Rudy Garns's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
One important goal, according to Daeyeol Lee, PhD, Department of Neurobiology and Kavli Institute for Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, is understanding the neurobiological basis for individual variability while making decisions.
-
“For instance, addiction is fundamentally a problem of making bad choices, resulting from impaired reward signaling and decision-making circuits in the brain. Understanding these circuits has become key to linking genes and molecules with behavior in clinical studies.”
-
understanding the neurobiological basis for individual variability while making decisions
Tim van Gelder, Principal Fellow in Philosophy at the University of Melbourne, discusses one of the most critical of all human activities - decision making. Ockham's Razor - 28 March 2010 -
The hippocampus, a part of the brain essential for memory, has long been known to "replay" recently experienced events. Previously, replay was believed to be a simple process of reviewing recent experiences in order to help consolidate them into long-term memory. However, researchers have discovered that the replay function of the hippocampus is actually a much more complex, cognitive process.
The amygdala damage did not appear to affect risk-aversion—a similar behavior with an important difference. People who are risk-averse are less likely to take chances even when they have nothing to lose.
The frontal pole cortex (FPC) expanded markedly during human evolution, but its function remains uncertain in both monkeys and humans. Accordingly, we examined single-cell activity in this area. On every trial, monkeys decided between two response targets on the basis of a 'stay' or 'shift' cue. Feedback followed at a fixed delay. FPC cells did not encode the monkeys' decisions when they were made, but did so later on, as feedback approached. This finding indicates that the FPC is involved in monitoring or evaluating decisions. Using a control task and delayed feedback, we found that decision coding lasted until feedback only when the monkeys combined working memory with sensory cues to 'self-generate' decisions, as opposed to when they simply followed trial-by-trial instructions. A role in monitoring or evaluating self-generated decisions could account for FPC's expansion during human evolution.
Whaley offers a summary of papers by Martino et al. (open access) and Sharot et al. in a recent issue of J. Neurosci and a more recent paper by Croxson et al. notes correlates of cost-benefits valuation. (Deric Bownds' MindBlog)
They have identified a brain region that predicts choices before we even know what they are. The caudate nucleus, part of a structure called the striatum, is involved in anticipating rewards.
What interests me is the question of how humans learn to live with uncertainty. Before the scientific revolution determinism was a strong ideal. Religion brought about a denial of uncertainty, and many people knew that their kin or their race was exactly the one that God had favored. They also thought they were entitled to get rid of competing ideas and the people that propagated them. How does a society change from this condition into one in which we understand that there is this fundamental uncertainty? How do we avoid the illusion of certainty to produce the understanding that everything, whether it be a medical test or deciding on the best cure for a particular kind of cancer, has a fundamental element of uncertainty?
a biased mind can handle uncertainty more efficiently and robustly than an unbiased mind relying on more resource-intensive and general-purpose processing strategies (Deric Bownds' MindBlog)
Everyday actions such as sending an email or eating a sandwich are governed in the brain by a cascade of decision-making that runs from abstract to concrete, rather as in a large corporation, a new study has shown.
Furlong and Opfer do a nice set of experiments showing that we can be lured into making decisions by numbers that seem bigger than they really are. (Deric Bownds' MindBlog)
Don't think too much before purchasing that new car or television. According to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research, people who deliberate about decisions make less accurate judgments than people who trust their instincts.
Fellows 3 (3): 159 -- Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in decision...
-
2. Mind
thought, intelligence, compr...
Items: 3 | Visits: 7
Created by: Exploring Life
-
Data-Based School Reform
Selected readings for all se...
Items: 18 | Visits: 13
Created by: Michelle Harris
-
PERSONALITY TYPES & Thinking patterns in decision-making
by understanding dissimilar ...
Items: 117 | Visits: 18
Created by: Ambi Oct
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo
