Effect of somatic marker hypothesis on making decisions

Effect of somatic marker hypothesis on making decisions The Somatic-marker hypothesis (SMH) was first proposed by Demasio (1996), to explain the process of decision-making, while incorporating the role of emotion. This hypothesis developed after working with neurological patients who had damage to the prefrontal region, specifically in the ventral and medial regions, and presented severe impairments in decision making abilities (Damasio, 1979, 1994). As patients did not show any other impairment to their mental abilities, other than a compromised ability to express emotion, Damasio was able to investigate a link between emotion and decision-making ability. However, this link has been opposed by the Expected Utility Theory, which considers a rational approach to decision-making, in which emotion does not play a role (Friedman Savage, 1948). Demasio states within the SMH that people are able to make decisions through interaction between emotion and rationality, to produce the most appropriate outcome. These interactions are made by the emotional response and information from environmental input being presented in the form of physiological arousal, allowing an individual to assess their emotional response to a situation (Gazzaniga, Ivry Mangun, 2009). He argued that emotion is most commonly presented through alterations in an individuals physiological state, as these emotions are represented within the brain as temporary changes in the activity pattern of somato-sensory structures. Although human emotion has been primarily linked to the functions of the limbic system, the SMH proposed that despite the involvement of emotion, the neuronal circuit involved in decision making incorporates a variety of brain regions outside of these classic limbic system structures (MacLean, 1949). Damasio argues that in this process the emo tional responses require multiple sources of feedback from the periphery brain in order to assist decision making (Damasio, 2004). There have been found to be two different forms of stimuli which cause an alteration in physiological states of humans allowing decision-making to later occur; primary inducers are innate or learned stimuli which rely on the amygdala to produce a physiological change; secondary inducers are entities which are produced through the recall of a personal experience of a primary inducer and rely on the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) to activate somatic states; these are most common in the face of uncertain outcomes, as they rely on information provided by similar past experiences. These somatic states, which are experienced when a stimuli is presented, are the result of responses aimed at the brain which lead to; the central nervous system (CNS) releasing neurotransmitters, a modification of the state of somatosensory maps, and an alteration in the transmission of signals from the body to somatosensory regions. The body receives information from these changes, and combines them to be interpreted as an emotion (Bechara, 2004). After a somatic state has been produced by a primary inducer, signals are then received by the brain to produce somatic state patterns in the brainstem nuclei and in the somato-sensing cortices. Once this somatic state alteration has occurred due to the initial presentation of a primary inducer, the pattern is stored for later recall. Later presentation of this primary inducer or a related secondary inducer can cause the somatic state pattern to be recalled and produce a similar emotional response. As a result, the brain is able to produce a prediction model of alterations expected to occur in the body, allowing the individual to respond more effectively and rapidly to the stimuli, without having to wait for the changes in physiology to be produced by the periphery (Dunn, Dalgleish, Lawrence, 2006). This reaction is summarised by the SMH, as the process allows an individual to be influenced in decision-making by the basic biasing signals which are produced as a result of the neurotr ansmitters being released in the cerebral cortex and the diencephalon. For every response to a situation that an individual contemplates, a somatic state is created, which serve as an indicator of the expected outcome (Damasio, Tranel Damasio, 1991; Damasio, 1996). This causes the somatic state to apply a biasing effect of an individuals behaviours, feelings, and cognitive patterns in response to a situation. Evidence of the link between emotion and decision-making was provided by Domasio, when he observed a patient who had damage to the orbitofrontal cortex. He found that the patient E.V.R was able to generate reasonable solutions when presented with a social reasoning task, however, was unable to prioritize these solutions, identifying the most effective (Saver Damasio, 1991). Prior to this, the orbitofrontal cortex had primarily been associated with the control of emotion. This suggests that the decision-making process relies on information provided by the emotion region of the brain, in order to provide a reasonable response. Alternatively, some psychologists argue that the orbitofrontal cortex plays a leading role in applying social knowledge to the decision-making process rather than considering an individuals emotional response, due to the recognition of which rules can be applied to a particular social situation, rather than assessing somatic markers (Gazziniga et al., 2009). More evidence was provided by the neuropsychologist Le Doux (1996) who found that humans and animals responded to stimuli which could potentially harm them so quickly it was unlikely they could have considered the risks posed to them being in that situation. He argued that this quick emotional evaluation of stimuli is an innate response which has developed with evolution to preserve our species in the face of danger, rather than cognitively processing the unfolding events. Considering his evidence, LaDoux explains that our emotional circuitry is designed to have a greater influence on our rational approaches to decisions, rather than our rational thoughts over-riding our emotions. Despite the SMH satisfactorily explaining how our emotions have an unconscious effect on our decision making process, we must also consider the fact that emotions are also known to act consciously on our rational judgement. Some psychologists