Article Analysis Draganski (Essay Sample)

Students Name Nstructors Name Course Name Due Date Article Analysis 1. Based on the description in the Brain lecture, my understanding is that the researchers divided a group of volunteers into two groups: jugglers and non-jugglers. The juggler group was tasked with learning to juggle three balls over the course of three months, while the non-juggler group did not learn any new skill (Draganski et al. 311). Both groups underwent brain scans at three different time points: before the juggler group started learning, after the juggler group became proficient at juggling, and three months after the second scan. 2. The presentation stated that the researchers discovered that the juggler group underwent temporary structural alterations in the left posterior intraparietal sulcus and the mid-temporal area of the brain, two areas linked to the processing and storage of complex visual motion information. After the juggler group learnt to juggle, these changes were seen, but by the third scan, their juggling abilities had declined. 3. Three examples of details included in the article but not in the lecture: a) The study involved 24 participants (21 female, 3 male) with a mean age of 22 years (Draganski et al. 311). b) The researchers used a technique called voxel-based morphometry, which is a sophisticated whole-brain imaging technique designed to find significant regional differences in grey and white matter. c) The researchers found no significant differences in grey matter between the juggler and non-juggler groups at the baseline scan. 4. In my opinion, this study does a middling job of studying a representative group of participants. The sample size of 24 participants is relatively small, and the age range is quite narrow (mean age of 22 years). Additionally, the study included a disproportionate number of female participants (21 females, 3 males). While the study's conclusions may be valid for young adults, it may not be generalizable to other age groups or to the broader population. However, the use of a homogeneous group of participants matched for age and sex can also be seen as a strength, as it helps control for potential confounding variables. 5. Yes, this study is an experiment. The researchers manipulated an independent variable (learning to juggle) and observed its effect on a dependent variable (brain structure). The presence of a control group (non-jugglers) and random assignment of participants to the two groups further support the classification of this study as an experiment. 6. Conceptually, the independent variable is the act of learning a new skill (juggling). This variable is operationalized by assigning participants to either learn a classic three-ball cascade juggling routine (juggler group) or not learn any new skill (non-juggler group). 7. Conceptually, the dependent variable is brain plasticity or structural changes in the brain. This variable is operationalized by measuring changes in grey matter volume in specific brain regions using voxel-based morphometry, a whole-brain imaging technique. 8. Without using technical jargon, the researchers found that after the juggler group learned to juggle, there was an increase in the amount of grey matter (the part of the brain involved in processing information) in two specific areas of the brain: one area near the middle of the side of the head (the mid-temporal area) and another area towards the back of the head (the left posterior intraparietal sulcus). These changes were temporary and decreased after the jugglers stopped practicing their newly acquired juggling skills. 9. I would anticipate a favorable association given that there was a claim of a "close relationship" between the structural grey-matter alterations and juggling performance. In other words, as the jugglers became more proficient at juggling, the grey matter changes in the relevant brain regions became more pronounced. Conversely, as their juggling skills deteriorated after the third scan, the grey matter changes also dimi...