criterion described above.For the calculation of LI-2,we made scatter di-agrams.Interestingly,the scatter diagrams showed similar concave curves in all subjects.We thought that the concave curves were unique to functional MR imaging using the z score,and that each con-cave curve represented robust and more detailed information.The two regression coefficients of the regression lines were calculated from the scatter di-agram.The regression coefficient of the regression line represented the rate of decrease of the activated pixels.LI-2yielded the difference between the rate of decrease in the left hemisphere and that in the right hemisphere.LI-2was afixedfigure,indepen-dent of the z score and thus,LI-2was believed to represent a quantitative lateralization across the two hemispheres.The LI-2method was thought to meet thefirst criterion,concerning robust information. The reliability of LI-2did not differ even if the regression coefficient of the regression line differed significantly among subjects,because each regres-sion coefficient was based on a sufficient amount of information.The LI-2method was thus thought to meet the second criterion regarding intersubject comparisons.As for reproducibility,the LI-2meth-od was found to be more suitable than the LI-1 method,even though the three LI-2scores of sev-eral subjects differed somewhat.The intrasubject variability in LI might be attributed to the inherent variability in the subjects’responses,but we were not able to identify the cause of intrasubject vari-ability in this study.The LI-2method differed from the LI-1method in its ability to evaluate weak activated pixels.TheAJNR:22,May 2001990NAGATA F IG 4.A and B,The regression line of subjects 5(A )and 10(B ).Circles indicate the left ROI;squares,the right ROI.The underlined fixed values indicate the regression coefficient of the regression line for each ROI (regression analysis,R ;correlation coefficient).F IG 5.Scatter plot shows gap between LI-1and LI-2(regression analysis,r 2ϭ.244,P Ͻ.01,n ϭ28).F IG 6.Scatter plot for LI-1versus LI-2for subjects 12through 17.LI-1method could not evaluate the weak activated pixels.The functional MR imaging technique has been used to localize the centers of primary func-tions,such as motor,sensory,and visual functions.For localizing such a functional center,it is nec-essary to set the threshold (z score)at a high value to exclude secondarily activated areas.It is,how-ever,not appropriate to set too high a threshold,because many true and weak activated pixels might be missed.We suspected that weak activated pixels played an important role in language function.LI-2was calculated on the basis of both weak and strong activated pixels (ie,on the concave curves).To our knowledge,the LI-2method thus met all three criteria for a useful medical examination.ConclusionIn evaluating the lateralization of linguistic func-tion,we found that a comparison of the number ofactivated pixels at only one threshold was not a correct method,since the correlation between the two hemispheres regarding the number of activated pixels at one threshold did not always represent the correlation at another threshold.Therefore,we es-tablished a more suitable