have suggested that this allows us to employ our emotions as another form of information which we integrate into our logical decision-making process (Schwarz, 2000). When presented with a range of alternatives, it is suggested that we consider the emotions relating to the options before us, which we are often very aware of. Strong empirical evidence has been provided from data on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a decision-making task which is believed to rely on emotional-related feedback from the body to enable an appropriate response (Bechara, Tranel, Damasio Damasio, 1996). The data indicated the lesions in the VMPFC cause impairments in decision-making, particularly the ability to select the most appropriate and advantageous option. This behavioural impairment has therefore been associated with the absence of predictor signals which allow an individual to differentiate between good and bad decisions. IGT has been praised as a sensitive, ecological measure of decision-making impairment, however, assumptions required for it to support the SMH have been criticised as unsound. The first assumption was that this learning is possible due to predictor marker signals produced by the body. Evidence from psychophysiological profiles compiled during the IGT did not support this suggestion (Tomb, Hauser, Deldin Caramazza, 2002), resulting in the lack of a causal relationship being established between disrupted feedback from the periphery and impaired decision-making. This suggests that the predictor changes may actually represent the expectancy anticipation towards the outcome, once the decision has already been made (Amiez, Procyk, Honore, Sequeira Joseph, 2003). It is also suggested that the tasks which aimed to measure implicit learning as the reward/punishment schedule as being cognitively inexplicable, in fact demonstrated accurate knowledge of the tasks possible outcomes (Maia McClelland, 2004). It was found that cognitive mechanisms, including working-memory exert a strong influence on task performance. Further support was given for the SMH in the business environment, as it is able to explain why we often rely on gut feelings when making a decision, and find them to be better predictors for a decision outcome than market data and past research. Physiological evidence from these studies identifies the involvement of the striatum and anterior cingulated in recognizing patterns and calculating the probabilities of outcomes. It was found that these areas respond immediately when presented with repeated or alternative somatic state patterns (Huettel et al. 2002). Alternatively, Rolls (1999) provides criticism, as he argues that the SMH proposes a very inefficient view that peripheral responses are located in the execution route, and for interpretation and measurement of this peripheral response to occur simultaneously. Rather, he suggests that reinforcement association, located in the orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala, is more than efficient enough to allow emotion-based learning to occ ur. This learning would consequently alter behaviours via the orbitofrontal-striatal pathways, through implicit or explicit processes. An alternative theory to decision-making is the Expected Utility Theory (EUT) (Bernoulli, 1738 cited 1997) which states that an individual is able to select an appropriate resolution in risky circumstances by comparing their expected utility values. These are calculated by adding the utility value of the outcomes multiplied by their respective probabilities, for each option available (Mongin, 1997). The expected utilities are determined by considering the probability of each possible outcome (gain or loss) for a particular option (Hoogendoorn, Merk Treur, 2006). This theory of decision-making considers a rational approach, in which emotion does not cause a bias towards the decisions made. However, much criticism has been provided by Kahneman and Tversky (1974, 1979) when considering this theory as a practical model for human decision-making. They found in numerous studies that humans are particularly bad at estimating probabilities objectively, and so their emotions may cause a bias in the final decision-making process. This has been reinforced by many others (Ellsberg, 1961; Fellner, 1961) who highlight the difficulty in determining the level of uncertainty in a given situation. They also suggest that people are not often aware of the exact probabilities associated with the possible outcomes, and so this problem, combined with the issue of ambiguity has been the focus for much further research Kahnenman Tversky, 2000). To conclude, the Somatic Marker Hypothesis proposed by Damasio (1994) suggests that when an individual experiences a situation, alterations in their physiological state are represented within their body as changes in their somato-sensory state. These changes are represented as an emotion towards that particular situation and act as an indicator of the expected outcome. When faced with a similar situation in the future, which requires a decision, Damasio suggested that an individual extracts emotional information supplied by somatic marker to facilitate them in the decision-making process. Evidence for this theory has been provided by numerous studies of neurological patients who had damage to the prefrontal region, and presented severe impairments in decision making abilities (Damasio, 1979, 1994). However, psychologists Gazziniga et, al. (2009) suggest that although emotion does play a role in decision-making, it is involved in the recognition of socially acceptable activities, rath er than assessing somatic markers. In contrast, the Expected Utility Theory approaches decision-making in a much more rational way. It states that an individual assesses the probability of loss or gain for each available outcome in order to select the most advantageous choice of action. Bachara Demasio (2005) has since suggested further research to fully explore some unanswered questions posed by the SMH. Little research has previously been conducted into the different kinds of decision-making and the relationship it may have with recruiting different neural networks for different tasks. Secondly, he proposed investigating if we are able to successfully identify when emotions are helpful or a hindrance in decision-making and if there are any individual differences.

