A Representation Theorem for Frequently Irrational Agents

The standard representation theorem for expected utility theory tells us that if a subject’s preferences conform to certain axioms, then she can be represented as maximising her expected utility given a particular set of credences and utilities—and, moreover, that having those credences and utilities is the only way that she could be maximising her expected utility (given her preferences). However, the kinds of agents these theorems seem apt to tell us anything about are highly idealised, being (amongst other things) always probabilistically coherent with infinitely precise degrees of belief and full knowledge of all a priori truths. Ordinary subjects do not look very rational when compared to the kinds of agents usually talked about in decision theory. In this paper, I will develop an expected utility representation theorem aimed at the representation of those who are neither probabilistically coherent, logically omniscient, nor expected utility maximisers across the board—that is, agents who are frequently irrational. The agents in question may be deductively fallible, have incoherent credences, limited representational capacities, and fail to maximise expected utility for all but a limited class of gambles.     

The right hemisphere maintains solution-related activation for yet-to-be-solved problems

In five experiments, we examined the time course of hemispheric differences in solution activation for insight-like problems. We propose that solving insight problems requires retrieval of unusual interpretations of problem elements, and that right-hemisphere (RH) coarse semantic coding is more likely than left-hemisphere (LH) fine semantic coding to maintain semantic activation of such interpretations. In four experiments, participants attempted word problems for 7 sec (Experiments 1A and 1B) or 2 sec (Experiments 2A and 2B), and 750 msec later responded to lateralized target words. After 7 sec of solving effort, Experiment 1A participants showed greater solution-related priming (i.e., they named solutions faster than unrelated words) for left visual field-RH (lvf-RH) targets than for right visual field-LH (rvf-LH) targets, and Experiment 1B participants made faster solution decisions on target words presented to the RH, as previously demonstrated following 15 sec of effort. After 2 sec of solving effort in Experiment 2A, women showed symmetric solution-related priming, although men showed a slight lvf-RH advantage in priming; and in Experiment 2B participants made equally quick solution decisions for targets presented to the LH and to the RH. In Experiment 3, participants viewed the problems for 1,250 msec then named lateralized target words; they showed symmetric solution-related priming. These experiments demonstrate solution activation initially in both hemispheres, but maintained solution activation only in the RH.     

Frontal-Lobe Involvement in Spatial Memory: Evidence from PET,fMRI, and Lesion Studies

Many studies have identified the prefrontal cortex as the brain area that is critical for spatial memory, both in humans and in other primates. Other studies, however, have failed to establish this relation. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to review the literature regarding the role of the human prefrontal lobe in spatial memory. This was done by examining the evidence obtained from neuropsychological patients and from studies using brain-imaging techniques (PET and fMRI). Evidence supporting the notion that the prefrontal cortex is extensively involved in spatial working memory was found. The majority of these studies, however, suggests that frontal-lobe involvement is not related to the type of material that is being processed (e.g., spatial vs. nonspatial), but to process-specific functions, such as encoding and retrieval. Theoretically, these functions could be linked to the central executive within Baddeley's working-memory model, or to recent theories that emphasize the various processes that play a role in working memory. Also, methodological issues were discussed. Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the precise interaction of domain-specific and general processes.