method by fitting the con-cave curve from the scatter diagrams into a func-tion to allow more robust and detailed information.In this study,(1/z score)4was found to be the op-timal function with the highest correlation coeffi-cient.We did not create a theoretical foundation for selecting (1/z score)4as the function;therefore,it might be possible that another function exists that would fit the concave curve better than (1/z score)4.At the least,we strongly believe that a comparisonAJNR:22,May2001LINGUISTIC FUNCTION LATERALIZATION991of the concave curves between the two hemispheres is a more accurate,sound,and reliable method than a comparison of the number of activated pixels at only one threshold.References1.Wada J.A new method for the determination of the side ofcerebral speech dominance:a preliminary report on the intra-carotid injection of sodium amytal in man[in Japanese].Igaku Seibutugaku(Med Biol)1949;14:221–2222.Wada J,Rasmussen T.Intracarotid injection of sodium amytalfor the lateralization of cerebral speech dominance.J Neuro-surg1960;17:266–2823.Dion JE,Gates PC,Fox AJ,Barnett HJ,Blom RJ.Clinical eventsfollowing neuroangiography:a prospective study.Stroke1987;18:997–10044.Hietala SO,Silfvenius H,Aasly J,Olivecrona M,Jonsson L.Brain perfusion with intracarotid injection of99mTc-HM-PAO in partial epilepsy during amobarbital testing.Eur J Nucl Med1990;16:683–6875.Strauss E,Wada J,Goldwater B.Sex differences in intrahem-ispheric reorganization of speech.Neuropsychologia1992;30: 353–3596.Satz P,Strauss E,Wada J,Orsini DL.Some correlates of intra-and interhemispheric speech organization after left focal brain injury.Neuropsychologia1988;26:345–3507.Sano Y,Kato M,Kojima T.Long-term assessment of aphasia[in Japanese].Situgosyokenkyu1996;16:123–1338.Dichowny M,Jayakar P,Harvey AS,et nguage cortex rep-resentation:effects of developmental versus acquired pathol-ogy.Ann Neurol1996;40:31–389.Ogawa S,Lee TM,Nayak AS,Glynn P.Oxygenation-sensitivecontrast in magnetic resonance image of rodent brain at high magneticfields.Magn Reson Med1990;14:68–7810.Binder JR,Rao SM,Hammeke TA,et teralized humanbrain language systems demonstrated by task subtraction functional magnetic imaging.Arch Neurol1995;52:593–601 11.Pugh KR,Shaywitz BA,Shaywitz SE,et al.Cerebral organi-zation of component processes in reading.Brain1996;119: 1221–123812.Binder JR,Hammeke JA,Rao SM,Cox RW.Function of the leftplanum temporale in auditory and linguistic processing.Brain 1996;119:1239–124713.Cuenod CA,Bookheimor SY,Hertz-Pannier L,Zeffiro TA,Theo-dore WH,Bihan DL.Functional MRI during word generation using conventional equipment:a potential tool for languagelocalization in the clinical environment.Neurology1995;45: 1821–182714.Kim KHS,Relkin NR,Lee KM,Hirsch J.Distinct cortical areasassociated with native and second languages.Nature1997;388: 171–17415.Hertz-Pannier L,Gaillard WD,Mott SM,et al.Noninvasive as-sessment of language dominance in children and adolescents with functional MRI:a preliminary study.Neurology1997;48: 1003–101216.Binder JR,Swanson SJ,Hammeke TA,et al.Determination oflanguage dominance using functional MRI:a comparison with the Wada test.Neurology1996;46:978–98417.Desmond