The proactive brain: Using rudimentary information to make predictive judgments

In a recent Cognitive neuroscience framework we proposed to consider the human brain as proactive, in that it continuously generates predictions about what to expect in the environment. These continuous predictions are extremely rapid, and depend on similarities between novel inputs and the closest familiar representations stored in memory. For example, if you see a chair that you have never seen before, you can still determine what it is, its function, approximate weight, approximate price, and other such characteristics. To derive these analogies rapidly we rely on surprisingly little information. This paper provides a theoretical expansion of our work by describing studies and ideas that collectively synthesize to illustrate this unifying principle of the human brain. We specify the nature of the information used to form impressions, preferences, judgments and predictions, propose neural circuits that mediate these vital mental skills, and derive novel hypotheses that can be tested in the future. This proposal implies that mental life and behavior are guided by ‘‘scripts,’’ which are developed with experience and stored in memory. This framework has broad ramifications, ranging from clinical psychology and mental illness, to the study of consumer behavior. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  M. Bar,et al.  Very first impressions. , 2006, Emotion.

[2]  J. O'Doherty,et al.  Encoding Predictive Reward Value in Human Amygdala and Orbitofrontal Cortex , 2003, Science.

[3]  S. Rauch,et al.  Masked Presentations of Emotional Facial Expressions Modulate Amygdala Activity without Explicit Knowledge , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  P. Whalen Fear, Vigilance, and Ambiguity , 1998 .

[5]  M. Bar,et al.  Visual elements of subjective preference modulate amygdala activation , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  S Ullman,et al.  Sequence seeking and counter streams: a computational model for bidirectional information flow in the visual cortex. , 1995, Cerebral cortex.

[7]  A. Lüthi,et al.  Processing of Temporal Unpredictability in Human and Animal Amygdala , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  Gregory J. Feist,et al.  Openness to Experience, Non-Conformity, and the Preference for Abstract Art , 2004 .

[9]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  SCRIPTS, PLANS, GOALS, AND UNDERSTANDING , 1988 .

[10]  M. Frank,et al.  The dark side of self- and social perception: black uniforms and aggression in professional sports. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience? , 2004, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[12]  G L Shulman,et al.  INAUGURAL ARTICLE by a Recently Elected Academy Member:A default mode of brain function , 2001 .

[13]  H. Leder,et al.  When Feature Information Comes First! Early Processing of Inverted Faces , 2005, Perception.

[14]  J. Bullier Integrated model of visual processing , 2001, Brain Research Reviews.

[15]  M. Banaji,et al.  Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. , 1995, Psychological review.

[16]  M. Bar,et al.  Humans Prefer Curved Visual Objects , 2006, Psychological science.

[17]  A. Young,et al.  Recognition of facial emotion in nine individuals with bilateral amygdala damage , 1999, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  M. Bar Visual objects in context , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[19]  M. Bar A Cortical Mechanism for Triggering Top-Down Facilitation in Visual Object Recognition , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. , 1982 .

[21]  Frank J. Bernieri,et al.  Toward a histology of social behavior: Judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream , 2000 .

[22]  S. Grossberg How does a brain build a cognitive code , 1980 .

[23]  Joseph J. Paton,et al.  The primate amygdala represents the positive and negative value of visual stimuli during learning , 2006, Nature.

[24]  M. Bar The proactive brain: using analogies and associations to generate predictions , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[25]  P. Vuilleumier,et al.  How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  J. Bullier,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing: new vistas on the distributed organization of the visual system , 1995, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[27]  D. Tucker,et al.  Medial Frontal Cortex in Action Monitoring , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  How parallel are the primate visual pathways? , 1993, Annual review of neuroscience.

[29]  Kristen A. Lindquist,et al.  Opinion TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.11 No.8 Cognitive-emotional interactions Language as context for the , 2022 .

[30]  M. Bar,et al.  Magnocellular Projections as the Trigger of Top-Down Facilitation in Recognition , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[31]  E. Rolls,et al.  The functional neuroanatomy of the human orbitofrontal cortex: evidence from neuroimaging and neuropsychology , 2004, Progress in Neurobiology.

[32]  D Mumford,et al.  On the computational architecture of the neocortex. II. The role of cortico-cortical loops. , 1992, Biological cybernetics.

[33]  Janine Willis,et al.  First Impressions , 2006, Psychological science.

[34]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[35]  J. Pardo,et al.  Brain activity in ventromedial prefrontal cortex correlates with individual differences in negative affect , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  Paul J. Silvia,et al.  Do People Prefer Curved Objects? Angularity, Expertise, and Aesthetic Preference , 2009 .

[37]  R Shapley,et al.  Visual sensitivity and parallel retinocortical channels. , 1990, Annual review of psychology.

[38]  D. J. Felleman,et al.  Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. , 1991, Cerebral cortex.

[39]  Oya Demirbilek,et al.  Product design, semantics and emotional response , 2003, Ergonomics.

[40]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  Integrating Top-Down and Bottom-Up Sensory Processing by Somato-Dendritic Interactions , 2004, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[41]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[42]  W. Singer,et al.  Dynamic predictions: Oscillations and synchrony in top–down processing , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[43]  Edward A. Vessel,et al.  The neural basis of scene preferences , 2007, Neuroreport.

[44]  R. Fazio,et al.  On the automatic activation of attitudes. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[45]  Lester M. Hyman,et al.  Which are the stimuli in facial displays of anger and happiness? Configurational bases of emotion recognition. , 1992 .

[46]  H. Barbas Connections underlying the synthesis of cognition, memory, and emotion in primate prefrontal cortices , 2000, Brain Research Bulletin.

[47]  Jeffrey S. Maxwell,et al.  Human Amygdala Responsivity to Masked Fearful Eye Whites , 2004, Science.

[48]  M. Bar,et al.  Cortical Analysis of Visual Context , 2003, Neuron.

[49]  M. Bar,et al.  The units of thought , 2007, Hippocampus.

[50]  D. Mumford On the computational architecture of the neocortex , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.