Neuroeconomist Vasily Klyucharev from a Swiss university spoke about the mechanisms of external influence on the human brain.
Don't want to transfer money to the Pension Fund? Nothing, you get a magnetic discharge into the brain and you want it right away! Or maybe you are too intractable in the elections and refuse to put a cross next to the "correct" candidate? The problem is solved in the same way. Does it smell like a conspiracy theory? Yes and no.
Scientists have groped in our head zones, influencing which it is possible to turn a conformist into a nonconformist, make a fair one to give up their principles for a while … All this resembles some kind of terrible sci-fi thriller, but, alas, this is already reality. At least, this is the conclusion that first of all suggests itself when you get acquainted with a new direction of science - neuroeconomics, which originated in Switzerland, at the University of Basel. However, one of the staff and teachers of this respected scientific institution, Vasily KLYUCHAREV, does not agree with such a radical point of view. He was able to highlight in the new direction of science positive moments for humanity.
So what is hidden there, in our brain? Previously, it was studied as the most common organ - remember the lessons of anatomy. But at the beginning of the XXI century, it turns out that he can generate thoughts and regulate behavior! Having studied this mechanism, you can make the society ideal, get rid of criminals and drug addicts. Today, neuroscientists already know the mechanism by which memory improves, and they apply the principles of the nervous system to control robots. Two years ago, MK wrote that the Scientific Center of Neurology of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences had developed a system for activating brain neurons in blind people so that they could see without the help of their eyes, according to an impulse received from electrodes implanted in the brain …
But while neurocybernetics controlled robots, economists also saw useful moments in neuroscience. But what if you examine the consumer's brain to better understand their behavior? they decided. After all, in this way it will be possible to understand what desires drive all of us and which brain centers are involved in the course of our daily economic activity: from buying goods to deciding to invest in a private pension fund. This is how symbiosis was born - neuroeconomics.
So, Vasily, how did it all start and how did it happen that you became interested in this strange science?
- It seems strange only at first glance. I have always been fascinated by the study of the nature of decision making. This is fundamental research that combines the achievements of economics, psychology and other disciplines. Neurobiology explains our decisions by analyzing the activity of neurons in the brain. For example, a person who is obese must follow a diet. But will he follow the advice of a doctor? We can try to find out about this by leading to a specific part of the brain responsible for making decisions, sensors that register the activity of brain cells. In addition, I have always been interested to know what mechanism makes a person fall under the influence of others. In general, we were engaged in purely fundamental research into the nature of human behavior.
And then economists took you into circulation …
Promotional video:
- It turned out that economists have also studied the nature of decision-making for many years, however, they were mainly interested in the behavior of people in the course of financial transactions: when investing money, creating retirement savings or shopping in supermarkets, the motives that make consumers choose one or another product. And they studied these puzzles of behavior, relying solely on mathematical, linear calculations and a psychological model based on the assumption that people are rational and predictable. However, more than ten years ago, the famous psychologist Daniel Kahneman, Nobel laureate in economics, proved that a person is not always rational, capable of illogical behavior, and therefore is absolutely non-linear. So, economists needed the help of neuroscientists to help us understand the complex structure of the brain of a potential investor or buyer.
You said that a person is sometimes unpredictable. Give an example of a mind game that economic psychologists have encountered
“One of the mysteries, for example, is that people don't like saving for retirement. Neuroeconomic studies have shown that in the frontal frontal area of the cerebral cortex there is a zone for making rational decisions, a “zone of self-control”. And for those who control themselves well, it actively works against the emotional background. But these are few. When lottery organizers offer winners a choice: get 50 million now or 100 million in equal shares over 10 years, they mostly choose 50 million now. After all, the further away in time the moment of receiving pleasure is, the less this pleasure attracts us.
The new science of neuroeconomics is also aimed at helping to correct such decisions, especially for patients with certain disorders who can spend all their money in an hour. For example, we can try to "influence" the decision-making zone with a magnetic field, and the citizen will begin to actively control his behavior.
The magnetic field … to the brain ?
