Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice:

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice: Results of recent studies point towards a new framework for the neural bases of economic choice. The principles of this framework include the idea that evaluation is limited to a single option within the focus of attention and that we accept or reject that option relative to the entire set of alternatives. Rejection leads attention to a new option, although it can later switch back to a previously rejected one. The option to which a neuron’s firing rate refers is determined dynamically by attention and not stably by labelled lines. Value is always computed relative to the value of rejection. Comparison results not from explicit competition between discrete populations of neurons, but indirectly, as in a horse race, from the fact that the first option whose value crosses a threshold is selected. Consequently, comparison can occur within a single pool of neurons rather than by competition between two or more neuronal populations. The computations that constitute comparison thus occur at multiple levels, including premotor levels, simultaneously (i.e. the brain uses a distributed consensus), and not in discrete stages. This framework suggests a solution to a set of otherwise unresolved neuronal binding problems that result from the need to link options to values, comparisons to actions, and choices to outcomes. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Brain and Neuroscience Advances SAGE

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice:

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice:

Brain and Neuroscience Advances , Volume 2: 1 – Apr 13, 2018

Abstract

Results of recent studies point towards a new framework for the neural bases of economic choice. The principles of this framework include the idea that evaluation is limited to a single option within the focus of attention and that we accept or reject that option relative to the entire set of alternatives. Rejection leads attention to a new option, although it can later switch back to a previously rejected one. The option to which a neuron’s firing rate refers is determined dynamically by attention and not stably by labelled lines. Value is always computed relative to the value of rejection. Comparison results not from explicit competition between discrete populations of neurons, but indirectly, as in a horse race, from the fact that the first option whose value crosses a threshold is selected. Consequently, comparison can occur within a single pool of neurons rather than by competition between two or more neuronal populations. The computations that constitute comparison thus occur at multiple levels, including premotor levels, simultaneously (i.e. the brain uses a distributed consensus), and not in discrete stages. This framework suggests a solution to a set of otherwise unresolved neuronal binding problems that result from the need to link options to values, comparisons to actions, and choices to outcomes.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/a-neuronal-theory-of-sequential-economic-choice-bsJ40szhMH
Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications Ltd and British Neuroscience Association, unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses
ISSN
2398-2128
eISSN
2398-2128
DOI
10.1177/2398212818766675
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Results of recent studies point towards a new framework for the neural bases of economic choice. The principles of this framework include the idea that evaluation is limited to a single option within the focus of attention and that we accept or reject that option relative to the entire set of alternatives. Rejection leads attention to a new option, although it can later switch back to a previously rejected one. The option to which a neuron’s firing rate refers is determined dynamically by attention and not stably by labelled lines. Value is always computed relative to the value of rejection. Comparison results not from explicit competition between discrete populations of neurons, but indirectly, as in a horse race, from the fact that the first option whose value crosses a threshold is selected. Consequently, comparison can occur within a single pool of neurons rather than by competition between two or more neuronal populations. The computations that constitute comparison thus occur at multiple levels, including premotor levels, simultaneously (i.e. the brain uses a distributed consensus), and not in discrete stages. This framework suggests a solution to a set of otherwise unresolved neuronal binding problems that result from the need to link options to values, comparisons to actions, and choices to outcomes.

Journal

Brain and Neuroscience AdvancesSAGE

Published: Apr 13, 2018

Keywords: Neuroeconomics; mutual inhibition; repetition suppression; labelled line

References