Southern Arizona: Lives that Shaped the Frontier Experience :: Essays Papers

"Ordinary" Women in Early Twentieth Century Southern Arizona: Lives that Shaped the Frontier Experience Some historians have argued that women’s roles in early 20th century Arizona centered exclusively around the domestic sphere and typified values of femininity such as passivity, motherhood, and loyalty to marriage. Their journeys to the West are likewise portrayed as involuntary and life on the frontier a hated struggle. For example, Christiane Fischer states, â€Å"Frontier conditions tended to reinforce women in their traditional roles and did not open up any new possibilities for them† (Fischer, 46). Although this may have been true for some, women’s overall experiences and contributions to Arizona’s history were much more complex. Although historically â€Å"important† figures are often over-represented in the stories we tell about our past, it is essential to remember that social change cannot occur without the involvement of thousands of ordinary folks. According to E.D. Branch, â€Å"If there is a moral to the history of the westwa rd movement, it is this: the transcendent importance of small things and of unimportant people† (Branch in Poling-Kempes, xii). This is especially relevant to women’s history in that women’s experiences are often ignored in dominant discourse and their achievements are relegated to the invisible sphere of domesticity. This essay will explore the ways in which â€Å"ordinary† women influenced the development of the Arizona frontier and to what extent the conditions of this lifestyle affected their roles and opportunities. At the turn of the century, women in the West enjoyed greater freedom than their sisters in other parts of the country. Various social and economic necessities both allowed and forced women into situations that were traditionally reserved for men. Lesley Poling-Kempes states, â€Å"Liberation may have been a side effect, rather than a motivating force or premeditated goal, for women in the new society of the American West† (Poling-Kempes, 49). Women in this region generally had a better economic status, more job opportunities, and higher legal status than women in other regions (Rothschild and Hronek, xx). Historians have presented several hypotheses to explain this geographical distinction. One such theory is that the biased sex ratio (many more men were present than women) required men to be tolerant of women leading unconventional lifestyles. Another possibility is that, overall, the frontier embraced a more democratic way of life than settled areas, which in turn affected women’s rights (Rothschild and Hronek, xx).

Breakthroughs in Modern Deep Sea Treasure Hunting

Modern deep sea treasure hunting and/or modern marine archaeology have benefited greatly from two technical breakthroughs: (1) side scanning sonar and; (2) remotely operated vehicles (ROVs). These two breakthroughs have made the largest financial impact on the profession than any other modern breakthroughs in the same field. Before side scanning sonar and ROVs were developed for practical use, deep sea treasure hunting professionals and marine archaeologists have to contend with human limitations on the vast three-dimensions of the sea.Two dimensions involve covering the length and width of the water surface or coastline (Smith). The third involves exploring the depths. The first two dimensions challenge the luxury of time. Unlike sunken cities (â€Å"Port Royal†), shipwrecks have occurred in random places over a very wide area. Tracking the exact location of sunken ships could take years through the investigation of historical records (Handwerk), (Australian Broadcasting Corp oration [ABC]), sample dives and other traditional methods. Moreover, since shipwrecks have occurred at random periods in history (Burke), pinpoint accuracy is an issue (â€Å"Outer Continental†).Deep sea explorers need to choose one shipwreck from a choice of many (Barrett). UNESCO estimates that there are more than 3 million shipwrecks in the world (Raja). Exploration costs a lot of money too. Bills fetch as much as â‚ ¬500 Thousand (â€Å"Italy†) or even US $6. 