Archivio per 28 giugno 2016

28
Giu
16

People who meditate are more aware of their unconscious brain

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

People who meditate are more aware of their unconscious brain activity – or so a new take on a classic “free will” experiment suggests. The results hint that the feeling of conscious control over our actions can vary – and provide more clues to understanding the complex nature of free will. The famous experiment that challenged our notions of free will was first done in 1983 by neuroscientist Benjamin Libet. It involved measuring electrical activity in someone’s brain while asking them to press a button, whenever they like, while they watch a special clock that allows them to note the time precisely. Typically people feel like they decide to press the button about 200 milliseconds before their finger moves – but the electrodes reveal activity in the part of their brain that controls movement occurs a further 350 milliseconds before they feel they make that decision. This suggests that in fact it is the unconscious brain that “decides” when to press the button. In the new study, a team at the University of Sussex in Brighton, UK, did a slimmed-down version of the experiment (omitting the brain electrodes), with 57 volunteers, 11 of whom regularly practised mindfulness mediation. The meditators had a longer gap in time between when they felt like they decided to move their finger and when it physically moved – 149 compared with 68 milliseconds for the other people.

See on newscientist.com

Annunci
28
Giu
16

Prediction markets have to occasionally “get it wrong” to be calibrated – Decision Science News

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

Two recent events in the UK made it look like prediction markets’ predictions aren’t worth much. The soccer team Leicester City won the premiere league title despite the markets putting the odds of them doing so at 5,000 to 1 (.02%). Last week, people in the UK, voted to leave the European Union. A few hours before it was sure they would exit, a prediction market put their probability of leaving at 10%. See the figure above from PredictIt. X axis is roughly time before the outcome was certain. Y axis can be interpreted as probability of exit (70 cents = 70%). It jumped from 10% to 90% in just five hours. Analysts like to “explain” market results, coming up with a reason why an event was a failure of the prediction market. For instance, in the two events above, the Wall Street Journal, perhaps correctly, claims the bets were unduly influenced by London bettors. Through big London bets the odds moved to reflect what Londoners believe instead of the sentiment of the crowd. In predicting a Brexit, the sentiment of the crowd is exactly what you want. Whenever the prediction market is far on the wrong side of 50%, explanations will arise as to why the prediction market was wrong. Let’s take a step back here.

See on decisionsciencenews.com




Time is real? I think not

giugno: 2016
L M M G V S D
« Mag   Lug »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Commenti recenti

Inserisci il tuo indirizzo e-mail per iscriverti a questo blog e ricevere notifiche di nuovi messaggi per e-mail.

Segui assieme ad altri 1.024 follower

Annunci

%d blogger hanno fatto clic su Mi Piace per questo: