Why bother with the brain? A role for decision neuroscience in understanding strategic variability

Abstract

Neuroscience, by its nature, seems to hold considerable promise for understanding the fundamental mechanisms of decision making. In recent years, several studies in the domain of "neuroeconomics" or "decision neuroscience" have provided important insights into brain function. Yet, the apparent success and value of each of these domains are frequently called into question by researchers in economics and behavioral decision making. Critics often charge that knowledge about the brain is unnecessary for understanding decision preferences. In this chapter, I contend that knowledge about underlying brain mechanisms helps in the development of biologically plausible models of behavior, which can then help elucidate the mechanisms underlying individual choice biases and strategic preferences. Using a novel risky choice paradigm, I will demonstrate that people vary in whether they adopt compensatory or noncompensatory rules in economic decision making. Importantly, neuroimaging studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging reveal that distinct neural mechanisms support variability in choices and variability in strategic preferences. Converging evidence from a study involving decisions between hypothetical stocks illustrates how knowledge about the underlying mechanisms can help inform neuroanatomical models of cognitive control. Last, I will demonstrate how knowledge about these underlying neural mechanisms can provide novel insights into the effects of decision states like sleep deprivation on decision preferences. Together, these findings suggest that neuroscience can play a critical role in creating robust and flexible models of real-world decision behavior.