<p>This morning I've heard this talk on Ted.com:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_killingsworth_want_to_be_happier_stay_in_the_moment.html" rel="nofollow">Matt Killingsworth: Want to be happier? Stay in the moment</a></p>

<p>The presenter is discussing an iPhone app used to track happiness, and <strong>seems to draw a conclusion that "mind wandering" is a related to much unhappiness</strong>, and that mind wandering is pervasive in 47% of his respondents. He also suggests that "being in the present" is tied to feeling happier.</p>

<p>His methods and graphs aside, I'm interested in this question:</p>

<p>Is "mind wandering" a thought pattern that arises naturally as a cognitive process, regardless of the brain biology? Or is it a biological marker, indicating the change of state of the persons biological homeostatic state? By Biological homeostatic state I mean neurotransmitter levels/binding, endocrine system state, etc.</p>

<p>For example, if a person is intoxicated with alcohol, then the person cannot help, but feel different, because of the foreign substance. <strong>I'm interested if there's any research indicating if different mental states, for example mind wandering, are caused by something that changes within the brain?</strong> </p>

<p>Because mind wandering is a rather vague subject, here's another thought process that has a very definitive effect on happiness: <strong>suicidal ideation</strong>. If a person is thinking of suicide, there's at least a chance that the person will follow through with the ideation, and from the quotes below, it seems that at least some victims were studied</p>

<p>(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin_receptor" rel="nofollow">Serotonin receptors on wikipedia</a>):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Deceased <strong>suicidal</strong> and otherwise <strong>depressed</strong> patients have had more
  <strong>5-HT2A</strong> receptors than normal patients. These findings suggest that
  post-synaptic 5-HT2A overdensity is involved in the pathogenesis of
  depression.[4]</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And another one: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Many human polymorphisms have been identified influencing the
  expression of <strong>5-HT2C</strong>. <strong>Significant correlations</strong> are suggested,
  specifically in relation to psychiatric disorders such as <strong>depression</strong>,
  OCD, and anxiety-related conditions. Polymorphisms also correlate with
  susceptibility to a number of conditions including drug abuse and
  obesity.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Reading this, it seems plausible that suicidal ideation, as a thought process, is at least partially related to the Serotonin(5HT) receptors 2A and 2C. As such, is it plausible to say that suicidal ideation is a biological marker of depression, just as mind wandering may be a biological marker of unhappiness?</p>

<p>Thank you for your input!</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-11-05T20:32:32.220Z
"arises naturally as a cognitive process, completely independent of biology" - so you know, to my knowledge this is a pretty controversial statement: the generally accepted belief in neuroscience (again, to my knowledge) is that *everything* is based in biology/chemistry (bioelectrochemistry, to be precise).
BenCole
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-11-05T20:36:00.610Z
Also, you have two questions here - it may result in better/more answers if you were to split them into two questions: `I'm interested if there's any research indicating if different mental states, for example mind wandering, are caused by something that changes within the brain?`  and  `As such, is it plausible to say that suicidal ideation is a biological marker of depression, just as mind wandering may be a biological marker of unhappiness?`
BenCole
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-11-05T21:53:32.230Z
Thank you, what I'm trying to express with "completely independent" is that the cognitive process alone may be responsible for the experience of mind wandering, and stuff like neurotransmitter levels do not play a significant role in the process. I've adjusted the wording of my question. As for the second example, I will think of how the two questions may be split
Alex Stone
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-30T07:49:41.993Z
Still, I think the controversial statement is "cognitive process alone", depending on what you mean.  Do you mean the processes in the brain responsible for cognition or cognitive processes as separate from the brain?  The latter is the controversial statement.  Even the former is somewhat of a difficult question.  Cognition seems to be distributed across the brain.  The processes (functional brain dynamics) themselves aren't all well documented yet; several frameworks are emerging, though.
Keegan Keplinger
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-31T14:53:18.603Z
As @BenCole pointed out, there are at least two questions in here which could be split up. Since this question didn't attract any answers over a long period of time, I've closed the question until done so. I do feel they can be good questions on their own, but a possible reason nobody answered so far is the scope is too broad.
Steven Jeuris
<neuroscience><abnormal-psychology><psychiatry><depression>
Is happiness a result of cognitive or a side effect of neurobiological processes?
Alex Stone
# Is happiness a result of cognitive or a side effect of neurobiological processes?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-11-05)

