The human brain’s ability to actively make decisions and infer possible outcomes based on prior experience or insight is a highly complex process that is still largely unknown. Additionally, researching how and what neural circuits are flexibly used in learned associations is a complex process. In the article “Neural circuits for inference-based decision-making”, Wang and Kahnt attempt to understand how humans rely on past experiences to predict future outcomes in novel context. Through the use of FMRI and ECG, Wang and Kahnt found that the OFC and HC neurons are largely responsible for the learned associations and inferences such as lab 13 explained, “The ability to flexibly utilize prior knowledge and experiences to mentally simulate probable outcomes is critical for making adaptive decisions” (et al. Wang, 2021). Throughout homosapien evolution decision and inference creation has been paramount in the survival and complex building of civilization. However, many decisions can become swayed or perverted through other neural processes that are more pleasurable or less complex such as positive and negative arousal.
Climate change has become forefront in the world stage as a continuing and exponentially worsening issue. The decisions of world leaders and mega corporations to fix the man-made issues contributing to climate change have been researched in order to understand the neurological methods behind decision making processes of people. In the paper “Environmental neuroeconomics: how neuroscience can inform our understanding of human responses to climate change”, Sawe and Chawla examine how the study of neuroecconomics examines the factors that lead to environmental based decisions. Similarly to Wang and Kahnt, Sawe and Chawla examined literature that used fMRI and ECG to understand the mechanisms underlying individual and collective decision-making around climate change.
To best examine which brain areas are more active in positive climate change action, brain imagining has shown that positive arousal is correlated with activity in the ventral striatum, the reward pathway, because of the higher level region nucleus accumbens’ primary and secondary responses. However, the anterior insula’s activity correlates with negative arousal, such as loss, risks, physiologically and morally aversive situations. People’s responses, which lead to subjective valuation and assessment of benefit-cost tradeoffs, in the aforementioned areas are integrated in the medial prefrontal cortex. A concrete example shows that the “FMRI study of donations to protect state and national park lands from developmental land use threats shows environmental donation decisions are associated with anterior insula activity, and that this activity is amplified in those with stronger pro-environmental attitudes” (et al. Sawe and Chawla, 2021). There are other factors that contribute to the decision making process of climate change such as uncertainty associated with outcomes and impacts of climate change action. Furthermore, the psychology of what people cannot see directly in front of them does not immediately affect them plays a crucial role in the lack of action. Climate change is still viewed as something in the future which leads to indecision due to a lack of urgency to act on climate change. Future time perception and decisive future impact is subject to priming and is thus, malleable, which proves that advocating and educating populations about ways to fix climate change can work. Finally, social behavior effects the brains ability to make decisions due to wanting to “fit in” with societies norms. This behavior further creates a lack of indecision in communities about climate change.
The direct observation and testing of brain regions to determine how the brain makes learned associations to predict future outcomes and make decisions, in addition to, observing what brain regions are active during positive and negative decision making allow researchers to understand and predict future human-based decisions and societal outcomes. Using this data, researchers can better inform educators and advocates about what works to change or affect people’s decisions and behaviors about climate change.
References
Wang, Fang, Kahnt, Thorsten. (2021, 02, 004). Neural circuits for inference-based decision-making. Science Direct, Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.004
Sawe, Niki, Chawla, Kiran. (2021, December). Environmental neuroeconomics: how neuroscience can inform our understanding of human responses to climate change. Science Direct, Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.08.002
