• Like

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

PowerPoint Presentation

  • 382 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
382
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Psychopathic Traits: The PCL-SV consists of 12 traits. Two factors; an interpersonal-affective factor and an impulsivity-social deviance factor. (i.e., Factor 1) includes superficial charm, grandiosity, lack of empathy and shallow affect, deception and manipulativeness, lack of remorse, and not accepting responsibility. Individuals who score high on these factors are often characterized as being callous and unemotional.The impulsivity-social deviance factor (i.e., Factor 2) includes impulsivity and need for stimulation, irresponsibility, poor behavioral controls, lacking long-term goals, early childhood and adolescent antisocial behavior, and adult antisocial behavior. Individuals who score high on this factor generally have a long history of aggression and antisocial behavior (in various forms), as well as difficulty controlling their impulses and delaying gratification. For each trait, a score of 0 indicates that the trait is absent, a score of 1 indicates the trait may be present (or appears to be present in a less extreme form), and a score of 2 indicates that the trait is clearly present.
  • 1) includes superficial charm, grandiosity, lack of empathy and shallow affect, deception and manipulativeness, lack of remorse, and not accepting responsibility. Individuals who score high on these factors are often characterized as being callous and unemotional.
  • Charness & Rabin 2002 QJE
  • Choice #9: Everyone picks A1 (but weakly dominated)
  • Charness & Rabin 2002 QJE
  • Charness & Rabin 2002 QJE
  • Anecdote about realizing subject was SP
  • Charness & Rabin 2002 QJE
  • Charness & Rabin 2002 QJE