This morning I've heard this talk on Ted.com:

[Matt Killingsworth: Want to be happier? Stay in the moment](http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_killingsworth_want_to_be_happier_stay_in_the_moment.html)

The presenter is discussing an iPhone app used to track happiness, and **seems to draw a conclusion that "mind wandering" is a related to much unhappiness**, and that mind wandering is pervasive in 47% of his respondents. He also suggests that "being in the present" is tied to feeling happier.

His methods and graphs aside, I'm interested in this question:

Is "mind wandering" a thought pattern that arises naturally as a cognitive process, regardless of the brain biology? Or is it a biological marker, indicating the change of state of the persons biological homeostatic state? By Biological homeostatic state I mean neurotransmitter levels/binding, endocrine system state, etc.

For example, if a person is intoxicated with alcohol, then the person cannot help, but feel different, because of the foreign substance. **I'm interested if there's any research indicating if different mental states, for example mind wandering, are caused by something that changes within the brain?**

Because mind wandering is a rather vague subject, here's another thought process that has a very definitive effect on happiness: **suicidal ideation**. If a person is thinking of suicide, there's at least a chance that the person will follow through with the ideation, and from the quotes below, it seems that at least some victims were studied

([Serotonin receptors on wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin_receptor)):

> Deceased **suicidal** and otherwise **depressed** patients have had more
> **5-HT2A** receptors than normal patients. These findings suggest that
> post-synaptic 5-HT2A overdensity is involved in the pathogenesis of
> depression.[4]

And another one:

> Many human polymorphisms have been identified influencing the
> expression of **5-HT2C**. **Significant correlations** are suggested,
> specifically in relation to psychiatric disorders such as **depression**,
> OCD, and anxiety-related conditions. Polymorphisms also correlate with
> susceptibility to a number of conditions including drug abuse and
> obesity.

Reading this, it seems plausible that suicidal ideation, as a thought process, is at least partially related to the Serotonin(5HT) receptors 2A and 2C. As such, is it plausible to say that suicidal ideation is a biological marker of depression, just as mind wandering may be a biological marker of unhappiness?

Thank you for your input!

**Tags:** neuroscience, abnormal-psychology, psychiatry, depression

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "arises naturally as a cognitive process, completely independent of biology" - so you know, to my knowledge this is a pretty controversial statement: the generally accepted belief in neuroscience (again, to my knowledge) is that *everything* is based in biology/chemistry (bioelectrochemistry, to be precise).  
> **username_1**: Also, you have two questions here - it may result in better/more answers if you were to split them into two questions: `I'm interested if there's any research indicating if different mental states, for example mind wandering, are caused by something that changes within the brain?`  and  `As such, is it plausible to say that suicidal ideation is a biological marker of depression, just as mind wandering may be a biological marker of unhappiness?`  
> **username_0**: Thank you, what I'm trying to express with "completely independent" is that the cognitive process alone may be responsible for the experience of mind wandering, and stuff like neurotransmitter levels do not play a significant role in the process. I've adjusted the wording of my question. As for the second example, I will think of how the two questions may be split  
> **username_2**: Still, I think the controversial statement is "cognitive process alone", depending on what you mean.  Do you mean the processes in the brain responsible for cognition or cognitive processes as separate from the brain?  The latter is the controversial statement.  Even the former is somewhat of a difficult question.  Cognition seems to be distributed across the brain.  The processes (functional brain dynamics) themselves aren't all well documented yet; several frameworks are emerging, though.  
> **username_3**: As @username_1 pointed out, there are at least two questions in here which could be split up. Since this question didn't attract any answers over a long period of time, I've closed the question until done so. I do feel they can be good questions on their own, but a possible reason nobody answered so far is the scope is too broad.  

---

## 0 answers

