Areas of cognitive neuroscience that are relevant for understanding decision making processes
We are continuously making decisions that can range in complexity and decision making time from making investments, buying a home, deciding to eat (or not eat) a fresh cream filled chocolate doughnut to ‘deciding’ to stop (or not stop) at a yellow light in an intersection.
On this website we have several postings that are about how we make decisions. Reading the literature on decision science leaves us with no doubt that making good decisions involves a complex interplay between history of learning (development), context, genetics and all of the supporting brain hardware (networks) and ‘software’ (neurochemical events). You knew all that. I knew that. You also have been exposed to loads of books, articles, popular programming on a range of topics like neuroeconomics.
I was urged to try and bring some order to what we know about decision making. I found that charge overwhelming so instead I thought a contribution that highlights some recent findings can be of value. I also felt that highlighting areas of knowledge that can inform us about decision making processes can be of real value. So here goes starting with what is new.
The amygdale is another brain system player that has marched on the decision making stage, this brain structure has long been known to be tuned to signaling fear, but also appears to have a important role in evaluating the good stuff in our lives. Given the location of the amygdale in the brain makes it a logical candidate for mediating decision processes. It is linked through a complex network of cells to brain regions involved in all five senses and is also well connected to the prefrontal cortex — the brain’s control center for planning and decision making. The amygdala is also part of the limbic system, a primitive brain structure involved in emotion and arousal that for decades has been known to identify danger and threats. Scientists such as Elizabeth Murray and NIH have recently identified the amygdala’s role in reward-based behavior. Furthermore, given the amygdala’s connection to the prefrontal cortex it turns out to be a crucial part of the circuitry in allowing animals (monkeys) to make good decisions. Part of the evidence needed for establishing the role of the amygdale in good decision making is based on controlled laboratory studies of animals whose amygdale has been removed. To quote Murray in her view of the role of the amygada in goal setting, “It means the animals literally know and somehow represent a goal. And that if the value of the goal changes, they can therefore change their behavior. We think this is what humans do, so it’s really helpful to understand the neural (amygdala) circuitry.” In another study published in the Jan 5, 2011 issue of the Journal of Neuroscience Jenison and colleagues have shown how single neurons in the human amygdala are able to assess the value of and how amygdala neurons compute value in real time, while decisions are being made.
Knowing something about the COMPLEX neuroanatomy of decision still leaves us in the dark when it comes to understanding how our brains operate and evaluate information which can then be translated into action. How are decisions made under emotional conditions compared to cool and collected decision making? How does our knowledge of cravings, (such as is the case in addicts) relevant to understanding high emotion decision making? How is willpower and self regulation reflected in decision making? From a developmental perspective it would seem that understanding how learning executive functions including planning and the ability to delay instant gratification evolve into decision making skills?
It would be nice to be able to diagram decision processes based on its components played out in real time. We are far from being there although we are learning lots of bit and pieces of relevant knowledge.
A note from a website reader
JR writes us a short note in response to yesterday’s posting of ‘What should we know to understand how we make good and bad decisions?’ LAK writes about complexity of decision processes. Of course we would like to know all about the behavioral/neural components of behind our decisions and consequent actions. Of course we also appreciate that those components may be somewhat different in deciding about the economics of our retirement, in deciding to walk away from a wonderful doughnut, or whether to stop or go through a yellow light at an intersection. So even though our decision science knowledge is spotty we do know a few things that can help us make better decisions. At the top of the list is to slow down the decision making process so that we move from automatic, reflexive (often emotional) responding to decisions based on reflection and review of relevant knowledge. It also helps to be disciplined and skilled at delaying gratification which is a kind of expertise that we learn starting in childhood but can also be strengthened through refresher learning.