JE,Sum JM,Wagner AD,et al.Functional MRI mea-surement of language lateralization in Wada-tested patients.Brain1995;118:1411–141918.Bahn MM,Lin W,Silbergeld DL,Miller JW,et al.Localizationof language cortices by functional MR imaging compared with intracarotid amobarbital hemispheric sedation.AJNR Am J Neuroradiol1997;169:575–57919.Hinke RM,Hu X,Stillman AE,et al.Functional magnetic res-onance imaging of Broca’s area during internal speech.Neu-roreport1993;4:675–67820.Swanson SJ,Hammeke TA,Binder JR,Fischer M,Morris GL.Mueller nguage lateralization ratios with functional magnetic resonance imaging and Wada testing:preliminary report(abstr).J Int Neuropsychiatry Soc1995;1:14121.Orikasa H.Rinsyokenkyu Design[in Japanese].Tokyo:Mako-koeki;199522.Oldfield RC.The assessment and analysis of handedness:theEdinburgh inventory.Neuropsychologia1971;9:97–11323.Talairach J,Pierre T.Co-planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the HumanBrain:3-Dimensional Proportional System,an Approach to Ce-rebral Imaging.New York:Thieme;198824.Bandettini PA,Wong EC,Hinks RS,Tikofsky RS,Hyde JS.Timecourse EPI of human brain function during task activation.Magn Reson Med1992;25:390–39725.Okuno T.Ohyotokei Handbook[in Japanese].Tokyo:Youken-dou;198226.Terada K.Suikeitokeigaku[in Japanese].Tokyo:Asakurasyoten;197027.Fukutomi K,Nagai M,Nakamura Y,Yanagawa H.Kihontokei-gaku[in Japanese].Tokyo:Nanzandou;199528.Righini A,Divitis OD,Prinster A,et al.Functional MRI:pri-mary motor cortex localization in patients with brain tumors.J Comput Assist Tomogr1996;20:702–70829.Gazzaniga MS.The Cognitive Neurosciences.Cambridge:MITPress;199530.Renzi ED,Colombo A,Scapra M.The aphasic isolate:a clinical-CT scan study of a particularly severe subgroup of global aphasics.Brain1991;114:1719–173031.Willmes K,Poeck K.To what extent can aphasic syndromesbe localized?Brain1993;116:1527–1540。
课题：右脑开发ppt课件
课题：右脑开发
16
我们的危机
调查显示，现代社会95%以上的人仅仅开发 了大脑的一半，重点在左脑。右脑的大部分潜能 仍未开发。
科学家的研究告诉我们，大脑的左右两个半 球中，左脑功能的大部分，例如计算、书写、装 配机器等工作，正在逐步被计算机所代替。所以 有学者警告说：“不会使用右脑的人，将会被计 算机取代之，成为无用的人”。因此，21世纪的 学生，不会使用右脑，就好像不懂计算机一样， 将会跟不上时代发展的趋势。对右脑潜能的开发， 可使学生以旺盛的精力、清醒的头脑、敏捷的思 维进行高效的学习。所以，开发右脑是21世纪的 一项伟大工程。
课题：右脑开发
17
我们的机遇
所有取得大成功的伟人，诸如创立宗教伦理原则的教主默罕默德，耶稣， 释迦摩尼；创立哲学和社会伦理道德的柏拉图，亚里士多德，孔子，老子； 创建社会改革理论和实践的政治家马克思，拿破仑，林肯，毛泽东；科学理 论和技术发明创造家爱因斯坦，牛顿，爱迪生；文学艺术家莎士比亚，巴尔 扎克，毕加索，贝多芬，哪一个不是善于开发利用自我大脑潜能和群体乃至 人类的大脑潜能的巨匠？
5
生 活 化 一 点
课题：右脑开发
6
左.右脑功能：
右脑 （本能脑，潜意识脑）
图像化机能（企划力， 创造力，想象力）
与宇宙共振共鸣机能（第六感 、 透视力 、 直觉力 、 灵感 、 梦境等）
超高速自动演算机能 （ 心算、数学 ）
超高速大量记忆（速读、记忆力）
左脑 （意识脑）
知性·知识·理解·思考 判断·推断·语言·抑制 五感（视、听、嗅、触、 味觉）
• 在英国最近拍摄的一部纪录片中，丹尼尔.塔米特 被称为“脑人”。他的运算能力可以和计算机媲 美，对数的记忆让人瞠目结舌。2006年，塔米特
左右脑思维ppt课件
.
依靠机器比记忆重要
二、巴德·福克斯是如何知道这个日子对客 户的意义的
✓ 1、通过秘书的提醒 ✓ 2、通过CRM的提醒程序 ✓ 3、通过自己的记忆 ✓ 4、碰巧的机会
49
.
认真的分析是优秀销售的基本功
三、巴德·福克斯怎么知道客户喜欢什么的？ ✓ 1、通过互联网搜索出来的 ✓ 2、通过查看人口资料登机 ✓ 3、通过电话号码资料查到的 ✓ 4、通过杂志的人物专访了解到的
77
.
销售基本原理
✓ 基本公理一：
不同的人对于利益的理解是不同的。这种不同的理解 可以被转化从而趋同或者差异加大。
✓ 基本管理二：
买卖双方基于各自的利益开展的互动行为。行为是基 于利益的，利益有可能是不同的。
78
.
销售原理的五条引理
✓ 五条引理：不同的人对利益的理解不同， 不同的时间不同，不同的场合不同，不同 的对象不同，不同的展示活动不同。
15
.
左右脑的科学依据
✓ 1981年，美国脑神经科学家罗杰·斯佩里 为此获得诺贝尔医学奖
✓ 左右脑的作用
16
.
人类是如何使用自己的大脑的？
✓ 左右脑的分工
左脑用于思考以及逻辑思维 右脑用于记忆以及感性表现
✓ 左右脑的分工表现
左脑用于分析眼前的事情 右脑用于感觉眼前的处境
✓ 对价格/价值的思考模式
✓ 主要目标
针对未知客户的情况较多 属于大众传播以及广告投放等
31
.
