Non Conscious Processes preceding Intuitive decisions

1
Non Conscious Processes preceding Intuitive
decisions

• Dick J. Bierman
• University of Amsterdam
• Utrecht University

2
Damasios Somatic Marker model
Previous problem
Current similar problem
Previous decision (selection of alternative)
NC Reduction of Alternatives
Good or Bad outcome
Somatic Marking Of Decision
Current decision
3
The 3 factors of Intuition

• Implicit Learning (from previous experiences)
• Development of Somatic marker
• Listening to Somatic marker (giving rise to
  advantageous decisions)

4
Qualitative research Chess Player

• Automatic selection of a reduced set of
  alternatives
• Feels bad/good argument

5
Empirical test

• Damasio Gambling task. Choosing the good deck.
• Somatic marker Skin Conductance

6
Damasio gambling procedure

• Participant gets initially 2000
• Draws cards from one of 4 different decks
• Card is either winning or losing

Preparation
Skin Conductance
time
7
Results

• Increase of SM preceding incorrect decisions.
• But paradox if SM warns then there should be an
  SM before correct decisions!!!

8
Less attractive aspects of Gambling Task

• Implicit learning is too simple
• Factor of Listening to Somatic Marker cannot be
  measured through slow Skin Conductance
• So
• New task Artificial Grammar task
• New dep. Variable Pupil Dilation

9
Movie
10
Results skin conductance
decision
feedback
Confirm Damasios findings
11
Results pupil dilation
(t(24) 1.87 plt 0.04 one tailed Preconceptual
phase only!
12
Results maximum pupil size
(t(24) 3.02 plt 0.005) Preconceptual phase only.
SM drives the decision
13
BEYOND THE BRAIN?Is intuition also driven by the
actual future outcome
Somatic Marker
Current decision
Future outcome
Physiological Response
14
Pre-sentiment

• Anticipation of a random event
• Two potential outcomes
• One good, one bad
• Eg. Presentation of random positive and negative
  pictures but also presentation of random winning
  and loosing cards!

15
CARD!-analysis Damasios Gambling experiment

• t 1.634 df117 p 0.053
• Presentiment effect 20!!!!

16
Hamms Animal fear study
Skin Conductance
time
17
Hamms publication
18
Results re-analysis Hamms data
stimulus
19
Erotic Presentiment effect at time -4
seconds. Td 2.89 df 39 p lt 0.01
Bierman Scholte, 2002
20
Unified Intuition paradigm

• Manipulate the future randomly
• Is possible by having two reinforcements eg -10
  euro and -100 euro randomly selected.
• Not as strong as neutral-emotional pictures

21
Comparing -10 -100in BIAL experiment
feedback
Decision made
22
Future plans

• Intuition assessment instrument (4 factors)
• Implicit learning
• Somatic marker
• Listening to SM
• Pre-sentiment
• Intuition training
• bio feedback of Somatic Marker

23
Is Intuition also driven by genetic information

• SM -gt Information input from previous experiences
• Could evolution also have created a pathway.
• INSTINCT can be modelled as part of the intuitive
  process