- Do not be alarmed, I gave this as an example, we are doing such experiments now only in laboratory conditions. In principle, there is nothing wrong with transcranial magnetic stimulation. The device is a coil of wires. A current is quickly driven through them, resulting in a strong magnetic field, its narrowly directed beam. It is directed to a specific area of the brain and acts for one to 30 minutes. Ideally, a person does not feel anything, except that in the zone of influence of the field, muscles can involuntarily twitch. Something similar is already being developed for military personnel in the United States. If I am not mistaken, this is a helmet with magnetic brain stimulation. What do they stimulate there, I do not know for sure.
And after such a correction, a person will forever remain a hoarder?
- Not. The effect of a single magnetic field on the brain usually lasts from 30 minutes to 1 hour. I will give one more example of behavior that is irrational from the point of view of classical economics. We asked two subjects to play the game "Ultimatum". One was given $ 100, which he had to share with a partner. Moreover, he could take 99 for himself, and give a colleague a dollar. In turn, the last player had the right to refuse his share if he considered the division unfair, and in this case no one got the money.
Experiments carried out at the universities of Basel and Zurich have shown that players began to give up the “legal” share as soon as they saw an injustice. Perhaps this concept is embedded in our social nature, but it was very difficult for economists with their "rational" concepts to understand this. Indeed, from their "linear" point of view, taking at least a dollar is better than being left with nothing … But neuroeconomists have found that when an unfair amount is offered, neurons of a certain emotional area are activated in the brains of the subjects. At the moment of making a decision to give up money, the activity becomes even greater - it can only be compared with that which occurs during pain or disgust. By the way, the monkeys demonstrate the same sense of justice.
And this feeling can also be suppressed by a magnetic shock?
- Yes, for a short time you can make people agree with the unfair division of money.
It turns out that it is easy to make a puppet out of a person, forcing him to make decisions against his principles?
- In the laboratory, it is possible to influence human decision-making using neurobiological methods. But this process is very painstaking and complicated. And to some extent, in much larger volumes, this is already being done now with the help of commercials that are shown on TV. People prone to conformism, suggestions, are led to them very quickly. It is much more important for neuroeconomics to understand the fundamental mechanisms of these manipulations. This will help us better control ourselves and better understand the impact on us. We are just beginning such research, but theoretically, even now, using the neurobiological method, one can even try to turn a conformist into a nonconformist, and vice versa.
I agree with everyone, but only for an hour
And where is our zone of intractability or vice versa?
- The zone of involvement in conformism lies exactly along the middle meridian of the brain. By the way, this zone can also be activated by chemical methods. There is a substance called dopamine, which is contained in our brain, including in this zone. Danish scientists have recently discovered that the more of it, the more trusting, accommodating, and vice versa.
On the other hand, you can also influence our gullibility with a simple spray. Roughly speaking, if the hormone oxytocin is puffed into the nose, then a person's degree of trust in others increases for a while and fear goes away. Encouraged by these findings, the discoverers of this effect began to advertise it as a universal tool for increasing trust and social harmony, but soon stopped short. In Holland, when studying the effect of oxytocin, it was found that the "hormone of social peace and trust", as it was dubbed, improves relations between people only in their social group. To the outer group, the person who used the oxytocin spray became extremely suspicious and aggressive.
I suspect that cunning supermarket businessmen are already rubbing their hands in order to use any of the tools proposed by science in their salesrooms and increase sales of some stale goods
- There were such requests, but the answer did not satisfy them. The fact is that oxytocin to affect a large group of customers would take so much that it was necessary to create a real cloud of this substance in the store.
So, thank God, they won't force us to march in formation
- Yes, it is unlikely, at least now it is almost impossible.
Well, in principle? If the ruling party wants everyone to vote for its candidate …
- It will not work to affect the brain from afar - a directed beam of magnetic waves is strong only when it comes directly to the brain, and very quickly weakens as it moves away from the object. But there is a slower, but sure mechanism that will help the opposition in time. If they organize and systematically come to the elections with loud slogans, then they will gradually win over those who doubt them. A change in preferences will snowball towards the visible oppositionally active majority. When a person sees that his opinion differs from the opinion of a large group of people, he unconsciously changes his mind, because in the brain at the level of neurons a signal is turned on: "My previous belief is a mistake!" This is inherent in us evolutionarily - ancient people could only survive together.