Transcript

  • 1. Neural Computation Underlying Individual and Social Decision-Making
    Ming Hsu
    Haas School of Business
    University of California, Berkeley
  • 2. Neesweek, 09.August 2004
    Forbes, 01.September 2002
  • 3. The Big Picture
    Economics:
    formal, axiomatic, global
    Human
    Behavior
    Psychology: intuitive, empirical, local
    Neuroscience:
    biological, computational evolutionary
  • 4. The Big Picture
    Economics:
    formal, axiomatic, global.
    Neuroeconomics
    “A mechanistic, behavioral, and mathematical explanation of choice that transcends [each field separately].”
    - Glimcher and Rustichini. Science (2004)
    Human
    Behavior
    Psychology: intuitive, empirical,
    local.
    Neuroscience:
    biological, circuitry, evolutionary.
  • 5. The Big Picture
    Economics:
    formal, axiomatic, global.
    Neuroeconomics
    Studies how the brain encodes and computes values that guide behavior.
    Allows us to improve models, design markets/AI, create new diagnostic tools
    Human
    Behavior
    Psychology: intuitive, empirical,
    local.
    Neuroscience:
    biological, circuitry, evolutionary.
  • 6. Tools That We Used
    Functional Magnetic
    Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
    Special Populations
  • 7. fMRI Scanner
    7
  • 8. fMRI: Changes in Magnetization
    Activated State
    Basal State
  • 9. Agenda
    Individual Decision-Making
    Ambiguity aversion
    fMRI and brain lesion
    Sociopaths
    Social preferences
    Special population
    Take-aways
  • 10. Simple Decisions: Blackjack
  • 11. Simple Decisions: Blackjack
  • 12. Stock?
    Bond?
    Domestic?
    Foreign?
    Diversify
    Think long-term
    More Complicated: Investing
  • 13. Whether?
    Who?
    When?
    Where?
    37% Rule (Mosteller, 1987)
    “Dozen” Rule (Todd, 1997)
    Complicated: Love/Marriage
  • 14. Simple
    Complex
    Most of life’s decisions
    Little knowledge
    of probabilities
    Precise knowledge
    of probabilities
  • 15. Uncertainty about uncertainty?
  • 16. Ellsberg Paradox
    1961
  • 17. Urn I: Risk
    5 Red
    5 Blue
    Most people indifferent between
    betting on red versus blue
  • 18. Urn II: Ambiguity
    10 - x Red
    x Blue
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    Most people indifferent between
    betting on red versus blue
  • 19. Choose Between Urns
    Urn II
    (Ambiguous)
    Urn I
    (Risk)
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    Many people prefer betting on Urn I
    over Urn II.
  • 20. Where Is The Paradox?
    Urn II
    (Ambiguous)
    Urn I
    (Risk)
    P(RedII)=P(BlueII)
    P(RedII) < 0.5
    P(BlueII) < 0.5
    P(RedI) = P(BlueI)
    P(RedI) = 0.5
    P(BlueI) = 0.5
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    P(RedI) + P(BlueI) = 1
    P(RedII) + P(BlueII) = 1
  • 21. Not ambiguity
    averse
    Simple
    Complex
    Verizon
    Jennifer
    or
    Deutsche Telekom
    or
    Angelina
  • 22. Verizon or Deutsche Telecom?
    French & Poterba, American Economic Review (1991).
  • 23. fMRI Experiment
    Hsu, Bhatt, Adolphs, Tranel, and Camerer. Science. (2005)
  • 24. fMRI Experiment
    Hsu, Bhatt, Adolphs, Tranel, and Camerer. Science. (2005)
  • 25. Expected Reward Region
    y - Brain response
    A(.) - Ambiguity trials
    R(.) - Risk trials
    E(.) - Expected value of choices
    W(.) - Nuisance parameters
  • 26. % Signal Change
    Lower Activity under Ambiguity
  • 27. Region Reacting to Uncertainty
    Orbitofrontal Cortex
    y - Brain response
    A(.) - Ambiguity trials
    R(.) - Risk trials
    E(.) - Expected value of choices
    W(.) - Nuisance parameters
    N.B. This region does not correlate with expected reward.
  • 28. Stochastic Choice Model
    Brain Imaging Data
    Behavioral Choice Data
    Link Between Brain and Behavior
  • 29. ?
    Late
    Early
    A Signal for Uncertainty?
  • 30. Lesion Subjects
    Orbitofrontal
    Control
  • 31. Lesion Experiment
    100 Cards
    50 Red
    50 Black
    100 Cards
    x Red
    100-x Black
    Choose between gamble worth 100 points OR
    Sure payoffs of 15, 25, 30, 40 and 60 points.
  • 32. Estimated Risk and Ambiguity Attitudes
    Orbitofrontal Lesion
    Control Lesion
    Orbitofrontal lesion patients more rational!
  • 33. Imputed value
    OFC lesion estimate
     = 0.82
    Stochastic Choice Model
    Linking Neural, Behavioral, and Lesion Data
    Brain Imaging Data
    Behavioral Choice Data
  • 34. Agenda
    Individual Decision-Making
    Ambiguity aversion
    fMRI and brain lesion
    Sociopaths
    Social preferences
    Special population
    How neuroscience
    can help economics
    How economics can help neuroscience
  • 35. Norman Bates
    Psycho, 1960
  • 36. Criminality
    Estimated psychopathy rates among prisoners (various times after 1990)
    North American: 20.5% (2003 PCL-R manual)
    Canada: 15 – 25% (federal prison)
    Iran: 23%
    UK: 26%
    Younger beginnings (14 y.o. vs. 28 y.o. )
    “Instrumental” homicides
  • 37. MeasuringPsychopathy
    Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, Screening version (PCL-R SV)
    24 point scale: 12 traits scored 0, 1, 2
    Two factors
    Interpersonal-affective factor (6 traits)
    Impulsivity-social deviance (6 traits)
    Impulsivity-social deviance (Factor 2) is less important for us
    Except for safety concerns, of course!
  • 38. Interpersonal-affective factor
    Callous and unemotional
    Superficial charm
    Grandiosity
    Lack of empathy and shallow affect
    Deception and manipulativeness
    Lack of remorse
    Not accepting responsibility
  • 39. Characterizing Psychopathy using Economic Games
    What we’re doing
    Characterize behavior in these individuals
    Provide a quantitative measure of (social) behavior
    Where we want to go
    Use this measure to search for neural and genetic correlates of psychopathy
    And other psychiatric and neurological diseases
  • 40. Responder Game
    Your
    payoff
    Other’s
    payoff
    Your
    payoff
    Other’s
    payoff
  • 41. B: Costless punishment
    Selfish
    Generous
  • 42. B: Costly Reward
    Selfish
    Generous
  • 43. Responder Game: Intentions Matter
  • 44. Responder Game: Intentions Matter
  • 45. Power matters?
    SPs (only): Refuse to let Player B choose
  • 46. Responder Game: Intentions MatterPower matters
    I would not give control over to another person, even for more money.
  • 47. Responder Game: Intentions MatterPower matters?
    I would not give control over to another person, even for more money.
    Seems like A1 is the more “dominant.”
  • 48. Take-aways
    Neuroeconomics is possible
    Studying neural mechanisms of economic decision-making
    Nascent field, only about 10 years old
    Much progress during that time
    Many open questions, opportunities
    Moral decision-making
    Strategic thinking
    Financial bubbles
    http://neuroecon.berkeley.edu
  • 49. Eric Set
    Edelyn Verona
    Colin Camerer
    Ralph Adolphs
    Daniel Tranel
    Steve Quartz
    Peter Bossaerts
    Meghana Bhatt
    CédricAnen
    Shreesh Mysore
    Acknowledgements