[02.02.2025] Spelling/Grammar, AnKing-MCAT/AnKingMed, ID 2932963

View Suggestion on AnkiHub

Not really fond of this card in the first place.

In the deck we have:

The opposite of sensory adaptation is {{c1::amplification}}.

{{c1::Sensory adaptation}} (or {{c1::neural adaptation}}) is a {{c2::decreased}} responsiveness of a sensory neuron over time in response to a constant stimulus.

which would imply that sensory adaptation involves a decrease in response to stimulus. I dont really know how to articulate this well but there is sensory adaptation as a term and as a concept but these cards seem pretty counterintuitive/contradictory.

Nothing really to do with ur edit but this reminds me these cards are kind of a problem.

Related UWorld:

Sensory adaptation (or neural adaptation) is a decreased responsiveness of a sensory neuron over time in response to a constant stimulus.

Cant edit anything.
The opposite of sensory adaptation is {{c1::amplification}}.
This is UP regulation.

is what we have. The second one I put in is from the UWorld one that I made cant fix it.

The existing card isn’t great. I think we can tweak a bit more, though, imo:

  • Current suggestion: {{c1::Sensory adaptation}} describes how {{c2::our receptors can increase or decrease their sensitivity to a stimulus.::do what?}}

I’m thinking something like:

  1. {{c1::Sensory adaptation}} is the process by which {{c2::sensory receptors increase or decrease their sensitivity to a stimulus over time.::do what?}}

or

  1. {{c1::Sensory adaptation}} is the process by which {{c2::sensory receptors adjust their sensitivity to a stimulus, either increasing or decreasing their response over time.::do what?}}”

What’s your opinion on the fact that this current card contradicts our definition for sensory amplification?
We have this other card:
The opposite of sensory adaptation is {{c1::amplification}}.
This is UP regulation.

Which would suggest that sensory adaptation is a decrease/downregulation in sensitivity. Rather than our current card which suggests that sensory adaptation is an increase or decrease in sensitivity.

Notably, UWorld also seems to take the hardline approach that:

Sensory adaptation (or neural adaptation) is a decreased responsiveness of a sensory neuron over time in response to a constant stimulus.

which also contradicts our definition in this card. It seem like in this card we are describing the concept of what adaptation means rather than the actual term sensory adaptation.

We can dig deeper, but I’m not sure there is one consensus on this.

For example, Kaplan discusses physiological (sensory) adaptation to light, and gives the example of both constriction and dilation while noting that it “generally raises the…threshold for sensory response.”

Khan goes the same angle: “Sensory adaptation is a change in the sensitivity of perceptionwe can get both up- and down-regulation.”

Whereas UWorld really lines it up as “sensory adaptation occurs when…fewer messages to the brain” which obviously hews to only the attenuation angle.

If so, we have another example of discrepancy in source material.

In these occasions the safest thing is probably to append a note in the Extra field to account for the discrepancy in primary reference sources.

I agree. Thats why I’m wondering if it makes sense to just define sensory amplification in the card about sensory amplification rather than defining it by comparing it to sensory adaptation. As is, these cards don’t really work together.

Well, are we just going to change the other card from:

The opposite of X is Y” to “the definition of X is ____

I’m not sure changing the structure of the card wholesale is fair to existing users, really.

Do we know the source material for the other card?

I don’t see the term ‘amplification’ in either UWorld or Kaplan. It also strikes me as an odd word choice, in that you’re typically talking about sensitization or desensitization/habituation, rather than amplification which is typically more related to the signal than the reception.

I agree it’s a big change but don’t the two definitions actually not work together at all? Sensory amplification can’t be the opposite of adaptation if adaptation is both upregulation and down regulation.

I agree it’s weird word choice but I don’t think desensitization or habituation can be described as the opposite of sensory adaptation either if we define sensory adaptation in the deck as an increase or decrease in responsiveness. By not making it a comparison card we aren’t forced to take a hardline approach with whether or not sensory adaptation is an increase or decrease or just a decrease since there is a discrepancy between sources.

It’s all discussed here:

https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/processing-the-environment/somatosensation/v/sensory-adaptation-and-amplification

^ adaptation vs amplification

There is a discrepancy, yeah. This is the same issue we’ve run into before, and until such day as all sources are completely vetted against each other we won’t ever entirely avoid all of them

I understand the point/s, but I would reinforce that changing the content of a card on unsuspecting users is not an appropriate avenue, imo. That’s not great conduct as curators, short of absolute errors.

If you want to suggest a change we can vote on it like anything. I’m of the mind here that we shouldn’t, and/or can’t, dance entirely around all of these discrepancies to avoid them entirely and trying to do so is a recipe for failure. At the very least, one could argue that dancing around them does not address them and could very well lead to more, not less, confusion for some users.

Editorializing around them is not our role, in my opinion; where primary sources disagree we should point to the presence of disagreement and note as such. If and when we find a corroborating AAMC source, we can defer to it as ground-level truth.

TL; DR: where discrepancies exist, I think we note them as such and clarify. It’s not appropriate to our role to editorialize around them, imo