But why are the current rallies not distinguished by a 100% turnout of Muscovites?
- Because on TV we are shown another “majority”, satisfied with the authorities, and as a result, two opinions are always fighting in our brain.
Our freedom is an illusion
“Not so long ago, American neuroeconomists at the University of Oregon got a very interesting result by studying the nature of charity,” says Klyucharyov. - As a model, they took the European system of donations, which are taken from citizens immediately with taxes, and the voluntary American one. Having simulated various situations in the scanner, they realized that the most positively colored emotional response is caused precisely by a voluntary donation.
And if we additionally stimulate the charity zone, will we donate all our property? This is probably how the gypsies act…
- This is not a separate "charity center" in the brain, but the same notorious pleasure center that is activated when we do charity work. Stimulating it can cause serious side effects, such as risky behavior associated with the disappearance of the concept of self-control and self-preservation. So, as you can see, brain games are very dangerous.
“It’s good if everyone adheres to these views, but I doubt that we will be able to keep the genie from the jug
- Modern neurobiological technologies and the motives of our behavior are so complex and intricate that in the coming decades we will not be able to manipulate people with acceptable accuracy. In addition, in modern Western universities, such experiments are under the strict control of ethics commissions.
But won't neuroeconomics change our ideas about our own freedom?
- By and large, we are all not free. The concept of freedom of choice is a kind of myth, I am more and more convinced of this. Do you believe in causation?
Well yes
- And I believe. And this means that what is inherent in us at birth: the genetic set, the activity of neurons in a particular area of the brain - all this (taking into account the specific conditions of the environment in which we grow) will ultimately lead to a predictable result. To refute this is like expecting the possibility of the Leaning Tower of Pisa falling in the opposite direction from its slope. It is already tilted, slowly but surely approaching the ground, and there can be no other way. Exactly the same processes are happening to us: the mechanism is running. In this regard, despite the fact that I am not religious, I agree with the Protestants, whose main dogma is the predetermination of everything and everyone.
But there are surprises in our life. For example, parents who are drunks have simply exemplary children
- And this is also due to genetics, neurons and a specific social environment. Here, in my opinion, there is no free choice. We do not know from whom exactly the child inherited positive traits - maybe it was his grandparents. Then they met a good teacher on their way, and, following a certain activity of their brain, they chose the right path in life. In this case, I like the statement of Spinoza: “A person deceives himself when he talks about freedom. He just doesn't know the real reasons for his behavior."
Well, are there any advantages in your science for an ordinary person?
- Of course have. Knowing how merchants, advertisers, bankers can influence us, we can resist this.
How?
- Rule # 1. Never give in to beautiful promises, loud statements in commercials. They almost always embellish the product. Rule # 2. Don't let TV influence your opinion of politicians, judge them by their deeds. There is nothing supernatural in the powers that be, and therefore evaluate them by the same yardstick as the locksmith in your DEZ.
And if in a year or two they start to process us with “neuroeconomic methods”, will we be able to somehow notice, feel it?
- Simple prototypes of special gadgets are already appearing, for example, there are iPhones that read brain activity, headphones against winter depression. But they are not dangerous, their purpose is to register the work of the brain (for example, your mood) and affect the brain for good purposes. Most likely, neuroeconomic methods will never be applied to a wide audience, but, perhaps, they will find their application when testing marketing campaigns, optimizing work with clients. The only thing that raises some concerns is neuroeconomic studies of genetic predispositions to certain decisions.
Access to our genetic information can be misused, for example, by health insurance companies. In the future, they can easily increase the amount of the insurance premium for a person with a genetic predisposition to risky behavior. Therefore, initiatives for the total collection of genetic information, for example, those originating from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, must be under strict public control.
So, once again you are convinced that everything has a downside: geneticists treat diseases, but they can also turn the knowledge gained against patients. Neuroscientists create robotic assistants, but with their help, savvy marketers can bankrupt you in no time. In general, remember that our main trump card in front of all cunning neurotechnologies is our innate sense of universal justice, thanks to which we would rather give up the dollar than accept a dishonest division.