25 Million (Reuters) for one shipwreck alone. Hence, most deep sea explorers try to get financial backing from investors (Dennis) and concentrate their resources on just one shipwreck. With side scanning sonar, deep sea exploration companies can now cover larger areas at shorter periods of time.Odyssey Marine Exploration for instance covered 3,700 square miles and detected 2,100 possible shipwrecks in a period of less than four months (â€Å"Outer Continental†). Compare this with Mel Fisher’s 16-year search of Nuestra Senora de Atocha, a 1622 Spanish galleon wreck off the Florida Straits (Illingworth). Maybe even with Howard Collingwood’s use of archival research and a translator of historical texts as preliminaries to his cesium magnetometer scan of his target coverage (â€Å"Interview†). The third dimension challenges the forces of nature.Divers have to contend with these: (1) great water pressures; (2) strong undersea currents; (3) murky and sometimes polluted waters; (4) hostile sea creatures like sharks, eels, and crabs; (4) razor-sharp corals and other hard, pointed objects under the sea; and (5) moving heavy debris under water (â€Å"Port Royal†). In this dimension, ROVs have already accomplished many great things. The deepest deep sea treasure recovery has been made by ROVs at a depth of 170 meters (Reuters). ZEUS, a ROV, visually inspected 400 possible shipwrecks in a record-time of four months (â€Å"Outer Continental†).Moreover, wi th James Cameron’s filming of the Titanic (â€Å"Florida†), ROVs have been popularized and have become most financially-rewarding, Hollywood-style (â€Å"Master†). ROVs did not only address the forces of nature and provided safety to divers, ROVs also provided a new kind of treasure to deep sea professionals—royalty income from films. Works Cited Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). â€Å"Australia. † ABC Regional Online – Australia 14 July 2005. . Jordan 2. 7:17. Barrett, Helen. â€Å"Australia. † 24 Hour Museum – UK 17 July 2005. . Jordan 2. 7:17. Burke, Alan. â€Å"Massachusetts. † Gloucester Daily Times – USA 26 July 2005. (article no longer available). Jordan 2. 7:9. Dennis, Jan. â€Å"Dreams of Sunken Treasure Lure Ex-Hostage Back to South America. † Associated Press 26 Sep. 2004. . â€Å"Underwater. † â€Å"Florida. † Jacksonville Business Journal – Flordica, USA 27 Sep. 2 005. . Jordan 2. 7:9. Handwerk, Brian. â€Å"North Carolina.† National Geographic News – USA 12 July 2005. . Jordan 2. 9:10. Illingworth, Montieth M. â€Å"The Treasure Hunters: Before You Invest in a Search for Sunken Treasure, Find Out What You are Diving Into. † Cigar Aficionado Online. 1995. 6 Jan. 2006. . â€Å"Interview with Treasure Hunter. † CNN. com – Transcripts. Video transcript aired on 20 June 2004. CNN. 6 Jan. 2006. â€Å"Italy. † ANSA – Rome, Italy 27 Sep. 2005.. Jordan 2. 9:14. Jordan, Brian, MAC. Marine Cultural and Historic Newsletter 2. 7, Silver Spring, MD: National Marine Protected Area Center, July 2005. —. Marine Cultural and Historic Newsletter 2. 9, Silver Spring, MD: National Marine Protected Area Center, Sep. 2005. â€Å"Master of the Deep. † New Scientist – Interview. . â€Å"Underwater. † â€Å"Outer Continental Shelf and International Waters. † Tampa Bay Business Journa l 26 Sep. 2005. . Jordan 2. 9:12. â€Å"Port Royal – The Sunken City. † Book Review. 6 Jan. 2006. UK: AquaPress . Raja M. â€Å"Shipwreck Salvors See Treasure for the Taking. † Asia Times Online 17 Sep. 2004. . â€Å"Underwater. † Reuters. â€Å"Norway. † MSNBC – USA 20 Sep. 2005. . Jordan 2. 9:15. Smith, Helena. â€Å"Greece. † The Boston Globe 11 Sep. 2005. . Jordan 2. 9:13.

