Threat Simulation- The Function of Dreaming?

Dreaming is a pure form of phenomenality, created by the brain untouched by external stimulation or behavioral activity, yet including a full range of phenomenal contents. Thus, it has been suggested that the dreaming brain could be used as a model system in a biological research program on consciousness (Revonsuo, 2006). In the present thesis, the philosophical view of biological realism is accepted, and thus, dreaming is considered as a natural biological phenomenon, explainable in naturalistic terms. The major theoretical contribution of the present thesis is that it explores dreaming from a multidisciplinary perspective, integrating information from various fields of science, such as dream research, consciousness research, evolutionary psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. Further, it places dreaming into a multilevel framework, and investigates the constitutive, etiological, and contextual explanations for dreaming. Currently, the only theory offering a full multilevel explanation for dreaming, that is, a theory including constitutive, etiological, and contextual level explanations, is the Threat Simulation Theory (TST) (Revonsuo, 2000a; 2000b). The empirical significance of the present thesis lies in the tests conducted to test this specific theory put forth to explain the form, content, and biological function of dreaming. The first step in the empirical testing of the TST was to define exact criteria for what is a ‘threatening event’ in dreams, and then to develop a detailed and reliable content analysis scale with which it is possible to empirically explore and quantify threatening events in dreams. The second step was to seek answers to the following questions derived from the TST: How frequent threatening events are in dreams? What kind of qualities these events have? How threatening events in dreams relate to the most recently encoded or the most salient memory traces of threatening events experienced in waking life? What are the effects of exposure to severe waking life threat on dreams? The results reveal that threatening events are relatively frequent in dreams, and that the simulated threats are realistic. The most common threats include aggression, are targeted mainly against the dream self, and include simulations of relevant and appropriate defensive actions. Further, real threat experiences activate the threat simulation system in a unique manner, and dream content is modulated by the activation of long term episodic memory traces with highest negative saliency. To sum up, most of the predictions of the TST tested in this thesis received considerable support. The TST presents a strong argument that explains the specific design of dreams as threat simulations. The TST also offers a plausible explanation for why dreaming would have been selected for: because dreaming interacted with the environment in such a way that enhanced fitness of ancestral humans. By referring to a single threat simulation mechanism it furthermore manages to explain a wide variety of dream content data that already exists in the literature, and to predict the overall statistical patterns of threat content in different samples of dreams. The TST and the empirical tests conducted to test the theory are a prime example of what a multidisciplinary approach to mental phenomena can accomplish. Thus far, dreaming seems to have always resided in the periphery of science, never regarded worth to be studied by the mainstream. Nevertheless, when brought to the spotlight, the study of dreaming can greatly benefit from ideas in diverse branches of science. Vice versa, knowledge learned from the study of dreaming can be applied in various disciplines. The main contribution of the present thesis lies in putting dreaming back where it belongs, that is, into the spotlight in the cross-road of various disciplines.

Thinking Outside the Box: Enhancing Science Teaching by Combining (Instead of Contrasting) Laboratory and Simulation Activities

