Evaluation of the Extent of Somatic Marker Hypothesis
Critically evaluate to what extent the ‘somatic-marker hypothesis’ explains how decisions are made in the face of an uncertain outcome.
In mind of Kim Sterelny’s (2007) statement that ‘Human Life is one long decision tree’, it is not surprising that there has been a vast amount of research into the process of how we evaluate the desirability of alternative choices and select a particular option. One area of research, of particular interest here, is Damasio’s Somatic Marker Hypothesis (SMH) (1991) which uses the neuroeconomic approach through its integration of the fields of psychology, neuroscience and economics to invoke an understanding of how one makes a decision (Damasio, Tranel & Damasio, 1998). This Theory supports the RAF hypothesis that significant risky outcomes elicit emotional reactions (Stanfey, Loewenstein, McClue & Cohen, 2006,). The SMH proposes that stochastic decision making is the result of emotion-based biasing signals in the body- in particular from the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex (VMPFC) (Bechara, Damasio, Tranel & Damasio, 2005). This concept will be discussed in further detail (with reference to it’s origin and experimental support), followed by a critical analysis of the extent to which the SMH successfully explains what it contends to. Since the SMH focuses solely on the role of emotion in decision making, the Rationale Planning Model (1995) will also be examined in comparison to the SMH for it’s explanation of decision making as a purely logical and rational process. The Rational Planning Model by Banfield (1995) proposes that the decision maker consciously undergoes five steps when coming to a decision and so approaches the choice in a very rational manner. Subsequently, an evaluation of the two theories for stochastic decision making will follow to discern how well they account for stochastic decision making.
The SMH stemmed from attempts to explain why a patient (E.V.R.), with an ablation of the VMPFC, often
In mind of Kim Sterelny’s (2007) statement that ‘Human Life is one long decision tree’, it is not surprising that there has been a vast amount of research into the process of how we evaluate the desirability of alternative choices and select a particular option. One area of research, of particular interest here, is Damasio’s Somatic Marker Hypothesis (SMH) (1991) which uses the neuroeconomic approach through its integration of the fields of psychology, neuroscience and economics to invoke an understanding of how one makes a decision (Damasio, Tranel & Damasio, 1998). This Theory supports the RAF hypothesis that significant risky outcomes elicit emotional reactions (Stanfey, Loewenstein, McClue & Cohen, 2006,). The SMH proposes that stochastic decision making is the result of emotion-based biasing signals in the body- in particular from the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex (VMPFC) (Bechara, Damasio, Tranel & Damasio, 2005). This concept will be discussed in further detail (with reference to it’s origin and experimental support), followed by a critical analysis of the extent to which the SMH successfully explains what it contends to. Since the SMH focuses solely on the role of emotion in decision making, the Rationale Planning Model (1995) will also be examined in comparison to the SMH for it’s explanation of decision making as a purely logical and rational process. The Rational Planning Model by Banfield (1995) proposes that the decision maker consciously undergoes five steps when coming to a decision and so approaches the choice in a very rational manner. Subsequently, an evaluation of the two theories for stochastic decision making will follow to discern how well they account for stochastic decision making.
The SMH stemmed from attempts to explain why a patient (E.V.R.), with an ablation of the VMPFC, often