The Moundbuilder Myth Debunked

The Moundbuilder myth is a story believed, wholeheartedly, by Euroamericans in North America well into the last decades of the 19th and even into the 20th century. The central myth was that indigenous people who lived in what is today the United States were incapable of engineering of the thousands of prehistoric earthworks found by the newcomers and must have been built by some other race of people. That myth served as justification for the plan to exterminate Native Americans and take their property. It was debunked in the late 19th century. Key Takeaways: Moundbuilder Myth The Moundbuilder Myth was created in the mid-19th century to explain a disconnect within the thought processes of Euroamerican settlers.  The settlers appreciated the thousands of mounds on their new properties, but could not bear to credit mound construction to the Native American people they were displacing.  The myth credited the mounds to a fictional race of beings which had been driven out by the Native American residents.  The Moundbuilder Myth was disproven in the late 1880s.  Many thousands of earthen mounds were purposefully destroyed after the myth was dispelled. Early Explorations and the Mound Builders The earliest expeditions of Europeans into the Americas were by the Spanish who found living, vigorous and advanced civilizations—the Inca, the Aztecs, the Maya all had versions of state societies. The Spanish conquistador Hernando de Soto even found the true mound builders, when he visited the chiefdoms of the Mississippians running their sophisticated communities from Florida to the Mississippi River between 1539–1546. Circa 1540, Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto (c.1500–1542) and his men journey across America on one of their expeditions in search of treasure. Original Artwork: Painting by Frederic Remington. MPI / Stringer / Getty Images But the English who came to North America convinced themselves first that the people already inhabiting the land they were settling were literally descended from the Canaanites from Israel. As the European colonization moved westward, the newcomers continued to meet Native people some of whom were already devastated by diseases, and they began to find thousands of examples of massive earthworks—very tall mounds like Cahokias Monks Mound in Illinois, as well as mound groups, and mounds in various geometric shapes, spiral mounds, and bird and other animal effigies. The Great Serpent Mound in Adams County, Ohio, built and used by the Adena people between 800 BCE and 400 CE. This protected historical earthworks is nearly a quarter of a mile long and represents a giant snake holding an egg in its jaws. Photo by MPI/Getty Images A Myth is Born The earthworks encountered by the Europeans were a source of great fascination to the new settlers—but only after they convinced themselves that the mounds had to have been built by a superior race, and that couldnt be the Native Americans. Because the new Euroamerican settlers could not, or did not want to, believe that the mounds had been built by the Native American peoples they were displacing as fast as they could, some of them—including the scholarly community—began to formulate a theory of the lost race of mound builders. The moundbuilders were said to be a race of superior beings, perhaps one of the Lost Tribes of Israel, or ancestors of Mexicans, who were killed off by later people. Some amateur excavators of the mounds claimed that the skeletal remains in them were of very tall individuals, who certainly could not be Native Americans. Or so they thought. Restored Mississippian palisaded mound group at Aztalan State Park in Wisconsin, fancifully named for the ancient home town of the Aztecs. MattGush / iStock / Getty Images Plus It was never an official government policy that the engineering feats were made by someone other than the indigenous residents, but the theory did bolster arguments supporting the manifest destiny of European desires. Many of the earliest settlers of the midwest were at least initially proud of the earthworks on their properties and did much to preserve them. Debunking the Myth By the late 1870s, however, scholarly research led by Cyrus Thomas (1825–1910) of the Smithsonian Institution and Frederick Ward Putnam (1839–1915) of the Peabody Museum reported conclusive evidence that there was no physical difference between the people buried in the mounds and modern Native Americans. Subsequent DNA research has proven that time and again.  Scholars then and today recognized that the ancestors of modern Native Americans were responsible for all of the prehistoric mound constructions in North America. Unintended Consequences Members of the public were harder to convince, and if you read county histories into the 1950s, you will still see stories about the Lost Race of Moundbuilders. Scholars did their best to convince people that the Native Americans were the architects of the mounds, by giving lecture tours and publishing newspaper stories. That effort backfired. Unfortunately, once the myth of a Lost Race was dispelled, the settlers lost interest in the mounds, and many if not most of the thousands of mounds in the American midwest were destroyed as settlers simply plowed away the evidence that a civilized, intelligent and capable people had been driven from their rightful lands. Selected Sources Clark, Mallam. R. The Mound Builders:  An American Myth. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 23 (1976): 145–75. Print.Denevan, William M. The Pristine Myth: The Landscape of the Americas in 1492. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 82.3 (1992): 369–85. Print.Mann, Rob. Intruding on the Past: The Reuse of Ancient Earthen Mounds by Native Americans. Southeastern Archaeology 24.1 (2005): 1–10. Print.McGuire, Randall H. Archeology and the First Americans. American Anthropologist 94.4 (1992): 816–36. Print.Peet, Stephen D. Comparison of the Effigy Builders with the Modern Indians. American Antiquarian and Oriental Journal 17 (1895): 19–43. Print.Trigger, Bruce G. Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian. American Antiquity 45.4 (1980): 662–76. Print.Watkins, Joe. Indigenous Archaeology: American Indian Values and Scientific Practice. Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press, 2000. Print.Wymer, Dee Anne. On the Edge of the Secular and the Sacred: Hopewell Mound-Builder Archaeology in Context. Antiquity 90.350 (2016): 532–34. Print.