The focus of the present work was on 10- to 12-year-old elementary school students’ conceptual learning outcomes in science in two specific inquiry-learning environments, laboratory and simulation. The main aim was to examine if it would be more beneficial to combine than contrast simulation and laboratory activities in science teaching. It was argued that the status quo where laboratories and simulations are seen as alternative or competing methods in science teaching is hardly an optimal solution to promote students’ learning and understanding in various science domains. It was hypothesized that it would make more sense and be more productive to combine laboratories and simulations. Several explanations and examples were provided to back up the hypothesis. In order to test whether learning with the combination of laboratory and simulation activities can result in better conceptual understanding in science than learning with laboratory or simulation activities alone, two experiments were conducted in the domain of electricity. In these experiments students constructed and studied electrical circuits in three different learning environments: laboratory (real circuits), simulation (virtual circuits), and simulation-laboratory combination (real and virtual circuits were used simultaneously). In order to measure and compare how these environments affected students’ conceptual understanding of circuits, a subject knowledge assessment questionnaire was administered before and after the experimentation. The results of the experiments were presented in four empirical studies. Three of the studies focused on learning outcomes between the conditions and one on learning processes. Study I analyzed learning outcomes from experiment I. The aim of the study was to investigate if it would be more beneficial to combine simulation and laboratory activities than to use them separately in teaching the concepts of simple electricity. Matched-trios were created based on the pre-test results of 66 elementary school students and divided randomly into a laboratory (real circuits), simulation (virtual circuits) and simulation-laboratory combination (real and virtual circuits simultaneously) conditions. In each condition students had 90 minutes to construct and study various circuits. The results showed that studying electrical circuits in the simulation–laboratory combination environment improved students’ conceptual understanding more than studying circuits in simulation and laboratory environments alone. Although there were no statistical differences between simulation and laboratory environments, the learning effect was more pronounced in the simulation condition where the students made clear progress during the intervention, whereas in the laboratory condition students’ conceptual understanding remained at an elementary level after the intervention. Study II analyzed learning outcomes from experiment II. The aim of the study was to investigate if and how learning outcomes in simulation and simulation-laboratory combination environments are mediated by implicit (only procedural guidance) and explicit (more structure and guidance for the discovery process) instruction in the context of simple DC circuits. Matched-quartets were created based on the pre-test results of 50 elementary school students and divided randomly into a simulation implicit (SI), simulation explicit (SE), combination implicit (CI) and combination explicit (CE) conditions. The results showed that when the students were working with the simulation alone, they were able to gain significantly greater amount of subject knowledge when they received metacognitive support (explicit instruction; SE) for the discovery process than when they received only procedural guidance (implicit instruction: SI). However, this additional scaffolding was not enough to reach the level of the students in the combination environment (CI and CE). A surprising finding in Study II was that instructional support had a different effect in the combination environment than in the simulation environment. In the combination environment explicit instruction (CE) did not seem to elicit much additional gain for students’ understanding of electric circuits compared to implicit instruction (CI). Instead, explicit instruction slowed down the inquiry process substantially in the combination environment. Study III analyzed from video data learning processes of those 50 students that participated in experiment II (cf. Study II above). The focus was on three specific learning processes: cognitive conflicts, self-explanations, and analogical encodings. The aim of the study was to find out possible explanations for the success of the combination condition in Experiments I and II. The video data provided clear evidence about the benefits of studying with the real and virtual circuits simultaneously (the combination conditions). Mostly the representations complemented each other, that is, one representation helped students to interpret and understand the outcomes they received from the other representation. However, there were also instances in which analogical encoding took place, that is, situations in which the slightly discrepant results between the representations ‘forced’ students to focus on those features that could be generalised across the two representations. No statistical differences were found in the amount of experienced cognitive conflicts and self-explanations between simulation and combination conditions, though in self-explanations there was a nascent trend in favour of the combination. There was also a clear tendency suggesting that explicit guidance increased the amount of self-explanations. Overall, the amount of cognitive conflicts and self-explanations was very low. The aim of the Study IV was twofold: the main aim was to provide an aggregated overview of the learning outcomes of experiments I and II; the secondary aim was to explore the relationship between the learning environments and students’ prior domain knowledge (low and high) in the experiments. Aggregated results of experiments I & II showed that on average, 91% of the students in the combination environment scored above the average of the laboratory environment, and 76% of them scored also above the average of the simulation environment. Seventy percent of the students in the simulation environment scored above the average of the laboratory environment. The results further showed that overall students seemed to benefit from combining simulations and laboratories regardless of their level of prior knowledge, that is, students with either low or high prior knowledge who studied circuits in the combination environment outperformed their counterparts who studied in the laboratory or simulation environment alone. The effect seemed to be slightly bigger among the students with low prior knowledge. However, more detailed inspection of the results showed that there were considerable differences between the experiments regarding how students with low and high prior knowledge benefitted from the combination: in Experiment I, especially students with low prior knowledge benefitted from the combination as compared to those students that used only the simulation, whereas in Experiment II, only students with high prior knowledge seemed to benefit from the combination relative to the simulation group. Regarding the differences between simulation and laboratory groups, the benefits of using a simulation seemed to be slightly higher among students with high prior knowledge. The results of the four empirical studies support the hypothesis concerning the benefits of using simulation along with laboratory activities to promote students’ conceptual understanding of electricity. It can be concluded that when teaching students about electricity, the students can gain better understanding when they have an opportunity to use the simulation and the real circuits in parallel than if they have only the real circuits or only a computer simulation available, even when the use of the simulation is supported with the explicit instruction. The outcomes of the empirical studies can be considered as the first unambiguous evidence on the (additional) benefits of combining laboratory and simulation activities in science education as compared to learning with laboratories and simulations alone.

A game theoretic simulation model for quality oriented timber supply to sawmills

Summary

Comparison of thinning methods in a Scots pine stand on drained peatland : a simulation study

Tiivistelmä: Harvennusmenetelmien vertailu ojitetun turvemaan männikössä. Simulointitutkimus

Comparing simulation methods for modelling the errors of stand inventory data

Abstract

Simulation of spring wheat responses to elevated CO‚́‚ and temperature by using CERES-wheat crop model

Selostus: Kohotettujen CO‚́‚:n ja lämpötilan vaikutukset kevätvehnän fenologiseen kehitykseen ja sadontuottomahdollisuuksiin

Modeling and Simulation ofReal-Time System as a Tool to Improve Capacity Management - Case Fenix

Tämän tutkimustyön kohteena on TietoEnator Oy:n kehittämän Fenix-tietojärjestelmän kapasiteettitarpeen ennustaminen. Työn tavoitteena on tutustua Fenix-järjestelmän eri osa-alueisiin, löytää tapa eritellä ja mallintaa eri osa-alueiden vaikutus järjestelmän kuormitukseen ja selvittää alustavasti mitkä parametrit vaikuttavat kyseisten osa-alueiden luomaan kuormitukseen. Osa tätä työtä on tutkia eri vaihtoehtoja simuloinnille ja selvittää eri vaihtoehtojen soveltuvuus monimutkaisten järjestelmien mallintamiseen. Kerätyn tiedon pohjaltaluodaan järjestelmäntietovaraston kuormitusta kuvaava simulaatiomalli. Hyödyntämällä mallista saatua tietoa ja tuotantojärjestelmästä mitattua tietoa mallia kehitetään vastaamaan yhä lähemmin todellisen järjestelmän toimintaa. Mallista tarkastellaan esimerkiksi simuloitua järjestelmäkuormaa ja jonojen käyttäytymistä. Tuotantojärjestelmästä mitataan eri kuormalähteiden käytösmuutoksia esimerkiksi käyttäjämäärän ja kellonajan suhteessa. Tämän työn tulosten on tarkoitus toimia pohjana myöhemmin tehtävälle jatkotutkimukselle, jossa osa-alueiden parametrisointia tarkennetaan lisää, mallin kykyä kuvata todellista järjestelmää tehostetaanja mallin laajuutta kasvatetaan.