初次认知
✓ 初次认知
多次接触后，开始好奇，由好奇开始主动搜索相关资 料，从而开始建立一定程度的认知。认知从时间，程 度上发展后，形成固定的态度
✓ 主要目标
强化品牌认知度 提高潜在客户的成交率
保护大脑的PPT课件
创造良好的睡眠环境，如安静、黑暗、凉爽等，有助于提 高睡眠质量。
详细描述
良好的睡眠环境可以提高睡眠质量。建议保持室内安静、 黑暗、凉爽等环境因素，同时避免使用电子设备等刺激性 物品。
保持积极心态
总结词
保持积极的心态和情绪，有助于调节神经递质和荷尔蒙水平，保护大脑健康。
详细描述
积极的心态和情绪可以促进神经递质和荷尔蒙的正常分泌，如多巴胺、血清素 等，有助于提高大脑的认知功能和记忆力。建议通过社交互动、兴趣爱好等方 式保持积极心态。
PART 03
大脑的疾病与预防
阿尔茨海默病
阿尔茨海默病是一种常见的神经系统 退行性疾病，主要症状包括记忆力减 退、思维混乱、语言障碍等。
目前尚无殊效药物能够治愈阿尔茨海 默病，但通过药物治疗、心理治疗和 康复训练等综合手段，可以缓解症状 ，提高患者生活质量。
阿尔茨海默病的病因尚未完全明确， 可能与遗传、环境、生活习惯等多种 因素有关。
良好的睡眠对大脑的健康至关重要。充足的睡眠可以帮助 大脑修复和恢复功能，提高认知能力和记忆力。建议每晚 保持7-9小时的睡眠时间。
总结词
建立规律的睡眠习惯，有助于调节生物钟，提高睡眠质量 。
详细描述
建立规律的睡眠习惯有助于调节生物钟，提高睡眠质量。 建议每晚在同一时间入睡和起床，保持规律的睡眠习惯。
详细描述
大脑需要足够的营养来保持正常运转，如维生素、矿物质 、蛋白质等。健康饮食应包含足够的蔬菜、水果、全谷类 食物、低脂肪乳制品、瘦肉和鱼类等，同时减少糖分和饱 和脂肪的摄入。
总结词
控制盐和糖的摄入量，有助于降低高血压和糖尿病等慢性 病的风险，从而保护大脑健康。
详细描述
高盐和高糖饮食会导致血压和血糖升高，长期如此会损伤 大脑功能。因此，应控制饮食中的盐和糖含量，尽量选择 天然、低糖、低盐的食物。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
GREEN YELLOW BLUE ORANGE
WHITE RED GREEN BLUE ORANGE
YELLOW WHITE GREEN RED BLUE
WHITE GREEN ORANGE YELLOW
ORANGE BLUE GREEN RED WHITE
YELLOW RED BLUE YELLOW
2. Left Brain and Right Brain Inventory this document throws light on how left and right brain control different characteristics of human beings.
3. Left Brain - this document provides
➢ It's all about which side of your brain dominates - the left or the right.
-
6
➢ The human brain is bifurcated down the middle into two parts, popularly known as the left brain and right brain respectively. We know that different parts of the brain control different bodily and mental functions.
FUNCTIONS OF
LEFT BRAIN
Vs
RIGHT BRAIN
-
1
Are you Creative or Analytical?
Our brain has two halves – the right and the left. People using left part of the brain are usually logical and analytical. While those who use the right half of the brain are creative, innovative and imaginative.
ORANGE RED WHITE BROWN WHITE
-3Leabharlann If you merely read the words, you are likely to be using right brain.
Whereas, if you read the colours, you are using your left brain.
➢ Over the years, a theory that has gained in popularity is that the right brain and the left brain are responsible for different modes of thought and that the way in which a person thinks will depend on which side of his brain predominates.
information on differences between left brain
thinking and right brain thinking.
-
5
Left Brain vs. Right Brain I'm creative and he's analytical
➢ Have you ever thought why some people can paint beautifully, but have difficulty adding two and two? Or why some people can understand the intricacies of calculus effortlessly, but struggle to write a one-page essay?
Do you want to know whether you are right or left brained?
-
2
Try this! Read aloud, as quickly as possible,
the colour in which the words are written but not the actual words.
-
4
This topic is presented in three parts with detailed information on each
1. Left Brain vs. Right Brain - this document provides fundamentals of Left Brain thinking vs. Right Brain thinking.
➢ Left-brain dominated people may find their
thought processes vague and difficult to follow,
for they are quite opposite in the way they think.
Left-brain dominated people tend to be more
-
7
Left brain vs. right brain
➢ People who rely more heavily on the right half of their brain tend to be more imaginative and intuitive. They see things as a whole and are interested in patterns, shapes and sizes. The right brain is associated with artistic ability like singing, painting, writing poetry, etc.